5.3 The Framer, Maker, and Nourisher of Creation: Haer. 4.6.2 (Gen 1:26, Gen 1:28, Gen 2:7)
Genesis, the Creation, and the Divine Economy image and likeness of God. The rejection of the salvation of the whole person is the link between 2 Cor 11:3 and the activity of Satan in the Garden, and the promulgation of the Gnostic teaching. Just as the serpent deceived Adam and Eve and led them to death, so now the Gnostics are deceiving the faithful and turning them away from the church.
5.3
The Framer, Maker, and Nourisher of Creation: Haer. 4.6.2
(Gen 1:26, Gen 1:28, Gen 2:7) After the preface, the next allusion to Gen 1–3 surfaces in Haer. 4.6.2. This chapter is crucial for determining Irenaeus' dependence upon Justin. Focusing upon this section, Michael Slusser summarized the various positions and argued persuasively that Irenaeus studied under Justin and learned "all that Justin had to teach him."11 This is the only instance where Irenaeus cites a portion of Justin's lost work against Marcion and the citation of Justin is part of a broader evaluation of the Valentinian reading of Matt 11:27.12 This section is also important because it reveals that Irenaeus' intertextual networking is not completely novel.13 His intertextual connections are inculcated from others who instructed him in the faith. Irenaeus' reports that, in light of his own polemic against Marcion, Justin argues for the continuity between the Creator and the Son of God.
The citation of Justin in Haer. 4.6.2 begins with an echo of Christ's words in John 5:31, but he reinterprets the language to say, "I [Justin] would not have believed even the Lord Himself, if He had announced any other than He who is our Framer, Maker and Nourisher" (Ipsi quoque Domino non credidissem
11 Slusser, "How Much," 520. One of the more significant disagreements is the length of his citation of Justin. The last clause refers to Christ's work of recapitulation, which, if original, may suggest that Irenaeus derived his doctrine of recapitulation from Justin. Among other arguments, scholars who opt for the shorter reading point to the parallel citation in Eusebius who omits the final clause. Slusser, "How Much." 518, Eusebius H.E. 4.18.9. See also Steenberg, Irenaeus, 17–18; Grant, Irenaeus, 39.
12 Slusser, "How Much," 519. Eusebius mentions this work, as well as Photius. See EH 4.18.9.
Orbe has an extensive treatment of this chapter evaluating the competing Irenaean and Valentinian readings of Matt 11:27 (along with Origen). Orbe, "La Revelacion Del Hijo
Por el Padre Segun San Ireneo (Adv. Haer. IV,6): Para la exegesis precivena de Matt 11,27," in Teología De San Ireneo IV: Traducción y Comentario del Libro IV del 'Adversus haereses'
(Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1996): 50–103, originally published in Greg 51
(1970): 5–83.
13 See also discussion of Presbyter in Haer. 4.32.1.
chapter 5 alterum Deum annuntianti praeter Fabricatorem et Factorem et Nutritorem).14
For Justin (and Irenaeus), contra Marcion, the relationship between the Father and the Creator and the Son is so essential that he would not believe the incarnate Son if he denied his relationship to the Creator.15 Only the Creator, who is revealed in Christ, is able to form, nourish, and bring humanity to the appointed consummation.16 The three titles "Framer" (Fabricatorem), "Maker"
(Factorem) and "Nourisher" (Nutritorem) are echoes of the creation of humanity in Gen 1–2. Although the verbs are not exactly parallel, the three-fold allusion mirrors the three prominent creation texts: Gen 1:26, Gen 2:7, and Gen
1:28 (in that order). Irenaeus uses a variety of verbal cognates to describe the creation and preservation of Adam.17 These are not incremental or progressive in relationship —that is the interpretation of the Gnostics—but the three-fold use of the verbal titles indicates his harmonious reading of Gen 1–2, where all the titles refer to the same divine being.18 The prosopological style of reading is clear in the transformation of the key verbs into titles for God in order to identify God as the one and only divine being creating humankind in Genesis.19
The prosopological reading of creation texts in Gen 1–2 is also supported with echoes of Gen 1–2 that refer to the Son of God who "made this world"
(mundum fecit), "formed" (plasmavit) humanity and "administers" (administrat) all things. The administration over creation also anticipates the Incarnation, where he "recapitulates his own handiwork in himself" (suum plasma in semetipsum recapitulans, Eph 1:10).20 The language of plasma is a common reference to the substance of Adam's formation in Gen 2:7 that unites this text with Eph 1:10. For Justin (and Irenaeus) the echoes of the creation of the world, creation of humankind, and the administration of "all things" fashion a brief narratival arrangement that binds the creation accounts and links these passages to the incarnation. These connections serve his purpose
14 Haer. 4.6.2. Similar argument and imagery is found in Haer. 4.6.6 and Haer. 4.7.4.
15 EH 4.18.9. Eusebius notes that Irenaeus cites Justin, but his citation only mentions the language of "Creator" rather than of the three titles.
16 Orbe, "La Revelacion," 58.
17 He typically cites faciamus in Gen 1:26 (Haer. 4.20.1, Haer. 5.1.3), plasmavit in Gen 2:7
(Haer. 4.11.1, Haer. 4.20.1) and crescite et multiplicamini in Gen 1:28 (Haer. 4.11.1). However,
Irenaeus' style and argument frequently employs cognates and parallels. For example, in Haer. 4.11.1 he states that God "formed" (plasmavit) Adam for "growth and increase" (augmentum et incrementum) and he also uses factus Haer. 3.23.3 to refer to Gen 1:26.
18 See also Haer. 2.28.1. Haer. 3.24.2, Haer. 4.38.3, and the discussion of scriptural titles in Haer. 3.7.2.
19 See a similar use of titles in Haer. 3.3.3.
20 Haer. 4.6.2.