5.9 Word of God and the Unity of Scripture: Haer. 4.32.1 (Gen 1:3)
Genesis, the Creation, and the Divine Economy 5.9
Word of God and the Unity of Scripture: Haer. 4.32.1 (Gen 1:3) Continuing his analysis of Old Testament prophecy, the next allusion to Gen
1–3 surfaces in a highly debated section that describes the teaching of a certain presbyter that was also a disciple of the apostles. According to Irenaeus, this presbyter argues for the unity of the two testaments under the activity of one God who is the Creator of all things. Charles Hill has argued convincingly that the presbyter is Polycarp.64 In this section, Irenaeus frames both his appeal to Genesis and the relationship of Gen 1–3 to the rest of salvation history as the teaching of this presbyter.65 To claim angels or another power other than God created the world will not unite the teaching of the Old and the New
Testaments. On the other hand, Irenaeus writes that those who believe one God made all things by the Word affirm the most basic theological assumption and the key that unlocks scriptural exegesis. This places the intertextual reception of Gen 1–3 and the apostolic teaching in the New Testament at the forefront of Irenaeus' objectives. In addition, alongside the reference to Justin in Haer. 4.6.2, here again Irenaeus connects his intertextual reading to the teaching of his predecessors. In this section, Irenaeus reads Gen 1:3 prosopologically in continuity with John 1:3. This reading is also supported by a series of "verbal" links to the language of Eph 4:5–6, and Eph 4:15–16/Col 2:19.
Irenaeus' prosopological exegesis of Gen 1:3 is distinctly "trinitarian." The allusions to God "speaking," for Irenaeus, are a clear delineation of the divine roles in creation.66 Steenberg is right to note that Irenaeus ignores the imagery of "light" (lux), which is so essential to Philonic and Gnostic readings of Gen
1:3, to concentrate solely on the "triune nature of God's creative activity."67 He begins with the claim that God created all things by the Word, alluding to John
1:3, and then cites Gen 1:3 saying, "God said, Let there be light: and there was
64 Charles E. Hill, From the Lost Teaching of Polycarp: Identifying Irenaeus' Apostolic Presbyter and the Author of Ad Diognetum. Hill, "Polycarp Contra Marcion Irenaeus' Presbyterial
Source in Haer. 4.27–32," StuPat 40 (2006): 399–412.
65 In keeping with his intertextual perspective, Irenaeus notes the result of departing from the unity of the Testaments results in "inconsistency" (incongruentiam) and "contradictions" (contradictiones). The only difference in this instance is that Irenaeus attributes this intertextual perspective to Polycarp.
66 Steenberg, Irenaeus, 70. While Steenberg is right to say this is his only "quotation" of Gen
1:3, the parallel allusion to Gen 1:3 in Haer. 2.2.5 is unmistakable and supported by common textual referents. Steenberg, Irenaeus, 70.
67 Steenberg, Irenaeus, 71 n. 24. Orbe makes attempts to interpret lux Christologically, but the context does not support this rendering. This also indicates that Irenaeus and the Gnostics are not always debating the same texts, but networks of texts.
chapter 5 light" (Et dixit Deus: Fiat lux, et facta est lux).68 The emphasis is placed on the verb "said" (dixit) as representative of the Son's involvement in creation with God the Father. Irenaeus cites Gen 1:3 specifically because it reflects the first act of speaking creation into existence, thereby communicating the notion that the Son is with the Father from the beginning of creation. He could have included any number of texts From Gen 1 that contain God speaking creation into existence, such as Gen 1:6 and Gen 1:9.69
These specific "verbal" links are supported by a range of Pauline and Johannine texts including: John 1:3, Eph 4:5–6, and Eph 4:15–16/Col 2:19.
Together with Gen 1:3, all these texts communicate the unity of God in creation and the efficiency of his Word. In this sense the New Testament revelation gives identity to the nature of God acting in creation in Gen 1. I have already mentioned that Irenaeus alludes to the activity of the Word in creation in John 1:3, but he also adds a citation that even more clearly expresses the concept that all things were made in and through the Word. The use of Eph 4:5–6 expresses the singularity of God and the three-fold expression that God the Father is above all, in all, and through all.70 Irenaeus uses this three-fold expression of Eph 4:5–6 as evidence of a triune God, who is over all creation. For Irenaeus, the blending of these three texts Gen 1:3, John 1:3, and Eph 4:5–6 teach that the Father created all things by means of the Son.
The sources of these allusions also point to the unity between Mosaic account, the Gospels, and the apostolic testimony in their teaching that there is one God who made all things by the Word. This belief, for Irenaeus, is the "head" (caput) or foundation upon which all beliefs (or scriptures) rests. He joins these three allusions with another echo of Paul's imagery of the body in Eph 4:16/Col 2:19, which he applies to his intertextual perspective of Genesis.71
According to Irenaeus, the true interpreter of scripture must, first of all, grasp the "head" (caput) of the (scriptural) body (Eph 4:15–16/Col 2:19), which is the doctrine of the creation of all things by means of the Word of God (Gen 1:3,
John 1:3, and Eph 4:5–6). Then, after acknowledging this doctrinal "head," the 68 Haer. 4.32.1. The emphasis on the consistency of the words (omnis sermo ei constabit) contributes to the notion of intertextuality in Irenaeus.
69 His use of Gen 1:3 is unusual, because I would expect Gen 1:26 in this context since he typically uses this text to speak of the divine proclamations. For this reason, I suspect in this case Irenaeus is actually reading or citing the teaching of the presbyter. Outside of this passage, his use of Gen 1:3 is rare. Cf. Haer. 2.2.5.
70 CSf. Epid 5, Haer. 2.2.5–6; and Haer. 5.17.4.
71 Noormann, Irenäus, 243.