5.10 The Spiritual Disciple and the Heretics: Haer. 4.33.4 and Haer. 4.34.4
Genesis, the Creation, and the Divine Economy interpreter will have the proper framework for reading scripture so that every part of the body of scripture will fit together in harmony.
5.10
The Spiritual Disciple and the Heretics: Haer. 4.33.4 and Haer. 4.34.4
Following his summary of the teaching of the presbyter, in Haer. 4.33–35 Irenaeus discusses how the "spiritual disciple" (1 Cor 2:15) judges the doctrines of those outside the church, especially the heretics including the Ebionites,
Marcion and Valentinus. Given the Ebionites rejection of the incarnation, Irenaeus again returns to his intertextual reading of Isa 7:14 alongside several passages including Gen 1:26 and Gen 2:7. Then his critique of Marcion and the Valentinians is organized around his interpretation of Isa 2:3–4 and the fulfillment of this passage in Christ this passage. Irenaeus' reading of both these texts depends upon an Adam-Christ typology, along with a David, Solomon, and Jonah-Christ typology that links the creation of Adam with the preexistence and economic activity of the Son.
5.10.1
Ebionites and the Incarnation: Haer. 4.33.4 (Gen 1:26; Gen 2:7) In Haer. 4.33.4 he responds to the Ebionites denial of the incarnation through a combination of allusions and echoes including: Gen 1:26, Gen 2:7, Isa 7:14,
Matt 12:41–42, Matt 22:29, and Matt 22:43. He questions their understanding of salvation and how even they could escape the corruption of their bodies unless God had given them a "sign of salvation" (signum . . . salutis, Isa 7:14).72
With a set of rhetorical questions, he explains how Christ, who was of the same fleshy substance as David, Solomon, and Jonah, could be greater than them and powerful enough to subdue the one who is "stronger than men" (hominem fortis erat), echoing the role of Satan in Adam's disobedience (Gen 3:1–6).73 His closing question and final statement function rhetorically as responses to all these theological dilemmas.
Alluding to the creation of humankind in Gen 1:26, Irenaeus asks, "but who else is more superior and excellent than the man who was formed after the likeness of God, except the Son of God, after whose image man was created?"
(Melior autem eo homine qui secundum similitudinem Dei factus est et praecellentior, quisnam sit alius nisi Filius Dei, ad cujus similitudinem factus est homo?,
Gen 1:26).74 Christ must be greater than all humanity because humankind was 72 Haer. 4.33.4. Cf. Orbe, "En torno a los Ebionitas," Aug 33 (1993): 315–37.
73 Cf. Matt 12:29, Matt 12:41–42, and Matt 22:43.
74 Haer. 4.33.4.
chapter 5 formed after his image and likeness. So also he is greater than David, Solomon, and Jonah (Matt 12:41–42, Matt 2:43), and the strong man, that is Satan, who subdued humanity (Matt 12:29, i.e. Gen 3:1–6). He was also God who was made human and received the birth from a virgin (Isa 7:14), thereby enacting the salvation from death. Irenaeus summarizes this conception of salvation in the closing lines with reference to the incarnation and the conflation of John
1:14, Gen 1:26, and Gen 2:7 saying: "For this reason in these last days he has revealed the similitude; for the Son of God was made human, assuming the ancient formation into his own nature" (Et propter hoc in fine ipse ostendit similitudinem Filius Dei, homo factus, antiquam plasmationem in semetipsum suscipiens).75 The language of Son of God "became human" (homo factus) and "ancient formation" (antiquam plasmationem) calls to mind the imagery of the Word becoming flesh in John 1:14 and the formation from the dust in Gen 2:7.76
Salvation, therefore, is enacted in the recaptulatory nature of the incarnation as reflected in similitude between Adam and Christ's formation.
5.10.2
Christ the Ploughshare and Pruning Hook: Haer. 4.34.4 (Gen 2:7, Gen 3:17–8) In Haer. 4.34–35 Irenaeus focuses his critique on Marcion, Valentinus, and their followers, and continues to develop typological relationships and illustrative readings of texts in response to their Christology. He begins his criticism by challenging them to read scriptures and the writings of the apostles carefully, because the whole life of Christ is predicted in them. He points to the realization of the New Covenant in Christ and the preaching of the apostles.77
The new covenant, inaugurated through the life of the incarnate Son of God, becomes the "law of life" (vivificatrix lex), or "law of liberty" (libertatis lex), as he will later state, that fulfills the Law of Moses.78 This change in covenant is anticipated in his discussion of Isa 2:3–4. Here Irenaeus finds the figuration of the Christ event in the imagery of the people of God transforming their swords into "ploughshares" (aratra) and their spears into "pruninghooks" ( falces).79
75 Haer. 4.33.4.
76 The echo of John 1:14 is not referenced in either BP or SC.
77 He also addresses those who wish to take up the position of the Jews and interpret the New Covenant as the construction of the temple under Zerubbabel. Irenaeus argues that during this time no new covenant was given because they were still function under the Mosaic Law. But from the time of Christ the new covenant, which brings peace and life has gone out to the whole earth.
78 Orbe, Teología IV, 475 n. 36.
79 Haer. 4.33.4.
Genesis, the Creation, and the Divine Economy In order to explain this transition, Irenaeus appeals to the language of John
4:37, "in him is the saying true" (hoc est sermo verus), to suggest that in Christ the proclamation of peace in Isa 2:3–4 is realized.80 But he points out that the same Son of God introduced both the plough and the pruning hook. In other words, the Son is both planting and harvesting.81 The distinction between the former and the latter is the distinctive economic stages of these events enacted through different human mediators. In the beginning, Adam and Abel prefigure the salvific activity of Son of God in Gen 2–4, while in the "last" days Christcrucified and the apostolic preaching mediate the fulfillment of salvation.
In terms of the Adam-Christ typology, Irenaeus argues that the Son of God introduced the "plough" (aratrum) at the first "formation of Adam" (Adam plasmatio), which most naturally applies to the formation from the dust in Gen 2:7. He describes the act of formation in Gen 2:7 as the "first semination"
(primam seminationem), which is characteristic of Middle-Platonic imagery of planting and semination of the soul.82 The Son of God is, quite literally, tilling the ground and planting the first human form upon the earth.83 Orbe vividly describes this event saying: "El Verbo labró la tierra virgen, sembrando en ella, con Adán, el humano plasma; y lo recogió con Cristo, fructificado ya a Su imagen y semejanza."84 However, it is obvious that the corresponding farming imagery contributes to Irenaeus' intertextual connections, including the language of "earth," "plough," "pruning hook," and the conceptual imagery of God molding Adam from the dust. When these images are applied to the life of Christ, the "plough" (aratrum) is revealed in the crucifixion when "wood joined with iron" (lignum copulatum ferro) so that Christ's bodily sacrifice
"cleansed his earth" (expurgavit ejus terram). This imagery points to Christ's crucified body nailed to the cross with iron spikes as the purification and atoning sacrifice. Through his bodily sacrifice on the cross, Christ "ploughs" the earthly substance of Adam's formation (Gen 2:7) and purifies it from all sin. The explicit substantival connection is that the plough, like the nails in 80 The text of John 4:37 is the conclusion to Jesus' discussion about the workers for the harvest in John 4:31–38. The context of reaping and sowing is a natural correlation to the farming imagery of ploughshares and pruning hooks.
81 Orbe, Teología IV, 476 n. 42. cf. I Apol, 55.
82 The language of "semination" (seminationem) has roots in Middle-Platonism as expressed in Justin's thought, but in this instance there is a complex scriptural basis for his use of this imagery. Mark Edwards, "On the Platonic Schooling of Justin Martyr," TS 42.1 (1991):
17–34.
83 This agricultural imagery calls to mind the language of Gen 2:5 where no one was found to work the ground and the planting of the Garden in Gen 2:8.
84 Orbe, Teología IV, 476 n. 43.