Reading Gnostic Creation: the Intertextual Reception of Genesis 1–3 in Book 1 of Adversus Haereses

CHAPTER 2 Reading Gnostic Creation: The Intertextual Reception of Genesis 1–3 in Book 1 of Adversus Haereses

2.1 Introduction

This study of Irenaeus’ intertextual reading of Gen 1–3 begins with Haer. 1, where the Bishop of Lyons composes a protracted critique of the Gnostic communities found in Lyons and throughout the Mediterranean region.1 In the opening lines of Adversus Haereses he explains that he is writing to expose their origin, nature, and doctrine. He begins with the Valentinian thought pre- cipitating in the followers of Ptolemaeus, since he is particularly concerned with the way their teaching had been taking root in the communities sur- rounding the Rhone Valley.2 Irenaeus reports that he had personal conversa- tions with the disciples of Valentinus and other sects in order to get a firsthand account of their doctrines, and he compiles his understanding of their basic theological assertions.3 Therefore, the texts of Haer. 1 unfolds as a carefully summarized theological catalogue of Ptolemean Valentinianism and other related streams of Gnosticism, with particular attention given to the theological and cosmological

1 Haer. 1.pf.1. Following the contributions of Michael Williams and Karen King, the labels “Gnostic” and “Gnosticism” continue to be problematic and potentially misleading. Wherever possible I will identify the specific school or community in view. However, I will retain the label “Gnostic,” because some of Irenaeus’ discussions are intentionally general thus the more inclusive descriptions are necessary as indicators of all the groups Irenaeus’ mentions throughout Adversus Haereses. See Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism.” Karen L. King, What Is Gnosticism? (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003). For a similar suggestion see Steenberg, Irenaeus, 15. For a discussion of various labels Irenaeus’ gives his Valentinian opponents see Einar Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed: The Church of the ‘Valentinians’ (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 13–22. 2 Haer. 1.13.7. Grant, Irenaeus, 21. 3 Haer. 1.pf.2. He also mentions Ptolemaeus in Haer. 1.12.1 and Haer. 2.4.1. W.C. Van Unnik, Newly Discovered Gnostic Writings: A preliminary survey of the Nag Hammadi find (London: SCM Press, 1960), 62. See David Tripp, “The Original Sequence of Irenaeus ‘Adversus Haereses’ 1: A Suggestion,” SecCent. 8 (1991): 157–62. Eusebius mentions this work in Hist. eccl. 3.23.3 and Hist. eccl. 5.7.1.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ��5 | doi ��.��63/9789004294523_003 READING GNOSTIC CREATION 47 framework of each sect.4 Excluding the preface in Haer. 1.pf.1–2 and the con- clusion in Haer. 1.31.3–4, the contents comprise three main sections. First, in Haer. 1.1–9 Irenaeus examines the doctrines of Ptolemean Valentinianism, especially their cosmology and cosmogony. Second, in Haer. 1.10–22 he con- trasts the diversity of the heretics’ systems with the unity of the teaching of the church. Finally, in Haer. 1.23–31.2 he identifies the origins and ancestry of Valentinianism.5 While Irenaeus’ catalog of heretics is clearly dependent upon earlier sources, his summary of Valentinianism and related streams is the old- est surviving account.6 Within this summary, Irenaeus provides several descriptions of the Gnostic reading of Gen 1–3. Though scholars question the reliability of Irenaeus’ pre- sentation of the views of his opponents, his analysis of their views is brief and focused.7 His evaluation of their exegesis shows that the Gnostics actually uti- lize reading strategies that, in many ways, mirror Irenaeus’ own intertextual exegesis.8 Beginning with Haer. 1, Irenaeus describes how Gnostic intertextual- ity unites the texts of Gen 1–3 with other scriptural imagery and extra-biblical material. The style of these intertextual connections can be framed within a set of conceptual categories including: a general literary reading of Gen 1–3, catchwords or verbal connections, prosopological interpretation, illustrative application, and gematria. The Gnostics, however, are less concerned with the intertextual connections between scriptural passages than with the harmonization of scripture to their various cosmological accounts. In his summary of the Gnostic exegesis of Gen 1–3, Gerard Luttikhuizen makes a similar observation saying, “[t]he intertextual tension between the biblical texts and their Gnostic interpreta- tions betrays that on essential points the thought structure of the interpreters

4 The summary of the contents of Haer. 1 is also found in Haer. 2.pf.1. On the relationship (or lack there of) between Valentinus and the Valentinians see: Christoph Markschies, Valentinus Gnosticus? Untersuchungen zur Valentinianischen Gnosis mit einem Kommentar zu den Fragmenten Valentinus (Tübigen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1992). 5 SC 264.28–152. 6 Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, 9; cf. Haer. 1.pf.2; 1.13.3; 1.15.6; 3.17.4; 4.pf.2. 7 Haer. 1.pf.2. For a discussion on the reliability of Irenaeus’ representation see: Steenberg, Irenaeus, 11; Thomas Holsinger-Friesen, Irenaeus, 43–50; Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, 12–13; Perkins, “Irenaeus and the Gnostics: Rhetoric and Composition in Adversus Haereses Book One,” VC 30 (1976): 193–200. 8 BP notes a reference to Gen 1:26 in Haer. 1.15.3, Gen 3:1 in Haer. 1.30.14, and Gen 3:18 in Haer. 1.24.2, but these echoes were not definitive enough for consideration.