Valentinian Influence on Irenaeus: Early Allegorization of the New Testament

Chapter 16 Valentinian Influence on Irenaeus: Early Allegorization of the New Testament David W. Jorgensen There is widespread agreement among historians of early Christianity that Irenaeus of Lyons marks a watershed moment in the development of both Christian theology and Christian biblical hermeneutics.1 Irenaeus has been called the first Christian systematic theologian on record, as he builds a unified theology out of an emerging biblical canon whose contours he helped rein- force by means of his own utilization of them in his grand narrative.2 The first, so far as we know, to describe and defend the fourfold gospel, he also included as authoritative the Acts of the Apostles, most of the greater Pauline corpus, most of the catholic letters, and the Revelation of John. Elevating all of these writings to the level of the Hebrew Scriptures, he narrates an unfolding history of salvation that incorporates all of these disparate materials into a unified whole, a “Scripture” with a single author (God), a single hero (Christ),3 and a 1 The version of this paper presented at the Rome conference was based on chapter 3 of my then-forthcoming 2014 doctoral dissertation, which has since been published as Treasure Hidden in a Field: Early Christian Reception of the Gospel of Matthew (Berlin: de Gruyter 2016). It is published here with the kind permission of de Gruyter. It is my hope that the argument presented in this paper, freed from the rest of the chapter (which contained meticulous analysis of Valentinian cosmological speculation), and supplemented by some examples that are absent from the book, may be seen more clearly than in the chapter. At the same time, the reader is referred to the book for further detail. The present article is also the sequel to “Nor is One Ambiguity Resolved by Another Ambiguity: Irenaeus of Lyons and the Rhetoric of Interpretation” (2013), which in similar fashion presents the core argument of chapter 2 of the dissertation and book. 2 Young, Art of Performance, 54, 63. For similar claims, see Osborn, Irenaeus, xiv; Meeks, Moral World, 159–60; Greer, “Christian Bible,” 156. Of course, once we accept the Valentinians as Christians, then the authors of those Valentinian systematic treatises (ὑπομνήματα) known to Irenaeus might well lay claim to this title, depending upon how we define “systematic theology.” Furthermore, depending upon how we date some of the pseudepigraphic and anonymous systematic treatises from Nag Hammadi, the same might be said for them; e.g., the Valentinian Tripartite Tractate (NHC I,5), the untitled tractate known as A Valentinian Exposition (NHC XI,2), the untitled, non-Valentinian tractate known as On the Origin of the World (NHC II,5), and the Apocryphon of John. Cf. Thomassen, Spiritual Seed, 20–22. 3 Greer, “Christian Bible,” 155–56. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004414815_018 Valentinian Influence on Irenaeus 401 single underlying hypothesis (ὑπόθεσις; argumentum). This last term, having its origins in Greek rhetorical education, indicates the matter that lies at the basis of any written or artistic representation, including its plot, subject matter, con- tents, theme, and/or its “argument.”4 In analyzing a poem, a dramatic piece or a political speech, one might attempt to demonstrate that a proposed hypo thesis is the “real” one; that is, the one intended by the author. Irenaeus works hard to demonstrate not only the truth of his hypothesis, but that “Scripture,” as he defines its borders, has one at all.5 As Elaine Pagels incisively points out, if second-century Christians had thought Irenaeus’ hypothesis was obvious, he would not have needed to compose a massive, five-volume refutation of the alternatives.6 Nonetheless, Irenaeus’ postulation of what he calls the apostolic faith was to prove enormously influential. Rowan Greer writes: [I]n broad terms the theological framework articulated by Irenaeus re- mains a constant throughout the [third to fifth centuries]. Christian theology revolves around the Christian story that traces human progress from creation to the incarnation and to its consummation in the age to come. The story moves from the immaturity or the unstable perfection of Adam in paradise to the maturity or stable perfection of the resurrection life in the heavenly city.7 Greer presents here an abridged version of Irenaeus’ “story” or hypothesis, which Irenaeus himself presents three times in slightly different ways, at Haer. 1.10.1, 1.22.1, and 3.4.2, the first and third of which contain numerous elements that would appear in later creeds. As Frances Young points out,8 none of these Irenaean “stories” are adequate summaries of Scripture, as they omit signifi- cant events from Israel’s history while including some elements, such as the eternal punishment of rebellious angels, that have no obvious counterpart in the writings Irenaeus found authoritative.9 The history of salvation narrative that Irenaeus tells is necessarily selective in its use of “Scripture.” “Yet its power,” 4 Grant, Irenaeus, 47–49. 5 Grant, Irenaeus, 46. 6 Pagels, “Irenaeus,” 351. 7 Greer, “Christian Bible,” 185. 8 Young, Art of Performance, 49–54. 9 However, see Schultz, “Origin of Sin.” Schultz’s analysis of Irenaeus’ dependence on texts such as 1 Enoch, The Apocalypse of Moses, The Life of Adam and Eve, and other Jewish pseude- pigraphical texts for his theology raises the question of whether Irenaeus would have consid- ered these texts “Scripture.”.

Load more