My book reviews include full spoilers. To see other books I’ve reviewed, please click HERE.
Title: Against Heresies (Books I-III)
Author: Irenaeus of Lyon
Copyright Date: (A) March 23, 2021
Narrated by: Peter Brooke
Audio length: 13 hours, 53 minutes
Summary
(via amazon)
St. Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyon, France, wrote Against Heresies in 180 AD. It is a collected work made up of five books, in which Irenaeus examines the many schools of Gnostic thought of his day, in addition to various heretical Christian sects. He contrasts these with the orthodoxy of Christianity. This version of the work contains the first three books, which, before the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library, were the best surviving description of Gnosticism. The early authorship of the document gives a rare window into the doctrine of the early church, and what scriptures were considered genuine.
(via wiki)
Against Heresies is a work of Christian theology written in Greek by Irenaeus, the bishop of Lugdunum (now Lyon in France). Due to its reference to Eleutherus as the current bishop of Rome, the work is usually dated c. 180. In it, Irenaeus identifies and describes several schools of Gnosticism, and other schools of Christian thought, whose beliefs he rejects as heresy. He contrasts them with orthodox Christianity (proto-orthodox Christianity).
Only fragments of the original text in ancient Greek remain today, but a complete (less one paragraph) Latin translation – “very ancient”, “probably made in the fourth or early fifth century” – still survives. Books IV and V exist in their entirety in a literal version in Armenian. There are quotations in Syriac, but it is not clear if a translation of the whole was ever made into Syriac.
Against Heresies (Latin: Adversus haereses, Greek: Κατὰ αἱρέσεων), also given as Against the Heresies, is the conventional name for the work. That name for it comes from Eusebius, whose Ecclesiastical History contains many quotations from Against Heresies. The original title of the work, in Koine Greek, was Ἔλεγχος καὶ ἀνατροπὴ τῆς ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως (Elenchos kai anatropē tēs pseudōnymou gnōseōs). And so in English the work is sometimes referred to by translations of the full Greek title, such as Refutation and Overthrow of the Knowledge Falsely So-called, The Detection and Overthrow of Knowledge Falsely So-Called, Detection and Overthrow of Knowledge Falsely So-Called, The Refutation and Overthrowal of Knowledge falsely so-called, and Refutation and Overthrowal of Knowledge falsely so-called.
The final phrase “of knowledge falsely so-called” (Ancient Greek: tes pseudonymou gnoseos genitive case; or nominative case pseudonymos gnosis – ψευδώνυμος pseudonymos meaning “under a false name, falsely called”) is found in 1 Timothy 6:20
Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the profane chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge; …
Historical importance
Until the discovery of the Library of Nag Hammadi in 1945, Against Heresies was the best surviving contemporary description of Gnosticism. Today, the treatise remains historically important as one of the first unambiguous attestations of the canonical gospel texts and some of the Pauline epistles. Irenaeus cites from most of the New Testament canon, as well as the noncanonical works 1 Clement and The Shepherd of Hermas; however, he makes no references to Philemon, 2 Peter, 3 John or Jude – four of the shortest epistles.
Purpose
Against Heresies can be dated to sometime between 174 and 189 AD, as the list of the Bishops of Rome includes Eleutherius, but not his successor Victor. The earliest manuscript fragment of Against Heresies, P. Oxy. 405, dates to around 200 AD.
Irenaeus’ primary goal in writing Against Heresies was to attack sects that deviated from Christianity, mainly the Gnostics and Marcionites. In particular, he sought to disprove what he saw as incorrect interpretations of scripture on the part of Gnostics such as Valentinus. Irenaeus sought to present “what was understood as an authentic form of century-old Christian tradition against various forms of Gnosticism”. As James VanderKam notes, elements of this early Christian tradition drawn upon by Irenaeus include apocalyptic traditions such as 1 Enoch.
As bishop, Irenaeus felt compelled to keep a close eye on the Valentinians and to safeguard the church from them. In order to fulfill this duty, Irenaeus became well informed of Gnostic doctrines and traditions. His studies of Gnosticism eventually led to the compilation of this treatise.
Main ideas
Irenaeus argued that orthodox Christianity was passed down to him from the apostles who knew Jesus personally, while the Gnostics and Marcionites were distorting this apostolic tradition.
While the Gnostics offered salvation through secret knowledge available only to a few, Irenaeus contended that the true doctrines of the Christian faith are identical even when taught by bishops in different areas.
While many of the Gnostics viewed the material world as flawed and from which believers sought to escape to an eternal realm of spirit, Irenaeus saw creation as good and ultimately destined for glorification. As Mark Jeffrey Olson points out, 1 Corinthians 15:50 is quoted more than any other verse from the letters of Paul in Against Heresies:
I tell you this, brethren: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.
— 1 Corinthians 15:50, RSV
Both Irenaeus and the Valentinians use this verse to argue for their own understandings of the resurrection of the dead. The Valentinians believed that resurrection was a purely spiritual phenomenon, while Irenaeus insisted that Christians would be raised from the dead in fleshly bodies. According to Irenaeus, this verse was used by the Gnostics to argue that “the handiwork of God is not saved”.
Irenaeus also polemicized against Marcion of Sinope, who preached that the creator God of the Hebrew Bible and the Father of Jesus Christ were two different Gods. Irenaeus argues that the same God who sent Jesus to the Earth also led man through history by way of the Jewish law and prophets.
Contents
- Book 1: I. Valentinus, II. the Propator, III. the misuse of the Bible, IV. the mother Achamoth, V. the Demiurge, VI. The threefold man, VII. against the incarnation, VIII. the Valentinians misuse of the Bible, IX. refutation by Irenaeus, X. the unity of the church, XI. Valentinus’ disciples and others. XII. Ptolemy and Colorbasus. XIII. Marcus. XIV. letters and syllables. XV. Sige on the twenty-four elements. XVI. the Marcosians. XVII. Marcosians. XVIII. Misuse of passages from Genesis. XIX. misuse of Bible XX. apocryphal scriptures, XXI. the heretics on redemption, XXII. deviations from the truth. XXIII. Simon Magus and Menander. XXIV. Saturninus and Basilides. XXV. Carpocrates. XXVI. Cerinthus, the Ebionites, and Nicolaitans. XXVII. Cerdo and Marcion. XXVIII. Tatian, the Encratites. XXIX. Borborians. XXX. Ophites and Sethians. XXXI. Cainites and conclusion of Book I.
- Book 2: A rebuttal of the Gnostic systems employing philosophical arguments primarily rather than employing Scripture.
- Book 3: Rebuttal based on apostolic succession and tradition passed down of the faith; defense of the incarnation of Jesus; defense of the virgin birth.
My Review
If you are an enjoyer of theology, or of Church History, I highly recommend tackling this 2nd century text. Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of John the Apostle, so the chain of custody between the teachings of Jesus, directly, to the author of this text is relatively small.
This book is a very challenging read (or listen, as was the case for me) if you are unfamiliar with the Gnosticism that was growing up alongside the early Church. The book is valuable in the sense that it provides one of the earliest contemporary accounts of what those early Gnostics believed. It’s also valuable inasmuch as it is also one of the earliest non-Canon texts that identify what the official Church believed. As to the latter, this remains relevant today as that topic remains debated, even if the cause of that debate is usually no longer Gnostic heretics.
Gnosticism is difficult to pin down because it is not a unified set of ideas. The closest analogy I can come up with, to explain what these groups did, is to compare them with modern day political conspiracy theorists. In a lot of cases, these groups seem to be the product of pattern recognition gone wrong. A person, professing unique insight, might notice that the Bible makes use of the number 12 a lot, and come up with an explanation and belief-system as to why. That person would then use this system to assert a knowledge-based authority over the actual Church hierarchy. The problem with these diverse groups – as Irenaeus shows – is that their systems don’t hold up after scrutiny. Most people, though, do not possess the knowledge or time to do a broad and thorough rebuttal, so they remain potential targets of these false teachings.
I found the effort of Irenaeus in the book to be really useful, in a broad sense. Even though I approached the book without a deep knowledge of the topic about which he was issuing a rebuttal, I did learn from the systematic refutations and rebuttals he provided. In general, the Gnostics and other heretics seem to be consistently preying upon the same thing over and over. Human beings are skilled with pattern recognition. Scripture has several areas wherein God appears to be operating with some kind of unexpounded upon pattern. A lot of people struggle to accept that there are things that are unrevealed and unexplained – so much so that they are willing to create or accept bad explanations. This is an impulse that everyone must attempt to check in themselves, otherwise we risk letting curiosity or pride lead us away from truth, in the name of pursuing truth. David addressed this in the Psalms.
131 O Lord, my heart is not lifted up; my eyes are not raised too high; I do not occupy myself with things too great and too marvelous for me.
2 But I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with its mother; like a weaned child is my soul within me.
3 O Israel, hope in the Lord from this time forth and forevermore.
Some things are just too big for us to understand, and we shouldn’t dwell on them. The knowledge and understanding that we do possess is sufficient for our needs.
The most relevant portion of this audiobook was Book III. This gives us a pretty clear picture of the beliefs of the 2nd century Church. Irenaeus was taught by Polycarp who was taught by John the Apostle. This text makes a very early case for the Papacy, citing its authority and providing a history of every Bishop of Rome until his own time. That’s probably inconvenient for a lot of assertions often made today about the role of the Papacy and the early Church. He also makes a lengthy argument for Church tradition and for the pre-Christian Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint.) That is again very inconvenient for a lot of modern self-identifying Christians. The Gnostics rely on their adherents to trust in the special knowledge of people outside the Church. Irenaeus makes the argument that there is a traceable and reliable chain of discipleship from the Apostles until the present. He notes that it makes no sense to believe that one of the Gnostic teachers might possess knowledge that the Apostles did not possess or pass down. Not only that, these teachings often are in contradiction with the teaching of the Apostles.
Having finished the first three books, I do regret not picking up an audio copy that includes Book IV and V, which continue to be focused on the beliefs and teaching of the early Church at this time. The text became much more explicable once the author stopped writing about things like tetrads and demiurges. Books I and II were a slow listen, with a lot of internet search explanations executed, whereas Book III was much more familiar ground.
My advice to anyone who wants to read this would be to familiarize yourself with Gnosticism and its terminology first, at least to some degree, before you begin this book. It is interesting but it does feel like you are listening to a foreign language without that background knowledge. If you just want to familiarize yourself with “what did the early Church believe” though, you can probably just read Book III without the context of the first two books and get a lot from that effort.
Overall, I’m really glad that I read this and I might now undertake to better understand a lot of the Gnostic and early Church heresies about which Irenaeus was writing.
