Here in Part 3 of my series on Irenaeus’ Against Heresies, I’m going to focus Chapter 10 of Book 1, where, after detailing the particulars of Gnostic teachings in the first nine chapters, he contrasts all that with the unity and core teaching of the Apostolic Church.
Now, there are many so-called scholars these days who claim that there really was no unity within the early Church, that various groups all believed different things, and that there was no such actual doctrine unity until much later, particularly when Constantine the Great called the first Church Council in Nicaea in AD 325, forced such unity on the Church, and persecuted heretics. I call this the “Da Vinci Code version” of Church history, or more particularly, pseudo-history…or even more particularly, utter crap.
What it all boils down to is this: such so-called scholars look at the writings of early Church Fathers like Irenaeus and say, “Nu-uh! He’s lying! Dan Brown and Bart Ehrman are much more reliable!” Now, to be sure, as Irenaeus clearly emphasizes, there were a lot of different groups who really did teaching wildly different things. That is not in dispute. No one denies that. But Irenaeus makes it clear that these different groups sprung up after the time of the Apostles and had no root in the original teaching of those original Apostles. Therefore, Irenaeus goes to great lengths to contrast those later, wildly divergent sects and teachings with the earlier, original Church and Apostolic teaching. Furthermore, despite what these so-called scholars claim (namely that uniformity was only later imposed during the time of Constantine), what we see here in Irenaeus, in the mid-second century—a good 150 years before Nicaea—is a clear explanation of that original, Apostolic teaching. As we will see, much in the famous Nicene Creed can be seen in Irenaeus’ explanation of the basic teaching of the Apostolic Church. Simply put, Nicaea didn’t forcibly impose anything on the Church. Rather, it bore witness to core, Apostolic teaching that had been there all along.
Early Indications of Creed
We this here in Against Heresies 1:10.1, which I will quote (from my paraphrase) in full:
1By contrast, the Church, even though it is spread throughout the world, has received teaching directly from the apostles and in turn disciples everyone in this same faith:
The Church believes in one God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of heaven, earth, the sea, and everything in them.
We believe in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the various stages of God’s plan, the arrival of our Lord Jesus Christ, from his birth from a virgin, the passion, the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension to heaven in the flesh.
We believe He will appear in the future from heaven in the glory of the Father “to gather all things into one,” and to raise up anew all flesh of the entire human race, so that “every knee will bow—everything in heaven, on earth, and under the earth—and every tongue confess” that our Lord Jesus Christ is God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father.
We believe He will exercise righteous judgment for everyone. He will send spiritual wickedness, along with the angels who transgressed and the ungodly, unrighteous, wicked, and profane people into everlasting fire. And He will grant grace and immortality on those who are righteous, holy, and who have kept His commandments and have persevered in His love. It doesn’t matter if they have done so ever since the beginning or have repented later on—Christ will surround all of them with everlasting glory.
***
Long before the Nicene Creed, we have here in Irenaeus most of the core elements found in the Nicene Creed. First, there is a clear Trinitarian belief in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Second, there is clear emphasis is Christ’s taking on flesh—with the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension emphasized…and again in the flesh. Third, there is the belief of Christ’s future glorification throughout all flesh and creation. There is the teaching of Christ’s righteous judgment that will result in punishment for wickedness, and grace and immortality for the righteous.
These have always been the core, fundamental beliefs and teachings of the Church. These teachings are at the heart of the Christian faith. Anyone (be it ancient Gnostics or many so-called scholars) who claims that there was not originally a Trinitarian belief from the very beginning of Christianity is lying, pure and simple. We see such thinking in the writings of Paul and throughout the New Testament, we see the clearer formation of Trinitarian doctrine here in Irenaeus, and further clarification is made later on. But the point is, Trinitarian belief and teaching has been there from the beginning.
Another thing that often gets overlooked is the continual insistence that Christ took on flesh. Although He is one with the Father, He also became a living, breathing human being in the flesh. Back in Irenaeus’ time, the Gnostic teaching was that Christ never really was a real human being, but rather was some kind of airy “spirit” who came to give “secret knowledge” to a select few that taught them how to escape this “fleshly prison” and disgusting material creation. Irenaeus insists the precise opposite is true. Christ became flesh in order to redeem, sanctify, and transform flesh and the material creation into something more because flesh and the material creation was created by God and it is good…it is good…it is good.
If you don’t understand that, you do not understand the Christian concept of what salvation is. The Good News of salvation is that that we’ll “fly away” from this creation and be some sort of “spirits” flitting around in the clouds. The Good News of salvation is that this creation is good and that God, through Christ, will redeem and sanctify it. Our mortal flesh will be transformed to be immortal flesh. The Christian hope is that we will become like Christ WHO IS ONE WITH GOD AND YET WHO IS THE PERFECT IMAGE OF GOD. That is our human destiny—the transformation of the material creation and this human flesh.
The Unity of Christian Teaching
Irenaeus then says that those things he just articulated as the core teachings of the Church are held by all the churches throughout the world. They are, if you will, the real fundamentals of Christian teaching. He uses the analogy of a house, with the house itself being the Church, but all the individual congregations throughout the world being different rooms. Yes, there are different rooms, but it’s still one house with the same foundation. He writes in 1.10.2:
2The Church has received this preaching and this faith, even though it is scattered throughout the world. It’s like a house. Church members might be living in different rooms, but it’s still one house. Everyone in the Church believes the same points of doctrine, as if everyone had the same heart and soul. The Church proclaims this doctrine, teaches it, and hands it down in perfect harmony, as if it is all coming from the same mouth. Even though there might be different languages throughout the world, the basic Christian Tradition is one and the same.
Whether there are churches in Germany, Spain, Gaul, the East, Egypt, or Libya, or anywhere else, they do not believe or hand down anything different. Just like the same sun shines throughout the world, so too does the same Christian preaching of the truth shine everywhere and enlightens everyone who are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth.
And no matter how gifted or eloquent any Church leader may be, no one teaches any doctrines different from these, because they know that no one is greater than the Master—Jesus. Similarly, even if a Church leader is not the best speaker, he cannot harm Church Tradition, as long as he is committed to preaching what has been handed down. The faith is always one and the same no matter who is preaching it.
***
Again, some modern-day, so-called scholars scoff at what Irenaeus claims here about Church unity. They say it is an idealized caricature that really acted as a grasp for power against all the other, equally valid Christian groups with whom Irenaeus disagreed. According to them, there wasn’t any real unity; it was all just a wonderfully diversified movement…clearly patterned after our modern, postmodern notion of diversity and equity! And men like Irenaeus (and the later Nicene council) lined up on the side of the oppressor, while the tolerant and open-minded sects of Gnosticism were the oppressed.
Two things. First, the Church unity that Irenaeus emphasizes is centered on just those core elements of the historical Christian faith. Those were, and are, the defining points of faith and doctrine that define the historical Christian faith. There wasn’t the elaborate system of doctrines and denominational peculiarities at this time. Irenaeus is emphasizing the core beliefs that the Apostles handed down to the Church. Sure, there were, and are, some items that Christians have a difference of opinion on, but Irenaeus makes it clear: the true Church holds to these core beliefs, and if you reject those core beliefs, you are not a Christian. I’m sorry if that sounds “intolerant,” but the Christian faith in not the equivalent of some modern day think tank or political activist club.
Second, it doesn’t take a PhD to understand these core beliefs of the Church. Every Christian can understand them. Furthermore, as someone who grew up in Evangelicalism and is now Orthodox, this is something I have always seen in pretty much all Evangelical and Protestant churches I’ve been to. Most churches, most Christian schools, most Christian organizations have in their statement of faith these core beliefs. Sure, they add their own particular items at times, but the core beliefs that Irenaeus stated back in the second century are the same core beliefs in almost every Church around the world.
Heretical Teachers…the “Intellectual Scholars” of Their Day
Finally, in 1.10.3, Irenaeus says something that makes me immediately think of many modern so-called scholars who, though they may have a PhD in Biblical Studies or Theology, are nothing more than modern day heretics, pure and simple. He writes, “These heretics might be academically intelligent people, but that doesn’t mean they can go about changing the fundamentals of the Christian faith. They can’t just start making up another God besides the true Framer, Maker, and Preserver of the universe. They can’t just make up another Christ or another Only-Begotten.”
Personally, it has been so discouraging over the past few years to read so many academics, be it in Biblical Studies or Church History, who have gotten famous by putting forth claims that are not only directly contrary to the Christian faith, but are, quite simply, moronic and outlandish. And yet, for some reason, they are praised and treated like veritable oracles. And, sadly, I’ve seen a lot of people who may have grown up in Evangelicalism, but who have become so bitter that they haven’t simply rejected certain clear mistakes within Evangelicalism, but they have started to listen and parrot the teachings of certain scholars who are teaching things that completely go against the historical Christian faith. Simply put, some people’s bitterness against Evangelicalism has led them to accept and praise people who are undermining the historical Christian faith. And no, what these so-called scholars and modern-day heretics are claiming isn’t even intellectually and logically coherent. It is as fanciful and stupid as the Gnostic heretics and their “systems” that Irenaeus picks apart throughout his book.
How to Interpret the Bible
At the end of 1.10.3, Irenaeus suggests that the way to study the Bible is to always look for how something can build upon the fundamentals of the Christian faith. He then suggests we are to consider the following things:
- How God works toward human salvation
- How He put up with the apostasy of the angels who transgressed and the disobedience of men
- How some things are eternal and heavenly while others are temporal and earthly
- How God revealed Himself to the prophets in different ways
- How there was more than just one covenant given to mankind, and what each one was about
- Why the Word of God became flesh and suffered
- Why the coming of the Son of God took place in these last days and what the Scriptures said about both the end of this world and the things to come
- How God has made Gentiles co-heirs and part of the same body, with all the saints
- How the mortal body will take on immortality.
If you take the time to think about it, there is a lot of wisdom in what Irenaeus is saying here. Yes, as someone who has spent years “getting my academic degrees” and engaging in biblical exegesis, I know there is a lot to be gained by historical research and literary analysis of the Bible. Understanding the original context is crucial. At the same time, though, unless you can take all that academic study of the Bible and then take what you’ve learned and let it help illuminate those things that Irenaeus mentions, your academic study and degrees won’t amount to dung.
At the end of 1.10.3, Irenaeus takes one more jab at the Gnostic teachers of his day when he says, “Just because someone might more intelligent or be a better speaker, that doesn’t mean he can go beyond those things and start talking about “the Enthymesis of a mistake-prone Aeon,” or “a Pleroma containing thirty Aeons, then countless Aeons.” It’s blasphemy, pure and simple. Those kinds of “teachers” do not possess any divine wisdom whatsoever. By contrast, the true Orthodox Church possesses and preserves the same faith throughout the world.”
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. What Irenaeus said about those Gnostic teachers of his day is equally applicable to many modern-day, so-called scholars. My condensed paraphrase of Irenaeus is available on Amazon.
