Stephen O Presley, The Intertextual Reception of Genesis 1–3 in Irenaeus of Lyons

D. Driver
{"title":"Stephen O Presley, The Intertextual Reception of Genesis 1–3 in Irenaeus of Lyons","authors":"D. Driver","doi":"10.1177/1063851220907982","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Irenaeus of Lyons is known as an early Christian apologist and theologian of creation. He has also been called the first biblical theologian. All of these elements are in view in Stephen Presley’s The Intertextual Reception of Genesis 1–3 in Irenaeus of Lyons (Leiden: Brill, 2015). A revision of his PhD at the University of St. Andrews, completed under the supervision of Mark Elliott, the study also pays a debt to D. Jeffrey Bingham, both as the teacher who first helped Presley conceive of the project and as the editor who brought it to print in Brill’s The Bible in Ancient Christianity series. It is easy enough to find accounts of Irenaeus that focus on his anti-Gnostic polemic. Such accounts seem bound to call “problematic” his description of the Ebionites, Marcion, Valentinus, and others. It is also common to see the spotlight trained on Irenaeus the trinitarian theologian. Both accounts tend to prioritize his proto-creedal commitments over his exegetical operations. Either way, whether one is thinking of Irenaeus and the heretics or Irenaeus and the scriptures, it can be difficult to avoid the impression that his work is important for some reason other than his ability to read well. The great value of Presley’s study, which builds on two earlier monographs on the use of Genesis in Irenaeus, is its exhaustive description of precisely how Genesis 1–3 functions across all five books of Adversus haereses. Irenaeus is given his due as an apologist, with acknowledged limitations, and as a theologian, especially of creation, but it is his handling of scripture that takes center stage. Presley treats “every verifiable echo, allusion, and citation of Gen 1–3” in Haer., together with the scriptural intertexts that are drawn into the orbit of Gen 1–3 (pp. 5, 241). On this account, Irenaeus emerges as a biblically minded theologian of creation whose handling of Christian scripture is marked by hermeneutical complexity and sophistication. 907982 PRE0010.1177/1063851220907982Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theologybook review book-review2020","PeriodicalId":223812,"journal":{"name":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1063851220907982","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Irenaeus of Lyons is known as an early Christian apologist and theologian of creation. He has also been called the first biblical theologian. All of these elements are in view in Stephen Presley’s The Intertextual Reception of Genesis 1–3 in Irenaeus of Lyons (Leiden: Brill, 2015). A revision of his PhD at the University of St. Andrews, completed under the supervision of Mark Elliott, the study also pays a debt to D. Jeffrey Bingham, both as the teacher who first helped Presley conceive of the project and as the editor who brought it to print in Brill’s The Bible in Ancient Christianity series. It is easy enough to find accounts of Irenaeus that focus on his anti-Gnostic polemic. Such accounts seem bound to call “problematic” his description of the Ebionites, Marcion, Valentinus, and others. It is also common to see the spotlight trained on Irenaeus the trinitarian theologian. Both accounts tend to prioritize his proto-creedal commitments over his exegetical operations. Either way, whether one is thinking of Irenaeus and the heretics or Irenaeus and the scriptures, it can be difficult to avoid the impression that his work is important for some reason other than his ability to read well. The great value of Presley’s study, which builds on two earlier monographs on the use of Genesis in Irenaeus, is its exhaustive description of precisely how Genesis 1–3 functions across all five books of Adversus haereses. Irenaeus is given his due as an apologist, with acknowledged limitations, and as a theologian, especially of creation, but it is his handling of scripture that takes center stage. Presley treats “every verifiable echo, allusion, and citation of Gen 1–3” in Haer., together with the scriptural intertexts that are drawn into the orbit of Gen 1–3 (pp. 5, 241). On this account, Irenaeus emerges as a biblically minded theologian of creation whose handling of Christian scripture is marked by hermeneutical complexity and sophistication. 907982 PRE0010.1177/1063851220907982Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theologybook review book-review2020
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Stephen O Presley,里昂Irenaeus的《创世纪1-3的互文接受》
里昂的爱任纽被认为是早期基督教的辩护者和创造神学家。他也被称为第一位圣经神学家。所有这些元素都在Stephen Presley的《创世纪1-3的互文接受》(Leiden: Brill, 2015)中有所体现。这项研究是他在圣安德鲁斯大学(University of St. Andrews)的博士学位论文的修订版,是在马克·埃利奥特(Mark Elliott)的指导下完成的。这项研究也要感谢杰弗里·宾厄姆(D. Jeffrey Bingham),他既是第一个帮助普雷斯利构思这个项目的老师,也是把它印在布里尔(Brill)的《古代基督教中的圣经》系列丛书中的编辑。很容易找到对爱任纽的描述,集中在他的反诺斯替论战上。这样的叙述似乎必然会让他对伊便尼派、马吉安、瓦伦提努斯和其他人的描述“有问题”。我们也经常看到聚光灯对准三位一体神学家爱任纽。两种说法都倾向于优先考虑他的原始信条承诺,而不是他的训诂操作。不管怎样,不管一个人是想到爱任纽和异教徒,还是爱任纽和经文,都很难避免这样一种印象,即他的作品之所以重要,是因为他的阅读能力之外的原因。普雷斯利的研究是建立在两本早期关于《创世纪》在爱任纽的应用的专著之上的,它的巨大价值在于它详尽地描述了《创世纪》1-3是如何在《Adversus haereses》的五卷书中发挥作用的。爱任纽作为一个辩护者,有公认的局限性,作为一个神学家,尤其是创造学的神学家,得到了应有的评价,但他对圣经的处理才是最重要的。Presley在Haer中处理了“创世纪1-3的每一个可证实的回声、典喻和引用”。,以及《创世记》第1-3章的经文互文(第5,241页)。在这种情况下,爱任纽作为一个有圣经思想的创造神学家出现,他对基督教经文的处理以解释学的复杂性和复杂性为标志。907982 PRE0010.1177/1063851220907982Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical theology书评,书评,2020
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Catholicity and the Catholic Church: Protestant Concerns and (Roman) Catholic Perspectives Supremely Simple Trinity and Contemporary “Natural Theology”: Bonaventure Beyond Jenson and Plotinus Editor’s Note The Grammar of Salvation: The Function of Trinitarian Theology in the Works of Karen Kilby and Robert Jenson Reasons to Say Farewell
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1