202 Irenaeus: Life, Scripture, Legacyof the one gospel as influenced by the differing backgrounds, characteristics and his-
tories of the evangelists,^9 so he understands Paul’s unique linguistic style and turns of
phrase (which he acknowledges can be misleading to some readers),^10 and so, too, he
understands the various means by which the truth can be examined and articulated
by human reason and expression. Irenaeus’s philosophical and cultural background
comes to bear here, and is not insubstantial. Among the traditions with which he was
aware, and with which he engages (Osborn follows Benoit and indicates 32 occasions
in the Ref. on which Irenaeus explicitly cites the opinions of various philosophers,
most of which occur in book II^11 ), we can list the Middle Platonic, Stoic and Second
Sophistic philosophies of the period; and he himself reveals his knowledge of writers
such as Plato, Homer, Hesiod, and Pindar, as well as Aristophanes, Menander, and
the pre-Socratics (particularly Xenophanes).^12 Whilst he tends not to engage directly
with philosophical expression to anything near the degree of other writers of his era,
this background is nonetheless an important part of his own formation and context,
and Irenaeus certainly sees the best of “Pagan learning” as part of God’s redemptive
economy, useful to the Christian.^13
Yet it is in interpersonal contacts, rather than systems or schools, that Irenaeus’s
real influences lie—and of these he had many. Once in Rome (having perhaps followed
Polycarp there c. 155), and later in Gaul, Irenaeus became part of a network of sig-
nificant ecclesiastical and theological figures that he in some sense expanded through
his own background. His interactions with pope Victor betray a certain ecclesiastical
significance, whatever his rank of presbyter may have meant in that age; and those
same interactions also give evidence of ongoing links with the Asiatic traditions from
which he had come. Beyond that dispute, Irenaeus acknowledges a wide array of influ-
ences. He more than one refers to respected elders and “certain men of ours” in his
writings, one of which is Papias, another certainly Ignatius of Antioch^14 ; and of the
apostolic fathers such as Clement and the author of the Shepherd of Hermas he had a
respect strong enough to consider their texts scriptural.^15 While it cannot be proved,
his familiarity with the writings of Theophilus in Antioch seems fairly certain, given
the similarities between portions of the Ad Autolycum and Irenaeus’s comments in
both the Refutation and Demonstration.^16 How precisely Irenaeus would have known
Theophilus’s works is a curious, and utterly speculative, question, especially given their
overlapping chronologies.^17 Perhaps it can be attributed to Rome’s significance in terms
of intellectual and anti-Pagan Christian thought, attracting copies of relevant works
from elsewhere, particularly amidst the flourish of apologetic activity that was only just
calming in Irenaeus’s day.
Somewhat more secure are the speculations we can put forward with regard to Jus-
tin’s influence on Irenaeus. While he never mentions having met him, it seems entirely
unlikely that Irenaeus would not have known Justin personally during his time in Rome.
Justin was a significant figure, Irenaeus had a propensity for “sitting at the feet” of Chris-
tian teachers, and their dates put them in the city simultaneously for perhaps as many as
ten or twelve years.^18 Justin’s influence is certainly apparent in Irenaeus’ writing.^19
And then, of course, there is Valentinus. Irenaeus’s great foe (at least rhetorically,
pastorally) had once been an eminent member of the Christian community in Rome,