The immortality of the Soul

From the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Irenaeus deduces that the soul, although created, is immortal, for "souls continue to exist, that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgement."

Nonetheless, the soul is not immortal in its own right, but because it shares in life given to it by God.

Transmigration of Souls

In chapter 33 Irenaeus seeks to refute the doctrine of the transmigration of the soul based on the point that the soul does not remember its existence in other bodies other than its own.

Nonetheless, Irenaeus shares certain common ideas with his opponents which not all Christians would agree with. He definitely sees the soul as distinct from the body and to a certain extent superior to the body. Thus the body is the instrument, although the skilful working of God, is still the "instrument" with the soul being the artist which possesses it and has power over it.

Irenaeus also believes that the number of souls are forordained by God and that when this number is reached, then the end will come.

Not greater than the creator

In chapters 29-32 Irenaeus focuses on the blasphemous claims made by some heretics that being spiritual they are greater than the Creator God (Demiurge) who is animal.

In this section we also get some interesting opinions on:

The Role and future of the Body

"those acts which are deemed righteous are performed in bodies...God, when He resuscitates our mortal bodies which preserved righteousness, will render them incorruptible and immortal."

Statement of Apostolic Tradition

"But there is one only God, the Creator...He it is whom the law proclaims, whom the prophets preach, whom Christ reveals, whom the apostles make known to us, and in whom the Church believes. He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed and manifested to all to whom He is revealed; for those [only] know Him to whom the Son has revealed Him. But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues, and all to whom He wills that God should be revealed."

On the Contemporary Nature of the Miraculous Spiritual Gifts

"Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform [miracles]... For some do certainly and truly drive out devils...Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years."

Humble epistemology continued

In chapter 28 we see Irenaeus continue in his defence of a humble epistemology. That which is not clear in Scripture should be entrusted to God and not lead to idle speculation. From this perspective the problem with heretics is that they seek to know too much.

Is Irenaeus' christology subordinationist? Certainly this chapter seems to lead us in that direction.

Humble Epistemology

In chapter 24 Ireneaus argues for a form of humble epistemology recognising that one "
"cannot have experience or form a conception of all things like God;" and mocks a biblical literalism, of which fundamentalists are enamoured, that would deeply investigate passages such as “even the hairs of your head are all numbered,” (Mat_10:30) or “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and not one of them falls to the ground without the will of your Father,” (Mat_10:29) .

Esoteric Hermeneutics

In chapters 21-24 Ireneaus protests against the habit of his opponents of reading references to the Aeons in the NT. He also objects to their focus on numbers, syllables and letters in the Biblical text.

Chapter 22 is the most curious in this section. Ireneaus is arguing against the claim that Jesus exerted his ministry for one year. Against what he sees as a literalistic interpretation of Isaiah 61:2 he claims:
(i) That "the prophets have very often expressed themselves in parables and allegories, and [are] not [to be understood] according to the mere sound of the words."
(ii) The year of the Lord is to be understood as the whole period of time during which men here and receive the Gospel in faith.
(iii) That Jesus celebrated the Passover on more than one occasion, according to the Gospel of John and therefore his ministry lasted more than one year.
(iv) In a more bizarre fashion that Jesus died at the age of 50. Amongst his arguments for this are:
(a) That to redeem mankind Jesus had to go through all the ages up to old age [50 in his context]. Yet by that argument Jesus would also have to be a woman to redeem women.
(b) That when his opponents complained that Jesus was not yet 50 but claimed to have seen Abraham this suggests that he was over 40, otherwise they would have said that Jesus was not yet 40. In this argument he also declares that Jesus was not "a mere phantasm, but an actual being of flesh and blood"
(c) That to be considered a Master and a Teacher Jesus could not have been 30.
(d) That there was a tradition going back to John and other apostles that Jesus was crucified at 50.

Deconstructing heresy

In chapters 15-20 of Book 2 Ireneaus continues to deconstruct his opponents ideas, at times showing a sense of humour as when he replies to his critics claims that he is ignorant because he is in a lower Aeon, he replies that anyone can postulate an unlimited number of Aeons and place their opponents in the lower realms.

In contrast to the gnostic complexity, his view of creation is that "this God, the Creator, who formed the world, is the only God, and that there is no other God besides Him — He Himself receiving from Himself the model and figure of those things which have been made".

Thinking just a bit outside the box, I started to wonder whether the later classical insistence on the impassibility of God was not in part a reaction to the simply bizarre nature of the gnostic theogenies.

At the end of this section Ireneaus deals with bizarre claims trying to link Judas and the suffering of Christ to the sufferings of a twelfth Aeon. In reply he presents his understanding of Christ's death as:
"but the Lord suffered that He might bring those who have wandered from the Father, back to knowledge and to His fellowship...but the Lord, having suffered, and bestowing the knowledge of the Father, conferred on us salvation...His passion gave rise to strength and power. For the Lord, through means of suffering, “ascending into the lofty place, led captivity captive, gave gifts to men,” (Psa_68:18; Eph_4:8) and conferred on those that believe in Him the power “to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and on all the power of the enemy,” (Luk_10:19; [Mar_16:17, Mar_16:18]) that is, of the leader of apostasy. Our Lord also by His passion destroyed death, and dispersed error, and put an end to corruption, and destroyed ignorance, "

Not so new

In chapters 8-14 Irenaeus continues his process of deconstructing his gnostic opponents, including pointing out how some of their "novel" ideas were in fact present in Greek poets, philosophers and other types.
Nonetheless, there are a few moments when his own theology shines, as the following quotations illustrate:

"yet God is in this point pre-eminently superior to men, that He Himself called into being the substance of His creation, when previously it had no existence."
"He is a simple, uncompounded Being, without diverse members, and altogether like, and equal to himself, since He is wholly understanding, and wholly spirit, and wholly thought, and wholly intelligence, and wholly reason, and wholly hearing, and wholly seeing, and wholly light, and the whole source of all that is good."

Book 2 Opens

Book 2 Opens with Irenaeus categorically stating that this world was not created by a demiurge or by angels against the will of God, but by the one God through his Word. Much of his argument in the opening seven chapters is to seek to deconstruct his gnostic opponents by pushing their perspective to its logical extremities. One of his favourite arguments is that to suggest that creation is evil questions the goodness or the greatness of the One God,
" If again, as some say, their Father permitted these things without approving of them, then He gave the permission on account of some necessity, being either able to prevent [such procedure], or not able. But if indeed He could not [hinder it], then He is weak and powerless; while, if He could, He is a seducer, a hypocrite, and a slave of necessity, inasmuch as He does not consent [to such a course], and yet allows it as if He did consent."
Note however, how this is very close to the classical problem of evil and raises the question of how Irenaeus will account for the presence of evil in the universe created by the one great God.

On a different subject altogether, Irenaeus also claims that angels and demons have never seen God, but respect/fear Him due to His reputation.