The Five Books Against Marcion.
Book I. Wherein is described the god of Marcion. …
Chapter III.—The Unity of God. He is the Supreme Being, and There Cannot Be a Second Supreme.
Chapter XXVII.—Dangerous Effects to Religion and Morality of the Doctrine of So Weak a God.
Chapter XXVIII.—The Tables Turned Upon Marcion, by Contrasts, in Favour of the True God.
Chapter II.—Why Christ’s Coming Should Be Previously Announced.
Chapter III.—Miracles Alone, Without Prophecy, an Insufficient Evidence of Christ’s Mission.
Chapter V.—Sundry Features of the Prophetic Style: Principles of Its Interpretation.
Chapter VIII.—Absurdity of Marcion’s Docetic Opinions Reality of Christ’s Incarnation.
Chapter X.—The Truly Incarnate State More Worthy of God Than Marcion’s Fantastic Flesh.
Chapter XI.—Christ Was Truly Born Marcion’s Absurd Cavil in Defence of a Putative Nativity.
Chapter XII.—Isaiah’s Prophecy of Emmanuel. Christ Entitled to that Name.
Chapter XVI.—The Sacred Name Jesus Most Suited to the Christ of the Creator. Joshua a Type of Him.
Chapter XVII.—Prophecies in Isaiah and the Psalms Respecting Christ’s Humiliation.
Chapter XIX.—Prophecies of the Death of Christ.
Chapter XXI.—The Call of the Gentiles Under the Influence of the Gospel Foretold.
Chapter XXIV.—Christ’s Millennial and Heavenly Glory in Company with His Saints.
Book IV. In Which Tertullian Pursues His…
In the scheme of Marcion, on the contrary, the mystery edition the
Chapter XXI.—St. Paul Preached No New God, When He Announced the Repeal of Some of God’s Ancient Ordinances. Never Any Hesitation About Belief in the Creator, as the God Whom Christ Revealed, Until Marcion’s Heresy.
Now if it was with the view of preaching a new god that he was eager to abrogate the law of the old God, how is it that he prescribes no rule about244 Nihil præscribit de. the new god, but solely about the old law, if it be not because faith in the Creator245 i.e., “the old God,” as he has just called Him. was still to continue, and His law alone was to come to an end?246 Concessare debebat.—just as the Psalmist had declared: “Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth stand up, and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord, and against His Anointed.”247 Ps. ii. 3, 1, 2. And, indeed, if another god were preached by Paul, there could be no doubt about the law, whether it were to be kept or not, because of course it would not belong to the new lord, the enemy248 Æmulum. of the law. The very newness and difference of the god would take away not only all question about the old and alien law, but even all mention of it. But the whole question, as it then stood, was this, that although the God of the law was the same as was preached in Christ, yet there was a disparagement249 Derogaretur. of His law. Permanent still, therefore, stood faith in the Creator and in His Christ; manner of life and discipline alone fluctuated.250 Nutabat. Some disputed about eating idol sacrifices, others about the veiled dress of women, others again about marriage and divorce, and some even about the hope of the resurrection; but about God no one disputed. Now, if this question also had entered into dispute, surely it would be found in the apostle, and that too as a great and vital point. No doubt, after the time of the apostles, the truth respecting the belief of God suffered corruption, but it is equally certain that during the life of the apostles their teaching on this great article did not suffer at all; so that no other teaching will have the right of being received as apostolic than that which is at the present day proclaimed in the churches of apostolic foundation. You will, however, find no church of apostolic origin251 Census. but such as reposes its Christian faith in the Creator.252 In Creatore christianizet. But if the churches shall prove to have been corrupt from the beginning, where shall the pure ones be found? Will it be amongst the adversaries of the Creator? Show us, then, one of your churches, tracing its descent from an apostle, and you will have gained the day.253 Obduxeris. For this sense of the word, see Apol. 1. sub init. “sed obducimur,” etc. Forasmuch then as it is on all accounts evident that there was from Christ down to Marcion’s time no other God in the rule of sacred truth254 Sacramenti. than the Creator, the proof of our argument is sufficiently established, in which we have shown that the god of our heretic first became known by his separation of the gospel and the law. Our previous position255 Definito. is accordingly made good, that no god is to be believed whom any man has devised out of his own conceits; except indeed the man be a prophet,256 That is, “inspired.” and then his own conceits would not be concerned in the matter. If Marcion, however, shall be able to lay claim to this inspired character, it will be necessary for it to be shown. There must be no doubt or paltering.257 Nihil retractare oportebat. For all heresy is thrust out by this wedge of the truth, that Christ is proved to be the revealer of no God else but the Creator.258 [Kaye, p. 274.]
CAPUT XXI.
Caeterum, si quasi novum Deum praedicans, veteris Dei legem cupiebat excludere, quare de deo quidem novo nihil praescribit, sed de vetere lege solummodo, nisi quoniam, fide manente in Creatorem, sola lex ejus concessare debebat? ut et Psalmus ille (Ps. II, 3) praececinerat : Disrumpamus a nobis vinculaeorum, et abjiciamus eorum jugum a nobis: ex quo scilicet tumultuatae sunt gentes, et populi meditati 0270Asunt inania; adstiterunt reges terrae, et magistratus conveneruntin unum adversus Dominum et adversus Christum ejus (Ibid., 1, 2). Et utique, si alius deus praedicaretur a Paulo, nulla disceptatio esset servandae legis, necne, non pertinentis scilicet ad dominum novum et aemulum legis. Ipsa enim dei novitas atque diversitas abstulisset non modo quaestionem veteris et alienae legis, verum omnem ejus mentionem. Sed hic erat totus status quaestionis, quod, cum idem Deus legis in Christo praedicaretur, legi ejus derogaretur. Stabat igitur fides semper in Creatore et Christo ejus, sed conversatio et disciplina nutabat. Nam et alii de idolothyto edendo, alii de mulierum velamento, alii de nuptiis vel repudiis, nonnulli et de spe resurrectionis, disceptabant; de Deo, nemo. Nam, 0270B si fuisset haec quoque quaestio disceptata, et ipsa apud Apostolum inveniretur, vel quanto principalis. Quod si post apostolorum tempora, adulterium veritas passa est circa Dei regulam, ergo jam apostolica traditio nihil passa est in tempore suo circa Dei regulam, et non alia agnoscenda erit traditio apostolorum, quam quae hodie apud ipsorum Ecclesias editur. Nullam autem apostolici census Ecclesiam invenias, quae non in Creatore christianizet. Aut si hae erunt a primordio corruptae, quae erunt integrae? nimirum adversariae Creatoris. Exhibe ergo aliquam ex tuis apostolici sensus, et obduxeris . Igitur, cum omnibus modis constet alium deum in regula sacramenti istius non fuisse a Christo usque ad Marcionem, quam Creatorem, satis jam et probatio nostra munita 0270C est, qua ostendimus notitiam dei haeretici ex Evangelii et Legis separatione coepisse, et definitio superior instructa est: non esse credendum deum quem homo de suis sensibus composuerit, nisi plane prophetes, id est non de suis sensibus. Quod si Marcion poterit dici, debebit etiam probari. Nihil retractare oportebat, hoc enim cuneo veritatis omnis extruditur haeresis, cum Christus non alterius dei quam Creatoris circumlator ostenditur.