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 XXXII.—A Sort of Sorites, as the Logicians Call It, to Show that the Parables of the Lost Sheep and the Lost Drachma Have No Suitable Application to the Christ of Marcion.
Who sought after the lost sheep and the lost piece of silver?2446 Luke xv. 1–10. Was it not the loser? But who was the loser? Was it not he who once possessed2447 Habuit. them? Who, then, was that? Was it not he to whom they belonged?2448 Cujus fuit: i.e., each of the things respectively. Since, then, man is the property of none other than the Creator, He possessed Him who owned him; He lost him who once possessed him; He sought him who lost him; He found him who sought him; He rejoiced who found him. Therefore the purport2449 Argumentum. of neither parable has anything whatever to do with him2450 Vacat circa eum. to whom belongs neither the sheep nor the piece of silver, that is to say, man. For he lost him not, because he possessed him not; and he sought him not, because he lost him not; and he found him not, because he sought him not; and he rejoiced not, because he found him not. Therefore, to rejoice over the sinner’s repentance—that is, at the recovery of lost man—is the attribute of Him who long ago professed that He would rather that the sinner should repent and not die.
CAPUT XXXII.
0439BOvem et drachmam perditam quis requirit? Nonne qui perdidit? Quis autem perdidit? Nonne qui habuit? Quis vero habuit? Nonne cujus fuit? Si igitur homo non alterius est res, quam Creatoris; is eum habuit, cujus fuit. Is perdidit, qui habuit. Is requisivit, qui perdidit. Is invenit, qui quaesivit. Is exultavit, qui invenit. Ita utriusque parabolae argumentum vacat circa eum, cujus non est ovis neque drachma, id est homo. Non enim perdidit, quia non habuit; nec requisivit, quia non perdidit; nec invenit, quia nec requisivit; nec exultavit, quia non invenit. Atque adeo exultare illius est de poenitentia peccatoris, id est, de perditi recuperatione, qui se professus est olim male peccatoris poenitentiam quam mortem.