The library · Edition and sources
Tertullian: Against Marcion, Books I–V
ANF historical edition · Edition commentary
Book V. Wherein Tertullian proves, with respect to St. Paul's epistles, what he had proved in the preceding book with respect to St. Luke's gospel. Far from being at variance, they were in perfect unison with the writings of the Old Testament, and therefore testified that the Creator was the only God, and that the Lord Jesus was his Christ. As in the preceding books, Tertullian supports his argument with profound reasoning, and many happy illustrations of Holy Scripture. — Translator and historical edition notes (part 21)
Demutationi.
Suggested by the ἰσχυσας of Sept. in Isa. xxv. 8 .
1 Cor. xv. 55 .
Isa. xxv. 8 and (especially) Hos. xiii. 14 .
The Septuagint version of the passage in Hosea is, ποῦ ἡ δίκη σου, θάνατε ; ποῦ τὸ κέντνον σου, ᾅδη , which is very like the form of the apostrophe in 1 Cor. xv. 55 .
1 Cor. viii. 5 .
2 Cor. i. 3 .
Gen. i. 22 .
Dan. ii. 19, 20; iii. 28, 29; iv. 34, 37 .
2 Cor. i. 3 .
Ps. lxxxvi. 15; cxii. 4; cxlv. 8; Jonah iv. 2 .
Jonah iii. 8 .
2 Kings xx. 3, 5 .
1 Kings xxi. 27, 29 .
2 Sam. xii. 13 .
Ezek. xxxiii. 11 .
Atquin et nos.
The Contingent qualities in logic.
2 Cor. iii. 6 .
Joel ii. 28 .
2 Cor. iii. 6 .
Deut. xxxii. 39 .
See above in book ii. [cap. xi. p. 306.]
Apud unum recenseri prævenerunt.
2 Cor. iii. 7, 13 .
2 Cor. iii. 7, 8 .
Obtunsi: “blunted,” 2 Cor. iii. 14 .
He seems to have read the clause as applying to the world , but St. Paul certainly refers only to the obdurate Jews. The text is: “Sed obtunsi sunt sensus mundi.
2 Cor. iii. 15 .
2 Cor. iii. 16 .
2 Cor. iii. 18 .
2 Cor. iii. 18 , but T.’s reading is “tanquam a domino spirituum” (“even as by the Lord of the Spirits,” probably the sevenfold Spirit.). The original is, καθάπερ ἀπὸ Κυρίου Πνεύματος , “by the Lord the Spirit.”
Moysi ordinem totum.
2 Cor. iv. 4 .
He would stop off the phrase τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου from ὁ Θεὸς , and remove it to the end of the sentence as a qualification of τῶν ἀπίστων . He adds another interpretation just afterwards, which, we need not say, is both more consistent with the sense of the passage and with the consensus of Christian writers of all ages, although “it is historically curious” (as Dean Alford has remarked) “that Irenæus [ Hæres. iv. 48, Origen, Tertullian (v. 11, contra Marcion )], Chrysostom, Œcumenius, Theodoret, Theophylact, all repudiate, in their zeal against the Manichæans, the grammatical rendering, and take τῶν ἀπίστων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου together” (Greek Testament, in loc .). [I have corrected Alford’s reference to Tertullian which he makes B. iv. 11.]
Isa. xxix. 13 .
Isa. vi. 10 (only adapted).
Isa. vii. 9 , Sept.
Sept. κρὐψω , “will hide.”
Said concessively, in reference to M.’s position above mentioned.
Marcion’s “God of this world” being the God of the Old Testament.
Hactenus: pro non amplius (Oehler) tractasse.
“A fuller criticism on this slight matter might give his opponent the advantage, as apparently betraying a penury of weightier and more certain arguments” (Oehler).
Isa. xiv. 14 .
Mancipata est illi.
2 Cor. iv. 6 .
Gen. i. 3 .
Isa. xlix. 6 (Sept. quoted in Acts xiii. 47 ).
Isa. ix. 2 and Matt. iv. 16 .
Ps. iv. 7 (Sept.).
Persona: the πρόσωπον of the Septuagint.
2 Cor. iv. 4 .
Ait.
Eph. ii. 12 .
2 Cor. iv. 7 .
2 Cor. iv. 8–12 .
Oehler, after Fr. Junius, defends the reading “mortificationem dei ,” instead of Domini, in reference to Marcion, who seems to have so corrupted the reading.
2 Cor. iv. 10 .
2 Cor. iv. 10 .
2 Cor. iv. 16–18 .
2 Cor. iv. 11 .
2 Cor. iv. 14 .
2 Cor. iv. 16 .
2 Cor. iv. 16 .
Vexatione.
Animi.
2 Cor. v. 1 .
As Marcion would have men believe.
2 Cor. v. 2, 3 .
Despoliati.
Gravemur.
2 Cor. v. 4 .
Strinxit.
1 Cor. xv. 52 .
Superinduti magis quod de cœlo quam exuti corpus.
Utique et mortui.
De cœlo.
1 Cor. xv. 53 .
Induunt.
Superinduunt.
2 Cor. v. 4 .
Vita præveniri.
2 Cor. v. 4 ; and see his treatise, De Resurrect. Carnis , cap. xlii.
2 Cor. v. 5 .
2 Cor. v. 6 .
Boni ducere.
2 Cor. v. 8 .
2 Cor. v. 10 .
Deputari cum.
2 Cor. v. 10 .
Per id, per quod, i.e., corpus.
2 Cor. v. 17 .
Isa. xliii. 19 .
His reading of 2 Cor. vii. 1 .
1 Cor. xv. 50 .
2 Cor. xi. 2 .
Utique ut sponsam sponso.
2 Cor. xi. 13 .
Prædicationis adulteratæ.
A reference to Marcion’s other god of the New Testament, of which he tortured the epistles (and this passage among them) to produce the evidence.
2 Cor. xi. 14 .
Patitur. The work here referred to is not extant; it is, however, referred to in the De Anima , c. lv.
Precario; “that which one must beg for.” See, however, above, book iv. chap. xxii. p. 384, note 8, for a different turn to this word.
2 Kings ii. 11 .
2 Cor. xii. 7, 8 .
1 Sam. ii. 7, 8; Ps. cxlvii. 6; Luke i. 52 .
Job i. 12 and 2 Cor. xii. 9 .
Gal. i. 6–9 .
2 Cor. xiii. 1 .
2 Cor. xiii. 2 .
2 Cor. xiii. 10 .
Profligatur.
Concessionem.
Apud Creatorem.
Excludere.
Rom. i. 16, 17 .
Utique.
Rom. i. 18 .
Rom. ii. 2 .
Aliud est si.
Nostri instrumenti.
Rom. ii. 12–16 .
Instar legis: “which is as good as a law to them,” etc.
Rom. ii. 16 .
Rom. ii. 2 .
Rom. i. 18 .
See the remarks on verses 16 and 17 above.
Rom. ii. 21 .
Ut homo.
Ex. iii. 22 .
Ex. xx. 15 ; see above, book iv. chap. xxiv. p. 387.
Scilicet verebatur.
Rom. ii. 24 .
Rom. ii. 29 .
Jer. iv. 4 .
Deut. x. 16 (Sept.).
Metens.
Rom. ii. 28 .
Tunc.
Rom. iii. 21, 22 .
Tertullian, by the word “ enjoins ” (monet), seems to have read the passage in Rom. v. 1 in the hortatory sense with ἔχωμεν , “ let us have peace with God.” If so, his authority must be added to that exceedingly strong ms. authority which Dean Alford ( Greek Test. in loc. ) regrets to find overpowering the received reading of ἔχομεν , “ we have ,” etc. We subjoin Alford’s critical note in support of the ἔχωμεν , which (with Lachmann) he yet admits into his more recent text: “AB (originally) CDKLfh (originally) m 17 latt (including F-lat); of the versions the older Syriac (Peschito) (and Copt;of the fathers, Chrysostom, Cyril, Theodoret, Damascene, Thephylact, Œcumenius, Rufinus, Pelagius, Orosius, Augustine, Cassiodorus,” before whom I would insert Tertullian, and the Codex Sinaiticus , in its original state; although, like its great rival in authority, the Codex Vaticanus , it afterwards received the reading ἔχομεν . These second readings of these mss. , and the later Syriac (Philoxenian), with Epiphanius, Didymus, and Sedulius, are the almost only authorities quoted for the received text. [Dr. H. over-estimates the “rival” Codices .]
Nusquam.
Ejus.
Rom. v. 20 .
Rom. v. 20 .
Nisi si: an ironical particle.
Ideo ut.
Apud ipsum.
Rom. v. 21 .
Gal. iii. 22 .
Rom. iii. 19 .
Rom. vii. 4, also Gal. ii. 19 . This (although a quotation) is here a Marcionite argument; but there is no need to suppose, with Pamelius, that Marcion tampers with Rom. vi. 2 . Oehler also supposes that this is the passage quoted. But no doubt it is a correct quotation from the seventh chapter , as we have indicated.
Statim (or, perhaps, in respect of the derivation), “firmly” or “stedfastly.”
Ejus.
Rom. vii. 4 .
In this argument Tertullian applies with good effect the terms “flesh” and “body,” making the first [which he elsewhere calls the “ terrena materia ” of our nature ( ad Uxor. i. 4)] the proof of the reality of the second, in opposition to Marcion’s Docetic error. “ Σὰρξ is not = σῶμα , but as in John i. 14 , the material of which man is in the body compounded” (Alford).
Compare the first part of ver. 4 with vers. 5 and 6 and viii. 2, 3 .
Rom. vii. 7 .
This, which is really the second clause of Rom. vii. 7 , seems to be here put as a Marcionite argument of disparagement to the law.
Per quam liquuit delictum latere: a playful paradox, in the manner of our author, between liquere and latere .
Rom. vii. 8 .
Rom. vii. 13 .
Rom. vii. 14 .
Rom. viii. 3 .
Sensus νοός in Rom. vii. 23 .