Anomalies in Against Marcion: Chapter 35

Introduction

Chapter 35 of Tertullian’s Against Marcion stands out due to its puzzling narrative and arguments, which seem to bridge content from different sections of Luke’s Gospel. Tertullian’s discussions on the healing of lepers contain elements that suggest an original, more coherent source that has been dispersed and rearranged. This chapter, along with the related passages in Against Marcion, reveals inconsistencies and overlapping themes that invite a deeper investigation.

The Narrative of Healing Leprosy

In Chapter 35, Tertullian explores the healing of ten lepers by Jesus and compares it to the solitary healing performed by Elisha on Naaman the Syrian. Tertullian's argument emphasizes that Christ operated outside the strictures of Jewish law, showcasing his divine authority and contrasting it with the prophets’ methods.

Tertullian writes:

"The law concerning lepers has a profound meaning, in respect of the various forms of that disease and of the high priest's inspection of it... For Christ dispenses with the strict rules of the law here too in the healing of ten lepers, whom he merely told to go and show themselves to the priests, and cleansed them as they went, with no contact and no word of command, but by silent power and unaided will..."

Comparing Healings

Tertullian’s argument involves comparing the healing methods of Jesus and Elisha. While Elisha needed material means—seven washes in the Jordan—Jesus healed by mere command. This is drawn from Luke 4:27, Luke 5, and Luke 17, but the juxtaposition suggests that Tertullian might be referencing a more integrated original narrative. Tertullian notes:

"But even though Elisha, the Creator's prophet, cleansed no more than one leper, Naaman the Syrian, when there were all those many lepers in Israel, even this does not indicate that Christ was in some sense different, as though he were in this respect superior..."

The Narrative in Luke

The overlapping elements between Luke 4, Luke 5, and Luke 17 indicate that these passages were possibly part of a single, continuous narrative in Marcion’s gospel. In Luke 17, Jesus heals ten lepers, sending them to show themselves to the priests, with only the Samaritan returning to give thanks. In Luke 5, Jesus heals a leper and sends him to the priest as well. Tertullian uses these examples to illustrate Christ's power and authority over the Jewish law.

"Luke 17:11: Now on his way to Jerusalem, Jesus traveled along the border between Samaria and Galilee... Luke 4:27: And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian..."

Marcion’s Influence

Tertullian’s handling of these passages suggests that Marcion’s gospel might have presented these healings in a different context. Epiphanius’s account supports this by mentioning Marcion's redaction of the gospel texts, indicating he merged various elements to emphasize Christ's superiority to the Jewish prophets.

"Marcion left the proverb Lc 4, 236 relating to the healing activity of Jesus and, by merging Lc 4, 27 with Lc 17, 14, wanted to make his readers aware that Jesus helped incomparably many more sick people to physical health than the prophets of the Jewish God..."

Anomalies and Overlaps

Tertullian’s arguments reveal anomalies and overlaps that point to a shared source or a common narrative. The use of Luke 4:27 in different leper healing narratives raises questions about Tertullian's sources and his method of argumentation. He treats these episodes as separate but relies on the same scriptural justifications, suggesting a more complex origin of these texts.

"My question here is a common one throughout Against Marcion. Why doesn't Tertullian realize that he is using Luke 4:27 in conjunction with ALLEGEDLY TWO DIFFERENT LEPER HEALING NARRATIVES? How can one leper narrative AT THE BEGINNING at chapter 5 of Luke being using the same statement from Luke 4:27 as a very similar leper healing narrative from near the end of the gospel of Luke, one which has the same command to the lepers 'go show yourself to the priests' and also the same explanation from Tertullian, namely that the passage(s) are used to show Jesus only needed a divine word to heal rather than baptism? This surely can't be coincidence."

Conclusion

Chapter 35 of Against Marcion presents a fascinating puzzle. Tertullian’s arguments suggest that the narratives in Luke’s Gospel were possibly derived from a more unified source, which might have been altered by Marcion or subsequent editors. The overlaps and thematic consistencies indicate that early Christian texts were more fluid and interconnected than traditionally thought. This chapter invites us to reconsider the textual history of the gospels and the role of Marcion in shaping early Christian literature.