Even More Proof that Tertullian is Arguing from an Orthodox Gospel, Not the Marcionite Gospel

The notion that Tertullian's arguments in Against Marcion are based on the Marcionite gospel is fundamentally flawed. Let's delve into why Tertullian was, in fact, using an orthodox gospel—most likely Luke—to make his case against Marcion, rather than Marcion's own adulterated version of it.

Tertullian’s Methodology

Tertullian's approach is clear: he is systematically refuting Marcion using an orthodox text. The idea that he was using the Marcionite gospel is not only unsupported but also illogical. Tertullian consistently argues from the standpoint of orthodox Christianity, demonstrating how Marcion's alterations deviate from the true gospel.

Evidence from Against Marcion

Consider the following passage from Against Marcion:

"Wars, I imagine, and kingdom against kingdom, and nation against nation, and a plague, and famines and earthquakes, and fearful sights, and great signs from heaven, all of which are in keeping with a stern and fearsome God..."

This passage, along with many others, references Old Testament prophecies and their fulfillment in the New Testament. Tertullian's arguments presuppose a gospel that upholds Jewish prophetic traditions, which is incompatible with Marcion's theology. This strongly suggests that Tertullian is using an orthodox gospel.

The Holy Spirit and the Prophets

Tertullian argues that the fulfillment of prophecies and the work of the Holy Spirit confirm the authenticity of the gospel he uses. He writes:

"He says in fact, Because the holy stones roll down, not, Because soldiers fight. For the stones are those foundations upon which we are being built up, laid down, as Paul says, upon the foundation of the apostles..."

Tertullian’s reliance on Old Testament prophecies to support his arguments is a clear indicator that he is not using a Marcionite text. Marcion rejected the Old Testament and its prophecies, so using such arguments would be nonsensical if Tertullian were working from a Marcionite gospel.

The Case of Epiphanius

To further underscore this point, let's consider Epiphanius' approach. Epiphanius explicitly states that he used Marcion’s own texts to refute him:

"Some years ago, to find what falsehood this Marcion had invented and what his silly teaching was, I took up his very books which he had <mutilated>, his so-called Gospel and Apostolic Canon."

Epiphanius provides a detailed account of how he extracted material from Marcion’s texts to refute him. This explicit confirmation is what we lack in Tertullian’s work. Tertullian does not state outright that he is using Marcion's texts; instead, he seems to be engaging with the orthodox texts that Marcion purportedly altered.

Tertullian’s Intentions

In Against Marcion, Tertullian writes:

"Now I turn to the truly Judaic gospel (referring to the Gospel of the Catholic Church, as adulterated by Judaizers), but also the Pontic one (referring to the one that the Pontic Marcion had), demonstrating its adulteration in the meantime."

This statement clearly indicates that Tertullian is contrasting the orthodox gospel with Marcion's version, not using Marcion's text as his primary source. He aims to demonstrate the adulteration by comparing it to the orthodox original.

Conclusion

The evidence overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that Tertullian was arguing from an orthodox gospel, likely Luke, rather than a Marcionite text. His method involves demonstrating how Marcion's alterations deviate from the true gospel, which he consistently aligns with Jewish prophetic traditions and the teachings of the apostles.

It’s time to put to rest the notion that Tertullian was using a Marcionite gospel to make his arguments. His approach is firmly rooted in orthodox Christianity, using the original texts to expose Marcion’s deviations. The suggestion that he was working from Marcion’s gospel is not only unsupported but also undermines the very structure of his arguments.

Let's acknowledge the clarity and intent behind Tertullian’s work, recognizing it for what it is: a robust defense of orthodox Christianity against the heretical alterations proposed by Marcion.