On the Claim that Tertullian Exclusively Used the Marcionite Canon

The debate over whether Tertullian exclusively used the Marcionite canon in his refutation of Marcion’s theology has intrigued scholars for centuries. This blog post delves into the intricacies of Tertullian’s Adversus Marcionem, exploring whether he strictly relied on Marcion's texts or also incorporated the orthodox versions to make his arguments.

Tertullian's Approach: A Close Examination

Initial Accusations Against Marcion: Tertullian begins by accusing Marcion of falsifying the Gospel of Luke. He states in Adversus Marcionem 4.2.4-5 that Marcion edited the text to align with his theological views, essentially creating a distorted version. Tertullian asserts that Marcion’s alterations aimed to sever the connection between the New Testament and the Old Testament, thus promoting his doctrine of two gods: the just creator of the Old Testament and the good god revealed by Jesus.

Tertullian’s Methodology: Tertullian’s method in refuting Marcion involves a meticulous analysis of the text, as Matthias Klinghardt points out. Tertullian follows Marcion’s gospel text from beginning to end, highlighting inconsistencies and theological contradictions. For instance, in Adversus Marcionem 4.7.6, he discusses Jesus teaching in the synagogue, using this passage to argue that Jesus belonged to the Creator God of the Old Testament.

Evidence of Exclusive Use of Marcion's Text: A critical point in the debate is whether Tertullian explicitly claims to use only Marcion’s texts without referring to the orthodox versions. An examination of Adversus Marcionem reveals several instances where Tertullian appears to be engaging directly with Marcion’s gospel:

1. Textual Analysis and Argumentation: Tertullian frequently dissects Marcion’s gospel text, pointing out where it diverges from the canonical Luke. For example, in Adversus Marcionem 4.6, he discusses how Marcion’s version omits certain passages that align Jesus with the Creator God, thus attempting to prove the text’s adulteration.

2. Use of Scriptural References: Tertullian’s references to “scriptura” and “evangelium” throughout his work often pertain to the texts as understood by the Marcionites. He challenges the integrity of Marcion’s gospel by comparing it to the orthodox understanding without necessarily quoting the canonical texts directly.

Challenges in Proving Exclusive Use: Despite these indications, Tertullian does not explicitly state that he uses Marcion’s gospel exclusively. He often refers to the broader context of Christian doctrine and occasionally contrasts Marcion’s interpretations with those of the orthodox church. For example, in Adversus Marcionem 4.2.1, he discusses the evangelical instrument being promulgated by the apostles, suggesting a reliance on apostolic authority that extends beyond Marcion’s edits.

Conclusion: The claim that Tertullian exclusively used the Marcionite canon in his refutation is not unequivocally supported by his writings. While Tertullian meticulously engages with Marcion’s gospel and highlights its deviations, he does so within a broader framework of Christian orthodoxy. His arguments often presuppose the integrity of the orthodox texts, suggesting that he viewed Marcion’s gospel as a corrupted version of the truth rather than a completely separate document.

In conclusion, while Tertullian’s work demonstrates a thorough engagement with Marcion’s texts, the evidence does not conclusively prove that he used them exclusively without reference to the orthodox versions. His primary aim was to show that Marcion’s alterations did not sever the connection to the Creator God, thereby affirming the continuity and integrity of the Christian message as understood by the orthodox church.