The most explicit proof that the Marcionites identified 'Marcion' as the name of 'Paul'

A sample of what appears in the Real Messiah order it here

Proof that the Marcionites identified ‘Marcion’ as their Apostle
in the place of our Irenaean invention of ‘St. Paul’

1.Tertullian Against Marcion Book 5:1
(Evans 1972 translation unless otherwise noted)

For too long scholars have simply assumed that when Tertullian attacks the Marcionite understanding of the ‘Apostle’ that they accepted him under the name of ‘Paul.’ Once you become aware that at least some of the reports regarding the Marcionites understood that they identified ‘Marcion’ as their apostle it will become obvious to the reader that Tertullian is actually telling us the same thing at the beginning of his last book against Marcion:

I desire to hear from Marcion the origin of his apostle. I am a sort of new disciple, having had instruction from no other teacher. For the moment my only belief is that nothing ought to be believed without good reason, and that that is believed without good reason which is believed without knowledge of its origin and I must with the best of reasons approach this inquiry with uneasiness when I find one affirmed to be an apostle, of whom in the list of the apostles in the gospel I find no trace. So when I am told that he was subsequently promoted by our Lord, by now at rest in heaven, I find some lack of foresight in the fact that Christ did not know beforehand that he would have need of him but after setting in order the office of apostleship and sending them out upon their duties, considered it necessary, on an impulse [ex incursu] and not by deliberation, to add another, by compulsion so to speak and not by design.

So then, shipmaster out of Pontus, supposing you have never accepted into your craft any smuggled or illicit merchandise, have never appropriated or adulterated any cargo, and in the things of God are even more careful and trustworthy, will you please tell us under what bill of lading you accepted Paul as apostle who had stamped him with that mark of distinction, who commended him to you, and who put him in your charge? Only so may you with confidence disembark him: only so can he avoid being proved to belong to him who has put in evidence all the documents that attest his apostleship. He himself claims to be an apostle, and that not from men nor through any man, but through Jesus Christ. Clearly any man can make claims for himself: but his claim is confirmed by another person's attestation. One person writes the document, another signs it, a third attests the signature, and a fourth enters it in the records. No man is for himself both claimant and witness.

Besides this, you have found it written that many will come and say, ‘I am Christ.’ If there is one that makes a false claim to be Christ, much more can there be one who professes that he is an apostle of Christ. Thus far my converse has been in the guise of a disciple and an inquirer: from now on I propose to shatter your confidence, for you have no means of proving its validity, and to shame your presumption, since you make claims but reject the means of establishing them. Let Christ, let the apostle, belong to your other god: yet you have no proof of it except from the Creator's archives.

Even Genesis long ago promised Paul to me. Among those figures and prophetical blessings over his sons, when Jacob had got to Benjamin he said, Benjamin is a ravening wolf: until morning he will still devour, and in the evening will distribute food.c He foresaw that Paul would arise of the tribe of Benjamin, a ravening wolf devouring until the morning, that is, one who in his early life would harass the Lord's flock as a persecutor of the churches, and then at evening would distribute food, that is, in declining age would feed Christ's sheep as the doctor of the gentiles. Also the harshness at first of Saul's pursuit of David, and afterwards his repentance and contentment on receiving good for evil, had nothing else in view except Paul in Saul according to tribal descent, and Jesus in David by the Virgin's descent from him.

Should you, however, disapprove of these types, the Acts of the Apostles, at all events, have handed down to me this career of Paul, which you must not refuse to accept. From them I prove that the persecutor became an apostle, not from men, nor by a man: from them I am led even to believe him: by their means I dislodge you from your claim to him, and have no fear of what you say. Therefore you deny the Apostle Paul. [emphasis mine] I do not blaspheme him whom I defend. If I deny, it is to force you to prove. If I deny, it is to enforce my claim that he is mine. Otherwise, if you have your eye on our belief, accept the evidence on which it depends. If you challenge us to adopt yours, tell us the facts on which it is founded. Either prove that the things you believe really are so: or else, if you have no proof, how can you believe? Or who are you, to believe in despite of him from whom alone there is proof of what you believe? So then accept the apostle on my evidence, as as you do Christ: he is my apostle, as also Christ is mine.



I desire to hear from Marcion the origin of his apostle (Et ideo ex opusculi ordine ad hanc materiam devolutus apostoli quoque originem a Marcione desidero)

• Evans translation: I desire to hear from Marcion the origin of Paul the apostle.
• Holmes translation: I require to know of Marcion the origin of his apostles

I am a sort of new disciple, having had instruction from no other teacher (novus aliqui discipulus nec ullius alterius auditor)

For the moment my only belief is that nothing ought to be believed without good reason, and that that is believed without good reason which is believed without knowledge of its origin (qui nihil interim credam nisi nihil temere credendum, temere porro credi quodcunque sine originis agnitione creditor)

and I must with the best of reasons approach this inquiry with uneasiness when I find one affirmed to be an apostle, of whom in the list of the apostles in the gospel I find no trace (quique dignissime ad sollicitudinem redigam istam inquisitionem, cum is mihi affirmatur apostolus quem in albo apostolorum apud evangelium non deprehendo)


So when I am told that he was subsequently promoted by our Lord, by now at rest
in heaven, I find some lack of foresight in the fact that Christ did not know beforehand that he would have need of him (Denique audiens postea eum a domino allectum, iam in caelis quiescente, quasi inprovidentiam existimo si non ante scivit illum sibi necessarium Christus),


but after setting in order the office of apostleship and sending them out upon their duties, considered it necessary, on an impulse [ex incursu] and not by deliberation, to add another, by compulsion so to speak and not by design (sed iam ordinato officio apostolatus et in sua opera dimisso, ex incursu, non ex prospectu, adiciendum existimavit, necessitate, ut ita dixerim, non voluntate)


So then, shipmaster out of Pontus, supposing you have never accepted into your craft any smuggled or illicit merchandise, have never appropriated or adulterated any cargo, and in the things of God are even more careful and trustworthy, will you please tell us under what bill of lading you accepted Paul as apostle (Quamobrem, Pontice nauclere, si nunquam furtivas merces vel illicitas in acatos tuas recepisti, si nullum omnino onus avertisti vel adulterasti, cautior utique et fidelior in dei rebus, edas velim nobis, quo symbolo susceperis apostolum Paulum)

who had stamped him with that mark of distinction, who commended him to you, and who put him in your charge? Only so may you with confidence disembark him: only so can he avoid being proved to belong to him who has put in evidence all the documents that attest his apostleship (quis illum tituli charactere percusserit, quis transmiserit tibi, quis imposuerit, ut possis eum constanter exponere, ne illius probetur qui omnia apostolatus eius instrumenta protulerit)

He himself claims to be an apostle, and that not from men nor through any man, but through Jesus Christ (Ipse se, inquit, apostolum est professus, et quidem non ab hominibus nec per hominem, sed per Iesum Christum)

• Evans: He himself, says Marcion, claims to be an apostle, and that not from men nor through any man, but through Jesus Christ.
• Holmes: He professes himself to be "an apostle"----to use his own, words----"not of men, nor by man, but by Jesus Christ."


Clearly any man can make claims for himself: but his claim is confirmed by another person's attestation (Plane profiteri potest semetipsum quis, verum professio eius alterius auctoritate conficitur)

One person writes the document, another signs it, a third attests the signature,
and a fourth enters it in the records (Alius scribit, alius subscribit, alius obsignat, alius actis refert)

No man is for himself both claimant and witness (Nemo sibi et professor et testis est)

Besides this, you have found it written that many will come and say, I am Christ (Praeter haec utique legisti multos venturos qui dicant, Ego sum Christus)

• Marcion is the subject cf Tert Against Marcion IV:39 “So then those people will come, saying I am Christ. You, will receive them: you have received one exactly like them. For this one too has come in his own name.”


If there is one that makes a false claim to be Christ, much more can there be one who professes that he is an apostle of Christ (Si est qui se Christum mentiatur, quanto magis qui se apostolum praedicet Christi)

Thus far my converse has been in the guise of a disciple and an inquirer: from now on I propose to shatter your confidence, for you have no means of proving its validity, and to shame your presumption, since you make claims but reject the means of establishing them (Adhuc ego in persona discipuli et inquisitoris conversor, ut iam hinc et fidem tuam obtundam, qui unde eam probes non habes, et impudentiam suffundam, qui vindicas, et unde possis vindicare non recipis)

Let Christ, let the apostle, belong to your other god: yet you have no proof of it except from the Creator's archives (Sit Christus, sit apostolus, ut alterius, dum non probantur nisi de instrumento creatoris)

Even Genesis long ago promised Paul to me. Among those figures and prophetical bless-
ings over his sons, when Jacob had got to Benjamin he said, Benjamin is a ravening wolf: until morning he will still devour, and in the evening will distribute food.c He foresaw that Paul would arise of the tribe of Benjamin, a ravening wolf devouring until the morning, that is, one who in his early life would harass the Lord's flock as a persecutor of the churches, and then at evening would distribute food, that is, in declining age would feed Christ's sheep as the doctor of the gentiles. Also the harshness at first of Saul's pursuit of David, and afterwards his repentance and contentment on receiving good for evil, had nothing else in view except Paul in Saul according to tribal descent, and Jesus in David by the Virgin's descent from him.

Should you, however, disapprove of these types, the Acts of the Apostles, at all events, have handed down to me this career of Paul, which you must not refuse to accept (Haec figurarum sacramenta si tibi displicent, certe Acta Apostolorum hunc mihi ordinem Pauli tradiderunt, a te quoque non negandum)

• Evans: If these figurative mysteries do not please you, certainly the Acts of the Apostles have handed down to me this history of Paul, nor can you deny it

From them I prove that the persecutor became an apostle, not from men, nor by a man: from them I am led even to believe him: by their means I dislodge you from your claim to him, and have no fear of what you say (Inde apostolum ostendo persecutorem, non ab hominibus neque per hominem; inde et ipsi credere inducor; inde te a defensione eius expello, nec timeo dicentem)


You therefore deny the Apostle Paul (Tu ergo negas apostolum Paulum)

• Evans: And do you then deny that Paul is an apostle?
• Holmes: Then you deny the Apostle Paul.

I do not blaspheme him whom I defend (Non blasphemo quem tueor)

• Evans: I speak no evil against him whom I retain for myself
• Holmes: I do not calumniate him whom I defend - Holmes’ note “An insinuation that Marcion's defence of Paul was, in fact, a calumny of the apostle.” We would turn this around - an insinuation that Marcion's defence of his apostle was, in fact, a calumny of the Catholic apostle ‘Paul.’

If I deny, it is to force you to prove (Nego, ut te probare compellam)

If I deny, it is to enforce my claim that he is mine (Nego, ut meum esse convincam)
Otherwise, if you have your eye on our belief, accept the evidence on which it depends (Aut si ad nostram fidem spectas, recipe quae eam faciunt)

If you challenge us to adopt yours, tell us the facts on which it is founded (Si ad tuam provocas, ede quae eam praestruunt)

Either prove that the things you believe really are so: or else, if you have no proof, how can you believe? (Aut proba esse quae credis; aut si non probas, quomodo credis?)

Or who are you, to believe in despite of him from whom alone there is proof of what you believe? (Aut qualis es adversus eum credens a quo solo probatur esse quod credis?)

So then accept the apostle on my evidence, as as you do Christ: he is my apostle, as also Christ is mine (Habe nunc et apostolum de meo sicut et Christum, tam meum apostolum quam et Christum)

Latin text

Et ideo ex opusculi ordine ad hanc materiam devolutus apostoli quoque originem a Marcione desidero, novus aliqui discipulus nec ullius alterius auditor, qui nihil interim credam nisi nihil temere credendum, temere porro credi quodcunque sine originis agnitione creditur, quique dignissime ad sollicitudinem redigam istam inquisitionem, cum is mihi affirmatur apostolus quem in albo apostolorum apud evangelium non deprehendo. [2] Denique audiens postea eum a domino allectum, iam in caelis quiescente, quasi inprovidentiam existimo si non ante scivit illum sibi necessarium Christus, sed iam ordinato officio apostolatus et in sua opera dimisso, ex incursu, non ex prospectu, adiciendum existimavit, necessitate, ut ita dixerim, non voluntate. Quamobrem, Pontice nauclere, si nunquam furtivas merces vel illicitas in acatos tuas recepisti, si nullum omnino onus avertisti vel adulterasti,cautior utique et fidelior in dei rebus, edas velim nobis, quo symbolo susceperis apostolum Paulum, quis illum tituli charactere percusserit, quis transmiserit tibi, quis imposuerit, ut possis eum constanter exponere, ne illius probetur qui omnia apostolatus eius instrumenta protulerit. [3] Ipse se, inquit, apostolum est pro- fessus, et quidem non ab hominibus nec per hominem, sed per Iesum Christum. Plane profiteri potest semetipsum quis, verum professio eius alterius auctoritate conficitur. Alius scribit, alius subscribit, alius obsignat, alius actis refert. Nemo sibi et professor et testis est. Praeter haec utique legisti multos venturos qui dicant, Ego sum Christus. [4] Si est qui se Christum mentiatur, quanto magis qui se apostolum praedicet Christi? Adhuc ego in persona discipuli et inquisitoris conversor, ut iam hinc et fidem tuam obtundam, qui unde eam probes non habes, et impudentiam suffundam, qui vindicas, et unde possis vindicare non recipis. Sit Christus, sit apostolus, ut alterius, dum non probantur nisi de instrumento creatoris. [5] Nam mihi Paulum etiam Genesis olim repromisit. Inter illas enim figuras et propheticas super filios suos benedictions Iacob cum ad Beniamin direxisset, Beniamin, inquit, lupus rapax ad matutinum comedet adhuc, et ad vesperam dabit escam. Ex tribu enim Beniamin oriturum Paulum providebat, lupum rapacem ad matutinum comedentem, id est prima aetate vastaturum pecora domini ut persecutorem ecclesiarum, dehinc ad vesperam escam daturum, id est devergente iam aetate oves Christi educa- turum ut doctorem nationum. [6] Nam et Saulis primo asperitas
insectationis erga David, dehinc paenitentia et satisfactio, bona pro malis recipientis, non aliud portendebat quam Paulum in Saule secundum tribus et Iesum in David secundum virginis censum. Haec figurarum sacramenta si tibi displicent, certe Acta Apostolorum hunc mihi ordinem Pauli tradiderunt, a te quoque non negandum. Inde apostolum ostendo persecutorem, non ab hominibus neque per hominem; inde et ipsi credere inducor; inde
te a defensione eius expello, nec timeo dicentem, Tu ergo negas apostolum Paulum? Non blasphemo quem tueor. Nego, ut te probare compellam. [7] Nego, ut meum esse convincam. Aut si adnostram fidem spectas, recipe quae eam faciunt. Si ad tuam provocas, ede quae eam praestruunt. Aut proba esse quae credis; aut si non probas, quomodo credis? Aut qualis es adversus eum credens a quo solo probatur esse quod credis? [8] Habe nunc etapostolum de meo sicut et Christum, tam meum apostolum quam
et Christum.