| Feature in Text | Description in Book II (12–22) | Structural / Redactional Signal | Parallel with Irenaean Method or Heresiological Tradition | Why This Could Suggest Use of Earlier Source (e.g., Irenaeus or Shared Anti-Marcion Dossier) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Axiom + Genesis “justice through separation” proof (II.12) | Argument begins with maxim (“bonum ubi et iustum”) then runs through Genesis separations as acts of judgment | Highly schematic “school proof” independent of local controversy | Irenaeus often demonstrates theological principles through ordered scriptural catalogues | Portable logical block that could be lifted into any anti-dualist polemic; resembles pre-existing pedagogical argument unit |
| Catalogue-style exegesis rather than contextual analysis (II.12.1–12.3) | Creation narrative listed as sequential proof examples | Catalogue format typical of prepared rhetorical modules | Heresiological tradition frequently compiles proof-text chains | Suggests inherited argument skeleton later framed in Tertullian’s voice |
| Moral psychology deterrence engine (II.13) | Justice framed as beneficial deterrence; fear safeguards good behavior | Self-contained philosophical excursus | Common apologetic response against Epicurean or anti-judgment theology; present in earlier polemic traditions | Reusable moral engine not tied specifically to Marcion’s textual claims; resembles stock anti-dualist argument |
| Hypothetical reasoning structure (“if no fear, why not indulge?”) (II.13) | Mechanical logical sequence leading to necessity of judgment | Formulaic argumentative template | Similar structured reductio reasoning in Irenaeus’ refutations | Suggests inherited rhetorical pattern rather than ad hoc invention |
| “Mala” semantic distinction (delicta vs supplicia) (II.14) | Defines dual meanings of “mala” to resolve Isaiah 45:7 objection | Handbook-like definitional bifurcation | Heresiological tradition relies on lexical distinctions to neutralize heretical readings | Appears as ready-made doctrinal clarification unit usable across controversies |
| Punishment-as-good trope (II.14) | Punishments are “mala” only experientially but intrinsically just and good | Stable apologetic commonplace | Similar argumentation appears in broader anti-dualist polemic | Indicative of inherited doctrinal motif reused here |
| “Severitas bona quia iusta” procedural rule (II.15) | Establish justice first; severity follows logically | Methodological mini-rule governing argument flow | Irenaeus uses procedural logic controlling refutation stages | Reads like modular argumentative instruction rather than spontaneous development |
| Medical/surgical analogy for divine severity (II.15–16) | Tools cutting/burning analogous to corrective punishment | Highly portable rhetorical analogy widely reused in moral discourse | Analogical reasoning common in apologetic traditions | Suggests importation of standard rhetorical exemplum into anti-Marcion context |
| Anthropopathism defense (II.16.2–16.7) | God’s “anger” interpreted analogically like anthropomorphic language | Generic apologetic defense not Marcion-specific | Widely attested defense in early Christian literature | Looks like inherited doctrinal block inserted into larger polemic |
| “World itself testifies” natural theology maxim (II.17) | Creator evidenced by cosmic order even if gospel texts removed | Classic natural theology commonplace | Irenaeus appeals to creation as universal witness | Portable apologetic maxim adapted to Marcionite controversy |
| Ethical catalogue from Mosaic law (II.17.3–17.4) | Rapid list of moral precepts showing Creator’s goodness | Catalogue presentation suggests ready-made proof list | Irenaean method: demonstrate continuity of moral law with Christian ethics | Suggests inherited dossier of proof-texts emphasizing ethical continuity |
| Law as pedagogy for hard-hearted people (II.18) | Talio and food laws framed as disciplinary training | Catechetical explanation recurring across patristic apologetics | Common anti-heretical defense of harsh OT laws | Reads like pre-existing doctrinal explanation adapted to specific debate |
| Sacrifice reinterpreted as pedagogical strategy (II.18–19) | Ritual demands reframed as corrective redirection away from idolatry | Systematic apologetic reframing | Similar explanatory moves in anti-gnostic literature | Portable explanatory module consistent with inherited tradition |
| Prophetic admonition catalogue (II.19) | Rapid-fire prophetic moral statements supporting Creator’s goodness | Proof-text accumulation resembling dossier compilation | Irenaeus frequently compiles prophetic testimonia | Suggests reuse of established scriptural evidence collection |
| Egyptian gold “wages not theft” defense (II.20) | Standard apologetic response to Exodus plunder narrative | Classic controversy-response unit | Appears widely in Christian apologetic tradition | Looks like inherited stock answer rather than newly developed argument |
| Compensation argument escalation (II.20) | Labor vs gold comparison emphasizing justice | Rhetorical flourish attached to familiar defense | Analogical argument common in earlier polemic | Reinforces impression of adapting traditional reply block |
| Repetitive casuistry structure (“distinguish X from Y”) (II.21–22) | Series of objections answered via distinctions (Sabbath/Jericho; images/serpent; sacrifices) | Highly formulaic problem-solution template | Mirrors structured refutation approach of heresiological handbooks | Strong indicator of “objection bank” style dossier material reused across debates |
| Antithesis-style resolution pattern (II.21–22) | Contradictions solved through categorical distinctions | Looks like commentary responding to Marcionite Antitheses | Irenaeus similarly dismantles systems by resolving alleged contradictions | Suggests engagement with inherited collection of Marcionite objections and prepared answers |
| Dense cluster of analogies, distinctions, and catalogues (overall II.12–22) | Argument proceeds through portable units rather than continuous narrative | Modular composition profile | Characteristic of compilation drawing from earlier materials | Internal structure strongly consistent with reworked anti-Marcion dossier underlying present Latin text |
Friday, February 13, 2026
Adversus Marcionem Book II (chs. 12–22) — Internal Signals Potentially Suggesting Reuse of Earlier Anti-Marcionite Dossier Material (Possibly within Irenaean Tradition)
Email stephan.h.huller@gmail.com with comments or questions.
