| Irenaeus (III, 12.12) | Tertullian (Adv. Marc. IV.13) |
|---|---|
| …ex his, quae adhuc apud eos custodiuntur, arguemus eos… “…we will refute them from those things still preserved among them…” | Evolve igitur prophetas, et ordinem totum recognosce. “Unroll therefore the prophets and recognize the whole order.” |
| …non enim alium Deum ostendunt, sed eum qui per legem et prophetas annuntiatus est… “…for they do not show another God, but the one proclaimed through the Law and the Prophets…” | Habes Christum prophetarum. “You have the Christ of the prophets.” |
| …Scripturae ipsae eos arguunt… “…the Scriptures themselves refute them…” | Habes nominis repraesentationem, habes actum evangelizantis… habes locum montis… habes auditum patris… “You have the representation of the name, the act of evangelizing… the place of the mountain… the hearing of the Father…” |
| …secundum Scripturas demonstrantes… “…demonstrating according to the Scriptures…” | Huius enim numeri figuras apud creatorem deprehendo… “For I discover figures of this number with the Creator…” |
| …prophetarum voces concordant cum evangelio… “…the voices of the prophets agree with the Gospel…” | Non potest simpliciter factum ab illo quid videri quod potest videri non simpliciter factum a meo. Eius erit res apud quem invenitur rei praeparatura. “Nothing done by him can appear merely simple when it can be seen as prepared beforehand by mine. The matter belongs to him in whom its preparation is found.” |
| …haeretici Scripturas truncant et pervertunt… “…heretics mutilate and distort the Scriptures…” | Quid tale de numeri defensione competit Christo Marcionis? “What such defense of number belongs to Marcion’s Christ?” |
| Passage Unit (IV.13.x) | Argument Function (inside Marcion’s Luke) | Structural / Irenaean Method Signals | Redaction & Dependence Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| IV.13.1–2 | Narrative coherence argued through prophetic framework (“evolve igitur prophetas…”) | Refutation from retained narrative; prophecy as structural interpretive grid | HIGH — strong alignment with Irenaean method of demonstrating prophetic continuity within shared gospel material |
| IV.13.3–4 | Inventory of prophetic correspondences (name, act, place, time, voice, divine hearing) | Enumerative prophetic catena; unified economy reconstruction | HIGH — inventory-style piling of correspondences strongly reminiscent of Irenaean compositional technique |
| IV.13.5 | Twelve apostles defended through numerical typology (Elim springs, stones, gems) | Figural continuity; numerical symbolism linking gospel to creator history | HIGH — dense typological reasoning suggests inherited anti-Marcion schema |
| IV.13.6 | Principle of preparatory precedent (“rei praeparatura”) identifying true Christ | Recapitulation-style continuity logic; preparatory typology as ownership criterion | HIGH — conceptual structure closely parallels Irenaean theological framework |
| IV.13.7 | Renaming of Peter interpreted through creator-pattern precedents (Abraham, Sarah, etc.) | Pattern-of-divine-action continuity rather than philological argument | MEDIUM-HIGH — typological patterning reflects inherited anti-heretical reasoning |
| IV.13.8 | Rock (“petra”) typology tying Peter to creator-Christ identity | Ontological continuity through prophetic symbolism | HIGH — modular typological argument consistent with earlier anti-Marcion tradition |
| IV.13.9–10 | Gentile gathering interpreted as fulfillment of prophetic promises | Prophetic fulfillment dissolving Marcionite discontinuity | HIGH — classic Irenaean fulfillment logic applied internally to retained gospel narrative |
Tertullian, Adv. Marc. IV.13: “Evolve igitur prophetas, et ordinem totum recognosce… habes Christum prophetarum… eius erit res apud quem invenitur rei praeparatura” // Irenaeus, AH III.11.7 “Marcion evangelium decurtans”; III.16.1–5 Christus in prophetis praenuntiatus; IV.20.1 prophetica praeparatio Christi; IV.33.1 unitas oeconomiae; II.25.1–3 contra mutilationem scripturarum.
Methodological parallels. The chapter exemplifies refutation from retained scriptural materials by grounding Gospel episodes in prophetic anticipation, consistent with the Irenaean program of arguing against Marcion “ex his quae adhuc apud eos custodiuntur.” Tertullian interprets mountain preaching, nocturnal prayer, apostolic selection, and naming of Peter through prophetic typology; this matches Irenaeus’s method of establishing continuity between Gospel narrative and prophetic figures (AH IV.20). The argument proceeds by internal critique: Marcion’s Christ lacks prophetic prefiguration, whereas the catholic Christ is demonstrably embedded within prophetic history. Enumeration of scriptural precedents (Isaiah, Psalms, Nahum, Exodus typology) parallels Irenaeus’s cumulative proof technique.
Structural correspondences. The argument unfolds in a recognizably Irenaean sequence: identification of prophetic predictions → demonstration of Gospel fulfillment → typological symbolism (mountain, voice, prayer) → numerical symbolism (twelve apostles) → ecclesiological interpretation (gathering of the nations). The emphasis on “ordo” reflects Irenaeus’s recurring concern with the ordered economy of revelation (AH III.16; IV.33), moving from prophecy to Christological realization. The transition from individual pericopes to symbolic structures (twelve fountains, gems, stones) mirrors Irenaeus’s habit of reading salvation history through typological patterns.
Historical polemic parallels. Marcion is implicitly framed as severing Christ from prophetic tradition, echoing Irenaeus’s portrayal of heretics as innovators who detach Christ from the Creator’s economy (AH I.27; III.12). The insistence that nothing in Christ is “simplex factum” but prepared in advance aligns with Irenaeus’s anti-heretical insistence on divine prefiguration and apostolic continuity. Appeals to prophetic voice and ecclesial gathering reinforce the polemic that catholic tradition preserves the authentic historical sequence.
Inherited exegetical scaffolding. The chapter displays signs of pre-existing exegetical material: structured chains of prophetic citations corresponding to Gospel actions; typological reasoning linking the number twelve to multiple scriptural precedents; and harmony-compatible scholia explaining symbolic acts. The cumulative catalogue of prophetic anticipations resembles dominical-logia commentary rather than purely rhetorical invention, suggesting reliance on an earlier exegetical dossier.
Condensed assessment. The chapter strongly supports dependence upon an earlier Irenaean anti-Marcionite framework: prophetic fulfillment governs the interpretation, numerical and typological arguments align with Irenaean theology of preparation and recapitulation, and the method reflects systematic refutation using Marcion’s retained Gospel material within a unified prophetic economy.
