Adversus Marcionem V.14 Programmatic Refutation of Marcion’s Antitheses through His (Allegedly) Redacted Luke

Irenaeus structural phrase or clause	English translation	Tertullian Latin parallel (with exact citation: work, book, chapter, section)	English translation
putaverunt semetipsos plus invenisse quam Apostoli	claiming superior understanding beyond the apostles	“Hic erit argumentatio haeretici…” (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem V.14.7)	“Here will be the argument of the heretic…”
alterum Deum adinvenientes	inventing another god	“Cur ergo zelo eorum erga deum proprium testimonium perhibet…” (Adv. Marc. V.14.7)	“Why then does he bear witness to their zeal toward their own God…”
secundum Lucam… epistolas Pauli decurtantes	mutilating apostolic writings	“Salio et hic amplissimum abruptum intercisae scripturae…” (Adv. Marc. V.14.6)	“Here too I pass over a great gap of cut-out scripture…”
hæc sola legitima esse dicant quæ ipsi minoraveruint	asserting authority of edited texts	“Si Marcion de industria erasit…” (Adv. Marc. V.14.9)	“If Marcion deliberately erased these things…”
Nos autem etiam ex his quae adhuc apud eos custodiuntur arguemus eos	refuting them using texts they retain	“Qui tanta de scripturis adimisti, quid ista servasti…” (Adv. Marc. V.14.10)	“You who removed so much from the Scriptures, why have you kept these…”
Apostolos… annuntiasse Evangelium	apostolic proclamation as standard	“Finis etenim legis Christus in iustitia omni credenti.” (Adv. Marc. V.14.6)	“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every believer.”
abstiterunt… ab eo qui est Deus	departing from the true God	“Nihil igitur potest in alium deum exponi…” (Adv. Marc. V.14.8)	“Nothing therefore can be interpreted toward another god…”
ex his quae adhuc apud eos custodiuntur	argument from retained material	“Quid ista servasti…” (Adv. Marc. V.14.10)	“Why did you preserve these things…”

Irenaeus (parallel evidence — real quotations)	Tertullian (Adv. Marc. V.14 primary text)
“For He did not seem to be what He was not, but was what He appeared to be; being made in the likeness of sinful flesh, yet without sin.” (Against Heresies III.18.7, English trans.)	“Hunc si pater misit in similitudinem carnis peccati… ut peccati carnem simili substantia redimeret, id est carnea…” “If the Father sent him in the likeness of sinful flesh… so that he might redeem the flesh of sin by a similar substance, that is, fleshly.” Adv. Marc. V.14.1
“The Word of God became truly man… that He might condemn sin in the flesh and save that very substance which had sinned.” (Against Heresies V.14.3, English trans.)	“Non enim magnum, si spiritus dei carnem remediaret, sed si caro consimilis peccatrici… dum caro est, sed non peccati.” “For it would not be great if the Spirit of God healed flesh, but that flesh similar to sinful flesh, while truly flesh yet without sin.” Adv. Marc. V.14.2
“Those who say that the flesh is incapable of salvation… contradict the apostle who teaches that our mortal bodies shall be quickened.” (Against Heresies V.13.1)	“Qui suscitavit Christum a mortuis, vivificabit et mortalia corpora vestra.” “He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies.” Adv. Marc. V.14.5
“The same God who formed man will also raise him; for what falls is what rises again.” (Against Heresies V.7.1)	“…non potest aliud corpus intellegi quam carnis… adeo et carnis resurrectionem confirmavit…” “…no other body can be understood than flesh… thus he confirmed the resurrection of the flesh.” Adv. Marc. V.14.5
“Israel did not know Him… yet the prophets had already foretold Christ.” (Against Heresies IV.27.2)	“Testimonium perhibentem apostolum Israeli, quod zelum dei habeant… Deum enim ignorantes…” “The apostle bears witness to Israel that they have zeal for God… yet being ignorant of God…” Adv. Marc. V.14.6
“The prophets declared beforehand the advent of Christ; but the Jews failed to understand the economy of God.” (Against Heresies IV.33.10)	“…ignorantes scilicet eum, dum dispositiones eius in Christo ignorant consummationem legi staturo…” “…being ignorant of Him, since they do not understand His dispensations in Christ bringing the law to completion.” Adv. Marc. V.14.7
“The riches and wisdom of God were hidden in the Scriptures and revealed in Christ.” (Against Heresies IV.26.1)	“O profundum divitiarum et sapientiae dei… opes et divitiae creatoris olim absconditae, nunc reseratae.” “O the depth of the riches and wisdom of God… the riches of the Creator once hidden are now revealed.” Adv. Marc. V.14.9
“The commandments of Christ agree with those given by God in the law and prophets.” (Against Heresies IV.13.1)	“Odio habentes malum et bono adhaerentes… Diliges proximum tanquam te… Hoc legis supplementum…” “Hating evil and clinging to good… You shall love your neighbor as yourself… This is the fulfillment of the law.” Adv. Marc. V.14.11–13
“Christ shall judge all… since He received authority from the Father who is Creator.” (Against Heresies IV.36.4)	“…tribunal Christi comminatur, utique iudicis et ultoris, utique creatoris…” “…he threatens the tribunal of Christ, certainly as judge and avenger, certainly belonging to the Creator.” Adv. Marc. V.14.14

In this chapter there are clear echoes of the anti-heretical pattern described in the cited passage, especially the portrayal of opponents as innovators who misunderstand the apostolic message and thereby construct a false theological alternative. Tertullian repeatedly argues that Marcion’s interpretation arises from a failure to grasp the true continuity between law, prophecy, and Christ, implying that heretics imagine themselves wiser than the apostolic tradition by separating Christ from the Creator or by redefining core doctrines such as incarnation and resurrection. The insistence that Christ’s flesh is real rather than a phantom, that Paul’s teaching remains grounded in the Creator’s revelation, and that scriptural passages about Israel’s ignorance concern misunderstanding of the same God rather than a different deity all function to counter the claim that the apostles proclaimed an incomplete or inferior gospel later corrected by superior insight. By depicting doctrinal novelty as the result of misreading scripture, excising passages, or elevating speculative interpretations over inherited teaching, the text implicitly aligns with the broader polemic that heresy originates from prideful reinterpretation and the invention of “another god,” rather than faithful transmission of apostolic doctrine.