Adversus Marcionem V.3 Programmatic Refutation of Marcion’s Antitheses through His (Allegedly) Redacted Luke

Irenaeus (AH III, 12.12) structural phrase or clause	English translation	Tertullian Latin parallel	English translation
…putaverunt semetipsos plus invenisse quam Apostoli…	they thought themselves superior to the apostles	“ut conferret cum illis de evangelii sui regula, ne in vacuum tot annis cucurrisset aut curreret… Adeo ab illis probari et constabiliri desiderarat” (Adversus Marcionem V.3.1)	“that he might confer with them about the rule of his gospel… he desired to be approved and confirmed by them.”
…Apostolos quidem… annuntiasse Evangelium…	the apostles proclaim the gospel as normative authority	“Bene igitur quod et dexteras Paulo dederunt Petrus et Iacobus et Ioannes… de officii distributione pepigerunt” (Adversus Marcionem V.3.6)	“It is good then that Peter and James and John gave Paul the right hand… and agreed about the distribution of ministry.”
…qui ab eo sunt ad intercidendas conversi sunt scripturas…	Marcion and his followers alter/cut the Scriptures	“ostenditur quid supra haeretica industria eraserit” (Adversus Marcionem V.3.11)	“it is shown what heretical industry had erased above.”
Nos autem etiam ex his quae adhuc apud eos custodiuntur arguemus eos	we refute them from what they still retain	“non interpolatione scripturae… sed retentione veteris disciplinae… atque ita pervertentes evangelium” (Adversus Marcionem V.3.2)	“not by interpolation of Scripture… but by retaining older discipline… thus perverting the gospel.”
…abstiterunt… ab eo qui est Deus, alterum Deum adinvenientes	they depart from the true God and invent another god	“Eiusdem tamen dei cuius et lex… nec enim laborasset fidem a lege discernere, quam diversitas ipsius divinitatis ultro discrevisset” (Adversus Marcionem V.3.8)	“of the same God whose law it is… he would not have needed to distinguish faith from law if a diversity of deity already existed.”

Irenaeus (parallel evidence)	Tertullian (Adv. Marc. V.3 primary text)
“Non enim sine causa Paulus ad apostolos ascendit… sed ut concordiam evangelii demonstraret.” (Adv. Haer. III.13.1) “For Paul did not go up to the apostles without reason, but to demonstrate the agreement of the Gospel.”	“Denique ad patrocinium Petri ceterorumque apostolorum ascendisse Hierosolymam… ut conferret cum illis de evangelii sui regula, ne in vacuum tot annis cucurrisset…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.1) “Finally, he writes that he went up to Jerusalem to the authority of Peter and the other apostles… to confer with them concerning the rule of his gospel, lest he had run or should run in vain for so many years.”
“Haeretici… evangelium pervertunt, non intellectu recto.” (cf. AH III.11; III.12 context) “Heretics pervert the Gospel, not through right understanding.”	“…falsos et superinducticios fratres appellat… atque ita pervertentes evangelium…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.2) “…he calls them false and superinduced brethren… thus perverting the gospel…”
“Apostoli secundum dispensationem interdum Iudaeis Iudaei facti sunt.” (cf. AH III.12 thematic use of apostolic accommodation)	“…adeo vera, ut apostolo consonent profitenti factum se Iudaeis Iudaeum ut Iudaeos lucrifaceret…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.5; cf. 1 Cor 9:20) “…so true that it agrees with the apostle confessing that he became a Jew to the Jews in order to gain the Jews…”
Harmony of Paul with apostolic college: “Paulus cum reliquis apostolis consonat.” (cf. AH III.13–15)	“Bene igitur quod et dexteras Paulo dederunt Petrus et Iacobus et Ioannes…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.6) “Rightly therefore Peter and James and John gave their right hands to Paul…”
Creator vs another god: “Non alium Deum praedicaverunt apostoli.” (AH III.12.13) “The apostles did not preach another God.”	“…eius dei et Christi praedicatorem Paulum cuius legem… interim tamen pro temporibus admiserat…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.6) “…Paul as preacher of that God and Christ whose law, though excluded, he nevertheless admitted for a time…”
Appeal to prophetic scripture confirming apostolic teaching: “Prophetae evangelium praenuntiaverunt.” (cf. AH IV.34)	“…Destrui autem lex habuit ex quo vox Ioannis clamavit in eremo: Parate vias domini…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.8; Luke 3:4) “…But the Law began to be destroyed from when the voice of John cried in the wilderness: Prepare the ways of the Lord…”
Use of prophetic authority to interpret Paul: “Prophetarum testimonia apostolicam doctrinam confirmant.” (cf. AH III.21)	“…quia iustus ex fide vivit… Quod si prophetes Abacuc praenuntiavit, habes et apostolum prophetas confirmantem…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.8–9; Hab 2:4) “…because the just lives by faith… if the prophet Habakkuk foretold it, you have the apostle confirming the prophets…”
Unity of blessing and curse under same God: Irenaeus argues both judgment and blessing belong to one Creator (cf. AH IV.40 thematic)	“…utrumque habes propositum apud creatorem: Ecce posui… maledictionem et benedictionem.” (Adv. Marc. V.3.9; Deut 11:26) “…you have both set forth by the Creator: ‘Behold I set before you curse and blessing.’”
Christ not alien to Creator’s economy: “Christus non alienus a Creatore.” (cf. AH III.11; IV.6 thematic)	“Et quomodo praemaledixisset eum creator quem ignorat?” (Adv. Marc. V.3.10) “And how would the Creator have cursed beforehand one whom he does not know?”
Abrahamic faith continuity: “Abraham pater fidei… eadem fides nunc justificat.” (cf. AH IV.21)	“…mentionem scilicet Abrahae… nos apostolus filios Abrahae per fidem affirmat…” (Adv. Marc. V.3.11) “…the apostle affirms us to be sons of Abraham through faith…”

This chapter shows clear evidence of the polemical framework often articulated in earlier anti-heretical sources, especially the accusation that heretics claim superior insight beyond the apostles and thereby introduce a second god. Although the language of “putaverunt semetipsos plus invenisse quam Apostoli” does not appear explicitly, the underlying logic governs Tertullian’s interpretation throughout. The narrative emphasis on Paul’s journey to Jerusalem to confer with Peter and the other apostles (“ascendisse Hierosolymam… ut conferret cum illis de evangelii sui regula, ne in vacuum… cucurrisset”) functions as a direct rebuttal to any claim that Paul possessed an independent revelation surpassing apostolic authority. Instead, Paul seeks confirmation within the established apostolic framework, demonstrating continuity rather than innovation. Tertullian repeatedly construes disputes over circumcision and the Law as internal questions of discipline within the Creator’s economy, not as evidence of a new deity, thereby countering the Marcionite claim that Paul proclaimed a god distinct from the Creator. The insistence that Paul acted in coordination with the apostles and within prophetic expectation — reinforced through appeals to Acts, prophetic texts, and apostolic agreement (“dextras ei darent… de officii distributione pepigerunt”) — implicitly characterizes opposing interpretations as attempts to elevate later insight above the apostolic tradition. In this way, the chapter reflects the classic anti-heretical charge that doctrinal novelty arises when interpreters assume themselves wiser than the apostles and thereby invent theological distinctions foreign to the original proclamation.