Adversus Marcionem V.9 Programmatic Refutation of Marcion’s Antitheses through His (Allegedly) Redacted Luke

Irenaeus (III, 12.12) structural phrase or clause	English translation	Tertullian Latin parallel	English translation
Nos autem etiam ex his quae adhuc apud eos custodiuntur arguemus eos	But we will refute them from the things they still retain	“ut iam hinc profiteamur nos proinde probaturos nullum alium deum ab apostolo circumlatum, sicut probavimus nec a Christo, ex ipsius utique epistulis Pauli” (Adversus Marcionem V.1.9)	“so that from this point we declare that we shall prove that no other god is proclaimed by the apostle, as we have proved neither by Christ, from Paul’s own epistles themselves.”
secundum Lucam autem evangelium et epistolas Pauli decurtantes	mutilating Luke and the Pauline letters	“quas proinde mutilatas etiam de numero forma iam haeretici evangelii praeiudicasse debebit” (Adversus Marcionem V.1.9)	“which therefore, being mutilated, must already be prejudged by the form of the heretical gospel.”
Apostolos quidem… annuntiasse Evangelium	apostolic authority as standard	“Si ergo carnis resurrectionem negantes apostolus retundit, utique adversus illos tuetur quod illi negabant” (Adversus Marcionem V.9.2)	“If therefore the apostle refutes those denying the resurrection of the flesh, he defends against them what they denied.”
ex his quae adhuc apud eos custodiuntur	refuting from texts retained by opponents	“Nos edimus evangelia (de quorum fide aliquid utique iam… confirmasse debemus)” (Adversus Marcionem V.9.7)	“We produce the gospels (whose reliability we must already have confirmed…).”

Irenaeus (parallel evidence)	Tertullian (Adv. Marc. V.9 primary text)
Latin: “Quemadmodum enim in Adam omnes morimur, sic et in Christo omnes vivificabuntur… carnis resurrectionem apostolus manifeste praedicavit.” English: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive… the apostle clearly proclaimed the resurrection of the flesh.” (Adv. Haer. V.13.1)	Latin: “Si ergo carnis resurrectionem negantes apostolus retundit… carnis scilicet resurrectionem.” English: “If therefore the apostle refutes those who deny the resurrection of the flesh… he is defending precisely the resurrection of the flesh.” (Adv. Marc. V.9.2)
Latin: “Resurrectionem autem carnis manifestam facit dicens… mortuum quod resurgit idipsum est quod cecidit.” English: “He makes the resurrection of the flesh clear… what rises again is the very thing that fell.” (Adv. Haer. V.7.1)	Latin: “Resurgere autem non est nisi eius quod cecidit… hoc cadit quod in terram abit… hoc resurgit quod cadit.” English: “To rise again belongs only to that which has fallen… what goes into the earth falls… what falls rises again.” (Adv. Marc. V.9.4)
Latin: “Quoniam per hominem mors, per hominem et resurrectio mortuorum… idem Christus verus homo.” English: “Since through a man came death, through a man also the resurrection of the dead… Christ himself being true man.” (Adv. Haer. III.18.7)	Latin: “Quia per hominem mors, et per hominem resurrectio… hic mihi et Christi corpus ostenditur in nomine hominis.” English: “Because through a man came death, and through a man resurrection… here the body of Christ is shown to me under the name ‘man.’” (Adv. Marc. V.9.5)
Latin: “Non alium Deum praedicant apostoli quam eum qui per prophetas locutus est.” English: “The apostles preach no other God than the one who spoke through the prophets.” (Adv. Haer. III.12.7)	Latin: “Oportet enim regnare eum… Sede ad dexteram meam donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum.” English: “For he must reign… ‘Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a footstool for your feet.’” (Adv. Marc. V.9.6)
Latin: “Scripturas propheticas ad Christum pertinentes demonstramus… psalmi David de Christo praedicant.” English: “We demonstrate that the prophetic scriptures concern Christ… the psalms of David proclaim Christ.” (Adv. Haer. IV.33.1)	Latin: “Nos edimus evangelia… nocturna nativitate declarantia dominum… ante luciferum ex utero generavi te.” English: “We produce the Gospels… declaring the Lord’s birth at night… ‘Before the morning star I begot you from the womb.’” (Adv. Marc. V.9.7–8)
Latin: “Melchisedech autem sacerdos Dei altissimi figuram Christi praeferebat.” English: “Melchizedek, priest of the Most High God, prefigured Christ.” (Adv. Haer. IV.17.2)	Latin: “Tu es sacerdos in aevum… secundum ordinem Melchisedec.” English: “‘You are a priest forever… according to the order of Melchizedek.’” (Adv. Marc. V.9.8)
Latin: “Regnum Christi universale est… omnes gentes subiectae ei erunt.” English: “The kingdom of Christ is universal… all nations shall be subject to him.” (Adv. Haer. III.6.1)	Latin: “Dominabitur… a mari ad mare… adorabunt illum omnes reges… servient ei omnes nationes.” English: “He shall rule… from sea to sea… all kings shall adore him… all nations shall serve him.” (Adv. Marc. V.9.11)
Latin: “Benedicentur in semine Abrahae omnes gentes… hoc est in Christo.” English: “All nations shall be blessed in the seed of Abraham… that is, in Christ.” (Adv. Haer. III.5.3)	Latin: “Et benedicentur in illo universae gentes… In Salomone nulla natio benedicitur, in Christo vero omnis.” English: “And in him all nations shall be blessed… In Solomon no nation is blessed, but in Christ every nation.” (Adv. Marc. V.9.12)

Signs of the polemical pattern expressed in the cited statement are clearly present in this chapter, especially in the way Tertullian frames doctrinal disagreement as the result of heretical overconfidence that claims insight beyond apostolic teaching. The argument repeatedly insists that authentic Christian doctrine must remain anchored in the Creator’s previously revealed plan and prophetic testimony, while alternative interpretations—such as denying the resurrection of the flesh or reinterpreting Christ apart from the Creator—are portrayed as innovations arising from a failure to remain within apostolic continuity. Tertullian’s method parallels the accusation that heretics believe they have discovered more than the apostles: he argues that the apostles themselves taught bodily resurrection and the fulfillment of prophetic promises, and therefore any reinterpretation that detaches Paul or Christ from the Creator amounts to inventing “another god.” The extensive appeal to scriptural prophecy (e.g., Psalms interpreted christologically, Melchizedek typology, and prophetic promises of dominion) reinforces the claim that apostolic proclamation was already aligned with Israel’s Scriptures, thereby countering the notion that the apostles were still bound by merely “Jewish” understanding while later interpreters possess a purer insight. In this way the chapter exhibits the same underlying logic as the earlier polemical formula: heresy is characterized as a satanically inflated departure from the apostolic rule, replacing inherited revelation with self-authorized doctrinal innovation.