Tertullian said Marcion later professed repentance

[Secret Alias]

But as Lampe notes the Valentinian strand was added last presumably by people hostile to myths. The followers of Tatian, who wrote a lot of the anti-Marcionite material were "mythicists."

[davidbrainerd]

But as Lamps notes the Valentinian strand was added last presumably by people hostile to myths. The followers of Tatian, who wrote a lot of the anti-Marcionite material were "mythicists."

I don't buy either assertion. Perhaps you should start a new thread trying to prove these wild assertions.

[Secret Alias]

The idea that Irenaeus based material was layered is well attested. Only idiots read ancient religious texts as beginning to end original compositions faithfully "locked in" from the time of original composition

[John T]

Tertullian just copied out stuff Irenaeus wrote, copied out stuff Justin wrote, copied out stuff Theophilus wrote - modifying it with little flourishes or transposition.

Yep, sounds about right but that doesn't make it fake news.

However, for the sake of argument, if Tertullian was not aware that he was reading/copying the equivalent of the New York Times (fake news) back then, then why didn't someone from the Marcion camp at the time of Tertullian correct the record and say that Marcion was never excommunicated, never repented but rather went to his death-bed as an stead-fast leader of his Gnostic church?

John T

[davidbrainerd]

However, for the sake of argument, if Tertullian was not aware that he was reading/copying the equivalent of the New York Times (fake news) back then, then why didn't someone from the Marcion camp correct the record and say that Marcion was never excommunicated, never repented but rather went to his death-bed as an stead-fast leader of his Gnostic church?

Their books got burned. Why do you think you don't have an actual copy of Marcion's gospel but only a crappy reconstruction based on Tertullian's writings? Why when you read the New York Times do they say 100% of scientists agree global warming is all manmade and going to kill us unless we put catalytic converters on cows' butts? Why aren't the scientists who disagree quoted? They must not exist right. Lmao.

[MrMacSon]

Tertullian just copied out stuff Irenaeus wrote, copied out stuff Justin wrote, copied out stuff Theophilus wrote - modifying it with little flourishes or transposition.

Are you saying Terullian directly copied out stuff Justin wrote? or Justin's stuff via Ireneaus? or both?

[Secret Alias]

As Andrew notes - posting.php?mode=quote&f=3&p=69714 - Tertullian's Against Marcion Book 4 is a development of Irenaeus's Against Marcion is a reworking of Justin's Against Marcion. There are three layers:

Layer 1 Justin's Against Marcion (c. 150 CE)
Layer 2 Irenaeus's Against Marcion (c. 180 CE)
Layer 3 Tertullian's Against Marcion (c. 210 CE)

The Luke-based argument starts with Irenaeus (Tertullian copied it the way he did to make Against the Valentinians from the source behind chapters 1 - 12 Against Haereses Book 1). The original treatise written by Justin was based on a gospel harmony not Luke hence the frequent allusion to things cut from 'my gospel' which come from Matthew not Luke.

[Secret Alias]

Yep, sounds about right but that doesn't make it fake news.

So which was it? Hegesippus went to Rome under Anicetus and met a heretic named Marcellina or Polycarp went to Rome under Anicetus and met a heretic named Marcion? The two reports are structured around the same original contents written 147 CE (= Anicetus) but Irenaeus's report expands the Hegesippus and changes the name (according to my reading) of the individual reporting - viz. Polycarp. Sounds like fake news to me. Hard to believe him when he says that all these Marcionites (the Valentinian material was added later according to Lampe) 'repented' and converted to the church. Easier to believe they were forced into it. The Marcion story of an 'almost repentance' seems mythical and legendary especially in light of the change of name (Marcellina to Marcion) at the start. Probably a non-existent character or a figure like 'Ebion of the Ebionites' which was used to explain the existence of a sect.

With great ingenuity Lightfoot has found traces of this list in St. Epiphanius, Haer., XXVII, 6, where that saint of the fourth century carelessly says: Marcellina came to us lately and destroyed many, in the days of Anicetus, Bishop of Rome", and then refers to "the above catalogue", though he has given none. He is clearly quoting a writer who was at Rome in the time of Anicetus and made a list of popes beginning with St. Peter and St. Paul, martyred in the twelfth year of Nero. A list which has some curious agreements with Epiphanius, and extends only to Anicetus, is found in the poem of Pseudo-Tertullian against Marcion; the author has mistaken Marcellina for Marcion. The same list is at the base of the earlier part of the Liberian Catalogue, doubtless from Hippolytus (see under Clement I).

[Secret Alias]

As noted above the Marcion repentance effort story under Eleutherus fits the structure of the expansion of Hegesippus down to Eleutherius. Red is the corrupted but structurally limited text based on Hegesippus, bold red the expansion of Hegesippus and bold black beginning with 'But Polycarp' is referenced out of nowhere (as if Irenaeus is commenting on the citation just given):

The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth.

But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time,— a man who was of much greater weight, and a more steadfast witness of truth, than Valentinus, and Marcion, and the rest of the heretics. He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles—that, namely, which is handed down by the Church. There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within. And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, Do you know me? I do know you, the first-born of Satan. Such was the horror which the apostles and their disciples had against holding even verbal communication with any corrupters of the truth; as Paul also says, A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sins, being condemned of himself. Titus 3:10 There is also a very powerful Epistle of Polycarp written to the Philippians, from which those who choose to do so, and are anxious about their salvation, can learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of the truth. Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.

The 'but Polycarp' doesn't make any sense in the context. Polycarp hasn't even been mentioned or been the subject of the discussion up until now.

[davidbrainerd]

Probably a non-existent character or a figure like 'Ebion of the Ebionites' which was used to explain the existence of a sect.

You make too many claims at once, and this one is more idiotic than the rest.

Ebion is created as an epynonimous founder to explain the group name Ebionim on the basis of a founder's name rather than an attribute of the group, to prevent any claim that they are "the poor" in Galatians 2. The name Marcion simply cannot be created in this way. Furthermore, Ebionim was a self designation of the group, so it has to be maligned somehow; whereas Marcionites its itself a maligning group designation created by the Catholics on the basis of asserting Marcion as the founder of the group, whereas the adherents of the same probably prefered to merely be called Chrestians.