Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Marcion Rejected the Preceding Portion of St. Luke's Gospel. Therefore This Review Opens with an Examination of the Case of the Evil Spirit in the Synagogue of Capernaum. He Whom the Demon Acknowledged Was the Creator's Christ.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter
VII.—Marcion Rejected the Preceding Portion of St. Luke’s
Gospel. Therefore This Review Opens with an Examination of the Case of
the Evil Spirit in the Synagogue of Capernaum. He Whom the Demon
Acknowledged Was the Creator’s Christ.
In the fifteenth year of the reign of
Tiberius3634
| 3634 Luke iii. 1
and iv. 31. | (for such is
Marcion’s proposition) he “came down to the Galilean city
of Capernaum,” of course meaning3635
from the heaven of the Creator, to which he had previously descended
from his own. What then had been his course,3636
for him to be described as first descending from his own heaven to the
Creator’s? For why should I abstain from censuring those parts of
the statement which do not satisfy the requirement of an ordinary
narrative, but always end in a falsehood? To be sure, our censure has
been once for all expressed in the question, which we have
already3637
| 3637 See above, book i.
chap. xxiii. [Comp. i. cap. xix.] | suggested: Whether,
when descending through the Creator’s domain, and indeed in
hostility to him, he could possibly have been admitted by him, and by
him been transmitted to the earth, which was equally his territory?
Now, however, I want also to know the remainder of his course down,
assuming that he came
down. For we must not be too nice in inquiring3638
| 3638 This is here the force
of viderit, our author’s very favourite idiom. |
whether it is supposed that he was seen in any place. To come
into view3639
indicates3640
a sudden unexpected glance, which for a
moment fixed3641
the eye upon the
object that passed before the view, without staying. But when it
happens that a descent has been effected, it is apparent, and comes
under the notice of the eyes.3642
| 3642 Descendisse autem, dum
fit, videtur et subit oculos. Probably this bit of characteristic
Latinity had better be rendered thus: “The accomplishment of a
descent, however, is, whilst happening, a visible process, and one that
meets the eye.” Of the various readings, “dum sit,”
“dum it,” “dum fit,” we take the last with
Oehler, only understanding the clause as a parenthesis. | Moreover, it takes
account of fact, and thus obliges one to examine in what
condition with what preparation,3643
with how much
violence or moderation, and further, at what time of the day or night,
the descent was made; who, again, saw the descent, who reported it, who
seriously avouched the fact, which certainly was not easy to be
believed, even after the asseveration. It is, in short, too
bad3644
that Romulus should have had in Proculus an
avoucher of his ascent to heaven, when the Christ of (this) god could
not find any one to announce his descent from heaven; just as if the
ascent of the one and the descent of the other were not effected on one
and the same ladder of falsehood! Then, what had he to do with Galilee,
if he did not belong to the Creator by whom3645
that region was destined (for His Christ) when about to enter on His
ministry?3646
| 3646 Ingressuro
prædicationem. | As Isaiah says:
“Drink in this first, and be prompt, O region of Zabulon and land
of Nephthalim, and ye others who (inhabit) the sea-coast, and that of
Jordan, Galilee of the nations, ye people who sit in darkness, behold a
great light; upon you, who inhabit (that) land, sitting in the shadow
of death, the light hath arisen.”3647
| 3647 This is the literal
rendering of Tertullian’s version of the prophet’s words,
which occur chap. ix. 1, 2. The first clause closely follows the LXX.
(ed. Tisch.): Τοῦτο
πρῶτον πίε,
ταχύ ποίει. This
curious passage is explained by Grotius (on Matt. iv. 14) as a mistake
of ancient copyists; as if what the Seventy had originally rendered
ταχὺ
ποίει, from the hiphil
of ללק, had been
faultily written ταχὺ
πίε, and the latter had crept into the text with
the marginal note πρῶτον, instead of a
repetition of ταχὺ. However this be,
Tertullian’s old Latin Bible had the passage thus: “Hoc
primum bibito, cito facito, regio Zabulon,” etc. | It
is, however, well that Marcion’s god does claim to be the
enlightener of the nations, that so he might have the better reason for
coming down from heaven; only, if it must needs be,3648
he should rather have made Pontus his place
of descent than Galilee. But since both the place and the work of
illumination according to the prophecy are compatible with Christ, we
begin to discern3649
that He is the
subject of the prophecy, which shows that at the very outset of His
ministry, He came not to destroy the law and the prophets, but
rather to fulfil them;3650
for Marcion has
erased the passage as an interpolation.3651
It
will, however, be vain for him to deny that Christ uttered in word what
He forthwith did partially indeed. For the prophecy about place He at
once fulfilled. From heaven straight to the synagogue. As the adage
runs: “The business on which we are come, do at once.”
Marcion must even expunge from the Gospel, “I am not sent but
unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel;”3652
and, “It is not meet to take the
children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs,”3653
—in order, forsooth, that Christ may
not appear to be an Israelite. But facts will satisfy me instead of
words. Withdraw all the sayings of my Christ, His acts shall speak. Lo,
He enters the synagogue; surely (this is going) to the lost sheep of
the house of Israel. Behold, it is to Israelites first that He offers
the “bread” of His doctrine; surely it is because they are
“children” that He shows them this priority.3654
Observe, He does not yet impart it to
others; surely He passes them by as “dogs.” For to whom
else could He better have imparted it, than to such as were strangers
to the Creator, if He especially belonged not to the Creator? And yet
how could He have been admitted into the synagogue—one so
abruptly appearing,3655
so unknown; one, of
whom no one had as yet been apprised of His tribe, His nation, His
family, and lastly, His enrolment in the census of Augustus—that
most faithful witness of the Lord’s nativity, kept in the
archives of Rome? They certainly would have remembered, if they did not
know Him to be circumcised, that He must not be admitted into their
most holy places. And even if He had the general right of
entering3656
| 3656 Etsi passim
adiretur. | the synagogue (like
other Jews), yet the function of giving instruction was allowed only to
a man who was extremely well known, and examined and tried, and for
some time invested with the privilege after experience duly attested
elsewhere. But “they were all astonished at His doctrine.”
Of course they were; “for, says (St. Luke), “His word was
with power3657
—not because
He taught in opposition to the law and the prophets. No doubt, His divine
discourse3658
gave forth both
power and grace, building up rather than pulling down the substance of
the law and the prophets. Otherwise, instead of
“astonishment, they would feel horror. It would not be
admiration, but aversion, prompt and sure, which they would bestow on
one who was the destroyer of law and prophets, and the especial
propounder as a natural consequence of a rival god; for he would have
been unable to teach anything to the disparagement of the law and the
prophets, and so far of the Creator also, without premising the
doctrine of a different and rival divinity. Inasmuch, then, as
the Scripture makes no other statement on the matter than that the
simple force and power of His word produced astonishment, it more
naturally3659
shows that His
teaching was in accordance with the Creator by not denying (that it was
so), than that it was in opposition to the Creator, by not asserting
(such a fact). And thus He will either have to be acknowledged as
belonging to Him,3660
| 3660 That is, the
Creator. | in accordance with
whom He taught; or else will have to be adjudged a deceiver since He
taught in accordance with One whom He had come to oppose. In the same
passage, “the spirit of an unclean devil” exclaims:
“What have we to do with Thee, Thou Jesus? Art Thou come to
destroy us? I know Thee who Thou art, the Holy One of
God.”3661
I do not here raise
the question whether this appellation was suitable to one who ought not
to be called Christ, unless he were sent by the Creator.3662
Elsewhere3663
| 3663 See above, in
book iii. chap. xii., on the name Emmanuel; in chap. xv., on the
name Christ; and in chap. xvi., on the name
Jesus. | there has been
already given a full consideration of His titles.
My present discussion is, how the evil spirit
could have known that He was called by such a name, when there had
never at any time been uttered about Him a single prophecy by a god who
was unknown, and up to that time silent, of whom it was not possible
for Him to be attested as “the Holy One,” as (of a god)
unknown even to his own Creator. What similar event could he
then have published3664
of a new
deity, whereby he might betoken for “the holy one” of the
rival god? Simply that he went into the synagogue, and did
nothing even in word against the Creator? As therefore he could not by
any means acknowledge him, whom he was ignorant of, to be Jesus and the
Holy One of God; so did he acknowledge Him whom he knew (to be both).
For he remembered how that the prophet had prophesied3665
| 3665 Ps.
xvi. 10, and probably Dan. ix. 24. | of “the Holy One” of God, and
how that God’s name of “Jesus” was in the son of
Nun.3666
| 3666 Compare what was said
above in book iii., chap. xvi. p. 335. | These facts he had also received3667
from the angel, according to our
Gospel: “Wherefore that which shall be born of thee shall
be called the Holy One, the Son of God;”3668
and, “Thou shalt call his name
Jesus.”3669
Thus he actually
had (although only an evil spirit) some idea of the Lord’s
dispensation, rather than of any strange and heretofore imperfectly
understood one. Because he also premised this question:
“What have we to do with Thee?”—not as if referring
to a strange Jesus, to whom pertain the evil spirits of the
Creator. Nor did he say, What hast Thou to do with us? but, “What
have we to do with Thee?” as if deploring himself, and
deprecating his own calamity; at the prospect of which he adds:
“Art Thou come to destroy us?” So completely did he
acknowledge in Jesus the Son of that God who was judicial and avenging,
and (so to speak) severe,3670
and not of him who
was simply good,3671
and knew not how to
destroy or how to punish! Now for what purpose have we adduced
his passage first?3672
In order to show
that Jesus was neither acknowledged by the evil spirit, nor affirmed by
Himself, to be any other than the Creator’s. Well, but Jesus
rebuked him, you say. To be sure he did, as being an envious (spirit),
and in his very confession only petulant, and evil in
adulation—just as if it had been Christ’s highest glory to
have come for the destruction of demons, and not for the salvation of
mankind; whereas His wish really was that His disciples should not
glory in the subjection of evil spirits but in the fair beauty of
salvation.3673
Why else3674
did He rebuke him? If it was because he was
entirely wrong (in his invocation), then He was neither Jesus nor the
Holy One of God; if it was because he was partially wrong—for
having supposed him to be, rightly enough,3675
Jesus and the Holy One of God, but also as belonging to the
Creator—most unjustly would He have rebuked him for thinking what
he knew he ought to think (about Him), and for not supposing that of
Him which he knew not that he ought to suppose—that he was
another Jesus, and the holy one of the other god. If,
however, the rebuke has not a
more probable meaning3676
| 3676 Verisimiliorem
statum. | than that which we
ascribe to it, it follows that the evil spirit made no mistake, and was
not rebuked for lying; for it was Jesus Himself, besides whom it was
impossible for the evil spirit to have acknowledged any other, whilst
Jesus affirmed that He was He whom the evil spirit had acknowledged, by
not rebuking him for uttering a lie.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
