Paul and Pseudepigraphy (Pauline Studies, Book 8)

54 armin d. baum

Tertullian, adversus Marcionem 4.2.1–3

In his controversy with Marcion (207/8 ce), tertullian addressed the

question of why the early readers of the new testament historical books

were not content to accept their anonymity but emphatically asked about

the names of their authors. tertullian also commented on the edition of

luke’s gospel which Marcion used. It was particularly in this context that

he attached importance to the names of the gospel authors and dismissed

anonymous gospels.74

We lay it down as our first position, that the evangelical testament has

apostles for its authors, to whom was assigned by the lord himself this

office of publishing the gospel. since, however, there are apostolic men also,

they are yet not alone, but appear with apostles and after apostles; because

the preaching of disciples might be open to the suspicion of an affectation

of glory, if there did not accompany it the authority of the masters, which

means that of Christ, for it was that which made the apostles their master.

2 of the apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first instill faith into us;

whilst of apostolic men, luke and Mark renew it afterwards. these all start

with the same principles of the faith, so far as relates to the one only god

the Creator and his Christ, how that he was born of the Virgin, and came to

fulfill the law and the prophets. never mind if there does occur some varia-

tion in the order of their narratives, provided that there be agreement in the

essential matter of the faith, in which there is disagreement with Marcion.

3 Marcion, on the other hand, you must know, ascribes no author to his

gospel, as if it could not be allowed him to affix a title to that from which

it was no crime (in his eyes) to subvert the very body. and here I might

now make a stand, and contend that a work ought not to be recognized,

which holds not its head erect, which exhibits no consistency, which gives

no promise of credibility from the fullness of its title and the just profession

of its author.

Tertullian, adversus Marcionem 4.5.3–4

tertullian would not have considered the second and third gospels to be

deceptive forgeries if they had been attributed to Peter and Paul, since he

regarded Mark and luke only as publishers of their teachers’ narratives

about the life of Jesus.75

the same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence to the

other gospels also, which we possess equally through their means, and

according to their usage—I mean the gospels of John and Matthew—while

74 trans. in ANF 3:347.

75 trans. in ANF 3:350.