Against Praxeas; Against Marcion; On Baptism; Apology

So long, however, as its form exists in its proper order, you may seek and discuss as much as you please, and give full rein to¹ your curiosity, in whatever seems to you to hang in doubt, or to be shrouded in obscurity. You have at hand, no doubt, some learned² brother gifted with the grace of knowledge, some one of the experienced class, some one of your close acquaintance who is curious like yourself; although with yourself, a seeker he will, after all,³ be quite aware⁴ that it is better for you to remain in ignorance, lest you should come to know what you ought not, because you have acquired the knowledge of what you ought to know.⁵ "Thy faith," He says, "hath saved thee"⁶ not observe your skill⁷ in the Scriptures. Now, faith has been deposited in the rule; it has a law, and (in the observance thereof) salvation. Skill,⁸ however, consists in curious art, having for its glory simply the readiness that comes from knack.⁹ Let such curious art give place to faith; let such glory yield to salvation. At any rate, let them either relinquish their noisiness,¹⁰ or else be quiet. To know nothing in opposition to the rule (of faith), is to know all things. (Suppose) that heretics were not enemies to the truth, so that we were not forewarned to avoid them, what sort of conduct would it be to agree with men who do themselves confess that they are still seeking? For if they are still seeking, they have not as yet found anything amounting to certainty; and therefore, whatever they seem for a while¹¹ to hold, they betray their own scepticism,¹² whilst they continue seeking. You therefore, who seek after their fashion, looking to those who are themselves ever seeking, a doubter to doubters, a waverer to waverers, must needs be "led, blindly by the blind, down into the ditch."¹³ But when, for the sake of deceiving us, they pretend that they are still seeking, in order that they may palm¹⁴ their essays¹⁵ upon us by the suggestion of an anxious sympathy,¹⁶ —when, in short (after gaining an access to us), they proceed at once to insist on the necessity of our inquiring into such points as they were in the habit of advancing, then it is high time for us in moral obligation¹⁷ to repel¹⁸ them, so that they may know that it is not Christ, but themselves, whom we disavow. For since they are still seekers, they have no fixed tenets yet;¹⁹ and being not fixed in tenet, they have not yet believed; and being not yet believers, they are not Christians. But even though they have their tenets and their belief, they still say that inquiry is necessary in order to discussion.²⁰ Previous, however, to the discussion, they deny what they confess not yet to have believed, so long as they keep it an object of inquiry. When men, therefore, are not Christians even on their own admission,²¹ how much more (do they fail to appear such) to us! What sort of truth is that which they patronize,²² when they commend it to us with a lie? Well, but they actually²³ treat of the Scriptures and recommend (their opinions) out of the Scriptures! To be sure they do.²⁴ From what other source could they derive arguments concerning the things of the faith, except from the records of the faith?

We are therefore come to (the gist of) our position; for at this point we were aiming, and for this we were preparing in the preamble of our address (which we have just completed),—so that we may now join issue on the contention to which our adversaries challenge us. They put forward²⁵ the Scriptures, and by this insolence²⁶ of theirs they at once influence some. In the encounter itself, however, they weary the strong, they catch the weak, and dismiss waverers with a doubt. Accordingly, we oppose to them this step above all others, of not admitting them to any discussion of the Scriptures.²⁷

If in these lie their resources, before they can use them, it ought to be clearly seen to whom belongs the possession of the Scriptures, that none may be admitted to the use thereof who has no title at all to the privilege.

I might be thought to have laid down this position to remedy distrust in my case,²⁸ or from a desire of entering on the contest²⁹ in some other way, were there not reasons on my side, especially this, that our faith owes deference³⁰ to the apostle, who forbids us to enter on "questions," or to lend our ears to new-fangled statements,³¹ or to consort with a heretic "after the first and second admonition,"³² not, (be it observed,) after discussion. Discussion he has inhibited in this way, by designating admonition as the purpose of dealing with a heretic, and the first one too, because he is not a Christian; in order that he might not, after the manner of a Christian, seem to require correction again and again, and "before two or three witnesses,"³³ seeing that he ought to be corrected, for the very reason that he is not to be disputed with; and in the next place, because a controversy over the Scriptures can, clearly,³⁴ produce no other effect than help to upset either the stomach or the brain.

Now this heresy of yours³⁵ does not receive certain Scriptures; and whichever of them it does receive, it perverts by means of additions and diminutions, for the accomplishment of it own purpose; and such as it does receive, it receives not in their entirety; but even when it does receive any up to a certain point³⁶ as entire, it nevertheless perverts even these by the contrivance of diverse interpretations. Truth is just as much opposed by an adulteration of its meaning as it is by a corruption of its text.³⁷ Their vain presumptions must needs refuse to acknowledge the (writings) whereby they are refuted. They rely on those which they have falsely put together, and which they have selected, because of³⁸ their ambiguity. Though most skilled³⁹ in the Scriptures, you will make no progress,⁴⁰ when everything which you maintain is denied on the other side, and whatever you deny is (by them) maintained. As for yourself, indeed, you will lose nothing but your breath, and gain nothing but vexation from their blasphemy.

But with respect to the man for whose sake you enter on the discussion of the Scriptures,⁴¹ with the view of strengthening him when afflicted with doubts, (let me ask) will it be to the truth, or rather to heretical opinions that he will lean? Influenced by the very fact that he sees you have made no progress, whilst the other side is on an equal footing⁴² (with yourself) in denying and in defence, or at any rate on a like standing⁴³ he will go away confirmed in his uncertainty⁴⁴ by the discussion, not knowing which side to adjudge heretical. For, no doubt, they too are able⁴⁵ to retort these things on us. It is indeed a necessary consequence that they should go so far as to say that adulterations of the Scriptures, and false expositions thereof, are rather introduced by ourselves, inasmuch as they, no less than we⁴⁶ maintain that truth is on their side.

Our appeal, therefore, must not be made to the Scriptures; nor must controversy be admitted on points in which victory will either be impossible,⁴⁷ or uncertain, or not certain enough.⁴⁸ But even if a discussion from the Scriptures⁴⁹ should not turn out in such a way as to place both sides on a par, (yet) the natural order of things would require that this point should be first proposed, which is now the only one which we must discuss: "With whom lies that very faith to which the Scriptures belong.⁵⁰ From what and through whom, and when, and to whom, has been handed down that rule,⁵¹ by which men become Christians?" For wherever it shall be manifest that the true Christian rule and faith shall be, there will likewise be the true Scriptures and expositions thereof, and all the Christian traditions.

Christ Jesus our Lord (may He bear with me a moment in thus expressing myself!), whosoever He is, of what God soever He is the Son, of what substance soever He is man and God, of what faith soever He is the teacher, of what reward soever He is the Promiser, did, whilst He lived on earth, Himself declare what He was, what He had been, what the Father's will was which He was administering, what the duty of man was which He was prescribing; (and this declaration He made,) either openly to the people, or privately to His disciples, of whom He had chosen the twelve chief ones to be at His side,⁵² and whom He destined to be the teachers of the nations. Accordingly, after one of these had been struck off, He commanded the eleven others, on His departure to the Father, to "go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost."⁵³ Immediately, therefore, so did the apostles, whom this designation indicates as "the sent." Having, on the authority of a prophecy, which occurs in a psalm of David,⁵⁴ chosen Matthias by lot as the twelfth, into the place of Judas, they obtained the promised power of the Holy Ghost for the gift of miracles and of utterance; and after first bearing witness to the faith in Jesus Christ throughout Judæa, and founding churches (there), they next went forth into the world and preached the same doctrine of the same faith to the nations. They then in like manner founded churches in every city, from which all the other churches, one after another, derived the tradition of the faith,⁵⁵ and the seeds of doctrine, and are every day deriving them,⁵⁶ that they may become churches. Indeed, it is on this account only that they will be able to deem themselves apostolic, as being the offspring of apostolic churches. Every sort of thing⁵⁷ must necessarily revert to its original for its classification.⁵⁸ Therefore the churches, although they are so many and so great, comprise but the one primitive church, (founded) by the apostles, from which they all (spring). In this way all are primitive, and all are apostolic, whilst they are all proved to be one, in (unbroken) unity, by their peaceful communion,⁵⁹ and title of brotherhood, and bond⁶⁰ of hospitality,—privileges⁶¹ which no other rule directs than the one tradition of the selfsame mystery.⁶²

From this, therefore, do we draw up our rule. Since the Lord Jesus Christ sent the apostles to preach, (our rule is) that no others ought to be received as preachers than those whom Christ appointed; for "no man knoweth the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him."⁶³ Nor does the Son seem to have revealed Him to any other than the apostles, whom He sent forth to preach—that, of course, which He revealed to them. Now, what that was which they preached—in other words, what it was which Christ revealed to them—can, as I must here likewise prescribe, properly be proved in no other way than by those very churches which the apostles founded in person, by declaring the gospel to them directly themselves, both vivâ voce, as the phrase is, and subsequently by their epistles. If, then, these things are so, it is in the same degree⁶⁴ manifest that all doctrine which agrees with the apostolic churches—those moulds⁶⁵ and original sources of the faith must be reckoned for truth, as undoubtedly containing that which the (said) churches received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, Christ from God. Whereas all doctrine must be prejudged⁶⁶ as false⁶⁷ which savours of contrariety to the truth of the churches and apostles of Christ and God. It remains, then, that we demonstrate whether this doctrine of ours, of which we have now given the rule, has its origin⁶⁸ in the tradition of the apostles, and whether all other doctrines do not ipso facto⁶⁹ proceed from falsehood. We hold communion with the apostolic churches because our doctrine is in no respect different from theirs. This is our witness of truth.

But inasmuch as the proof is so near at hand,⁷⁰ that if it were at once produced there would be nothing left to be dealt with, let us give way for a while to the opposite side, if they think that they can find some means of invalidating this rule, just as if no proof were forthcoming from us. They usually tell us that the apostles did not know all things: (but herein) they are impelled by the same madness, whereby they turn round to the very opposite point,⁷¹ and declare that the apostles certainly knew all things, but did not deliver all things to all persons,—in either case exposing Christ to blame for having sent forth apostles who had either too much ignorance, or too little simplicity. What man, then, of sound mind can possibly suppose that they were ignorant of anything, whom the Lord ordained to be masters (or teachers),⁷² keeping them, as He did, inseparable (from Himself) in their attendance, in their discipleship, in their society, to whom, "when they were alone, He used to expound" all things⁷³ which were obscure, telling them that "to them it was given to know those mysteries,"⁷⁴ which it was not permitted the people to understand? Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called "the rock on which the church should be built,"⁷⁵ who also obtained "the keys of the kingdom of heaven,"⁷⁶ with the power of "loosing and binding in heaven and on earth?"⁷⁷ Was anything, again, concealed from John, the Lord's most beloved disciple, who used to lean on His breast⁷⁸ to whom alone the Lord pointed Judas out as the traitor,⁷⁹ whom He commended to Mary as a son in His own stead?⁸⁰ Of what could He have meant those to be ignorant, to whom He even exhibited His own glory with Moses and Elias, and the Father's voice moreover, from heaven?⁸¹ Not as if He thus disapproved⁸² of all the rest, but because "by three witnesses must every word be established."⁸³ After the same fashion,⁸⁴ too, (I suppose,) were they ignorant to whom, after His resurrection also, He vouchsafed, as they were journeying together, "to expound all the Scriptures."⁸⁵ No doubt⁸⁶ He had once said, "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot hear them now;" but even then He added, "When He, the Spirit of truth, shall come, He will lead you into all truth."⁸⁷ He (thus) shows that there was nothing of which they were ignorant, to whom He had promised the future attainment of all truth by help of the Spirit of truth. And assuredly He fulfilled His promise, since it is proved in the Acts of the Apostles that the Holy Ghost did come down. Now they who reject that Scripture⁸⁸ can neither belong to the Holy Spirit, seeing that they cannot acknowledge that the Holy Ghost has been sent as yet to the disciples, nor can they presume to claim to be a church themselves⁸⁹ who positively have no means of proving when, and with what swaddling-clothes⁹⁰ this body was established. Of so much importance is it to them not to have any proofs for the things which they maintain, lest along with them there be introduced damaging exposures⁹¹ of those things which they mendaciously devise.

Now, with the view of branding⁹² the apostles with some mark of ignorance, they put forth the case of Peter and them that were with him having been rebuked by Paul. "Something therefore," they say, "was wanting in them." (This they allege,) in order that they may from this construct that other position of theirs, that a fuller knowledge may possibly have afterwards come over (the apostles,) such as fell to the share of Paul when he rebuked those who preceded him. I may here say to those who reject The Acts of the Apostles: "It is first necessary that you show us who this Paul was,—both what he was before he was an apostle, and how he became an apostle,"—so very great is the use which they make of him in respect of other questions also. It is true that he tells us himself that he was a persecutor before he became an apostle,⁹³ still this is not enough for any man who examines before he believes, since even the Lord Himself did not bear witness of Himself.⁹⁴ But let them believe without the Scriptures, if their object is to believe contrary to the Scriptures.⁹⁵ Still they should show, from the circumstance which they allege of Peter's being rebuked by Paul, that Paul added yet another form of the gospel besides that which Peter and the rest had previously set forth. But the fact is,⁹⁶ having been converted from a persecutor to a preacher, he is introduced as one of the brethren to brethren, by brethren—to them, indeed, by men who had put on faith from the apostles' hands. Afterwards, as he himself narrates, he "went up to Jerusalem for the purpose of seeing Peter,"⁹⁷ because of his office, no doubt,⁹⁸ and by right of a common belief and preaching. Now they certainly would not have been surprised at his having become a preacher instead of a persecutor, if his preaching were of something contrary; nor, moreover, would they have "glorified the Lord,"⁹⁹ because Paul had presented himself as an adversary to Him. They accordingly even gave him "the right hand of fellowship,"¹⁰⁰ as a sign of their agreement with him, and arranged amongst themselves a distribution of office, not a diversity of gospel, so that they should severally preach not a different gospel, but (the same), to different persons,¹⁰¹ Peter to the circumcision, Paul to the Gentiles. Forasmuch, then, as Peter was rebuked because, after he had lived with the Gentiles, he proceeded to separate himself from their company out of respect for persons, the fault surely was one of conversation, not of preaching.¹⁰² For it does not appear from this, that any other God than the Creator, or any other Christ than (the son) of Mary, or any other hope than the resurrection, was (by him) announced.

I have not the good fortune,¹⁰³ or, as I must rather say,¹⁰⁴ I have not the unenviable task,¹⁰⁵ of setting apostles by the ears.¹⁰⁶ But, inasmuch as our very perverse cavillers obtrude the rebuke in question for the set purpose of bringing the earlier¹⁰⁷ doctrine into suspicion, I will put in a defence, as it were, for Peter, to the effect that even Paul said that he was "made all things to all men—to the Jews a Jew," to those who were not Jews as one who was not a Jew—"that he might gain all."¹⁰⁸ Therefore it was according to times and persons and causes that they used to censure certain practices, which they would not hesitate themselves to pursue, in like conformity to times and persons and causes. Just (e.g.) as if Peter too had censured Paul, because, whilst forbidding circumcision, he actually circumcised Timothy himself. Never mind¹⁰⁹ those who pass sentence on apostles! It is a happy fact that Peter is on the same level with Paul in the very glory¹¹⁰ of martyrdom. Now, although Paul was carried away even to the third heaven, and was caught up to paradise,¹¹¹ and heard certain revelations there, yet these cannot possibly seem to have qualified him for (teaching) another doctrine, seeing that their very nature was such as to render them communicable to no human being.¹¹² If, however, that unspeakable mystery¹¹³ did leak out,¹¹⁴ and become known to any man, and if any heresy affirms that it does itself follow the same, (then) either Paul must be charged with having betrayed the secret, or some other man must actually¹¹⁵ be shown to have been afterwards "caught up into paradise," who had permission to speak out plainly what Paul was not allowed (even) to mutter.

But here is, as we have said,¹¹⁶ the same madness, in their allowing indeed that the apostles were ignorant of nothing, and preached not any (doctrines) which contradicted one another, but at the same time insisting that they did not reveal all to all men, for that they proclaimed some openly and to all the world, whilst they disclosed others (only) in secret and to a few, because Paul addressed even this expression to Timothy: "O Timothy, guard that which is entrusted to thee;"¹¹⁷ and again: "That good thing which was committed unto thee keep."¹¹⁸ What is this deposit? Is it so secret as to be supposed to characterize¹¹⁹ a new doctrine? or is it a part of that charge of which he says, "This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy?"¹²⁰ and also of that precept of which he says, "I charge thee in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Jesus Christ who witnessed a good confession under Pontius Pilate, that thou keep this commandment?"¹²¹ Now, what is (this) commandment and what is (this) charge? From the preceding and the succeeding contexts, it will be manifest that there is no mysterious¹²² hint darkly suggested in this expression about (some) far-fetched¹²³ doctrine, but that a warning is rather given against receiving any other (doctrine) than that which Timothy had heard from himself, as I take it publicly: "Before many witnesses" is his phrase.¹²⁴ Now, if they refuse to allow that the church is meant by these "many witnesses," it matters nothing, since nothing could have been secret which was produced "before many witnesses." Nor, again, must the circumstance of his having wished him to "commit these things to faithful men, who should be able to teach others also,"¹²⁵ be construed into a proof of there being some occult gospel. For, when he says "these things," he refers to the things of which he is writing at the moment. In reference, however, to occult subjects, he would have called them, as being absent, those things, not these things, to one who had a joint knowledge of them with himself.¹²⁶

Besides which, it must have followed, that, for the man to whom he committed the ministration of the gospel, he would add the injunction that it be not ministered in all places,¹²⁷ and without respect to persons,¹²⁸ in accordance with the Lord's saying, "Not to cast one's pearls before swine, nor that which is holy unto dogs."¹²⁹ Openly did the Lord speak,¹³⁰ without any intimation of a hidden mystery. He had Himself commanded that, "whatsoever they had heard in darkness" and in secret, they should "declare in the light and on the house-tops."¹³¹ He had Himself foreshown, by means of a parable, that they should not keep back in secret, fruitless of interest,¹³² a single pound, that is, one word of His. He used Himself to tell them that a candle was not usually "pushed away under a bushel, but placed on a candlestick," in order to "give light to all who are in the house."¹³³ These things the apostles either neglected, or failed to understand, if they fulfilled them not, by concealing any portion of the light, that is, of the word of God and the mystery of Christ. Of no man, I am quite sure, were they afraid,—neither of Jews nor of Gentiles in their violence;¹³⁴ with all the greater freedom, then, would they certainly preach in the church, who held not their tongue in synagogues and public places. Indeed they would have found it impossible either to convert Jews or to bring in Gentiles, unless they "set forth in order"¹³⁵ that which they would have them believe. Much less, when churches were advanced in the faith, would they have withdrawn from them anything for the purpose of committing it separately to some few others. Although, even supposing that among intimate friends,¹³⁶ so to speak, they did hold certain discussions, yet it is incredible that these could have been such as to bring in some other rule of faith, differing from and contrary to that which they were proclaiming through the Catholic churches,¹³⁷ —as if they spoke of one God in the Church, (and) another at home, and described one substance of Christ, publicly, (and) another secretly, and announced one hope of the resurrection before all men, (and) another before the few; although they themselves, in their epistles, besought men that they would all speak one and the same thing, and that there should be no divisions and dissensions in the church,¹³⁸ seeing that they, whether Paul or others, preached the same things. Moreover, they remembered (the words): "Let your communication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than this cometh of evil;"¹³⁹ so that they were not to handle the gospel in a diversity of treatment.

Since, therefore, it is incredible that the apostles were either ignorant of the whole scope of the message which they had to declare,¹⁴⁰ or failed to make known to all men the entire rule of faith, let us see whether, while the apostles proclaimed it, perhaps, simply and fully, the churches, through their own fault, set it forth otherwise than the apostles had done. All these suggestions of distrust¹⁴¹ you may find put forward by the heretics. They bear in mind how the churches were rebuked by the apostle: "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you?"¹⁴² and, "Ye did run so well; who hath hindered you?"¹⁴³ and how the epistle actually begins: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him, who hath called you as His own in grace, to another gospel."¹⁴⁴ That they likewise (remember), what was written to the Corinthians, that they "were yet carnal," who "required to be fed with milk," being as yet "unable to bear strong meat;"¹⁴⁵ who also "thought that they knew somewhat, whereas they knew not yet anything, as they ought to know."¹⁴⁶ When they raise the objection that the churches were rebuked, let them suppose that they were also corrected; let them also remember those (churches), concerning whose faith and knowledge and conversation the apostle "rejoices and gives thanks to God," which nevertheless even at this day, unite with those which were rebuked in the privileges of one and the same institution.

Grant, then, that all have erred; that the apostle was mistaken in giving his testimony; that the Holy Ghost had no such respect to any one (church) as to lead it into truth, although sent with this view by Christ,¹⁴⁷ and for this asked of the Father that He might be the teacher of truth;¹⁴⁸ grant, also, that He, the Steward of God, the Vicar of Christ,¹⁴⁹ neglected His office, permitting the churches for a time to understand differently, (and) to believe differently, what He Himself was preaching by the apostles,—is it likely that so many churches, and they so great, should have gone astray into one and the same faith? No casualty distributed among many men issues in one and the same result. Error of doctrine in the churches must necessarily have produced various issues. When, however, that which is deposited among many is found to be one and the same, it is not the result of error, but of tradition. Can any one, then, be reckless¹⁵⁰ enough to say that they were in error who handed on the tradition?

In whatever manner error came, it reigned of course¹⁵¹ only as long as there was an absence of heresies? Truth had to wait for certain Marcionites and Valentinians to set it free. During the interval the gospel was wrongly¹⁵² preached; men wrongly believed; so many thousands were wrongly baptized; so many works of faith were wrongly wrought; so many miraculous gifts,¹⁵³ so many spiritual endowments,¹⁵⁴ were wrongly set in operation; so many priestly functions, so many ministries,¹⁵⁵ were wrongly executed; and, to sum up the whole, so many martyrs wrongly received their crowns! Else, if not wrongly done, and to no purpose, how comes it to pass that the things of God were on their course before it was known to what God they belonged? that there were Christians before Christ was found? that there were heresies before true doctrine? Not so; for in all cases truth precedes its copy, the likeness succeeds the reality. Absurd enough, however, is it, that heresy should be deemed to have preceded its own prior doctrine, even on this account, because it is that (doctrine) itself which foretold that there should be heresies against which men would have to guard! To a church which possessed this doctrine, it was written—yea, the doctrine itself writes to its own church—"Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel than that which we have preached, let him be accursed."¹⁵⁶

Where was Marcion then, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus then, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago,—in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,¹⁵⁷ —and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus,¹⁵⁸ until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled. Marcion, indeed, [went] with the two hundred sesterces which he had brought into the church, and,¹⁵⁹ when banished at last to a permanent excommunication, they scattered abroad the poisons of their doctrines. Afterwards, it is true, Marcion professed repentance, and agreed to the conditions granted to him—that he should receive reconciliation if he restored to the church all the others whom he had been training for perdition: he was prevented, however, by death. It was indeed¹⁶⁰ necessary that there should be heresies;¹⁶¹ and yet it does not follow from that necessity, that heresies are a good thing. As if it has not been necessary also that there should be evil! It was even necessary that the Lord should be betrayed; but woe to the traitor!¹⁶² So that no man may from this defend heresies. If we must likewise touch the descent¹⁶³ of Apelles, he is far from being "one of the old school,"¹⁶⁴ like his instructor and moulder, Marcion; he rather forsook the continence of Marcion, by resorting to the company of a woman, and withdrew to Alexandria, out of sight of his most abstemious¹⁶⁵ master. Returning therefrom, after some years, unimproved, except that he was no longer a Marcionite, he clave¹⁶⁶ to another woman, the maiden Philumene (whom we have already¹⁶⁷ mentioned), who herself afterwards became an enormous prostitute. Having been imposed on by her vigorous spirit,¹⁶⁸ he committed to writing the revelations which he had learned of her. Persons are still living who remember them,—their own actual disciples and successors,—who cannot therefore deny the lateness of their date. But, in fact, by their own works they are convicted, even as the Lord said.¹⁶⁹ For since Marcion separated the New Testament from the Old, he is (necessarily) subsequent to that which he separated, inasmuch as it was only in his power to separate what was (previously) united. Having then been united previous to its separation, the fact of its subsequent separation proves the subsequence also of the man who effected the separation. In like manner Valentinus, by his different expositions and acknowledged¹⁷⁰ emendations, makes these changes on the express ground of previous faultiness, and therefore demonstrates the difference¹⁷¹ of the documents. These corrupters of the truth we mention as being more notorious and more public¹⁷² than others. There is, however, a certain man¹⁷³ named Nigidius, and Hermogenes, and several others, who still pursue the course¹⁷⁴ of perverting the ways of the Lord. Let them show me by what authority they come! If it be some other God they preach, how comes it that they employ the things and the writings and the names of that God against whom they preach? If it be the same God, why treat Him in some other way? Let them prove themselves to be new apostles!¹⁷⁵ Let them maintain that Christ has come down a second time, taught in person a second time, has been twice crucified, twice dead, twice raised! For thus has the apostle described (the order of events in the life of Christ); for thus, too, is He¹⁷⁶ accustomed to make His apostles—to give them, (that is), power besides of working the same miracles which He worked Himself.¹⁷⁷ I would therefore have their mighty deeds also brought forward; except that I allow their mightiest deed to be that by which they perversely vie with the apostles. For whilst they used to raise men to life from the dead, these consign men to death from their living state.