-- Note, I will address and refute Stephen Huller's assertions on AM in another thread, and point out why each of them is incorrect; as he was kind enough to lay out his reasoning in that other thread for why he believes AM is derived from a Greek source of Irenaeus. So please do not bring that separate topic up of source authorship in this thread, so we may focus on the content and form of the Antithesis itself
The Antithesis is an uncertain form, and may have contained multiple parts. The first part of it appears to have been a rather formulated set of verse comparisons from the OT and the NT (Marcionite) in short paraphrased form. This is not unlike the Gospel of Thomas. There may well have been another section of the document that included an dissertation (or Apology) into the separateness of the Jewish Tribal God from the High God, and of the fact that the Jewish Christ had not come. But this is difficult to ascertain because the sources all contain artificial dialogues and debates, which are overlaid with polemic points and modified to fit the presentation forms. So initially I will only address the twelve (12) secure antithesis bullets, and perhaps two (2) others that are probable.
I have followed the form of Dialogue Adamantius, as I believe this is closer to the form than the Gospel of Matthew, where by dialogue necessity the citations were changed to first person dialogue. The first 10 are simply quoted from Dialogue Adamantius, stripping away the artificial conversational and disputatious elements. The 11th and 12th are my attempts at plausible reconstructions. The 13th is the phrase that launched Terutullian's AM (Good and Bad Fruit) which I will handle in the second post.
So without further adieu Part I of the Antithesis -- The Pairs: (note, a commentary/footnote is in a box below, one for each Antithesis pair)
But our good Lord, when He was sending His disciples into the world, said, “Neither shoes on your feet, nor knapsack, nor two tunics, nor gold in your belts.”
2) The prophet of the God of Creation, when war came upon the people, went up to the top of the mountain and stretched out his hands to God so that he might destroy many in battle. Yet our Lord, because He is good, stretched out his hands, not to destroy, but to save men.
3) The Lord brought to view in the Law say, ‘You shall love him who loves you and you shall hate your enemy.”
But our Lord, because He is good, says “Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.”
4) The prophet of the God of Creation, so that he might destroy more of the enemy, stopped the sun from setting until he should finish slaying those who were fighting against his people.
But the Lord, because He is good, says, “Let not the sun go upon you in anger.”
5) It says in the Law, ‘Eye for Eye and tooth for tooth,’
but the Lord, because He is good, says in the Gospel, "If anyone should slap you on the cheek, turn the other one to him."
6) The prophet of the God of Creation told a bear to come out of a thicket and devour the children who met him,
but the good Lord says, "Let the children come to me, for such is the kingdom of heaven."
7) The Creator God did not know where Adam was, when he asks, "Where are you?"
Christ, however, knew even men's thoughts.
8) in the Law it says, "cloak for a cloak"
But the good Lord says, "If anyone should take your cloak, give him your tunic also"
9) The prophet of the god of Creation records, "My bow is bent, and my arrows are sharpened."
But the Apostle says, "Put on the armor of God, that you may be able to extinguish the fiery darts of the wicked one."
10) The God of Creation, after Isaac became partially blind, did not restore his sight,
but our Lord, because he is good, opened the eyes of many blind.
11) The God of Creation was known to Adam and his contemporaries – this clear from their Scriptures
But the Father of Christ is unknown, for our Lord says, “No one knows the Father, except the Son, neither does anyone know the son, except the Father.“
12) in the Law it says, "Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce,"
But the good Lord says, "every one who divorces his wife, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."
Greek Text
ὁ δὲ κύριος ἡμῶν ὁ ἀγαθός, ἀποστέλλων τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην, λέγει· μήτε ὑποδήματα ἐν τοῖς ποσὶν ὑμῶν, μήτε πήραν, μήτε δύο χιτῶνας, μήτε χαλκὸν ἐν ταῖς ζώνᾳις ὑμῶν.
2) Ὁ προφήτης τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς γενέσεως, πολέμου συστάντος πρὸς τὸν λαόν, ἀναβὰς ἐπὶ τὴν κορυφὴν τοῦ ὄρους, ἐξέτεινε τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ πρὸς τὸν θεόν, ἵνα πολλοὺς τῷ πολέμῳ ἀνέλῃ· ὁ δὲ κύριος ἡμῶν, ἀγαθὸς ὤν, ἐξέτεινε τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ οὐχὶ τοῦ ἀνελεῖν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἀλλὰ τοῦ σῶσαι. τί οὖν ὅνοιον; ὁ μὲν διὰ τῆς ἐκτάσεως τῶν χειρῶν ἀναιρεῖ, ὁ δὲ σῴζεα.
3) Ὁ προφήτης τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς γενέσεως, πολέμου συστάντος πρὸς τὸν λαόν, ἀναβὰς ἐπὶ τὴν κορυφὴν τοῦ ὄρους, ἐξέτεινε τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ πρὸς τὸν θεόν, ἵνα πολλοὺς τῷ πολέμῳ ἀνέλῃ· ὁ δὲ κύριος ἡμῶν, ἀγαθὸς ὤν, ἐξέτεινε τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ οὐχὶ τοῦ ἀνελεῖν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἀλλὰ τοῦ σῶσαι.
4) Ὁ προφήτης τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς γενέσεως, ἵνα πολεμῶν πλείονας ἀνέλῃ, ἔστησε τὸν ἥλιον τοῦ μὴ δῦσαι μέχρι συντελέσῃ ἀναιρῶν τοὺς πολεμοῦντας πρὸς τὸν λαόν· ὁ δὲ κύριος, ἀγαθὸς ὤν, λέγει· ὁ ἥλιος μὴ ἐπιδυέτω ἐπὶ τῷ παροπγισμῷ ὑμῶν.
5) Ἐν τῷ νόμῳ λέγει· ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ καὶ ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος, ὁ δὲ κύριος, ἀγαθὸς ὤν, λέγει ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ. ἐάν τίς σε ῥαπίσῃ εἰς τὴν σιαγόνα, παράθες αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ᾶλλην.
6) Ὁ προφήτης τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς γενέσεως ἐκ δρυμοῦ [Ἐλισσαῖος] ἄρκτῳ εἶπεν ἐξελθεῖν καὶ καταφαγεῖν τοὺς ἀπαντήσαντας αὐτῷ παῖδας· ὁ δὲ ἀγαθὸς κύριος· ἄφετε, φησί, τὰ παιδία ἔρχεσθαι πρός με· τῶν γὰρ τοιούτων ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐανῶν.
7) Ὁ δημιουργὸς οὐδὲ ᾔδει ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ Ἀδάμ, λέγων· ποῦ εἶ; ὁ δὲ Χριστὸς καὶ τοὺς διαλογισμοὺς τῶν ἀνθρώπων ᾔδει.
8) Πῶς οὖν ἐν τῷ νόμῳ λέγει· ἱμάτιον ἀνθ᾽ ἱματίου, ὁ δὲ ἀγαθὸς κύριος λέγει· ἐάν τίς σου ἄρῃ τὸ ἱμάτιον, πρόσθες αὐτῷ καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα
9) Ὁ προφήτης τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς γενέσεως λέγει· τὰ τόξα μου ἐντεταμένα καὶ τὰ βέλη μου ἠκονημένα, ὁ δὲ ἀπόστολός φησιν· ἐνδύσασθε τὴν πανοπλίαν τοῦ θεοῦ πρὸς τὸ δύνασθαι τὰ βέλη τοῦ πονηροῦ τὰ πεπυρωμένα σβέσαι.
10) Ὁ θεοῦ τῆς γενέσεως ὑποχυθέντα τὸν Ἰσαὰκ οὐκέτι ἐποίησε διαβλέψαι, ὁ δὲ κύριος ἡμῶν, ἀγαθὸς ὤν, πολλῶν τυφλῶν ἤνοιξεν ὀφθαλμούς.
11) ὁ δημιουργὸς ἐγνώσθη τῷ Ἀδὰμ καὶ τοῖς κατὰ καιρόν, ὡς ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς δηλοῦται· ὁ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ πατὴρ ἄγνωστός ἐστιν, ὡς ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν λέγει· οὐδεὶς ἔγνω τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱός, οὐδὲ τὸν υἱόν τισ γινώσκει εἰ μὴ ὁ πατήρ.
12) Πῶς οὖν ἐν τῷ νόμῳ λέγει· Ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, δότω αὐτῇ ἀποστάσιον.
ὁ δὲ ἀγαθὸς κύριος λέγει· Πᾶς ὁ ἀπολύων τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχευθῆναι.
Latin Text
2) Propheta dei illius, qui refertur in lege, cum bellum populo illi esset illatum, ascendit super uerticem montis et extendit manus suas ad deum ut quamplurimi hostium prosternerentur in bello. Dominus autem noster, qui bonus est, extendit manus suas, non ut interimeret homines, sed ut saluaret. Quod ergo simile est, ubi alius extendit manus suas ad interitum, alius ad salutm?
3) Propheta dei illius, qui refertur in lege, cum bellum populo illi esset illatum, ascendit super uerticem montis et extendit manus suas ad deum ut quamplurimi hostium prosternerentur in bello. Dominus autem noster, qui bonus est, extendit manus suas, non ut interimeret homines, sed ut saluaret.
4) Propheta dei illius, qui refertur in lge, pro eo, ut plures interirent in bello, solem stare fecit ne occumberet usque quo ille trucidaret inimicos suos. Dominus autem, qui bonus est, dicit: Sol non occidat super iracundiam uestram.
5) In lege scriptum est: Oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente. Dominus autem, qui bonus est, dicit in euangelio: Si quis te percusserit in dexteram maimillam, praebe ei et alteram.
6) Propheta legis antiquae ursis praecepit exire de silva et comedere pueros qui ei occurrerunt. Bonus autem diminus dicit: Sinite pueros uenire ad me; talium est enim regnum coelorum.
7) Creator deus nescienat ubi esset Adam. Dicit enim: Adam, ubi es? Christus autem etiam cogitationes hominum nouerat.
8) in lege scriptum est auferri uestimentum pro uestimento, bonus autem dominus dicit: Si tibi quis aufert tunicam, da ei et pallium
9) Creator deus dicit: Areum meum extendam et sagittas meas consummabo in eos. Apostolus uero dicit: Onduite uos arma Dei, ut possitis iacula maligni ignita exstinguere.
10) Deus legis excaecato Issac non reddidit uisum. Dominus autem noster bonus multorum oculos aperuit non uidentium.
11) et alius creator, qui cum Adam locutus est uel cum caeteris quos refert scriptura, quibus et innotuit. Christi autem pater nulli cognitus est, sicut Christus pronuntiat, de se dicens: Nemo nouit Patrem nisi solus filius, enque filium quis nouit nisi pater.
Footnotes/Commentary
2) D.A. 1.11, Exodus 17:8ff against apparently Luke 5:13, Matthew 8:3 and Mark 1:41, however only Mark clearly makes it Jesus who is stretching out his hands to heal the leper. Jesus explicitly tells the man with the withered hand to stretch his hands out in Luke 6:10, Mathew 12:13, Mark 3:5. It's seems probable that the stories originally portrayed Jesus as not stretching out his hands to heal. But we do see Jesus place his hands on people, as in Luke 13:13, Luke 4:40 -- although parallels do not have this, so it could be these two versions are later Lukan additions or adjustments displaying the same understanding as Mark 1:41. It appears Jesus was always passive or using words, such as Luke 8:44ff the bleeding woman Mark 5:27ff, Matthew 9:20 (Luke 22:51 is clearly a later addition); and in similar stories in Matthew 14:34/Mark 6:56. Notice that in Luke 4:39 Jesus rebukes the fever, but in Matthew 8:15/Mark 1:31 versions he touches her hand. We similar on the blind man in Luke 18:42/Mark 10:52 were Jesus simply tells the man his faith healed him, while Matthew 20:34 again has him touch to heal, Matthew 9:29 also has this touching (the touching of Mathew 17:17 transfiguration scene is not for healing ... well not literally). Mark 7:33-35, which expands upon the common source with Mathew also has this touching. All this suggests that this Antithesis pair is somewhat later than the Gospel, reflecting later beleifs about Jesus.
3) D.A. 1.12, also Matthew 5:43-44, set Leviticus 19:18 LXX with τὸν ἀγαπῶντά σε for τὸν πλησίον σου, (see Matthew 5:43) against Luke 6:27-28 (see Matthew 5:44) and //s Matthew 8:12, 22:13, 25:30, 41
Matthew 5:43-44 took this pair directly from the Antithesis, including the exact same paraphrases of Levitius and Luke as found in DA 1.12
4) D.A. 1.13, Joshua 10:12-14 against Ephesians 4:26
5) D.A. 1.15, Matthew 5:38-39 (which extends it) set Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, Deuteronomy 19:21 LXX against Luke 6:29/Matthew 5:39
Note: Allowing for voice and variance (e.g., Western support σιαγόνα σου for δεξιὰν σιαγόνα which is rated uncertain) we are looking at Matthew having taken nearly verbatim this Antithesis pair, even including reading ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος against the LXX ὀδούς ἀντί ὀδούς (all three verse). The odds are long the source could have been anything else.
6) D.A. 1.16, see LXX 4 kings 2:24 against Matthew 19:14, Mark 10:14, Luke 18:16
7) D.A. 1.17, Genesis 3:9 against Luke 6:8, 9:17 (very loose paraphrase)
8) D.A. 1.18 the exact source is confusing, Admanatius replies that this is similar to "tooth for a tooth" found in Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, Pretty guesses Leviticus 6:11; 16:23-24 which is put against Luke 6:29, c.f. Matthew 5:40
Note: this is an example of where the Antithesis paraphrasing is so great that the source is anyone's guess. Possible it is a local midrash long lost
9) D.A. 1.19 Isaiah 5:28 combined with Deuteronomy 32:23 LXX against Ephesians 6:13, 16
10) D.A. 1.20 reads ὐποχυθέντα but otherwise refers to Genesis 27:1, set against several sight restorations, perhaps Luke 18:42 in mind.
Rufinus Latin may be corrupt, as he writes "(In) the Law" instead of the "God of Genesis";
11) D.A. 1.23, pretty much take you pick from OT passages, and from the NT a paraphrase of Luke 10:22 (also Matthew 11:27) reading ἔγνω instead of ἐπιγινώσκει. We see this reading specifically noted by Irenaeus in AH 4.6.1, pseudo Clement Homilies 18.4 Οὐδεὶς ἔγνω τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱός, ὡς οὐδὲ τὸν υἱόν τις οἶδεν εἰ μὴ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ οἷς ἂν βούληται ὁ υἱὸς ἀποκαλύψαι; and Recognitions 2.47 (Latin only).
12) Matthew 5:31-32 compares Deuteronomy 24:1-4 against Luke 16:18. Matthew attempts to Ameliorate the Marcionite position, see 1 Corinthians 7:10 (maybe 7:11 also), by allowing divorce still on the grounds of adultery, which basically is a way of saying the Mosaic Law still holds.