Luke 4.1-15, the temptation and teaching of Jesus.
1 Ἰησοῦς δὲ πλήρης Πνεύματος Ἁγίου ὑπέστρεψεν ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, καὶ ἤγετο ἐν τῷ Πνεύματι ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ 2 ἡμέρας τεσσεράκοντα πειραζόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. Καὶ οὐκ ἔφαγεν οὐδὲν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις, καὶ συντελεσθεισῶν αὐτῶν ἐπείνασεν. 3 εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ διάβολος Εἰ Υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, εἰπὲ τῷ λίθῳ τούτῳ ἵνα γένηται ἄρτος. 4 καὶ ἀπεκρίθη πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ Ἰησοῦς Γέγραπται ὅτι Οὐκ ἐπ’ ἄρτῳ μόνῳ ζήσεται ὁ ἄνθρωπος. 5 Καὶ ἀναγαγὼν αὐτὸν ἔδειξεν αὐτῷ πάσας τὰς βασιλείας τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐν στιγμῇ χρόνου. 6 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ διάβολος Σοὶ δώσω τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἅπασαν καὶ τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν, ὅτι ἐμοὶ παραδέδοται καὶ ᾧ ἐὰν θέλω δίδωμι αὐτήν· 7 σὺ οὖν ἐὰν προσκυνήσῃς ἐνώπιον ἐμοῦ, ἔσται σοῦ πᾶσα. 8 καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ Γέγραπται Προσκυνήσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου καὶ αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύσεις. 9 Ἤγαγεν δὲ αὐτὸν εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ καὶ ἔστησεν ἐπὶ τὸ πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Εἰ Υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, βάλε σεαυτὸν ἐντεῦθεν κάτω· 10 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ ἐντελεῖται περὶ σοῦ τοῦ διαφυλάξαι σε, 11 καὶ ὅτι ἐπὶ χειρῶν ἀροῦσίν σε μή ποτε προσκόψῃς πρὸς λίθον τὸν πόδα σου. 12 καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὅτι Εἴρηται Οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου. 13 Καὶ συντελέσας πάντα πειρασμὸν ὁ διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ ἄχρι καιροῦ. 14 Καὶ ὑπέστρεψεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἐν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ Πνεύματος εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν· καὶ φήμη ἐξῆλθεν καθ’ ὅλης τῆς περιχώρου περὶ αὐτοῦ. 15 καὶ αὐτὸς ἐδίδασκεν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν, δοξαζόμενος ὑπὸ πάντων. |
1 Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness 2 for forty days, being tempted by the devil. He ate nothing in those days. Afterward, when they were completed, he was hungry. 3 The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become bread.” 4 Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’ ” 5 The devil, leading him up on a high mountain, showed him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. 6 The devil said to him, “I will give you all this authority, and their glory, for it has been delivered to me; and I give it to whomever I want. 7 If you therefore will worship before me, it will all be yours.” 8 Jesus answered him, “Get behind me Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and you shall serve him only.’ ” 9 He led him to Jerusalem, and set him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down from here, 10 for it is written, ‘He will put his angels in charge of you, to guard you;’ 11 and, ‘On their hands they will bear you up, lest perhaps you dash your foot against a stone.’ ” 12 Jesus answering, said to him, “It has been said, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God.’ ” 13 When the devil had completed every temptation, he departed from him until another time. 14 Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee, and news about him spread through all the surrounding area. 15 He taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all. |
Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.6.7: [7] Sed iam nec mihi competit principes huius aevi virtutes et potestates interpretari creatoris, quia ignorantiam illis adscribit apostolus, Iesum autem et secundum nostrum evangelium diabolus quoque in temptatione cognovit, et secundum commune instrumentum spiritus nequam sciebat eum sanctum dei esse et Iesum vocari et in perditionem eorum venisse. Etiam parabola fortis illius armati, quem alius validior oppressit et vasa eius occupavit, si in creatoris accipitur apud Marcionem, iam nec ignorasse ultra potuit creator deum gloriae dum ab eo opprimitur, nec in cruce eum figere adversus quem valere non potuit, et superest ut secundum me quidem credibile sit scientes virtutes et potestates creatoris deum gloriae Christum suum crucifixisse, qua desperatione et malitiae redundantia servi quoque scelestissimi dominos suos interficere non dubitant. Scriptum est enim apud me satanam in Iudam introisse. / [7] But it is no longer open to me even to interpret the princes and powers of this world as the Creator's, since the apostle imputes ignorance to them, whereas even the devil according to our Gospel recognised Jesus in the temptation, and, according to the record which is common to both (Marcionites and ourselves) the evil spirit knew that Jesus was the Holy One of God, and that Jesus was His name, and that He was come to destroy them. The parable also of the strong man armed, whom a stronger than he overcame and seized his goods, is admitted by Marcion to have reference to the Creator: therefore the Creator could not have been ignorant any longer of the God of glory, since He is overcome by him; nor could He have crucified him whom He was unable to cope with. The inevitable inference, therefore, as it seems to me, is that we must believe that the princes and powers of the Creator did knowingly crucify the God of glory in His Christ, with that desperation and excessive malice with which the most abandoned slaves do not even hesitate to slay their masters. For it is written in my Gospel that "Satan entered into Judas."
Luke 4.31-37, teaching with authority and the exorcism of the Capernaum demoniac.
31 Καὶ κατῆλθεν εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ πόλιν τῆς Γαλιλαίας. καὶ ἦν διδάσκων αὐτοὺς ἐν τοῖς σάββασιν ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ· 32 καὶ ἐξεπλήσσοντο δὲ πάντες ἐπὶ τῇ διδαχῇ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἐν ἐξουσίᾳ ἦν ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ. 33 καὶ ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ ἦν ἄνθρωπος ἔχων πνεῦμα δαιμονίου ἀκαθάρτου, καὶ ἀνέκραξεν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ 34 Ἔα, τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί, Ἰησοῦ ~Ναζαρηνέ~; ἦλθες ἀπολέσαι ἡμᾶς; οἶδά σε τίς εἶ, ὁ Ἅγιος τοῦ Θεοῦ. 35 καὶ ἐπετίμησεν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγων Φιμώθητι καὶ ἔξελθε ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ. καὶ ῥίψαν αὐτὸν τὸ δαιμόνιον εἰς τὸ μέσον ἐξῆλθεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ μηδὲν βλάψαν αὐτόν. 36 καὶ ἐγένετο θάμβος ἐπὶ πάντας, καὶ συνελάλουν πρὸς ἀλλήλους λέγοντες Τίς ὁ λόγος οὗτος, ὅτι ἐν ἐξουσίᾳ καὶ δυνάμει ἐπιτάσσει τοῖς ἀκαθάρτοις πνεύμασιν καὶ ἐξέρχονται; 37 καὶ ἐξεπορεύετο ἦχος περὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς πάντα τόπον τῆς περιχώρου. |
31 He came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee. He was teaching them on the Sabbath day in the synagogue, 32 And [Marcion: but] they were all astonished at his teaching, for his word was with authority. 33 In the synagogue there was a man who had a spirit of an unclean demon, and he cried out with a loud voice, 34 saying, “Ah! what have we to do with you, Jesus ~of Nazareth~? Have you come to destroy us? I know you who you are: the Holy One of God!” 35 Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be silent, and come out of him!” When the demon had thrown him down in the middle of them, he came out of him, having done him no harm. 36 Amazement came on all, and they spoke together, one with another, saying, “What is this word? For with authority and power he commands the unclean spirits, and they come out!” 37 News about him went out into every place of the surrounding region. |
Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.7.1-13: [1] Anno quintodecimo principatus Tiberiani proponit eum descendisse in civitatem Galilaeae Capharnaum, utique de caelo creatoris, in quod de suo ante descenderat. Ecquid ergo ordinis fuerat ut prius de suo caelo in creatoris descendens describeretur? Cur enim non et ista reprehendam quae non implent fidem ordinariae narrationis, deficientis in mendacio semper? Plane semel dicta sint per quae iam alibi retractavimus an descendens per creatorem, et quidem adversus ipsum, potuerit ab eo admitti et inde tramitti in terram aeque ipsius. [2] Nunc autem et reliquum ordinem descensionis expostulo, tenens descendisse illum. Viderit enim sicubi appamisse positum est. Apparere subitum ex inopinato sapit conspectum, qui semel impegerit oculos in id quod sine mora apparuit. Descendisse autem dum fit, videtur et subit oculos. De facto etiam ordinem facit, atque ita cogit exigere, quali habitu, quali suggestu, quonam impetu vel temperamento, etiam quo in tempore diei noctisve descenderit: praeterea quis viderit descendentem, quis retulerit, quis asseveraverit rem utique nec asseveranti facile credendam. [3] Indignum denique ut Romulus quidem ascensus sui in caelum habuerit Proculum affirmatorem, Christus vero dei descensus de caelo sui non invenerit annuntiatorem, quasi non sic et ille ascenderit iisdem mendacii scalis, sicut et iste descendit. Quid autem illi cum Galilaea, si non erat creatoris, cui ista regio destinabatur ingressuro praedicationem? dicente Esaia, Hoc primum bibito, cito facito, regio Zabulon et terra Nephthalim, et ceteri qui maritimam et Iordanis, Galilaea nationum, populus qui sedetis in tenebris, videte lumen magnum: qui habitatis terram, sedentes in umbra mortis, lumen ortum est super vos. [4] Bene autem quod et deus Marcionis illuminator vindicatur nationum, quo magis debuerit vel de caelo descendere, et, si utique, in Pontum potius descendere quam in Galilaeam. Ceterum et loco et illuminationis opere secundum praedicationem occurrentibus Christo iam eum prophetatum incipimus agnoscere, ostendentem in primo ingressu venisse se non ut legem et prophetas dissolveret, sed ut potius adimpleret. Hoc enim Marcion ut additum erasit. [5] Sed frustra negabit Christum dixisse quod statim fecit ex parte. Prophetiam enim interim de loco adimplevit. De caelo statim ad synagogam. Ut dici solet, ad quod venimus; hoc age, Marcion, aufer etiam illud de evangelio, Non sum missus nisi ad oves perditas domus Israel, et, Non est auferre panem filiis et dare eum canibus, ne scilicet Christus Israelis videretur. [6] Sufficiunt mihi facta pro dictis. Detrahe voces Christi mei, res loquentur. Ecce venit in synagogam; certe ad oves perditas domus Israelis. Ecce doctrinae suae panem prioribus offert Israelitis; certe ut filios praefert. Ecce aliis eum nondum impertit; certe ut canes praeterit. Quibus autem magis impertisset quam extraneis creatoris, si ipse inprimis non fuisset creatoris? [7] Et tamen quomodo in synagogam potuit admitti tam repentinus, tam ignotus, cuius nemo adhuc certus de tribu, de populo, de domo, de censu denique Augusti, quem testem fidelissimum dominicae nativitatis Romana archiva custodiunt? Meminerant certe, nisi circumcisum scirent, non admittendum in sancta sanctorum. Sed etsi passim synagoga adiretur, non tamen ad docendum nisi ab optime cognito et explorato et probato, iam pridem in hoc ipsum vel aliunde commendato cum hoc munere. Stupebant autem omnes ad doctrinam eius. Plane. Quoniam, inquit, in potestate erat sermo eius, non quoniam adversus legem et prophetas docebat. Utique enim eloquium divinum et vim et gratiam praestabat, magis exstruens quam destruens substantiam legis et prophetarum. [8] Alioquin non stuperent, sed horrerent. Nec mirarentur, sed statim aversarentur destructorem legis et prophetarum, et utique inprimis alterius dei praedicatorem, quia nec potuisset adversus legem et prophetas docere et hoc nomine adversus creatorem, non praemissa diversae atque aemulae divinitatis professione. Cum ergo nihil tale scriptura significet, nisi solam vim et potestatem sermonis admirationi fuisse, facilius ostendit secundum creatorem docuisse illum, quia non negavit, quam adversus creatorem, quia non significavit. [9] Atque ita aut eius erit agnoscendus secundum quem docuit, aut praevaricator iudicandus si secundum eum adversus quem venerat docuit. Exclamat ibidem spiritus daemonis, Quid nobis et tibi est Iesu? venisti perdere nos: scio qui sis, sanctus dei. [10] Hic ego non retractabo an et hoc cognomentum competierit ei quem nec Christum vocari oporteret, si non creatoris. Alibi iam de nominibus expostulatum est. At nunc discepto quomodo hoc eum vocari cognoverit daemon, nulla unquam retro emissa praedicatione in illum a deo ignoto et in id temporis muto, cuius nec sanctum eum contestari potuit, ut ignoti etiam ipsi suo creatori. Quid autem iam tale ediderit novae divinitatis per quod posset alterius dei sanctus intellegi? [11] Tantum quod synagogam introgressus, et nec sermone operatus aliquid adversus creatorem? Sicut ergo quem ignorabat nullo modo poterat Iesum et sanctum dei agnoscere, ita quem norat agnovit. Nam et prophetam meminerat sanctum dei praedicasse, et Iesum nomen dei esse in filio Nave. Haec et ab angelo exceperat secundum nostrum evangelium: Propterea quod in te nascetur vocabitur sanctum, filius dei: et, Vocabis nomen eius Iesum. [12] Sed et habebat utique sensum aliquem dominicae dispositionis (licet daemon tamen), magis quam alienae et nondum satis cognitae. Nam et praemisit, Quid nobis et tibi, Iesu? non quasi in extraneum, sed ad quem pertinent spiritus creatoris. Nec enim dixit, Quid tibi et nobis? sed, Quid nobis et tibi? se deplorans et sorti suae exprobrans; quam iam videns adicit, Venisti perdere nos. [13] Adeo iudicis et ultoris et, ut ita dixerim, saevi dei filium agnoverat Iesum, non optimi illius, et perdere et punire nescientis. Quorsum hunc locum praemisimus ? Ut Iesum et a daemone non alium doceamus agnitum et a semetipso non alium confirmatum quam creatoris. Atquin, inquis, increpuit illum Iesus. Plane, ut invidiosum, et in ipsa confessione petulantem et male adulantem; quasi haec esset summa gloria Christi, si ad perditionem daemonum venisset et non potius ad hominum salutem, qui nec discipulos de subactione spirituum sed de candida salutis gloriari volebat. / [1] In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius (for such is Marcion's proposition) he "came down to the Galilean city of Capernaum," of course meaning from the heaven of the Creator, to which he had previously descended from his own. What then had been his Course, 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 already 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? [2] 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 inquiring whether it is supposed that he was seen in any place. To come into view indicates a sudden unexpected glance, which for a moment fixed 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. Moreover, it takes account of fact, and thus obliges one to examine in what condition with what preparation, 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. [3] It is, in short, too bad 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 whom that region was destined (for His Christ) when about to enter on His ministry? 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." [4] 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, 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 discern 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; for Marcion has erased the passage as an interpolation. [5] 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; " and, "It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs," ----in order, forsooth, that Christ may not appear to be an Israelite. [6] 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. 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? [7] And yet how could He have been admitted into the synagogue----one so abruptly appearing, 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 entering 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 power ----not because He taught in opposition to the law and the prophets. No doubt, His divine discourse gave forth both power and grace, building up rather than pulling down the substance of the law and the prophets. [8] 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 naturally 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). [9] And thus He will either have to be acknowledged as belonging to Him, 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." [10] 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. Elsewhere 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 published of a new deity, whereby he might betoken for "the holy one" of the rival god? [11] 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 prophesied of "the Holy One" of God, and how that God's name of "Jesus" was in the son of Nun. These facts he had also received 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; " and, "Thou shalt call his name Jesus." [12] 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?" [13] So completely did he acknowledge in Jesus the Son of that God who was judicial and avenging, and (so to speak) severe, and not of him who was simply good, and knew not how to destroy or how to punish! Now for what purpose have we adduced his passage first? 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.
Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.13.1: [1] Certe evangelizat Sion et Hierusalem pacem et bona omnia, certe ascendit in montem et illic pernoctat in oratione et utique auditur a patre. Evolve igitur prophetas, et ordinem totum recognosce. In montem excelsum, inquit Esaias, ascende, qui evangelizas Sion, extolle cum vigore vocem tuam, qui evangelizas Hierusalem. Adhuc in vigore obstupescebant in doctrina eius; erat enim docens tanquam virtutem habens. Et rursus: Propterea cognoscet populus nomen meum in illa die. Quod nomen, nisi Christi? Quod ego sum ipse qui loquor. Tunc enim ipse erat qui in prophetis loquebatur, sermo, filius creatoris. / [1] Surely to Sion He brings good tidings, and to Jerusalem peace and all blessings; He goes up into a mountain, and there spends a night in prayer, and He is indeed heard by the Father. Accordingly turn over the prophets, and learn therefrom His entire course. "Into the high mountain," says Isaiah, "get Thee up, who bringest good tidings to Sion; lift up Thy voice with strength, who bringest good tidings to Jerusalem." "They were mightily astonished at His doctrine; for He was teaching as one who had power." And again: "Therefore, my people shall know my name in that day." What name does the prophet mean, but Christ's? "That I am He that doth speak----even I." For it was He who used to speak in the prophets----the Word, the Creator's Son.
Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.6.7: [7] Sed iam nec mihi competit principes huius aevi virtutes et potestates interpretari creatoris, quia ignorantiam illis adscribit apostolus, Iesum autem et secundum nostrum evangelium diabolus quoque in temptatione cognovit, et secundum commune instrumentum spiritus nequam sciebat eum sanctum dei esse et Iesum vocari et in perditionem eorum venisse. Etiam parabola fortis illius armati, quem alius validior oppressit et vasa eius occupavit, si in creatoris accipitur apud Marcionem, iam nec ignorasse ultra potuit creator deum gloriae dum ab eo opprimitur, nec in cruce eum figere adversus quem valere non potuit, et superest ut secundum me quidem credibile sit scientes virtutes et potestates creatoris deum gloriae Christum suum crucifixisse, qua desperatione et malitiae redundantia servi quoque scelestissimi dominos suos interficere non dubitant. Scriptum est enim apud me satanam in Iudam introisse. / [7] But it is no longer open to me even to interpret the princes and powers of this world as the Creator's, since the apostle imputes ignorance to them, whereas even the devil according to our Gospel recognised Jesus in the temptation, and, according to the record which is common to both (Marcionites and ourselves) the evil spirit knew that Jesus was the Holy One of God, and that Jesus was His name, and that He was come to destroy them. The parable also of the strong man armed, whom a stronger than he overcame and seized his goods, is admitted by Marcion to have reference to the Creator: therefore the Creator could not have been ignorant any longer of the God of glory, since He is overcome by him; nor could He have crucified him whom He was unable to cope with. The inevitable inference, therefore, as it seems to me, is that we must believe that the princes and powers of the Creator did knowingly crucify the God of glory in His Christ, with that desperation and excessive malice with which the most abandoned slaves do not even hesitate to slay their masters. For it is written in my Gospel that "Satan entered into Judas."
From Tertullian, On the Flesh of Christ 22.1: Deleant igitur et testimonia daemonum filium David proclamantium ad Iesum.... / They may, then, obliterate the testimony of the devils which proclaimed Jesus the son of David....
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.27.2: Succedens autem ei Marcion Ponticus, adampliavit doctrinam, impudorate blasphemans eum, qui a lege et prophetis annuntiatus est Deus ; malorum factorem et bellorum concupiscentem et inconstantem quoque sententia et contrarium sibi ipsum dicens. Iesum autem ab eo Patre, qui est super mundi fabricatorem Deum, venientem in Iudaeam temporibus Pontii Pilati praesidis, qui fuit procurator Tiberii Caesaris, in hominis forma manifestatum his, qui in Iudaea erant, dissolventem prophetas et legem et omnia opera eius Dei, qui mundum fecit, quem et Cosmocratorem dicit. Et super haec id quod est secundum Lucam evangelium circumcidens et omnia, quae sunt de generatione Domini conscripta auferens, et de doctrina sermonum Domini multa auferens, in quibus manifestissime conditorem huius universitatis suum Patrem confitens Dominus conscriptus est; semetipsum esse veraciorem, quam sunt hi, qui evangelium tradiderunt, apostoli, suasit discipulis suis; sed particulam Evangelii tradens eis. Similiter autem et apostoli Pauli epistolas abscidit, auferens quaecunque manifeste dicta sunt ab Apostolo de eo Deo qui mundum fecit, quoniam hic Pater Domini nostri Iesu Christi, et quaecunque ex propheticis memorans Apostolus docuit praenunciantibus adventum Domini. / Marcion of Pontus succeeded him, and developed his doctrine. In so doing, he advanced the most daring blasphemy against Him who is proclaimed as God by the law and the prophets, declaring Him to be the author of evils, to take delight in war, to be infirm of purpose, and even to be contrary to Himself. But Jesus being derived from that father who is above the God that made the world, and coming into Judaea in the times of Pontius Pilate the governor, who was the procurator of Tiberius Caesar, was manifested in the form of a man to those who were in Judaea, abolishing the prophets and the law, and all the works of that God who made the world, whom also he calls Cosmocrator. Besides this, he mutilates the Gospel which is according to Luke, removing all that is written respecting the generation of the Lord, and setting aside a great deal of the teaching of the Lord, in which the Lord is recorded as most dearly confessing that the Maker of this universe is His Father. He likewise persuaded his disciples that he himself was more worthy of credit than are those apostles who have handed down the Gospel to us, furnishing them not with the Gospel, but merely a fragment of it. In like manner, too, he dismembered the Epistles of Paul, removing all that is said by the apostle respecting that God who made the world, to the effect that He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and also those passages from the prophetical writings which the apostle quotes, in order to teach us that they announced beforehand the coming of the Lord.
Excerpt from Origen, On the Epistle to Titus, quoted by Pamphilus in his Apology for Origen: ...vel secundum eos qui Deum quidem eum fatentur, non tamen assumpsisse animam corpusque terrenum; qui sub specie quasi amplioris gloriae Iesu Domino deferendae, omnia quae ab eo gesta sunt, visa geri magis, quam vere gesta esse testantur: quique neque de virgine natum fatentur, sed triginta annorum virum eum apparuisse in Iudaea. / Or a heretic may agree with those who indeed confess that he is God, but not that he assumed humanity, that is, a soul and earthly body. These heretics, under the pretext of ascribing greater glory to Jesus the Lord, claim that all his actions seemed to have been done rather than were truly done. Moreover, they do not acknowledge that he was born of a virgin, but say that he appeared in Judea as a thirty-year-old man.
Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.31.6: ...»διδάσκειν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς». εἰ γὰρ μεσίτης ἐστίν, ἀπήλλακται, φησί, πάσης τῆς τοῦ κακοῦ φύσεως. – κακὸς δ' ἔστιν, ὡς λέγει, ὁ δημιουργὸς καὶ τούτου τὰ ποιήματα· διὰ τοῦτο ἀγέν<ν>ητος κατῆλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, φησίν, ἵνα ᾖ πάσης ἀπηλλαγμένος κακίας. – ἀπήλλακται δέ, φησί, καὶ τῆς τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ φύσεως, ἵνα ᾖ μεσίτης, ὡς, φησίν, ὁ Παῦλος <*> καὶ ὡς αὐτὸς ὁμολογεῖ <λέγων>· «τί με λέγετε ἀγαθόν; εἷ<ς> ἐστιν ἀγαθός». / ...He proceeded to give instruction in the synagogues. For if He is a Mediator, He has been, he says, liberated from the entire nature of the Evil Deity. Now, as he affirms, the Demiurge is evil, and his works. For this reason, he affirms, Jesus came down unbegotten, in order that He might be liberated from all (admixture of) evil. And He has, he says, been liberated from the nature of the Good One likewise, in order that He may be a Mediator, as Paul states, and as Himself acknowledges: "Why do you call me good? There is one good."
Adamantius Dialogue, according to Dieter T. Roth (page 358): 64,14–15 (2.3)51—[Mark.] Καθὼς περιέχει τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὅτι ἐπι Τιβερίου Καίσαρος, ἐπι τῶν χρόνων Πιλάτου. | Sicut scriptum est in evangelio, anno quinto decimo Tiberii Caesaris, temporibus Pilati. | 98,2–3 (2.18)—[Ad.] . . . καὶ πότε ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ μηδέποτε φανεὶς πρὸ τῶν Τιβερίου Καίσαρος χρόνων; . . . | . . . Et quando promisit, qui nunquam apparvit ante tempora Tiberii Caesaris? . . . | 102,22–23 (2.19)— [Ad.] . . . οὔτε ἄγνωστος ἦν, οὔτε τότε πρῶτον, ὥς φασιν, ἐπὶ Τιβερίου κατελθὼν ἐφάνη ἐν Καφαρναούμ. . . . | . . . neque ignotus est, neque, ut dicunt, temporibus Tiberii primo manifestatus est in Cafarnaiim. . . .
Dieter T. Roth remarks (page 399) concerning verse 31: One final point to make here is that in the discussion of the opening of Marcion’s Gospel, Harnack also mentioned a comment found in a 7th century Syriac manuscript preserved in the British Museum (cod. Add. 17215 fol. 30): "Our Lord was not born from a woman, but stole the domain of the Creator and came down and appeared for the first time between Jerusalem and Jericho, like a human being in form and image and likeness, but without our body." It is not clear, however, that the reference is to the opening of Marcion’s Gospel. Harnack stated “Woher die Kunde stammt, Jesus sei zuerst zwischen Jerusalem und Jericho erschienen, habe ich nicht ermitteln können.” Roukema is probably correct in stating, "Most probably this text alludes to the allegory according to which it was essentially Christ who, disguised as the Samaritan, appeared on the way from Jerusalem to Jericho." Rather problematic, however, is the fact that this parable is elsewhere unattested for Marcion’s text. In addition, though Zahn accepted the tradition as authentic, there is some doubt as to whether the fragment actually preserves a statement of Marcion, and therefore should not be invoked, or at the very least invoked with extreme caution, for either the opening of Marcion’s Gospel or the parable of the good Samaritan.
Luke 4.16-30, rejection at Nazareth.
16 Καὶ ἦλθεν εἰς Ναζαρά [Marcion: Ναζαρέθ], οὗ ἦν τεθραμμένος, καὶ εἰσῆλθεν κατὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν σαββάτων εἰς τὴν συναγωγήν, καὶ ἀνέστη ἀναγνῶναι. 17 καὶ ἐπεδόθη αὐτῷ βιβλίον τοῦ προφήτου Ἡσαΐου, καὶ ἀνοίξας τὸ βιβλίον εὗρεν τὸν τόπον οὗ ἦν γεγραμμένον 18 Πνεῦμα Κυρίου ἐπ’ ἐμέ, οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς, ἀπέσταλκέν με κηρῦξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν, ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει, 19 κηρῦξαι ἐνιαυτὸν Κυρίου δεκτόν. 20 καὶ πτύξας τὸ βιβλίον ἀποδοὺς τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ ἐκάθισεν· καὶ πάντων οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ ἦσαν ἀτενίζοντες αὐτῷ. 21 ἤρξατο δὲ λέγειν πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὅτι Σήμερον πεπλήρωται ἡ γραφὴ αὕτη ἐν τοῖς ὠσὶν ὑμῶν. 22 καὶ πάντες ἐμαρτύρουν αὐτῷ καὶ ἐθαύμαζον ἐπὶ τοῖς λόγοις τῆς χάριτος τοῖς ἐκπορευομένοις ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔλεγον Οὐχὶ υἱός ἐστιν Ἰωσὴφ οὗτος; 23 καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς Πάντως ἐρεῖτέ μοι τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην Ἰατρέ, θεράπευσον σεαυτόν· ὅσα ἠκούσαμεν γενόμενα εἰς τὴν Καφαρναοὺμ, ποίησον καὶ ὧδε ἐν τῇ πατρίδι σου. 24 εἶπεν δέ Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐδεὶς προφήτης δεκτός ἐστιν ἐν τῇ πατρίδι αὐτοῦ. 25 ἐπ’ ἀληθείας δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, πολλαὶ χῆραι ἦσαν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡλείου ἐν τῷ Ἰσραήλ, ὅτε ἐκλείσθη ὁ οὐρανὸς ἐπὶ ἔτη τρία καὶ μῆνας ἕξ, ὡς ἐγένετο λιμὸς μέγας ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν, 26 καὶ πρὸς οὐδεμίαν αὐτῶν ἐπέμφθη Ἡλείας εἰ μὴ εἰς Σάρεπτα τῆς Σιδωνίας πρὸς γυναῖκα χήραν. 27 καὶ πολλοὶ λεπροὶ ἦσαν ἐν τῷ Ἰσραὴλ ἐπὶ Ἑλισαίου τοῦ προφήτου, καὶ οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν ἐκαθαρίσθη εἰ μὴ Ναιμὰν ὁ Σύρος. [Marcion locates this verse at 17.14.] 28 καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν πάντες θυμοῦ ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ ἀκούοντες ταῦτα, 29 καὶ ἀναστάντες ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ἔξω τῆς πόλεως, καὶ ἤγαγον αὐτὸν ἕως ὀφρύος τοῦ ὄρους ἐφ’ οὗ ἡ πόλις ᾠκοδόμητο αὐτῶν, ὥστε κατακρημνίσαι αὐτόν· 30 αὐτὸς δὲ διελθὼν διὰ μέσου αὐτῶν ἐπορεύετο. |
16 He came to Nazara [Marcion: Nazareth], where he had been brought up. He entered, as was his custom, into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. 17 The book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. He opened the book, and found the place where it was written, 18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to heal the broken hearted, to proclaim release to the captives, recovering of sight to the blind, to deliver those who are crushed, 19 and to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” 20 He closed the book, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of all in the synagogue were fastened on him. 21 He began to tell them, “Today, this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.” 22 All testified about him, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth, and they said, “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” 23 He said to them, “Doubtless you will tell me this parable, ‘Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we have heard done at Capernaum, do also here in your hometown.’ ” 24 He said, “Most certainly I tell you, no prophet is acceptable in his hometown. 25 But truly I tell you, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the sky was shut up three years and six months, when a great famine came over all the land. 26 Elijah was sent to none of them, except to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. 27 There were many lepers in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed, except Naaman, the Syrian.” [Marcion locates this verse at 17.14.] 28 They were all filled with wrath in the synagogue, as they heard these things. 29 They rose up, threw him out of the city, and led him to the brow of the hill that their city was built on, that they might throw him off the cliff. 30 But he, passing through the middle of them, went his way. |
Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.8.1-3: [1] Nazaraeus vocari habebat secundum prophetiam Christus creatoris. Unde et ipso nomine nos Iudaei Nazarenos appellant per eum. Nam et sumus de quibus scriptum est: Nazaraei exalbati sunt super nivem, qui scilicet retro luridati delinquentiae maculis et nigrati ignorantiae tenebris. Christo autem appellatio Nazaraei competitura erat ex infantiae latebris, ad quas apud Nazareth descendit, vitando Archelaum filium Herodis. [2] Hoc propterea non omisi, quia Christum Marcionis oportuerat omne commercium eierasse etiam locorum familiarium Christi creatoris, habentem tanta Iudaeae oppida non ita Christo creatoris per prophetas emancipata. Ceterum prophetarum erit Christus ubicunque secundum prophetas invenitur. Et tamen apud Nazareth. quoque nihil novi notatur praedicasse, dum alio, merito unius proverbii, eiectus refertur. Hic primum manus ei iniectas animadvertens necesse habeo iam de substantia eius corporali praefinire, quod non possit phantasma credi qui contactum et quidem violentia plenum detentus et captus et ad praecipitium usque protractus admiserit. [3] Nam etsi per medios evasit, sed ante iam vim expertus, et postea dimissus; scilicet soluto, uti assolet, tumultu, vel etiam irrupto, non tamen per caliginem eluso, quae nulli omnino tactui succidisset, si fuisset. Tangere enim et tangi nisi corpus nulla potest res, etiam saecularis sapientiae digna sententia est. / [1] The Christ of the Creator had to be called a Nazarene according to prophecy; whence the Jews also designate us, on that very account, Nazerenes after Him. For we are they of whom it is written, "Her Nazarites were whiter than snow; " even they who were once defiled with the stains of sin, and darkened with the clouds of ignorance. But to Christ the title Nazarene was destined to become a suitable one, from the hiding-place of His infancy, for which He went down and dwelt at Nazareth, to escape from Archelaus the son of Herod. [2] This fact I have not refrained from mentioning on this account, because it behoved Marcion's Christ to have forborne all connection whatever with the domestic localities of the Creator's Christ, when he had so many towns in Judaea which had not been by the prophets thus assigned to the Creator's Christ. But Christ will be (the Christ) of the prophets, wheresoever He is found in accordance with the prophets. And yet even at Nazareth He is not remarked as having preached anything new, whilst in another verse He is said to have been rejected by reason of a simple proverb. Here at once, when I observe that they laid their hands on Him, I cannot help drawing a conclusion respecting His bodily substance, which cannot be believed to have been a phantom, since it was capable of being touched and even violently handled, when He was seized and taken and led to the very brink of a precipice. [3] For although He escaped through the midst of them, He had already experienced their rough treatment, and afterwards went His way, no doubt because the crowd (as usually happens) gave way, or was even broken through; but not because it was eluded as by an impalpable disguise, which, if there had been such, would not at all have submitted to any touch. "Tangere enim et tangi, nisi corpus, nulla potest res," is even a sentence worthy of a place in the world's wisdom.
From Jerome, Against John of Jerusalem 34: Alioquin et ante resurrectionem, cum eduxissent eum de Nazareth, ut praecipitarent de supercilio montis, transivit per medios, id est, elapsus est de manibus eorum. Numquid iuxta Marcionem dicere possumus, quod ideo nativitas eius in phantasmate fuerit, quia contra naturam qui tenebatur, elapsus est? Quod Magis licet, hoc Domino non licet? / Besides, even before His resurrection, when they had led Him out from Nazareth that they might cast Him down headlong from the brow of the hill, He passed through the midst of them, that is, escaped out of their hands. Can we follow Marcion, and say that because, when He was held fast, He escaped in a manner contrary to nature, therefore His birth must have been only apparent? Has not the Lord a privilege which is conceded to magicians?
Ephrem, Commentary on the Diatessaron, according to Dieter T. Roth (page 398): 11.23—Il entra donc à Bethsaïde, chez les Juifs, et l’évangéliste n’indique pas d’autre parole de leur part que: Médecin, guéris-toi toi-même. Et ils le saisirent, et ils sortierent vers le flanc de la montagne. Il n’est guère vraisemblable que leur colère ait été causée par des paroles sur le Dieu juste opposé au Dieu bon. Car si Notre-Seigneur leur avait parlé du créateur, et qu’en retour, ils l’eussent saisi pour le précipiter, pourquoi l’évangéliste ne mentionnerait-il pas de semblables réactions en d’autres endroits?
Luke 4.38-44, the healing of the mother-in-law of Peter, the evening healings, departing from Capernaum, and in the synagogues.
38 Ἀναστὰς δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς συναγωγῆς εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν Σίμωνος. πενθερὰ δὲ τοῦ Σίμωνος ἦν συνεχομένη πυρετῷ μεγάλῳ, καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν περὶ αὐτῆς. 39 καὶ ἐπιστὰς ἐπάνω αὐτῆς ἐπετίμησεν τῷ πυρετῷ, καὶ ἀφῆκεν αὐτήν· παραχρῆμα δὲ ἀναστᾶσα διηκόνει αὐτοῖς. 40 Δύνοντος δὲ τοῦ ἡλίου ἅπαντες ὅσοι εἶχον ἀσθενοῦντας νόσοις ποικίλαις ἤγαγον αὐτοὺς πρὸς αὐτόν· ὁ δὲ ἑνὶ ἑκάστῳ αὐτῶν τὰς χεῖρας ἐπιτιθεὶς ἐθεράπευεν αὐτούς. 41 ἐξήρχετο δὲ καὶ δαιμόνια ἀπὸ πολλῶν, κραυγάζοντα καὶ λέγοντα ὅτι Σὺ εἶ ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ. καὶ ἐπιτιμῶν οὐκ εἴα αὐτὰ λαλεῖν, ὅτι ᾔδεισαν τὸν Χριστὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι. 42 Γενομένης δὲ ἡμέρας ἐξελθὼν ἐπορεύθη εἰς ἔρημον τόπον· καὶ οἱ ὄχλοι ἐπεζήτουν αὐτόν, καὶ ἦλθον ἕως αὐτοῦ, καὶ κατεῖχον αὐτὸν τοῦ μὴ πορεύεσθαι ἀπ’ αὐτῶν. 43 ὁ δὲ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὅτι Καὶ ταῖς ἑτέραις πόλεσιν εὐαγγελίσασθαί με δεῖ τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὅτι ἐπὶ τοῦτο ἀπεστάλην. 44 καὶ ἦν κηρύσσων εἰς τὰς συναγωγὰς τῆς Ἰουδαίας. |
38 He rose up from the synagogue, and entered into Simon’s house. Simon’s mother-in-law was afflicted with a great fever, and they begged him for her. 39 He stood over her, and rebuked the fever; and it left her. Immediately she rose up and served them. 40 When the sun was setting, all those who had any sick with various diseases brought them to him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them. 41 Demons also came out of many, crying out, and saying, “You are the Christ, the Son of God!” Rebuking them, he didn’t allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ. 42 When it was day, he departed and went into an uninhabited place, and the multitudes looked for him, and came to him, and held on to him, so that he wouldn’t go away from them. 43 But he said to them, “I must preach the good news of God’s Kingdom to the other cities also. For this reason I have been sent.” 44 He was preaching in the synagogues of Galilee. |
Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.8.4-5: [4] Ad summam, et ipse mox tetigit alios, quibus manus imponens, utique sentiendas, beneficia medicinarum conferebat, tam vera, tam non imaginaria, quam erant per quas conferebat. Ipse igitur est Christus Esaiae, remediator valetudinum. Hic, inquit, imbecillitates nostras aufert et languores portat. Portare autem Graeci etiam pro eo solent ponere quod est tollere. Sufficit interim mihi generalis repromissio. Quodcunque curaverit Iesus, meus est. Veniemus tamen et ad species curationum. [5] Ceterum et a daemoniis liberare curatio est valetudinis. Itaque spiritus nequam quasi ex forma iam prioris exempli cum testimonio excedebant vociferantes, Tu es filius dei. Cuius dei, vel hic pareat. Sed proinde increpabantur et iubebantur tacere. Proinde enim Christus ab hominibus, non a spiritibus immundis, volebat se filium dei agnosci, ille Christus duntaxat cui hoc congruebat quia praemiserat per quos posset agnosci, et utique digniores praedicatores. / [4] In short, He did himself touch others, upon whom He laid His hands, which were capable of being felt, and conferred the blessings of healing, which were not less true, not less unimaginary, than were the hands wherewith He bestowed them. He was therefore the very Christ of Isaiah, the healer of our sicknesses. "Surely," says he, "He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows." Now the Greeks are accustomed to use for carry a word which also signifies to take away. A general promise Is enough for me in passing. Whatever were the cures which Jesus effected, He is mine. [5] We will come, however, to the kinds of cures. To liberate men, then, from evil spirits, is a cure of sickness. Accordingly, wicked spirits (just in the manner of our former example) used to go forth with a testimony, exclaiming, "Thou art the Son of God," ----of what God, is clear enough from the case itself. But they were rebuked, and ordered not to speak; precisely because Christ willed Himself to be proclaimed by men, not by unclean spirits, as the Son of God----even that Christ alone to whom this was befitting, because He had sent beforehand men through whom He might become known, and who were assuredly worthier preachers.
Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.8.9-10: [9] In solitudinem procedit. Solemnis et huiusmodi regio creatoris. Oportebat sermonem illic quoque videri in corpore ubi egerat aliquando et in nube. Competebat et evangelio habitus loci qui placuerat et legi. Capiat itaque iocunditatem solitudo: hoc Esaias promiserat. Detentus a turbis, Oportet me, inquit, et aliis civitatibus annuntiare regnum dei. [10] Ostenderat iam alicubi deum suum? Non puto adhuc usque. Sed de his loquebatur qui alium quoque deum noverant? Nec hoc credo. Ergo si nec ille alium deum ediderat nec illi noverant praeter creatorem, eiusdem dei regnum portendebat quem solum sciebat notum eis qui audiebant. / [9] "He departed, and went into a desert place." This was, indeed, the Creator's customary region. It was proper that the Word should there appear in body, where He had aforetime, wrought in a cloud. To the gospel also was suitable that condition of place which had once been determined on for the law. "Let the wilderness and the solitary place, therefore, be glad and rejoice; "so had Isaiah promised. When "stayed" by the crowds, He said," I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also." [10] Had He displayed His God anywhere yet? I suppose as yet nowhere. But was He speaking of those who knew of another god also? I do not believe so. If, therefore, neither He had preached, nor they had known, any other God but the Creator, He was announcing the kingdom of that God whom He knew to be the only God known to those who were listening to Him.