ANTITHESIS

Contradictions Between the Old Testament Diety and the New Testament God.
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and Contradictions [antithesis] of gnosis falsley so called.

from the pseudo-Pauline epistle of I Timothy 6:20 (circ.150 C.E.).

This page represents a short exercise on my part (rather loose and by no means comprehensive)- the purpose of which is to provide a brief glimpse into Marcion’s lost work, “Antithesis”, which can be best described as a Marcionite commentary on the New Testament, which set forth contrasts on passages( via narrative commentary, or by the presentation of OT and NT scriptures side-by-side) between the Hebrew diety and the Alien God. It is not certain how this work was actually arranged, whether a separate work apart from Marcion’s canon, or a commentary incorporated into it. For the first part of this exercise, an attempt is made here to extract and construct from Tertullian’s hostile witness (Adversus Marcionem) a Marcionite narrative, so as to allow the marcionite voice to express its views on the following three subjects:
I. The Creator God and the Supreme God,
II. The Inconsistancies of the Creator God, and
III. The Two Christs.

For the second half of this exercise, a simple side-by-side presentation of OT and NT scriptures is given, which demonstrates the contradictions between the OT Creator God and the NT Supreme God. I must emphasize that this is a loose presentation, in that I have not confined myself to citing only passages which appeared in Marcion’s canon, but have made free use of other canonical material as well. In any event, this will at least provide the reader a general idea of what Marcion’s work “Antithesis” may have been like. For a further in-depth discussion on Marcion’s “Antithesis”, see Adolf Von Harnack’s work, “Marcion: The Gospel of the Alien God” (pp.53-63; E.T. Labyrinth Press, 1990).
I. The Creator God and the Supreme God

For an evil tree bringeth forth not good fruit; neither does a good tree bring forth evil fruit. For every tree is known by his own fruit. Luke 6:43,44a

I am the Lord, and there is none else; I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil…
Isaiah 45:6,7

I create evil – This god is the author of evil – there must be another God, after the analogy of the good tree producing its good fruit. In Christ is found a different disposition, one of a simple and pure benevolence – which differs from the Creator.
In Christ a new God is revealed.

The Creator God is judicial, harsh, and mighty in war.
The Supreme God is gentle and simply good and excellent.

The title “God” is a vague one, and applied to other Beings as well; as it is written, ” He standeth in the congregation of the mighty”; “He judgeth among the gods” (Psalm 82:1,6), “Ye are gods”. Thus as the attribute of supremacy would be inappropriate to these, although they be called gods, so it is to the Creator.

Jesus Christ and none else revealed a new God, who, in the Old world and in the Old time and under the Old God was unknown and unheard of ; Whom is accounted by no one through long centuries back, and ancient in men’s very ignorance of Him – even in ancient names He was unknown and concealed. He had remained unknown by any works from the beginning. Even the Creator was unaware of the Supreme God being above himself, Who, although He did not manifest Himself from the beginning and by means of the creation, has yet revealed Himself in Christ Jesus.

To be sure, this world is a grand work, worthy of a god. Yet the Supreme God has a creation of His own, and His own world, and His own sky. One work is sufficient for our God: He has delivered man by His supreme and most excellent goodness, which is preferable to the creation of all the locusts. A primary and perfect goodness is shed voluntarily and freely upon strangers without any obligation of friendship, on the principle that we are bidden to love our enemies, who as such on that very account are strangers to us.

The Supreme God is susceptible to no feeling of rivalry, or anger, or damage, or injury . He inflicts no punishment and takes no offence, and is not feared, as a good being ought not to be an object of fear, as a judicial being, in whom resides the grounds for fear – anger, severity, judgements, vengence, and condemnation.
II. The Inconsistencies of the Creator God

The Creator God is inconsistent, in respect of persons, sometimes disapproving where approbation is deserved; or else lacking in foresight, bestowing approbation on men who ought rather be reprobated, as if he either censured his own past judgements, or could not forecast his future ones.

With fickleness and improvidence he repented, or on some recollection of some wrong-doing, because the Creator actually says “It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king” (1 Samual 15:11), his repentence in the sense of an acknowledgement of some evil work or error. This is also the case in the matter of the Ninevites, when the Book of Jonah (3:10) states,
“And God repented of the evil that he had said he would do unto them; and he did not.”

The Creator called out to Adam, “Where art thou?” as if ignorant of where Adam was; and when Adam alleged that the shame of his nakedness was the reason for hiding himself, the Creator inquired whether he had eaten of the tree, as if he were in doubt (Genesis 3:9-11).

In the case of Sodom and Gomorrha, he says “I will go down now, to see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it which is come to me; and if not, I will know”; another instance of his uncertainty in ignorance.

The Creator God was even mean enough in his very fierceness, when, in his wrath against the people for their consecration of the golden calf, he makes this request to Moses: “Let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them; and I will make thee a great nation” (Exodus 32:10). Moses is better than his God, as the deprecatur and indeed, the averter of his anger, “For Thou shalt not do this; or else destroy me along with them” (Exodus 32:32).
III. The Two Christs

The Christ who in the days of Tiberius was, by a previously unknown God, revealed for the salvation of all nations, is a different being from him who was ordained by the Creator God for the restoration of the Jewish state, and who is yet to come.

The Creator’s Christ is to be a warrior, a bearer of arms, and mighty in war.
The Christ of the Good God, who has come, is a far different being from the Creator’s Christ.

Isaiah’s description of Christ in no point suits the Christ of the Good God. Isaiah’s Christ is to be called Emmanuel (Isaiah 7:14); then, he takes the riches of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria against the king of Assyria (Isaiah 8:4). But yet, He who is come was neither born under such a name, nor ever engaged in such a war-like enterprise.

A Christ had come who had never been foreannounced, but the Christ predicted had not yet appeared. The Jews were themselves quite certain that it was some other who came; so they not only rejected Him as a stranger, but slew Him as an enemy, though they would have acknowledged Him, and with all religious devotion followed Him, if He had been one of them.

The difference between the two Christs, is that the Jewish Christ was ordained by the Creator for the restoration of the people alone from its dispersion,
while our Christ was appointed by the supremely Good God for the liberation of the whole human race.
Who among the nations can turn to the Creator, when those whom the prophets name are proselytes of individually different and private conditions?

It is the Christ of the Other, Supreme God Who was driven to the cross by the hostile powers and authorities of the Creator. The suffering of the cross was not predicted of the Creator’s Christ; moreover, it should not be believed that the Creator would expose his son to that kind of death on which he himself had pronounced a curse. “Cursed” says he, “is everyone who hangeth on a tree” (Deuteronomy 21:3, Galatians 3:13).