Anf-02 vi.iv.v.iii Pg 24.1
Anf-03 v.iv.vi.iii Pg 26 Now, inasmuch as the circumstances require such an interpretation as this, no one will refuse to admit that Paul preached that God and that Christ whose law he was excluding all the while, however much he allowed it, owing to the times, but which he would have had summarily to abolish if he had published a new god. Rightly, then, did Peter and James and John give their right hand of fellowship to Paul, and agree on such a division of their work, as that Paul should go to the heathen, and themselves to the circumcision.5292
1 Cor. ix. 20; 22.
Anf-03 iv.iv.xiv Pg 7 does he mean “to idolaters an idolater?” “to heathens a heathen?” “to the worldly worldly?” But albeit he does not prohibit us from having our conversation with idolaters and adulterers, and the other criminals, saying, “Otherwise ye would go out from the world,”268
1 Cor. ix. 22.
Anf-03 v.iii.xxiv Pg 8 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 mind2108
1 Cor. ix. 20; 22.
2108 Viderint. those who pass sentence on apostles! It is a happy fact that Peter is on the same level with Paul in the very glory2109
2109 Et in martyrio. of martyrdom. Now, although Paul was carried away even to the third heaven, and was caught up to paradise,2110
Anf-03 v.iv.v.iii Pg 14 that he might gain all, it was possible that Peter also might have betaken himself to the same plan of practising somewhat different from what he taught. And, in like manner, if false apostles also crept in, their character too showed itself in their insisting upon circumcision and the Jewish ceremonies. So that it was not on account of their preaching, but of their conversation, that they were marked by St. Paul, who would with equal impartiality have marked them with censure, if they had erred at all with respect to God the Creator or His Christ. Each several case will therefore have to be distinguished. When Marcion complains that apostles are suspected (for their prevarication and dissimulation) of having even depraved the gospel, he thereby accuses Christ, by accusing those whom Christ chose. If, then, the apostles, who are censured simply for inconsistency of walk, composed the Gospel in a pure form,3556
1 Cor. ix. 22.
3556 Integrum. but false apostles interpolated their true record; and if our own copies have been made from these,3557
3557 Inde nostra digesta. where will that genuine text3558
3558 Germanum instrumentum. of the apostle’s writings be found which has not suffered adulteration? Which was it that enlightened Paul, and through him Luke? It is either completely blotted out, as if by some deluge—being obliterated by the inundation of falsifiers—in which case even Marcion does not possess the true Gospel; or else, is that very edition which Marcion alone possesses the true one, that is, of the apostles? How, then, does that agree with ours, which is said not to be (the work) of apostles, but of Luke? Or else, again, if that which Marcion uses is not to be attributed to Luke simply because it does agree with ours (which, of course,3559
3559 That is, according to the Marcionite cavil. is, also adulterated in its title), then it is the work of apostles. Our Gospel, therefore, which is in agreement with it, is equally the work of apostles, but also adulterated in its title.3560
3560 De titulo quoque.
Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 7
VERSE (16) -
1Co 9:22 Pr 11:30 Lu 15:10 1Ti 4:16 Jas 5:19,20 1Pe 3:1,2