Galatians

Although Galatians is the fourth of Paul's epistles in our Bibles, it is the first in Marcion's Apostolicon. As this is also the first epistle on which both Tertullian and Epiphanius comment, we might expect that their comments would be the most detailed, and perhaps least affected by 'fatigue.' However, as will be seen, while Tertullian appears to see a number of large omissions in Marcion's version of Galatians (McGal), Epiphanius only reports a one small difference.

Galatians 1:1-9

Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;) [1:1] And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia: [1:2] Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, [1:3] Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: [1:4] To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. [1:5] I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: [1:6] Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. [1:7] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. [1:8] As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. [1:9]

Several people (e.g. Harnack) have suggested that Marcion omitted "and God the Father" from v. 1:1, apparently based on testimony from Jerome, although this has been disputed. As is discussed under the heading 'Common Items' in Marcion's Apostolicon: The Pauline Epistles, when discussing First Corinthians Tertullian makes it clear that he saw at least v. 1:3 at the beginning of Marcion's version of Galatians (McGal), and so perhaps we would have expected him to comment on v. 1:1 if he saw any difference here. However, neither he nor Epiphanius do so, and (apart from the later comments when discussing 1 Cor) Tertullian's first comments on the text of Galatians itself are references to vv. 1:6-8. He comments on this being "the most decisive [epistle] against Judaism," and then quotes v. 1:6-7a:

Since also he makes mention of no other god ... it is clear enough in what sense he writes, "I marvel that you are so soon removed from Him who has called you to His grace to another gospel." ... When he adds, too, the words, "which is not another," he confirms the fact that the gospel which he maintains is the Creator's.

Tertullian quotes from Isa 40:9, 42:6, 52:9 and Mt 12:21, refers to v. 1:7 again, and then quotes most of v. 1:8, while omitting "unto you than that which we have preached unto you:"

But perhaps, to avoid this difficulty, you will say that he therefore added just afterwards, "Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel, let him be accursed," because he was aware that the Creator was going to introduce a gospel!

This wording may suggest that Tertullian saw a slightly shorter version of v. 1:8, but Epiphanius, in his 'Elenchus 16 and 24' on 1 Cor 15:1, quotes this verse in full:

“Though we, or an angel, preach any other Gospel unto you than that which ye have received, let him be accursed.”

According to Nathaniel Lardner there is a possible variation in v. 1:7:

The Marcionite, in the dialogue ascribed to Origen, in citing the 7th verse of this chapter, inserts the words, "according to my gospel," after the word "another;" and in the end of the verse, after the word "pervert," instead of "the gospel of Christ," he read, ‘to a gospel different from that of Christ.’ These variations might be inserted from the Apostolicon of Marcion, as Dr. Mill thinks; or perhaps they might not be intended as an exact quotation, but only as an argument, consisting partly of the words of the apostle in this place, and partly of what the Marcionite had before quoted, which seems to be from Romans ii.16, together with his own explanation or comment.

While it is not certain what McGal contained here, there is no suggestion from either Tertullian or Epiphanius that it was different from what they saw in their copies of Galatians.

Galatians 1:10-17

For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. [1:10] But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. [1:11] For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. [1:12] For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: [1:13] And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. [1:14] But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, [1:15] To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: [1:16] Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. [1:17]

Tertullian writes: "He then cursorily touches on his own conversion from a persecutor to an apostle," which we may reasonably take to indicate that he is referring to at least vv. 1:13-17, and possibly covering vv. 1:10-12 as well. Tertullian then states that this confirms "the Acts of the apostles," from which he refers to Ac 15:1, 5, 6,10, and 28, indicating that therse verses contain "very subject of this epistle," and then comments that "it becomes apparent why you [Marcion] reject" "the Acts of the apostles," giving as his reason that "they declare no other God than the Creator."

Galatians 1:18-24

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. [1:18] But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. [1:19] Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. [1:20] Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; [1:21] And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: [1:22] But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. [1:23] And they glorified God in me. [1:24]

Neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius comments on vv. 1:18-24, but Evans (following Harnack) writes:

He omitted 1:18-24 [the visit to Jerusalem and the meeting with Cephas and James, followed by retirement to Syria and Cilicia].

There appears to be no authority for this statement other than the fact that these verses are not attested as having been present in the Apostolicon.

Galatians 2:1-5

Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. [2:1] And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain. [2:2] But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: [2:3] And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: [2:4] To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you. [2:5]

Evans comments that Marcion: "retained 2:1 and 2, but seems to have altered them by inserting a summary of vv. 18-24." Indeed, Tertullian does appear to give a different version of v. 2:2, while also only quoting v. 2:1a, but it is by no means certain that he is actually quoting:

... he tells us that "fourteen years after he went up to Jerusalem," in order to confer with them about the rule which he followed in his gospel, "lest perchance he should all those years have been running, and be running still, in vain, (which would be the case,) of course, if his preaching of the gospel fell short of their method.

Tertullian mentions Titus not being circumcised: "neither was Titus circumcised," which suggests that he also saw v. 2:1 (in which Titus is first mentioned), following which he quotes from v. 2:4-5

Therefore he says: "Because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ, that they might bring us into bondage, to whom we gave place by subjection not even for an hour."

Tertullian next writes: "Let us only attend to the clear sense and to the reason of the thing, and the perversion of the Scripture will be apparent," following which he quotes vv. 2:3-4a. It has been suggested that he is referring to Marcion's "perversion of the scripture," but from what follows it seem more likely that he is instead commenting on Paul's actions, for example later having Timothy circumcised, and also quoting 1 Cor 9:21-22 (See First Corinthians).

Galatians 2:6-10

But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me: [2:6] But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; [2:7] (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) [2:8] And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. [2:9] Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do. [2:10]

Neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius refer to vv. 2:6-8, and according to Evans Marcion omitted these verses:

He omitted 2:6-9a [the consultation with James, Cephas, and John], but retained 9b and 10 [omitting Barnabas].

However, Tertullian writes:

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." Their agreement, also, "to remember the poor" was in complete conformity with the law of the Creator, which cherished the poor and needy, as has been shown in our observations on your Gospel.

As he refers to Peter, James, and John without any suggestion that Marcion had omitted their names it is most likely that Tertullian saw the whole of vv. 2:9-10 in the Apostolican. Additionally, there is no actual evidence to suggest that vv. 2:6-8 were not present, and all that can really be stated is that they are unattested. However, it is possible that these verses are an interpolation, as Peter Kirby suggests:

These verses are unattested as being in Marcion. There is some level of expectation that Tertullian would have quoted it against Marcion to show the harmony of Paul with Peter as apostles. Some or all of these verses are considered an interpolation on other grounds by C. P. Coffin (“Peter or Cephas in Pauline Usage“), Ernst Barnikol (“The Non-Pauline Origin of the Parallelism of the Apostles Peter and Paul“), William O Walker Jr. (“Galatians 2:8 and the Question of Paul’s Apostleship“), J. C. O’Neil (The Recovery of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians, p. 37), and Hermann Detering (The Original Version of the Epistle to the Galatians, p. 33).

If vv. 2:6-8 are an interpolation, then this would suggest that Marcion's version of Galatians pre-dates what we see in our bibles.

Galatians 2:11-14

But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. [2:11] For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. [2:12] And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. [2:13] But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? [2:14]

Tertullian refers to v. 2:11, sensuring Peter's actions. He quotes most of v. 2:12 and v. 14a, but it seems clear that he saw the whole of vv. 2:11-14:

Paul, however, censures Peter for not walking straightforwardly according to the truth of the gospel. No doubt he blames him; but it was solely because of his inconsistency in the matter of "eating," which he varied according to the sort of persons (whom he associated with) "fearing them which were of the circumcision," but not on account of any perverse opinion touching another god. For if such a question had arisen, others also would have been "resisted face to face" by the man who had not even spared Peter on the comparatively small matter of his doubtful conversation.

Galatians 2:16-21

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. [2:16] But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. [2:17] For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. [2:18] For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. [2:19] I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. [2:20] I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. [2:21]

In trying to make a point against the Marcionites Tertullian quotes v. 2:16a and v. 2:18:

But what do the Marcionites wish to have believed (on the point)? For the rest, the apostle must (be permitted to) go on with his own statement, wherein he says that "a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith:" faith, however, in the same God to whom belongs the law also. For of course he would have bestowed no labour on severing faith from the law, when the difference of the god would, if there had only been any, have of itself produced such a severance. Justly, therefore, did he refuse to "build up again (the structure of the law) which he had overthrown."

Tertullian then states that: "The law, indeed, had to be overthrown," and "that the difficulties of the law might be changed into the facilities of the gospel," and uses several quotes from the Old Testament and Acts to make his point. These mentions of the law may reasonably be taken as references to v. 2:19. He then concludes with a reference to v. 2:20:

... The object, therefore, of the faith whereby the just man shall live, will be that same God to whom likewise belongs the law, by doing which no man is justified.

Galatians 3:1-9

O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? [3:1] This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? [3:2] Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? [3:3] Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. [3:4] He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? [3:5] Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. [3:6] Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. [3:7] And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. [3:8] So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. [3:9]

Tertullian next refers to v. 3:13, while Epiphanius' next comment is on v. 3:10a. Evans suggests that vv. 3:6-9 were not present in Marcion's Apostolican:

He omitted 3:6-9 [even as Abraham believed God . . . are blessed with faithful Abraham]

Lardner agrees that some of these verses were not present, stating:

In chapter iii. Marcion omitted the 6th, 7th, and 8th verses, in order to get rid of the mention of Abraham, and of the gospel having been preached to him; on which account he ought also to have omitted part of the 9th verse, σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ, "with faithful Abraham;" and according to Tertullian's manner of stating the argument against him, this was the case.

Jason D. BeDuhn comments on these verses, and notes a remark from Tertullian regarding the absence of a connection to Abraham:

Both Harnack (Marcion, 72*) and Schmid (Marcion und sein Apostolos, 106) conclude that Marcion’s text lacked Gal. 3.6-9. Jerome, Comm. Gal. 3.6 says, "In this passage all the way to where it is written, 'who from faith are blessed together with the faithful Abraham,' Marcion erased from his Apostle" … Tertullian, who jumps from Gal. 2.18 to 3.10 in his comments without saying anything about an omission, goes back to note one when he comes to comment on Gal 3:26, contending that the logic of the latter verse is ruined by the absence of the connection to the faith of Abraham.

A key point here is the reference to Abraham, whose name occurs in nine places in Galatians: in vv. 3:6-9, 14, 16, 18, 29, and finally at v. 4:22, and immediately before his reference to v. 4:22 Tertullian writes:

But as, in the case of thieves, something of the stolen goods is apt to drop by the way, as a clue to their detection; so, as it seems to me, it has happened to Marcion: the last mention of Abraham's name he has left untouched (in the epistle), although no passage required his erasure more than this, even his partial alteration of the text.

From this is it clear that in Marcion's version of Galatians the name of Abraham only appears once, in v. 4:22, so meaning that some or all of each of vv. 3:6-9, 14, 16, 18, 29 were not present. It is clear from the text that this almost certainly means that vv. 3:6-8 were not present, but it is possible that v. 3:9a (So then they which be of faith are blessed) may have been present. However, the fact that eight out of nine of the mentions of Abraham in Galatians are not present in the Apostolican is not evidence that Marcion edited the text, but simply that at some time the text did not contain them.

Galatians 3:10-14

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. [3:10] But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. [3:11] And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. [3:12] Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: [3:13] That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. [3:14]

Epiphanius quotes from vv. 3:11b, 10a, and 12b, in that order::

“Learn that the just shall live by faith. For as many as are under the Law are under a curse; but, The man that doeth them shall live by them.” (Scholion 1)

He offers no explanation for this order, but it is not just a simple slip on his part, as in his 2-part Elenchus 1 he quotes: “Learn that the just shall live by faith,” and “They are under a curse,’’ in that order. Then he writes:

“Cursed is everyone that hangeth upon a tree; but he that is of the promise is by the freewoman.” (Scholion 2)

This appears to be a combination of v. 3:13b and v. 4:23b, as if he saw none of the intervening text. Evans partially supports this where he comments that:

... 3:14 was altered into Therefore we received the blessing of the Spirit by faith (reading eulogian for epaggelian).

Tertullian quotes just the beginning and end of v. 3:13, and 3:14b:

Why, however, "Christ" "was made a curse for us," is declared by the apostle himself in a way which quite helps our side, as being the result of the Creator's appointment. But yet it by no means follows, because the Creator said of old, "Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree," that Christ belonged to another god, and on that account was accursed even then in the law... "We have received therefore, the promise of the Spirit," as the apostle says, "through faith," even that faith by which the just man lives, in accordance with the Creator's purpose.

Tertullian's Latin in 3:14 actually reads: 'Accepimus igitur benedictionem spiritalem per fidem,' so that instead of "promise" it appears that in common with Epiphanius he saw "blessing." This reading is found in P⁴⁶, D*, F, G, and other mss, so making it unlikely that it is a Marcionite change.

Galatians 3:15-26

Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; [3:15a] Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. [3:15b] Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. [3:16] And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. [3:17] For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. [3:18] Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. [3:19] Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. [3:20] Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. [3:21] But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. [3:22] But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. [3:23] Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. [3:24] But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. [3:25] For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. [3:26]

There appears to be some doubt about v. 3:15 in the Apostolicon, as Lardner explains:

In the 15th verse of this chapter Marcion erased some things. Tertullian gives no particular account of what he left out. Dr. Mill expresses himself dubiously on this head. If I may be allowed to guess from the manner in which Tertullian expresseth himself, I should imagine that Marcion erased the whole of the 3d chapter after the word λέγω, in the 15th verse, and the beginning of the 4th chapter, till you come to the word ὅτε, in the 3d verse, and then the words will be connected in the following manner, turning from the 15th verse of the 3d chapter to the 3d of the fourth chapter:

"Brethren, I speak after the manner of men [v. 3:15a] -- when we were children, we were in bondage under the elements of the world; [v. 4:3] but when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son." [v. 4:4a]

This is precisely what Tertullian's argument requires, and they are the very words which he connects together. Dr. Mill indeed gives the words of Tertullian, as a various reading under the 3d verse. But from what he himself says under the 15th verse of the former chapter, and from this various reading being found no where else but in this place of Tertullian, it appears highly probable that the sense before given of this passage of Tertullian is the true one.

Lardner is suggesting that Marcion's version of Galatians did not contain vv. 3:15b- 4:3a, and Kirby agrees that v. 3:15a was connected to the beginning of v. 4:3, while not suggesting that the intervening verses were absent. He quotes BeDuhn in support:

This [v. 3:15a] is omitted in its current location. It is found instead immediately before Gal 4:3 instead. BeDuhn writes, “Tertullian, Marc. 5.4.1. Tertullian attests a transposition of 3.15a, adding ‘still’ (‘I still speak,’ Latin adhuc > Gk eti), to the beginning of this verse and omitting 4.3a ‘thus also you’ in agreement with Clement of Alexandria. Ephrem Syrus omits the clause at 3.15, but does not place it at 4.3.”

This appears to ignore the fact that Tertullian made it clear that the referrences to Abraham in vv. 3:16, 18, and 29 were not present in McGal, which only make sense if much of the text of vv. 3:15b-4:3a was also not present. Tertullian refers to v. 3:26 before he refers to vv. 3:15a/4:3, suggesting perhaps that this was indeed the order that he saw:

What I say, then, is this, that that God is the object of faith who prefigured the grace of faith. But when he also adds, "For you are all the children of faith," it becomes clear that what the heretic's industry erased was the mention of Abraham's name; for by faith the apostle declares us to be "children of Abraham," and after mentioning him he expressly called us "children of faith" also.

The reference here to "what the heretic's industry erased" indicates that text immediately prior to v. 3:26 was omitted from McGal, and we have already seen that none of the references to Abraham in vv. 3:7-9, 14, 16, 18 or 29 were present, so it is reasonable to believe that much of the text of vv. 3:15-25 was not present in the Apostolicon. According to Evans:

He omitted 3:15-25 [a man's testament: the covenant and the law: the promise to Abraham: the seed to whom the promise was made: the law a pedagogue] and altered 3:26 to Ye are all the sons of faith. He omitted also 3:27-4:2 [baptized into Christ: heirs according to promise].

In other words, Evans believed that all of vv. 3:15-4:2 (with the exception of a version of v. 3:26) was not present. However, BeDuhn suggests that just the end of v. 3:18 might have been omitted, which could have allowed for vv. 3:15b, 17-18a to be present, even though these verses are unattested:

Gk mss 056 and 0176 show how the phrase mentioning Abraham could be omitted from v. 18 and leave a passage that makes perfect sense, by omitting τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐπαγγελίας by homeoteleuton with ἐπαγγελίας at the end of the previous phrase. [i.e. omitting v. 3:18b]

Tertullian follows his quote from v. 3:26 by quoting v. 3:6 from "the apostle" (i.e. Paul's version of Galatians) and discussing Abraham's faith, until noting that Marcion's order was wrong, and quoting vv. 3:15a/4:3 as if this was a contiguous piece of text:

"But," says he, "I speak after the manner of men: when we were children, we were placed in bondage under the elements of the world." This, however, was not said "after the manner of men." For there is no figure here, but literal truth. For (with respect to the latter clause of this passage), what child (in the sense, that is, in which the Gentiles are children) is not in bondage to the elements of the world, which he looks up to in the light of a god?

He then quotes vv. 3:15-16 from "the apostle" (i.e. from Romans, not McRom), appearing not to see "yet if it be confirmed" in v. 3:15:

With regard, however, to the former clause, there was a figure (as the apostle wrote it); because after he had said, "I speak after the manner of men," he adds, "Though it be but a man's covenant, no man disannuls, or adds thereto." For by the figure of the permanency of a human covenant he was defending the divine testament. "To Abraham were the promises made, and to his seed. He said not 'to seeds,' as of many; but as of one, 'to your seed,' which is Christ."

Galatians 3:27-4:4

For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. [3:27] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. [3:28] And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. [3:29] Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; [4:1] But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. [4:2] Even so we, [4:3a] when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: [4:3b] But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, [4:4]

Immediately after having quoted vv. 3:15a/4:3 from McRom and vv. 3:15-16 from Romans, Tertullian comments on Marcion's erasure and then quotes vv. 4:4a:

Fie on Marcion's sponge! But indeed it is superfluous to dwell on what he has erased, when he may be more effectually confuted from that which he has retained. "But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth His Son" — the God, of course, who is the Lord of that very succession of times which constitutes an age; who also ordained, as "signs" of time, suns and moons and constellations and stars; who furthermore both predetermined and predicted that the revelation of His Son should be postponed to the end of the times.

After noting that vv. 4:1-2 are unattested, BeDuhn reports that:

Harnack, Marcion, 74*, suggests that these verses probably were present as the referent of 3.15a, which was transposed to the beginning of 4.3. But Tertullian complains that 3.15a makes no sense because what follows in 4.3ff. is not an analogy from human practice, but a statement of actual spiritual fact; this criticism would lose its cogency if 4.1-2, with its analogy from human practice, immediately preceded, in which case 3.15a would be taken to refer back to it, just as Harnack supposes

The location of the comment from Tertullian makes it clear that text immediately prior to v. 4:4 was not present in the Apostolicon, and given that Tertullian had previously indicated that the reference to Abraham in v. 3:29 was not present, we can be virtually certain that none of vv. 3:27-4:3a was present either. Tertullian does not refer to any of v. 4:4b, but Evans states:

At 4:3 he read Again I speak after the manner of men, When we were children etc.

This agrees with what Tertullian reports, even though Evans apparently fails to recognize that this is actually vv. 3:15a/4:3b. Evans then continues:

but omitting from verse 4 [born of a woman]

Evans believes that "made (or born) of a woman" was actually omitted by Marcion, but BeDuhn reports Jerome as suggesting that Marcion had a slightly different phrase when he writes (possibly from a quotation of Origen):

"Please note that he (Paul) did not say 'born through a woman' - phrasing opted for by Marcion and other heresies which pretend that the flesh of Christ was imaginary - but 'born of a woman.'"

As neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius report any differences here this seems unlikely. However, Hermann Detering believes that:

The Reconstruction of the Marcionite Text is relatively simple for Gal 4,4. There is a consensus of all scholars that the words γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός, γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον were missing in Marcion’s edition. The fact is unambiguously confirmed by Tertullian. He surely would not have omitted the words that showed Christ’s genuine human nature to be true and that therefore could be used as an excellent argument against Marcion’s docetism, if then he had found them in Marcion.”

This argument can only be used if Tertullian himself knew these words in v. 4:4, and even then we could reasonably expect either Tertullian or Epiphanius to have commented on their absense from the version in the Apostolicon if that was the case. The lack of any comment from either therefore tells us nothing, and we are simply left uncertain regarding v. 4:4b.

Galatians 4:5-6

To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. [4:5] And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. [4:6]

Tertullian quotes v. 4:5 and most of v. 4:6, interspersed with quotes from Isaiah and Joel:

But for what end did He send His Son? "To redeem them that were under the law," .... "that we might receive the adoption of sons," that is, the Gentiles, who once were not sons... That we may have, therefore the assurance that we are the children of God, "He has sent forth His Spirit into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father."

Evans follows his comment (above) on v. 4:4 with: "and in verse 6 reading When ye were sons," and BeDuhn notes:

Marcion's text shows some differences with most witnesses to the catholic text: "you are God's children," instead of "you are children," in agreement with Gk mss D, F, G; "he has sent" rather than "God has sent," in agreement with Gk mss B and 1739; "his spirit" (to pneuma auto) in place of "the spirit of his son" (to pneuma tou hiou autou), in agreement with P⁴⁶, 1734, and 1738; [and] "into our hearts," rather than "into your hearts' (most early manyscripts agree).

The mss support for these readings suggests that this is what Tertullian actually saw in McGal.

Galatians 4:7-10

Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. [4:7] Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. [4:8] But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? [4:9] Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. [4:10]

Tertullian refers back to the end of v. 4:6, and then quotes from v. 4:9b, 8, and 10 (although it is clear that he knows that this is not the order in the text):

Who is (our) Father, but He who is also our Maker? Therefore, after such affluence (of grace), they should not have returned "to weak and beggarly elements." ... He did not therefore seek, by any depreciation of the mundane elements, to turn them away from their god, although, when he said just before, "Howbeit, then, you serve them which by nature are no gods," he censured the error of that physical or natural superstition which holds the elements to be god; but at the God of those elements he aimed not in this censure. He tells us himself clearly enough what he means by "elements," even the rudiments of the law: "You observe days, and months, and times, and years" — the sabbaths, I suppose, and the preparations, and the fasts, and the high days.

Tertullian either saw a shorter version of v. 4:8 (omitting "when ye knew not God") or is paraphrasing. As he also only quotes briefly from v. 4:9b the latter seems likely.

Galatians 4:11-21

Tertullian has nothing to say regarding vv. 4:11-21 here, but he does quote from v. 4:19 in his commentary on First Corinthians:

He says specifically "sons of men," and not men promiscuously; thus exhibiting to us those who were the children of men truly so called, choice men, apostles. "For," says he, "I have begotten you through the gospel;" [1 Cor 4:15] and "You are my children, of whom I travail again in birth." [Gal 4:19]

Evans states: "He probably retained 4:11-20, though this is not commented on by Tertullian."

Galatians 4:22-26

For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. [4:22] But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. [4:23] Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. [4:24] For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. [4:45] But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. [4:26] For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. [4:27] Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. [4:28] But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. [4:29] Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. [4:30] So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. [4:31]

Tertullian comments on Marcion's failure to erase the reference to Abraham from v. 4:22, but his comment on "stolen goods" does not appear to refer to anything new, but instead to the lack of previous references to Abraham in Marcion's version of Galatians, as has already been noted above:

Tertullian continues by quoting almost all of vv. 4:22-24:

"For (it is written) that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman; but he who was of the bond maid was born after the flesh, but he of the free woman was by promise: which things are allegorized" (that is to say, they presaged something besides the literal history); "for these are the two covenants," or the two exhibitions (of the divine plans), as we have found the word interpreted, "the one from the Mount Sinai," in relation to the synagogue of the Jews, according to the law, "which genders to bondage"

He then writes as if what we see as Ephesians 1:21 was inserted at this point:

— "the other genders" (to liberty, being raised) above all principality, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come,

Evans states that in McGal vv. 4:21-26:

... was retained but seriously altered, with "expositions" for "covenants" in verse 24 and, after that, Another that gendereth above all principality and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world but also in that which is to come (from Ephesians 1:21) and The holy church our mother, to whom we have made promise.

Despite the unusual nature of this evidence, and the fact that Epiphanius does not note it, there is other evidence supporting this (possible) interpolation. BeDuhn states that:

Harnack (Marcion, 76*) attributes this addition to Marcion's editoral hand. But a portion of the same combined reading is found in Ephrem Syrus' commentary on the letters of Paul (135), as first noted by Harris.

On the assumption that both Galatians and Ephesians were authored by the same person, or that the author of one had access to the other, it would not be surprising for text from one letter might be inserted into another if the same point needed to be made in both. After from what we see in Eph 1:21, Tertullian then continues by quoting v. 4:26b and all of v. 4:31, with no mention of vv. 4:27-30:

"which is the mother of us all," in which we have the promise of (Christ's) holy church; by reason of which he adds in conclusion: "So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond woman, but of the free."

According to Evans "He omitted 4:27-30 [Rejoice thou barren etc.: cast out the bondwoman etc.]"

Galatians 5:1-6

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. [5:1] Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. [5:2] For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. [5:3] Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. [5:4] For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. [5:5] For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. [5:6]

Tertullian quotes most of v. 5:1, and may possibly be referring to vv. 5:3 or 4 when he refers to "the Law":

When he speaks of "the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free," does not the very phrase indicate that He is the Liberator who was once the Master? ... It was not meet that those who had received liberty should be "entangled again with the yoke of bondage" — that is, of the law;

Epiphanius quotes a slightly different version of v. 5:3 in his 'Scholion 3:' “I testify that a man that is circumcised is a debtor to do the whole Law,” but does not suggest that he saw any difference between Galatians and McGal. Tertullian continues by quoting almost all of v. 5:6:

If, now, he were for excluding circumcision, as the messenger of a new god, why does he say that "in Christ neither circumcision avails anything, nor uncircumcision?" ... Furthermore, since both circumcision and uncircumcision were attributed to the same Deity, both lost their power in Christ, by reason of the excellency ... of that faith "which," he says "works by love."

Galatians 5:9-10

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. [5:9] I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. [5:10]

In his Scholion 4 Epiphanius writes: In place of, “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump,” he put, “corrupteth the whole lump.” Lardner suggests that: "Marcion's reading is probably' the right one." Tertullian makes no reference to v. 5:9, but quotes part of v. 5:10:

... in another passage: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself." [Lev 19:18] "But he that troubles you shall have to bear judgment."

Galatians 5:14

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. [5:14]

Tertullian quotes this verse as:

"For," says he, "all the law is fulfilled in you (by this): 'You shall love your neighbour as yourself.''

In Scholion 5 Epiphanius has:

For all the Law is fulfilled by you; thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

Both Tertullian and Epiphanius give a different ending to v. 5:14a, one with partial support. BeDuhn writes:

Gk mss D, F, G, some manuscripts of the OL, and the Gothic version, all have a text that conflates Marcion's text with the catholic one: "in you in one saying." Moreover, the same set of witnesses (except the Gothic version) agree with Marcion's text in skipping over "in the [sic]" before the quotation of "love thy neighbor as thyself."

The lack of any comment from either Tertullian or Epiphanius suggests that they saw no difference here.

Galatians 5:19-21

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, [5:19] Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, [5:20] Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. [5:21]

Tertullian refers to vv. 5:19a and 21b, and also the parallel passage in 1 Cor 15:50:

For what are this next words? "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." [1 Cor 15:50] He means "the works of the flesh" and blood, which, in his Epistle to the Galatians, deprive men of the kingdom of God.

Even though Tertullian refers to "the works of the flesh and blood," it seems likely that he did not actually see "and blood" in v. 5:19, as in his commentary on Marcion's version of First Corinthians he states:

We have often shown before now, that the apostle classes heresies as evil among "works of the flesh," and that he would have those persons accounted estimable who shun heresies as an evil thing.

In addition, in his Scholion 6 Epiphanius (who quotes all three verses) does not have these words:

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, factions,

envyings, drunkenness, revelings—of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Epiphanius omits "and such like" from v. 5:21, and in Elenchus 6 he also refers to "flesh and blood," but like Tertullian he only does so in a quote from 1 Cor 15:50.

Galatians 5:24

And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. [5:24]

Epiphanius confirms the presence of this verse in McGal in his Scholion 7:

“They that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.”

Galatians 6:2-10

Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. [6:2] For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. [6:3] But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. [6:4] For every man shall bear his own burden. [6:5] Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things. [6:6] Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. [6:7] For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. [6:8] And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not. [6:9] As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith. [6:10]

Tertullian quotes from vv. 6:2, 7 - 10a, although he swaps his quotes of v. 6:9b and v. 6:10a.

When, therefore, he says, "Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ," since this cannot be accomplished except a man love his neighbour as himself, it is evident that [this] ... is really "the law of Christ," though literally the law of the Creator... "For whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap." It is then the God of recompense and judgment who threatens this. "Let us not be weary in well-doing;" and "as we have opportunity, let us do good." ... If, however, He also announces recompense, then from the same God must come the harvest both of death and of life. But "in due time we shall reap;"

Galatians 6:13-18

For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. [6:13] But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. [6:14] For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. [6:15] And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. [6:16] From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus. [6:17] Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen. [6:18]

Epiphanius quotes v. 6:13a in his Scholion 8: “For neither do they themselves who are circumcised (now) keep the Law,” without using it to comment on Marcion in any way. Tertullian then quotes from v. 6:14b and 17:

Moreover, "the world is crucified unto me," who am a servant of the Creator ... "and I unto the world," not unto the God who made the world... But when he adds, that "he bare in his body the scars of Christ" ... he therefore expressed the truth, that the flesh of Christ is not putative, but real and substantial, the scars of which he represents as borne upon his body.

Summary

Tertullian's explicit comments indicate that a considerable quantity of the text of what we know as Galatians was not present in the version in Marcion's Apostolicon, although the boundaries of the 'missing' portions of text are not completely clear. Evans summaries the missing text as being:

1:18-24; 2:6-9a; 3:6-9 and parts of 10-12; 3:14a and 15-25; 4:27-30; with extensive alteration of 4:21-6.

While not everyone agrees with some of the specifics, there is general agreement with the pattern of a small number of 'blocks' of whole verses not being present, rather than a larger number of small phrases or individual words. While it is generally believed that Marcion removed these blocks of text from Galatians, there is nothing in the missing blocks themselves that prevents them being interpolations into a shorter original. Indeed, some of the differences in McGal have sufficient support in the extant mss of Galatians to make it very unlikely that they are of Marcionite origin.

The other point that needs to be emphasized is that Epiphanius shows no sign of having seen the shorter version of Galatians upon which Tertullian comments. Instead, he notes a single difference of just one word, in v. 5:9. This begins a pattern across the epistles, with Epiphanius apparently seeing an 'Apostolicon' containing epistles either almost exactly as we see them (while Tertullian saw a much shorter version), or heavily altered epistles where Tertullian saw little or no difference.

Next: First Corinthians