Mockery in place of argument

Next he goes back over what he has often said before about Marcion’s opinion. In some places he sets out Marcion’s views truly; in others he has misheard even those. We need not answer that opinion, or even refute it.

Then he again brings up, on his own account, what can be said for Marcion and what against him, saying which charges they escape and into which they fall. And when he wants to side with the argument that claims Jesus was foretold, so as to accuse Marcion and his followers, he says plainly: “How will one who was punished like this be shown to be a child of God, unless it has been foretold about him?”

Then he jests again and, as is his habit, mocks, bringing in two sons of gods, one the son of the Creator and the other the son of Marcion’s god. He paints a picture of their single combats, saying they are like the fights of quails, and of the battles of their fathers, the gods; or else he says that the fathers, useless and doting from old age, do nothing to one another but leave their sons to fight.

So what he himself said earlier, we shall say to him: what old woman lulling a child to sleep would not be ashamed to say such things as he says in his book entitled The True Doctrine? For he ought to have stood up to the arguments in earnest; instead he leaves the substance aside and jests and plays the buffoon, thinking that he is writing mimes or lampoons. He does not see that such a way of conducting the argument works against his own purpose, since he wants us to leave Christianity and attend to his doctrines. Had he set these out with dignity, they might perhaps have been more persuasive; but since he mocks and jests and plays the buffoon, we shall say that it was for lack of serious arguments (for he neither had them nor knew any) that he fell into such great nonsense.