[736]. But see n. 2, p. [217], infra.
[737]. As is plain from the words of Plutarch quoting, as is generally thought, Theopompus of Chios. See Is. et Os. cc. XLVI., XLVII. Al-Bîrûnî, Chronology, p. 189, says indeed that both Bardesanes and Marcion borrowed from Zoroaster. But this was eight centuries after Marcion’s death, and we have no evidence as to Al-Bîrûnî’s means of knowledge of his tenets.
[738]. Harvey’s Irenaeus, I. p. cli. There is a curious resemblance to Marcion’s Demiurge in the Clementine Homilies, XX. c. 2, where the king of this world who rules by law and rejoices in the destruction of sinners is mentioned. But the Homilies are probably Ebionite and certainly, in the form in which they have come down to us, later than Marcion.
[739]. Neander Antignostikus, Eng. ed. vol. II. p. 490, calls him the representative of the Protestant spirit. In modern times, it is perhaps sufficient to notice Harnack’s predilection, as shown in his Dogmengeschichte, for Marcion and his works. Foakes-Jackson, Some Christian Difficulties of the Second and Twentieth Centuries (Hulsean Lectures), Cambridge, 1903, pp. 19 sqq., thinks the study of the controversy between Marcion and Tertullian should especially appeal to Modernists.
[740]. Hippolytus, op. cit. Bk VII. c. 29, p. 378, Cruice.
[741]. Epiphanius, Haer. XLII. p. 556, Oehler.
[742]. Op. et loc. cit.
[743]. Tertullian, adv. Marc. Bk IV. c. 11. Cf. p. 207, supra.
[744]. Tertullian, op. cit. Bk I. c. 27.
[745]. Harnack in Encyclopaedia Britannica (11th ed.) s.v. “Marcion.”