Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol III:
Tertullian: Part II: Pagan Philosophy the Parent of Heresies. The Connection Between Deflections from Christian Faith and the Old Systems of Pagan Philosophy.

Chapter VII.—Pagan Philosophy the Parent of Heresies. The Connection Between Deflections from Christian Faith and the Old Systems of Pagan Philosophy.

These are “the doctrines” of men and “of demons” 1911 produced for itching ears of the spirit of this world’s wisdom: this the Lord called “foolishness,” 1912 and “chose the foolish things of the world” to confound even philosophy itself. For (philosophy) it is which is the material of the world’s wisdom, the rash interpreter of the nature and the dispensation of God. Indeed 1913 heresies are themselves instigated 1914 by philosophy. From this source came the Æons, and I known not what infinite forms, 1915 and the trinity of man 1916 in the system of Valentinus, who was of Plato’s school. From the same source came Marcion’s better god, with all his tranquillity; he came of the Stoics. Then, again, the opinion that the soul dies is held by the Epicureans; while the denial of the restoration of the body is taken from the aggregate school of all the philosophers; also, when matter is made equal to God, then you have the teaching of Zeno; and when any doctrine is alleged touching a god of fire, then Heraclitus comes in. The same subject-matter is discussed over and over again 1917 by the heretics and the philosophers; the same arguments 1918 are involved. Whence comes evil? Why is it permitted? What is the origin of man? and in what way does he come? Besides the question which Valentinus has very lately proposed—Whence comes God? Which he settles with the answer: From enthymesis and ectroma. 1919 Unhappy Aristotle! who invented for these men dialectics, the art of building up and pulling down; an art so evasive in its propositions, 1920 so far-fetched in its conjectures, so harsh, in its arguments, so productive of contentions—embarrassing 1921 even to itself, retracting everything, and really treating of 1922 nothing! Whence spring those “fables and endless genealogies,” 1923 and “unprofitable questions,” 1924 and “words which spread like a cancer?” 1925 From all these, when the apostle would restrain us, he expressly names philosophy as that which he would have us be on our guard against. Writing to the Colossians, he says, “See that no one beguile you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, and contrary to the wisdom of the Holy Ghost.” 1926 He had been at Athens, and had in his interviews (with its philosophers) become acquainted with that human wisdom which pretends to know the truth, whilst it only corrupts it, and is itself divided into its own manifold heresies, by the variety of its mutually repugnant sects. What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church? what between heretics and Christians? Our instruction comes from “the porch of Solomon,” 1927 who had himself taught that “the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart.” 1928 Away with 1929 all attempts to produce a mottled Christianity of Stoic, Platonic, and dialectic composition! We want no curious disputation after possessing Christ Jesus, no inquisition after enjoying the gospel! With our faith, we desire no further belief. For this is our palmary faith, that there is nothing which we ought to believe besides.

Footnotes

1 Tim. iv. 1.

1 Cor. 3:18, 25.

Denique.

Subornantur.

Formeæ, “Ideæ” (Oehler).

See Tertullian’s treatises, adversus Valentinum, xxv., and de Anima, xxi.; also Epiphanius, Hær. xxxi . 23.

Volutatur.

Retractatus.

“De enthymesi;” for this word Tertullian gives animationem (in his tract against Valentinus, ix.), which seems to mean, “the mind in operation.” (See the same treatise, x. xi.) With regard to the other word, Jerome (on Amos. iii.) adduces Valentinus as calling Christ ἔκτρωμα, that is, abortion.

Sententiis.

Molestam.

Tractaverit, in the sense of conclusively settling.

1 Tim. i. 4.

Tit. iii. 9.

2 Tim. ii. 17.

Col. ii. 8. The last clause, “præter providentiam Spiritus Sancti,” is either Tertullian’s reading, or his gloss of the apostle’s οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν—“not after Christ.”

Because in the beginning of the church the apostles taught in Solomon’s porch, Acts iii. 5.

Wisd. 1.1.

Viderint.