Tertullian — Against Marcion 1.11
And rightly, they say. For who is not so known to his own as to strangers? No one. I hold this voice too. For what sort of thing is it that something be alien to God? To whom nothing would be alien if anyone were—because this is God’s, that all things are his and all things pertain to him—lest he at once hear from us: what then has he to do with strangers?
But now it is enough that none is proved whose nothing is proved. For as the Creator from this is both God and undoubted God, because all things are his and nothing alien to him, so also another is for that reason not God, because all things are not his and therefore also alien.
Finally if the universe is the Creator’s, I already see no place for another god; all things are full and occupied by their author. If any space is vacant for some divinity among creatures, it will clearly be vacant for a false one; truth lies open to falsehood—why should such force of idols not somewhere receive Marcion’s god?
Therefore I also demand this from the Creator’s form: that his god ought to have been known from works of some proper world and man and age of his own, since even the world’s error presumed gods whom it sometimes confesses were men, because something from each seemed provided for life’s utilities—so also this from God’s form was believed divine: to institute or show what is apt and necessary for human affairs.
Or exhibit a reason worthy of God why he created nothing, if he is—because he would have created if he had been—under that prejudice by which our God is not otherwise manifest to be than because he created this whole; wanting to be known he still put on flesh’s disgrace and even admitted the Creator’s curse hung on a tree—how much more honestly he should have prefaced knowledge of himself by marks of his own work, and as superior knowing the lower god so equipped he ought to have founded even more outstanding works!
Latin
Et merito, inquiunt. quis enim non tam suis notus est quam extraneis? nemo. teneo et hanc uocem. quale est enim, ut aliquid extraneum deo sit? cui nihil extraneum esset, si quis esset, — quia dei hoc est, omnia illius esse et omnia ad illum pertinere — uel ne statim audiret a nobis: quid ergo illi cum extraneis? quod plenius suo loco audiet. at nunc satis est nullum probari cuius nihil probatur. sicut enim creator ex hoc et deus et indubitatus deus, quia omnia ipsius et nihil extraneum illi, ita et alius idcirco non deus, quia omnia non eius ideoque et extranea. denique si uniuersitas «rpatoris est, iam nec locum uideo dei alterius. plena et occupata sunt omnia suo auctore. si uacat aliquid spatii alicuius diuinitati in creaturis, plane falsae uacabit. patet mendacio ueritas. tanta uis idolorum cur non recipiat alicubi deum Marcionis? igitur et hoc ex forma creatoris expostulo, deum (eius) ex operibus cognosci debuisse alicuius proprii sui mundi et hominis et saeculi, quando etiam error orbis propterea deos praesumpserit, quos homines interdum confitetur. quoniam aliquid ab unoquoque prospectum uidetur utilitatibus et commodis uitae. ita et hoc ex forma dei creditum est diuinum esse, instituere uel demonstrare quid aptum et necessarium rebus humanis. adeo inde auctoritas accommodata si falsae diuinitati, unde praecesserat uerae, unam saltim cicerculam deus Marcionis propriam protulisse debuerat, ut nouus aliqui Triptolemus praedicaretur. aut exhibe rationem deo dignam, cur nihil condiderit, si est; quia condidisset, si fuisset, illo scilicet praeiudicio, quo et nostrum deum non alias manifestum est esse quam quia totum condidit hoc., semel enim praescriptio stabit non posse illos et deum confiteri creatorem et eum, quem uolunt aeque deum credi, non ad eius formam probare, quem et ipsi et omnes deum (agnoscunt,) ut, quando hoc ipso nemo creatorem deum dubitet. quia totum hoc condidit, hoc ipso nemo debeat credere deum et illum, qui nihil condidit, nisi ratio forte proferatur. duplex ista uideatur necesse est, ut aut noluerit condere quid aut non potuerit. tertium cessat sed non potuisse indignum deo est. noluisse an dignum, uolo inquirere. dic mihi, Marcion, uoluit deus tuus cognosci se quocumque in tempore an non? alio proposito et descendit et praedicauit et passus resurrexit quam uti cognosceretur? at sine dubio, si cognitus est, uoluit. nihil enim circa eum fieret, nisi uoluisset. qui ergo tantopere notitiam sui procuranit, ut in dedecore carnis exhiberetur, et quidem maiore, si falsae, - nam hoc turpius, si et mentitus est substantiam corporis — qui et maledictum in se creatoris admisit ligno suspensus, quanto honestius per aliqua propriae molitionis indicia cognitionem sui praestruxisset! maxime aduersus eum cognosci habens, apud quem ex operibus ab initio cognitus non erat. nam et quale est, ut creator quidem ignorans esse alium super se deum, ut uolunt Marcionitae, qui solum se etiam iurans adseuerabat, tantis operibus notitiam sui armauerit, quam potuerat non ita curasse secundum singularitatis suae praesumptionem, ille autem sublimior, sciens inferiorem deum tam instructum, nullam sibi prospexerit agnoscendo paraturam? quando etiam insigniora et superbiora opera debuisset condidisse, ut et deus ex operibus cognosceretur secundum creatorem et ex honestioribus potior et generosior creatore.