Modern-Day Marcionism – A Continuing Threat to Us All

The Apostle John (left) with Marcion of Sinope (Right)

In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus sent out 70 of His disciples to go before Him into the surrounding towns to proclaim the arrival of God’s Kingdom. These disciples were endowed with the power to heal sickness and cast out demons. Although the Bible does not name these followers, church history suggests that one of them, Philologus, became the Bishop of Sinope, a city in modern-day Turkey. Only four decades after Jesus’ ascension, it is believed that this Philologus had a son named Marcion. Though he became a leader in the church in Sinope and even founded a movement bearing his name, he was deemed a heretic and excommunicated from the Church around 144 AD. Yet, despite his rejection by the early church, some of his doctrines are still, albeit unknowingly, practiced today by Christians across various traditions. Are you one of them?

A major aspect of Marcionism is the selective belief in certain portions of Scripture while rejecting others—thus distorting the true character of God. Marcion held that the God of the Old Testament (Yahweh) was not the same as the God of the New Testament (Jesus). Simply put, he saw too much wrath and not enough grace in the Old Testament. Likewise, Marcion did not emphasize the death of Jesus as a substitutionary atonement but instead viewed Him as a mere exemplar of humanity. He even created his own canon of Scripture, which unsurprisingly included his own writings. In other words, Marcion’s understanding of God was shaped by a personal and severely amended hermeneutic that excluded the Old Testament and even parts of the New. Consequently, his flawed approach to interpreting Scripture led to a distorted view of God. Simply put, a poor theology is often the result of a poor hermeneutic.

Although Marcionism manifests in many theological camps today, I want to focus on one in particular. In line with John G. Machen’s work, a fundamental problem I observe among many theologically liberal Christians is their approach to Scripture. Generally speaking, their theology and worldview are narrowly based on the words of Jesus rather than the whole counsel of God’s Word. While this might sound harmless, it is anything but. For instance, Jesus never explicitly condemned homosexuality. Therefore, even though both the Old and New Testaments clearly denounce the practice, theologically liberal Christians often dismiss these passages as non-authoritative since Jesus Himself did not address the issue. Likewise, Jesus never stated that women should not be pastors, yet the Apostle Paul clearly did. In the minds of many liberal Christians, Paul’s teachings on this matter are not definitive. As expected, this theological perspective often leads to support for same-sex marriage and extreme egalitarianism within the church. This approach is modern-day Marcionism. Even when practiced with good intentions, it remains a flawed hermeneutic. Let me briefly address two major problems with this specific belief, which elevates certain portions of Scripture above others.

First, Jesus Himself affirmed the Hebrew Scriptures as God’s Word and declared that “all the Scriptures” concerned Him (Luke 24:27). He further confirmed this in Luke 24:44-48 and John 5:46.

Second, just because Jesus did not speak on a specific topic does not mean it is speculative or open to reinterpretation—especially when other portions of Scripture address it. As far as we know, Jesus never explicitly condemned spousal abuse. Does this mean we can entertain the idea that a man is biblically allowed to beat his wife? Likewise, Jesus never mentioned pedophilia, transgenderism, or whether biological males should share restrooms with biological females. Should we assume these modern issues are open for debate simply because they are not found in red ink? A theology based solely on Jesus’ words ignores 90% of the Bible. Depending on whether you measure by chapters or word count, the Gospels comprise only 7.5% to 10.3% of Scripture. While these examples may seem extreme, the principle remains clear.

While I believe modern-day Marcionism is most evident in liberal theology, it is something even those who believe in biblical inerrancy must guard against. Personally, because I disagree with Calvinism and Reformed Theology, I must be careful not to dismiss or misinterpret passages about predestination and election. I have had to wrestle with these concepts to synthesize Scripture faithfully. Similarly, Calvinists must grapple with the concepts of free will and God’s desire that all people be saved. Those inclined toward Universalism need to confront the doctrine of Hell. Protestants may need to reassess their views on confession and good works, while Catholics should reflect on God’s providential grace. And in their commendable desire to express nonjudgmental love, liberal Christians must contend with the Scriptures that address homosexuality and other prevailing sexual ethics.

If we pick and choose which parts of God’s Word to believe, we are practicing modern-day Marcionism. Because this is a convenient and comfortable form of Christianity—one that aligns with our modern, Western individualism—we are all susceptible. Yet, this ancient and still-present hermeneutic has never been historically orthodox. It only leads to a compromised and diminished version of Christianity, making it a continuing threat to us all.

But what do you think?

Micah Coate, President and Host of Salvation and Stuff