diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:16:16 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:16:16 -0700 |
| commit | 7f8cab0aafb9d38af6a3b6d8028008175fea039a (patch) | |
| tree | fc86b00a15b1faa5657fe87183016d45776c0959 /990-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '990-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 990-h/990-h.htm | 4082 |
1 files changed, 4082 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/990-h/990-h.htm b/990-h/990-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c068859 --- /dev/null +++ b/990-h/990-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,4082 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en"> + +<head> + +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" /> + +<title> +The Project Gutenberg E-text of A Theologico-Political Treatise—Part 2, +by Benedict of Spinoza +</title> + +<style type="text/css"> +body { color: black; + background: white; + margin-right: 10%; + margin-left: 10%; + font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; + text-align: justify } + +p {text-indent: 0% } + +p.noindent {text-indent: 0% } + +p.t1 {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 200%; + text-align: center } + +p.t2 {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 150%; + text-align: center } + +p.t3 {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 100%; + text-align: center } + +p.t3b {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 100%; + font-weight: bold; + text-align: center } + +p.t4 {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 80%; + text-align: center } + +p.t4b {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 80%; + font-weight: bold; + text-align: center } + +p.t5 {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 60%; + text-align: center } + +h1 { text-align: center } +h2 { text-align: center } +h3 { text-align: center } +h4 { text-align: center } +h5 { text-align: center } + +p.poem {text-indent: 0%; + margin-left: 10%; } + +p.contents {text-indent: -3%; + margin-left: 5% } + +p.thought {text-indent: 0% ; + letter-spacing: 4em ; + text-align: center } + +p.letter {text-indent: 0%; + margin-left: 10% ; + margin-right: 10% } + +p.footnote {text-indent: 0% ; + font-size: 80%; + margin-left: 10% ; + margin-right: 10% } + +p.transnote {text-indent: 0% ; + margin-left: 0% ; + margin-right: 0% } + +p.intro {font-size: 90% ; + text-indent: -5% ; + margin-left: 5% ; + margin-right: 0% } + +p.quote {text-indent: 4% ; + margin-left: 0% ; + margin-right: 0% } + +p.finis { font-size: larger ; + text-align: center ; + text-indent: 0% ; + margin-left: 0% ; + margin-right: 0% } + +</style> + +</head> + +<body> + + +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Theological-Political Treatise [Part II], by +Benedict of Spinoza + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most +other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions +whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of +the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at +www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have +to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. + +Title: A Theological-Political Treatise [Part II] + +Author: Benedict of Spinoza + +Translator: R. H. M. Elwes + +Posting Date: December 13, 2014 [EBook #990] +Release Date: July, 1997 +First Posted: July 16, 1997 +[Last updated: January 18, 2021] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THEOLOGICAL-POLITICAL TREATISE, 2 *** + + + + +Produced by Joseph B. Yesselman. HTML version by Al Haines. + + + + + +</pre> + + +<p class="t3"> +<br /><br /> +Sentence Numbers, shown thus (1), have been added by volunteer. +</p> + +<h1> +<br /><br /><br /> +A Theologico-Political Treatise +</h1> + +<p class="t3b"> +Part 2 - Chapters VI to X +</p> + +<p class="t3"> +by Baruch Spinoza +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3b"> +TABLE OF CONTENTS: +</p> + +<p><br /></p> + +<p class="t3b"> +<a href="#chap06">CHAPTER VI</a> - Of Miracles. +</p> + +<p> +Confused ideas of the vulgar on the subject. +</p> + +<p> +A miracle in the sense of a contravention of natural laws an absurdity. +</p> + +<p> +In the sense of an event, whose cause is unknown, +less edifying than an event better understood. +</p> + +<p> +God's providence identical with the course of nature. +How Scripture miracles may be interpreted. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3b"> +<a href="#chap07">CHAPTER VII</a> - Of the Interpretation of Scripture. +</p> + +<p> +Current systems of interpretation erroneous. +<br /><br /> +Only true system to interpret it by itself. +<br /><br /> +Reasons why this system cannot now be carried out in its entirety. +<br /><br /> +Yet these difficulties do not interfere with our understanding +the plainest and most important passages. +<br /><br /> +Rival systems examined - that of a supernatural +faculty being necessary - refuted. +<br /><br /> +That of Maimonides. +<br /><br /> +Refuted. +<br /><br /> +Traditions of the Pharisees and the Papists rejected. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3b"> +<a href="#chap08">CHAPTER VIII.</a> - Of the authorship of the Pentateuch,<br /> +and the other historical books of the Old Testament. +</p> + +<p> +The Pentateuch not written by Moses. +<br /><br /> +His actual writings distinct. +<br /><br /> +Traces of late authorship in the other historical books. +<br /><br /> +All the historical books the work of one man. +<br /><br /> +Probably Ezra. +<br /><br /> +Who compiled first the book of Deuteronomy. +<br /><br /> +And then a history, distinguishing the books by the names of their subjects. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3b"> +<a href="#chap09">CHAPTER IX.</a> - Other questions about these books. +</p> + +<p> +That these books have not been thoroughly revised and made to agree. +<br /><br /> +That there are many doubtful readings. +<br /><br /> +That the existing marginal notes are often such. +<br /><br /> +The other explanations of these notes refuted. +<br /><br /> +The hiatus. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3b"> +<a href="#chap10">CHAPTER X.</a> - An Examination of the remaining books of<br /> +the Old Testament according to the preceding method. +</p> + +<p> +Chronicles, Psalms, Proverbs. +<br /><br /> +Isaiah, Jeremiah. +<br /><br /> +Ezekiel, Hosea. +<br /><br /> +Other prophets, Jonah, Job. +<br /><br /> +Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther. +<br /><br /> +The author declines to undertake a similar detailed +examination of the New Testament. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3b"> +<a href="#endnotes">Author's Endnotes to the Treatise</a> +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /></p> + +<p><a id="chap06"></a></p> +<h3> +CHAPTER VI. - OF MIRACLES. +</h3> + +<p> +(1) As men are accustomed to call Divine the knowledge which transcends +human understanding, so also do they style Divine, or the work of God, +anything of which the cause is not generally known: for the masses think +that the power and providence of God are most clearly displayed by events +that are extraordinary and contrary to the conception they have formed of +nature, especially if such events bring them any profit or convenience: they +think that the clearest possible proof of God's existence is afforded when +nature, as they suppose, breaks her accustomed order, and consequently they +believe that those who explain or endeavour to understand phenomena or +miracles through their natural causes are doing away with God and His +providence. (2) They suppose, forsooth, that God is inactive so long as +nature works in her accustomed order, and vice versa, that the power of +nature and natural causes are idle so long as God is acting: thus they +imagine two powers distinct one from the other, the power of God and the +power of nature, though the latter is in a sense determined by God, or (as +most people believe now) created by Him. (3) What they mean by either, and +what they understand by God and nature they do not know, except that they +imagine the power of God to be like that of some royal potentate, and +nature's power to consist in force and energy. +</p> + +<p> +(4) The masses then style unusual phenomena, "miracles," and partly from +piety, partly for the sake of opposing the students of science, prefer to +remain in ignorance of natural causes, and only to hear of those things +which they know least, and consequently admire most. (5) In fact, the common +people can only adore God, and refer all things to His power by removing +natural causes, and conceiving things happening out of their due course, and +only admires the power of God when the power of nature is conceived of as in +subjection to it. +</p> + +<p> +(6) This idea seems to have taken its rise among the early Jews who saw the +Gentiles round them worshipping visible gods such as the sun, the moon, the +earth, water, air, &c., and in order to inspire the conviction that such +divinities were weak and inconstant, or changeable, told how they themselves +were under the sway of an invisible God, and narrated their miracles, +trying further to show that the God whom they worshipped arranged the whole +of nature for their sole benefit: this idea was so pleasing to humanity that +men go on to this day imagining miracles, so that they may believe +themselves God's favourites, and the final cause for which God created and +directs all things. +</p> + +<p> +(7) What pretension will not people in their folly advance! (8) They have no +single sound idea concerning either God or nature, they confound God's +decrees with human decrees, they conceive nature as so limited that they +believe man to be its chief part! (9) I have spent enough space in setting +forth these common ideas and prejudices concerning nature and miracles, but +in order to afford a regular demonstration I will show - +</p> + +<p> +(10) I. That nature cannot be contravened, but that she preserves a fixed +and immutable order, and at the same time I will explain what is meant by a +miracle. +</p> + +<p> +(11) II. That God's nature and existence, and consequently His providence +cannot be known from miracles, but that they can all be much better +perceived from the fixed and immutable order of nature. +</p> + +<p> +(12) III. That by the decrees and volitions, and consequently the providence +of God, Scripture (as I will prove by Scriptural examples) means nothing but +nature's order following necessarily from her eternal laws. +</p> + +<p> +(13) IV. Lastly, I will treat of the method of interpreting Scriptural +miracles, and the chief points to be noted concerning the narratives of +them. +</p> + +<p> +(14) Such are the principal subjects which will be discussed in this +chapter, and which will serve, I think, not a little to further the object +of this treatise. +</p> + +<p> +(15) Our first point is easily proved from what we showed in Chap. IV. about +Divine law - namely, that all that God wishes or determines involves eternal +necessity and truth, for we demonstrated that God's understanding is +identical with His will, and that it is the same thing to say that God wills +a thing, as to say, that He understands it; hence, as it follows +necessarily, from the Divine nature and perfection that God understands a +thing as it is, it follows no less necessarily that He wills it as it is. +(16) Now, as nothing is necessarily true save only by Divine decree, it is +plain that the universal laws of nature are decrees of God following from +the necessity and perfection of the Divine nature. (17) Hence, any event +happening in nature which contravened nature's universal laws, would +necessarily also contravene the Divine decree, nature, and understanding; or +if anyone asserted that God acts in contravention to the laws of nature, he, +ipso facto, would be compelled to assert that God acted against His own +nature - an evident absurdity. (18) One might easily show from the same +premises that the power and efficiency of nature are in themselves the +Divine power and efficiency, and that the Divine power is the very essence +of God, but this I gladly pass over for the present. +</p> + +<p> +(19) Nothing, then, comes to pass in nature (N.B. I do not mean here by +"nature," merely matter and its modifications, but infinite other things +besides matter.) in contravention to her universal laws, nay, everything +agrees with them and follows from them, for whatsoever comes to pass, comes +to pass by the will and eternal decree of God; that is, as we have just +pointed out, whatever comes to pass, comes to pass according to laws and +rules which involve eternal necessity and truth; nature, therefore, always +observes laws and rules which involve eternal necessity and truth, although +they may not all be known to us, and therefore she keeps a fixed and mutable +order. (20) Nor is there any sound reason for limiting the power and +efficacy of nature, and asserting that her laws are fit for certain +purposes, but not for all; for as the efficacy and power of nature, are the +very efficacy and power of God, and as the laws and rules of nature are the +decrees of God, it is in every way to be believed that the power of nature +is infinite, and that her laws are broad enough to embrace everything +conceived by, the Divine intellect; the only alternative is to assert that +God has created nature so weak, and has ordained for her laws so barren, +that He is repeatedly compelled to come afresh to her aid if He wishes that +she should be preserved, and that things should happen as He desires: a +conclusion, in my opinion, very far removed from reason. (21) Further, as +nothing happens in nature which does not follow from her laws, and as her +laws embrace everything conceived by the Divine intellect, and lastly, as +nature preserves a fixed and immutable order; it most clearly follows that +miracles are only intelligible as in relation to human opinions, and merely +mean events of which the natural cause cannot be explained by a reference to +any ordinary occurrence, either by us, or at any rate, by the writer and +narrator of the miracle. +</p> + +<p> +(22) We may, in fact, say that a miracle is an event of which the causes +annot be explained by the natural reason through a reference to ascertained +workings of nature; but since miracles were wrought according to the +understanding of the masses, who are wholly ignorant of the workings of +nature, it is certain that the ancients took for a miracle whatever they +could not explain by the method adopted by the unlearned in such cases, +namely, an appeal to the memory, a recalling of something similar, which is +ordinarily regarded without wonder; for most people think they sufficiently +understand a thing when they have ceased to wonder at it. (23) The ancients, +then, and indeed most men up to the present day, had no other criterion for +a miracle; hence we cannot doubt that many things are narrated in Scripture +as miracles of which the causes could easily be explained by reference to +ascertained workings of nature. (24) We have hinted as much in Chap. II., in +speaking of the sun standing still in the time of Joshua, and to say on the +subject when we come to treat of the interpretation of miracles later on in +this chapter. +</p> + +<p> +(25) It is now time to pass on to the second point, and show that we cannot +gain an understanding of God's essence, existence, or providence by means of +miracles, but that these truths are much better perceived through the fixed +and immutable order of nature. (26) I thus proceed with the demonstration. +(27) As God's existence is not self-evident (6) it must necessarily be +inferred from ideas so firmly and incontrovertibly true, that no power can +be postulated or conceived sufficient to impugn them. (28) They ought +certainly so to appear to us when we infer from them God's existence, if we +wish to place our conclusion beyond the reach of doubt; for if we could +conceive that such ideas could be impugned by any power whatsoever, we +should doubt of their truth, we should doubt of our conclusion, namely, of +God's existence, and should never be able to be certain of anything. (29) +Further, we know that nothing either agrees with or is contrary to nature, +unless it agrees with or is contrary to these primary ideas; wherefore if we +would conceive that anything could be done in nature by any power whatsoever +which would be contrary to the laws of nature, it would also be contrary to +our primary ideas, and we should have either to reject it as absurd, or else +to cast doubt (as just shown) on our primary ideas, and consequently on the +existence of God, and on everything howsoever perceived. (30) Therefore +miracles, in the sense of events contrary to the laws of nature, so far from +demonstrating to us the existence of God, would, on the contrary, lead us to +doubt it, where, otherwise, we might have been absolutely certain of it, as +knowing that nature follows a fixed and immutable order. +</p> + +<p> +(31) Let us take miracle as meaning that which cannot be explained through +natural causes. (32) This may be interpreted in two senses: either as that +which has natural causes, but cannot be examined by the human intellect; or +as that which has no cause save God and God's will. (33) But as all things +which come to pass through natural causes, come to pass also solely +through the will and power of God, it comes to this, that a miracle, whether +it has natural causes or not, is a result which cannot be explained by its +cause, that is a phenomenon which surpasses human understanding; but from +such a phenomenon, and certainly from a result surpassing our understanding, +we can gain no knowledge. (34) For whatsoever we understand clearly and +distinctly should be plain to us either in itself or by means of something +else clearly and distinctly understood; wherefore from a miracle or a +phenomenon which we cannot understand, we can gain no knowledge of God's +essence, or existence, or indeed anything about God or nature; whereas when +we know that all things are ordained and ratified by God, that the +operations of nature follow from the essence of God, and that the laws of +nature are eternal decrees and volitions of God, we must perforce conclude +that our knowledge of God, and of God's will increases in proportion to our +knowledge and clear understanding of nature, as we see how she depends on +her primal cause, and how she works according to eternal law. (35) Wherefore +so far as our understanding goes, those phenomena which we clearly and +distinctly understand have much better right to be called works of God, and +to be referred to the will of God than those about which we are entirely +ignorant, although they appeal powerfully to the imagination, and compel +men's admiration. +</p> + +<p> +(36) It is only phenomena that we clearly and distinctly understand, which +heighten our knowledge of God, and most clearly indicate His will and +decrees. (37) Plainly, they are but triflers who, when they cannot explain a +thing, run back to the will of God; this is, truly, a ridiculous way of +expressing ignorance. (38) Again, even supposing that some conclusion could +be drawn from miracles, we could not possibly infer from them the existence +of God: for a miracle being an event under limitations is the expression of +a fixed and limited power; therefore we could not possibly infer from an +effect of this kind the existence of a cause whose power is infinite, but at +the utmost only of a cause whose power is greater than that of the said +effect. (39) I say at the utmost, for a phenomenon may be the result of many +concurrent causes, and its power may be less than the power of the sum of +such causes, but far greater than that of any one of them taken +individually. (40) On the other hand, the laws of nature, as we have +shown, extend over infinity, and are conceived by us as, after a fashion, +eternal, and nature works in accordance with them in a fixed and immutable +order; therefore, such laws indicate to us in a certain degree the infinity, +the eternity, and the immutability of God. +</p> + +<p> +(40) We may conclude, then, that we cannot gain knowledge of the existence +and providence of God by means of miracles, but that we can far better infer +them from the fixed and immutable order of nature. (41) By miracle, I here +mean an event which surpasses, or is thought to surpass, human +comprehension: for in so far as it is supposed to destroy or interrupt the +order of nature or her laws, it not only can give us no knowledge of God, +but, contrariwise, takes away that which we naturally have, and makes us +doubt of God and everything else. +</p> + +<p> +(42) Neither do I recognize any difference between an event against the laws +of nature and an event beyond the laws of nature (that is, according to +some, an event which does not contravene nature, though she is inadequate to +produce or effect it) - for a miracle is wrought in, and not beyond nature, +though it may be said in itself to be above nature, and, therefore, +must necessarily interrupt the order of nature, which otherwise we conceive +of as fixed and unchangeable, according to God's decrees. (43) If, +therefore, anything should come to pass in nature which does not follow from +her laws, it would also be in contravention to the order which God has +established in nature for ever through universal natural laws: it would, +therefore, be in contravention to God's nature and laws, and, consequently, +belief in it would throw doubt upon everything, and lead to Atheism. +</p> + +<p> +(44) I think I have now sufficiently established my second point, so that we +can again conclude that a miracle, whether in contravention to, or beyond, +nature, is a mere absurdity; and, therefore, that what is meant in Scripture +by a miracle can only be a work of nature, which surpasses, or is believed +to surpass, human comprehension. (45) Before passing on to my third point, I +will adduce Scriptural authority for my assertion that God cannot be known +from miracles. (46) Scripture nowhere states the doctrine openly, but it can +readily be inferred from several passages. (47) Firstly, that in which Moses +commands (Deut. xiii.) that a false prophet should be put to death, even +though he work miracles: "If there arise a prophet among you, and giveth +thee a sign or wonder, and the sign or wonder come to pass, saying, Let us +go after other gods . . . thou shalt not hearken unto the voice of that +prophet; for the Lord your God proveth you, and that prophet shall be put to +death." (48) From this it clearly follows that miracles could be wrought +even by false prophets; and that, unless men are honestly endowed with the +true knowledge and love of God, they may be as easily led by miracles to +follow false gods as to follow the true God; for these words are added: "For +the Lord your God tempts you, that He may know whether you love Him with all +your heart and with all your mind." +</p> + +<p> +(49) Further, the Israelites, from all their miracles, were unable to form a +sound conception of God, as their experience testified: for when they had +persuaded themselves that Moses had departed from among them, they +petitioned Aaron to give them visible gods; and the idea of God they had +formed as the result of all their miracles was - a calf! +</p> + +<p> +(50) Asaph, though he had heard of so many miracles, yet doubted of the +providence of God, and would have turned himself from the true way, if he +had not at last come to understand true blessedness. (See Ps. lxxxiii.) (51) +Solomon, too, at a time when the Jewish nation was at the height of its +prosperity, suspects that all things happen by chance. (See Eccles. iii:19, +20, 21; and chap. ix:2, 3, &c.) +</p> + +<p> +(52) Lastly, nearly all the prophets found it very hard to reconcile the +order of nature and human affairs with the conception they had formed of +God's providence, whereas philosophers who endeavour to understand things by +clear conceptions of them, rather than by miracles, have always found the +task extremely easy - at least, such of them as place true happiness solely +in virtue and peace of mind, and who aim at obeying nature, rather than +being obeyed by her. (53) Such persons rest assured that God directs nature +according to the requirements of universal laws, not according to the +requirements of the particular laws of human nature, and trial, therefore, +God's scheme comprehends, not only the human race, but the whole of nature. +</p> + +<p> +(54) It is plain, then, from Scripture itself, that miracles can give no +knowledge of God, nor clearly teach us the providence of God. (55) As to the +frequent statements in Scripture, that God wrought miracles to make Himself +plain to man - as in Exodus x:2, where He deceived the Egyptians, and gave +signs of Himself, that the Israelites might know that He was God,- it does +not, therefore, follow that miracles really taught this truth, but only that +the Jews held opinions which laid them easily open to conviction by +miracles. (56) We have shown in Chap. II. that the reasons assigned by the +prophets, or those which are formed from revelation, are not assigned +in accordance with ideas universal and common to all, but in accordance with +the accepted doctrines, however absurd, and with the opinions of those to +whom the revelation was given, or those whom the Holy Spirit wished to +convince. +</p> + +<p> +(57) This we have illustrated by many Scriptural instances, and can further +cite Paul, who to the Greeks was a Greek, and to the Jews a Jew. (58) But +although these miracles could convince the Egyptians and Jews from their +standpoint, they could not give a true idea and knowledge of God, but only +cause them to admit that there was a Deity more powerful than anything known +to them, and that this Deity took special care of the Jews, who had just +then an unexpectedly happy issue of all their affairs. (59) They could not +teach them that God cares equally for all, for this can be taught only by +philosophy: the Jews, and all who took their knowledge of God's providence +from the dissimilarity of human conditions of life and the inequalities of +fortune, persuaded themselves that God loved the Jews above all men, though +they did not surpass their fellows in true human perfection. +</p> + +<p> +(60) I now go on to my third point, and show from Scripture that the decrees +and mandates of God, and consequently His providence, are merely the order +of nature - that is, when Scripture describes an event as accomplished by +God or God's will, we must understand merely that it was in accordance with +the law and order of nature, not, as most people believe, that nature had +for a season ceased to act, or that her order was temporarily interrupted. +(61) But Scripture does not directly teach matters unconnected with its +doctrine, wherefore it has no care to explain things by their natural +causes, nor to expound matters merely speculative. (62) Wherefore our +conclusion must be gathered by inference from those Scriptural narratives +which happen to be written more at length and circumstantially than usual. +(63) Of these I will cite a few. +</p> + +<p> +(64) In the first book of Samuel, ix:15, 16, it is related that God revealed +to Samuel that He would send Saul to him, yet God did not send Saul to +Samuel as people are wont to send one man to another. (65) His "sending" was +merely the ordinary course of nature. (66) Saul was looking for the asses he +had lost, and was meditating a return home without them, when, at the +suggestion of his servant, he went to the prophet Samuel, to learn from him +where he might find them. (67) From no part of the narrative does it appear +that Saul had any command from God to visit Samuel beyond this natural +motive. +</p> + +<p> +(68) In Psalm cv. 24 it is said that God changed the hearts of the +Egyptians, so that they hated the Israelites. (69) This was evidently a +natural change, as appears from Exodus, chap.i., where we find no slight +reason for the Egyptians reducing the Israelites to slavery. +</p> + +<p> +(70) In Genesis ix:13, God tells Noah that He will set His bow in the cloud; +this action of God's is but another way of expressing the refraction and +reflection which the rays of the sun are subjected to in drops of water. +</p> + +<p> +(71) In Psalm cxlvii:18, the natural action and warmth of the wind, by which +hoar frost and snow are melted, are styled the word of the Lord, and in +verse 15 wind and cold are called the commandment and word of God. +</p> + +<p> +(72) In Psalm civ:4, wind and fire are called the angels and ministers of +God, and various other passages of the same sort are found in Scripture, +clearly showing that the decree, commandment, fiat, and word of God are +merely expressions for the action and order of nature. +</p> + +<p> +(73) Thus it is plain that all the events narrated in Scripture came to pass +naturally, and are referred directly to God because Scripture, as we have +shown, does not aim at explaining things by their natural causes, but only +at narrating what appeals to the popular imagination, and doing so in the +manner best calculated to excite wonder, and consequently to impress the +minds of the masses with devotion. (74) If, therefore, events are found in +the Bible which we cannot refer to their causes, nay, which seem entirely to +contradict the order of nature, we must not come to a stand, but assuredly +believe that whatever did really happen happened naturally. (75) This view +is confirmed by the fact that in the case of every miracle there were many +attendant circumstances, though these were not always related, especially +where the narrative was of a poetic character. +</p> + +<p> +(76) The circumstances of the miracles clearly show, I maintain, that +natural causes were needed. (77) For instance, in order to infect the +Egyptians with blains, it was necessary that Moses should scatter ashes in +the air (Exod. ix: 10); the locusts also came upon the land of Egypt by a +command of God in accordance with nature, namely, by an east wind blowing +for a whole day and night; and they departed by a very strong west wind +(Exod. x:14, 19). (78) By a similar Divine mandate the sea opened a way for +the Jews (Exo. xiv:21), namely, by an east wind which blew very strongly all +night. +</p> + +<p> +(79) So, too, when Elisha would revive the boy who was believed to be dead, +he was obliged to bend over him several times until the flesh of the child +waxed warm, and at last he opened his eyes (2 Kings iv:34, 35). +</p> + +<p> +(80) Again, in John's Gospel (chap. ix.) certain acts are mentioned as +performed by Christ preparatory to healing the blind man, and there are +numerous other instances showing that something further than the absolute +fiat of God is required for working a miracle. +</p> + +<p> +(81) Wherefore we may believe that, although the circumstances attending +miracles are not related always or in full detail, yet a miracle was never +performed without them. +</p> + +<p> +(82) This is confirmed by Exodus xiv:27, where it is simply stated that +"Moses stretched forth his hand, and the waters of the sea returned to their +strength in the morning," no mention being made of a wind; but in the song +of Moses (Exod. xv:10) we read, "Thou didst blow with Thy wind (i.e. with a +very strong wind), and the sea covered them." (83) Thus the attendant +circumstance is omitted in the history, and the miracle is thereby enhanced. +</p> + +<p> +(84) But perhaps someone will insist that we find many things in Scripture +which seem in nowise explicable by natural causes, as for instance, that the +sins of men and their prayers can be the cause of rain and of the earth's +fertility, or that faith can heal the blind, and so on. (85) But I think +I have already made sufficient answer: I have shown that Scripture does not +explain things by their secondary causes, but only narrates them in the +order and the style which has most power to move men, and especially +uneducated men, to devotion; and therefore it speaks inaccurately of God and +of events, seeing that its object is not to convince the reason, but to +attract and lay hold of the imagination. (86) If the Bible were to describe +the destruction of an empire in the style of political historians, the +masses would remain unstirred, whereas the contrary is the case when it +adopts the method of poetic description, and refers all things +immediately to God. (87) When, therefore, the Bible says that the earth is +barren because of men's sins, or that the blind were healed by faith, we +ought to take no more notice than when it says that God is angry at men's +sins, that He is sad, that He repents of the good He has promised and done; +or that on seeing a sign he remembers something He had promised, and other +similar expressions, which are either thrown out poetically or related +according to the opinion and prejudices of the writer. +</p> + +<p> +(88) We may, then, be absolutely certain that every event which is truly +described in Scripture necessarily happened, like everything else, according +to natural laws; and if anything is there set down which can be proved in +set terms to contravene the order of nature, or not to be deducible +therefrom, we must believe it to have been foisted into the sacred writings +by irreligious hands; for whatsoever is contrary to nature is also contrary +to reason, and whatsoever is contrary to reason is absurd, and, ipso facto, +to be rejected. +</p> + +<p> +(89) There remain some points concerning the interpretation of miracles to +be noted, or rather to be recapitulated, for most of them have been already +stated. (90) These I proceed to discuss in the fourth division of my +subject, and I am led to do so lest anyone should, by wrongly interpreting a +miracle, rashly suspect that he has found something in Scripture contrary to +human reason. +</p> + +<p> +(91) It is very rare for men to relate an event simply as it happened, +without adding any element of their own judgment. (92) When they see or hear +anything new, they are, unless strictly on their guard, so occupied with +their own preconceived opinions that they perceive something quite +different from the plain facts seen or heard, especially if such facts +surpass the comprehension of the beholder or hearer, and, most of all, if he +is interested in their happening in a given way. +</p> + +<p> +(93) Thus men relate in chronicles and histories their own opinions rather +than actual events, so that one and the same event is so differently related +by two men of different opinions, that it seems like two separate +occurrences; and, further, it is very easy from historical chronicles to +gather the personal opinions of the historian. +</p> + +<p> +(94) I could cite many instances in proof of this from the writings both of +natural philosophers and historians, but I will content myself with one only +from Scripture, and leave the reader to judge of the rest. +</p> + +<p> +(95) In the time of Joshua the Hebrews held the ordinary opinion that the +sun moves with a daily motion, and that the earth remains at rest; to this +preconceived opinion they adapted the miracle which occurred during their +battle with the five kings. (96) They did not simply relate that that day +was longer than usual, but asserted that the sun and moon stood still, or +ceased from their motion - a statement which would be of great service to +them at that time in convincing and proving by experience to the Gentiles, +who worshipped the sun, that the sun was under the control of another deity +who could compel it to change its daily course. (97) Thus, partly through +religious motives, partly through preconceived opinions, they conceived of +and related the occurrence as something quite different from what really +happened. +</p> + +<p> +(98) Thus in order to interpret the Scriptural miracles and understand from +the narration of them how they really happened, it is necessary to know the +opinions of those who first related them, and have recorded them for us in +writing, and to distinguish such opinions from the actual impression made +upon their senses, otherwise we shall confound opinions and judgments with +the actual miracle as it really occurred: nay, further, we shall confound +actual events with symbolical and imaginary ones. (99) For many things are +narrated in Scripture as real, and were believed to be real, which were in +fact only symbolical and imaginary. (100) As, for instance, that God came +down from heaven (Exod. xix:28, Deut. v:28), and that Mount Sinai smoked +because God descended upon it surrounded with fire; or, again that Elijah +ascended into heaven in a chariot of fire, with horses of fire; all these +things were assuredly merely symbols adapted to the opinions of those who +have handed them down to us as they were represented to them, namely, as +real. (101) All who have any education know that God has no right hand nor +left; that He is not moved nor at rest, nor in a particular place, but that +He is absolutely infinite and contains in Himself all perfections. +</p> + +<p> +(102) These things, I repeat, are known to whoever judges of things by the +perception of pure reason, and not according as his imagination is affected +by his outward senses. (103) Following the example of the masses who imagine +a bodily Deity, holding a royal court with a throne on the convexity of +heaven, above the stars, which are believed to be not very, far off from the +earth. +</p> + +<p> +(104) To these and similar opinions very many narrations in Scripture are +adapted, and should not, therefore, be mistaken by philosophers for +realities. +</p> + +<p> +(105) Lastly, in order to understand, in the case of miracles, what actually +took place, we ought to be familiar with Jewish phrases and metaphors; +anyone who did not make sufficient allowance for these, would be continually +seeing miracles in Scripture where nothing of the kind is intended by the +writer; he would thus miss the knowledge not only of what actually happened, +but also of the mind of the writers of the sacred text. (106) For instance, +Zechariah speaking of some future war says (chap. xiv:7): "It shall be one +day which shall be known to the Lord, not day, nor night; but at even time +it shall be light." In these words he seems to predict a great miracle, yet +he only means that the battle will be doubtful the whole day, that the issue +will be known only to God, but that in the evening they will gain the +victory: the prophets frequently used to predict victories and defeats of +the nations in similar phrases. (107) Thus Isaiah, describing the +destruction of Babylon, says (chap. xiii.): "The stars of heaven, and the +constellations thereof, shall not give their light; the sun shall be +darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to +shine." (108) Now I suppose no one imagines that at the destruction of +Babylon these phenomena actually occurred any more than that which the +prophet adds, "For I will make the heavens to tremble, and remove the earth +out of her place." +</p> + +<p> +(109) So, too, Isaiah in foretelling to the Jews that they would return from +Babylon to Jerusalem in safety, and would not suffer from thirst on their +journey, says: "And they thirsted not when He led them through the deserts; +He caused the waters to flow out of the rocks for them; He clave the rocks, +and the waters gushed out." (110) These words merely mean that the Jews, +like other people, found springs in the desert, at which they quenched their +thirst; for when the Jews returned to Jerusalem with the consent of Cyrus, +it is admitted that no similar miracles befell them. +</p> + +<p> +(111) In this way many occurrences in the Bible are to be regarded merely as +Jewish expressions. (112) There is no need for me to go through them in +detail; but I will call attention generally to the fact that the Jews +employed such phrases not only rhetorically, but also, and indeed chiefly, +from devotional motives. (113) Such is the reason for the substitution of +"bless God" for "curse God" in 1 Kings xxi:10, and Job ii:9, and for all +things being referred to God, whence it appears that the Bible seems to +relate nothing but miracles, even when speaking of the most ordinary +occurrences, as in the examples given above. +</p> + +<p> +(114) Hence we must believe that when the Bible says that the Lord hardened +Pharaoh's heart, it only means that Pharaoh was obstinate; when it says that +God opened the windows of heaven, it only means that it rained very hard, +and so on. (115) When we reflect on these peculiarities, and also on the +fact that most things are related very shortly, with very little details and +almost in abridgments, we shall see that there is hardly anything in +Scripture which can be proved contrary to natural reason, while, on the +other hand, many things which before seemed obscure, will after a little +consideration be understood and easily explained. +</p> + +<p> +(116) I think I have now very clearly explained all that I proposed to +explain, but before I finish this chapter I would call attention to the fact +that I have adopted a different method in speaking of miracles to that which +I employed in treating of prophecy. (117) Of prophecy I have asserted +nothing which could not be inferred from promises revealed in Scripture, +whereas in this chapter I have deduced my conclusions solely from the +principles ascertained by the natural light of reason. (118) I have +proceeded in this way advisedly, for prophecy, in that it surpasses human +knowledge, is a purely theological question; therefore, I knew that I could +not make any assertions about it, nor learn wherein it consists, except +through deductions from premises that have been revealed; therefore I was +compelled to collate the history of prophecy, and to draw therefrom certain +conclusions which would teach me, in so far as such teaching is possible, +the nature and properties of the gift. (119) But in the case of miracles, as +our inquiry is a question purely philosophical (namely, whether anything can +happen which contravenes or does not follow from the laws of nature), I was +not under any such necessity: I therefore thought it wiser to unravel the +difficulty through premises ascertained and thoroughly known by the +natural light of reason. I say I thought it wiser, for I could also +easily have solved the problem merely from the doctrines and +fundamental principles of Scripture: in order that everyone may +acknowledge this, I will briefly show how it could be done. +</p> + +<p> +(120) Scripture makes the general assertion in several passages that +nature's course is fixed and unchangeable. (121) In Ps. cxlviii:6, for +instance, and Jer. xxxi:35. (122) The wise man also, in Eccles. i:10, +distinctly teaches that "there is nothing new under the sun," and in verses +11, 12, illustrating the same idea, he adds that although something +occasionally happens which seems new, it is not really new, but "hath been +already of old time, which was before us, whereof there is no remembrance, +neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with +those that come after." (123) Again in chap. iii:11, he says, "God hath made +everything beautiful in his time," and immediately afterwards adds, "I know +that whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever; nothing can be put to it, +nor anything taken from it." +</p> + +<p> +(124) Now all these texts teach most distinctly that nature preserves a +fixed and unchangeable order, and that God in all ages, known and unknown, +has been the same; further, that the laws of nature are so perfect, that +nothing can be added thereto nor taken therefrom; and, lastly, that miracles +only appear as something new because of man's ignorance. +</p> + +<p> +(125) Such is the express teaching of Scripture: nowhere does Scripture +assert that anything happens which contradicts, or cannot follow from the +laws of nature; and, therefore, we should not attribute to it such a +doctrine. +</p> + +<p> +(126) To these considerations we must add, that miracles require causes and +attendant circumstances, and that they follow, not from some mysterious +royal power which the masses attribute to God, but from the Divine rule and +decree, that is (as we have shown from Scripture itself) from the laws and +order of nature; lastly, that miracles can be wrought even by false +prophets, as is proved from Deut. xiii. and Matt. xxiv:24. +</p> + +<p> +(127) The conclusion, then, that is most plainly put before us is, that +miracles were natural occurrences, and must therefore be so explained as to +appear neither new (in the words of Solomon) nor contrary to nature, but, as +far as possible, in complete agreement with ordinary events. (128) This can +easily be done by anyone, now that I have set forth the rules drawn from +Scripture. (129) Nevertheless, though I maintain that Scripture teaches this +doctrine, I do not assert that it teaches it as a truth necessary to +salvation, but only that the prophets were in agreement with ourselves on +the point; therefore everyone is free to think on the subject as he +likes, according as he thinks it best for himself, and most likely to +conduce to the worship of God and to singlehearted religion. +</p> + +<p> +(130) This is also the opinion of Josephus, for at the conclusion of the +second book of his "Antiquities," he writes: Let no man think this story +incredible of the sea's dividing to save these people, for we find it in +ancient records that this hath been seen before, whether by God's +extraordinary will or by the course of nature it is indifferent. (131) The +same thing happened one time to the Macedonians, under the command of +Alexander, when for want of another passage the Pamphylian Sea divided to +make them way; God's Providence making use of Alexander at that time as His +instrument for destroying the Persian Empire. (132) This is attested by all +the historians who have pretended to write the Life of that Prince. (133) +But people are at liberty to think what they please." +</p> + +<p> +(134) Such are the words of Josephus, and such is his opinion on faith in +miracles. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /></p> + +<p><a id="chap07"></a></p> +<h3> +CHAPTER VII. - OF THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE +</h3> + +<p> +(1) When people declare, as all are ready to do, that the Bible is the Word +of God teaching man true blessedness and the way of salvation, they +evidently do not mean what they say; for the masses take no pains at all to +live according to Scripture, and we see most people endeavouring to hawk +about their own commentaries as the word of God, and giving their best +efforts, under the guise of religion, to compelling others to think as they +do: we generally see, I say, theologians anxious to learn how to wring their +inventions and sayings out of the sacred text, and to fortify them with +Divine authority. (2) Such persons never display, less scruple or +more zeal than when they, are interpreting Scripture or the mind of the Holy +Ghost; if we ever see them perturbed, it is not that they fear to attribute +some error to the Holy Spirit, and to stray from the right path, but that +they are afraid to be convicted of error by others, and thus to overthrow +and bring into contempt their own authority. (3) But if men really believed +what they verbally testify of Scripture, they would adopt quite a different +plan of life: their minds would not be agitated by so many contentions, nor +so many hatreds, and they would cease to be excited by such a blind and rash +passion for interpreting the sacred writings, and excogitating novelties +in religion. (4) On the contrary, they would not dare to adopt, as the +teaching of Scripture, anything which they could not plainly deduce +therefrom: lastly, those sacrilegious persons who have dared, in several +passages, to interpolate the Bible, would have shrunk from so great a +crime, and would have stayed their sacrilegious hands. +</p> + +<p> +(5) Ambition and unscrupulousness have waxed so powerful, that religion is +thought to consist, not so much in respecting the writings of the Holy +Ghost, as in defending human commentaries, so that religion is no longer +identified with charity, but with spreading discord and propagating +insensate hatred disguised under the name of zeal for the Lord, and eager +ardour. +</p> + +<p> +(6) To these evils we must add superstition, which teaches men to despise +reason and nature, and only to admire and venerate that which is repugnant +to both: whence it is not wonderful that for the sake of increasing the +admiration and veneration felt for Scripture, men strive to explain it so as +to make it appear to contradict, as far as possible, both one and the other: +thus they dream that most profound mysteries lie hid in the Bible, and weary +themselves out in the investigation of these absurdities, to the neglect of +what is useful. (7) Every result of their diseased imagination they +attribute to the Holy Ghost, and strive to defend with the utmost zeal and +passion; for it is an observed fact that men employ their reason to defend +conclusions arrived at by reason, but conclusions arrived at by the passions +are defended by the passions. +</p> + +<p> +(8) If we would separate ourselves from the crowd and escape from +theological prejudices, instead of rashly accepting human commentaries for +Divine documents, we must consider the true method of interpreting Scripture +and dwell upon it at some length: for if we remain in ignorance of this we +cannot know, certainly, what the Bible and the Holy Spirit wish to teach. +</p> + +<p> +(9)I may sum up the matter by saying that the method of interpreting +Scripture does not widely differ from the method of interpreting nature - in +fact, it is almost the same. (10) For as the interpretation of nature +consists in the examination of the history of nature, and therefrom +deducing definitions of natural phenomena on certain fixed axioms, so +Scriptural interpretation proceeds by the examination of Scripture, and +inferring the intention of its authors as a legitimate conclusion from its +fundamental principles. (11) By working in this manner everyone will +always advance without danger of error - that is, if they admit no +principles for interpreting Scripture, and discussing its contents save such +as they find in Scripture itself - and will be able with equal security to +discuss what surpasses our understanding, and what is known by the natural +light of reason. +</p> + +<p> +(12) In order to make clear that such a method is not only correct, but is +also the only one advisable, and that it agrees with that employed in +interpreting nature, I must remark that Scripture very often treats of +matters which cannot be deduced from principles known to reason: for it is +chiefly made up of narratives and revelation: the narratives generally +contain miracles - that is, as we have shown in the last chapter, relations +of extraordinary natural occurrences adapted to the opinions and judgment of +the historians who recorded them: the revelations also were adapted to the +opinions of the prophets, as we showed in Chap. II., and in themselves +surpassed human comprehension. (13) Therefore the knowledge of all these - +that is, of nearly the whole contents of Scripture, must be sought from +Scripture alone, even as the knowledge of nature is sought from nature. (14) +As for the moral doctrines which are also contained in the Bible, they may +be demonstrated from received axioms, but we cannot prove in the same manner +that Scripture intended to teach them, this can only be learned from +Scripture itself. +</p> + +<p> +(15) If we would bear unprejudiced witness to the Divine origin of +Scripture, we must prove solely on its own authority that it teaches true +moral doctrines, for by such means alone can its Divine origin be +demonstrated: we have shown that the certitude of the prophets depended +chiefly on their having minds turned towards what is just and good, +therefore we ought to have proof of their possessing this quality before we +repose faith in them. (16) From miracles God's divinity cannot be proved, as +I have already shown, and need not now repeat, for miracles could be +wrought by false prophets. (17) Wherefore the Divine origin of Scripture +must consist solely in its teaching true virtue. (18) But we must come to +our conclusion simply on Scriptural grounds, for if we were unable to do so +we could not, unless strongly prejudiced accept the Bible and bear +witness to its Divine origin. +</p> + +<p> +(19) Our knowledge of Scripture must then be looked for in Scripture only. +</p> + +<p> +(20) Lastly, Scripture does not give us definition of things any more than +nature does: therefore, such definitions must be sought in the latter case +from the diverse workings of nature; in the former case, from the various +narratives about the given subject which occur in the Bible. +</p> + +<p> +(21) The universal rule, then, in interpreting Scripture is to accept +nothing as an authoritative Scriptural statement which we do not perceive +very clearly when we examine it in the light of its history. (22) What I +mean by its history, and what should be the chief points elucidated, I will +now explain. +</p> + +<p> +(23) The history of a Scriptural statement comprises - +</p> + +<p> +(23) I. The nature and properties of the language in which the books of the +Bible were written, and in which their authors were, accustomed to speak. +(24) We shall thus be able to investigate every expression by comparison +with common conversational usages. +</p> + +<p> +(25) Now all the writers both of the Old Testament and the New were Hebrews: +therefore, a knowledge of the Hebrew language is before all things +necessary, not only for the comprehension of the Old Testament, which was +written in that tongue, but also of the New: for although the latter was +published in other languages, yet its characteristics are Hebrew. +</p> + +<p> +(26) II. An analysis of each book and arrangement of its contents under +heads; so that we may have at hand the various texts which treat of a given +subject. (27) Lastly, a note of all the passages which are ambiguous or +obscure, or which seem mutually contradictory. +</p> + +<p> +(28) I call passages clear or obscure according as their meaning is inferred +easily or with difficulty in relation to the context, not according as their +truth is perceived easily or the reverse by reason. (29) We are at work not +on the truth of passages, but solely on their meaning. (30) We must take +especial care, when we are in search of the meaning of a text, not to be led +away by our reason in so far as it is founded on principles of natural +knowledge (to say nothing of prejudices): in order not to confound the +meaning of a passage with its truth, we must examine it solely by means of +the signification of the words, or by a reason acknowledging no foundation +but Scripture. +</p> + +<p> +(31) I will illustrate my meaning by an example. (32) The words of Moses, +"God is a fire" and "God is jealous," are perfectly clear so long as we +regard merely the signification of the words, and I therefore reckon them +among the clear passages, though in relation to reason and truth they are +most obscure: still, although the literal meaning is repugnant to the +natural light of reason, nevertheless, if it cannot be clearly overruled on +grounds and principles derived from its Scriptural "history," it, that is, +the literal meaning, must be the one retained: and contrariwise if these +passages literally interpreted are found to clash with principles derived +from Scripture, though such literal interpretation were in absolute harmony +with reason, they must be interpreted in a different manner, i.e. +metaphorically. +</p> + +<p> +(33) If we would know whether Moses believed God to be a fire or not, we +must on no account decide the question on grounds of the reasonableness or +the reverse of such an opinion, but must judge solely by the other opinions +of Moses which are on record. +</p> + +<p> +(34) In the present instance, as Moses says in several other passages that +God has no likeness to any visible thing, whether in heaven or in earth, or +in the water, either all such passages must be taken metaphorically, or else +the one before us must be so explained. (35) However, as we should depart as +little as possible from the literal sense, we must first ask whether this +text, God is a fire, admits of any but the literal meaning - that is, +whether the word fire ever means anything besides ordinary natural fire. +(36) If no such second meaning can be found, the text must be taken +literally, however repugnant to reason it may be: and all the other +passages, though in complete accordance with reason, must be brought into +harmony with it. (37) If the verbal expressions would not admit of being +thus harmonized, we should have to set them down as irreconcilable, and +suspend our judgment concerning them. (38) However, as we find the name fire +applied to anger and jealousy (see Job xxxi:12) we can thus easily reconcile +the words of Moses, and legitimately conclude that the two propositions God +is a fire, and God is jealous, are in meaning identical. +</p> + +<p> +(39) Further, as Moses clearly teaches that God is jealous, and nowhere +states that God is without passions or emotions, we must evidently infer +that Moses held this doctrine himself, or at any rate, that he wished to +teach it, nor must we refrain because such a belief seems contrary to +reason: for as we have shown, we cannot wrest the meaning of texts to suit +the dictates of our reason, or our preconceived opinions. (40) The whole +knowledge of the Bible must be sought solely from itself. +</p> + +<p> +(41) III. Lastly, such a history should relate the environment of all the +prophetic books extant; that is, the life, the conduct, and the studies of +the author of each book, who he was, what was the occasion, and the epoch of +his writing, whom did he write for, and in what language. (42) Further, +it should inquire into the fate of each book: how it was first received, +into whose hands it fell, how many different versions there were of it, by +whose advice was it received into the Bible, and, lastly, how all the books +now universally accepted as sacred, were united into a single whole. +</p> + +<p> +(43) All such information should, as I have said, be contained in the +"history" of Scripture. (44) For, in order to know what statements are set +forth as laws, and what as moral precepts, it is important to be acquainted +with the life, the conduct, and the pursuits of their author: moreover, +it becomes easier to explain a man's writings in proportion as we have more +intimate knowledge of his genius and temperament. +</p> + +<p> +(45) Further, that we may not confound precepts which are eternal with those +which served only a temporary purpose, or were only meant for a few, we +should know what was the occasion, the time, the age, in which each book was +written, and to what nation it was addressed.(46) Lastly, we should have +knowledge on the other points I have mentioned, in order to be sure, +in addition to the authenticity of the work, that it has not been tampered +with by sacrilegious hands, or whether errors can have crept in, and, if so, +whether they have been corrected by men sufficiently skilled and worthy of +credence. (47) All these things should be known, that we may not be led away +by blind impulse to accept whatever is thrust on our notice, instead of only +that which is sure and indisputable. +</p> + +<p> +(48) Now when we are in possession of this history of Scripture, and have +finally decided that we assert nothing as prophetic doctrine which does not +directly follow from such history, or which is not clearly deducible from +it, then, I say, it will be time to gird ourselves for the task of +investigating the mind of the prophets and of the Holy Spirit. (49) But in +this further arguing, also, we shall require a method very like that +employed in interpreting nature from her history. (50) As in the examination +of natural phenomena we try first to investigate what is most universal +and common to all nature - such, for instance, as motion and rest, and their +laws and rules, which nature always observes, and through which she +continually works - and then we proceed to what is less universal; so, too, +in the history of Scripture, we seek first for that which is most universal, +and serves for the basis and foundation of all Scripture, a doctrine, in +fact, that is commended by all the prophets as eternal and most profitable +to all men. (51) For example, that God is one, and that He is omnipotent, +that He alone should be worshipped, that He has a care for all men, and that +He especially loves those who adore Him and love their neighbour as +themselves, &c. (52) These and similar doctrines, I repeat, Scripture +everywhere so clearly and expressly teaches, that no one was ever in doubt +of its meaning concerning them. +</p> + +<p> +(53) The nature of God, His manner of regarding and providing for things, +and similar doctrines, Scripture nowhere teaches professedly, and as eternal +doctrine; on the contrary, we have shown that the prophets themselves did +not agree on the subject; therefore, we must not lay down any doctrine as +Scriptural on such subjects, though it may appear perfectly clear on +rational grounds. +</p> + +<p> +(54) From a proper knowledge of this universal doctrine of Scripture, we +must then proceed to other doctrines less universal, but which, +nevertheless, have regard to the general conduct of life, and flow from the +universal doctrine like rivulets from a source; such are all particular +external manifestations of true virtue, which need a given occasion for +their exercise; whatever is obscure or ambiguous on such points in Scripture +must be explained and defined by its universal doctrine; with regard to +contradictory instances, we must observe the occasion and the time in which +they were written. (55) For instance, when Christ says, "Blessed are they +that mourn, for they shall be comforted" we do not know, from the actual +passage, what sort of mourners are meant; as, however, Christ afterwards +teaches that we should have care for nothing, save only for the kingdom of +God and His righteousness, which is commended as the highest good (see +Matt. vi:33), it follows that by mourners He only meant those who mourn for +the kingdom of God and righteousness neglected by man: for this would be the +only cause of mourning to those who love nothing but the Divine kingdom and +justice, and who evidently despise the gifts of fortune. (56) So, too, when +Christ says: "But if a man strike you on the right cheek, turn to him the +left also," and the words which follow. +</p> + +<p> +(57) If He had given such a command, as a lawgiver, to judges, He would +thereby have abrogated the law of Moses, but this He expressly says He did +not do (Matt. v:17). (58) Wherefore we must consider who was the speaker, +what was the occasion, and to whom were the words addressed. (59) Now Christ +said that He did not ordain laws as a legislator, but inculcated precepts as +a teacher: inasmuch as He did not aim at correcting outward actions so +much as the frame of mind. (60) Further, these words were spoken to men who +were oppressed, who lived in a corrupt commonwealth on the brink of ruin, +where justice was utterly neglected. (61) The very doctrine inculcated here +by Christ just before the destruction of the city was also taught by +Jeremiah before the first destruction of Jerusalem, that is, in similar +circumstances, as we see from Lamentations iii:25-30. +</p> + +<p> +(62) Now as such teaching was only set forth by the prophets in times of +oppression, and was even then never laid down as a law; and as, on the other +hand, Moses (who did not write in times of oppression, but - mark this - +strove to found a well-ordered commonwealth), while condemning envy and +hatred of one's neighbour, yet ordained that an eye should be given for +an eye, it follows most clearly from these purely Scriptural grounds that +this precept of Christ and Jeremiah concerning submission to injuries was +only valid in places where justice is neglected, and in a time of +oppression, but does not hold good in a well-ordered state. +</p> + +<p> +(63) In a well-ordered state where justice is administered every one is +bound, if he would be accounted just, to demand penalties before the judge +(see Lev:1), not for the sake of vengeance (Lev. xix:17, 18), but in order +to defend justice and his country's laws, and to prevent the wicked +rejoicing in their wickedness. (64) All this is plainly in accordance with +reason. (65) I might cite many other examples in the same manner, but I +think the foregoing are sufficient to explain my meaning and the utility of +this method, and this is all my present purpose. (66) Hitherto we have only +shown how to investigate those passages of Scripture which treat of +practical conduct, and which, therefore, are more easily examined, for on +such subjects there was never really any controversy among the writers of +the Bible. +</p> + +<p> +(67) The purely speculative passages cannot be so easily traced to their +real meaning: the way becomes narrower, for as the prophets differed in +matters speculative among themselves, and the narratives are in great +measure adapted to the prejudices of each age, we must not, on any account +infer the intention of one prophet from clearer passages in the writings of +another; nor must we so explain his meaning, unless it is perfectly plain +that the two prophets were at one in the matter. +</p> + +<p> +(68) How we are to arrive at the intention of the prophets in such cases I +will briefly explain. (69) Here, too, we must begin from the most universal +proposition, inquiring first from the most clear Scriptural statements what +is the nature of prophecy or revelation, and wherein does it consist; then +we must proceed to miracles, and so on to whatever is most general till we +come to the opinions of a particular prophet, and, at last, to the meaning +of a particular revelation, prophecy, history, or miracle. (70) We have +already pointed out that great caution is necessary not to confound the mind +of a prophet or historian with the mind of the Holy Spirit and the truth +of the matter; therefore I need not dwell further on the subject. (71) I +would, however, here remark concerning the meaning of revelation, that the +present method only teaches us what the prophets really saw or heard, not +what they desired to signify or represent by symbols. (72) The latter may be +guessed at but cannot be inferred with certainty from Scriptural premises. +</p> + +<p> +(73) We have thus shown the plan for interpreting Scripture, and have, at +the same time, demonstrated that it is the one and surest way of +investigating its true meaning. (74) I am willing indeed to admit that those +persons (if any such there be) would be more absolutely certainly right, who +have received either a trustworthy tradition or an assurance from the +prophets themselves, such as is claimed by the Pharisees; or who have a +pontiff gifted with infallibility in the interpretation of Scripture, such +as the Roman Catholics boast. (75) But as we can never be perfectly sure, +either of such a tradition or of the authority of the pontiff, we cannot +found any certain conclusion on either: the one is denied by the oldest sect +of Christians, the other by the oldest sect of Jews. (76) Indeed, if we +consider the series of years (to mention no other point) accepted by the +Pharisees from their Rabbis, during which time they say they have handed +down the tradition from Moses, we shall find that it is not correct, as I +show elsewhere. (77) Therefore such a tradition should be received with +extreme suspicion; and although, according to our method, we are bound to +consider as uncorrupted the tradition of the Jews, namely, the meaning of +the Hebrew words which we received from them, we may accept the latter while +retaining our doubts about the former. +</p> + +<p> +(78) No one has ever been able to change the meaning of a word in ordinary +use, though many have changed the meaning of a particular sentence. (79) +Such a proceeding would be most difficult; for whoever attempted to change +the meaning of a word, would be compelled, at the same time, to explain all +the authors who employed it, each according to his temperament and +intention, or else, with consummate cunning, to falsify them. +</p> + +<p> +(80) Further, the masses and the learned alike preserve language, but it is +only the learned who preserve the meaning of particular sentences and books: +thus, we may easily imagine that the learned having a very rare book in +their power, might change or corrupt the meaning of a sentence in it, but +they could not alter the signification of the words; moreover, if anyone +wanted to change the meaning of a common word he would not be able to keep +up the change among posterity, or in common parlance or writing. +</p> + +<p> +(81) For these and such-like reasons we may readily conclude that it would +never enter into the mind of anyone to corrupt a language, though the +intention of a writer may often have been falsified by changing his phrases +or interpreting them amiss. (82) As then our method (based on the principle +that the knowledge of Scripture must be sought from itself alone) is the +sole true one, we must evidently renounce any knowledge which it cannot +furnish for the complete understanding of Scripture. (83) I will now point +out its difficulties and shortcomings, which prevent our gaining a complete +and assured knowledge of the Sacred Text. +</p> + +<p> +(84) Its first great difficulty consists in its requiring a thorough +knowledge of the Hebrew language. (85) Where is such knowledge to be +obtained? (86) The men of old who employed the Hebrew tongue have left none +of the principles and bases of their language to posterity; we have from +them absolutely nothing in the way of dictionary, grammar, or rhetoric. +</p> + +<p> +(87) Now the Hebrew nation has lost all its grace and beauty (as one would +expect after the defeats and persecutions it has gone through), and has only +retained certain fragments of its language and of a few books. (88) Nearly +all the names of fruits, birds, and fishes, and many other words have +perished in the wear and tear of time. (89) Further, the meaning of many +nouns and verbs which occur in the Bible are either utterly lost, or are +subjects of dispute. (90) And not only are these gone, but we are lacking in +a knowledge of Hebrew phraseology. (91) The devouring tooth of time has +destroyed turns of expression peculiar to the Hebrews, so that we know them +no more. +</p> + +<p> +(92) Therefore we cannot investigate as we would all the meanings of a +sentence by the uses of the language; and there are many phrases of which +the meaning is most obscure or altogether inexplicable, though the component +words are perfectly plain. +</p> + +<p> +(93) To this impossibility of tracing the history of the Hebrew language +must be added its particular nature and composition: these give rise to so +many ambiguities that it is impossible to find a method which would +enable us to gain a certain knowledge of all the statements in Scripture, +[Endnote 7]. (94) In addition to the sources of ambiguities common to all +languages, there are many peculiar to Hebrew. (95) These, I think, it worth +while to mention. +</p> + +<p> +(96) Firstly, an ambiguity often arises in the Bible from our mistaking one +letter for another similar one. (97) The Hebrews divide the letters of the +alphabet into five classes, according to the five organs of the month +employed in pronouncing them, namely, the lips, the tongue, the teeth, the +palate, and the throat. (98) For instance, Alpha, Ghet, Hgain, He, are +called gutturals, and are barely distinguishable, by any sign that we know, +one from the other. (99) El, which signifies to, is often taken for hgal, +which signifies above, and vice versa. (100) Hence sentences are often +rendered rather ambiguous or meaningless. +</p> + +<p> +(101) A second difficulty arises from the multiplied meaning of conjunctions +and adverbs. (102) For instance, vau serves promiscuously for a particle of +union or of separation, meaning, and, but, because, however, then: ki, has +seven or eight meanings, namely, wherefore, although, if, when, inasmuch as, +because, a burning, &c., and so on with almost all particles. +</p> + +<p> +(103) The third very fertile source of doubt is the fact that Hebrew verbs +in the indicative mood lack the present, the past imperfect, the pluperfect, +the future perfect, and other tenses most frequently employed in other +languages; in the imperative and infinitive moods they are wanting in all +except the present, and a subjunctive mood does not exist. (104) Now, +although all these defects in moods and tenses may be supplied by certain +fundamental rules of the language with ease and even elegance, the ancient +writers evidently neglected such rules altogether, and employed +indifferently future for present and past, and vice versa past for future, +and also indicative for imperative and subjunctive, with the result of +considerable confusion. +</p> + +<p> +(105) Besides these sources of ambiguity there are two others, one very +important. (106) Firstly, there are in Hebrew no vowels; secondly, the +sentences are not separated by any marks elucidating the meaning or +separating the clauses. (107) Though the want of these two has generally +been supplied by points and accents, such substitutes cannot be accepted by +us, inasmuch as they were invented and designed by men of an after age whose +authority should carry no weight. (108) The ancients wrote without points +(that is, without vowels and accents), as is abundantly testified; their +descendants added what was lacking, according to their own ideas of +Scriptural interpretation; wherefore the existing accents and points are +simply current interpretations, and are no more authoritative than any other +commentaries. +</p> + +<p> +(109) Those who are ignorant of this fact cannot justify the author of the +Epistle to the Hebrews for interpreting (chap. xi:21) Genesis (xlvii:31) +very differently from the version given in our Hebrew text as at present +pointed, as though the Apostle had been obliged to learn the meaning of +Scripture from those who added the points. (110) In my opinion the latter +are clearly wrong. (111) In order that everyone may judge for himself, and +also see how the discrepancy arose simply from the want of vowels, I will +give both interpretations. (112)Those who pointed our version read, "And +Israel bent himself over, or (changing Hqain into Aleph, a similar letter) +towards, the head of the bed." (113) The author of the Epistle reads, "And +Israel bent himself over the head of his staff," substituting mate for mita, +from which it only differs in respect of vowels. (114) Now as in this +narrative it is Jacob's age only that is in question, and not his illness, +which is not touched on till the next chapter, it seems more likely that the +historian intended to say that Jacob bent over the head of his staff (a +thing commonly used by men of advanced age for their support) than that he +bowed himself at the head of his bed, especially as for the former reading +no substitution of letters is required. (115) In this example I have desired +not only to reconcile the passage in the Epistle with the passage in +Genesis, but also and chiefly to illustrate how little trust should be +placed in the points and accents which are found in our present Bible, and +so to prove that he who would be without bias in interpreting Scripture +should hesitate about accepting them, and inquire afresh for himself. (116) +Such being the nature and structure of the Hebrew language, one may easily +understand that many difficulties are likely to arise, and that no possible +method could solve all of them. (117) It is useless to hope for a way out of +our difficulties in the comparison of various parallel passages (we have +shown that the only method of discovering the true sense of a passage out of +many alternative ones is to see what are the usages of the language), for +this comparison of parallel passages can only accidentally throw light on a +difficult point, seeing that the prophets never wrote with the express +object of explaining their own phrases or those of other people, and also +because we cannot infer the meaning of one prophet or apostle by the meaning +of another, unless on a purely practical question, not when the matter is +speculative, or if a miracle, or history is being narrated. (118) I might +illustrate my point with instances, for there are many inexplicable phrases +in Scripture, but I would rather pass on to consider the difficulties and +imperfections of the method under discussion. +</p> + +<p> +(119) A further difficulty attends the method, from the fact that it +requires the history of all that has happened to every book in the Bible; +such a history we are often quite unable to furnish. (120) Of the authors, +or (if the expression be preferred), the writers of many of the books, we +are either in complete ignorance, or at any rate in doubt, as I will point +out at length. (121) Further, we do not know either the occasions or the +epochs when these books of unknown authorship were written; we cannot say +into what hands they fell, nor how the numerous varying versions +originated; nor, lastly, whether there were not other versions, now lost. +(122) I have briefly shown that such knowledge is necessary, but I passed +over certain considerations which I will now draw attention to. +</p> + +<p> +(123) If we read a book which contains incredible or impossible narratives, +or is written in a very obscure style, and if we know nothing of its author, +nor of the time or occasion of its being written, we shall vainly endeavour +to gain any certain knowledge of its true meaning. (124) For being in +ignorance on these points we cannot possibly know the aim or intended aim of +the author; if we are fully informed, we so order our thoughts as not to be +in any way prejudiced either in ascribing to the author or him for whom the +author wrote either more or less than his meaning, and we only take into +consideration what the author may have had in his mind, or what the time and +occasion demanded. (125) I think this must be tolerably evident to all. +</p> + +<p> +(126) It often happens that in different books we read histories in +themselves similar, but which we judge very differently, according to the +opinions we have formed of the authors. (127) I remember once to have read +in some book that a man named Orlando Furioso used to drive a kind of winged +monster through the air, fly over any countries he liked, kill unaided vast +numbers of men and giants, and such like fancies, which from the point of +view of reason are obviously absurd. (128) A very similar story I read in +Ovid of Perseus, and also in the books of Judges and Kings of Samson, who +alone and unarmed killed thousands of men, and of Elijah, who flew through +the air, said at last went up to heaven in a chariot of fire, with horses of +fire. (129) All these stories are obviously alike, but we judge them very +differently. (130) The first only sought to amuse, the second had a +political object, the third a religious object.(131) We gather this simply +from the opinions we had previously formed of the authors. (132) Thus it +is evidently necessary to know something of the authors of writings which +are obscure or unintelligible, if we would interpret their meaning; and for +the same reason, in order to choose the proper reading from among a great +variety, we ought to have information as to the versions in which the +differences are found, and as to the possibility of other readings having +been discovered by persons of greater authority. +</p> + +<p> +(133) A further difficulty attends this method in the case of some of the +books of Scripture, namely, that they are no longer extant in their original +language. (133) The Gospel according to Matthew, and certainly the Epistle +to the Hebrews, were written, it is thought, in Hebrew, though they no +longer exist in that form. (134) Aben Ezra affirms in his commentaries that +the book of Job was translated into Hebrew out of another language, and that +its obscurity arises from this fact. (135) I say nothing of the apocryphal +books, for their authority stands on very inferior ground. +</p> + +<p> +(136) The foregoing difficulties in this method of interpreting Scripture +from its own history, I conceive to be so great that I do not hesitate to +say that the true meaning of Scripture is in many places inexplicable, or at +best mere subject for guesswork; but I must again point out, on the other +hand, that such difficulties only arise when we endeavour to follow the +meaning of a prophet in matters which cannot be perceived, but only +imagined, not in things, whereof the understanding can give a clear idea, +and which are conceivable through themselves: [Endnote 8] matters which by +their nature are easily perceived cannot be expressed so obscurely as to be +unintelligible; as the proverb says, "a word is enough to the wise." (137) +Euclid, who only wrote of matters very simple and easily understood, can +easily be comprehended by anyone in any language; we can follow his +intention perfectly, and be certain of his true meaning, without having a +thorough knowledge of the language in which he wrote; in fact, a quite +rudimentary acquaintance is sufficient. (138) We need make no researches +concerning the life, the pursuits, or the habits of the author; nor need we +inquire in what language, nor when he wrote, nor the vicissitudes of his +book, nor its various readings, nor how, nor by whose advice it has been +received. +</p> + +<p> +(139) What we here say of Euclid might equally be said of any book which +treats of things by their nature perceptible: thus we conclude that we can +easily follow the intention of Scripture in moral questions, from the +history we possess of it, and we can be sure of its true meaning. +</p> + +<p> +(140) The precepts of true piety are expressed in very ordinary language, +and are equally simple and easily understood. (141) Further, as true +salvation and blessedness consist in a true assent of the soul - and we +truly assent only to what we clearly understand - it is most plain that we +can follow with certainty the intention of Scripture in matters relating to +salvation and necessary to blessedness; therefore, we need not be much +troubled about what remains: such matters, inasmuch as we generally cannot +grasp them with our reason and understanding, are more curious than +profitable. +</p> + +<p> +(142) I think I have now set forth the true method of Scriptural +interpretation, and have sufficiently explained my own opinion thereon. +(143) Besides, I do not doubt that everyone will see that such a method only +requires the aid of natural reason. (144) The nature and efficacy of the +natural reason consists in deducing and proving the unknown from the known, +or in carrying premises to their legitimate conclusions; and these are the +very processes which our method desiderates. (145) Though we must admit that +it does not suffice to explain everything in the Bible, such imperfection +does not spring from its own nature, but from the fact that the path +which it teaches us, as the true one, has never been tended or trodden by +men, and has thus, by the lapse of time, become very difficult, and almost +impassable, as, indeed, I have shown in the difficulties I draw attention +to. +</p> + +<p> +(146) There only remains to examine the opinions of those who differ from +me. (147) The first which comes under our notice is, that the light of +nature has no power to interpret Scripture, but that a supernatural faculty +is required for the task. (148) What is meant by this supernatural faculty I +will leave to its propounders to explain. (149) Personally, I can only +suppose that they have adopted a very obscure way of stating their complete +uncertainty about the true meaning of Scripture. (150) If we look at their +interpretations, they contain nothing supernatural, at least nothing but the +merest conjectures. +</p> + +<p> +(151) Let them be placed side by side with the interpretations of those who +frankly confess that they have no faculty beyond their natural ones; we +shall see that the two are just alike - both human, both long pondered over, +both laboriously invented. (152) To say that the natural reason is +insufficient for such results is plainly untrue, firstly, for the reasons +above stated, namely, that the difficulty of interpreting Scripture arises +from no defect in human reason, but simply from the carelessness (not to say +malice) of men who neglected the history of the Bible while there were still +materials for inquiry; secondly, from the fact (admitted, I think, by all) +that the supernatural faculty is a Divine gift granted only to the faithful. +(153) But the prophets and apostles did not preach to the faithful only, but +chiefly to the unfaithful and wicked. (154) Such persons, therefore, were +able to understand the intention of the prophets and apostles, otherwise the +prophets and apostles would have seemed to be preaching to little boys and +infants, not to men endowed with reason. (155) Moses, too, would have given +his laws in vain, if they could only be comprehended by the faithful, who +need no law. (156) Indeed, those who demand supernatural faculties for +comprehending the meaning of the prophets and apostles seem truly lacking in +natural faculties, so that we should hardly suppose such persons the +possessors of a Divine supernatural gift. +</p> + +<p> +(157) The opinion of Maimonides was widely different. (158) He asserted +that each passage in Scripture admits of various, nay, contrary, +meanings; but that we could never be certain of any particular one till we +knew that the passage, as we interpreted it, contained nothing contrary or +repugnant to reason. (159) If the literal meaning clashes with reason, +though the passage seems in itself perfectly clear, it must be interpreted +in some metaphorical sense. (160) This doctrine he lays down very plainly in +chap. xxv. part ii. of his book, "More Nebuchim," for he says: "Know that we +shrink not from affirming that the world hath existed from eternity, +because of what Scripture saith concerning the world's creation. (161) For +the texts which teach that the world was created are not more in number than +those which teach that God hath a body; neither are the approaches in this +matter of the world's creation closed, or even made hard to us: so that we +should not be able to explain what is written, as we did when we showed +that God hath no body, nay, peradventure, we could explain and make fast the +doctrine of the world's eternity more easily than we did away with the +doctrines that God hath a beatified body. (162) Yet two things hinder me +from doing as I have said, and believing that the world is eternal. +(163) As it hath been clearly shown that God hath not a body, we must +perforce explain all those passages whereof the literal sense agreeth not +with the demonstration, for sure it is that they can be so explained. (164) +But the eternity of the world hath not been so demonstrated, therefore +it is not necessary to do violence to Scripture in support of some common +opinion, whereof we might, at the bidding of reason, embrace the contrary." +</p> + +<p> +(165) Such are the words of Maimonides, and they are evidently sufficient to +establish our point: for if he had been convinced by reason that the world +is eternal, he would not have hesitated to twist and explain away the words +of Scripture till he made them appear to teach this doctrine. (166) He would +have felt quite sure that Scripture, though everywhere plainly denying the +eternity of the world, really intends to teach it. (167) So that, however +clear the meaning of Scripture may be, he would not feel certain of having +grasped it, so long as he remained doubtful of the truth of what, was +written. (168) For we are in doubt whether a thing is in conformity with +reason, or contrary thereto, so long as we are uncertain of its truth, +and, consequently, we cannot be sure whether the literal meaning of a +passage be true or false. +</p> + +<p> +(169) If such a theory as this were sound, I would certainly grant that some +faculty beyond the natural reason is required for interpreting Scripture. +(170) For nearly all things that we find in Scripture cannot be inferred +from known principles of the natural reason, and, therefore, we should be +unable to come to any conclusion about their truth, or about the real +meaning and intention of Scripture, but should stand in need of some +further assistance. +</p> + +<p> +(171) Further, the truth of this theory would involve that the masses, +having generally no comprehension of, nor leisure for, detailed proofs, +would be reduced to receiving all their knowledge of Scripture on the +authority and testimony of philosophers, and, consequently, would be +compelled to suppose that the interpretations given by philosophers were +infallible. +</p> + +<p> +(172) Truly this would be a new form of ecclesiastical authority, and a new +sort of priests or pontiffs, more likely to excite men's ridicule than their +veneration. (173) Certainly our method demands a knowledge of Hebrew for +which the masses have no leisure; but no such objection as the foregoing can +be brought against us. (174) For the ordinary Jews or Gentiles, to whom the +prophets and apostles preached and wrote, understood the language, and, +consequently, the intention of the prophet or apostle addressing them; but +they did not grasp the intrinsic reason of what was preached, which, +according to Maimonides, would be necessary for an understanding of it. +</p> + +<p> +(175) There is nothing, then, in our method which renders it necessary that +the masses should follow the testimony of commentators, for I point to a set +of unlearned people who understood the language of the prophets and +apostles; whereas Maimonides could not point to any such who could arrive at +the prophetic or apostolic meaning through their knowledge of the causes +of things. +</p> + +<p> +(176) As to the multitude of our own time, we have shown that whatsoever is +necessary to salvation, though its reasons may be unknown, can easily be +understood in any language, because it is thoroughly ordinary and usual; it +is in such understanding as this that the masses acquiesce, not in the +testimony of commentators; with regard to other questions, the ignorant and +the learned fare alike. +</p> + +<p> +(177) But let us return to the opinion of Maimonides, and examine it more +closely. In the first place, he supposes that the prophets were in entire +agreement one with another, and that they were consummate philosophers and +theologians; for he would have them to have based their conclusions on the +absolute truth. (178) Further, he supposes that the sense of Scripture +cannot be made plain from Scripture itself, for the truth of things is not +made plain therein (in that it does not prove any thing, nor teach the +matters of which it speaks through their definitions and first causes), +therefore, according to Maimonides, the true sense of Scripture cannot be +made plain from itself, and must not be there sought. +</p> + +<p> +(179) The falsity of such a doctrine is shown in this very chapter, for we +have shown both by reason and examples that the meaning of Scripture is only +made plain through Scripture itself, and even in questions deducible from +ordinary knowledge should be looked for from no other source. +</p> + +<p> +(180) Lastly, such a theory supposes that we may explain the words of +Scripture according to our preconceived opinions, twisting them about, and +reversing or completely changing the literal sense, however plain it may be. +(181) Such licence is utterly opposed to the teaching of this and the +preceding chapters, and, moreover, will be evident to everyone as rash and +excessive. +</p> + +<p> +(182) But if we grant all this licence, what can it effect after all? +Absolutely nothing. (183) Those things which cannot be demonstrated, and +which make up the greater part of Scripture, cannot be examined by reason, +and cannot therefore be explained or interpreted by this rule; whereas, +on the contrary, by following our own method, we can explain many questions +of this nature, and discuss them on a sure basis, as we have already shown, +by reason and example. (184) Those matters which are by their nature +comprehensible we can easily explain, as has been pointed out, simply by +means of the context. +</p> + +<p> +(185) Therefore, the method of Maimonides is clearly useless: to which we +may add, that it does away with all the certainty which the masses acquire +by candid reading, or which is gained by any other persons in any other way. +(186) In conclusion, then, we dismiss Maimonides' theory as harmful, +useless, and absurd. +</p> + +<p> +(187) As to the tradition of the Pharisees, we have already shown that it is +not consistent, while the authority of the popes of Rome stands in need of +more credible evidence; the latter, indeed, I reject simply on this ground, +for if the popes could point out to us the meaning of Scripture as surely as +did the high priests of the Jews, I should not be deterred by the fact that +there have been heretic and impious Roman pontiffs; for among the Hebrew +high-priests of old there were also heretics and impious men who gained the +high- priesthood by improper means, but who, nevertheless, had Scriptural +sanction for their supreme power of interpreting the law. (See +Deut. xvii:11, 12, and xxxiii:10, also Malachi ii:8.) +</p> + +<p> +(188) However, as the popes can show no such sanction, their authority +remains open to very grave doubt, nor should anyone be deceived by the +example of the Jewish high-priests and think that the Catholic religion also +stands in need of a pontiff; he should bear in mind that the laws of Moses +being also the ordinary laws of the country, necessarily required some +public authority to insure their observance; for, if everyone were free to +interpret the laws of his country as he pleased, no state could stand, but +would for that very reason be dissolved at once, and public rights would +become private rights. +</p> + +<p> +(189) With religion the case is widely different. Inasmuch as it consists +not so much in outward actions as in simplicity and truth of character, it +stands outside the sphere of law and public authority. (190) Simplicity and +truth of character are not produced by the constraint of laws, nor by +the authority of the state, no one the whole world over can be forced or +legislated into a state of blessedness; the means required for such a +consummation are faithful and brotherly admonition, sound education, and, +above all, free use of the individual judgment. +</p> + +<p> +(191) Therefore, as the supreme right of free thinking, even on religion, is +in every man's power, and as it is inconceivable that such power could be +alienated, it is also in every man's power to wield the supreme right and +authority of free judgment in this behalf, and to explain and interpret +religion for himself. (192) The only reason for vesting the supreme +authority in the interpretation of law, and judgment on public affairs in +the hands of the magistrates, is that it concerns questions of public right. +(193) Similarly the supreme authority in explaining religion, and in passing +judgment thereon, is lodged with the individual because it concerns +questions of individual right. (194) So far, then, from the authority of the +Hebrew high-priests telling in confirmation of the authority of the Roman +pontiffs to interpret religion, it would rather tend to establish individual +freedom of judgment. (195) Thus in this way also, we have shown that our +method of interpreting Scripture is the best. (196) For as the highest power +of Scriptural interpretation belongs to every man, the rule for such +interpretation should be nothing but the natural light of reason which is +common to all - not any supernatural light nor any external authority; +moreover, such a rule ought not to be so difficult that it can only be +applied by very skilful philosophers, but should be adapted to the natural +and ordinary faculties and capacity of mankind. (197) And such I have shown +our method to be, for such difficulties as it has arise from men's +carelessness, and are no part of its nature. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /></p> + +<p><a id="chap08"></a></p> +<h3> +CHAPTER VIII. - OF THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE PENTATEUCH <br /> +AND THE OTHER HISTORICAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT +</h3> + +<p> +(1) In the former chapter we treated of the foundations and principles of +Scriptural knowledge, and showed that it consists solely in a trustworthy +history of the sacred writings; such a history, in spite of its +indispensability, the ancients neglected, or at any rate, whatever they may +have written or handed down has perished in the lapse of time, consequently +the groundwork for such an investigation is to a great extent, cut from +under us. (2) This might be put up with if succeeding generations had +confined themselves within the limits of truth, and had handed down +conscientiously what few particulars they had received or discovered without +any additions from their own brains: as it is, the history of the Bible is +not so much imperfect as untrustworthy: the foundations are not only too +scanty for building upon, but are also unsound. (3) It is part of my purpose +to remedy these defects, and to remove common theological prejudices. (4) +But I fear that I am attempting my task too late, for men have arrived at +the pitch of not suffering contradiction, but defending obstinately whatever +they have adopted under the name of religion. (5) So widely have these +prejudices taken possession of men's minds, that very few, comparatively +speaking, will listen to reason. (6) However, I will make the attempt, and +spare no efforts, for there is no positive reason for despairing of success. +</p> + +<p> +(7) In order to treat the subject methodically, I will begin with the +received opinions concerning the true authors of the sacred books, and in +the first place, speak of the author of the Pentateuch, who is almost +universally supposed to have been Moses. (8) The Pharisees are so firmly +convinced of his identity, that they account as a heretic anyone who differs +from them on the subject. (9) Wherefore, Aben Ezra, a man of enlightened +intelligence, and no small learning, who was the first, so far as I know, +to treat of this opinion, dared not express his meaning openly, but confined +himself to dark hints which I shall not scruple to elucidate, thus throwing full light on the subject. +</p> + +<p> +(10) The words of Aben Ezra which occur in his commentary on Deuteronomy are +as follows: "Beyond Jordan, &c. . . . If so be that thou understandest the +mystery of the twelve . . . moreover Moses wrote the law . . . The +Canaanite was then in the land . . . . it shall be revealed on the mount of +God . . . . then also behold his bed, his iron bed, then shalt thou know +the truth." (11) In these few words he hints, and also shows that it was not +Moses who wrote the Pentateuch, but someone who lived long after him, and +further, that the book which Moses wrote was something different from any +now extant. +</p> + +<p> +(12) To prove this, I say, he draws attention to the facts: +</p> + +<p> +(13) 1. That the preface to Deuteronomy could not have been written by +Moses, inasmuch as he ad never crossed the Jordan. +</p> + +<p> +(14) II. That the whole book of Moses was written at full length on the +circumference of a single altar (Deut. xxvii, and Josh. viii:37), which +altar, according to the Rabbis, consisted of only twelve stones: therefore +the book of Moses must have been of far less extent than the Pentateuch. +(15) This is what our author means, I think, by the mystery of the twelve, +unless he is referring to the twelve curses contained in the chapter of +Deuteronomy above cited, which he thought could not have been contained in +the law, because Moses bade the Levites read them after the recital of the +law, and so bind the people to its observance. (16) Or again, he may have +had in his mind the last chapter of Deuteronomy which treats of the death of +Moses, and which contains twelve verses. (17) But there is no need to dwell +further on these and similar conjectures. +</p> + +<p> +(18) III. That in Deut. xxxi:9, the expression occurs, "and Moses wrote the +law:" words that cannot be ascribed to Moses, but must be those of some +other writer narrating the deeds and writings of Moses. +</p> + +<p> +(19) IV. That in Genesis xii:6, the historian, after narrating that Abraham +journeyed through the and of Canaan, adds, "and the Canaanite was then in +the land," thus clearly excluding the time at which he wrote. (20) So that +this passage must have been written after the death of Moses, when the +Canaanites had been driven out, and no longer possessed the land. +</p> + +<p> +(21) Aben Ezra, in his commentary on the passage, alludes to the difficulty +as follows:- "And the Canaanite was then in the land: it appears that +Canaan, the grandson of Noah, took from another the land which bears his +name; if this be not the true meaning, there lurks some mystery in the +passage, and let him who understands it keep silence." (22) That is, if +Canaan invaded those regions, the sense will be, the Canaanite was then in +the land, in contradistinction to the time when it had been held by another: +but if, as follows from Gen. chap. x. Canaan was the first to inhabit the +land, the text must mean to exclude the time present, that is the time at +which it was written; therefore it cannot be the work of Moses, in +whose time the Canaanites still possessed those territories: this is the +mystery concerning which silence is recommended. +</p> + +<p> +(23) V. That in Genesis xxii:14 Mount Moriah is called the mount of God +[Endnote 9] a name which it did not acquire till after the building of the +Temple; the choice of the mountain was not made in the time of Moses, for +Moses does not point out any spot as chosen by God; on the contrary, he +foretells that God will at some future time choose a spot to which this name +will be given. +</p> + +<p> +(24) VI. Lastly, that in Deut. chap. iii., in the passage relating to Og, +king of Bashan, these words are inserted: "For only Og king of Bashan +remained of the remnant of giants: behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of +iron: is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the +length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a +man." (25) This parenthesis most plainly shows that its writer lived long +after Moses; for this mode of speaking is only employed by one treating of +things long past, and pointing to relics for the sake of gaining credence: +moreover, this bed was almost certainly first discovered by David, who +conquered the city of Rabbath (2 Sam. xii:30.) (26) Again, the historian a +little further on inserts after the words of Moses, "Jair, the son of +Manasseh, took all the country of Argob unto the coasts of Geshuri and +Maachathi; and called them after his own name, Bashan-havoth-jair, unto this +day." (27) This passage, I say, is inserted to explain the words of Moses +which precede it. (28) "And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, being the +kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of +Argob, with all Bashan, which is called the land of the giants." (29) The +Hebrews in the time of the writer indisputably knew what territories +belonged to the tribe of Judah, but did not know them under the name of the +jurisdiction of Argob, or the land of the giants. (30) Therefore the writer +is compelled to explain what these places were which were anciently so +styled, and at the same time to point out why they were at the time of his +writing known by the name of Jair, who was of the tribe of Manasseh, not of +Judah. (31) We have thus made clear the meaning of Aben Ezra and also the +passages of the Pentateuch which he cites in proof of his contention. (32) +However, Aben Ezra does not call attention to every instance, or even the +chief ones; there remain many of greater importance, which may be cited. +(33) Namely (I.), that the writer of the books in question not only speaks +of Moses in the third person, but also bears witness to many details +concerning him; for instance, "Moses talked with God;" "The Lord spoke with +Moses face to face;" "Moses was the meekest of men" (Numb. xii:3); "Moses +was wrath with the captains of the host; "Moses, the man of God, "Moses, the +servant of the Lord, died;" "There was never a prophet in Israel like +unto Moses," &c. (34) On the other hand, in Deuteronomy, where the law which +Moses had expounded to the people and written is set forth, Moses speaks and +declares what he has done in the first person: "God spake with me" (Deut. +ii:1, 17, &c.), "I prayed to the Lord," &c. (35) Except at the end of the +book, when the historian, after relating the words of Moses, begins again to +speak in the third person, and to tell how Moses handed over the law which +he had expounded to the people in writing, again admonishing them, and +further, how Moses ended his life. (36) All these details, the manner of +narration, the testimony, and the context of the whole story lead to the +plain conclusion that these books were written by another, and not by Moses +in person. +</p> + +<p> +(37) III. We must also remark that the history relates not only the manner +of Moses' death and burial, and the thirty days' mourning of the Hebrews, +but further compares him with all the prophets who came after him, and +states that he surpassed them all. (38) "There was never a prophet in Israel +like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face." (39) Such testimony +cannot have been given of Moses by himself, nor by any who immediately +succeeded him, but it must come from someone who lived centuries afterwards, +especially, as the historian speaks of past times. (40) "There was never a +prophet," &c. (41) And of the place of burial, "No one knows it to this +day." +</p> + +<p> +(42) III. We must note that some places are not styled by the names they +bore during Moses' lifetime, but by others which they obtained subsequently. +(43) For instance, Abraham is said to have pursued his enemies even unto +Dan, a name not bestowed on the city till long after the death of Joshua +(Gen. xiv:14, Judges xviii:29). +</p> + +<p> +(44) IV. The narrative is prolonged after the death of Moses, for in +Exodus xvi:34 we read that "the children of Israel did eat manna forty +years until they came to a land inhabited, until they came unto the borders +of the land of Canaan." (45) In other words, until the time alluded to in +Joshua vi:12. +</p> + +<p> +(46) So, too, in Genesis xxxvi:31 it is stated, "These are the kings that +reigned in Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." +(47) The historian, doubtless, here relates the kings of Idumaea before that +territory was conquered by David [Endnote 10] and garrisoned, as we read +in 2 Sam. viii:14. (48) From what has been said, it is thus clearer than the +sun at noonday that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses, but by someone +who lived long after Moses. (49) Let us now turn our attention to the books +which Moses actually did write, and which are cited in the Pentateuch; thus, +also, shall we see that they were different from the Pentateuch. (50) +Firstly, it appears from Exodus xvii:14 that Moses, by the command of God, +wrote an account of the war against Amalek. (51) The book in which he did so +is not named in the chapter just quoted, but in Numb. xxi:12 a book is +referred to under the title of the wars of God, and doubtless this war +against Amalek and the castrametations said in Numb. xxxiii:2 to have been +written by Moses are therein described. (52) We hear also in Exod. xxiv:4 of +another book called the Book of the Covenant, which Moses read before the +Israelites when they first made a covenant with God. (53) But this book or +this writing contained very little, namely, the laws or commandments of God +which we find in Exodus xx:22 to the end of chap. xxiv., and this no one +will deny who reads the aforesaid chapter rationally and impartially. (54) +It is there stated that as soon as Moses had learnt the feeling of the +people on the subject of making a covenant with God, he immediately wrote +down God's laws and utterances, and in the morning, after some ceremonies +had been performed, read out the conditions of the covenant to an assembly +of the whole people. (55) When these had been gone through, and doubtless +understood by all, the whole people gave their assent. +</p> + +<p> +(56) Now from the shortness of the time taken in its perusal and also from +its nature as a compact, this document evidently contained nothing more than +that which we have just described. (57) Further, it is clear that Moses +explained all the laws which he had received in the fortieth year after the +exodus from Egypt; also that he bound over the people a second time to +observe them, and that finally he committed them to writing (Deut. i:5; +xxix:14; xxxi:9), in a book which contained these laws explained, and the +new covenant, and this book was therefore called the book of the law of God: +the same which was afterwards added to by Joshua when he set forth the fresh +covenant with which he bound over the people and which he entered into +with God (Josh. xxiv:25, 26). +</p> + +<p> +(58) Now, as we have extent no book containing this covenant of Moses and +also the covenant of Joshua, we must perforce conclude that it has perished, +unless, indeed, we adopt the wild conjecture of the Chaldean paraphrast +Jonathan, and twist about the words of Scripture to our heart's content. +(59) This commentator, in the face of our present difficulty, preferred +corrupting the sacred text to confessing his own ignorance. (60) The passage +in the book of Joshua which runs, "and Joshua wrote these words in the +book of the law of God," he changes into "and Joshua wrote these words +and kept them with the book of the law of God." (61) What is to be done with +persons who will only see what pleases them? (62) What is such a proceeding +if it is not denying Scripture, and inventing another Bible out of our own +heads? (63) We may therefore conclude that the book of the law of God which +Moses wrote was not the Pentateuch, but something quite different, which the +author of the Pentateuch duly inserted into his book. (64) So much is +abundantly plain both from what I have said and from what I am about to add. +(65) For in the passage of Deuteronomy above quoted, where it is related +that Moses wrote the book of the law, the historian adds that he handed it +over to the priests and bade them read it out at a stated time to the whole +people. (66) This shows that the work was of much less length than the +Pentateuch, inasmuch as it could be read through at one sitting so as to be +understood by all; further, we must not omit to notice that out of all the +books which Moses wrote, this one book of the second covenant and the song +(which latter he wrote afterwards so that all the people might learn it), +was the only one which he caused to be religiously guarded and preserved. +(67) In the first covenant he had only bound over those who were present, +but in the second covenant he bound over all their descendants also (Dent. +xxix:14), and therefore ordered this covenant with future ages to be +religiously preserved, together with the Song, which was especially +addressed to posterity: as, then, we have no proof that Moses wrote any +book save this of the covenant, and as he committed no other to the care of +posterity; and, lastly, as there are many passages in the Pentateuch which +Moses could not have written, it follows that the belief that Moses was the +author of the Pentateuch is ungrounded and even irrational. (68) Someone +will perhaps ask whether Moses did not also write down other laws when they +were first revealed to him - in other words, whether, during the course of +forty years, he did not write down any of the laws which he promulgated, +save only those few which I have stated to be contained in the book of the +first covenant. (69) To this I would answer, that although it seems +reasonable to suppose that Moses wrote down the laws at the time when he +wished to communicate them to the people, yet we are not warranted to take +it as proved, for I have shown above that we must make no assertions in such +matters which we do not gather from Scripture, or which do not flow as +legitimate consequences from its fundamental principles. (70) We must not +accept whatever is reasonably probable. (71) However even reason in this +case would not force such a conclusion upon us: for it may be that the +assembly of elders wrote down the decrees of Moses and communicated them to +the people, and the historian collected them, and duly set them forth in his +narrative of the life of Moses. (72) So much for the five books of Moses: it +is now time for us to turn to the other sacred writings. +</p> + +<p> +(73) The book of Joshua may be proved not to be an autograph by reasons +similar to those we have just employed: for it must be some other than +Joshua who testifies that the fame of Joshua was spread over the whole +world; that he omitted nothing of what Moses had taught (Josh. vi:27; viii. +last verse; xi:15); that he grew old and summoned an assembly of the whole +people, and finally that he departed this life. (74) Furthermore, events are +related which took place after Joshua's death. (75) For instance, that the +Israelites worshipped God, after his death, so long as there were any old +men alive who remembered him; and in chap. xvi:10, we read that "Ephraim and +Manasseh did not drive out the Canaanites which dwelt in Gezer, but the +Canaanite dwelt in the land of Ephraim unto this day, and was tributary to +him." (76) This is the same statement as that in Judges, chap. i., and the +phrase "unto this day" shows that the writer was speaking of ancient times. +(77) With these texts we may compare the last verse of chap. xv., concerning +the sons of Judah, and also the history of Caleb in the same chap. v:14. +(78) Further, the building of an altar beyond Jordan by the two tribes and a +half, chap. xxii:10, sqq., seems to have taken place after the death of +Joshua, for in the whole narrative his name is never mentioned, but the +people alone held council as to waging war, sent out legates, waited for +their return, and finally approved of their answer. +</p> + +<p> +(79) Lastly, from chap. x:14, it is clear that the book was written many +generations after the death of Joshua, for it bears witness, there was +never any, day like unto, that day, either before or after, that the Lord +hearkened to the voice of a man," &c. (80) If, therefore, Joshua wrote any +book at all, it was that which is quoted in the work now before us, +chap. x:13. +</p> + +<p> +(81) With regard to the book of Judges, I suppose no rational person +persuades himself that it was written by the actual Judges. (82) For the +conclusion of the whole history contained in chap. ii. clearly shows that it +is all the work - of a single historian. (83) Further, inasmuch as the +writer frequently tells us that there was then no king in Israel, it is +evident that the book was written after the establishment of the monarchy. +</p> + +<p> +(84) The books of Samuel need not detain us long, inasmuch as the narrative +in them is continued long after Samuel's death; but I should like to draw +attention to the fact that it was written many generations after Samuel's +death. (85) For in book i. chap. ix:9, the historian remarks in a, +parenthesis, "Beforetime, in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, thus +he spake: Come, and let us go to the seer; for he that is now called a +prophet was beforetime called a seer." +</p> + +<p> +(86) Lastly, the books of Kings, as we gather from internal evidence, were +compiled from the books of King Solomon (I Kings xi:41), from the chronicles +of the kings of Judah (1 Kings xiv:19, 29), and the chronicles of the kings +of Israel. +</p> + +<p> +(87) We may, therefore, conclude that all the books we have considered +hitherto are compilations, and that the events therein are recorded as +having happened in old time. (88) Now, if we turn our attention to the +connection and argument of all these books, we shall easily see that they +were all written by a single historian, who wished to relate the antiquities +of the Jews from their first beginning down to the first destruction of the +city. (89) The way in which the several books are connected one with the +other is alone enough to show us that they form the narrative of one and the +same writer. (90) For as soon as he has related the life of Moses, the +historian thus passes on to the story of Joshua: "And it came to pass after +that Moses the servant of the Lord was dead, that God spake unto Joshua," +&c., so in the same way, after the death of Joshua was concluded, he passes +with identically the same transition and connection to the history of the +Judges: "And it came to pass after that Joshua was dead, that the children +of Israel sought from God," &c. (91) To the book of Judges he adds the story +of Ruth, as a sort of appendix, in these words: "Now it came to pass in the +days that the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land." +</p> + +<p> +(92) The first book of Samuel is introduced with a similar phrase; and so is +the second book of Samuel. (93) Then, before the history of David is +concluded, the historian passes in the same way to the first book of Kings, +and, after David's death, to the Second book of Kings. +</p> + +<p> +(94) The putting together, and the order of the narratives, show that they +are all the work of one man, writing with a create aim; for the historian +begins with relating the first origin of the Hebrew nation, and then sets +forth in order the times and the occasions in which Moses put forth his +laws, and made his predictions. (95) He then proceeds to relate how the +Israelites invaded the promised land in accordance with Moses' prophecy +(Deut. vii.); and how, when the land was subdued, they turned their backs on +their laws, and thereby incurred many misfortunes (Deut. xxxi:16, 17). (96) +He tells how they wished to elect rulers, and how, according as these rulers +observed the law, the people flourished or suffered (Deut. xxviii:36); +finally, how destruction came upon the nation, even as Moses had foretold. +(97) In regard to other matters, which do not serve to confirm the law, the +writer either passes over them in silence, or refers the reader to other +books for information. (98) All that is set down in the books we have +conduces to the sole object of setting forth the words and laws of Moses, +and proving them by subsequent events.(99) When we put together these three +considerations, namely, the unity of the subject of all the books, the +connection between them, and the fact that they are compilations made many +generations after the events they relate had taken place, we come to the +conclusion, as I have just stated, that they are all the work of a single +historian. (100) Who this historian was, it is not so easy to show; but I +suspect that he was Ezra, and there are several strong reasons for adopting +this hypothesis. +</p> + +<p> +(101) The historian whom we already know to be but one individual brings his +history down to the liberation of Jehoiakim, and adds that he himself sat at +the king's table all his life - that is, at the table either of Jehoiakim, +or of the son of Nebuchadnezzar, for the sense of the passage is ambiguous: +hence it follows that he did not live before the time of Ezra. (102) But +Scripture does not testify of any except of Ezra (Ezra vii:10), that he +"prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to set it forth, and +further that he was a ready scribe in the law of Moses." (103) Therefore, I +can not find anyone, save Ezra, to whom to attribute the sacred books. +</p> + +<p> +(104) Further, from this testimony concerning Ezra, we see that he prepared +his heart, not only to seek the law of the Lord, but also to set it forth; +and, in Nehemiah viii:8, we read that "they read in the book of the law of +God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the +reading." +</p> + +<p> +(105) As, then, in Deuteronomy, we find not only the book of the law of +Moses, or the greater part of it, but also many things inserted for its +better explanation, I conjecture that this Deuteronomy is the book of the +law of God, written, set forth, and explained by Ezra, which is referred to +in the text above quoted. (106) Two examples of the way matters were +inserted parenthetically in the text of Deuteronomy, with a view to its +fuller explanation, we have already given, in speaking of Aben Ezra's +opinion. (107) Many others are found in the course of the work: for +instance, in chap. ii:12: "The Horims dwelt also in Seir beforetime; but the +children of Esau succeeded them, when they had destroyed them from before +them, and dwelt in their stead; as Israel did unto the land of his +possession, which the Lord gave unto them." (108) This explains verses 3 and +4 of the same chapter, where it is stated that Mount Seir, which had come to +the children of Esau for a possession, did not fall into their hands +uninhabited; but that they invaded it, and turned out and destroyed the +Horims, who formerly dwelt therein, even as the children of Israel had done +unto the Canaanites after the death of Moses. +</p> + +<p> +(109) So, also, verses 6, 7, 8, 9, of the tenth chapter are inserted +parenthetically among the words of Moses. Everyone must see that verse 8, +which begins, "At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi," +necessarily refers to verse 5, and not to the death of Aaron, which is only +mentioned here by Ezra because Moses, in telling of the golden calf +worshipped by the people, stated that he had prayed for Aaron. +</p> + +<p> +(110) He then explains that at the time at which Moses spoke, God had chosen +for Himself the tribe of Levi in order that He may point out the reason for +their election, and for the fact of their not sharing in the inheritance; +after this digression, he resumes the thread of Moses' speech. (111) To +these parentheses we must add the preface to the book, and all the passages +in which Moses is spoken of in the third person, besides many which we +cannot now distinguish, though, doubtless, they would have been plainly +recognized by the writer's contemporaries. +</p> + +<p> +(112) If, I say, we were in possession of the book of the law as Moses wrote +it, I do not doubt that we should find a great difference in the words of +the precepts, the order in which they are given, and the reasons by which +they are supported. +</p> + +<p> +(113) A comparison of the decalogue in Deuteronomy with the decalogue in +Exodus, where its history is explicitly set forth, will be sufficient to +show us a wide discrepancy in all these three particulars, for the fourth +commandment is given not only in a different form, but at much greater +length, while the reason for its observance differs wholly from that stated +in Exodus. (114) Again, the order in which the tenth commandment is +explained differs in the two versions. (115) I think that the differences +here as elsewhere are the work of Ezra, who explained the law of God to his +contemporaries, and who wrote this book of the law of God, before anything +else; this I gather from the fact that it contains the laws of the country, +of which the people stood in most need, and also because it is not joined to +the book which precedes it by any connecting phrase, but begins with the +independent statement, "these are the words of Moses." (116) After this task +was completed, I think Ezra set himself to give a complete account of the +history of the Hebrew nation from the creation of the world to the entire +destruction of the city, and in this account he inserted the book of +Deuteronomy, and, possibly, he called the first five books by the name of +Moses, because his life is chiefly contained therein, and forms their +principal subject; for the same reason he called the sixth Joshua, the +seventh Judges, the eighth Ruth, the ninth, and perhaps the tenth, Samuel, +and, lastly, the eleventh and twelfth Kings. (117) Whether Ezra put the +finishing touches to this work and finished it as he intended, we will +discuss in the next chapter. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /></p> + +<p><a id="chap09"></a></p> +<h3> +CHAPTER IX - OTHER QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE SAME BOOKS: <br /> +NAMELY, WHETHER THEY WERE COMPLETELY FINISHED BY EZRA, <br /> +AND, FURTHER, WHETHER THE MARGINAL NOTES WHICH ARE FOUND <br /> +IN THE HEBREW TEXTS WERE VARIOUS READINGS. +</h3> + +<p> +(1) How greatly the inquiry we have just made concerning the real writer of +the twelve books aids us in attaining a complete understanding of them, may +be easily gathered solely from the passages which we have adduced in +confirmation of our opinion, and which would be most obscure without it. (2) +But besides the question of the writer, there are other points to notice +which common superstition forbids the multitude to apprehend. (3) Of these +the chief is, that Ezra (whom I will take to be the author of the aforesaid +books until some more likely person be suggested) did not put the finishing +touches to the narrative contained therein, but merely collected the +histories from various writers, and sometimes simply set them down, leaving +their examination and arrangement to posterity. +</p> + +<p> +(4) The cause (if it were not untimely death) which prevented him from +completing his work in all its portions, I cannot conjecture, but the fact +remains most clear, although we have lost the writings of the ancient Hebrew +historians, and can only judge from the few fragments which are still +extant. (5) For the history of Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii:17), as written in +the vision of Isaiah, is related as it is found in the chronicles of the +kings of Judah. (6) We read the same story, told with few exceptions, +[Endnote 11], in the same words, in the book of Isaiah which was contained +in the chronicles of the kings of Judah (2 Chron. xxxii:32). (7) From this +we must conclude that there were various versions of this narrative of +Isaiah's, unless, indeed, anyone would dream that in this, too, there lurks +a mystery. (8) Further, the last chapter of 2 Kings 27-30 is repeated in the +last chapter of Jeremiah, v.31-34. +</p> + +<p> +(9) Again, we find 2 Sam. vii. repeated in I Chron. xvii., but the +expressions in the two passages are so curiously varied [Endnote 12], that +we can very easily see that these two chapters were taken from two different +versions of the history of Nathan. +</p> + +<p> +(10) Lastly, the genealogy of the kings of Idumaea contained in Genesis +xxxvi:31, is repeated in the same words in 1 Chron. i., though we know that +the author of the latter work took his materials from other historians, not +from the twelve books we have ascribed to Ezra. (10) We may therefore be +sure that if we still possessed the writings of the historians, the matter +would be made clear; however, as we have lost them, we can only examine the +writings still extant, and from their order and connection, their various +repetitions, and, lastly, the contradictions in dates which they contain, +judge of the rest. +</p> + +<p> +(11) These, then, or the chief of them, we will now go through. (12) First, +in the story of Judah and Tamar (Gen. xxxviii.) the historian thus begins: +"And it came to pass at that time that Judah went down from his brethren." +(13) This time cannot refer to what immediately precedes [Endnote 13], but +must necessarily refer to something else, for from the time when Joseph was +sold into Egypt to the time when the patriarch Jacob, with all his family, +set out thither, cannot be reckoned as more than twenty-two years, for +Joseph, when he was sold by his brethren, was seventeen years old, and when +he was summoned by Pharaoh from prison was thirty; if to this we add the +seven years of plenty and two of famine, the total amounts to twenty-two +years. (14) Now, in so short a period, no one can suppose that so many +things happened as are described; that Judah had three children, one after +the other, from one wife, whom he married at the beginning of the period; +that the eldest of these, when he was old enough, married Tamar, and that +after he died his next brother succeeded to her; that, after all this, +Judah, without knowing it, had intercourse with his daughter-in-law, and +that she bore him twins, and, finally, that the eldest of these twins became +a father within the aforesaid period. (15) As all these events cannot have +taken place within the period mentioned in Genesis, the reference must +necessarily be to something treated of in another book: and Ezra in this +instance simply related the story, and inserted it without examination among +his other writings. +</p> + +<p> +(16) However, not only this chapter but the whole narrative of Joseph and +Jacob is collected and set forth from various histories, inasmuch as it is +quite inconsistent with itself. (17) For in Gen. xlvii. we are told that +Jacob, when he came at Joseph's bidding to salute Pharaoh, was 130 years +old. (18) If from this we deduct the twenty-two years which he passed +sorrowing for the absence of Joseph and the seventeen years forming Joseph's +age when he was sold, and, lastly, the seven years for which Jacob served +for Rachel, we find that he was very advanced in life, namely, eighty four, +when he took Leah to wife, whereas Dinah was scarcely seven years old when +she was violated by Shechem, [Endnote 14]. (19) Simeon and Levi were aged +respectively eleven and twelve when they spoiled the city and slew all the +males therein with the sword. +</p> + +<p> +(20) There is no need that I should go through the whole Pentateuch. (21) If +anyone pays attention to the way in which all the histories and precepts in +these five books are set down promiscuously and without order, with no +regard for dates; and further, how the same story is often repeated, +sometimes in a different version, he will easily, I say, discern that all +the materials were promiscuously collected and heaped together, in order +that they might at some subsequent time be more readily examined and reduced +to order. (22) Not only these five books, but also the narratives contained +in the remaining seven, going down to the destruction of the city, are +compiled in the same way. (23) For who does not see that in Judges ii:6 a +new historian is being quoted, who had also written of the deeds of Joshua, +and that his words are simply copied? (24) For after our historian has +stated in the last chapter of the book of Joshua that Joshua died and was +buried, and has promised, in the first chapter of Judges, to relate what +happened after his death, in what way, if he wished to continue the thread +of his history, could he connect the statement here made about Joshua with +what had gone before? +</p> + +<p> +(25) So, too, 1 Sam. 17, 18, are taken from another historian, who assigns a +cause for David's first frequenting Saul's court very different from that +given in chap. xvi. of the same book. (26) For he did not think that David +came to Saul in consequence of the advice of Saul's servants, as is +narrated in chap. xvi., but that being sent by chance to the camp by his +father on a message to his brothers, he was for the first time remarked by +Saul on the occasion of his victory, over Goliath the Philistine, and was +retained at his court. +</p> + +<p> +(27) I suspect the same thing has taken place in chap. xxvi. of the same +book, for the historian there seems to repeat the narrative given in chap. +xxiv. according to another man's version. (28) But I pass over this, and go +on to the computation of dates. +</p> + +<p> +(29) In I Kings, chap. vi., it is said that Solomon built the Temple in the +four hundred and eightieth year after the exodus from Egypt; but from the +historians themselves we get a much longer period, for: +</p> + +<pre> + Years. + Moses governed the people in the desert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 + Joshua, who lived 110 years, did not, according to Josephus and + others' opinion rule more than . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 + Cusban Rishathaim held the people in subjection . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + Othniel, son of Kenag, was judge for . . . . . . . . . [Endnote 15] 40 + Eglon, King of Moab, governed the people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + Ehud and Shamgar were judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 + Jachin, King of Canaan, held the people in subjection . . . . . . . . 20 + The people was at peace subsequently for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 + It was under subjection to Median . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + It obtained freedom under Gideon for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 + It fell under the rule of Abimelech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + Tola, son of Puah, was judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 + Jair was judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + The people was in subjection to the Philistines and Ammonites . . . . 18 + Jephthah was judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + Ibzan, the Bethlehemite, was judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + Elon, the Zabulonite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + Abclon, the Pirathonite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + The people was again subject to the Philistines . . . . . . . . . . . 40 + Samson was judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [Endnote 16] 20 + Eli was judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 + The people again fell into subjection to the Philistines, + till they were delivered by Samuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + David reigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 + Solomon reigned before he built the temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 +</pre> + +<p> +(30) All these periods added together make a total of 580 years. (31) But to +these must be added the years during which the Hebrew republic flourished +after the death of Joshua, until it was conquered by Cushan Rishathaim, +which I take to be very numerous, for I cannot bring myself to believe that +immediately after the death of Joshua all those who had witnessed his +miracles died simultaneously, nor that their successors at one stroke bid +farewell to their laws, and plunged from the highest virtue into the depth +of wickedness and obstinacy. +</p> + +<p> +(32) Nor, lastly, that Cushan Rishathaim subdued them on the instant; each +one of these circumstances requires almost a generation, and there is no +doubt that Judges ii:7, 9, 10, comprehends a great many years which it +passes over in silence. (33) We must also add the years during which Samuel +was judge, the number of which is not stated in Scripture, and also the +years during which Saul reigned, which are not clearly shown from his +history. (34) It is, indeed, stated in 1 Sam. xiii:1, that he reigned two +years, but the text in that passage is mutilated, and the records of his +reign lead us to suppose a longer period. (35) That the text is mutilated I +suppose no one will doubt who has ever advanced so far as the threshold of +the Hebrew language, for it runs as follows: "Saul was in his — year, when +he began to reign, and he reigned two years over Israel." (36) Who, I say, +does not see that the number of the years of Saul's age when he began to +reign has been omitted? (37) That the record of the reign presupposes a +greater number of years is equally beyond doubt, for in the same book, chap. +xxvii:7, it is stated that David sojourned among the Philistines, to whom he +had fled on account of Saul, a year and four months; thus the rest of the +reign must have been comprised in a space of eight months, which I think +no one will credit. (38) Josephus, at the end of the sixth book of his +antiquities, thus corrects the text: Saul reigned eighteen years while +Samuel was alive, and two years after his death. (39) However, all the +narrative in chap. xiii. is in complete disagreement with what goes before. +(40) At the end of chap. vii. it is narrated that the Philistines were so +crushed by the Hebrews that they did not venture, during Samuel's life, to +invade the borders of Israel; but in chap. xiii. we are told that the +Hebrews were invaded during the life of Samuel by the Philistines, and +reduced by them to such a state of wretchedness and poverty that they were +deprived not only of weapons with which to defend themselves, but also of +the means of making more. (41) I should be at pains enough if I were to try +and harmonize all the narratives contained in this first book of Samuel so +that they should seem to be all written and arranged by a single historian. +(42) But I return to my object. (43) The years, then, during which Saul +reigned must be added to the above computation; and, lastly, I have not +counted the years of the Hebrew anarchy, for I cannot from Scripture gather +their number. (44) I cannot, I say, be certain as to the period occupied by +the events related in Judges chap. xvii. on till the end of the book. +</p> + +<p> +(45) It is thus abundantly evident that we cannot arrive at a true +computation of years from the histories, and, further, that the histories +are inconsistent themselves on the subject. (46) We are compelled to confess +that these histories were compiled from various writers without previous +arrangement and examination. (47) Not less discrepancy is found between the +dates given in the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, and those in the +Chronicles of the Kings of Israel; in the latter, it is stated that Jehoram, +the son of Ahab, began to reign in the second year of the reign of Jehoram, +the son of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings i:17), but in the former we read that +Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat, began to reign in the fifth year of +Jehoram, the son of Ahab (2 Kings viii:16). (48) Anyone who compares the +narratives in Chronicles with the narratives in the books of Kings, will +find many similar discrepancies. (49) These there is no need for me to +examine here, and still less am I called upon to treat of the commentaries +of those who endeavour to harmonize them. (50) The Rabbis evidently let their +fancy run wild. (51) Such commentators as I have, read, dream, invent, and +as a last resort, play fast and loose with the language. (52) For instance, +when it is said in 2 Chronicles, that Ahab was forty-two years old when he +began to reign, they pretend that these years are computed from the reign of +Omri, not from the birth of Ahab. (53) If this can be shown to be the real +meaning of the writer of the book of Chronicles, all I can say is, that he +did not know how to state a fact. (54) The commentators make many other +assertions of this kind, which if true, would prove that the ancient Hebrews +were ignorant both of their own language, and of the way to relate a plain +narrative. (55) I should in such case recognize no rule or reason in +interpreting Scripture, but it would be permissible to hypothesize to one's +heart's content. +</p> + +<p> +(56) If anyone thinks that I am speaking too generally, and without +sufficient warrant, I would ask him to set himself to showing us some fixed +plan in these histories which might be followed without blame by other +writers of chronicles, and in his efforts at harmonizing and interpretation, +so strictly to observe and explain the phrases and expressions, the order +and the connections, that we may be able to imitate these also in our +writings (17). (57) If he succeeds, I will at once give him my hand, and he +shall be to me as great Apollo; for I confess that after long endeavours I +have been unable to discover anything of the kind. (58) I may add that I set +down nothing here which I have not long reflected upon, and that, though I +was imbued from my boyhood up with the ordinary opinions about the +Scriptures, I have been unable to withstand the force of what I have urged. +</p> + +<p> +(59) However, there is no need to detain the reader with this question, and +drive him to attempt an impossible task; I merely mentioned the fact in +order to throw light on my intention. +</p> + +<p> +(60) I now pass on to other points concerning the treatment of these books. +(61) For we must remark, in addition to what has been shown, that these +books were not guarded by posterity with such care that no faults crept in. +(62) The ancient scribes draw attention to many doubtful readings, and some +mutilated passages, but not to all that exist: whether the faults are +of sufficient importance to greatly embarrass the reader I will not now +discuss. (63) I am inclined to think that they are of minor moment to those, +at any rate, who read the Scriptures with enlightenment: and I can +positively, affirm that I have not noticed any fault or various reading in +doctrinal passages sufficient to render them obscure or doubtful. +</p> + +<p> +(64) There are some people, however, who will not admit that there is any +corruption, even in other passages, but maintain that by some unique +exercise of providence God has preserved from corruption every word in the +Bible: they say that the various readings are the symbols of profoundest +mysteries, and that mighty secrets lie hid in the twenty-eight hiatus which +occur, nay, even in the very form of the letters. +</p> + +<p> +(65) Whether they are actuated by folly and anile devotion, or whether by +arrogance and malice so that they alone may be held to possess the secrets +of God, I know not: this much I do know, that I find in their writings +nothing which has the air of a Divine secret, but only childish +lucubrations. (66) I have read and known certain Kabbalistic triflers, whose +insanity provokes my unceasing astonishment. (67) That faults have crept +in will, I think, be denied by no sensible person who reads the passage +about Saul, above quoted (1 Sam. xiii:1) and also 2 Sam. vi:2: "And David +arose and went with all the people that were with him from Judah, to bring +up from thence the ark of God." +</p> + +<p> +(68) No one can fail to remark that the name of their destination, viz., +Kirjath-jearim [Endnote 18], has been omitted: nor can we deny that +2 Sam. xiii:37, has been tampered with and mutilated. "And Absalom fled, and +went to Talmai, the son of Ammihud, king of Geshur. (69) And he mourned for +his son every day. So Absalom fled, and went to Geshur, and was there three +years." (70) I know that I have remarked other passages of the same kind, +but I cannot recall them at the moment. +</p> + +<p> +(71) That the marginal notes which are found continually in the Hebrew +Codices are doubtful readings will, I think, be evident to everyone who has +noticed that they often arise from the great similarity, of some of the +Hebrew letters, such for instance, as the similarity between Kaph and Beth, +Jod and Vau, Daleth and Reth, &c. (72) For example, the text in +2 Sam. v:24, runs "in the time when thou hearest," and similarly in +Judges xxi:22, "And it shall be when their fathers or their brothers come +unto us often," the marginal version is "come unto us to complain." +</p> + +<p> +(73) So also many various readings have arisen from the use of the letters +named mutes, which are generally not sounded in pronunciation, and are taken +promiscuously, one for the other. (74) For example, in Levit. xxv:29, it is +written, "The house shall be established which is not in the walled city," +but the margin has it, "which is in a walled city." +</p> + +<p> +(75) Though these matters are self-evident, [Endnore 6], it is necessary, to +answer the reasonings of certain Pharisees, by which they endeavour to +convince us that the marginal notes serve to indicate some mystery, and were +added or pointed out by the writers of the sacred books. (76) The first of +these reasons, which, in my opinion, carries little weight, is taken from +the practice of reading the Scriptures aloud. +</p> + +<p> +(77) If, it is urged, these notes were added to show various readings which +could not be decided upon by posterity, why has custom prevailed that the +marginal readings should always be retained? (78) Why has the meaning which +is preferred been set down in the margin when it ought to have been +incorporated in the text, and not relegated to a side note? +</p> + +<p> +(79) The second reason is more specious, and is taken from the nature of the +case. (80) It is admitted that faults have crept into the sacred writings by +chance and not by design; but they say that in the five books the word for a +girl is, with one exception, written without the letter "he," contrary to +all grammatical rules, whereas in the margin it is written correctly +according to the universal rule of grammar. (81) Can this have happened by +mistake? Is it possible to imagine a clerical error to have been committed +every time the word occurs? (82) Moreover, it would have been easy to +supply the emendation. (83) Hence, when these readings are not accidental +or corrections of manifest mistakes, it is supposed that they must have been +set down on purpose by the original writers, and have a meaning. (84) +However, it is easy to answer such arguments; as to the question of custom +having prevailed in the reading of the marginal versions, I will not spare +much time for its consideration: I know not the promptings of superstition, +and perhaps the practice may have arisen from the idea that both readings +were deemed equally good or tolerable, and therefore, lest either should be +neglected, one was appointed to be written, and the other to be read. (85) +They feared to pronounce judgment in so weighty a matter lest they should +mistake the false for the true, and therefore they would give preference to +neither, as they must necessarily have done if they had commanded one only +to be both read and written. (86) This would be especially the case where +the marginal readings were not written down in the sacred books: or the +custom may have originated because some things though rightly written down +were desired to be read otherwise according to the marginal version, and +therefore the general rule was made that the marginal version should be +followed in reading the Scriptures. (87) The cause which induced the scribes +to expressly prescribe certain passages to be read in the marginal version, +I will now touch on, for not all the marginal notes are various readings, +but some mark expressions which have passed out of common use, obsolete +words and terms which current decency did not allow to be read in a public +assembly. (88) The ancient writers, without any evil intention, employed no +courtly paraphrase, but called things by their plain names. (891) +Afterwards, through the spread of evil thoughts and luxury, words which +could be used by the ancients without offence, came to be considered +obscene. (90) There was no need for this cause to change the text of +Scripture. (91) Still, as a concession to the popular weakness, it became +the custom to substitute more decent terms for words denoting sexual +intercourse, excreta, &c., and to read them as they were given in the +margin. +</p> + +<p> +(92) At any rate, whatever may have been the origin of the practice of +reading Scripture according to the marginal version, it was not that the +true interpretation is contained therein. (93) For besides that, the +Rabbins in the Talmud often differ from the Massoretes, and give other +readings which they approve of, as I will shortly show, certain things are +found in the margin which appear less warranted by the uses of the Hebrew +language. (94) For example, in 2 Samuel xiv:22, we read, "In that the king +hath fulfilled the request of his servant," a construction plainly +regular, and agreeing with that in chap. xvi. (95) But the margin has it +"of thy servant," which does not agree with the person of the verb. (96) +So, too, chap. xvi:25 of the same book, we find, "As if one had inquired at +the oracle of God," the margin adding "someone" to stand as a nominative to +the verb. (97) But the correction is not apparently warranted, for it is +a common practice, well known to grammarians in the Hebrew language, to use +the third person singular of the active verb impersonally. +</p> + +<p> +(98) The second argument advanced by the Pharisees is easily answered from +what has just been said, namely, that the scribes besides the various +readings called attention to obsolete words. (99) For there is no doubt +that in Hebrew as in other languages, changes of use made many words +obsolete and antiquated, and such were found by the later scribes in the +sacred books and noted by them with a view to the books being publicly read +according to custom. (100) For this reason the word nahgar is always found +marked because its gender was originally common, and it had the same meaning +as the Latin juvenis (a young person). (101) So also the Hebrew capital was +anciently called Jerusalem, not Jerusalaim. (102) As to the pronouns himself +and herself, I think that the later scribes changed vau into jod (a very +frequent change in Hebrew) when they wished to express the feminine gender, +but that the ancients only distinguished the two genders by a change of +vowels. (103) I may also remark that the irregular tenses of certain verbs +differ in the ancient and modern forms, it being formerly considered a mark +of elegance to employ certain letters agreeable to the ear. +</p> + +<p> +(104) In a word, I could easily multiply proofs of this kind if I were not +afraid of abusing the patience of the reader. (105) Perhaps I shall be asked +how I became acquainted with the fact that all these expressions are +obsolete. (106) I reply that I have found them in the most ancient Hebrew +writers in the Bible itself, and that they have not been imitated by +subsequent authors, and thus they are recognized as antiquated, though the +language in which they occur is dead. (107) But perhaps someone may press +the question why, if it be true, as I say, that the marginal notes of the +Bible generally mark various readings, there are never more than two +readings of a passage, that in the text and that in the margin, instead of +three or more; and further, how the scribes can have hesitated between two +readings, one of which is evidently contrary to grammar, and the other a +plain correction. +</p> + +<p> +(108) The answer to these questions also is easy: I will premise that it is +almost certain that there once were more various readings than those now +recorded. (119) For instance, one finds many in the Talmud which the +Massoretes have neglected, and are so different one from the other that +even the superstitious editor of the Bomberg Bible confesses that he cannot +harmonize them. (110) "We cannot say anything," he writes, "except what we +have said above, namely, that the Talmud is generally in contradiction to +the Massorete." (111) So that we are nor bound to hold that there never were +more than two readings of any passage, yet I am willing to admit, and +indeed I believe that more than two readings are never found: and for the +following reasons:-(112) (I.) The cause of the differences of reading only +admits of two, being generally the similarity of certain letters, so that +the question resolved itself into which should be written Beth, or Kaf, +Jod or Vau, Daleth or Reth: cases which are constantly occurring, and +frequently yielding a fairly good meaning whichever alternative be adopted. +(113) Sometimes, too, it is a question whether a syllable be long or short, +quantity being determined by the letters called mutes. (114) Moreover, we +never asserted that all the marginal versions, without exception, marked +various readings; on the contrary, we have stated that many were due to +motives of decency or a desire to explain obsolete words. (115) (II.) I am +inclined to attribute the fact that more than two readings are never found +to the paucity of exemplars, perhaps not more than two or three, found by +the scribes. (116) In the treatise of the scribes, chap. vi., mention is +made of three only, pretended to have been found in the time of Ezra, in +order that the marginal versions might be attributed to him. +</p> + +<p> +(117) However that may be, if the scribes only had three codices we may +easily imagine that in a given passage two of them would be in accord, for +it would be extraordinary if each one of the three gave a different reading +of the same text. +</p> + +<p> +(118) The dearth of copies after the time of Ezra will surprise no one who +has read the 1st chapter of Maccabees, or Josephus's "Antiquities," Bk. 12, +chap. 5. (119) Nay, it appears wonderful considering the fierce and daily +persecution, that even these few should have been preserved. (120) This +will, I think, be plain to even a cursory reader of the history of those +times. +</p> + +<p> +(121) We have thus discovered the reasons why there are never more than two +readings of a passage in the Bible, but this is a long way from supposing +that we may therefore conclude that the Bible was purposely written +incorrectly in such passages in order to signify some mystery. (122) As to +the second argument, that some passages are so faultily written that they +are at plain variance with all grammar, and should have been corrected in +the text and not in the margin, I attach little weight to it, for I am not +concerned to say what religious motive the scribes may have had for acting +as they did: possibly they did so from candour, wishing to transmit the few +exemplars of the Bible which they had found exactly in their original state, +marking the differences they discovered in the margin, not as doubtful +readings, but as simple variants. (123) I have myself called them doubtful +readings, because it would be generally impossible to say which of the two +versions is preferable. +</p> + +<p> +(124) Lastly, besides these doubtful readings the scribes have (by leaving a +hiatus in the middle of a paragraph) marked several passages as mutilated. +(125) The Massoretes have counted up such instances, and they amount to +eight-and-twenty. (126) I do not know whether any mystery is thought to lurk +in the number, at any rate the Pharisees religiously preserve a certain +amount of empty space. +</p> + +<p> +(127) One of such hiatus occurs (to give an instance) in Gen. iv:8, where it +is written, "And Cain said to his brother . . . . and it came to pass while +they were in the field, &c.," a space being left in which we should expect +to hear what it was that Cain said. +</p> + +<p> +(128) Similarly there are (besides those points we have noticed) +eight-and-twenty hiatus left by the scribes. (129) Many of these would not +be recognized as mutilated if it were not for the empty space left. But I +have said enough on this subject. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /></p> + +<p><a id="chap10"></a></p> +<h3> +CHAPTER X. - AN EXAMINATION OF THE REMAINING BOOKS OF<br /> +THE OLD TESTAMENT ACCORDING TO THE PRECEDING METHOD. +</h3> + +<p> +(1) I now pass on to the remaining books of the Old Testament. (2) +Concerning the two books of Chronicles I have nothing particular or +important to remark, except that they were certainly written after the time +of Ezra, and possibly after the restoration of the Temple by Judas +Maccabaeus [Endnote 19]. (2) For in chap. ix. of the first book we find a +reckoning of the families who were the first to live in Jerusalem, and in +verse 17 the names of the porters, of which two recur in Nehemiah. (3) This +shows that the books were certainly compiled after the rebuilding of the +city. (4) As to their actual writer, their authority, utility, and doctrine, +I come to no conclusion. (5) I have always been astonished that they have +been included in the Bible by men who shut out from the canon the books of +Wisdom, Tobit, and the others styled apocryphal. (6) I do not aim at +disparaging their authority, but as they are universally received I will +leave them as they are. +</p> + +<p> +(7) The Psalms were collected and divided into five books in the time of the +second temple, for Ps. lxxxviii. was published, according to Philo-Judaeus, +while king Jehoiachin was still a prisoner in Babylon; and Ps. lxxxix. when +the same king obtained his liberty: I do not think Philo would have made the +statement unless either it had been the received opinion in his time, or +else had been told him by trustworthy persons. +</p> + +<p> +(8) The Proverbs of Solomon were, I believe, collected at the same time, or +at least in the time of King Josiah; for in chap. xxv:1, it is written, +"These are also proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah, king of +Judah, copied out." (9) I cannot here pass over in silence the audacity +of the Rabbis who wished to exclude from the sacred canon both the Proverbs +and Ecclesiastes, and to put them both in the Apocrypha. (10) In fact, they +would actually have done so, if they had not lighted on certain passages in +which the law of Moses is extolled. (11) It is, indeed, grievous to think +that the settling of the sacred canon lay in the hands of such men; however, +I congratulate them, in this instance, on their suffering us to see these +books in question, though I cannot refrain from doubting whether they have +transmitted them in absolute good faith; but I will not now linger on this +point. +</p> + +<p> +(10) I pass on, then, to the prophetic books. (11) An examination of these +assures me that the prophecies therein contained have been compiled from +other books, and are not always set down in the exact order in which they +were spoken or written by the prophets, but are only such as were collected +here and there, so that they are but fragmentary. +</p> + +<p> +(12) Isaiah began to prophecy in the reign of Uzziah, as the writer himself +testifies in the first verse. (13) He not only prophesied at that time, but +furthermore wrote the history of that king (see 2 Chron. xxvi:22) in a +volume now lost. (13) That which we possess, we have shown to have been +taken from the chronicles of the kings of Judah and Israel. +</p> + +<p> +(14) We may add that the Rabbis assert that this prophet prophesied in the +reign of Manasseh, by whom he was eventually put to death, and, although +this seems to be a myth, it yet shows that they did not think that all +Isaiah's prophecies are extant. +</p> + +<p> +(15) The prophecies of Jeremiah, which are related historically are also +taken from various chronicles; for not only are they heaped together +confusedly, without any account being taken of dates, but also the same +story is told in them differently in different passages. (16) For instance, +in chap. xxi. we are told that the cause of Jeremiah's arrest was that he +had prophesied the destruction of the city to Zedekiah who consulted him. +(17) This narrative suddenly passes, in chap xxii., to the prophet's +remonstrances to Jehoiakim (Zedekiah's predecessor), and the prediction he +made of that king's captivity; then, in chap. xxv., come the revelations +granted to the prophet previously, that is in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, +and, further on still, the revelations received in the first year of the +same reign. (18) The continuator of Jeremiah goes on heaping prophecy +upon prophecy without any regard to dates, until at last, in chap. xxxviii. +(as if the intervening chapters had been a parenthesis), he takes up the +thread dropped in chap. xxi. +</p> + +<p> +(19) In fact, the conjunction with which chap. xxxviii. begins, refers to +the 8th, 9th, and 10th verses of chap. xxi. Jeremiah's last arrest is then +very differently described, and a totally separate cause is given for his +daily retention in the court of the prison. +</p> + +<p> +(20) We may thus clearly see that these portions of the book have been +compiled from various sources, and are only from this point of view +comprehensible. (21) The prophecies contained in the remaining chapters, +where Jeremiah speaks in the first person, seem to be taken from a +book written by Baruch, at Jeremiah's dictation. (22) These, however, only +comprise (as appears from chap. xxxvi:2) the prophecies revealed to the +prophet from the time of Josiah to the fourth year of Jehoiakim, at which +period the book begins. (23) The contents of chap. xlv:2, on to chap. +li:59, seem taken from the same volume. +</p> + +<p> +(24) That the book of Ezekiel is only a fragment, is clearly indicated by +the first verse. (25) For anyone may see that the conjunction with which it +begins, refers to something already said, and connects what follows +therewith. (26) However, not only this conjunction, but the whole text +of the discourse implies other writings. (27) The fact of the present work +beginning the thirtieth year shows that the prophet is continuing, not +commencing a discourse; and this is confirmed by the writer, who +parenthetically states in verse 3, "The word of the Lord came often unto +Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans," as if to +say that the prophecies which he is about to relate are the sequel to +revelations formerly received by Ezekiel from God. (28) Furthermore, +Josephus, 11 Antiq." x:9, says that Ezekiel prophesied that Zedekiah should +not see Babylon, whereas the book we now have not only contains no such +statement, but contrariwise asserts in chap. xvii. that he should be taken +to Babylon as a captive, [Endnote 20]. +</p> + +<p> +(29) Of Hosea I cannot positively state that he wrote more than is now +extant in the book bearing his name, but I am astonished at the smallness of +the quantity we possess, for the sacred writer asserts that the prophet +prophesied for more than eighty years. +</p> + +<p> +(30) We may assert, speaking generally, that the compiler of the prophetic +books neither collected all the prophets, nor all the writings of those we +have; for of the prophets who are said to have prophesied in the reign of +Manasseh and of whom general mention is made in 2 Chron. xxxiii:10, 18, we +have, evidently, no prophecies extant; neither have we all the prophecies of +the twelve who give their names to books. (31) Of Jonah we have only the +prophecy concerning the Ninevites, though he also prophesied to the children +of Israel, as we learn in 2 Kings xiv:25. +</p> + +<p> +(32) The book and the personality of Job have caused much controversy. (33) +Some think that the book is the work of Moses, and the whole narrative +merely allegorical. (34) Such is the opinion of the Rabbins recorded in the +Talmud, and they are supported by, Maimonides in his "More Nebuchim." (35) +Others believe it to be a true history, and some suppose that Job lived in +the time of Jacob, and was married to his daughter Dinah. (36) Aben Ezra, +however, as I have already stated, affirms, in his commentaries, that the +work is a translation into Hebrew from some other language: I could wish +that he could advance more cogent arguments than he does, for we might then +conclude that the Gentiles also had sacred books. (37) I myself leave the +matter undecided, but I conjecture Job to have been a Gentile, and a man of +very stable character, who at first prospered, then was assailed with +terrible calamities, and finally, was restored to great happiness. (38) (He +is thus named, among others, by Ezekiel, xiv:12.) (39) I take it that the +constancy of his mind amid the vicissitudes of his fortune occasioned many +men to dispute about God's providence, or at least caused the writer of the +book in question to compose his dialogues; for the contents, and also the +style, seem to emanate far less from a man wretchedly ill and lying among +ashes, than from one reflecting at ease in his study. (40) I should also be +inclined to agree with Aben Ezra that the book is a translation, for its +poetry seems akin to that of the Gentiles; thus the Father of Gods summons a +council, and Momus, here called Satan, criticizes the Divine decrees with +the utmost freedom. (41) But these are mere conjectures without any solid +foundation. +</p> + +<p> +(42) I pass on to the book of Daniel, which, from chap. viii. onwards, +undoubtedly contains the writing of Daniel himself. (43) Whence the first +seven chapters are derived I cannot say; we may, however, conjecture that, +as they were first written in Chaldean, they are taken from Chaldean +chronicles. (44) If this could be proved, it would form a very striking +proof of the fact that the sacredness of Scripture depends on our +understanding of the doctrines therein signified, and not on the words, the +language, and the phrases in which these doctrines are conveyed to us; +and it would further show us that books which teach and speak of whatever is +highest and best are equally sacred, whatever be the tongue in which they +are written, or the nation to which they belong. +</p> + +<p> +(45) We can, however, in this case only remark that the chapters in question +were written in Chaldee, and yet are as sacred as the rest of the Bible. +</p> + +<p> +(46) The first book of Ezra is so intimately connected with the book of +Daniel that both are plainly recognizable as the work of the same author, +writing of Jewish history from the time of the first captivity onwards. (47) +I have no hesitation in joining to this the book of Esther, for the +conjunction with which it begins can refer to nothing else. (48) It cannot +be the same work as that written by Mordecai, for, in chap. ix:20-22, +another person relates that Mordecai wrote letters, and tells us their +contents; further, that Queen Esther confirmed the days of Purim in their +times appointed, and that the decree was written in the book that is (by a +Hebraism), in a book known to all then living, which, as Aben Ezra and the +rest confess, has now perished. (49) Lastly, for the rest of the acts of +Mordecai, the historian refers us to the chronicles of the kings of +Persia. (50) Thus there is no doubt that this book was written by the same +person as he who recounted the history of Daniel and Ezra, and who wrote +Nehemiah, [Endnote 21], sometimes called the second book of Ezra. (51) We +may, then, affirm that all these books are from one hand; but we have no +clue whatever to the personality of the author. (52) However, in order to +determine whence he, whoever he was, had gained a knowledge of the histories +which he had, perchance, in great measure himself written, we may remark +that the governors or chiefs of the Jews, after the restoration of the +Temple, kept scribes or historiographers, who wrote annals or chronicles of +them. (53) The chronicles of the kings are often quoted in the books of +Kings, but the chronicles of the chiefs and priests are quoted for the first +time in Nehemiah xii:23, and again in 1 Macc. xvi:24. (54) This is +undoubtedly the book referred to as containing the decree of Esther and the +acts of Mordecai; and which, as we said with Aben Ezra, is now lost. (55) +From it were taken the whole contents of these four books, for no other +authority is quoted by their writer, or is known to us. +</p> + +<p> +(56) That these books were not written by either Ezra or Nehemiah is plain +from Nehemiah xii:9, where the descendants of the high priest, Joshua are +traced down to Jaddua, the sixth high priest, who went to meet Alexander the +Great, when the Persian empire was almost subdued (Josephus, "Ant." ii. +108), or who, according to Philo-Judaeus, was the sixth and last high priest +under the Persians. (57) In the same chapter of Nehemiah, verse 22, this +point is clearly brought out: "The Levites in the days of Eliashib, Joiada, +and Johanan, and Jaddua, were recorded chief of the fathers: also the +priests, to the reign of Darius the Persian" - that is to say, in the +chronicles; and, I suppose, no one thinks [Endnote 22] that the lives of +Nehemiah and Ezra were so prolonged that they outlived fourteen kings of +Persia. (58) Cyrus was the first who granted the Jews permission to rebuild +their Temple: the period between his time and Darius, fourteenth and last +king of Persia, extends over 230 years. (59) I have, therefore, no doubt +that these books were written after Judas Maccabaeus had restored the +worship in the Temple, for at that time false books of Daniel, Ezra, and +Esther were published by evil-disposed persons, who were almost certainly +Sadducees, for the writings were never recognized by the Pharisees, so far +as I am aware; and, although certain myths in the fourth book of Ezra are +repeated in the Talmud, they must not be set down to the Pharisees, for all +but the most ignorant admit that they have been added by some trifler: in +fact, I think, someone must have made such additions with a view to casting +ridicule on all the traditions of the sect. +</p> + +<p> +(60) Perhaps these four books were written out and published at the time I +have mentioned with a view to showing the people that the prophecies of +Daniel had been fulfilled, and thus kindling their piety, and awakening a +hope of future deliverance in the midst of their misfortunes. (61) In +spite of their recent origin, the books before us contain many errors, due, +I suppose, to the haste with which they were written. (62) Marginal +readings, such as I have mentioned in the last chapter, are found here as +elsewhere, and in even greater abundance; there are, moreover, certain +passages which can only be accounted for by supposing some such cause as +hurry. +</p> + +<p> +(63) However, before calling attention to the marginal readings, I will +remark that, if the Pharisees are right in supposing them to have been +ancient, and the work of the original scribes, we must perforce admit that +these scribes (if there were more than one) set them down because they +found that the text from which they were copying was inaccurate, and did yet +not venture to alter what was written by their predecessors and superiors. +(64) I need not again go into the subject at length, and will, therefore, +proceed to mention some discrepancies not noticed in the margin. +</p> + +<p> +(65) I. Some error has crept into the text of the second chapter of Ezra, +for in verse 64 we are told that the total of all those mentioned in the +rest of the chapter amounts to 42,360; but, when we come to add up the +several items we get as result only 29,818. (66) There must, therefore, be +an error, either in the total, or in the details. (67) The total is probably +correct, for it would most likely be well known to all as a noteworthy +thing; but with the details, the case would be different. (68) If, then, any +error had crept into the total, it would at once have been remarked, and +easily corrected. (69) This view is confirmed by Nehemiah vii., where this +chapter of Ezra is mentioned, and a total is given in plain correspondence +thereto; but the details are altogether different - some are larger, and +some less, than those in Ezra, and altogether they amount to 31,089. +(70) We may, therefore, conclude that both in Ezra and in Nehemiah the +details are erroneously given. (71) The commentators who attempt to +harmonize these evident contradictions draw on their imagination, each to +the best of his ability; and while professing adoration for each letter and +word of Scripture, only succeed in holding up the sacred writers to +ridicule, as though they knew not how to write or relate a plain narrative. +(72) Such persons effect nothing but to render the clearness of Scripture +obscure. (73) If the Bible could everywhere be interpreted after their +fashion, there would be no such thing as a rational statement of which +the meaning could be relied on. (74) However, there is no need to dwell on +the subject; only I am convinced that if any historian were to attempt to +imitate the proceedings freely attributed to the writers of the Bible, the +commentators would cover him with contempt. (75) If it be blasphemy to +assert that there are any errors in Scripture, what name shall we apply to +those who foist into it their own fancies, who degrade the sacred writers +till they seem to write confused nonsense, and who deny the plainest and +most evident meanings? (76) What in the whole Bible can be plainer than the +fact that Ezra and his companions, in the second chapter of the book +attributed to him, have given in detail the reckoning of all the Hebrews who +set out with them for Jerusalem? (77) This is proved by the reckoning being +given, not only of those who told their lineage, but also of those who were +unable to do so. (78) Is it not equally clear from Nehemiah vii:5, that the +writer merely there copies the list given in Ezra? (79) Those, therefore, +who explain these passages otherwise, deny the plain meaning of Scripture - +nay, they deny Scripture itself. (80) They think it pious to reconcile one +passage of Scripture with another - a pretty piety, forsooth, which +accommodates the clear passages to the obscure, the correct to the faulty, +the sound to the corrupt. +</p> + +<p> +(81) Far be it from me to call such commentators blasphemers, if their +motives be pure: for to err is human. But I return to my subject. +</p> + +<p> +(82) Besides these errors in numerical details, there are others in the +genealogies, in the history, and, I fear also in the prophecies. (83) The +prophecy of Jeremiah (chap. xxii.), concerning Jechoniah, evidently does not +agree with his history, as given in I Chronicles iii:17-19, and especially +with the last words of the chapter, nor do I see how the prophecy, "thou +shalt die in peace," can be applied to Zedekiah, whose eyes were dug out +after his sons had been slain before him. (84) If prophecies are to be +interpreted by their issue, we must make a change of name, and read +Jechoniah for Zedekiah, and vice versa (85) This, however, would be too +paradoxical a proceeding; so I prefer to leave the matter unexplained, +especially as the error, if error there be, must be set down to the +historian, and not to any fault in the authorities. +</p> + +<p> +(86) Other difficulties I will not touch upon, as I should only weary the +reader, and, moreover, be repeating the remarks of other writers. (87) For +R. Selomo, in face of the manifest contradiction in the above-mentioned +genealogies, is compelled to break forth into these words (see his +commentary on 1 Chron. viii.): "Ezra (whom he supposes to be the author of +the book of Chronicles) gives different names and a different genealogy to +the sons of Benjamin from those which we find in Genesis, and describes most +of the Levites differently from Joshua, because he found original +discrepancies." (88) And, again, a little later: "The genealogy of Gibeon +and others is described twice in different ways, from different tables of +each genealogy, and in writing them down Ezra adopted the version given in +the majority of the texts, and when the authority was equal he gave both." +(89) Thus granting that these books were compiled from sources originally +incorrect and uncertain. +</p> + +<p> +(90) In fact the commentators, in seeking to harmonize difficulties, +generally do no more than indicate their causes: for I suppose no sane +person supposes that the sacred historians deliberately wrote with the +object of appearing to contradict themselves freely. (91) Perhaps I +shall be told that I am overthrowing the authority of Scripture, for that, +according to me, anyone may suspect it of error in any passage; but, on the +contrary, I have shown that my object has been to prevent the clear and +uncorrupted passages being accommodated to and corrupted by the faulty ones; +neither does the fact that some passages are corrupt warrant us in +suspecting all. (92) No book ever was completely free from faults, yet I +would ask, who suspects all books to be everywhere faulty? (93) Surely no +one, especially when the phraseology is clear and the intention of the +author plain. +</p> + +<p> +(94) I have now finished the task I set myself with respect to the books of +the Old Testament. (95) We may easily conclude from what has been said, that +before the time of the Maccabees there was no canon of sacred books, +[Endnote 23], but that those which we now possess were selected from a +multitude of others at the period of the restoration of the Temple by the +Pharisees (who also instituted the set form of prayers), who are alone +responsible for their acceptance. (96) Those, therefore, who would +demonstrate the authority of Holy Scripture, are bound to show the authority +of each separate book; it is not enough to prove the Divine origin of a +single book in order to infer the Divine origin of the rest. (97) In that +case we should have to assume that the council of Pharisees was, in its +choice of books, infallible, and this could never be proved. (98) I am led +to assert that the Pharisees alone selected the books of the Old Testament, +and inserted them in the canon, from the fact that in Daniel xii. is +proclaimed the doctrine of the Resurrection, which the Sadducees denied; +and, furthermore, the Pharisees plainly assert in the Talmud that they so +selected them. (99) For in the treatise of Sabbathus, chapter ii., folio 30, +page 2, it is written: R. Jehuda, surnamed Rabbi, reports that the experts +wished to conceal the book of Ecclesiastes because they found therein words +opposed to the law (that is, to the book of the law of Moses). (100) Why did +they not hide it? (101) "Because it begins in accordance with the law, and +ends according to the law;" and a little further on we read: "They sought +also to conceal the book of Proverbs." (102) And in the first chapter of the +same treatise, fol. 13, page 2: "Verily, name one man for good, even he who +was called Neghunja, the son of Hezekiah: for, save for him, the book of +Ezekiel would been concealed, because it agreed not with the words of the +law." +</p> + +<p> +(103) It is thus abundantly clear that men expert in the law summoned a +council to decide which books should be received into the canon, and which +excluded. (104) If any man, therefore, wishes to be certified as to the +authority of all the books, let him call a fresh council, and ask every +member his reasons. +</p> + +<p> +(105) The time has now come for examining in the same manner the books in +the New Testament; but as I learn that the task has been already performed +by men highly skilled in science and languages, and as I do not myself +possess a knowledge of Greek sufficiently exact for the task; lastly, as we +have lost the originals of those books which were written in Hebrew, I +prefer to decline the undertaking. (106) However, I will touch on those +points which have most bearing on my subject in the following chapter. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3"> +End of Part 2. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /></p> + +<h3> +<a id="endnotes"></a> +AUTHOR'S ENDNOTES TO THE THEOLOGICO-POLITICAL TREATISE +</h3> + +<p class="t3b"> +Part 2 - Chapters VI to X +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3"> +CHAPTER VI. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 6. (1) We doubt of the existence of God, and consequently of +all else, so long as we have no clear and distinct idea of God, but only a +confused one. (2) For as he who knows not rightly the nature of a triangle, +knows not that its three angles are equal to two right angles, so he who +conceives the Divine nature confusedly, does not see that it pertains to the +nature of God to exist. (3) Now, to conceive the nature of God clearly and +distinctly, it is necessary to pay attention to a certain number of very +simple notions, called general notions, and by their help to associate the +conceptions which we form of the attributes of the Divine nature. (4) It +then, for the first time, becomes clear to us, that God exists necessarily, +that He is omnipresent, and that all our conceptions involve in themselves +the nature of God and are conceived through it. (5) Lastly, we see that all +our adequate ideas are true. (6) Compare on this point the prolegomena to +book, "Principles of Descartes's philosophy set forth geometrically." +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3"> +CHAPTER VII. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 7. (1) "It is impossible to find a method which would enable us to +gain a certain knowledge of all the statements in Scripture." (2) I mean +impossible for us who have not the habitual use of the language, and have +lost the precise meaning of its phraseology. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 8. (1) "Not in things whereof the understanding can gain a clear and +distinct idea, and which are conceivable through themselves." (2) By things +conceivable I mean not only those which are rigidly proved, but also those +whereof we are morally certain, and are wont to hear without wonder, though +they are incapable of proof. (3) Everyone can see the truth of Euclid's +propositions before they are proved. (4) So also the histories of things +both future and past which do not surpass human credence, laws, +institutions, manners, I call conceivable and clear, though they cannot be +proved mathematically. (5) But hieroglyphics and histories which seem to +pass the bounds of belief I call inconceivable; yet even among these last +there are many which our method enables us to investigate, and to discover +the meaning of their narrator. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3"> +CHAPTER VIII. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 9. (1) "Mount Moriah is called the mount of God." (2) That is by the +historian, not by Abraham, for he says that the place now called "In the +mount of the Lord it shall be revealed," was called by Abraham, "the Lord +shall provide." +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 10. (1) "Before that territory [Idumoea] was conquered by David." +(2) From this time to the reign of Jehoram when they again separated from +the Jewish kingdom (2 Kings viii:20), the Idumaeans had no king, princes +appointed by the Jews supplied the place of kings (1 Kings xxii:48), in fact +the prince of Idumaea is called a king (2 Kings iii:9). +</p> + +<p> +(3) It may be doubted whether the last of the Idumaean kings had begun to +reign before the accession of Saul, or whether Scripture in this chapter of +Genesis wished to enumerate only such kings as were independent. (4) It is +evidently mere trifling to wish to enrol among Hebrew kings the name of +Moses, who set up a dominion entirely different from a monarchy. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3"> +CHAPTER IX. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 11. (1) "With few exceptions." (2) One of these exceptions is found +in 2 Kings xviii:20, where we read, "Thou sayest (but they are but vain +words)," the second person being used. (3) In Isaiah xxxvi:5, we read "I +say (but they are but vain words) I have counsel and strength for war," and +in the twenty-second verse of the chapter in Kings it is written, "But if ye +say," the plural number being used, whereas Isaiah gives the singular. (4) +The text in Isaiah does not contain the words found in 2 Kings xxxii:32. (5) +Thus there are several cases of various readings where it is impossible to +distinguish the best. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 12. (1) "The expressions in the two passages are so varied." (2) For +instance we read in 2 Sam. vii:6, "But I have walked in a tent and in a +tabernacle." (3) Whereas in 1 Chron. xvii:5, "but have gone from tent to +tent and from one tabernacle to another." (4) In 2 Sam. vii:10, we read, "to +afflict them," whereas in 1 Chron. vii:9, we find a different expression. (5) +I could point out other differences still greater, but a single reading of +the chapters in question will suffice to make them manifest to all who are +neither blind nor devoid of sense. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 13. (1) "This time cannot refer to what immediately precedes." (2) +It is plain from the context that this passage must allude to the time when +Joseph was sold by his brethren. (3) But this is not all. (4) We may draw +the same conclusion from the age of Judah, who was than twenty-two years old +at most, taking as basis of calculation his own history just narrated. (5) +It follows, indeed, from the last verse of Gen. xxx., that Judah was born in +the tenth of the years of Jacob's servitude to Laban, and Joseph in the +fourteenth. (6) Now, as we know that Joseph was seventeen years old when +sold by his brethren, Judah was then not more than twenty-one. (7) Hence, +those writers who assert that Judah's long absence from his father's +house took place before Joseph was sold, only seek to delude themselves and +to call in question the Scriptural authority which they are anxious to +protect. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 14. (1) "Dinah was scarcely seven years old when she was violated by +Schechem." (2) The opinion held by some that Jacob wandered about eight or +ten years between Mesopotamia and Bethel, savours of the ridiculous; if +respect for Aben Ezra, allows me to say so. (3) For it is clear that Jacob +had two reasons for haste: first, the desire to see his old parents; +secondly, and chiefly to perform, the vow made when he fled from his brother +(Gen. xxviii:10 and xxxi:13, and xxxv:1). (4) We read (Gen. xxxi:3), that +God had commanded him to fulfill his vow, and promised him help for +returning to his country. (5) If these considerations seem conjectures +rather than reasons, I will waive the point and admit that Jacob, more +unfortunate than Ulysses, spent eight or ten years or even longer, in this +short journey. (6) At any rate it cannot be denied that Benjamin was born in +the last year of this wandering, that is by the reckoning of the objectors, +when Joseph was sixteen or seventeen years old, for Jacob left Laban seven +years after Joseph's birth. (7) Now from the seventeenth year of Joseph's +age till the patriarch went into Egypt, not more than twenty-two years +elapsed, as we have shown in this chapter. (8) Consequently Benjamin, at the +time of the journey to Egypt, was twenty-three or twenty- four at the most. +(9) He would therefore have been a grandfather in the flower of his age +(Gen. xlvi:21, cf. Numb. xxvi:38, 40, and 1 Chron. viii:1), for it is +certain that Bela, Benjamin's eldest son, had at that time, two sons, Addai +and Naa-man. (10) This is just as absurd as the statement that Dinah was +violated at the age of seven, not to mention other impossibilities +which would result from the truth of the narrative. (11) Thus we see that +unskillful endeavours to solve difficulties, only raise fresh ones, and make +confusion worse confounded. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 15. (1) "Othniel, son of Kenag, was judge for forty years." (2) +Rabbi Levi Ben Gerson and others believe that these forty years which the +Bible says were passed in freedom, should be counted from the death of +Joshua, and consequently include the eight years during which the people +were subject to Kushan Rishathaim, while the following eighteen years +must be added on to the eighty years of Ehud's and Shamgar's judgeships. (3) +In this case it would be necessary to reckon the other years of subjection +among those said by the Bible to have been passed in freedom. (4) But the +Bible expressly notes the number of years of subjection, and the number of +years of freedom, and further declares (Judges ii:18) that the +Hebrew state was prosperous during the whole time of the judges. (5) +Therefore it is evident that Levi Ben Gerson (certainly a very learned man), +and those who follow him, correct rather than interpret the Scriptures. +</p> + +<p> +(6) The same fault is committed by those who assert, that Scripture, by this +general calculation of years, only intended to mark the period of the +regular administration of the Hebrew state, leaving out the years of anarchy +and subjection as periods of misfortune and interregnum. (7) Scripture +certainly passes over in silence periods of anarchy, but does not, as they +dream, refuse to reckon them or wipe them out of the country's annals. (8) +It is clear that Ezra, in 1 Kings vi., wished to reckon absolutely all the +years since the flight from Egypt. (9) This is so plain, that no one versed +in the Scriptures can doubt it. (10) For, without going back to the +precise words of the text, we may see that the genealogy of David given at +the end of the book of Ruth, and I Chron. ii., scarcely accounts for so +great a number of years. (11) For Nahshon, who was prince of the tribe of +Judah (Numb. vii:11), two years after the Exodus, died in the desert, and +his son Salmon passed the Jordan with Joshua. (12) Now this Salmon, +according to the genealogy, was David's great-grandfather. (13) Deducting, +then, from the total of 480 years, four years for Solomon's reign, seventy +for David's life, and forty for the time passed in the desert, we find that +David was born 366 years after the passage of the Jordan. (14) Hence we +must believe that David's father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and +great-great-grandfather begat children when they were ninety years old. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 16. (1) "Samson was judge for twenty years." (2) Samson was born +after the Hebrews had fallen under the dominion of the Philistines. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 17. (1) Otherwise, they rather correct than explain Scripture. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 18. (1) "Kirjath-jearim." Kirjath-jearim is also called Baale of +Judah. (2) Hence Kimchi and others think that the words Baale Judah, which I +have translated "the people of Judah," are the name of a town. (3) But this +is not so, for the word Baale is in the plural. (4) Moreover, comparing this +text in Samuel with I Chron. Xiii:5, we find that David did not rise up +and go forth out of Baale, but that he went thither. (5) If the author of +the book of Samuel had meant to name the place whence David took the ark, he +would, if he spoke Hebrew correctly, have said, "David rose up, and set +forth from Baale Judah, and took the ark from thence." +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3"> +CHAPTER X. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 19. (1) "After the restoration of the Temple by Judas Maccaboeus." +(2) This conjecture, if such it be, is founded on the genealogy of King +Jeconiah, given in 1 Chron. iii., which finishes at the sons of Elioenai, +the thirteenth in direct descent from him: whereon we must observe that +Jeconiah, before his captivity, had no children; but it is probable that he +had two while he was in prison, if we may draw any inference from the names +he gave them. (3) As to his grandchildren, it is evident that they were born +after his deliverance, if the names be any guide, for his grandson, Pedaiah +(a name meaning God hath delivered me), who, according to this chapter, was +the father of Zerubbabel, was born in the thirty-seventh or thirty-eighth +year of Jeconiah's life, that is thirty-three years before the restoration +of liberty to the Jews by Cyrus. (4) Therefore Zerubbabel, to whom Cyrus +gave the principality of Judaea, was thirteen or fourteen years old. (5) But +we need not carry the inquiry so far: we need only read attentively +the chapter of 1 Chron., already quoted, where (v. 17, sqq.) mention is made +of all the posterity of Jeconiah, and compare it with the Septuagint version +to see clearly that these books were not published, till after Maccabaeus +had restored the Temple, the sceptre no longer belonging to the house of +Jeconiah. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 20. (1) "Zedekiah should be taken to Babylon." (2) No one could then +have suspected that the prophecy of Ezekiel contradicted that of Jeremiah, +but the suspicion occurs to everyone who reads the narrative of Josephus. +(3) The event proved that both prophets were in the right. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 21. (1) "And who wrote Nehemiah." (2) That the greater part of the +book of Nehemiah was taken from the work composed by the prophet Nehemiah +himself, follows from the testimony of its author. (See chap. i.). (3) But +it is obvious that the whole of the passage contained between chap. viii. +and chap. xii. verse 26, together with the two last verses of chap. xii., +which form a sort of parenthesis to Nehemiah's words, were added by the +historian himself, who outlived Nehemiah. +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 22. (1) "I suppose no one thinks" that Ezra was the uncle of the +first high priest, named Joshua (see Ezra vii., and 1 Chron. vi:14), and +went to Jerusalem from Babylon with Zerubbabel (see Nehemiah xii:1). (2) But +it appears that when he saw, that the Jews were in a state of anarchy, he +returned to Babylon, as also did others (Nehem. i:2), and remained there +till the reign of Artaxerxes, when his requests were granted and he went a +second time to Jerusalem. (3) Nehemiah also went to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel +in the time of Cyrus (Ezra ii:2 and 63, cf. x:9, and Nehemiah x:1). (4) The +version given of the Hebrew word, translated "ambassador," is not supported +by any authority, while it is certain that fresh names were given to those +Jews who frequented the court. (5) Thus Daniel was named Balteshazzar, +and Zerubbabel Sheshbazzar (Dan. i:7). (6) Nehemiah was called Atirsata, +while in virtue of his office he was styled governor, or president. +(Nehem. v. 24, xii:26.) +</p> + +<p> +Endnote 23. (1) "Before the time of the Maccabees there was no canon of +sacred books." (2) The synagogue styled "the great" did not begin before the +subjugation of Asia by the Macedonians. (3) The contention of Maimonides, +Rabbi Abraham, Ben-David, and others, that the presidents of this synagogue +were Ezra, Daniel, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah, &c., is a pure fiction, +resting only on rabbinical tradition. (4) Indeed they assert that the +dominion of the Persians only lasted thirty-four years, and this is their +chief reason for maintaining that the decrees of the "great synagogue," or +synod (rejected by the Sadducees, but accepted by the Pharisees) were +ratified by the prophets, who received them from former prophets, and so in +direct succession from Moses, who received them from God Himself. (5) Such +is the doctrine which the Pharisees maintain with their wonted obstinacy. +(6) Enlightened persons, however, who know the reasons for the convoking of +councils, or synods, and are no strangers to the differences between +Pharisees and Sadducees, can easily divine the causes which led to the +assembling of this great synagogue. (7) It is very certain that no prophet +was there present, and that the decrees of the Pharisees, which they style +their traditions, derive all their authority from it. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /></p> + +<p class="t3"> +End of Endnotes to Part II. - Chapters VI to X. +</p> + +<p><br /><br /><br /><br /></p> + + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Theological-Political Treatise [Part +II], by Benedict of Spinoza + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THEOLOGICAL-POLITICAL TREATISE, 2 *** + +***** This file should be named 990-h.htm or 990-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/9/9/990/ + +Produced by Joseph B. Yesselman. HTML version by Al Haines. +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will +be renamed. + +Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright +law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, +so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United +States without permission and without paying copyright +royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part +of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, +and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive +specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this +eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook +for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, +performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given +away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks +not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the +trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. + +START: FULL LICENSE + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full +Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at +www.gutenberg.org/license. + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or +destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your +possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a +Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound +by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the +person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph +1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this +agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the +Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection +of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual +works in the collection are in the public domain in the United +States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the +United States and you are located in the United States, we do not +claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, +displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as +all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope +that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting +free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm +works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the +Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily +comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the +same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when +you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are +in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, +check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this +agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, +distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any +other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no +representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any +country outside the United States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other +immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear +prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work +on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, +performed, viewed, copied or distributed: + + This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and + most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no + restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it + under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this + eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the + United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you + are located before using this ebook. + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is +derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not +contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the +copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in +the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are +redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply +either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or +obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm +trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any +additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms +will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works +posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the +beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including +any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access +to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format +other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official +version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site +(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense +to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means +of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain +Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the +full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +provided that + +* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed + to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has + agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid + within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are + legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty + payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in + Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg + Literary Archive Foundation." + +* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all + copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue + all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm + works. + +* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of + any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of + receipt of the work. + +* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than +are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing +from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The +Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm +trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project +Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may +contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate +or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or +other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or +cannot be read by your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium +with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you +with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in +lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person +or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second +opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If +the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing +without further opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO +OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of +damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement +violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the +agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or +limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or +unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the +remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in +accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the +production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, +including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of +the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this +or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or +additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any +Defect you cause. + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of +computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It +exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations +from people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future +generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see +Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at +www.gutenberg.org + + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by +U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the +mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its +volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous +locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt +Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to +date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and +official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact + +For additional contact information: + + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND +DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular +state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To +donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project +Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be +freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and +distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of +volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in +the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not +necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper +edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search +facility: www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + + +</pre> + +</body> + +</html> + |