diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/3spnt10.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/3spnt10.txt | 1798 |
1 files changed, 1798 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/old/3spnt10.txt b/old/3spnt10.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..06d515f --- /dev/null +++ b/old/3spnt10.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1798 @@ +*The Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise* +This is Part III +#8 in our series by Spinoza [Originally Published Anonymously] + +Translated by R. H. M. Elwes + + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check +the copyright laws for your country before posting these files!! + +Please take a look at the important information in this header. +We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an +electronic path open for the next readers. Do not remove this. + + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations* + +Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and +further information is included below. We need your donations. + + +A Theologico-Political Treatise [Part III] + +by Benedict de Spinoza + +Also known as Baruch Spinoza + +Translated by R. H. M. Elwes + +July, 1997 [Etext #991] + + +*The Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise* +*****This file should be named 3spnt10.txt or 3spnt10.zip****** + +Corrected EDITIONS of our etexts get a new NUMBER, 3spnt11.txt. +VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, 3spnt10a.txt. + + +This Etext was created by Joseph B. Yesselman jyselman@erols.com +Please send corrections to him and also to hart@pobox.com + + +We are now trying to release all our books one month in advance +of the official release dates, for time for better editing. + +Please note: neither this list nor its contents are final till +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. To be sure you have an +up to date first edition [xxxxx10x.xxx] please check file sizes +in the first week of the next month. Since our ftp program has +a bug in it that scrambles the date [tried to fix and failed] a +look at the file size will have to do, but we will try to see a +new copy has at least one byte more or less. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +fifty hours is one conservative estimate for how long it we take +to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. This +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If our value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour this year as we release thirty-two text +files per month: or 400 more Etexts in 1996 for a total of 800. +If these reach just 10% of the computerized population, then the +total should reach 80 billion Etexts. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext +Files by the December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000=Trillion] +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only 10% of the present number of computer users. 2001 +should have at least twice as many computer users as that, so it +will require us reaching less than 5% of the users in 2001. + + +We need your donations more than ever! + + +All donations should be made to "Project Gutenberg/CMU": and are +tax deductible to the extent allowable by law. (CMU = Carnegie- +Mellon University). + +For these and other matters, please mail to: + +Project Gutenberg +P. O. Box 2782 +Champaign, IL 61825 + +When all other email fails try our Executive Director: +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> + +We would prefer to send you this information by email +(Internet, Bitnet, Compuserve, ATTMAIL or MCImail). + +****** +If you have an FTP program (or emulator), please +FTP directly to the Project Gutenberg archives: +[Mac users, do NOT point and click. . .type] + +ftp uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu +login: anonymous +password: your@login +cd etext/etext90 through /etext96 +or cd etext/articles [get suggest gut for more information] +dir [to see files] +get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files] +GET INDEX?00.GUT +for a list of books +and +GET NEW GUT for general information +and +MGET GUT* for newsletters. + +**Information prepared by the Project Gutenberg legal advisor** +(Three Pages) + + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG- +tm etexts, is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor +Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association at +Carnegie-Mellon University (the "Project"). Among other +things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext +under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this +etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors, +officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost +and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or +indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause: +[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification, +or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by +disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word pro- + cessing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the etext (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the + net profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Association/Carnegie-Mellon + University" within the 60 days following each + date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare) + your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time, +scanning machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty +free copyright licenses, and every other sort of contribution +you can think of. Money should be paid to "Project Gutenberg +Association / Carnegie-Mellon University". + +*END*THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END* + + + + + +This Etext was created by Joseph B. Yesselman jyselman@erols.com +Please send corrections to him and also to hart@pobox.com + + + +Part 1 - Chapters I to V - 1spnt10.txt +Part 2 - Chapters VI to X - 2spnt10.txt +Part 3 - Chapters XI to XV - 3spnt10.txt +Part 4 - Chapters XVI to XX - 4spnt10.txt + + + +Sentence Numbers, shown thus (1), have been added by volunteer. + + + + + +A Theologico-Political Treatise + +Part III - Chapters XI to XV + +by Baruch Spinoza + + + + +TABLE OF CONTENTS: + + + +CHAPTER XI - An Inquiry whether the Apostles wrote their +Epistles as Apostles and Prophets, or merely as Teachers, +and an Explanation of what is meant by Apostle. + +The epistles not in the prophetic style. + +The Apostles not commanded to write or preach in particular places. + +Different methods of teaching adopted by the Apostles. + + + +CHAPTER XII - Of the true Original of the Divine Law, +and wherefore Scripture is called Sacred, and the Word of God. +How that, in so far as it contains the Word of God, +it has come down to us uncorrupted. + + + +CHAPTER XIII - It is shown, that Scripture teaches only very Simple Doctrines, +such as suffice for right conduct. + +Error in speculative doctrine not impious - nor knowledge pious. +Piety consists in obedience. + + +CHAPTER XIV - Definitions of Faith, the True Faith, and the Foundations +of Faith, which is once for all separated from Philosophy. + +Danger resulting from the vulgar idea of faith. + +The only test of faith obedience and good works. + +As different men are disposed to obedience by different opinions, +universal faith can contain only the simplest doctrines. + +Fundamental distinction between faith and philosophy - +the key-stone of the present treatise. + + + +CHAPTER XV - Theology is shown not to be subservient to +Reason, nor Reason to Theology: a Definition of the reason +which enables us to accept the Authority of the Bible. + +Theory that Scripture must be accommodated to Reason - +maintained by Maimonides - already refuted in Chapter vii. + +Theory that Reason must be accommodated to Scripture - +maintained by Alpakhar - examined. + +And refuted. + +Scripture and Reason independent of one another. + +Certainty, of fundamental faith not mathematical but moral. + +Great utility of Revelation. + + +Authors Endnotes to the Treatise. + + + + +CHAPTER XI - AN INQUIRY WHETHER THE APOSTLES WROTE THEIR +EPISTLES AS APOSTLES AND PROPHETS, OR MERELY AS TEACHERS; +AND AN EXPLANATION OF WHAT IS MEANT BY AN APOSTLE. + + +(1) No reader of the New Testament can doubt that the Apostles were +prophets; but as a prophet does not always speak by revelation, but only, at +rare intervals, as we showed at the end of Chap. I., we may fairly inquire +whether the Apostles wrote their Epistles as prophets, by revelation and +express mandate, as Moses, Jeremiah, and others did, or whether only as +private individuals or teachers, especially as Paul, in Corinthians xiv:6, +mentions two sorts of preaching. + +(2) If we examine the style of the Epistles, we shall find it totally +different from that employed by the prophets. + +(3) The prophets are continually asserting that they speak by the command of +God: "Thus saith the Lord," "The Lord of hosts saith," "The command of the +Lord," &c.; and this was their habit not only in assemblies of the prophets, +but also in their epistles containing revelations, as appears from the epistle +of Elijah to Jehoram, 2 Chron. xxi:12, which begins, "Thus saith the Lord." + +(4) In the Apostolic Epistles we find nothing of the sort. (5) Contrariwise, +in I Cor. vii:40 Paul speaks according to his own opinion and in many +passages we come across doubtful and perplexed phrase; such as, "We think, +therefore," Rom. iii:28; "Now I think," [Endnote 24], Rom. viii:18, and so +on. (6) Besides these, other expressions are met with very different from +those used by the prophets. (7) For instance, 1 Cor. vii:6, "But I speak +this by permission, not by commandment;" "I give my judgment as one that +hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful" (1 Cor. vii:25), and so on +in many other passages. (8) We must also remark that in the aforesaid +chapter the Apostle says that when he states that he has or has +not the precept or commandment of God, he does not mean the precept or +commandment of God revealed to himself, but only the words uttered by Christ +in His Sermon on the Mount. (9) Furthermore, if we examine the manner in +which the Apostles give out evangelical doctrine, we shall see that it +differs materially from the method adopted by the prophets. (10) The +Apostles everywhere reason as if they were arguing rather than prophesying; +the prophecies, on the other hand, contain only dogmas and commands. (11) +God is therein introduced not as speaking to reason, but as issuing decrees +by His absolute fiat. (12) The authority of the prophets does not submit to +discussion, for whosoever wishes to find rational ground for his arguments, +by that very wish submits them to everyone's private judgment. (13) This +Paul, inasmuch as he uses reason, appears to have done, for he says in 1 +Cor. x:15, "I speak as to wise men, judge ye what I say." (14) The prophets, +as we showed at the end of Chapter I., did not perceive what was revealed by +virtue of their natural reason, and though there are certain passages in the +Pentateuch which seem to be appeals to induction, they turn out, on nearer +examination, to be nothing but peremptory commands. (15) For instance, when +Moses says, Deut. xxxi:27, "Behold, while I am yet alive with you, this day +ye have been rebellious against the Lord; and how much more after +my death," we must by no means conclude that Moses wished to convince the +Israelites by reason that they would necessarily fall away from the worship +of the Lord after his death; for the argument would have been false, as +Scripture itself shows: the Israelites continued faithful during the lives +of Joshua and the elders, and afterwards during the time of Samuel, David, +and Solomon. (16) Therefore the words of Moses are merely a moral +injunction, in which he predicts rhetorically the future backsliding of the +people so as to impress it vividly on their imagination. (17) I say that +Moses spoke of himself in order to lend likelihood to his prediction, and +not as a prophet by revelation, because in verse 21 of the same chapter we +are told that God revealed the same thing to Moses in different words, and +there was no need to make Moses certain by argument of God's prediction and +decree; it was only necessary that it should be vividly impressed on +his imagination, and this could not be better accomplished than by +imagining the existing contumacy of the people, of which he had had frequent +experience, as likely to extend into the future. + +(18) All the arguments employed by Moses in the five books are to be +understood in a similar manner; they are not drawn from the armoury of +reason, but are merely, modes of expression calculated to instil with +efficacy, and present vividly to the imagination the commands of God. +(19) However, I do not wish absolutely to deny that the prophets ever argued +from revelation; I only maintain that the prophets made more legitimate use +of argument in proportion as their knowledge approached more nearly to +ordinary knowledge, and by this we know that they possessed a knowledge +above the ordinary, inasmuch as they proclaimed absolute dogmas, +decrees, or judgments. (20) Thus Moses, the chief of the prophets, never +used legitimate argument, and, on the other hand, the long deductions and +arguments of Paul, such as we find in the Epistle to the Romans, are in +nowise written from supernatural revelation. + +(21) The modes of expression and discourse adopted by the Apostles in the +Epistles, show very clearly that the latter were not written by revelation +and Divine command, but merely by the natural powers and judgment of the +authors. (22) They consist in brotherly admonitions and courteous +expressions such as would never be employed in prophecy, as for instance, +Paul's excuse in Romans xv:15, "I have written the more boldly unto you in +some sort, my brethren." + +(23) We may arrive at the same conclusion from observing that we never read +that the Apostles were commanded to write, but only that they went +everywhere preaching, and confirmed their words with signs. (24) Their +personal presence and signs were absolutely necessary for the conversion and +establishment in religion of the Gentiles; as Paul himself expressly states +in Rom. i:11, "But I long to see you, that I may impart to you some +spiritual gift, to the end that ye may be established." + +(25) It may be objected that we might prove in similar fashion that the +Apostles did not preach as prophets, for they did not go to particular +places, as the prophets did, by the command of God. (26) We read in +the Old Testament that Jonah went to Nineveh to preach, and at the +same time that he was expressly sent there, and told that he most preach. +(27) So also it is related, at great length, of Moses that he went to Egypt +as the messenger of God, and was told at the same time what he should say to +the children of Israel and to king Pharaoh, and what wonders he should work +before them to give credit to his words. (28) Isaiah, Jeremiah, and +Ezekiel were expressly commanded to preach to the Israelites. Lastly, the +prophets only preached what we are assured by Scripture they had received +from God, whereas this is hardly ever said of the Apostles in the New +Testament, when they went about to preach. (29) On the contrary, we find +passages expressly implying that the Apostles chose the places where they +should preach on their own responsibility, for there was a difference +amounting to a quarrel between Paul and Barnabas on the subject (Acts xv:37, +38). (30) Often they wished to go to a place, but were prevented, as Paul +writes, Rom. i:13, "Oftentimes I purposed to come to you, but was let +hitherto;" and in I Cor. xvi:12, "As touching our brother Apollos, I greatly +desired him to come unto you with the brethren, but his will was not at all +to come at this time: but he will come when he shall have convenient time." + +(31) From these expressions and differences of opinion among the Apostles, +and also from the fact that Scripture nowhere testifies of them, as of the +ancient prophets, that they went by the command of God, one might conclude +that they preached as well as wrote in their capacity of teachers, and not +as prophets: but the question is easily solved if we observe the difference +between the mission of an Apostle and that of an Old Testament prophet. (32) +The latter were not called to preach and prophesy to all nations, but to +certain specified ones, and therefore an express and peculiar mandate was +required for each of them; the Apostles, on the other hand, were called to +preach to all men absolutely, and to turn all men to religion. (33) +Therefore, whithersoever they went, they were fulfilling Christ's +commandment; there was no need to reveal to them beforehand what they should +preach, for they were the disciples of Christ to whom their Master Himself +said (Matt. X:19, 20): "But, when they deliver you up, take no thought +how or what ye shall speak, for it shall be given you in that same +hour what ye shall speak." (34) We therefore conclude that the Apostles +were only indebted to special revelation in what they orally preached and +confirmed by signs (see the beginning of Chap. 11.); that which they taught +in speaking or writing without any confirmatory signs and wonders +they taught from their natural knowledge. (See I Cor. xiv:6.) (35) We need +not be deterred by the fact that all the Epistles begin by citing the +imprimatur of the Apostleship, for the Apostles, as I will shortly show, +were granted, not only the faculty of prophecy, but also the authority to +teach. (36) We may therefore admit that they wrote their Epistles as +Apostles, and for this cause every one of them began by citing the Apostolic +imprimatur, possibly with a view to the attention of the reader by asserting +that they were the persons who had made such mark among the faithful by +their preaching, and had shown bv many marvelous works that they were +teaching true religion and the way of salvation. (37) I observe that what is +said in the Epistles with regard to the Apostolic vocation and the Holy +Spirit of God which inspired them, has reference to their former preaching, +except in those passages where the expressions of the Spirit of God and the +Holy Spirit are used to signify a mind pure, upright, and devoted to +God. (38) For instance, in 1 Cor. vii:40, Paul says: But she is happier if +she so abide, after my judgment, and I think also that I have the Spirit of +God." (39) By the Spirit of God the Apostle here refers to his mind, as +we may see from the context: his meaning is as follows: "I account blessed +a widow who does not wish to marry a second husband; such is my opinion, for +I have settled to live unmarried, and I think that I am blessed." (40) There +are other similar passages which I need not now quote. + +(41) As we have seen that the Apostles wrote their Epistles solely by the +light of natural reason, we must inquire how they were enabled to teach by +natural knowledge matters outside its scope. (42) However, if we bear in +mind what we said in Chap. VII. of this treatise our difficulty will vanish: +for although the contents of the Bible entirely surpass our understanding, +we may safely discourse of them, provided we assume nothing not told +us in Scripture: by the same method the Apostles, from what they saw +and heard, and from what was revealed to them, were enabled to form and +elicit many conclusions which they would have been able to teach to men had +it been permissible. + +(43) Further, although religion, as preached by the Apostles, does not come +within the sphere of reason, in so far as it consists in the narration of +the life of Christ, yet its essence, which is chiefly moral, like the whole +of Christ's doctrine, can readily, be apprehended by the natural +faculties of all. + +(44) Lastly, the Apostles had no lack of supernatural illumination for the +purpose of adapting the religion they had attested by signs to the +understanding of everyone so that it might be readily received; nor for +exhortations on the subject: in fact, the object of the Epistles is to teach +and exhort men to lead that manner of life which each of the Apostles judged +best for confirming them in religion. (45) We may here repeat our former +remark, that the Apostles had received not only the faculty of preaching the +history, of Christ as prophets, and confirming it with signs, but also +authority for teaching and exhorting according as each thought best. (46) +Paul (2 Tim. i:11), "Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, +and a teacher of the Gentiles;" and again (I Tim. ii:7), "Whereunto I am +ordained a preacher and an apostle (I speak the truth in Christ and lie +not), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity." (47) These passages, I +say, show clearly the stamp both of the apostleship and the teachership: +the authority for admonishing whomsoever and wheresoever he pleased is +asserted by Paul in the Epistle to Philemon, v:8: "Wherefore, though I might +be much bold in Christ to enjoin thee that which is convenient, yet," &c., +where we may remark that if Paul had received from God as a prophet +what he wished to enjoin Philemon, and had been bound to speak in his +prophetic capacity, he would not have been able to change the command of God +into entreaties. (48) We must therefore understand him to refer to the +permission to admonish which he had received as a teacher, and not as a +prophet. (49) We have not yet made it quite clear that the Apostles might +each choose his own way of teaching, but only that by virtue of their +Apostleship they were teachers as well as prophets; however, if we +call reason to our aid we shall clearly see that an authority to teach +implies authority to choose the method. (50) It will nevertheless be, +perhaps, more satisfactory to draw all our proofs from Scripture; we are +there plainly told that each Apostle chose his particular method (Rom. xv: +20): "Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was +named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation." (51) If +all the Apostles had adopted the same method of teaching, and had all built +up the Christian religion on the same foundation, Paul would have had no +reason to call the work of a fellow-Apostle "another man's foundation," +inasmuch as it would have been identical with his own: his calling it +another man's proved that each Apostle built up his religious instruction on +different foundations, thus resembling other teachers who have each their +own method, and prefer instructing quite ignorant people who have never +learnt under another master, whether the subject be science, languages, or +even the indisputable truths of mathematics. (52) Furthermore, if we go +through the Epistles at all attentively, we shall see that the Apostles, +while agreeing about religion itself, are at variance as to the foundations +it rests on. (53) Paul, in order to strengthen men's religion, and show them +that salvation depends solely on the grace of God, teaches that no one can +boast of works, but only of faith, and that no one can be justified by works +(Rom. iii:27,28); in fact, he preaches the complete doctrine of +predestination. (54) James, on the other hand, states that man is justified +by works, and not by faith only (see his Epistle, ii:24), and omitting all +the disputations of Paul, confines religion to a very few elements. + +(55) Lastly, it is indisputable that from these different ground; for +religion selected by the Apostles, many quarrels and schisms distracted the +Church, even in the earliest times, and doubtless they will continue so to +distract it for ever, or at least till religion is separated from +philosophical speculations, and reduced to the few simple doctrines taught +by Christ to His disciples; such a task was impossible for the Apostles, +because the Gospel was then unknown to mankind, and lest its novelty should +offend men's ears it had to be adapted to the disposition of +contemporaries (2 Cor. ix:19, 20), and built up on the groundwork most +familiar and accepted at the time. (56) Thus none of the Apostles +philosophized more than did Paul, who was called to preach to the Gentiles; +other Apostles preaching to the Jews, who despised philosophy, similarly, +adapted themselves to the temper of their hearers (see Gal. ii. 11), and +preached a religion free from all philosophical speculations. (57) How blest +would our age be if it could witness a religion freed also from all the +trammels of superstition! + + + + +CHAPTER XII - OF THE TRUE ORIGINAL OF THE DIVINE LAW, AND + WHEREFORE SCRIPTURE IS CALLED SACRED, AND THE WORD OF GOD. + HOW THAT, IN S0 FAR AS IT CONTAINS THE WORD OF GOD, + IT HAS COME DOWN TO US UNCORRUPTED. + +(1) Those who look upon the Bible as a message sent down by God from Heaven +to men, will doubtless cry out that I have committed the sin against the +Holy Ghost because I have asserted that the Word of God is faulty, +mutilated, tampered with, and inconsistent; that we possess it only in +fragments, and that the original of the covenant which God made with the +Jews has been lost. (2) However, I have no doubt that a little reflection +will cause them to desist from their uproar: for not only reason but the +expressed opinions of prophets and apostles openly proclaim that God's +eternal Word and covenant, no less than true religion, is Divinely inscribed +in human hearts, that is, in the human mind, and that this is the true +original of God's covenant, stamped with His own seal, namely, the idea of +Himself, as it were, with the image of His Godhood. + +(3) Religion was imparted to the early Hebrews as a law written down, +because they were at that time in the condition of children, but afterwards +Moses (Deut. xxx:6) and Jeremiah (xxxi:33) predicted a time coming when the +Lord should write His law in their hearts. (4) Thus only the Jews, and +amongst them chiefly the Sadducees, struggled for the law written on +tablets; least of all need those who bear it inscribed on their hearts join +in the contest. (5) Those, therefore, who reflect, will find nothing in what +I have written repugnant either to the Word of God or to true religion and +faith, or calculated to weaken either one or the other: contrariwise, they +will see that I have strengthened religion, as I showed at the end of +Chapter X.; indeed, had it not been so, I should certainly have decided to +hold my peace, nay, I would even have asserted as a way out of all +difficulties that the Bible contains the most profound hidden +mysteries; however, as this doctrine has given rise to gross superstition +and other pernicious results spoken of at the beginning of Chapter V., I +have thought such a course unnecessary, especially as religion stands in no +need of superstitious adornments, but is, on the contrary, deprived by such +trappings of some of her splendour. + +(6) Still, it will be said, though the law of God is written in the heart, +the Bible is none the less the Word of God, and it is no more lawful to say +of Scripture than of God's Word that it is mutilated and corrupted. (7) I +fear that such objectors are too anxious to be pious, and that they are in +danger of turning religion into superstition, and worshipping paper and ink +in place of God's Word. + +(8) I am certified of thus much: I have said nothing unworthy of Scripture +or God's Word, and I have made no assertions which I could not prove by most +plain argument to be true. (9) I can, therefore, rest assured that I have +advanced nothing which is impious or even savours of impiety. + +(10) from what I have said, assume a licence to sin, and without any reason, +at I confess that some profane men, to whom religion is a burden, may, the +simple dictates of their lusts conclude that Scripture is everywhere faulty +and falsified, and that therefore its authority is null; but such men are +beyond the reach of help, for nothing, as the pro verb has it, can be said +so rightly that it cannot be twisted into wrong. (11) Those who wish to give +rein to their lusts are at no loss for an excuse, nor were those men of old +who possessed the original Scriptures, the ark of the covenant, nay, the +prophets and apostles in person among them, any better than the people of +to-day. (12) Human nature, Jew as well as Gentile, has always been the same, +and in every age virtue has been exceedingly rare. + +(13) Nevertheless, to remove every scruple, I will here show in what sense +the Bible or any inanimate thing should be called sacred and Divine; +also wherein the law of God consists, and how it cannot be contained in a +certain number of books; and, lastly, I will show that Scripture, in so far +as it teaches what is necessary for obedience and salvation, cannot have +been corrupted. (14) From these considerations everyone will be able to +judge that I have neither said anything against the Word of God nor given +any foothold to impiety. + +(15) A thing is called sacred and Divine when it is designed for promoting +piety, and continues sacred so long as it is religiously used: if the users +cease to be pious, the thing ceases to be sacred: if it be turned to base +uses, that which was formerly sacred becomes unclean and profane. (16) For +instance, a certain spot was named by the patriarch Jacob the house of God, +because he worshipped God there revealed to him: by the prophets the same +spot was called the house of iniquity (see Amos v:5, and Hosea x:5), because +the Israelites were wont, at the instigation of Jeroboam, to sacrifice there +to idols. (17) Another example puts the matter in the plainest light. (18) +Words gain their meaning solely from their usage, and if they are arranged +according to their accepted signification so as to move those who read them +to devotion, they will become sacred, and the book so written will be sacred +also. (19) But if their usage afterwards dies out so that the words have no +meaning, or the book becomes utterly neglected, whether from unworthy +motives, or because it is no longer needed, then the words and the book will +lose both their use and their sanctity: lastly, if these same words be +otherwise arranged, or if their customary meaning becomes perverted into its +opposite, then both the words and the book containing them become, instead +of sacred, impure and profane. + +(20) From this it follows that nothing is in itself absolutely sacred, or +profane, and unclean, apart from the mind, but only relatively thereto. (21) +Thus much is clear from many passages in the Bible. (22) Jeremiah (to select +one case out of many) says (chap. vii:4), that the Jews of his time +were wrong in calling Solomon's Temple, the Temple of God, for, as he goes +on to say in the same chapter, God's name would only be given to the Temple +so long as it was frequented by men who worshipped Him, and defended +justice, but that, if it became the resort of murderers, thieves, idolaters, +and other wicked persons, it would be turned into a den of malefactors. + +(23) Scripture, curiously enough, nowhere tells us what became of the Ark of +the Covenant, though there is no doubt that it was destroyed, or burnt +together with the Temple; yet there was nothing which the Hebrews considered +more sacred, or held in greater reverence. (24) Thus Scripture is sacred, +and its words Divine so long as it stirs mankind to devotion towards God: +but if it be utterly neglected, as it formerly was by the Jews, it becomes +nothing but paper and ink, and is left to be desecrated or corrupted: still, +though Scripture be thus corrupted or destroyed, we must not say that the +Word of God has suffered in like manner, else we shall be like the Jews, who +said that the Temple which would then be the Temple of God had perished in +the flames. (25) Jeremiah tells us this in respect to the law, for he thus +chides the ungodly of his time, "Wherefore, say you we are masters, and the +law of the Lord is with us? (26) Surely it has been given in vain, it is in +vain that the pen of the scribes " (has been made) - that is, you say +falsely that the Scripture is in your power, and that you possess the law of +God; for ye have made it of none effect. + +(27) So also, when Moses broke the first tables of the law, he did not by +any means cast the Word of God from his hands in anger and shatter it - such +an action would be inconceivable, either of Moses or of God's Word - he only +broke the tables of stone, which, though they had before been holy from +containing the covenant wherewith the Jews had bound themselves in +obedience to God, had entirely lost their sanctity when the covenant had +been violated by the worship of the calf, and were, therefore, as liable to +perish as the ark of the covenant. (28) It is thus scarcely to be wondered +at, that the original documents of Moses are no longer extant, nor that the +books we possess met with the fate we have described, when we consider that +the true original of the Divine covenant, the most sacred object of all, has +totally perished. + +(29) Let them cease, therefore, who accuse us of impiety, inasmuch as we +have said nothing against the Word of God, neither have we corrupted it, but +let them keep their anger, if they would wreak it justly, for the ancients +whose malice desecrated the Ark, the Temple, and the Law of God, and all +that was held sacred, subjecting them to corruption. (30) Furthermore, +if, according to the saying of the Apostle in 2 Cor. iii:3, they possessed +"the Epistle of Christ, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the +living God, not in tables of stone, but in the fleshy tables of the heart," +let them cease to worship the letter, and be so anxious concerning it. + +(31) I think I have now sufficiently shown in what respect Scripture should +be accounted sacred and Divine; we may now see what should rightly be +understood by the expression, the Word of the Lord; debar (the Hebrew +original) signifies word, speech, command, and thing. (32) The causes for +which a thing is in Hebrew said to be of God, or is referred to Him, have +been already detailed in Chap. I., and we can therefrom easily gather what +meaning Scripture attaches to the phrases, the word, the speech, the +command, or the thing of God. (33) I need not, therefore, repeat what I +there said, nor what was shown under the third head in the chapter on +miracles. (34) It is enough to mention the repetition for the better +understanding of what I am about to say - viz., that the Word of the Lord +when it has reference to anyone but God Himself, signifies that Divine law +treated of in Chap. IV.; in other words, religion, universal and catholic +to the whole human race, as Isaiah describes it (chap. i:10), teaching that +the true way of life consists, not in ceremonies, but in charity, and a true +heart, and calling it indifferently God's Law and God's Word. + +(35) The expression is also used metaphorically for the order of nature and +destiny (which, indeed, actually depend and follow from the eternal mandate +of the Divine nature), and especially for such parts of such order as were +foreseen by the prophets, for the prophets did not perceive future events as +the result of natural causes, but as the fiats and decrees of God. (36) +Lastly, it is employed for the command of any prophet, in so far as he had +perceived it by his peculiar faculty or prophetic gift, and not by the +natural light of reason; this use springs chiefly from the usual prophetic +conception of God as a legislator, which we remarked in Chap. IV. +(37) There are, then, three causes for the Bible's being called +the Word of God: because it teaches true religion, of which God is the +eternal Founder; because it narrates predictions of future events as +though they were decrees of God; because its actual authors generally +perceived things not by their ordinary natural faculties, but by a +power peculiar to themselves, and introduced these things perceived, +as told them by God. + +(37) Although Scripture contains much that is merely historical and can be +perceived by natural reason, yet its name is acquired from its chief subject +matter. + +(38) We can thus easily see how God can be said to be the Author of the +Bible: it is because of the true religion therein contained, and not because +He wished to communicate to men a certain number of books. (39) We can also +learn from hence the reason for the division into Old and New Testament. +(40) It was made because the prophets who preached religion before Christ, +preached it as a national law in virtue of the covenant entered into under +Moses; while the Apostles who came after Christ, preached it to all men as a +universal religion solely in virtue of Christ's Passion: the cause for the +division is not that the two parts are different in doctrine, nor that they +were written as originals of the covenant, nor, lastly, that the catholic +religion (which is in entire harmony with our nature) was new except in +relation to those who had not known it: " it was in the world," as John the +Evangelist says, " and the world knew it not." + +(41) Thus, even if we had fewer books of the Old and New Testament than we +have, we should still not be deprived of the Word of God (which, as we have +said, is identical with true religion), even as we do not now hold ourselves +to be deprived of it, though we lack many cardinal writings such as the Book +of the Law, which was religiously guarded in the Temple as the original of +the Covenant, also the Book of Wars, the Book of Chronicles, and many +others, from whence the extant Old Testament was taken and compiled. (42) +The above conclusion may be supported by many reasons. + +(43) I. Because the books of both Testaments were not written by express +command at one place for all ages, but are a fortuitous collection of the +works of men, writing each as his period and disposition dictated. (44) So +much is clearly shown by the call of the prophets who were bade to +admonish the ungodly of their time, and also by the Apostolic Epistles. + +(45) II. Because it is one thing to understand the meaning of Scripture +and the prophets, and quite another thing to understand the meaning + of God, or the actual truth. (46) This follows from what we said in +Chap. II. (47) We showed, in Chap. VI., that it applied to historic +narratives, and to miracles: but it by no means applies to questions +concerning true religion and virtue. + +(48) III. Because the books of the Old Testament were selected from many, +and were collected and sanctioned by a council of the Pharisees, as we +showed in Chap. X. (49) The books of the New Testament were also chosen from +many by councils which rejected as spurious other books held sacred by many. +(50) But these councils, both Pharisee and Christian, were not composed of +prophets, but only of learned men and teachers. (51) Still, we must grant +that they were guided in their choice by a regard for the Word of God ; and +they must, therefore, have known what the law of God was. + +(52) IV. Because the Apostles wrote not as prophets, but as teachers (see +last Chapter), and chose whatever method they thought best adapted for those +whom they addressed: and consequently, there are many things in the Epistles +(as we showed at the end of the last Chapter) which are not necessary to +salvation. + +(53) V. Lastly, because there are four Evangelists in the New Testament, and +it is scarcely credible that God can have designed to narrate the life of +Christ four times over, and to communicate it thus to mankind. (54) For +though there are some details related in one Gospel which are not in +another, and one often helps us to understand another, we cannot thence +conclude that all that is set down is of vital importance to us, and that +God chose the four Evangelists in order that the life of Christ might be +better understood; for each one preached his Gospel in a separate +locality, each wrote it down as he preached it, in simple language, in +order that the history of Christ might be clearly told, not with any view of +explaining his fellow-Evangelists. + +(55) If there are some passages which can be better, and more easily +understood by comparing the various versions, they are the result of chance, +and are not numerous: their continuance in obscurity would have impaired +neither the clearness of the narrative nor the blessedness of mankind. + +(56) We have now shown that Scripture can only be called the Word +of God in so far as it affects religion, or the Divine law; we must now +point out that, in respect to these questions, it is neither faulty, +tampered with, nor corrupt. (57) By faulty, tampered with, and corrupt, I +here mean written so incorrectly, that the meaning cannot be arrived at by a +study of the language, nor from the authority of Scripture. (58) I will not +go to such lengths as to say that the Bible, in so far as it contains the +Divine law, has always preserved the same vowel-points, the same letters, or +the same words (I leave this to be proved by, the Massoretes and other +worshippers of the letter), I only, maintain that the meaning by, which +alone an utterance is entitled to be called Divine, has come down to us +uncorrupted, even though the original wording may have been more often +changed than we suppose. (59) Such alterations, as I have said above, +detract nothing from the Divinity of the Bible, for the Bible would have +been no less Divine had it been written in different words or a different +language. (60) That the Divine law has in this sense come down to us +uncorrupted, is an assertion which admits of no dispute. (61) For from the +Bible itself we learn, without the smallest difficulty or ambiguity,, that +its cardinal precept is: To love God above all things, and one's neighbour +as one's self. (62) This cannot be a spurious passage, nor due to a hasty +and mistaken scribe, for if the Bible had ever put forth a different +doctrine it would have had to change the whole of its teaching, for this is +the corner-stone of religion, without which the whole fabric would fall +headlong to the ground. (63) The Bible would not be the work we have been +examining, but something quite different. + +(64) We remain, then, unshaken in our belief that this has always been the +doctrine of Scripture, and, consequently, that no error sufficient to +vitiate it can have crept in without being instantly, observed by all; nor +can anyone have succeeded in tampering with it and escaped the discovery of +his malice. + +(65) As this corner-stone is intact, we must perforce admit the same of +whatever other passages are indisputably dependent on it, and are also +fundamental, as, for instance, that a God exists, that He foresees all +things, that He is Almighty, that by His decree the good prosper and the +wicked come to naught, and, finally, that our salvation depends solely on +His grace. + +(66) These are doctrines which Scripture plainly teaches throughout, and +which it is bound to teach, else all the rest would be empty and baseless; +nor can we be less positive about other moral doctrines, which plainly are +built upon this universal foundation - for instance, to uphold justice, to +aid the weak, to do no murder, to covet no man's goods, &c. (67) Precepts, I +repeat, such as these, human malice and the lapse of ages are alike +powerless to destroy, for if any part of them perished, its loss would +immediately be supplied from the fundamental principle, especially the +doctrine of charity, which is everywhere in both Testaments extolled above +all others. (68) Moreover, though it be true that there is no conceivable +crime so heinous that it has never been committed, still there is no one who +would attempt in excuse for his crimes to destroy, the law, or introduce an +impious doctrine in the place of what is eternal and salutary; men's nature +is so constituted that everyone (be he king or subject) who has committed a +base action, tries to deck out his conduct with spurious excuses, till he +seems to have done nothing but what is just and right. + +(69) We may conclude, therefore, that the whole Divine law, as taught by +Scripture, has come down to us uncorrupted. (70) Besides this there are +certain facts which we may be sure have been transmitted in good faith. (71) +For instance, the main facts of Hebrew history, which were perfectly well +known to everyone. (72) The Jewish people were accustomed in former times to +chant the ancient history of their nation in psalms. (73) The main facts, +also, of Christ's life and passion were immediately spread abroad through +the whole Roman empire. (74) It is therefore scarcely credible, unless +nearly everybody, consented thereto, which we cannot suppose, that +successive generations have handed down the broad outline of the Gospel +narrative otherwise than as they received it. + +(74) Whatsoever, therefore, is spurious or faulty can only have reference to +details - some circumstances in one or the other history or prophecy +designed to stir the people to greater devotion; or in some miracle, with a +view of confounding philosophers; or, lastly, in speculative matters +after they had become mixed up with religion, so that some individual +might prop up his own inventions with a pretext of Divine authority. +(75) But such matters have little to do with salvation, whether +they be corrupted little or much, as I will show in detail in the next +chapter, though I think the question sufficiently plain from what I have +said already, especially in Chapter II. + + + + +CHAPTER XIII - IT IS SHOWN THAT SCRIPTURE TEACHES ONLY VERY SIMPLE + DOCTRINES, SUCH AS SUFFICE FOR RIGHT CONDUCT. + +(1) In the second chapter of this treatise we pointed out that the prophets +were gifted with extraordinary powers of imagination, but not of +understanding; also that God only revealed to them such things as are very +simple - not philosophic mysteries, - and that He adapted His +communications to their previous opinions. (2) We further showed in Chap. V. +that Scripture only transmits and teaches truths which can readily be +comprehended by all; not deducing and concatenating its conclusions from +definitions and axioms, but narrating quite simply, and confirming its +statements, with a view to inspiring belief, by an appeal to experience as +exemplified in miracles and history, and setting forth its truths in the +style and phraseology which would most appeal to the popular mind (cf. Chap. +VI., third division). + +(3) Lastly, we demonstrated in Chap. VIII. that the difficulty of +understanding Scripture lies in the language only, and not in the +abstruseness of the argument. + +(4) To these considerations we may add that the Prophets did not preach only +to the learned, but to all Jews, without exception, while the Apostles were +wont to teach the gospel doctrine in churches where there were public +meetings; whence it follows that Scriptural doctrine contains no lofty +speculations nor philosophic reasoning, but only very simple matters, such +as could be understood by the slowest intelligence. + +(5) I am consequently lost in wonder at the ingenuity of those whom I have +already mentioned, who detect in the Bible mysteries so profound that they +cannot be explained in human language, and who have introduced so many +philosophic speculations into religion that the Church seems like +an academy, and religion like a science, or rather a dispute. + +(6) It is not to be wondered at that men, who boast of possessing +supernatural intelligence, should be unwilling to yield the palm of +knowledge to philosophers who have only their ordinary, faculties; still I +should be surprised if I found them teaching any new speculative +doctrine, which was not a commonplace to those Gentile philosophers whom, in +spite of all, they stigmatize as blind; for, if one inquires what these +mysteries lurking in Scripture may be, one is confronted with nothing but +the reflections of Plato or Aristotle, or the like, which it would +often be easier for an ignorant man to dream than for the most accomplished +scholar to wrest out of the Bible. + +(7) However, I do not wish to affirm absolutely that Scripture contains no +doctrines in the sphere of philosophy, for in the last chapter I pointed out +some of the kind, as fundamental principles; but I go so far as to say that +such doctrines are very few and very simple. (8) Their precise nature and +definition I will now set forth. (9) The task will be easy, for we know that +Scripture does not aim at imparting scientific knowledge, and, therefore, it +demands from men nothing but obedience, and censures obstinacy, but not +ignorance. + +(10) Furthermore, as obedience to God consists solely in love to our +neighbour - for whosoever loveth his neighbour, as a means of obeying God, +hath, as St. Paul says (Rom. xiii:8), fulfilled the law, - it follows that +no knowledge is commended in the Bible save that which is necessary +for enabling all men to obey God in the manner stated, and without which +they would become rebellious, or without the discipline of obedience. + +(11) Other speculative questions, which have no direct bearing on this +object, or are concerned with the knowledge of natural events, do not affect +Scripture, and should be entirely separated from religion. + +(12) Now, though everyone, as we have said, is now quite able to see this +truth for himself, I should nevertheless wish, considering that the whole of +Religion depends thereon, to explain the entire question more accurately and +clearly. (13) To this end I must first prove that the intellectual +or accurate knowledge of God is not a gift, bestowed upon all good men +like obedience; and, further, that the knowledge of God, required by Him +through His prophets from everyone without exception, as needful to be +known, is simply a knowledge of His Divine justice and charity. (14) Both +these points are easily proved from Scripture. (15) The first plainly +follows from Exodus vi:2, where God, in order to show the singular grace +bestowed upon Moses, says to him: "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, +and unto Jacob by the name of El Sadai (A. V. God Almighty); but by my name +Jehovah was I not known to them" - for the better understanding of which +passage I may remark that El Sadai, in Hebrew, signifies the God who +suffices, in that He gives to every man that which suffices for him; and, +although Sadai is often used by itself, to signify God, we cannot doubt that +the word El (God, {power, might}) is everywhere understood. (16) +Furthermore, we must note that Jehovah is the only word found in Scripture +with the meaning of the absolute essence of God, without reference to +created things. (17) The Jews maintain, for this reason, that this is, +strictly speaking, the only name of God; that the rest of the words used are +merely titles; and, in truth, the other names of God, whether they be +substantives or adjectives, are merely attributive, and belong to Him, in +so far as He is conceived of in relation to created things, or manifested +through them. (18) Thus El, or Eloah, signifies powerful, as is well known, +and only applies to God in respect to His supremacy, as when we call Paul an +apostle; the faculties of his power are set forth in an accompanying +adjective, as El, great, awful, just, merciful, &c., or else all are +understood at once by the use of El in the plural number, with a singular +signification, an expression frequently adopted in Scripture. + +(19) Now, as God tells Moses that He was not known to the patriarchs by the +name of Jehovah, it follows that they were not cognizant of any attribute of +God which expresses His absolute essence, but only of His deeds and promises +that is, of His power, as manifested in visible things. (20) God does not +thus speak to Moses in order to accuse the patriarchs of infidelity, but, +on the contrary, as a means of extolling their belief and faith, inasmuch +as, though they possessed no extraordinary knowledge of God (such as +Moses had), they yet accepted His promises as fixed and certain; whereas +Moses, though his thoughts about God were more exalted, nevertheless doubted +about the Divine promises, and complained to God that, instead of the +promised deliverance, the prospects of the Israelites had darkened. + +(21) As the patriarchs did not know the distinctive name of God, and as God +mentions the fact to Moses, in praise of their faith and single-heartedness, +and in contrast to the extraordinary grace granted to Moses, it follows, as +we stated at first, that men are not bound by, decree to have knowledge of +the attributes of God, such knowledge being only granted to a few of the +faithful: it is hardly worth while to quote further examples from Scripture, +for everyone must recognize that knowledge of God is not equal among all +good men. (22) Moreover, a man cannot be ordered to be wise any more than he +can be ordered to live and exist. (23) Men, women, and children are all +alike able to obey by, commandment, but not to be wise. If any tell us that +it is not necessary to understand the Divine attributes, but that we must +believe them simply, without proof, he is plainly, trifling. (24) For what +is invisible and can only, be perceived by the mind, cannot be apprehended +by any, other means than proofs; if these are absent the object remains +ungrasped; the repetition of what has been heard on such subjects no more +indicates or attains to their meaning than the words of a parrot or a puppet +speaking without sense or signification. + +(25) Before I proceed I ought to explain how it comes that we are often told +in Genesis that the patriarchs preached in the name of Jehovah, this being +in plain contradiction to the text above quoted. (26) A reference to what +was said in Chap. VIII. will readily explain the difficulty. (27) It was +there shown that the writer of the Pentateuch did not always speak of things +and places by the names they bore in the times of which he was writing, but +by the names best known to his contemporaries. (28) God is thus said in the +Pentateuch to have been preached by the patriarchs under the name of +Jehovah, not because such was the name by which the patriarchs knew +Him, but because this name was the one most reverenced by the Jews. +(29) This point, I say, must necessarily be noticed, for in Exodus it is +expressly stated that God was not known to the patriarchs by this name; and +in chap. iii:13, it is said that Moses desired to know the name of God. (30) +Now, if this name had been already known it would have been known to Moses. +(31) We must therefore draw the conclusion indicated, namely, that the +faithful patriarchs did not know this name of God, and that the knowledge of +God is bestowed and not commanded by the Deity. + +(32) It is now time to pass on to our second point, and show that God +through His prophets required from men no other knowledge of Himself than is +contained in a knowledge of His justice and charity - that is, of attributes +which a certain manner of life will enable men to imitate. (33) Jeremiah +states this in so many words (xxii:15, 16): "Did not thy father eat, and +drink, and do judgment and justice? and then it was well with him. (34) He +judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well with him: was not +this to know Me ? saith the Lord." (35) The words in chap. ix:24 of the same +book are equally, clear. (36) "But let him that glorieth glory in this, that +he understandeth and knoweth Me, that I am the Lord which exercise loving- +kindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth; for in these things I +delight, saith the Lord." (37) The same doctrine maybe gathered from Exod. +xxxiv:6, where God revealed to Moses only, those of His attributes which +display the Divine justice and charity. (38) Lastly, we may call attention +to a passage in John which we shall discuss at more length hereafter; the +Apostle explains the nature of God (inasmuch as no one has beheld Him) +through charity only, and concludes that he who possesses charity possesses, +and in very, truth knows God. + +(39) We have thus seen that Moses, Jeremiah, and John sum up in a very short +compass the knowledge of God needful for all, and that they state it to +consist in exactly what we said, namely, that God is supremely just, and +supremely merciful - in other words, the one perfect pattern of the true +life. (40) We may add that Scripture nowhere gives an express definition of +God, and does not point out any other of His attributes which should be +apprehended save these, nor does it in set terms praise any others. +(41) Wherefore we may draw the general conclusion that an intellectual +knowledge of God, which takes cognizance of His nature in so far as it +actually is, and which cannot by any manner of living be imitated by mankind +or followed as an example, has no bearing whatever on true rules of conduct, +on faith, or on revealed religion; consequently that men may be in complete +error on the subject without incurring the charge of sinfulness. (42) We +need now no longer wonder that God adapted Himself to the existing opinions +and imaginations of the prophets, or that the faithful held different ideas +of God, as we showed in Chap. II.; or, again, that the sacred books speak +very inaccurately of God, attributing to Him hands, feet, eyes, ears, a +mind, and motion from one place to another; or that they ascribe to Him +emotions, such as jealousy, mercy, &c., or, lastly, that they describe +Him as a Judge in heaven sitting on a royal throne with Christ on His +right hand. (43) Such expressions are adapted to the understanding of the +multitude, it being the object of the Bible to make men not learned but +obedient. + +(44) In spite of this the general run of theologians, when they come upon +any of these phrases which they cannot rationally harmonize with the Divine +nature, maintain that they should be interpreted metaphorically, passages +they cannot understand they say should be interpreted literally. (45) But if +every expression of this kind in the Bible is necessarily to be interpreted +and understood metaphorically, Scripture must have been written, not for the +people and the unlearned masses, but chiefly for accomplished experts and +philosophers. + +(46) If it were indeed a sin to hold piously and simply the ideas about God +we have just quoted, the prophets ought to have been strictly on their guard +against the use of such expressions, seeing the weak-mindedness of the +people, and ought, on the other hand, to have set forth first of all, duly +and clearly, those attributes of God which are needful to be understood. + +(47) This they have nowhere done; we cannot, therefore, think that opinions +taken in themselves without respect to actions are either pious or impious, +but must maintain that a man is pious or impious in his beliefs only in so +far as he is thereby incited to obedience, or derives from them license +to sin and rebel. (48) If a man, by believing what is true, becomes +rebellious, his creed is impious; if by believing what is false he becomes +obedient, his creed is pious; for the true knowledge of God comes not by +commandment, but by Divine gift. (49) God has required nothing from man but +a knowledge of His Divine justice and charity, and that not as necessary to +scientific accuracy, but to obedience. + + + + +CHAPTER XIV - DEFINITIONS OF FAITH, THE FAITH, AND THE FOUNDATIONS + OF FAITH, WHICH IS ONCE FOR ALL SEPARATED FROM PHILOSOPHY. + +(1) For a true knowledge of faith it is above all things necessary to +understand that the Bible was adapted to the intelligence, not only of the +prophets, but also of the diverse and fickle Jewish multitude. (2) This will +be recognized by all who give any thought to the subject, for they will see +that a person who accepted promiscuously everything in Scripture as being +the universal and absolute teaching of God, without accurately defining what +was adapted to the popular intelligence, would find it impossible to escape +confounding the opinions of the masses with the Divine doctrines, praising +the judgments and comments of man as the teaching of God, and +making a wrong use of Scriptural authority. (3) Who, I say, does not +perceive that this is the chief reason why so many sectaries teach +contradictory opinions as Divine documents, and support their contentions +with numerous Scriptural texts, till it has passed in Belgium into a +proverb, geen ketter sonder letter - no heretic without a text? (4) The +sacred books were not written by one man, nor for the people of a single +period, but by many authors of different temperaments, at times extending +from first to last over nearly two thousand years, and perhaps much longer. +(5) We will not, however, accuse the sectaries of impiety because they have +adapted the words of Scripture to their own opinions; it is thus that these +words were adapted to the understanding of the masses originally, and +everyone is at liberty so to treat them if he sees that he can thus obey God +in matters relating to justice and charity with a more full consent: but +we do accuse those who will not grant this freedom to their fellows, +but who persecute all who differ from them, as God's enemies, however +honourable and virtuous be their lives; while, on the other hand, they +cherish those who agree with them, however foolish they may be, as God's +elect. (6) Such conduct is as wicked and dangerous to the state as any that +can be conceived. + +(7) In order, therefore, to establish the limits to which individual freedom +should extend, and to decide what persons, in spite of the diversity of +their opinions, are to be looked upon as the faithful, we must define faith +and its essentials. (8) This task I hope to accomplish in the present +chapter, and also to separate faith from philosophy, which is the chief aim +of the whole treatise. + +(9) In order to proceed duly to the demonstration let us recapitulate the +chief aim and object of Scripture; this will indicate a standard by which we +may define faith. + +(10) We have said in a former chapter that the aim and object of Scripture +is only to teach obedience. (11) Thus much, I think, no one can question. +(12) Who does not see that both Testaments are nothing else but schools for +this object, and have neither of them any aim beyond inspiring mankind with +a voluntary obedience? (13) For (not to repeat what I said in the last +chapter) I will remark that Moses did not seek to convince the Jews by +reason, but bound them by a covenant, by oaths, and by conferring benefits; +further, he threatened the people with punishment if they should infringe +the law, and promised rewards if they should obey it. +(14) All these are not means for teaching knowledge, but for inspiring +obedience. (15) The doctrine of the Gospels enjoins nothing but simple +faith, namely, to believe in God and to honour Him, which is the same thing +as to obey him. (16) There is no occasion for me to throw further light on +a question so plain by citing Scriptural texts commending obedience, such as +may be found in great numbers in both Testaments. (17) Moreover, the Bible +teaches very clearly in a great many passages what everyone ought to do in +order to obey God; the whole duty is summed up in love to one's neighbour. +(18) It cannot, therefore, be denied that he who by God's command loves his +neighbour as himself is truly obedient and blessed according to the law, +whereas he who hates his neighbour or neglects him is rebellious and +obstinate. + +(19) Lastly, it is plain to everyone that the Bible was not written and +disseminated only, for the learned, but for men of every age and race; +wherefore we may, rest assured that we are not bound by Scriptural command +to believe anything beyond what is absolutely necessary, for +fulfilling its main precept. + +(20) This precept, then, is the only standard of the whole Catholic faith, +and by it alone all the dogmas needful to be believed should be determined. +(21) So much being abundantly manifest, as is also the fact that all other +doctrines of the faith can be legitimately deduced therefrom by reason +alone, I leave it to every man to decide for himself how it comes to pass +that so many divisions have arisen in the Church: can it be from any other +cause than those suggested at the beginning of Chap. VIII.? (22) It is these +same causes which compel me to explain the method of determining the dogmas +of the faith from the foundation we have discovered, for if I +neglected to do so, and put the question on a regular basis, I might justly +be said to have promised too lavishly, for that anyone might, by my showing, +introduce any doctrine he liked into religion, under the pretext that it was +a necessary means to obedience: especially would this be the case in +questions respecting the Divine attributes. + +(23) In order, therefore, to set forth the whole matter methodically, I will +begin with a definition of faith, which on the principle above given, should +be as follows:- + +(24) Faith consists in a knowledge of God, without which obedience to Him +would be impossible, and which the mere fact of obedience to Him implies. +(25) This definition is so clear, and follows so plainly from what we have +already proved, that it needs no explanation. (26) The consequences involved +therein I will now briefly show. + +(27) (I.) Faith is not salutary in itself, but only in respect to the +obedience it implies, or as James puts it in his Epistle, ii:17, "Faith +without works is dead" (see the whole of the chapter quoted). + +(28) (II.) He who is truly obedient necessarily possesses true and saving +faith; for if obedience be granted, faith must be granted also, as the same +Apostle expressly says in these words (ii:18), "Show me thy faith without +thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works." (29) So also +John, I Ep. iv:7: "Everyone that loveth is born of God, and knoweth +God: he that loveth not, knoweth not God; for God is love." (30) From these +texts, I repeat, it follows that we can only judge a man faithful or +unfaithful by his works. (31) If his works be good, he is faithful, however +much his doctrines may differ from those of the rest of the faithful: if his +works be evil, though he may verbally conform, he is unfaithful. (32) For +obedience implies faith, and faith without works is dead. + +(33) John, in the 13th verse of the chapter above quoted, expressly teaches +the same doctrine: "Hereby," he says, "know we that we dwell in Him and He +in us, because He hath given us of His Spirit," i.e. love. (34) He had said +before that God is love, and therefore he concludes (on his own received +principles), that whoso possesses love possesses truly the Spirit of God. +(35) As no one has beheld God he infers that no one has knowledge or +consciousness of God, except from love towards his neighbour, and also that +no one can have knowledge of any of God's attributes, except this of love, +in so far as we participate therein. + +(36) If these arguments are not conclusive, they, at any rate, show the +Apostle's meaning, but the words in chap. ii:3, 4, of the same Epistle are +much clearer, for they state in so many words our precise contention: "And +hereby we do know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. (37) He +that saith, I know Him, and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the +truth is not in him." + +(38) From all this, I repeat, it follows that they are the true enemies of +Christ who persecute honourable and justice-loving men because they differ +from them, and do not uphold the same religious dogmas as themselves: for +whosoever loves justice and charity we know, by that very fact, to be +faithful: whosoever persecutes the faithful, is an enemy to Christ. + +(39) Lastly, it follows that faith does not demand that dogmas should be +true as that they should be pious - that is, such as will stir up the heart +to obey; though there be many such which contain not a shadow of truth, so +long as they be held in good faith, otherwise their adherents are +disobedient, for how can anyone, desirous of loving justice and obeying God, +adore as Divine what he knows to be alien from the Divine nature? (40) +However, men may err from simplicity of mind, and Scripture, as we +have seen, does not condemn ignorance, but obstinacy. (41) This is the +necessary result of our definition of faith, and all its branches +should spring from the universal rule above given, and from the evident aim +and object of the Bible, unless we choose to mix our own inventions +therewith. (42) Thus it is not true doctrines which are expressly required +by the Bible, so much as doctrines necessary for obedience, and to confirm +in our hearts the love of our neighbour, wherein (to adopt the words of +John) we are in God, and God in us. + +(43) As, then, each man's faith must be judged pious or impious only in +respect of its producing obedience or obstinacy, and not in respect of its +truth; and as no one will dispute that men's dispositions are exceedingly +varied, that all do not acquiesce in the same things, but are ruled +some by one opinion some by another, so that what moves one to devotion +moves another to laughter and contempt, it follows that there can be no +doctrines in the Catholic, or universal, religion, which can give rise to +controversy among good men. (44) Such doctrines might be pious to some and +impious to others, whereas they should be judged solely by their fruits. + +(45) To the universal religion, then, belong only such dogmas as are +absolutely required in order to attain obedience to God, and without which +such obedience would be impossible; as for the rest, each man - seeing that +he is the best judge of his own character should adopt whatever he thinks +best adapted to strengthen his love of justice. (46) If this were so, I +think there would be no further occasion for controversies in the Church. + +(47) I have now no further fear in enumerating the dogmas of universal faith +or the fundamental dogmas of the whole of Scripture, inasmuch as they all +tend (as may be seen from what has been said) to this one doctrine, namely, +that there exists a God, that is, a Supreme Being, Who loves justice and +charity, and Who must be obeyed by whosoever would be saved; that the +worship of this Being consists in the practice of justice and love towards +one's neighbour, and that they contain nothing beyond the following +doctrines :- + +(48) I. That God or a Supreme Being exists, sovereignly just and merciful, +the Exemplar of the true life; that whosoever is ignorant of or +disbelieves in His existence cannot obey Him or know Him as a Judge. + +(49) II. That He is One. (50) Nobody will dispute that this doctrine is +absolutely necessary for entire devotion, admiration, and love towards God. +(51) For devotion, admiration, and love spring from the superiority of one +over all else. + +(52) III. That He is omnipresent, or that all things are open to Him, for if +anything could be supposed to be concealed from Him, or to be unnoticed by, +Him, we might doubt or be ignorant of the equity of His judgment as +directing all things. + +(53) IV. That He has supreme right and dominion over all things, and that He +does nothing under compulsion, but by His absolute fiat and grace. (54) All +things are bound to obey Him, He is not bound to obey any. + +(55) V. That the worship of God consists only in justice and charity, or +love towards one's neighbour. + +(56) VI. That all those, and those only, who obey God by their manner of +life are saved; the rest of mankind, who live under the sway of their +pleasures, are lost. (57) If we did not believe this, there would be no +reason for obeying God rather than pleasure. + +(58) VII. Lastly, that God forgives the sins of those who repent. (59) No +one is free from sin, so that without this belief all would despair of +salvation, and there would be no reason for believing in the mercy of God. +(60) He who firmly believes that God, out of the mercy and grace with which +He directs all things, forgives the sins of men, and who feels his love of +God kindled thereby, he, I say, does really, know Christ according to the +Spirit, and Christ is in him. + +(61) No one can deny that all these doctrines are before all things +necessary, to be believed, in order that every man, without exception, may +be able to obey God according to the bidding of the Law above explained, for +if one of these precepts be disregarded obedience is destroyed. +(62) But as to what God, or the Exemplar of the true life, may be, whether +fire, or spirit, or light, or thought, or what not, this, I say, has nothing +to do with faith any more than has the question how He comes to be the +Exemplar of the true life, whether it be because He has a just and +merciful mind, or because all things exist and act through Him, and +consequently that we understand through Him, and through Him see what +is truly just and good. (63) Everyone may think on such questions as he +likes, + +(64) Furthermore, faith is not affected, whether we hold that God is +omnipresent essentially or potentially; that He directs all things by +absolute fiat, or by the necessity of His nature; that He dictates laws like +a prince, or that He sets them forth as eternal truths; that man obeys Him +by virtue of free will, or by virtue of the necessity of the Divine decree; +lastly, that the reward of the good and the punishment of the wicked is +natural or supernatural: these and such like questions have no bearing on +faith, except in so far as they are used as means to give us license to sin +more, or to obey God less. (65) I will go further, and maintain that every +man is bound to adapt these dogmas to his own way of thinking, and to +interpret them according as he feels that he can give them his fullest and +most unhesitating assent, so that he may the more easily obey God with his +whole heart. + +(66) Such was the manner, as we have already pointed out, in which the faith +was in old time revealed and written, in accordance with the understanding +and opinions of the prophets and people of the period; so, in like fashion, +every man is bound to adapt it to his own opinions, so that he may accept it +without any hesitation or mental repugnance. (67) We have shown that faith +does not so much re quire truth as piety, and that it is only quickening and +pious through obedience, consequently no one is faithful save by obedience +alone. (68) The best faith is not necessarily possessed by him who displays +the best reasons, but by him who displays the best fruits of justice and +charity. (69) How salutary and necessary this doctrine is for a state, in +order that men may dwell together in peace and concord; and how many and how +great causes of disturbance and crime are thereby cut off, I leave everyone +to judge for himself! + +(70) Before we go further, I may remark that we can, by means of what we +have just proved, easily answer the objections raised in Chap. I., when we +were discussing God's speaking with the Israelites on Mount Sinai. (71) For, +though the voice heard by the Israelites could not give those men any +philosophical or mathematical certitude of God's existence, it was yet +sufficient to thrill them with admiration for God, as they already knew Him, +and to stir them up to obedience: and such was the object of the display. +(72) God did not wish to teach the Israelites the absolute attributes of His +essence (none of which He then revealed), but to break down their hardness +of heart, and to draw them to obedience: therefore He did not appeal to them +with reasons, but with the sound of trumpets, thunder, and lightnings. + +(73) It remains for me to show that between faith or theology, and +philosophy, there is no connection, nor affinity. (74) I think no one will +dispute the fact who has knowledge of the aim and foundations of the two +subjects, for they are as wide apart as the poles. + +(75) Philosophy has no end in view save truth: faith, as we have abundantly +proved, looks for nothing but obedience and piety. (76) Again, philosophy is +based on axioms which must be sought from nature alone: faith is based on +history and language, and must be sought for only in Scripture and +revelation, as we showed in Chap. VII. (77) Faith, therefore, allows the +greatest latitude in philosophic speculation, allowing us without blame to +think what we like about anything, and only condemning, as heretics and +schismatics, those who teach opinions which tend to produce obstinacy, +hatred, strife, and anger; while, on the other hand, only considering +as faithful those who persuade us, as far as their reason and faculties will +permit, to follow justice and charity. + +(78) Lastly, as what we are now setting forth are the most important +subjects of my treatise, I would most urgently beg the reader, before I +proceed, to read these two chapters with especial attention, and to take the +trouble to weigh them well in his mind: let him take for granted that I +have not written with a view to introducing novelties, but in order to do +away with abuses, such as I hope I may, at some future time, at last see +reformed. + + + + +CHAPTER XV - THEOLOGY IS SHOWN NOT TO BE SUBSERVIENT TO REASON, + NOR REASON TO THEOLOGY: A DEFINITION OF THE REASON WHICH + ENABLES US TO ACCEPT THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. + +(1) Those who know not that philosophy and reason are distinct, dispute +whether Scripture should be made subservient to reason, or reason to +Scripture: that is, whether the meaning of Scripture should be made to +agreed with reason; or whether reason should be made to agree with +Scripture: the latter position is assumed by the sceptics who deny the +certitude of reason, the former by the dogmatists. (2) Both parties are, as +I have shown, utterly in the wrong, for either doctrine would require us to +tamper with reason or with Scripture. + +(3) We have shown that Scripture does not teach philosophy, but merely +obedience, and that all it contains has been adapted to the understanding +and established opinions of the multitude. (4) Those, therefore, who wish to +adapt it to philosophy, must needs ascribe to the prophets many ideas which +they never even dreamed of, and give an extremely forced interpretation to +their words: those on the other hand, who would make reason and philosophy +subservient to theology, will be forced to accept as Divine utterances the +prejudices of the ancient Jews, and to fill and confuse their mind +therewith. (5) In short, one party will run wild with the aid of reason, +and the other will run wild without the aid of reason. + +(6) The first among the Pharisees who openly maintained that Scripture +should be made to agree with reason, was Maimonides, whose opinion we +reviewed, and abundantly refuted in Chap. VIII.: now, although this writer +had much authority among his contemporaries, he was deserted on this +question by almost all, and the majority went straight over to the +opinion of a certain R. Jehuda Alpakhar, who, in his anxiety to avoid the +error of Maimonides, fell into another, which was its exact contrary. (7) He +held that reason should be made subservient, and entirely give way to +Scripture. (8) He thought that a passage should not be interpreted +metaphorically, simply because it was repugnant to reason, but only in the +cases when it is inconsistent with Scripture itself - that is, with its +clear doctrines. (9) Therefore he laid down the universal rule, that +whatsoever Scripture teaches dogmatically, and affirms expressly, must on +its own sole authority be admitted as absolutely true: that there is no +doctrine in the Bible which directly contradicts the general tenour of +the whole: but only some which appear to involve a difference, for the +phrases of Scripture often seem to imply something contrary to what has been +expressly taught. (10) Such phrases, and such phrases only, we may interpret +metaphorically. + +(11) For instance, Scripture clearly teaches the unity of God (see Deut. +vi:4), nor is there any text distinctly asserting a plurality of gods; but +in several passages God speaks of Himself, and the prophets speak of Him, in +the plural number; such phrases are simply a manner of speaking, and do not +mean that there actually are several gods: they are to be explained +metaphorically, not because a plurality of gods is repugnant to reason, but +because Scripture distinctly asserts that there is only one. + +(12) So, again, as Scripture asserts (as Alpakhar thinks) in Deut. iv:15, +that God is incorporeal, we are bound, solely by the authority of this text, +and not by reason, to believe that God has no body: consequently we must +explain metaphorically, on the sole authority of Scripture, all those +passages which attribute to God hands, feet, &c., and take them merely as +figures of speech. (13) Such is the opinion of Alpakhar. In so far as he +seeks to explain Scripture by Scripture, I praise him, but I marvel that a +man gifted with reason should wish to debase that faculty. (14) It is +true that Scripture should be explained by Scripture, so long as we are in +difficulties about the meaning and intention of the prophets, but when we +have elicited the true meaning, we must of necessity make use of our +judgment and reason in order to assent thereto. (15) If reason, however, +much as she rebels, is to be entirely subjected to Scripture, I ask, +are we to effect her submission by her own aid, or without her, and +blindly? (16) If the latter, we shall surely act foolishly and +injudiciously; if the former, we assent to Scripture under the dominion of +reason, and should not assent to it without her. (17) Moreover, I may ask +now, is a man to assent to anything against his reason? (18) What is denial +if it be not reason's refusal to assent? (19) In short, I am astonished that +anyone should wish to subject reason, the greatest of gifts and a light from +on high, to the dead letter which may have been corrupted by human malice; +that it should be thought no crime to speak with contempt of mind, the true +handwriting of God's Word, calling it corrupt, blind, and lost, while it is +considered the greatest of crimes to say the same of the letter, which is +merely the reflection and image of God's Word. (20) Men think it pious +to trust nothing to reason and their own judgment, and impious to doubt the +faith of those who have transmitted to us the sacred books. (21) Such +conduct is not piety, but mere folly. And, after all, why are they so +anxious? What are they afraid of? (22) Do they think that faith and religion +cannot be upheld unless - men purposely keep themselves in ignorance, and +turn their backs on reason? (23) If this be so, they have but a timid trust +in Scripture. + +(23) However, be it far from me to say that religion should seek to enslave +reason, or reason religion, or that both should not be able to keep their +sovereignity in perfect harmony. (24) I will revert to this question +presently, for I wish now to discuss Alpakhar's rule. + +(26) He requires, as we have stated, that we should accept as true, or +reject as false, everything asserted or denied by Scripture, and he further +states that Scripture never expressly asserts or denies anything which +contradicts its assertions or negations elsewhere. (27) The rashness of +such a requirement and statement can escape no one. (28) For (passing over +the fact that he does not notice that Scripture consists of different books, +written at different times, for different people, by different authors: and +also that his requirement is made on his own authority without +any corroboration from reason or Scripture) he would be bound to show that +all passages which are indirectly contradictory of the rest, can be +satisfactorily explained metaphorically through the nature of the language +and the context: further, that Scripture has come down to us untampered +with. (29) However, we will go into the matter at length. + +(30) Firstly, I ask what shall we do if reason prove recalcitrant? (31) +Shall we still be bound to affirm whatever Scripture affirms, and to deny +whatever Scripture denies? (32) Perhaps it will be answered that Scripture +contains nothing repugnant to reason. (33) But I insist !hat it expressly +affirms and teaches that God is jealous (namely, in the decalogue itself, +and in Exod. xxxiv:14, and in Deut. iv:24, and in many other places), and I +assert that such a doctrine is repugnant to reason. (34) It must, I suppose, +in spite of all, be accepted as true. If there are any passages in +Scripture which imply that God is not jealous, they must be taken +metaphorically as meaning nothing of the kind. (35) So, also, Scripture +expressly states (Exod. xix:20, &c.) that God came down to Mount Sinai, and +it attributes to Him other movements from place to place, nowhere +directly stating that God does not so move. (36) Wherefore, we must take the +passage literally, and Solomon's words (I Kings viii:27), "But will God +dwell on the earth? (37) Behold the heavens and earth cannot contain thee," +inasmuch as they do not expressly state that God does not move from place to +place, but only imply it, must be explained away till they have no further +semblance of denying locomotion to the Deity. (38) So also we must believe +that the sky is the habitation and throne of God, for Scripture expressly +says so; and similarly many passages expressing the opinions of the prophets +or the multitude, which reason and philosophy, but not Scripture, tell us to +be false, must be taken as true if we are io follow the guidance of our +author, for according to him, reason has nothing to do with the matter. (39) +Further, it is untrue that Scripture never contradicts itself directly, but +only by implication. (40) For Moses says, in so many words (Deut. iv:24), +"The Lord thy God is a consuming fire," and elsewhere expressly denies that +God has any likeness to visible things. (Deut. iv. 12.) (41) If it be +decided that the latter passage only contradicts the former by implication, +and must be adapted thereto, lest it seem to negative it, let us grant that +God is a fire; or rather, lest we should seem to have taken leave +of our senses, let us pass the matter over and take another example. + +(42) Samuel expressly denies that God ever repents, "for he is not a man +that he should repent" (I Sam. xv:29). (43) Jeremiah, on the other hand, +asserts that God does repent, both of the evil and of the good which He had +intended to do (Jer. xviii:8-10). (44) What? (45) Are not these two +texts directly contradictory? (46) Which of the two, then, would our author +want to explain metaphorically? (47) Both statements are general, and each +is the opposite of the other - what one flatly affirms, the other flatly, +denies. (48) So, by his own rule, he would be obliged at once to reject them +as false, and to accept them as true. + +(49) Again, what is the point of one passage, not being contradicted by +another directly, but only by implication, if the implication is clear, and +the nature and context of the passage preclude metaphorical interpretation? +(50) There are many such instances in the Bible, as we saw in Chap. II. +(where we pointed out that the prophets held different and contradictory +opinions), and also in Chaps. IX. and X., where we drew attention to the +contradictions in the historical narratives. (51) There is no need for me to +go through them all again, for what I have said sufficiently exposes the +absurdities which would follow from an opinion and rule such as we are +discussing, and shows the hastiness of its propounder. + +(52) We may, therefore, put this theory, as well as that of Maimonides, +entirely out of court; and we may, take it for indisputable that theology is +not bound to serve reason, nor reason theology, but that each has her own +domain. + +(53) The sphere of reason is, as we have said, truth and wisdom; the sphere +of theology, is piety and obedience. (54) The power of reason does not +extend so far as to determine for us that men may be blessed through simple +obedience, without understanding. (55) Theology, tells us nothing else, +enjoins on us no command save obedience, and has neither the will nor the +power to oppose reason: she defines the dogmas of faith (as we pointed out +in the last chapter) only in so far as they may be necessary, for obedience, +and leaves reason to determine their precise truth: for reason is the +light of the mind, and without her all things are dreams and phantoms. + +(56) By theology, I here mean, strictly speaking, revelation, in so far as +it indicates the object aimed at by Scripture namely, the scheme and manner +of obedience, or the true dogmas of piety and faith. (57) This may truly be +called the Word of God, which does not consist in a certain number of books +(see Chap. XII.). (58) Theology thus understood, if we regard its precepts +or rules of life, will be found in accordance with reason; and, if we look +to its aim and object, will be seen to be in nowise repugnant thereto, +wherefore it is universal to all men. + +(59) As for its bearing on Scripture, we have shown in Chap. VII. that the +meaning of Scripture should be gathered from its own history, and not from +the history of nature in general, which is the basis of philosophy. + +(60) We ought not to be hindered if we find that our investigation of the +meaning of Scripture thus conducted shows us that it is here and there +repugnant to reason; for whatever we may find of this sort in the Bible, +which men may be in ignorance of, without injury to their charity, has, we +may be sure, no bearing on theology or the Word of God, and may, therefore, +without blame, be viewed by every one as he pleases. + +(61) To sum up, we may draw the absolute conclusion that the Bible must not +be accommodated to reason, nor reason to the Bible. + +(62) Now, inasmuch as the basis of theology - the doctrine that man may be +saved by obedience alone - cannot be proved by reason whether it be true or +false, we may be asked, Why, then, should we believe it? (63) If we do so +without the aid of reason, we accept it blindly, and act foolishly and +injudiciously; if, on the other hand, we settle that it can be proved by +reason, theology becomes a part of philosophy, and inseparable therefrom. +(64) But I make answer that I have absolutely established that this basis of +theology cannot be investigated by the natural light of reason, or, at any +rate, that no one ever has proved it by such means, and, therefore, +revelation was necessary. (65) We should, however, make use of our reason, +in order to grasp with moral certainty what is revealed - I say, with moral +certainty, for we cannot hope to attain greater certainty, than the +prophets: yet their certainty was only, moral, as I showed in Chap. II. + +(66) Those, therefore, who attempt to set forth the authority of Scripture +with mathematical demonstrations are wholly in error: for the authority, of +the Bible is dependent on the authority of the prophets, and can be +supported by no stronger arguments than those employed in old time by the +prophets for convincing the people of their own authority. (67) Our +certainty on the same subject can be founded on no other basis than that +which served as foundation for the certainty of the prophets. + +(68) Now the certainty of the prophets consisted (as we pointed out) in these elements:- +(69) (I.) A distinct and vivid imagination. +(70) (II.) A sign. +(71) (III.) Lastly, and chiefly, a mind turned to what is just and good. It was based on no other +reasons than these, and consequently they cannot prove their authority by any other reasons, either +to the multitude whom they addressed orally, nor to us whom they address in writing. + +(72) The first of these reasons, namely, the vivid imagination, could be +valid only for the prophets; therefore, our certainty concerning revelation +must, and ought to be, based on the remaining two - namely, the sign and the +teaching. (73) Such is the express doctrine of Moses, for (in Deut. xviii.) +he bids the people obey the prophet who should give a true sign in the name +of the Lord, but if he should predict falsely, even though it were in the +name of the Lord, he should be put to death, as should also he who strives +to lead away the people from the true religion, though he confirm his +authority with signs and portents. (74) We may compare with the above Deut. +xiii. (75) Whence it follows that a true prophet could be distinguished from +a false one, both by his doctrine and by the miracles he wrought, for Moses +declares such an one to be a true prophet, and bids the people trust him +without fear of deceit. (76) He condemns as false, and worthy, of death, +those who predict anything falsely even in the name of the Lord, or who +preach false gods, even though their miracles be real. + +(77) The only reason, then, which we have for belief in Scripture or the +writings of the prophets, is the doctrine we find therein, and the +signs by which it is confirmed. (78) For as we see that the prophets extol +charity and justice above all things, and have no other object, we +conclude that they did not write from unworthy motives, but because they +really thought that men might become blessed through obedience and faith: +further, as we see that they confirmed their teaching with signs and +wonders, we become persuaded that they did not speak at random, nor run riot +in their prophecies. (79) We are further strengthened in our conclusion by +the fact that the morality they teach is in evident agreement with reason, +for it is no accidental coincidence that the Word of God which we find in +the prophets coincides with the Word of God written in our hearts. (80) We +may, I say, conclude this from the sacred books as certainly as did the Jews +of old from the living voice of the prophets: for we showed in Chap. XII. +that Scripture has come down to us intact in respect to its doctrine and +main narratives. + +(81) Therefore this whole basis of theology and Scripture, though it does +not admit of mathematical proof, may yet be accepted with the approval of +our judgment. (82) It would be folly to refuse to accept what is confirmed +by such ample prophetic testimony, and what has proved such a comfort to +those whose reason is comparatively weak, and such a benefit to the state; a +doctrine, moreover, which we may believe in without the slightest peril or +hurt, and should reject simply because it cannot be mathematically proved: +it is as though we should admit nothing as true, or as a wise rule of life, +which could ever, in any possible way, be called in question; or as though +most of our actions were not full of uncertainty and hazards. + +(83) I admit that those who believe that theology and philosophy are +mutually contradictory, and that therefore either one or the other must be +thrust from its throne - I admit, I say, that such persons are not +unreasonable in attempting to put theology on a firm basis, and to +demonstrate its truth mathematically. (84) Who, unless he were desperate or +mad, would wish to bid an incontinent farewell to reason, or to despise the +arts and sciences, or to deny reason's certitude? (85) But, in the +meanwhile, we cannot wholly absolve them from blame, inasmuch as they invoke +the aid of reason for her own defeat, and attempt infallibly to prove her +fallible. (86) While they are trying to prove mathematically the +authority and truth of theology, and to take away the authority of natural +reason, they are in reality only bringing theology under reason's dominion, +and proving that her authority has no weight unless natural reason be at the +back of it. + +(87) If they boast that they themselves assent because of the inward +testimony of the Holy Spirit, and that they only invoke the aid of reason +because of unbelievers, in order to convince them, not even so can this meet +with our approval, for we can easily show that they have spoken either from +emotion or vain-glory. (88) It most clearly follows from the last chapter +that the Holy Spirit only gives its testimony in favour of works, called by +Paul (in Gal. v:22) the fruits of the Spirit, and is in itself really +nothing but the mental acquiescence which follows a good action in our +souls. (89) No spirit gives testimony concerning the certitude of matters +within the sphere of speculation, save only reason, who is mistress, as we +have shown, of the whole realm of truth. (90) If then they assert that they +possess this Spirit which makes them certain of truth, they speak falsely, +and according to the prejudices of the emotions, or else they are in great +dread lest they should be vanquished by philosophers and exposed to public +ridicule, and therefore they flee, as it were, to the altar; but their +refuge is vain, for what altar will shelter a man who has outraged reason? +(91) However, I pass such persons over, for I think I have fulfilled my +purpose, and shown how philosophy should be separated from theology, and +wherein each consists; that neither should be subservient to the other, but +that each should keep her unopposed dominion. (92) Lastly, as occasion +offered, I have pointed out the absurdities, the inconveniences, and the +evils following from the extraordinary confusion which has hitherto +prevailed between the two subjects, owing to their not being properly +distinguished and separated. (93) Before I go further I would expressly +state (though I have said it before) that I consider the utility and the +need for Holy Scripture or Revelation to be very great. (94) For as we +cannot perceive by the natural light of reason that simple obedience is the +path of salvation [Endnote 25], and are taught by revelation only that it is +so by the special grace of God, which our reason cannot attain, it follows +that the Bible has brought a very great consolation to mankind. (95) All +are able to obey, whereas there are but very few, compared with the +aggregate of humanity, who can acquire the habit of virtue under the unaided +guidance of reason. (96) Thus if we had not the testimony of Scripture, we +should doubt of the salvation of nearly all men. + +End of Part 3 - Chapters XI to XV. + + + + +AUTHOR'S ENDNOTES TO THE THEOLOGICO-POLITICAL TREATISE + +CHAPTER XI. + +Endnote 24. (1) "Now I think." (2) The translators render the {Greek} +word "I infer", and assert that Paul uses it as synonymous with {a Greek +word}. (3) But the former word has, in Greek, the same meaning as the Hebrew +word rendered to think, to esteem, to judge. (4) And this signification +would be in entire agreement with the Syriac translation. (5) This Syriac +translation (if it be a translation, which is very doubtful, for we know +neither the time of its appearance, nor the translators and Syriac was the +vernacular of the Apostles) renders the text before us in a way well +explained by Tremellius as "we think, therefore." + +CHAPTER XV. + +Endnote 25. (1) "That simple obedience is the path of salvation." (2) +In other words, it is enough for salvation or blessedness, that we should +embrace the Divine decrees as laws or commands; there is no need to conceive +them as eternal truths. (3) This can be taught us by Revelation, not Reason, +as appears from the demonstrations given in Chapter IV. + + +End of Part III - Chapters XI to XV. + + + + +End of Part III +The Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise + |