Theologico-Political Treatise P3(神学与政治专题研究3)

VIP免费

2024-12-25 0 0 159.61KB 41 页 5.9玖币

侵权投诉

A Theologico-Political Treatise

A Theologico-Political

Treatise

Part III - Chapters XI to XV

Baruch Spinoza

A Theologico-Political 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)

A Theologico-Political Treatise

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.

A Theologico-Political Treatise

(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

A Theologico-Political Treatise

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.

A Theologico-Political Treatise

(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

A Theologico-Political Treatise

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

A Theologico-Political Treatise

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!

A Theologico-Political Treatise

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

文档加载中……请稍候！
如果长时间未打开，您也可以点击刷新试试。

下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便

5.9 玖币 0人已下载

立即下载 VIP免费下载

摘要：

ATheologico-PoliticalTreatise1ATheologico-PoliticalTreatisePartIII-ChaptersXItoXVBaruchSpinozaATheologico-PoliticalTreatise2CHAPTERXIANINQUIRYWHETHERTHEAPOSTLESWROTETHEIREPISTLESASAPOSTLESANDPROPHETS,ORMERELYASTEACHERS;ANDANEXPLANATIONOFWHATISMEANTBYANAPOSTLE.(1)NoreaderoftheNewTestamentcandoubtthat...

展开>> 收起<<

Theologico-Political Treatise P3(神学与政治专题研究3).pdf

共41页,预览9页

还剩页未读，继续阅读

声明：本站为文档C2C交易模式，即用户上传的文档直接被用户下载，本站只是中间服务平台，本站所有文档下载所得的收益归上传人(含作者)所有。玖贝云文库仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。若文档所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私，请立即通知玖贝云文库，我们立即给予删除！

Theologico-Political Treatise P3(神学与政治专题研究3)

相关推荐

开通VIP享超值会员特权

作者详情

相关内容

热门标签

举报选择: