CHAPTER I. - Of Prophecy

Sentence Numbers, shown thus (1), have been added by volunteer.

A Theologico-Political Treatise

Part 1 - Chapters I to V

Baruch Spinoza

A Theologico-Political Treatise

Part 1 - Chapters I to V

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

PREFACE.

Origin and consequences of superstition.

Causes that have led the author to write.

Course of his investigation.

For what readers the treatise is designed. Submission of author

to the rulers of his country.

CHAPTER I - Of Prophecy.

Definition of prophecy.

Distinction between revelation to Moses and to the other prophets.

Between Christ and other recipients of revelation.

Ambiguity of the word "Spirit."

The different senses in which things may be referred to God.

Different senses of "Spirit of God."

Prophets perceived revelation by imagination.

CHAPTER II - Of Prophets.

A mistake to suppose that prophecy can give knowledge of phenomena

Certainty of prophecy based on:

(1) Vividness of imagination,

(2) A Sign,

(3) Goodness of the Prophet.

Variation of prophecy with the temperament and opinions of the individual.

CHAPTER III - Of the Vocation of the Hebrews, and whether the Gift of

Prophecy was peculiar to them.

Happiness of Hebrews did not consist in the inferiority of the Gentile.

Nor in philosophic knowledge or virtue.

But in their conduct of affairs of state and escape from political dangers.

Even this Distinction did not exist in the time of Abraham.

Testimony from the Old Testament itself to the share of the Gentiles

in the law and favour of God.

Explanation of apparent discrepancy of the Epistle to the Romans.

Answer to the arguments for the eternal election of the Jews.

CHAPTER IV - Of the Divine Law.

Laws either depend on natural necessity or on human decree. The existence

of the latter not inconsistent with the former class of laws.

Divine law a kind of law founded on human decree:

called Divine from its object.

Divine law:

(1) universal;

(2) independent of the truth of any historical narrative;

(3) independent of rites and ceremonies;

(4) its own reward.

Reason does not present God as a law-giver for men.

Such a conception a proof of ignorance - in Adam - in the Israelites -

in Christians.

Testimony of the Scriptures in favour of reason and the

rational view of the Divine.

CHAPTER V - Of the Ceremonial Law.

Ceremonial law of the Old Testament no part of the Divine universal law,

but partial and temporary. Testimony of the prophets themselves to this

Testimony of the New Testament.

How the ceremonial law tended to preserve the Hebrew kingdom.

Christian rites on a similar footing.

What part of the Scripture narratives is one bound to believe?

Authors Endnotes to the Treatise.

A Theologico-Political Treatise

Part 1 - Chapters I to V

PREFACE.

(1)Men would never be superstitious, if they could govern all their

circumstances by set rules, or if they were always favoured by fortune: but

being frequently driven into straits where rules are useless, and being

often kept fluctuating pitiably between hope and fear by the uncertainty

of fortune's greedily coveted favours, they are consequently, for the most

part, very prone to credulity. (2) The human mind is readily swayed this way

or that in times of doubt, especially when hope and fear are struggling for

the mastery, though usually it is boastful, over - confident, and vain.

(3) This as a general fact I suppose everyone knows, though few, I believe,

know their own nature; no one can have lived in the world without observing

that most people, when in prosperity, are so over-brimming with wisdom

(however inexperienced they may be), that they take every offer of advice as

a personal insult, whereas in adversity they know not where to turn, but beg

and pray for counsel from every passer-by. (4) No plan is then too futile,

too absurd, or too fatuous for their adoption; the most frivolous causes

will raise them to hope, or plunge them into despair - if anything happens

during their fright which reminds them of some past good or ill, they think

it portends a happy or unhappy issue, and therefore (though it may have

proved abortive a hundred times before) style it a lucky or unlucky omen.

(5) Anything which excites their astonishment they believe to be a portent

signifying the anger of the gods or of the Supreme Being, and, mistaking

superstition for religion, account it impious not to avert the evil with

prayer and sacrifice. (6) Signs and wonders of this sort they conjure up

perpetually, till one might think Nature as mad as themselves, they

interpret her so fantastically.

(7) Thus it is brought prominently before us, that superstition's chief

victims are those persons who greedily covet temporal advantages; they it

is, who (especially when they are in danger, and cannot help themselves) are

wont with Prayers and womanish tears to implore help from God: upbraiding

Reason as blind, because she cannot show a sure path to the shadows they

pursue, and rejecting human wisdom as vain; but believing the phantoms of

imagination, dreams, and other childish absurdities, to be the very oracles

of Heaven. (8) As though God had turned away from the wise, and written His

decrees, not in the mind of man but in the entrails of beasts, or left them

to be proclaimed by the inspiration and instinct of fools, madmen, and

birds. Such is the unreason to which terror can drive mankind!

(9) Superstition, then, is engendered, preserved, and fostered by fear. If

anyone desire an example, let him take Alexander, who only began

superstitiously to seek guidance from seers, when he first learnt to fear

fortune in the passes of Sysis (Curtius, v. 4); whereas after he had

conquered Darius he consulted prophets no more, till a second time

frightened by reverses. (10) When the Scythians were provoking a battle, the

Bactrians had deserted, and he himself was lying sick of his wounds, "he

once more turned to superstition, the mockery of human wisdom, and bade

Aristander, to whom he confided his credulity, inquire the issue of affairs

with sacrificed victims." (11) Very numerous examples of a like nature might

be cited, clearly showing the fact, that only while under the dominion of

fear do men fall a prey to superstition; that all the portents ever invested

with the reverence of misguided religion are mere phantoms of dejected and

fearful minds; and lastly, that prophets have most power among the people,

and are most formidable to rulers, precisely at those times when the state

is in most peril. (12) I think this is sufficiently plain to all, and will

therefore say no more on the subject.

(13) The origin of superstition above given affords us a clear reason for

the fact, that it comes to all men naturally, though some refer its rise to

a dim notion of God, universal to mankind, and also tends to show, that it

is no less inconsistent and variable than other mental hallucinations and

emotional impulses, and further that it can only be maintained by hope,

hatred, anger, and deceit; since it springs, not from reason, but solely

from the more powerful phases of emotion. (14) Furthermore, we may readily

understand how difficult it is, to maintain in the same course men prone to

every form of credulity. (15) For, as the mass of mankind remains always at

about the same pitch of misery, it never assents long to any one remedy, but

is always best pleased by a novelty which has not yet proved illusive.

(16) This element of inconsistency has been the cause of many terrible wars

and revolutions; for, as Curtius well says (lib. iv. chap. 10): "The mob has

no ruler more potent than superstition," and is easily led, on the plea of

religion, at one moment to adore its kings as gods, and anon to execrate and

abjure them as humanity's common bane. (17) Immense pains have therefore

been taken to counteract this evil by investing religion, whether true or

false, with such pomp and ceremony, that it may rise superior to every

shock, and be always observed with studious reverence by the whole people--a

system which has been brought to great perfection by the Turks, for they

consider even controversy impious, and so clog men's minds with dogmatic

formulas, that they leave no room for sound reason, not even enough to doubt

with.

(18) But if, in despotic statecraft, the supreme and essential mystery be to

hoodwink the subjects, and to mask the fear, which keeps them clown, with

the specious garb of religion, so that men may fight as bravely for slavery

as for safety, and count it not shame but highest honour to risk their blood

and their lives for the vainglory of a tyrant; yet in a free state no more

mischievous expedient could be planned or attempted. (19) Wholly repugnant

to the general freedom are such devices as enthralling men's minds with

prejudices, forcing their judgment, or employing any of the weapons of

quasi-religious sedition; indeed, such seditions only spring up, when law

enters the domain of speculative thought, and opinions are put on trial and

condemned on the same footing as crimes, while those who defend and follow

them are sacrificed, not to public safety, but to their opponents'

hatred and cruelty. (20) If deeds only could be made the grounds of

criminal charges, and words were always allowed to pass free, such seditions

would be divested of every semblance of justification, and would be

separated from mere controversies by a hard and fast line.

(20) Now, seeing that we have the rare happiness of living in a republic,

where everyone's judgment is free and unshackled, where each may worship God

as his conscience dictates, and where freedom is esteemed before all things

dear and precious, I have believed that I should be undertaking no

ungrateful or unprofitable task, in demonstrating that not only can

such freedom be granted without prejudice to the public peace, but also,

that without such freedom, piety cannot flourish nor the public peace be

secure.

(21) Such is the chief conclusion I seek to establish in this treatise; but,

in order to reach it, I must first point out the misconceptions which, like

scars of our former bondage, still disfigure our notion of religion, and

must expose the false views about the civil authority which many have most

impudently advocated, endeavouring to turn the mind of the people, still

prone to heathen superstition, away from its legitimate rulers, and so bring

us again into slavery. (22) As to the order of my treatise I will speak

presently, but first I will recount the causes which led me to write.

(23) I have often wondered, that persons who make a boast of professing the

Christian religion, namely, love, joy, peace, temperance, and charity to all

men, should quarrel with such rancorous animosity, and display daily towards

one another such bitter hatred, that this, rather than the virtues they

claim, is the readiest criterion of their faith. (24) Matters have long

since come to such a pass, that one can only pronounce a man Christian,

Turk, Jew, or Heathen, by his general appearance and attire, by his

frequenting this or that place of worship, or employing the phraseology of a

particular sect - as for manner of life, it is in all cases the same. (25)

Inquiry into the cause of this anomaly leads me unhesitatingly to ascribe it

to the fact, that the ministries of the Church are regarded by the masses

merely as dignities, her offices as posts of emolument - in short, popular

religion may be summed up as respect for ecclesiastics. (26) The spread of

this misconception inflamed every worthless fellow with an intense desire to

enter holy orders, and thus the love of diffusing God's religion degenerated

into sordid avarice and ambition. (27) Every church became a theatre, where

orators, instead of church teachers, harangued, caring not to instruct the

people, but striving to attract admiration, to bring opponents to public

scorn, and to preach only novelties and paradoxes, such as would tickle

the ears of their congregation. (28) This state of things necessarily

stirred up an amount of controversy, envy, and hatred, which no lapse of

time could appease; so that we can scarcely wonder that of the old religion

nothing survives but its outward forms (even these, in the mouth of the

multitude, seem rather adulation than adoration of the Deity), and that

faith has become a mere compound of credulity and prejudices - aye,

prejudices too, which degrade man from rational being to beast, which

completely stifle the power of judgment between true and false, which seem,

in fact, carefully fostered for the purpose of extinguishing the last spark

of reason! (29) Piety, great God! and religion are become a tissue of

ridiculous mysteries; men, who flatly despise reason, who reject and turn

away from understanding as naturally corrupt, these, I say, these of all

men, are thought, O lie most horrible! to possess light from on High. (30)

Verily, if they had but one spark of light from on High, they would not

insolently rave, but would learn to worship God more wisely, and would be as

marked among their fellows for mercy as they now are for malice; if they

were concerned for their opponents' souls, instead of for their own

reputations, they would no longer fiercely persecute, but rather be filled

with pity and compassion.

(31) Furthermore, if any Divine light were in them, it would appear from

their doctrine. (32) I grant that they are never tired of professing their

wonder at the profound mysteries of Holy Writ; still I cannot discover that

they teach anything but speculations of Platonists and Aristotelians, to

which (in order to save their credit for Christianity) they have made Holy

Writ conform; not content to rave with the Greeks themselves, they want to

make the prophets rave also; showing conclusively, that never even in sleep

have they caught a glimpse of Scripture's Divine nature. (33) The very

vehemence of their admiration for the mysteries plainly attests, that

their belief in the Bible is a formal assent rather than a living faith: and

the fact is made still more apparent by their laying down beforehand, as a

foundation for the study and true interpretation of Scripture, the principle

that it is in every passage true and divine. (34) Such a doctrine should be

reached only after strict scrutiny and thorough comprehension of the Sacred

Books (which would teach it much better, for they stand in need no human

factions), and not be set up on the threshold, as it were, of inquiry.

(35) As I pondered over the facts that the light of reason is not only

despised, but by many even execrated as a source of impiety, that human

commentaries are accepted as divine records, and that credulity is extolled

as faith; as I marked the fierce controversies of philosophers raging in

Church and State, the source of bitter hatred and dissension, the ready

instruments of sedition and other ills innumerable, I determined to examine

the Bible afresh in a careful, impartial, and unfettered spirit, making no

assumptions concerning it, and attributing to it no doctrines, which I do

not find clearly therein set down. (36) With these precautions I constructed

a method of Scriptural interpretation, and thus equipped proceeded to

inquire - what is prophecy? (37) In what sense did God reveal himself to the

prophets, and why were these particular men - chosen by him? (38) Was it on

account of the sublimity of their thoughts about the Deity and nature, or

was it solely on account of their piety? (39) These questions being

answered, I was easily able to conclude, that the authority of the prophets

has weight only in matters of morality, and that their speculative doctrines

affect us little.

(40) Next I inquired, why the Hebrews were called God's chosen people,

and discovering that it was only because God had chosen for them a

certain strip of territory, where they might live peaceably and at

ease, I learnt that the Law revealed by God to Moses was merely the law

of the individual Hebrew state, therefore that it was binding on none

but Hebrews, and not even on Hebrews after the downfall of their

nation. (41) Further, in order to ascertain, whether it could be

concluded from Scripture, that the human understanding is naturally

corrupt, I inquired whether the Universal Religion, the Divine Law

revealed through the Prophets and Apostles to the whole human race,

differs from that which is taught by the light of natural reason,

whether miracles can take place in violation of the laws of nature, and

if so, whether they imply the existence of God more surely and clearly

than events, which we understand plainly and distinctly through their

immediate natural causes.

(42) Now, as in the whole course of my investigation I found nothing taught

expressly by Scripture, which does not agree with our understanding, or

which is repugnant thereto, and as I saw that the prophets taught nothing,

which is not very simple and easily to be grasped by all, and further, that

they clothed their teaching in the style, and confirmed it with the reasons,

which would most deeply move the mind of the masses to devotion towards God,

I became thoroughly convinced, that the Bible leaves reason absolutely free,

that it has nothing in common with philosophy, in fact, that Revelation and

Philosophy stand on different footings. In order to set this forth

categorically and exhaust the whole question, I point out the way in which

the Bible should be interpreted, and show that all of spiritual questions

should be sought from it alone, and not from the objects of ordinary

knowledge. (43) Thence I pass on to indicate the false notions, which have

from the fact that the multitude - ever prone to superstition, and caring

more for the shreds of antiquity for eternal truths - pays homage to the

Books of the Bible, rather than to the Word of God. (44) I show that the

Word of God has not been revealed as a certain number of books, was

displayed to the prophets as a simple idea of the mind, namely, obedience to

God in singleness of heart, and in the practice of justice and charity; and

I further point out, that this doctrine is set forth in Scripture in

accordance with the opinions and understandings of those, among whom the

Apostles and Prophets preached, to the end that men might receive it

willingly, and with their whole heart.

(45) Having thus laid bare the bases of belief, I draw the conclusion that

Revelation has obedience for its sole object, therefore, in purpose no less

than in foundation and method, stands entirely aloof from ordinary

knowledge; each has its separate province, neither can be called the

handmaid of the other.

(46) Furthermore, as men's habits of mind differ, so that some more readily

embrace one form of faith, some another, for what moves one to pray may move

another only to scoff, I conclude, in accordance with what has gone before,

that everyone should be free to choose for himself the foundations of his

creed, and that faith should be judged only by its fruits; each would then

obey God freely with his whole heart, while nothing would be publicly

honoured save justice and charity.

(47) Having thus drawn attention to the liberty conceded to everyone by the

revealed law of God, I pass on to another part of my subject, and prove that

this same liberty can and should be accorded with safety to the state and

the magisterial authority - in fact, that it cannot be withheld without

great danger to peace and detriment to the community.

(48) In order to establish my point, I start from the natural rights of the

individual, which are co-extensive with his desires and power, and from the

fact that no one is bound to live as another pleases, but is the guardian of

his own liberty. (49) I show that these rights can only be transferred to

those whom we depute to defend us, who acquire with the duties of defence

the power of ordering our lives, and I thence infer that rulers possess

rights only limited by their power, that they are the sole guardians of

justice and liberty, and that their subjects should act in all things as

they dictate: nevertheless, since no one can so utterly abdicate his own

power of self-defence as to cease to be a man, I conclude that no one can be

deprived of his natural rights absolutely, but that subjects, either by

tacit agreement, or by social contract, retain a certain number, which

cannot be taken from them without great danger to the state.

(50) From these considerations I pass on to the Hebrew State, which I

describe at some length, in order to trace the manner in which Religion

acquired the force of law, and to touch on other noteworthy points. (51) I

then prove, that the holders of sovereign power are the depositories and

interpreters of religious no less than of civil ordinances, and that they

alone have the right to decide what is just or unjust, pious or impious;

lastly, I conclude by showing, that they best retain this right and secure

safety to their state by allowing every man to think what he likes, and say

what he thinks.

(52) Such, Philosophical Reader, are the questions I submit to your notice,

counting on your approval, for the subject matter of the whole book and of

the several chapters is important and profitable. (53) I would say more, but

I do not want my preface to extend to a volume, especially as I know that

its leading propositions are to Philosophers but common places. (54) To the

rest of mankind I care not to commend my treatise, for I cannot expect that

it contains anything to please them: I know how deeply rooted are the

prejudices embraced under the name of religion; I am aware that in the mind

of the masses superstition is no less deeply rooted than fear; I recognize

that their constancy is mere obstinacy, and that they are led to praise or

blame by impulse rather than reason. (55) Therefore the multitude, and those

of like passions with the multitude, I ask not to read my book; nay, I would

rather that they should utterly neglect it, than that they should

misinterpret it after their wont. (56) They would gain no good themselves,

and might prove a stumbling-block to others, whose philosophy is hampered by

the belief that Reason is a mere handmaid to Theology, and whom I seek in

this work especially to benefit. (57) But as there will be many who have

neither the leisure, nor, perhaps, the inclination to read through all I

have written, I feel bound here, as at the end of my treatise, to declare

that I have written nothing, which I do not most willingly submit to the

examination and judgment of my country's rulers, and that I am ready to

retract anything, which they shall decide to be repugnant to the laws or

prejudicial to the public good. (58) I know that I am a man and, as a

man, liable to error, but against error I have taken scrupulous care, and

striven to keep in entire accordance with the laws of my country, with

loyalty, and with morality.

CHAPTER I. - Of Prophecy

(1) Prophecy, or revelation is sure knowledge revealed by God to man.

(2) A prophet is one who interprets the revelations of God to those who

are unable to attain to sure knowledge of the matters revealed, and

therefore can only apprehend them by simple faith.

(3) The Hebrew word for prophet is "_nabi_,"[Endnote 1] i.e. speaker or

interpreter, but in Scripture its meaning is restricted to interpreter

of God, as we may learn from Exodus vii:1, where God says to Moses,

"See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be

thy prophet;" implying that, since in interpreting Moses' words to

Pharaoh, Aaron acted the part of a prophet, Moses would be to Pharaoh

as a god, or in the attitude of a god.

(4) Prophets I will treat of in the next chapter, and at present consider

prophecy.

(5) Now it is evident, from the definition above given, that prophecy really

includes ordinary knowledge; for the knowledge which we acquire by our

natural faculties depends on knowledge of God and His eternal laws; but

ordinary knowledge is common to all men as men, and rests on foundations

which all share, whereas the multitude always strains after rarities

and exceptions, and thinks little of the gifts of nature; so that, when

prophecy is talked of, ordinary knowledge is not supposed to be included.

(6) Nevertheless it has as much right as any other to be called Divine, for

God's nature, in so far as we share therein, and God's laws, dictate it to

us; nor does it suffer from that to which we give the preeminence, except in

so far as the latter transcends its limits and cannot be accounted for by

natural laws taken in themselves. (7) In respect to the certainty it

involves, and the source from which it is derived, i.e. God, ordinary

knowledge is no whit inferior to prophetic, unless indeed we believe, or

rather dream, that the prophets had human bodies but superhuman minds, and

therefore that their sensations and consciousness were entirely different

from our own.

(8) But, although ordinary knowledge is Divine, its professors cannot be

called prophets [Endnote 2], for they teach what the rest of mankind could

perceive and apprehend, not merely by simple faith, but as surely and

honourably as themselves.

(9) Seeing then that our mind subjectively contains in itself and partakes

of the nature of God, and solely from this cause is enabled to form notions

explaining natural phenomena and inculcating morality, it follows that we

may rightly assert the nature of the human mind (in so far as it is thus

conceived) to be a primary cause of Divine revelation. (10) All that we

clearly and distinctly understand is dictated to us, as I have just pointed

out, by the idea and nature of God; not indeed through words, but in a way

far more excellent and agreeing perfectly with the nature of the mind, as

all who have enjoyed intellectual certainty will doubtless attest. (11)

Here, however, my chief purpose is to speak of matters having reference to

Scripture, so these few words on the light of reason will suffice.

(12) I will now pass on to, and treat more fully, the other ways and means

by which God makes revelations to mankind, both of that which transcends

ordinary knowledge, and of that within its scope; for there is no reason why

God should not employ other means to communicate what we know already by the

power of reason.

(13) Our conclusions on the subject must be drawn solely from Scripture; for

what can we affirm about matters transcending our knowledge except what is

told us by the words or writings of prophets? (14) And since there are, so

far as I know, no prophets now alive, we have no alternative but to read the

books of prophets departed, taking care the while not to reason from

metaphor or to ascribe anything to our authors which they do not themselves

distinctly state. (15) I must further premise that the Jews never make any

mention or account of secondary, or particular causes, but in a spirit of

religion, piety, and what is commonly called godliness, refer all things

directly to the Deity. (16) For instance if they make money by a

transaction, they say God gave it to them; if they desire anything, they say

God has disposed their hearts towards it; if they think anything, they say

God told them. (17) Hence we must not suppose that everything is prophecy or

revelation which is described in Scripture as told by God to anyone, but

only such things as are expressly announced as prophecy or revelation, or

are plainly pointed to as such by the context.

(18) A perusal of the sacred books will show us that all God's revelations

to the prophets were made through words or appearances, or a combination of

the two. (19) These words and appearances were of two kinds; 1.- real when

external to the mind of the prophet who heard or saw them, 2.- imaginary

when the imagination of the prophet was in a state which led him distinctly

to suppose that he heard or saw them.

(20) With a real voice God revealed to Moses the laws which He wished to be

transmitted to the Hebrews, as we may see from Exodus xxv:22, where God

says, "And there I will meet with thee and I will commune with thee from the

mercy seat which is between the Cherubim." (21) Some sort of real voice must

necessarily have been employed, for Moses found God ready to commune with

him at any time. This, as I shall shortly show, is the only instance of a

real voice.

(22) We might, perhaps, suppose that the voice with which God called Samuel

was real, for in 1 Sam. iii:21, we read, "And the Lord appeared again in

Shiloh, for the Lord revealed Himself to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the

Lord;" implying that the appearance of the Lord consisted in His making

Himself known to Samuel through a voice; in other words, that Samuel heard

the Lord speaking. (23) But we are compelled to distinguish between the

prophecies of Moses and those of other prophets, and therefore must decide

that this voice was imaginary, a conclusion further supported by the voice's

resemblance to the voice of Eli, which Samuel was in the habit of hearing,

and therefore might easily imagine; when thrice called by the Lord, Samuel

supposed it to have been Eli.

(24) The voice which Abimelech heard was imaginary, for it is written,

Gen. xx:6, "And God said unto him in a dream." (25) So that the will of God

was manifest to him, not in waking, but only in sleep, that is, when the

imagination is most active and uncontrolled. (26) Some of the Jews believe

that the actual words of the Decalogue were not spoken by God, but that the

Israelites heard a noise only, without any distinct words, and during its

continuance apprehended the Ten Commandments by pure intuition; to this

opinion I myself once inclined, seeing that the words of the Decalogue in

Exodus are different from the words of the Decalogue in Deuteronomy, for the

discrepancy seemed to imply (since God only spoke once) that the Ten

Commandments were not intended to convey the actual words of the Lord, but

only His meaning. (27) However, unless we would do violence to Scripture, we

must certainly admit that the Israelites heard a real voice, for Scripture

expressly says, Deut. v:4, "God spake with you face to face," i.e. as two

men ordinarily interchange ideas through the instrumentality of their two

bodies; and therefore it seems more consonant with Holy Writ to suppose that

God really did create a voice of some kind with which the Decalogue was

revealed. (28) The discrepancy of the two versions is treated of in

Chap. VIII.

(29) Yet not even thus is all difficulty removed, for it seems scarcely

reasonable to affirm that a created thing, depending on God in the same

manner as other created things, would be able to express or explain the

nature of God either verbally or really by means of its individual

organism: for instance, by declaring in the first person, "I am the Lord

your God."

(30) Certainly when anyone says with his mouth, "I understand," we do not

attribute the understanding to the mouth, but to the mind of the speaker;

yet this is because the mouth is the natural organ of a man speaking, and

the hearer, knowing what understanding is, easily comprehends, by a

comparison with himself, that the speaker's mind is meant; but if we knew

nothing of God beyond the mere name and wished to commune with Him, and be

assured of His existence, I fail to see how our wish would be satisfied by

the declaration of a created thing (depending on God neither more nor less

than ourselves), "I am the Lord." (31) If God contorted the lips of Moses,

or, I will not say Moses, but some beast, till they pronounced the words,

"I am the Lord," should we apprehend the Lord's existence therefrom?

(32) Scripture seems clearly to point to the belief that God spoke Himself,

having descended from heaven to Mount Sinai for the purpose - and not only

that the Israelites heard Him speaking, but that their chief men beheld Him

(Ex:xxiv.) (33) Further the law of Moses, which might neither be added to

nor curtailed, and which was set up as a national standard of right, nowhere

prescribed the belief that God is without body, or even without form or

figure, but only ordained that the Jews should believe in His existence and

worship Him alone: it forbade them to invent or fashion any likeness of the

Deity, but this was to insure purity of service; because, never having seen

God, they could not by means of images recall the likeness of God, but only

the likeness of some created thing which might thus gradually take the place

of God as the object of their adoration. (34) Nevertheless, the Bible

clearly implies that God has a form, and that Moses when he heard God

speaking was permitted to behold it, or at least its hinder parts.

(35) Doubtless some mystery lurks in this question which we will discuss

more fully below. (36) For the present I will call attention to the passages

in Scripture indicating the means by which God has revealed His laws to man.

(37) Revelation may be through figures only, as in I Chron:xxii., where God

displays his anger to David by means of an angel bearing a sword, and also

in the story of Balaam.

(38) Maimonides and others do indeed maintain that these and every other

instance of angelic apparitions (e.g. to Manoah and to Abraham offering up

Isaac) occurred during sleep, for that no one with his eyes open ever could

see an angel, but this is mere nonsense. (39) The sole object of such

commentators seems to be to extort from Scripture confirmations of

Aristotelian quibbles and their own inventions, a proceeding which I regard

as the acme of absurdity.

(40) In figures, not real but existing only in the prophet's imagination,

God revealed to Joseph his future lordship, and in words and figures He

revealed to Joshua that He would fight for the Hebrews, causing to appear an

angel, as it were the Captain of the Lord's host, bearing a sword, and by

this means communicating verbally. (41) The forsaking of Israel by

Providence was portrayed to Isaiah by a vision of the Lord, the thrice Holy,

sitting on a very lofty throne, and the Hebrews, stained with the mire of

their sins, sunk as it were in uncleanness, and thus as far as possible

distant from God. (42) The wretchedness of the people at the time was thus

revealed, while future calamities were foretold in words. I could cite from

Holy Writ many similar examples, but I think they are sufficiently well

known already.

(43) However, we get a still more clear confirmation of our position in Num

xii:6,7, as follows: "If there be any prophet among you, I the Lord will

make myself known unto him in a vision" (i.e. by appearances and signs, for

God says of the prophecy of Moses that it was a vision without signs), "and

will speak unto him in a dream" (i.e. not with actual words and an actual

voice). (44) "My servant Moses is not so; with him will I speak mouth to

mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches, and the similitude of the

Lord he shall behold," i.e. looking on me as a friend and not afraid, he

speaks with me (cf. Ex xxxiii:17).

(45) This makes it indisputable that the other prophets did not hear a real

voice, and we gather as much from Deut. xxxiv:10: "And there arose not a

prophet since in Israel like unto Moses whom the Lord knew face to face,"

which must mean that the Lord spoke with none other; for not even Moses saw

the Lord's face. (46) These are the only media of communication between

God and man which I find mentioned in Scripture, and therefore the only ones

which may be supposed or invented. (47) We may be able quite to comprehend

that God can communicate immediately with man, for without the intervention

of bodily means He communicates to our minds His essence; still, a man who

can by pure intuition comprehend ideas which are neither contained in nor

deducible from the foundations of our natural knowledge, must necessarily

possess a mind far superior to those of his fellow men, nor do I believe

that any have been so endowed save Christ. (48) To Him the ordinances of God

leading men to salvation were revealed directly without words or visions, so

that God manifested Himself to the Apostles through the mind of Christ as He

formerly did to Moses through the supernatural voice. (49) In this sense the

voice of Christ, like the voice which Moses heard, may be called the voice

of God, and it may be said that the wisdom of God (i.e. wisdom more than

human) took upon itself in Christ human nature, and that Christ was the way

of salvation. (50) I must at this juncture declare that those doctrines

which certain churches put forward concerning Christ, I neither affirm nor

deny, for I freely confess that I do not understand them. (51) What I have

just stated I gather from Scripture, where I never read that God appeared to

Christ, or spoke to Christ, but that God was revealed to the Apostles

through Christ; that Christ was the Way of Life, and that the old law was

given through an angel, and not immediately by God; whence it follows that

if Moses spoke with God face to face as a man speaks with his friend (i.e.

by means of their two bodies) Christ communed with God mind to mind.

(52) Thus we may conclude that no one except Christ received the revelations

of God without the aid of imagination, whether in words or vision. (53)

Therefore the power of prophecy implies not a peculiarly perfect mind, but a

peculiarly vivid imagination, as I will show more clearly in the next

chapter. (54) We will now inquire what is meant in the Bible by the

Spirit of God breathed into the prophets, or by the prophets speaking with

the Spirit of God; to that end we must determine the exact signification of

the Hebrew word _ruagh_, commonly translated spirit.

(55) The word _ruagh_ literally means a wind, _e.g._ the south

wind, but it is frequently employed in other derivative significations.

It is used as equivalent to,

(56) (1.) Breath: "Neither is there any spirit in his mouth," Ps. cxxxv:17.

(57) (2.) Life, or breathing: "And his spirit returned to him"

1 Sam. xxx:12; i.e. he breathed again.

(58) (3.) Courage and strength: "Neither did there remain any more spirit

in any man," Josh. ii:11; "And the spirit entered into me, and

made me stand on my feet," Ezek. ii:2.

(59) (4.) Virtue and fitness: "Days should speak, and multitudes of years

should teach wisdom; but there is a spirit in man," Job xxxii:7;

i.e. wisdom is not always found among old men for I now discover

that it depends on individual virtue and capacity. So, "A man in

whom is the Spirit," Numbers xxvii:18.

(60) (5.) Habit of mind: "Because he had another spirit with him,"

Numbers xiv:24; i.e. another habit of mind. "Behold I will pour

out My Spirit unto you," Prov. i:23.

(61) (6.) Will, purpose, desire, impulse: "Whither the spirit was to go,

they went," Ezek. 1:12; "That cover with a covering, but not of My

Spirit," Is. xxx:1; "For the Lord hath poured out on you the

spirit of deep sleep," Is. xxix:10; "Then was their spirit

softened," Judges viii:3; "He that ruleth his spirit, is better

than he that taketh a city," Prov. xvi:32; "He that hath no ru

over his own spirit," Prov. xxv:28; "Your spirit as fire shall

devour you," Isaiah xxxiii:1.

From the meaning of disposition we get -

(62) (7.) Passions and faculties. A lofty spirit means pride, a lowly spirit

humility, an evil spirit hatred and melancholy. So, too, the

expressions spirits of jealousy, fornication, wisdom, counsel,

bravery, stand for a jealous, lascivious, wise, prudent, or brave

mind (for we Hebrews use substantives in preference to

adjectives), or these various qualities.

(63) (8.) The mind itself, or the life: "Yea, they have all one spirit,"

Eccles. iii:19 "The spirit shall return to God Who gave it."

(64) (9.) The quarters of the world (from the winds which blow thence), or

even the side of anything turned towards a particular quarter -

Ezek. xxxvii:9; xlii:16, 17, 18, 19, &c.

(65) I have already alluded to the way in which things are referred to God,

and said to be of God.

(66) (1.) As belonging to His nature, and being, as it were, part of Him;

e.g. the power of God, the eyes of God.

(67) (2.) As under His dominion, and depending on His pleasure; thus the

heavens are called the heavens of the Lord, as being His chariot

and habitation. So Nebuchadnezzar is called the servant of God,

Assyria the scourge of God, &c.

(68) (3.) As dedicated to Him, e.g. the Temple of God, a Nazarene of God,

the Bread of God.

(69) (4.) As revealed through the prophets and not through our natural

faculties. In this sense the Mosaic law is called the law of God.

(70) (5.) As being in the superlative degree. Very high mountains are styled

the mountains of God, a very deep sleep, the sleep of God, &c. In

this sense we must explain Amos iv:11: "I have overthrown you as

the overthrow of the Lord came upon Sodom and Gomorrah," i.e. that

memorable overthrow, for since God Himself is the Speaker, the

passage cannot well be taken otherwise. The wisdom of Solomon is

called the wisdom of God, or extraordinary. The size of the cedars

of Lebanon is alluded to in the Psalmist's expression, "the cedars

of the Lord."

(71) Similarly, if the Jews were at a loss to understand any phenomenon, or

were ignorant of its cause, they referred it to God. (72) Thus a storm was

termed the chiding of God, thunder and lightning the arrows of God, for it

was thought that God kept the winds confined in caves, His treasuries; thus

differing merely in name from the Greek wind-god Eolus. (73) In like manner

miracles were called works of God, as being especially marvellous; though in

reality, of course, all natural events are the works of God, and take place

solely by His power. (74) The Psalmist calls the miracles in Egypt the works

of God, because the Hebrews found in them a way of safety which they had not

looked for, and therefore especially marvelled at.

(75) As, then, unusual natural phenomena are called works of God, and trees

of unusual size are called trees of God, we cannot wonder that very strong

and tall men, though impious robbers and whoremongers, are in Genesis called

sons of God.

(76) This reference of things wonderful to God was not peculiar to the Jews.

(77) Pharaoh, on hearing the interpretation of his dream, exclaimed that the

mind of the gods was in Joseph. (78) Nebuchadnezzar told Daniel that he

possessed the mind of the holy gods; so also in Latin anything well made is

often said to be wrought with Divine hands, which is equivalent to the

Hebrew phrase, wrought with the hand of God.

(80) We can now very easily understand and explain those passages of

Scripture which speak of the Spirit of God. (81) In some places the

expression merely means a very strong, dry, and deadly wind, as in

Isaiah xl:7, "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth, because the Spirit of

the Lord bloweth upon it." (82) Similarly in Gen. i:2: "The Spirit of the

Lord moved over the face of the waters." (83) At other times it is used as

equivalent to a high courage, thus the spirit of Gideon and of Samson is

called the Spirit of the Lord, as being very bold, and prepared for any

emergency. (84) Any unusual virtue or power is called the Spirit or Virtue

of the Lord, Ex. xxxi:3: "I will fill him (Bezaleel) with the Spirit of the

Lord," i.e., as the Bible itself explains, with talent above man's usual

endowment. (85) So Isa. xi:2: "And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon

him," is explained afterwards in the text to mean the spirit of wisdom and

understanding, of counsel and might.

(86) The melancholy of Saul is called the melancholy of the Lord, or a very

deep melancholy, the persons who applied the term showing that they

understood by it nothing supernatural, in that they sent for a musician to

assuage it by harp-playing. (87) Again, the "Spirit of the Lord" is used

as equivalent to the mind of man, for instance, Job xxvii:3: "And the Spirit

of the Lord in my nostrils," the allusion being to Gen. ii:7: "And God

breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life." (88) Ezekiel also,

prophesying to the dead, says (xxvii:14), "And I will give to you My Spirit,

and ye shall live;" i.e. I will restore you to life. (89) In Job xxxiv:14,

we read: "If He gather unto Himself His Spirit and breath;" in Gen. vi:3:

"My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh,"

i.e. since man acts on the dictates of his body, and not the spirit which I

gave him to discern the good, I will let him alone. (90) So, too, Ps. li:12:

"Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me; cast

me not away from Thy presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from me." (91)

It was supposed that sin originated only from the body, and that good

impulses come from the mind; therefore the Psalmist invokes the aid of God

against the bodily appetites, but prays that the spirit which the Lord, the

Holy One, had given him might be renewed. (92) Again, inasmuch as the Bible,

in concession to popular ignorance, describes God as having a mind, a heart,

emotions - nay, even a body and breath - the expression Spirit of the Lord

is used for God's mind, disposition, emotion, strength, or breath.

(93) Thus, Isa. xl:13: "Who hath disposed the Spirit of the Lord?" i.e. who,

save Himself, hath caused the mind of the Lord to will anything,? and

Isa. lxiii:10: "But they rebelled, and vexed the Holy Spirit."

(94) The phrase comes to be used of the law of Moses, which in a sense

expounds God's will, Is. lxiii. 11, "Where is He that put His Holy Spirit

within him?" meaning, as we clearly gather from the context, the law of

Moses. (95) Nehemiah, speaking of the giving of the law, says, i:20,

"Thou gavest also thy good Spirit to instruct them." (96) This is referred

to in Deut. iv:6, "This is your wisdom and understanding," and in

Ps. cxliii:10, "Thy good Spirit will lead me into the land of uprightness."

(97) The Spirit of the Lord may mean the breath of the Lord, for breath, no

less than a mind, a heart, and a body are attributed to God in Scripture, as

in Ps. xxxiii:6. (98) Hence it gets to mean the power, strength, or faculty

of God, as in Job xxxiii:4, "The Spirit of the Lord made me," i.e. the

power, or, if you prefer, the decree of the Lord. (99) So the Psalmist in

poetic language declares, xxxiii:6, "By the word of the Lord were the

heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth," i.e. by

a mandate issued, as it were, in one breath. (100) Also Ps. cxxxix:7,

"Whither shall I go from Thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from Thy

presence?" i.e. whither shall I go so as to be beyond Thy power and Thy

presence?

(101) Lastly, the Spirit of the Lord is used in Scripture to express the

emotions of God, e.g. His kindness and mercy, Micah ii:7, "Is the Spirit

[i.e. the mercy] of the Lord straitened? (102) Are these cruelties His

doings?" (103) Zech. iv:6, "Not by might or by power, but My Spirit [i.e.

mercy], saith the Lord of hosts." (104) The twelfth verse of the seventh

chapter of the same prophet must, I think, be interpreted in like manner:

"Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the

law, and the words which the Lord of hosts hath sent in His Spirit [i.e. in

His mercy] by the former prophets." (105) So also Haggai ii:5: "So My Spirit

remaineth among you: fear not."

(106) The passage in Isaiah xlviii:16, "And now the Lord and His Spirit hath

sent me," may be taken to refer to God's mercy or His revealed law; for the

prophet says, "From the beginning" (i.e. from the time when I first came to

you, to preach God's anger and His sentence forth against you) "I spoke not

in secret; from the time that it was, there am I," and now I am sent by

the mercy of God as a joyful messenger to preach your restoration. (107) Or

we may understand him to mean by the revealed law that he had before come to

warn them by the command of the law (Levit. xix:17) in the same manner under

the same conditions as Moses had warned them, that now, like Moses, he ends

by preaching their restoration. (108) But the first explanation seems to me

the best.

(109) Returning, then, to the main object of our discussion, we find that

the Scriptural phrases, "The Spirit of the Lord was upon a prophet," "The

Lord breathed His Spirit into men," "Men were filled with the Spirit of God,

with the Holy Spirit," &c., are quite clear to us, and mean that prophets

were endowed with a peculiar and extraordinary power, and devoted themselves

to piety with especial constancy(3); that thus they perceived the mind or

the thought of God, for we have shown that God's Spirit signifies in Hebrew

God's mind or thought, and that the law which shows His mind and thought is

called His Spirit; hence that the imagination of the prophets, inasmuch as

through it were revealed the decrees of God, may equally be called the mind

of God, and the prophets be said to have possessed the mind of God. (110) On

our minds also the mind of God and His eternal thoughts are impressed; but

this being the same for all men is less taken into account, especially by

the Hebrews, who claimed a pre-eminence, and despised other men and other

men's knowledge.

(111) Lastly, the prophets were said to possess the Spirit of God because

men knew not the cause of prophetic knowledge, and in their wonder referred

it with other marvels directly to the Deity, styling it Divine knowledge.

(112) We need no longer scruple to affirm that the prophets only

perceived God's revelation by the aid of imagination, that is, by words and

figures either real or imaginary. (113) We find no other means mentioned in

Scripture, and therefore must not invent any. (114) As to the particular law

of Nature by which the communications took place, I confess my ignorance.

(115) I might, indeed, say as others do, that they took place by the power

of God; but this would be mere trifling, and no better than explaining some

unique specimen by a transcendental term. (116) Everything takes place by

the power of God. (117) Nature herself is the power of God under another

name, and our ignorance of the power of God is co-extensive with our

ignorance of Nature. (118) It is absolute folly, therefore, to ascribe an

event to the power of God when we know not its natural cause, which is the

power of God.

(119) However, we are not now inquiring into the causes of prophetic

knowledge. (120) We are only attempting, as I have said, to examine the

Scriptural documents, and to draw our conclusions from them as from ultimate

natural facts; the causes of the documents do not concern us.

(121) As the prophets perceived the revelations of God by the aid of

imagination, they could indisputably perceive much that is beyond the

boundary of the intellect, for many more ideas can be constructed from words

and figures than from the principles and notions on which the whole fabric

of reasoned knowledge is reared.

(122) Thus we have a clue to the fact that the prophets perceived nearly

everything in parables and allegories, and clothed spiritual truths in

bodily forms, for such is the usual method of imagination. (122) We need no

longer wonder that Scripture and the prophets speak so strangely and

obscurely of God's Spirit or Mind (cf. Numbers xi:17, 1 Kings xxii:21, &c.),

that the Lord was seen by Micah as sitting, by Daniel as an old man clothed

in white, by Ezekiel as a fire, that the Holy Spirit appeared to those with

Christ as a descending dove, to the apostles as fiery tongues, to Paul on

his conversion as a great light. (124) All these expressions are plainly in

harmony with the current ideas of God and spirits.

(125) Inasmuch as imagination is fleeting and inconstant, we find that the

power of prophecy did not remain with a prophet for long, nor manifest

itself frequently, but was very rare; manifesting itself only in a few men,

and in them not often.

(126) We must necessarily inquire how the prophets became assured of the

truth of what they perceived by imagination, and not by sure mental laws;

but our investigation must be confined to Scripture, for the subject is one

on which we cannot acquire certain knowledge, and which we cannot explain by

the immediate causes. (127) Scripture teaching about the assurance of

prophets I will treat of in the next chapter.

Theologico-Political Treatise — Part 1 · 第 1 / 5 章