a theologico-political treatise [part iii]-第4部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！




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　ma