a theologico-political treatise [part ii]-第6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！


Scripture　alone；　even　as　the　knowledge　of　nature　is　sought　from　nature。　（14）



As　for　the　moral　doctrines　which　are　also　contained　in　the　Bible；　they　may



be　demonstrated　from　received　axioms；　but　we　cannot　prove　in　the　same　manner



that　Scripture　intended　to　teach　them；　this　can　only　be　learned　from



Scripture　itself。







（15）　If　we　would　bear　unprejudiced　witness　to　the　Divine　origin　of



Scripture；　we　must　prove　solely　on　its　own　authority　that　it　teaches　true



moral　doctrines；　for　by　such　means　alone　can　its　Divine　origin　be



demonstrated：　we　have　shown　that　the　certitude　of　the　prophets　depended



chiefly　on　their　having　minds　turned　towards　what　is　just　and　good；



therefore　we　ought　to　have　proof　of　their　possessing　this　quality　before　we



repose　faith　in　them。　（16）　From　miracles　God's　divinity　cannot　be　proved；　as



I　have　already　shown；　and　need　not　now　repeat；　for　miracles　could　be







wrought　by　false　prophets。　（17）　Wherefore　the　Divine　origin　of　Scripture



must　consist　solely　in　its　teaching　true　virtue。　（18）　But　we　must　come　to



our　conclusion　simply　on　Scriptural　grounds；　for　if　we　were　unable　to　do　so



we　could　not；　unless　strongly　prejudiced　accept　the　Bible　and　bear



witness　to　its　Divine　origin。







（19）　Our　knowledge　of　Scripture　must　then　be　looked　for　in　Scripture　only。







（20）　Lastly；　Scripture　does　not　give　us　definition　of　things　any　more　than



nature　does：　therefore；　such　definitions　must　be　sought　in　the　latter　case



from　the　diverse　workings　of　nature；　in　the　former　case；　from　the　various



narratives　about　the　given　subject　which　occur　in　the　Bible。







（21）　The　universal　rule；　then；　in　interpreting　Scripture　is　to　accept



nothing　as　an　authoritative　Scriptural　statement　which　we　do　not　perceive



very　clearly　when　we　examine　it　in　the　light　of　its　history。　（22）　What　I



mean　by　its　history；　and　what　should　be　the　chief　points　elucidated；　I　will



now　explain。







（23）　The　history　of　a　Scriptural　statement　comprises　…







（23）　I。　The　nature　and　properties　of　the　language　in　which　the　books　of　the



Bible　were　written；　and　in　which　their　authors　were；　accustomed　to　speak。



（24）　We　shall　thus　be　able　to　investigate　every　expression　by　comparison



with　common　conversational　usages。







（25）　Now　all　the　writers　both　of　the　Old　Testament　and　the　New　were　Hebrews：



therefore；　a　knowledge　of　the　Hebrew　language　is　before　all　things





necessary；　not　only　for　the　comprehension　of　the　Old　Testament；　which　was



written　in　that　tongue；　but　also　of　the　New：　for　although　the　latter　was



published　in　other　languages；　yet　its　characteristics　are　Hebrew。







（26）　II。　An　analysis　of　each　book　and　arrangement　of　its　contents　under



heads；　so　that　we　may　have　at　hand　the　various　texts　which　treat　of　a　given



subject。　（27）　Lastly；　a　note　of　all　the　passages　which　are　ambiguous　or



obscure；　or　which　seem　mutually　contradictory。







（28）　I　call　passages　clear　or　obscure　according　as　their　meaning　is　inferred



easily　or　with　difficulty　in　relation　to　the　context；　not　according　as　their



truth　is　perceived　easily　or　the　reverse　by　reason。　（29）　We　are　at　work　not



on　the　truth　of　passages；　but　solely　on　their　meaning。　（30）　We　must　take



especial　care；　when　we　are　in　search　of　the　meaning　of　a　text；　not　to　be　led



away　by　our　reason　in　so　far　as　it　is　founded　on　principles　of　natural



knowledge　（to　say　nothing　of　prejudices）：　in　order　not　to　confound　the



meaning　of　a　passage　with　its　truth；　we　must　examine　it　solely　by　means　of



the　signification　of　the　words；　or　by　a　reason　acknowledging　no　foundation



but　Scripture。







（31）　I　will　illustrate　my　meaning　by　an　example。　（32）　The　words　of　Moses；



〃God　is　a　fire〃　and　〃God　is　jealous；〃　are　perfectly　clear　so　long　as　we



regard　merely　the　signification　of　the　words；　and　I　therefore　reckon　them







among　the　clear　passages；　though　in　relation　to　reason　and　truth　they　are



most　obscure：　still；　although　the　literal　meaning　is　repugnant　to　the



natural　light　of　reason；　nevertheless；　if　it　cannot　be　clearly　overruled　on



grounds　and　principles　derived　from　its　Scriptural　〃history；〃　it；　that　is；



the　literal　meaning；　must　be　the　one　retained：　and　contrariwise　if　these



passages　literally　interpreted　are　found　to　clash　with　principles　derived



from　Scripture；　though　such　literal　interpretation　were　in　absolute　harmony



with　reason；　they　must　be　interpreted　in　a　different　manner；　i。e。



metaphorically。







（33）　If　we　would　know　whether　Moses　believed　God　to　be　a　fire　or　not；　we



must　on　no　account　decide　the　question　on　grounds　of　the　reasonableness　or



the　reverse　of　such　an　opinion；　but　must　judge　solely　by　the　other　opinions



of　Moses　which　are　on　record。







（34）　In　the　present　instance；　as　Moses　says　in　several　other　passages　that



God　has　no　likeness　to　any　visible　thing；　whether　in　heaven　or　in　earth；　or



in　the　water；　either　all　such　passages　must　be　taken　metaphorically；　or　else



the　one　before　us　must　be　so　explained。　（35）　However；　as　we　should　depart　as



little　as　possible　from　the　literal　sense；　we　must　first　ask　whether　this



text；　God　is　a　fire；　admits　of　any　but　the　literal　meaning　…　that　is；



whether　the　word　fire　ever　means　anything　besides　ordinary　natural　fire。



（36）　If　no　such　second　meaning　can　be　found；　the　text　must　be　taken



literally；　however　repugnant　to　reason　it　may　be：　and　all　the　other



passages；　though　in　complete　accordance　with　reason；　must　be　brought　into



harmony　with　it。　（37）　If　the　verbal　expressions　would　not　admit　of　being



thus　harmonized；　we　should　have　to　set　them　down　as　irreconcilable；　and



suspend　our　judgment　concerning　them。　（38）　However；　as　we　find　the　name　fire



applied　to　anger　and　jealousy　（see　Job　xxxi：12）　we　can　thus　easily　reconcile



the　words　of　Moses；　and　legitimately　conclude　that　the　two　propositions　God



is　a　fire；　and　God　is　jealous；　are　in　meaning　identical。







（39）　Further；　as　Moses　clearly　teaches　that　God　is　jealous；　and　nowhere



states　that　God　is　without　passions　or　emotions；　we　must　evidently　infer



that　Moses　held　this　doctrine　himself；　or　at　any　rate；　that　he　wished　to



teach　it；　nor　must　we　refrain　because　such　a　belief　seems　contrary　to



reason：　for　as　we　have　shown；　we　cannot　wrest　the　meaning　of　texts　to　suit



the　dictates　of　our　reason；　or　our　preconceived　opinions。　（40）　The　whole



knowledge　of　the　Bible　must　be　sought　solely　from　itself。







（41）　III。　Lastly；　such　a　history　should　relate　the　environment　of　all　the



prophetic　books　extant；　that　is；　the　life；　the　conduct；　and　the　studies　of



the　author　of　each　book；　who　he　was；　what　was　the　occasion；　and　the　epoch　of



his　writing；　whom　did　he　write　for；　and　in　what　language。　（42）　Further；



it　should　inquire　into　the　fate　of　each　book：　how　it　was　first　received；



into　whose　hands　it　fell；　how　many　different　versions　there　were　of　it；　by



whose　advice　was　it　received　into　the　Bible；　and；　lastly；　how　all　the　books



now　universally　accepted　as　sacred；　were　united　into　a　single　whole。







（43）　All　such　information　should；　as　I　have　said；　be　contained　in　the



〃history〃　of　Scripture。　（44）　For；　in　order　to　know　what　statements　are　set



forth　as　laws；　and　what　as　moral　precepts；　it　is　important　to　be　acquainted



with　the　life；　the　conduct；　and　the　pursuits　of　their　author：　moreover；



it　becomes　easier　to　explain　a　man's　writings　in　proportion　as　we　have　more



intimate　knowledge　of　his　genius　and　temperament。







（45）　Further；　that　we　may　not　confound　precepts　which　are　eternal　with　those



which　served　only　a　temporary　purpose；　or　were　only　meant　for　a　few；　we



should　know　what　was　the　occasion；　the　time；　the　age；　in　which　each　book　was



written；　and　to　what　nation　it　was　addressed。（46）　Lastly；　we　should　have



knowledge　on　the　other　points　I　have　mentioned；　in　order　to　be　sure；



in　addition　to　the　authenticity　of　the　work；　that　it　has　not　been　tampered



with　by　sacrilegious　hands；　or　whether　errors　can　have　crept　in；　and；　if　so；



whether　they　have　been　corrected　by　men　sufficiently　skilled　and　worthy　of



credence。　（47）　All　these　things　should　be　known；　that　we　may　not　be　led　away



by　blind　impulse　to　accept　whatever　is　thrust　on　our　notice；　instead　of　only



that　which　is　sure　and　indisputable。







（48）　Now　when　we　are　in　possession　of　this　history　of　Scripture；　and　have



finally　decided　that　we　assert　nothing　as　prophetic　doctrine　which　does　not



directly　follow　from　such　history；　or　which　is　not　clearly　deducible　from



it；　then；　I　say；　it　will　be　time　to　gird　ourselves　for　the　task　of



investigating　the　mind　of　the　prophets　and　of　the　Holy　Spirit。　（49）　But　in



this　further　arguing；　also；　we　shall　require　a　method　very　like　that



employed　in　interpreting　nature　from　her　history。　（50）　As　in　the　examination



of　natural　phenomena　we　try　first　to　investigate　what　is　most　universal



and　common　to　all　nature　…　such；　for　instance；　as　motion　and　rest；　and　their



laws　and　rules；　which　nature　always　observes；　and　through　which　she



continually　works　…　and　then　we　proceed　to　what　is　less　universal；　so；　too；



in　the　history　of　Scripture；　we　seek　first　for　that　which　is　most　universal；



and　serves　for　the　basis　and　foundation　of　all　Scripture；　a　doctrine；　in



fact；　that　is　commended　by　all　the　prophets　as　eternal　and　most　profitable



to　all　men。　（51）　For　example；　that　God　is　one；　and　that　He　is　omnipotent；



that　He　alone　should　be　worshipped；　that　He　has　a　care　for　all　men；　and　that



He　especially　loves　those　who　adore　Him　and　love　their　n