a theologico-political treatise [part i]-第10节

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！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！




themselves　for　a　new　worship；　and　lay　aside　the　worship　of　strange；　gods　…



that　is；　of　the　gods　of　the　land　where　they　were　（Gen。　xxxv：2；　3）。







（97）　David；　in　telling　Saul　that　he　was　compelled　by　the　king's　persecution



to　live　away　from　his　country；　said　that　he　was　driven　out　from　the　heritage



of　the　Lord；　and　sent　to　worship　other　gods　（1　Sam。　xxvi：19）。　（98）　Lastly；



he　believed　that　this　Being　or　Deity　had　His　habitation　in　the　heavens



（Deut。　xxxiii：27）；　an　opinion　very　common　among　the　Gentiles。







（99）　If　we　now　examine　the　revelations　to　Moses；　we　shall　find　that　they



were　accommodated　to　these　opinions；　as　he　believed　that　the　Divine　Nature



was　subject　to　the　conditions　of　mercy；　graciousness；　&c。；　so　God　was



revealed　to　him　in　accordance　with　his　idea　and　under　these　attributes　（see



Exodus　xxxiv：6；　7；　and　the　second　commandment）。　（100）　Further　it　is　related



（Ex。　xxxiii：18）　that　Moses　asked　of　God　that　he　might　behold　Him；　but　as



Moses　（as　we　have　said）　had　formed　no　mental　image　of　God；　and　God　（as　I



have　shown）　only　revealed　Himself　to　the　prophets　in　accordance　with　the



disposition　of　their　imagination；　He　did　not　reveal　Himself　in　any　form。



（101）　This；　I　repeat；　was　because　the　imagination　of　Moses　was　unsuitable；



for　other　prophets　bear　witness　that　they　saw　the　Lord；　for　instance；



Isaiah；　Ezekiel；　Daniel；　&c。　（102）　For　this　reason　God　answered　Moses；　〃Thou



canst　not　see　My　face；〃　and　inasmuch　as　Moses　believed　that　God　can　be



looked　upon　…　that　is；　that　no　contradiction　of　the　Divine　nature　is　therein



involved　（for　otherwise　he　would　never　have　preferred　his　request）　…　it　is



added；　〃For　no　one　shall　look　on　Me　and　live；〃　thus　giving　a　reason　in



accordance　with　Moses'　idea；　for　it　is　not　stated　that　a　contradiction　of



the　Divine　nature　would　be　involved；　as　was　really　the　case；　but　that　the



thing　would　not　come　to　pass　because　of　human　infirmity。







（103）　When　God　would　reveal　to　Moses　that　the　Israelites；　because　they



worshipped　the　calf；　were　to　be　placed　in　the　same　category　as　other



nations；　He　said　（ch。　xxxiii：2；　3）；　that　He　would　send　an　angel　（that　is；　a



being　who　should　have　charge　of　the　Israelites；　instead　of　the　Supreme



Being）；　and　that　He　Himself　would　no　longer　remain　among　them；　thus　leaving



Moses　no　ground　for　supposing　that　the　Israelites　were　more　beloved　by　God



than　the　other　nations　whose　guardianship　He　had　entrusted　to　other　beings



or　angels　（vide　verse　16）。







（104）　Lastly；　as　Moses　believed　that　God　dwelt　in　the　heavens；　God　was



revealed　to　him　as　coming　down　from　heaven　on　to　a　mountain；　and　in　order　to



talk　with　the　Lord　Moses　went　up　the　mountain；　which　he　certainly　need　not



have　done　if　he　could　have　conceived　of　God　as　omnipresent。







（105）　The　Israelites　knew　scarcely　anything　of　God；　although　He　was　revealed



to　them；　and　this　is　abundantly　evident　from　their　transferring；　a　few　days



afterwards；　the　honour　and　worship　due　to　Him　to　a　calf；　which　they　believed



to　be　the　god　who　had　brought　them　out　of　Egypt。　（106）　In　truth；　it　is



hardly　likely　that　men　accustomed　to　the　superstitions　of　Egypt；



uncultivated　and　sunk　in　most　abject　slavery；　should　have　held　any　sound



notions　about　the　Deity；　or　that　Moses　should　have　taught　them　anything



beyond　a　rule　of　right　living；　inculcating　it　not　like　a　philosopher；　as　the



result　of　freedom；　but　like　a　lawgiver　compelling　them　to　be　moral　by



legal　authority。　（107）　Thus　the　rule　of　right　living；　the　worship　and　love



of　God；　was　to　them　rather　a　bondage　than　the　true　liberty；　the　gift　and



grace　of　the　Deity。　（108）　Moses　bid　them　love　God　and　keep　His　law；　because



they　had　in　the　past　received　benefits　from　Him　（such　as　the



deliverance　from　slavery　in　Egypt）；　and　further　terrified　them　with　threats



if　they　transgressed　His　commands；　holding　out　many　promises　of　good　if　they



should　observe　them；　thus　treating　them　as　parents　treat　irrational



children。　It　is；　therefore；　certain　that　they　knew　not　the　excellence　of



virtue　and　the　true　happiness。







（109）　Jonah　thought　that　he　was　fleeing　from　the　sight　of　God；　which　seems



to　show　that　he　too　held　that　God　had　entrusted　the　care　of　the　nations



outside　Judaea　to　other　substituted　powers。　（110）　No　one　in　the　whole　of　the



Old　Testament　speaks　more　rationally　of　God　than　Solomon；　who　in　fact



surpassed　all　the　men　of　his　time　in　natural　ability。　（111）　Yet　he



considered　himself　above　the　law　（esteeming　it　only　to　have　been　given　for



men　without　reasonable　and　intellectual　grounds　for　their　actions）；　and　made



small　account　of　the　laws　concerning　kings；　which　are　mainly　three：　nay；　he



openly　violated　them　（in　this　he　did　wrong；　and　acted　in　a　manner　unworthy



of　a　philosopher；　by　indulging　in　sensual　pleasure）；　and　taught　that　all



Fortune's　favours　to　mankind　are　vanity；　that　humanity　has　no　nobler　gift



than　wisdom；　and　no　greater　punishment　than　folly。



（112）　See　Proverbs　xvi：22；　23。







（113）　But　let　us　return　to　the　prophets　whose　conflicting　opinions　we　have



undertaken　to　note。　（114）　The　expressed　ideas　of　Ezekiel　seemed　so　diverse



from　those　of　Moses　to　the　Rabbis　who　have　left　us　the　extant　prophetic



books　（as　is　told　in　the　treatise　of　Sabbathus；　i：13；　2）；　that　they　had



serious　thoughts　of　omitting　his　prophecy　from　the　canon；　and　would



doubtless　have　thus　excluded　it　if　a　certain　Hananiah　had　not　undertaken　to



explain　it；　a　task　which　（as　is　there　narrated）　he　with　great　zeal　and



labour　accomplished。　（115）　How　he　did　so　does　not　sufficiently　appear；



whether　it　was　by　writing　a　commentary　which　has　now　perished；　or　by



altering　Ezekiel's　words　and　audaciously　…　striking　out　phrases　according　to



his　fancy。　（116）　However　this　may　be；　chapter　xviii。　certainly　does　not　seem



to　agree　with　Exodus　xxxiv：7；　Jeremiah　xxxii：18；　&c。







（117　）　Samuel　believed　that　the　Lord　never　repented　of　anything　He　had



decreed　（1　Sam。　xv：29）；　for　when　Saul　was　sorry　for　his　sin；　and　wished　to



worship　God　and　ask　for　forgiveness；　Samuel　said　that　the　Lord　would　not　go



back　from　his　decree。







（118）　To　Jeremiah；　on　the　other　hand；　it　was　revealed　that；　〃If　that　nation



against　whom　I　（the　Lord）　have　pronounced；　turn　from　their　evil；　I　will



repent　of　the　evil　that　I　thought　to　do　unto　them。　（119）　If　it　do　evil　in　my



sight；　that　it　obey　not　my　voice；　then　I　will　repent　of　the　good　wherewith　I



said　I　would　benefit　them〃　（Jer。　xviii：8…10）。　（120）　Joel　（ii：13）　taught　that



the　Lord　repented　Him　only　of　evil。　（121）　Lastly；　it　is　clear　from　Gen　iv：　7



that　a　man　can　overcome　the　temptations　of　sin；　and　act　righteously；　for



this　doctrine　is　told　to　Cain；　though；　as　we　learn　from　Josephus　and　the



Scriptures；　he　never　did　so　overcome　them。　（122）　And　this　agrees　with　the



chapter　of　Jeremiah　just　cited；　for　it　is　there　said　that　the　Lord　repents



of　the　good　or　the　evil　pronounced；　if　the　men　in　question　change　their　ways



and　manner　of　life。　（123）　But；　on　the　other　hand；　Paul　（Rom。ix：10）　teaches



as　plainly　as　possible　that　men　have　no　control　over　the　temptations　of　the



flesh　save　by　the　special　vocation　and　grace　of　God。　（124）　And　when



（Rom。　iii：5　and　vi：19）　he　attributes　righteousness　to　man；　he　corrects



himself　as　speaking　merely　humanly　and　through　the　infirmity　of　the　flesh。







（125）　We　have　now　more　than　sufficiently　proved　our　point；　that　God　adapted



revelations　to　the　understanding　and　opinions　of　the　prophets；　and　that　in



matters　of　theory　without　bearing　on　charity　or　morality　the　prophets　could



be；　and；　in　fact；　were；　ignorant；　and　held　conflicting　opinions。　（126）　It



therefore　follows　that　we　must　by　no　means　go　to　the　prophets　for　knowledge；



either　of　natural　or　of　spiritual　phenomena。







（127）　We　have　determined；　then；　that　we　are　only　bound　to　believe　in　the



prophetic　writings；　the　object　and　substance　of　the　revelation；　with　regard



to　the　details；　every　one　may　believe　or　not；　as　he　likes。







（128）　For　instance；　the　revelation　to　Cain　only　teaches　us　that　God



admonished　him　to　lead　the　true　life；　for　such　alone　is　the　object　and



substance　of　the　revelation；　not　doctrines　concerning　free　will　and



philosophy。　（129）　Hence；　though　the　freedom　of　the　will　is　clearly　implied



in　the　words　of　the　admonition；　we　are　at　liberty　to　hold　a　contrary



opinion；　since　the　words　and　reasons　were　adapted　to　the　understanding　of



Cain。







（130）　So；　too；　the　revelation　to　Micaiah　would　only　teach　that　God　revealed



to　him　the　true　issue　of　the　battle　between　Ahab　and　Aram；　and　this　is　all



we　are　bound　to　believe。　（131）　Whatever　else　is　contained　in　the　revelation



concerning　the　true　and　the　false　Spirit　of　God；　the　army　of　heaven　standing



on　the　right　hand　and　on　the　left；　and　all　the　other　details；　does　not



affect　us　at　all。　（132）　E