a theologico-political treatise [part ii]-第19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！


chapter　of　Ezra　is　mentioned；　and　a　total　is　given　in　plain　correspondence



thereto；　but　the　details　are　altogether　different　…　some　are　larger；　and



some　less；　than　those　in　Ezra；　and　altogether　they　amount　to　31；089。



（70）　We　may；　therefore；　conclude　that　both　in　Ezra　and　in　Nehemiah　the



details　are　erroneously　given。　（71）　The　commentators　who　attempt　to



harmonize　these　evident　contradictions　draw　on　their　imagination；　each　to



the　best　of　his　ability；　and　while　professing　adoration　for　each　letter　and



word　of　Scripture；　only　succeed　in　holding　up　the　sacred　writers　to



ridicule；　as　though　they　knew　not　how　to　write　or　relate　a　plain　narrative。



（72）　Such　persons　effect　nothing　but　to　render　the　clearness　of　Scripture



obscure。　（73）　If　the　Bible　could　everywhere　be　interpreted　after　their



fashion；　there　would　be　no　such　thing　as　a　rational　statement　of　which



the　meaning　could　be　relied　on。　（74）　However；　there　is　no　need　to　dwell　on



the　subject；　only　I　am　convinced　that　if　any　historian　were　to　attempt　to



imitate　the　proceedings　freely　attributed　to　the　writers　of　the　Bible；　the



commentators　would　cover　him　with　contempt。　（75）　If　it　be　blasphemy　to



assert　that　there　are　any　errors　in　Scripture；　what　name　shall　we　apply　to



those　who　foist　into　it　their　own　fancies；　who　degrade　the　sacred　writers



till　they　seem　to　write　confused　nonsense；　and　who　deny　the　plainest　and



most　evident　meanings？　（76）　What　in　the　whole　Bible　can　be　plainer　than　the



fact　that　Ezra　and　his　companions；　in　the　second　chapter　of　the　book



attributed　to　him；　have　given　in　detail　the　reckoning　of　all　the　Hebrews　who



set　out　with　them　for　Jerusalem？　（77）　This　is　proved　by　the　reckoning　being



given；　not　only　of　those　who　told　their　lineage；　but　also　of　those　who　were



unable　to　do　so。　（78）　Is　it　not　equally　clear　from　Nehemiah　vii：5；　that　the



writer　merely　there　copies　the　list　given　in　Ezra？　（79）　Those；　therefore；



who　explain　these　pas　sages　otherwise；　deny　the　plain　meaning　of　Scripture　…



nay；　they　deny　Scripture　itself。　（80）　They　think　it　pious　to　reconcile　one



passage　of　Scripture　with　another　…　a　pretty　piety；　forsooth；　which



accommodates　the　clear　passages　to　the　obscure；　the　correct　to　the　faulty；



the　sound　to　the　corrupt。







（81）　Far　be　it　from　me　to　call　such　commentators　blasphemers；　if　their



motives　be　pure：　for　to　err　is　human。　But　I　return　to　my　subject。







（82）　Besides　these　errors　in　numerical　details；　there　are　others　in　the



genealogies；　in　the　history；　and；　I　fear　also　in　the　prophecies。　（83）　The



prophecy　of　Jeremiah　（chap。　xxii。）；　concerning　Jechoniah；　evidently　does　not



agree　with　his　history；　as　given　in　I　Chronicles　iii：17…19；　and　especially



with　the　last　words　of　the　chapter；　nor　do　I　see　how　the　prophecy；　〃thou



shalt　die　in　peace；〃　can　be　applied　to　Zedekiah；　whose　eyes　were　dug　out



after　his　sons　had　been　slain　before　him。　（84）　If　prophecies　are　to　be



interpreted　by　their　issue；　we　must　make　a　change　of　name；　and　read



Jechoniah　for　Zedekiah；　and　vice　versa　（85）　This；　however；　would　be　too



paradoxical　a　proceeding；　so　I　prefer　to　leave　the　matter　unexplained；



especially　as　the　error；　if　error　there　be；　must　be　set　down　to　the



historian；　and　not　to　any　fault　in　the　authorities。







（86）　Other　difficulties　I　will　not　touch　upon；　as　I　should　only　weary　the



reader；　and；　moreover；　be　repeating　the　remarks　of　other　writers。　（87）　For



R。　Selomo；　in　face　of　the　manifest　contradiction　in　the　above…mentioned



genealogies；　is　compelled　to　break　forth　into　these　words　（see　his



commentary　on　1　Chron。　viii。）：　〃Ezra　（whom　he　supposes　to　be　the　author　of



the　book　of　Chronicles）　gives　different　names　and　a　different　genealogy　to



the　sons　of　Benjamin　from　those　which　we　find　in　Genesis；　and　describes　most



of　the　Levites　differently　from　Joshua；　because　he　found　original



discrepancies。〃　（88）　And；　again；　a　little　later：　〃The　genealogy　of　Gibeon



and　others　is　described　twice　in　different　ways；　from　different　tables　of



each　genealogy；　and　in　writing　them　down　Ezra　adopted　the　version　given　in



the　majority　of　the　texts；　and　when　the　authority　was　equal　he　gave　both。〃



（89）　Thus　granting　that　these　books　were　compiled　from　sources　originally



incorrect　and　uncertain。







（90）　In　fact　the　commentators；　in　seeking　to　harmonize　difficulties；



generally　do　no　more　than　indicate　their　causes：　for　I　suppose　no　sane



person　supposes　that　the　sacred　historians　deliberately　wrote　with　the



object　of　appearing　to　contradict　themselves　freely。　（91）　Perhaps　I



shall　be　told　that　I　am　overthrowing　the　authority　of　Scripture；　for　that；



according　to　me；　anyone　may　suspect　it　of　error　in　any　passage；　but；　on　the



contrary；　I　have　shown　that　my　object　has　been　to　prevent　the　clear　and



uncorrupted　passages　being　accommodated　to　and　corrupted　by　the　faulty　ones；



neither　does　the　fact　that　some　passages　are　corrupt　warrant　us　in



suspecting　all。　（92）　No　book　ever　was　completely　free　from　faults；　yet　I



would　ask；　who　suspects　all　books　to　be　everywhere　faulty？　（93）　Surely　no



one；　especially　when　the　phraseology　is　clear　and　the　intention　of　the



author　plain。







（94）　I　have　now　finished　the　task　I　set　myself　with　respect　to　the　books　of



the　Old　Testament。　（95）　We　may　easily　conclude　from　what　has　been　said；　that



before　the　time　of　the　Maccabees　there　was　no　canon　of　sacred　books；



＇Endnote　23＇；　but　that　those　which　we　now　possess　were　selected　from　a



multitude　of　others　at　the　period　of　the　restoration　of　the　Temple　by　the



Pharisees　（who　also　instituted　the　set　form　of　prayers）；　who　are　alone



responsible　for　their　acceptance。　（96）　Those；　therefore；　who　would



demonstrate　the　authority　of　Holy　Scripture；　are　bound　to　show　the　authority



of　each　separate　book；　it　is　not　enough　to　prove　the　Divine　origin　of　a



single　book　in　order　to　infer　the　Divine　origin　of　the　rest。　（97）　In　that



case　we　should　have　to　assume　that　the　council　of　Pharisees　was；　in　its



choice　of　books；　infallible；　and　this　could　never　be　proved。　（98）　I　am　led



to　assert　that　the　Pharisees　alone　selected　the　books　of　the　Old　Testament；



and　inserted　them　in　the　canon；　from　the　fact　that　in　Daniel　ii。　is



proclaimed　the　doctrine　of　the　Resurrection；　which　the　Sadducees　denied；



and；　furthermore；　the　Pharisees　plainly　assert　in　the　Talmud　that　they　so



selected　them。　（99）　For　in　the　treatise　of　Sabbathus；　chapter　ii。；　folio　30；



page　2；　it　is　written：　R。　Jehuda；　surnamed　Rabbi；　reports　that　the　experts



wished　to　conceal　the　book　of　Ecclesiastes　because　they　found　therein　words



opposed　to　the　law　（that　is；　to　the　book　of　the　law　of　Moses）。　（100）　Why　did



they　not　hide　it？　（101）　Because　it　begins　in　accordance　with　the　law；　and



ends　according　to　the　law；〃　and　a　little　further　on　we　read：　〃They　sought



also　to　conceal　the　book　of　Proverbs。〃　（102）　And　in　the　first　chapter　of　the



same　treatise；　fol。　13；　page　2：　〃Verily；　name　one　man　for　good；　even　he　who



was　called　Neghunja；　the　son　of　Hezekiah：　for；　save　for　him；　the　book　of



Ezekiel　would　been　concealed；　because　it　agreed　not　with　the　words　of　the



law。〃







（103）　It　is　thus　abundantly　clear　that　men　expert　in　the　law　summoned　a



council　to　decide　which　books　should　be　received　into　the　canon；　and　which



excluded。　（104）　If　any　man；　therefore；　wishes　to　be　certified　as　to　the



authority　of　all　the　books；　let　him　call　a　fresh　council；　and　ask　every



member　his　reasons。







（105）　The　time　has　now　come　for　examining　in　the　same　manner　the　books　in



the　New　Testament；　but　as　I　learn　that　the　task　has　been　already　performed



by　men　highly　skilled　in　science　and　languages；　and　as　I　do　not　myself



possess　a　knowledge　of　Greek　sufficiently　exact　for　the　task；　lastly；　as　we



have　lost　the　originals　of　those　books　which　were　written　in　Hebrew；　I



prefer　to　decline　the　undertaking。　（106）　However；　I　will　touch　on　those



points　which　have　most　bearing　on　my　subject　in　the　following　chapter。



















End　of　Part　2。



















AUTHOR'S　ENDNOTES　TO　THE　THEOLOGICO…POLITICAL　TREATISE



Part　2　…　Chapters　VI　to　X











CHAPTER　VI。







Endnote　6。　（1）　We　doubt　of　the　existence　of　God；　and　consequently　of



all　else；　so　long　as　we　have　no　clear　and　distinct　idea　of　God；　but　only　a



confused　one。　（2）　For　as　he　who　knows　not　rightly　the　nature　of　a　triangle；



knows　not　that　its　three　angles　are　equal　to　two　right　angles；　so　he　who



conceives　the　Divine　nature　confusedly；　does　not　see　that　it　pertains　to　the



nature　of　God　to　exist。　（3）　Now；　to　conceive　the　nature　of　God　clearly　and



distinctly；　it　is　necessary　to　pay　attention　to　a　certain　number　of　very



simple　notions；　called　general　notions；　and　by　their　help　to　associate　the



conceptions　which　we　form　of　the　attributes　of　the　Divine　nature。　（4）　It



then；　for　the　first　time；　becomes　clear　to　us；　that　God　exists　necessarily；



that　He　is　omnipresent；　and　that　all　our　conceptions　involve　in　themselves



the　nature　of　God　and　are　conceived　through　it。　（5）　Lastly；　we　see　that　all



our　adequate　ideas　are　true。　（6）　Compare　on　this　point　the　prologomena　to



book；　〃Principles　of　Descartes's　philosophy　set　forth　geometrically。〃











CHAPTER　VII。







Endnote　7。　（1）　〃It　is　impossible　to　find　a　method　which　would　enable　us　to



gain　a　certain　knowledge　of　all　the　statements　in　Scripture。〃　（2）　I　mean



impossible　for　us　who　have　not　the　habitual　use　of　the　language；　and　have



lost　the　precise　meaning　of　its　phraseology。