a theologico-political treatise [part ii]-第9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！





is　evidently　necessary　to　know　something　of　the　authors　of　writings　which



are　obscure　or　unintelligible；　if　we　would　interpret　their　meaning；　and　for



the　same　reason；　in　order　to　choose　the　proper　reading　from　among　a　great



variety；　we　ought　to　have　information　as　to　the　versions　in　which　the



differences　are　found；　and　as　to　the　possibility　of　other　readings　having



been　discovered　by　persons　of　greater　authority。







（133）　A　further　difficulty　attends　this　method　in　the　case　of　some　of　the



books　of　Scripture；　namely；　that　they　are　no　longer　extant　in　their　original



language。　（133）　The　Gospel　according　to　Matthew；　and　certainly　the　Epistle



to　the　Hebrews；　were　written；　it　is　thought；　in　Hebrew；　though　they　no



longer　exist　in　that　form。　（134）　Aben　Ezra　affirms　in　his　commentaries　that



the　book　of　Job　was　translated　into　Hebrew　out　of　another　language；　and　that



its　obscurity　arises　from　this　fact。　（135）　I　say　nothing　of　the　apocryphal



books；　for　their　authority　stands　on　very　inferior　ground。







（136）　The　foregoing　difficulties　in　this　method　of　interpreting　Scripture



from　its　own　history；　I　conceive　to　be　so　great　that　I　do　not　hesitate　to



say　that　the　true　meaning　of　Scripture　is　in　many　places　inexplicable；　or　at



best　mere　subject　for　guesswork；　but　I　must　again　point　out；　on　the　other



hand；　that　such　difficulties　only　arise　when　we　endeavour　to　follow　the



meaning　of　a　prophet　in　matters　which　cannot　be　perceived；　but　only



imagined；　not　in　things；　whereof　the　understanding　can　give　a　clear　idea；



and　which　are　conceivable　through　themselves：；　＇Endnote　8＇；　matters　which　by



their　nature　are　easily　perceived　cannot　be　expressed　so　obscurely　as　to　be



unintelligible；　as　the　proverb　says；　〃a　word　is　enough　to　the　wise。〃　（137）



Euclid；　who　only　wrote　of　matters　very　simple　and　easily　understood；　can



easily　be　comprehended　by　anyone　in　any　language；　we　can　follow　his



intention　perfectly；；　and　be　certain　of　his　true　meaning；　without　having　a



thorough　knowledge　of　the　language　in　which　he　wrote；　in　fact；　a　quite



rudimentary　acquaintance　is　sufficient。　（138）　We　need　make　no　researches



concerning　the　life；　the　pursuits；　or　the　habits　of　the　author；　nor　need　we



inquire　in　what　language；　nor　when　he　wrote；　nor　the　vicissitudes　of　his



book；　nor　its　various　readings；　nor　how；　nor　by　whose　advice　it　has　been



received。







（139）　What　we　here　say　of　Euclid　might　equally　be　said　of　any　book　which



treats　of　things　by　their　nature　perceptible：　thus　we　conclude　that　we　can



easily　follow　the　intention　of　Scripture　in　moral　questions；　from　the



history　we　possess　of　it；　and　we　can　be　sure　of　its　true　meaning。







（140）　The　precepts　of　true　piety　are　expressed　in　very　ordinary　language；



and　are　equally　simple　and　easily　understood。　（141）　Further；　as　true



salvation　and　blessedness　consist　in　a　true　assent　of　the　soul　…　and　we



truly　assent　only　to　what　we　clearly　understand　…　it　is　most　plain　that　we



can　follow　with　certainty　the　intention　of　Scripture　in　matters　relating　to



salvation　and　necessary　to　blessedness；　therefore；　we　need　not　be　much



troubled　about　what　remains：　such　matters；　inasmuch　as　we　generally　cannot



grasp　them　with　our　reason　and　understanding；　are　more　curious　than



profitable。







（142）　I　think　I　have　now　set　forth　the　true　method　of　Scriptural



interpretation；　and　have　sufficiently　explained　my　own　opinion　thereon。



（143）　Besides；　I　do　not　doubt　that　everyone　will　see　that　such　a　method　only



requires　the　aid　of　natural　reason。　（144）　The　nature　and　efficacy　of　the



natural　reason　consists　in　deducing　and　proving　the　unknown　from　the　known；



or　in　carrying　premises　to　their　legitimate　conclusions；　and　these　are　the



very　processes　which　our　method　desiderates。　（145）　Though　we　must　admit　that



it　does　not　suffice　to　explain　everything　in　the　Bible；　such　imperfection



does　not　spring　from　its　own　nature；　but　from　the　fact　that　the　path



which　it　teaches　us；　as　the　true　one；　has　never　been　tended　or　trodden　by



men；　and　has　thus；　by　the　lapse　of　time；　become　very　difficult；　and　almost



impassable；　as；　indeed；　I　have　shown　in　the　difficulties　I　draw　attention



to。







（146）　There　only　remains　to　examine　the　opinions　of　those　who　differ　from



me。　（147）　The　first　which　comes　under　our　notice　is；　that　the　light　of



nature　has　no　power　to　interpret　Scripture；　but　that　a　supernatural　faculty



is　required　for　the　task。　（148）　What　is　meant　by　this　supernatural　faculty　I



will　leave　to　its　propounders　to　explain。　（149）　Personally；　I　can　only



suppose　that　they　have　adopted　a　very　obscure　way　of　stating　their　complete



uncertainty　about　the　true　meaning　of　Scripture。　（150）　If　we　look　at　their



interpretations；　they　contain　nothing　supernatural；　at　least　nothing　but　the



merest　conjectures。







（151）　Let　them　be　placed　side　by　side　with　the　interpretations　of　those　who



frankly　confess　that　they　have　no　faculty　beyond　their　natural　ones；　we



shall　see　that　the　two　are　just　alike　…　both　human；　both　long　pondered　over；



both　laboriously　invented。　（152）　To　say　that　the　natural　reason　is



insufficient　for　such　results　is　plainly　untrue；　firstly；　for　the　reasons



above　stated；　namely；　that　the　difficulty　of　interpreting　Scripture　arises



from　no　defect　in　human　reason；　but　simply　from　the　carelessness　（not　to　say



malice）　of　men　who　neglected　the　history　of　the　Bible　while　there　were　still



materials　for　inquiry；　secondly；　from　the　fact　（admitted；　I　think；　by　all）



that　the　supernatural　faculty　is　a　Divine　gift　granted　only　to　the　faithful。



（153）　But　the　prophets　and　apostles　did　not　preach　to　the　faithful　only；　but



chiefly　to　the　unfaithful　and　wicked。　（154）　Such　persons；　therefore；　were



able　to　understand　the　intention　of　the　prophets　and　apostles；　otherwise　the



prophets　and　apostles　would　have　seemed　to　be　preaching　to　little　boys　and



infants；　not　to　men　endowed　with　reason。　（155）　Moses；　too；　would　have　given



his　laws　in　vain；　if　they　could　only　be　comprehended　by　the　faithful；　who



need　no　law。　（156）　Indeed；　those　who　demand　supernatural　faculties　for



comprehending　the　meaning　of　the　prophets　and　apostles　seem　truly　lacking　in



natural　faculties；　so　that　we　should　hardly　suppose　such　persons　the



possessors　of　a　Divine　supernatural　gift。







（157）　The　opinion　of　Maimonides　was　widely　different。　（158）　He　asserted



that　each　passage　in　Scripture　admits　of　various；　nay；　contrary；



meanings；　but　that　we　could　never　be　certain　of　any　particular　one　till　we



knew　that　the　passage；　as　we　interpreted　it；　contained　nothing　contrary　or



repugnant　to　reason。　（159）　If　the　literal　meaning　clashes　with　reason；



though　the　passage　seems　in　itself　perfectly　clear；　it　must　be　interpreted



in　some　metaphorical　sense。　（160）　This　doctrine　he　lays　down　very　plainly　in



chap。　xxv。　part　ii。　of　his　book；　〃More　Nebuchim；〃　for　he　says：　〃Know　that　we



shrink　not　from　affirming　that　the　world　hath　existed　from　eternity；



because　of　what　Scripture　saith　concerning　the　world's　creation。　（161）　For



the　texts　which　teach　that　the　world　was　created　are　not　more　in　number　than



those　which　teach　that　God　hath　a　body；　neither　are　the　approaches　in　this



matter　of　the　world's　creation　closed；　or　even　made　hard　to　us：　so　that　we



should　not　be　able　to　explain　what　is　written；　as　we　did　when　we　showed



that　God　hath　no　body；　nay；　peradventure；　we　could　explain　and　make　fast　the



doctrine　of　the　world's　eternity　more　easily　than　we　did　away　with　the



doctrines　that　God　hath　a　beatified　body。　（162）　Yet　two　things　hinder　me



from　doing　as　I　have　said；　and　believing　that　the　world　is　eternal。



（163）　As　it　hath　been　clearly　shown　that　God　hath　not　a　body；　we　must



perforce　explain　all　those　passages　whereof　the　literal　sense　agreeth　not



with　the　demonstration；　for　sure　it　is　that　they　can　be　so　explained。　（164）



But　the　eternity　of　the　world　hath　not　been　so　demonstrated；　therefore



it　is　not　necessary　to　do　violence　to　Scripture　in　support　of　some　common



opinion；　whereof　we　might；　at　the　bidding　of　reason；　embrace　the　contrary。〃







（165）　Such　are　the　words　of　Maimonides；　and　they　are　evidently　sufficient　to



establish　our　point：　for　if　he　had　been　convinced　by　reason　that　the　world



is　eternal；　he　would　not　have　hesitated　to　twist　and　explain　away　the　words



of　Scripture　till　he　made　them　appear　to　teach　this　doctrine。　（166）　He　would



have　felt　quite　sure　that　Scripture；　though　everywhere　plainly　denying　the



eternity　of　the　world；　really　intends　to　teach　it。　（167）　So　that；　however



clear　the　meaning　of　Scripture　may　be；　he　would　not　feel　certain　of　having



grasped　it；　so　long　as　he　remained　doubtful　of　the　truth　of　what；　was



written。　（168）　For　we　are　in　doubt　whether　a　thing　is　in　conformity　with



reason；　or　contrary　thereto；　so　long　as　we　are　uncertain　of　its　truth；



and；　consequently；　we　cannot　be　sure　whether　the　literal　meaning　of　a



passage　be　true　or　false。







（169）　If　such　a　theory　as　this　were　sound；　I　would　certainly　grant　that　some



faculty　beyond　the　natural　reason　is　required　for　interpreting　Scripture。



（170）　For　nearly　all　things　that　we　find　in　Scripture　cannot　be　inferred



from　known　principles　of　the　natural　reason；　and；　therefore；　we　should　be



unable　to　come　to　any　conclusion　about　their　truth；　or　about　the　real



meaning　and　intention　of　Scripture；　but　should　stand　in　need　of　some



further　assistance。







（171）　Further；　the　truth　of　this　theory　would　involve　that　the　masses；



having　generally　no　comp