JBY Notes:

1.  Text was scanned from Book II and is a translation from
     Bruder's 1843  Latin  text  by  R.H.M.  Elwes  (1883). 
     JBY  added  sentence  numbers.  
 
2.  (y:xx):   y = Chapter  Number,  if  given;    xx = Sentence  Number.
 
3.  Page  numbers  are  those  of  Book II.
 
4.  Citation abbreviations.
 
5.  ( Spinoza's Footnote or the Latin word ) , 
     ] Shirley's Bk. XI (or XIII) translation variance or note [, 
     { JBY comment, emendation, or endnote }.    LINKS 
    Metaphor of Commandment of G-D, Referred to G-D.                       G:Shirley:42, Metaphors  

6.  Please e-mail errors, clarification requests, disagreement,
     or suggestions to josephb@yesselman.com. 

7.  TEXT version of TTP1; without links and without commentary. 
     This HTML version was abridged and formatted for conversion to an eBook.
     The abridged version is available to be read on various eBook Readers
 
8.  There  is  much  in  this  work that you will not agree with or, even          Graetz's Censure
     think  nonsense—although  keep  in mind that Spinoza was under 
     the constraints of religious  intolerance.    Spinoza was born in the       apparent modesty 
     very year (1632)  that the inquisitorial denunciation of Galileo took  
     place.  However,  partake  of  the work (and my commentaries) as  
     you  would  a  pomegranate; relish  the  flesh,  but spit-out the pits. 
   { Bk.XIB:143. } apparent modesty

9.  EL:[7]:viii, EL:[11]:xi, EL:[17]:xiii, EL:[22]:xvi, EL:[64]:xxxi, EL:xxxiii:J6, 
     L19:296, L20:297, L23:301, L49:364,  New Wine in Old Bottles. 
                                                             {Scriptural Theology}              Hampshire:205
10. The  chief  aim  of  the whole treatise is to separate  faith ^ {Religion}          Smith:Divine Law
      from philosophy.  ]Shirley:37—What emerges in the TTP, as far as is Spinoza           Hampshire:203 & 205
      concerned, is the possibility of a this-worldly blessedness for both the rational person               TL:L36(23):345
       (through philosophy) and the common person (through purified religion),[                    EL:L21:(73):298
      {By my defining Religion as an hypothesis, the two are synthesized.}                     Philosophy / Religion
 
11. Links - To differentiate links from quotations (both blue text) set your
                  browser options to show links underlined.  
 
12.  Suggestion:  Do  not  read this Spinoza electronic text consecutively       Durant's Story
       as  you  would a novel, but rather follow a thread  by following all its          EL:[3]:vi
       links  in  turn.   You will then be putting hypertexting to its fullest and         Schorsch
       best advantage—the fuller discussion of a thread. If you do not stick 
       to one thread (idea) at a time,  this Web Site will be very convoluted,        Tickle the Fancy
       confusing, and an annoying maze. 

       If you prefer to read linearly, read these plain vanilla text versions,
       abridged versions, e-book versions, or best, study the printed book—
       book page numbers are given for most scanned books.
 

Preface  BKII:Pg. 3

   Part                   Chapters

Author's, Shirley's, and JBY Endnotes to Theologico-Political Treatise - Part 1 :269

JBY Endnotes
 
 

TABLE OF CONTENTS:                                                             Bk.II:Page Numbers

   
A Theologico-Political Treatise , PART 1 , PART 2 , PART 3 , PART 4

Author's Notes to the Treatise

xxxiii:J6           Photocopy  of  Title  Page  of   the  first  edition  of  the                     Wolf
                 Tractatus Theologico-Politicus with sub-title omitted by Elwes.  
              The photo and translation are taken from Shirley's Book XI:46 & 47.  

                               

                                                TRACTATUS
                                     THEOLOGICO-POLITICUS

containing  a  number  of  dissertations,    wherein  it  is  shown  that
freedom  to  philosophise  can  not  only  be  granted  without  injury 
to   Piety   and   the   Peace   of   the  Commonwealth,  but  that  the 
Peace  of  the  Commonwealth  and  Piety  are  endangered  by  the 
                             suppression of this freedom.                                          Bk.XI:36103; Bk.XIA:272.   


                        John Epistle 1 Chapter 4, verse 13.                              Logos - 1 John 1:1

    "Hereby we know that we dwell in G-D and He in us, because             Immanent
                          He has given us of his Spirit."                               Bk.XIA:273.

                                           Hamburg. 
                         Published by Henry Kunraht 1670.                          Bk.XX:269. 

fortune: but being frequently driven into straits where rules are use-

less,  and  being  often  kept  fluctuating pitiably between hope and

fear  by  the uncertainty of fortune's greedily coveted favours, they

are consequently, for the most part, very prone to credulity. (P:2) The

human  mind  is  readily  swayed  this way or that in times of doubt,

especially  when  hope  and  fear  are  struggling  for  the  mastery,

though usually it is boastful, over-confident, and vain.



(P:3)  This  as  a  general fact I suppose everyone knows, though few,

I believe, know their own nature; no one can have lived in the world

without observing that most people, when in prosperity, are so over-

brimming  with  wisdom (however inexperienced they may be),  that

they  take  every  offer  of  advice  as a personal insult,  whereas in

adversity they know not where to turn, but beg and pray for counsel

from every passer-by.  (P:4)  No plan is then too futile,  too absurd,  or

too  fatuous  for  their adoption;  the most frivolous causes will raise

them  to  hope,  or  plunge  them  into despair—if anything happens

during their fright which reminds them of some past good or ill, they

think  it portends a happy or unhappy issue,  and therefore  (though

it may have proved abortive a hundred times before) style it a lucky

or  unlucky  omen.   (P:5)  Anything  which  excites  their astonishment

they  believe  to  be  a  portent signifying the anger of the Gods or of

the Supreme being, and, mistaking superstition for religion, account

it  impious  not  to avert the evil with prayer and sacrifice.  (P:6)  Signs

and wonders   page 4    of this sort they conjure up perpetually, till one

might think Nature as mad as themselves,  they interpret her so fan-

tastically.



(P:7)  Thus  it is brought prominently before us, that superstition's chief

victims  are  those persons who greedily covet temporal advantages;

they  it  is, who (especially when they are in danger, and cannot help

themselves)  are  wont  with  Prayers and womanish tears to implore

help  from  G-D:  upbraiding  Reason  as  blind, because she cannot            Metaphors  

show  a  sure path to the shadows they pursue, and rejecting human

wisdom  as  vain; but believing the phantoms of imagination, dreams,

and  other  childish  absurdities,  to  be  the  very  oracles of Heaven. 

(P:8)   As  though  G-D  had  turned away from the wise, and written His

decrees,  not  in  the  mind of man but in the entrails of beasts, or left

them  to  be  proclaimed  by  the inspiration and instinct of fools, mad-
           Bk.XIA:3123.
men,  and  birds.   (P:8a)  Such is the unreason to which terror can drive

mankind!


        Bk.XIA:2914.
(P:9)  Superstition,  then,  is  engendered,  preserved,  and  fostered by

fear.  (P:9a)  If  anyone  desire  an example, let him take Alexander, who

only  began  superstitiously  to  seek  guidance  from seers, when he

first learnt to fear fortune in the passes of Sysis (Curtius, v.4); where-

as  after  he  had  conquered Darius he consulted prophets no more,

till  a  second  time  frightened by reverses.  (P:10)  When the Scythians

were  provoking a battle, the Bactrians had deserted, and he himself

was  lying  sick  of  his wounds, "he once more turned to superstition,

the  mockery  of  human  wisdom,  and  bade Aristander, to whom he

confided  his  credulity, inquire the issue of affairs with sacrificed vic-

tims."  (P:11)   Very  numerous  examples  of a like nature might be cited,

clearly  showing  the  fact,  that only while under the dominion of fear

do  men  fall a prey to superstition; that all the portents ever invested

with  the  reverence  of  misguided religion are mere phantoms of de-

jected  and  fearful minds; and lastly, that prophets have most power

among  the  people,  and  are  most formidable to rulers, precisely at

those times when the state is in most peril.   (P:12)  I think this is suffici-

ently  plain  to  all,  and  will  therefore  say  no  more on the subject.


                              Bk.XIX:27040.
(P:13)  The  origin of superstition above given affords us a clear reason

for  the  fact,  that it comes to all men naturally, though some refer its

rise  to  a  dim  notion  of  G-D,  universal  page 5  to mankind, and also

tends  to  show, that it is no less inconsistent and variable than other
                                                     Bk.XIA:3022.
mental  hallucinations and emotional impulses, and further that it can

only  be  maintained  by  hope,  hatred,  anger,  and  deceit;  since it

springs,  not  from reason, but solely from the more powerful phases

of  emotion.  (P:14)   Furthermore,  we may readily understand how diffi-

cult  it  is, to maintain in the same course men prone to every form of

credulity.  (P:15)  For, as the mass of mankind remains always at about

the  same  pitch  of misery, it never assents long to any one remedy,

but  is  always  best  pleased  by a novelty which has not yet proved

illusive.



(P:16)  This  element of inconsistency has been the cause of many terri-

ble  wars  and revolutions; for, as Curtius well says (lib. iv. chap. 10):
                                                                     Bk.XIB:8154.
"The  mob  has  no ruler more potent than superstition," and is easily

led, on the plea of religion, at one moment to adore its kings as Gods,

and  anon  to execrate and abjure them as humanity's common bane.

(P:17)  Immense pains have therefore been taken to counteract this evil
                                                                                       Bk.XX:27283. 
by investing religion, whether true or false, with such pomp and cere-

mony,  that  it  may  rise  superior  to every shock, and be always ob-

served  with  studious  reverence  by  the  whole  people—a  system
                                                                                      Bk.XIA:3345.
which   has   been   brought  to  great  perfection  by  the  Turks,  for

they  consider  even  controversy  impious, and so clog men's minds

with  dogmatic  formulas,  that  they leave no room for sound reason,

not even enough to doubt with.



(P:18)   But if, in despotic statecraft, the supreme and essential mystery

be  to  hoodwink  the  subjects,  and  to  mask the fear, which keeps
                                         Bk.XIA:3344.
them  down,  with  the  specious  garb  of  religion,  so that men may
                       Bk.XIA:1991; Bk.XIX:27041.
fight  as  bravely for slavery as for safety, and count it not shame but

highest  honour  to risk their blood and their lives for the vainglory of
  Bk.XIB:8359.
a  tyrant;  yet in a free state no more mischievous expedient could be

planned or attempted.  (P:19)  Wholly repugnant to the general freedom

are  such devices as enthralling men's minds with prejudices, forcing

their  judgment,  or  employing any of the weapons of quasi-religious

sedition;  indeed, such seditions only spring up, when law enters the          Robinson3:63

domain of speculative thought, and opinions are put on trial and con-

demned on the same footing as crimes, while those who defend and

follow  them  are  sacrificed,  not  to  public safety, but to their  page 6
                                          Bk.XIA:3126.
opponents'  hatred  and cruelty.  (19a) If deeds only could be made the         Col:Hampshire:205

grounds  of  criminal  charges,  and  words  were  always  allowed to

pass  free,  such  seditions would be divested of every semblance of

justification,  and  would  be separated from mere controversies by a

hard and fast line.



(P:20)  Now,  seeing  that  we  have  the rare happiness of living in a re-
                          Bk.XIA:3446.
public,  where  everyone's  judgment  is  free and unshackled, where
                                                            Bk.XIA:4492. 
each  may  worship G-D as his conscience dictates, and where free-            Deus sive Natura
                                                            Bk.XIA:24107.
dom is esteemed before all things dear and precious, I have believed

that  I  should  be  undertaking  no  ungrateful or unprofitable task, in

demonstrating  that  not  only  can  such freedom be granted without

prejudice  to  the  public  peace, but also, that without such freedom,

piety  cannot  flourish  nor  the  public  peace  be  secure.



(P:21)   Such  is  the  chief conclusion I seek to establish in this treatise;

but,  in  order  to  reach  it,  I  must  first point out the misconceptions

which,  like  scars  of  our  former  bondage,  still disfigure our notion

of  religion, and must expose the false views about the civil authority

which  many have most impudently advocated, endeavouring to turn

the mind of the people, still prone to heathen superstition, away from
      Bk.XIA:287.
its legitimate rulers, and so bring us again into slavery.  (P:22)  As to the

order  of  my  treatise I will speak presently, but first I will recount the

causes which led me to write.



(P:23)   I  have  often  wondered, that persons who make a boast of pro-

fessing  the  Christian religion, namely, love, joy, peace, temperance,

and  charity to all men, should quarrel with such rancorous animosity,

and  display  daily  towards  one another such bitter hatred, that this,
                                                                                    Bk.XIA:3766.
rather  than  the  virtues  they  claim,  is the readiest criterion of their

faith.   (P:24)   Matters  have  long  since  come to such a pass, that one

can  only  pronounce  a man Christian, Turk, Jew, or Heathen, by his

general  appearance  and  attire, by his frequenting this or that place

of  worship,  or  employing  the  phraseology of a particular sect—as

for  manner  of  life,  it  is  in  all cases the same.  (P:25)  Inquiry into the

cause  of  this  anomaly  leads  me  unhesitatingly to ascribe it to the

fact,  that  the  ministries  of  the Church are regarded by the masses

merely  as  dignities,  her  offices  as  posts  of  emolument—in short,

popular  religion  may  be  summed  up  as  respect for ecclesiastics.

(P:26)   The  spread  of  this  misconception  inflamed  every  worthless

page 7  fellow  with  an  intense  desire  to  enter holy orders, and thus

the  love  of  diffusing G-D's religion degenerated into sordid avarice

and  ambition.  (P:27)   Every  church  became a theatre, where orators,

instead  of  church  teachers,  harangued,  caring  not  to instruct the

people,   but  striving  to  attract  admiration,  to  bring  opponents  to

public  scorn,  and  to  preach only novelties and paradoxes, such as

would  tickle  the ears of their congregation.  (P:28)  This state of things

necessarily  stirred  up  an  amount of controversy, envy, and hatred,

which  no  lapse  of  time  could  appease;  so  that  we can scarcely

wonder that of the old religion nothing survives but its outward forms

(even  these,  in  the  mouth  of  the multitude, seem rather adulation

than  adoration of the Deity), and that faith has become a mere com-

pound   of   credulity   and   prejudices—aye,  prejudices  too,  which

degrade  man  from  rational  being  to  beast, which completely stifle

the  power  of  judgment between true and false, which seem, in fact,

carefully  fostered  for  the purpose of extinguishing the last spark of

reason!   (P:29)   Piety,  great  G-D! and religion are become a tissue of
  Bk.XIA:3125; Bk.XIB:8257.
ridiculous  mysteries; men, who flatly despise reason, who reject and

turn  away  from  understanding  as  naturally  corrupt,  these,  I  say,

these  of  all  men,  are  thought,  O lie most horrible! to possess light

from  on  High.  (P:30)   Verily,  if they had but one spark of light from on

High,  they  would  not  insolently  rave,  but  would  learn to worship

G-D  more  wisely,  and  would be as marked among their fellows for

mercy  as  they  now  are  for malice; if they were concerned for their

opponents'  souls,  instead  of  for  their own reputations, they would

no   longer   fiercely  persecute,  but  rather  be  filled  with  pity  and
  Bk.XIB:21458.
compassion.



(P:31)  Furthermore,  if  any  Divine  light  were in them, it would appear

from  their  doctrine.  (P:32)  I  grant  that they are never tired of profess-

ing  their wonder at the profound mysteries of Holy Writ; still I cannot

discover  that they teach anything but speculations of Platonists and

Aristotelians,  to  which  ( in order to save their credit for Christianity)

they  have  made  Holy  Writ  conform;  not  content  to rave with the
      Bk.XIA:3128.
Greeks  themselves,  they  want  to  make  the  prophets  rave  also;

showing  conclusively,  that  never even in sleep have they caught a

glimpse  of  Scripture's  Divine   page 8   Nature.   (P:33)  The  very  vehe-

mence  of  their admiration for the mysteries plainly attests, that their

belief  in  the  Bible  is  a  formal assent rather than a living faith: and

the fact is made still more apparent by their laying down beforehand,

as a foundation for the study and true interpretation of Scripture, the

principle  that  it  is  in  every  passage  true  and divine.  (P:34)  Such a

doctrine  should  be  reached  only  after strict scrutiny and thorough

comprehension  of  the  Sacred  Books ( which  would  teach it much

better,  for  they  stand in need of no human factions), and not be set

up on the threshold, as it were, of inquiry.



(P:35)   As  I  pondered  over the facts that the light of reason is not only

despised,  but  by  many  even execrated as a source of impiety, that

human   commentaries  are  accepted  as  divine  records,   and  that

credulity  is  extolled  as faith; as I marked the fierce controversies of

philosophers  raging  in Church and State, the source of bitter hatred

and  dissension,   the  ready  instruments  of  sedition  and  other  ills

innumerable,  I  determined  to  examine the Bible afresh in a careful,

impartial,  and  unfettered  spirit, making no assumptions concerning

it,  and  attributing  to  it  no  doctrines,  which  I  do  not  find  clearly

therein   set   down.   (P:36)    With  these  precautions  I  constructed  a

method  of  Scriptural  interpretation,  and  thus equipped proceeded

to  inquire—what  is  prophecy?  (P:37)   In  what  sense did G-D reveal              Metaphor

himself  to  the prophets, and why were these particular men chosen

by  him?  (P:38)   Was  it  on  account  of  the  sublimity of their thoughts

about the Deity and Nature, or was it solely on account of their piety?

(P:39)   These questions being answered, I was easily able to conclude,

that  the  authority  of  the  prophets  has  weight  only  in  matters of
                               {theoretical, rather than practical}
morality, and that their speculative doctrines affect us little.



(P:40)   Next  I  inquired,  why  the  Hebrews  were  called G-D's chosen

people,  and  discovering  that  it was only because G-D had chosen

for  them  a  certain strip of territory, where they might live peaceably

and  at  ease,  I  learnt  that  the Law  revealed by G-D to Moses was            Metaphors 

merely  the  law  of  the  individual Hebrew state, therefore that it was           Constitution

binding  on  none  but  Hebrews,  and not even on Hebrews after the
                      Bk.XIA:9977. 
downfall  of  their  nation.  (P:41)  Further, in order to ascertain, whether              Runes:v

it  could  be concluded from Scripture, that the human understanding

page 9   is  naturally  corrupt,  I inquired whether the Universal Religion,            World State 

the  Divine  Law  revealed  through the Prophets and Apostles to the

whole  human  race,  differs  from  that which is taught by the light of

natural  reason,  whether  miracles  can  take place in violation of the

laws  of  Nature,  and  if  so, whether they imply the existence of G-D

more  surely  and  clearly  than  events, which we understand plainly

and distinctly through their immediate natural causes.



(P:42)  Now,  as in the whole course of my investigation I found nothing

taught  expressly  by Scripture, which does not agree with our under-

standing,  or  which  is  repugnant  thereto,   and  as  I  saw  that  the

prophets  taught  nothing,  which  is  not very simple and easily to be

grasped  by  all,  and  further,  that  they clothed their teaching in the

style,  and  confirmed  it  with the reasons, which would most deeply

move  the  mind  of  the  masses to devotion towards G-D, I became

thoroughly  convinced,  that  the Bible leaves reason absolutely free,
                                                                                                {Religion}
that  it  has  nothing  in common with philosophy, in fact, that Revela-              Sc:Note 8.
                                                        Bk.XIA:82135. 
tion  and  Philosophy  stand  on different footings. In order to set this

forth  categorically  and  exhaust  the  whole question, I point out the

way  in  which  the  Bible  should be interpreted, and show that all of

spiritual  questions  should  be sought from it alone, and not from the

objects  of  ordinary  knowledge.   (P:43)   Thence  I  pass on to indicate

the  false  notions, which  have from the fact that the multitude—ever

prone  to  superstition, and caring more for the shreds of antiquity for

eternal  truths—pays  homage  to the Books of the Bible, rather than
                Bk.XIX:57b.
to  the  Word of G-D.  (P:44)  I show that the Word of G-D has not been               Metaphor      

revealed   as   a   certain  number of books, but was displayed to the

prophets  as  a  simple  idea  of the mind, namely, obedience to G-D         Durant:641 - Theology 

in  singleness  of  heart,  and  in  the  practice  of  justice and charity;

and  I  further  point  out,  that this doctrine is set forth in Scripture in

accordance  with  the  opinions and understandings of those, among

whom  the  Apostles  and  Prophets preached,  to  the  end that men

might receive it willingly, and with their whole heart.



(P:45)   Having  thus  laid  bare  the  bases  of belief, I draw the conclusion
                                                    {peace-of-mind}                                                     Mark Twain 
that Revelation {Religion, faith} has obedience for its sole object, therefore,
                                                    Bk.XIA:286.
in  purpose  no  less   than   in  foundation  and   page 10   method,  stands

entirely   aloof  from ordinary knowledge {Reason, Philosophy}; each has its 

separate  province,  neither  can  be  called  the  handmaid  of the other.

{By defining religion as an hypothesis, I attempt to synthesize the two.}



(P:46)   Furthermore,  as  men's habits of mind differ, so that some more

readily  embrace  one  form of  faith,  some  another, for what moves
                                               Bk.XIA:15766, 2023.
one  to  pray  may  move another only to scoff, I conclude, in accord-

ance  with  what  has  gone  before, that everyone should be free to

choose   for   himself  the  foundation  of  his  creed,  and  that  faith
                                         {Cash Value}
should be judged only by its fruits; each would then obey G-D freely             Metaphors

with his whole  heart, while nothing would be publicly honoured save

justice and charity.



(P:47)  Having thus drawn attention to the liberty conceded to everyone

by  the  revealed  law of G-D, I pass on to another part of my subject,

and  prove  that  this  same  liberty can and should be accorded with

safety  to  the state  and the magisterial authority—in fact, that it can-

not  be  withheld  without great danger to peace and detriment to the

community.


                  Bk.XIA:51136  
(P:48)   In  order  to  establish  my  point, I start from the natural rights of

the  individual,  which  are  co-extensive  with  his desires and power,

and  from  the  fact  that  no  one is bound to live as another pleases,

but  is  the  guardian  of  his own liberty.  (P:49)  I show that these rights

can  only  be  transferred  to  those  whom  we  depute  to defend us,

who  acquire  with  the  duties  of  defence the power of ordering our

lives,  and  I  thence  infer  that  rulers  possess rights only limited by

their  power,  that  they  are  the sole guardians of justice and liberty,

and  that their subjects should act in all things as they dictate: never-

theless,  since  no one can so utterly abdicate his own power of self-

defence  as  to  cease  to  be  a  man,  I conclude that no one can be

deprived  of  his natural rights absolutely, but that subjects, either by

tacit   agreement,  or  by  social  contract,  retain  a  certain  number,

which  cannot  be  taken from them without great danger to the state.



(P:50)  From these considerations I pass on to the Hebrew State, which

I  describe  at  some  length,  in  order  to  trace  the manner in which

Religion  acquired the force of law, and to touch on other noteworthy             Constitution 

points.  (P:51)  I then prove, that the holders of sovereign power are the
                               Bk.XIA:51136  
depositories  and  interpreters  of  religious  no less than of civil ordi-             Robinson3:63 

nances,  and  that they a lone have the right to decide what is just or

 page 11  unjust,  pious  or  impious;  lastly,  I conclude by showing, that

they best retain this right and secure safety to their state by allowing
                                                                       Bk.XIA:1777.
every man to think what he likes, and say what he thinks.



(P:52)   Such,  Philosophical  Reader, are the questions I submit to your

notice,  counting  on  your  approval,  for  the  subject  matter  of  the

whole  book  and  of  the several chapters is important and profitable.

(53)   I  would  say  more,  but  I  do  not want my preface to extend to a

volume,  especially  as  I  know  that  its  leading  propositions  are to

Philosophers  but  commonplaces.  (P:54)  To the rest of mankind I care

not to commend my treatise, for I cannot expect that it contains any-

thing  to  please  them:  I know how deeply rooted are the prejudices

embraced  under  the  name  of  religion; I am aware that in the mind
                               Bk.XIB:8154.
of   the   masses  superstition  is  no  less  deeply  rooted  than  fear;

I recognize  that  their constancy is mere obstinacy, and that they are
                  Bk.XIA:4390. 
led  to  praise or blame by impulse rather than reason.  (P:55)Therefore

the  multitude,  and  those  of  like  passions  with the multitude, I ask

not  to  read  my  book;  nay,  I  would  rather that they should utterly

neglect   it,  than  that  they  should  misinterpret  it  after  their  wont.

(P:56)   They  would  gain no good themselves, and might prove a stum-

bling-block  to  others,  whose  philosophy  is hampered by the belief

that  Reason  is  a  mere  handmaid to Theology, and whom I seek in
                                                                                     Bk.XIA:4076. 
this  work  especially  to  benefit.  (P:57)   But  as there will be many who

have   neither   the   leisure,   nor,  perhaps,  the  inclination  to  read

through  all  I  have  written,  I  feel  bound  here, as at the end of my

treatise,  to  declare  that  I  have written nothing, which I do not most

willingly  submit  to  the  examination  and  judgment  of  my country's

rulers,  and  that  I  am  ready  to  retract  anything,  which  they shall
                                                                                            Bk.XIA:51137
decide  to  be  repugnant to the laws or prejudicial to the public good.

(P:58)  I know that I am a man and, as a man, liable to error, but against

error  I  have  taken scrupulous care, and striven to keep in entire ac-
                                                                                          Bk.XIA:51138ff
cordance  with the laws of my country, with loyalty, and with morality.

{Read EL:L49(43), a must.}    Bk.XIA:4077. 

page 13

CHAPTER I.—Of Prophecy


        Bk.XIA:9028.                                                                       {Metaphor}                          Yirmiyahu Yovel 
(1:1)   Prophecy,  or  revelation  is  sure  knowledge revealed by G-D to

man.  (1:2)  A  prophet  is  one  who  interprets  the  revelations  of G-D

{insights} to those  who are unable to attain to sure knowledge of the

matters  revealed, and therefore can only apprehend them by simple

faith.


                                         {EL:[65]:xxxi.}     Bk.XI:591. 
(1:3)  The  Hebrew  word  for  prophet is "naw-vee' " {Strong:5030}, (1)

i.e. speaker or interpreter, but in Scripture its meaning is restricted to

interpreter  of  God,  as  we  may learn from Exodus vii:1, where God

says  to  Moses,  "See,  I  have  made  thee  a  god  to Pharaoh, and

Aaron  thy  brother  shall be thy prophet;" implying that, since in inter-

preting  Moses'  words to Pharaoh, Aaron acted the part of a prophet,

Moses  would  be  to  Pharaoh  as  a  god, or in the attitude of a god.



(1:4) Prophets I will treat of in the next chapter, and at present consider

prophecy.



(1:5)  Now  it is evident,  from the definition above given, that prophecy

really  includes  ordinary  knowledge;  for  the  knowledge  which we

acquire  by  our  natural faculties depends on knowledge of G-D and
                                                                          Bk.XIX:293.
His  eternal  laws;  but  ordinary  knowledge is common to all men as

men,  and  rests  on  foundations  which all share, whereas the multi-

tude  always  strains  after rarities and exceptions, and thinks little of

the  gifts  of  Nature;  so  that,  when  prophecy is  talked of, ordinary

knowledge  is not supposed to be included.  (1:6)  Nevertheless  page 14

it  has  as  much  right  as  any  other  to  be  called Divine, for G-D's

Nature,  in  so  far  as  we share therein, and G-D's laws, dictate it to

us;  nor  does  it  suffer  from  that to which we give the preëminence,

except  in  so  far  as  the  latter  transcends  its  limits and cannot be

accounted  for  by  natural  laws  taken in themselves.  (1:7)  In respect

to  the  certainty  it  involves,  and the source from which it is derived,
                                                                        Bk.XIA:9030.  
i.e.  G-D,  ordinary  knowledge is no whit inferior to prophetic, unless

indeed  we  believe,  or  rather  dream,  that the prophets had human

bodies  but  superhuman  minds,  and therefore that their sensations

and  consciousness  were  entirely  different  from  our  own.



(1:8)  But, although ordinary knowledge is Divine, its professors cannot
          Bk.XIA:9031.  
be called prophets (2), for they teach what the rest of mankind could

perceive  and  apprehend,  not merely  by simple faith, but as surely

and honourably as themselves.



(1:9)  Seeing  then  that  our mind subjectively contains in itself and par-

takes  of  the  nature  of  G-D,  and  solely from this cause is enabled

to  form  notions explaining natural phenomena and inculcating moral-

ity, it follows that we may rightly assert the nature of the human mind
                                                                            Bk.XIA:9135.  
(in  so  far  as  it  is  thus  conceived) to be a primary cause of Divine

revelation.  All that we clearly and distinctly understand is dictated to

us,  as  I have just pointed out, by the idea and nature of G-D; not in-            Deus sive Natura 

deed  through  words,  but  in a way far more excellent and agreeing

perfectly  with  the  nature  of the mind, as all who have enjoyed intel-

lectual  certainty  will  doubtless attest.  (1:11)  Here, however, my chief

purpose  is  to  speak  of  matters  having  reference to Scripture, so

these few words on the light of reason will suffice.



(1:12)  I  will  now  pass  on  to, and treat more fully, the other ways and

means  by  which  G-D  makes  revelations  to  mankind, both of that

which transcends ordinary knowledge {i.e. Intuition}, and of that within

its scope; for  there  is  no  reason why G-D should not employ other

means   communicate   what   we   know   already  by  the  power  of 

reason.



(1:13)   Our  conclusions  on  the  subject  must  be  drawn  solely  from

Scripture;  for  what  can  we  affirm  about matters transcending our

knowledge   except   what  is  told  us  by  the  words  or  writings  of

prophets?  (1:14)   And  since  there  are,  so far as I know, no prophets

now  alive,  we  have  no  alternative but  page 15  to read the books of

prophets  departed,  taking  care  the  while not to reason from meta-

phor  or  to  ascribe  anything to our authors which they do not them-

selves  distinctly  state.  (1:15)   I  must  further  premise  that  the  Jews

never  make  any  mention  or  account  of  secondary,  or  particular

causes,  but in a spirit of religion, piety, and what is commonly called                Referral 

godliness, refer all things directly to the Deity. (16)  For instance if they        Spinozistic Scripture 

make  money  by  a transaction, they say G-D gave it to them; if they

desire  anything,  they  say G-D has disposed their hearts towards it;

if  they  think  anything, they say G-D told them.  (1:17)  Hence we must

not   suppose  that  everything  is  prophecy  or  revelation  which  is

described  in  Scripture  as  told  by  G-D  to  anyone,  but only such

things as are expressly announced as prophecy or revelation, or are

plainly pointed to as such by the context.



(1:18)   A perusal of the sacred books will show us that all God's revela-
                                                                         Bk.XIA:9029.    
tions  to  the prophets were made through words or appearances, or

a  combination of the two.  (1;19)  These words and appearances were

of  two  kinds;  (1) real when external to the mind of the prophet who

heard  or  saw  them,   (2)  imaginary  when  the  imagination  of  the

prophet  was  in  a  state  which led him distinctly to suppose that he

heard or saw them.



(1:20)  With  a  real  voice  God  revealed  to  Moses the laws which He

wished  to  be  transmitted  to  the  Hebrews,  as  we  may  see  from

Exodus xxv:22,  where  God  says,  "And  there  I  will meet with thee
                                                                              Strong: 3727 from 3722    
and  I  will commune with thee from the mercy seat which is between

the  Cherubim."   (1:21)   Some  sort of real voice must necessarily have

been  employed,  for  Moses  found God ready to commune with him
  Bk.XIA:9874.
at any time.  (1:21a) This, as I shall shortly show, is the only instance of

a real voice.



(1:22) We  might,  perhaps, suppose that the voice with which God call-

ed  Samuel  was  real,  for  in  1 Sam. iii:21,  we  read, "And the Lord

appeared again in Shiloh, for the Lord revealed Himself to Samuel in

Shiloh  by  the word of the Lord;" implying that the appearance of the

Lord  consisted  in  His  making  Himself known to Samuel through a

voice;   in   other   words,   that   Samuel   heard  the  Lord speaking.

(1:23) But  we  are  compelled to distinguish between the prophecies of

Moses  and  those of other prophets, and therefore must decide that

this  voice  was  imaginary, a conclusion further  page 16  supported by

the voice's resemblance to the voice of Eli, which Samuel was in the

habit of hearing, and therefore might easily imagine; when thrice call-

ed by the Lord, Samuel supposed it to have been Eli.



(1:24)  The voice which Abimelech heard was imaginary, for it is written,

Gen. xx:6, "And God said unto him in a dream."  (25) So that the will of

God  was  manifest  to him,  not  in  waking,  but only in sleep, that is,

when  the  imagination is most active and uncontrolled.  (1:26)  Some of

the  Jews  believe  that  the  actual words of the Decalogue were not

spoken  by  God,  but  that  the Israelites heard a noise only, without

any  distinct words,  and  during  its  continuance  apprehended  the
           Strong:4687 from 6680     
Ten  Commandments  by  pure intuition; to this opinion I myself once
 Bk.XIB:22683.                                                                          Exo 20:1
inclined,  seeing  that  the  words  of  the  Decalogue  in  Exodus are
                                                                                 Deut 5:4   
different  from  the  words  of  the Decalogue in Deuteronomy, for the

discrepancy  seemed  to  imply (since God only spoke once) that the

Ten Commandments  were  not intended to convey the actual words

of  the  Lord,  but  only His meaning.  (1:27)  However, unless we would

do  violence  to  Scripture, we must certainly admit that the Israelites

heard real voice, for Scripture expressly says, Deut. v:4, "God spake

with  you  face  to face,"  i.e. as two men ordinarily interchange ideas

through  the  instrumentality  of  their  two  bodies;   and  therefore  it

seems  more consonant with Holy Writ to suppose that God really did

create  a voice of some kind with which the Decalogue was revealed.

(1:28)  The  discrepancy  of  the  two versions is treated of in Chap. VIII.



(1:29)  Yet  not  even thus is all difficulty removed, for it seems scarcely

reasonable  to  affirm  that  a created thing, depending on God in the
                                                                                           Bk.XIX:576.
same  manner  as  other created things, would be able to express or

explain  the  nature  of  God  either  verbally or really by means of its

individual  organism:  for  instance,  by  declaring  in  the first person,

"I am the Lord your God." {Analogy—an arm does not express the nature of you.}



(1:30)  Certainly  when  anyone says with his mouth, "I understand," we

do  not  attribute  the  understanding to the mouth, but to the mind of

the  speaker;  yet this is because the mouth is the natural organ of a

man  speaking,  and  the  hearer,   knowing  what  understanding  is,

easily  comprehends,  by  a  comparison with himself, that the speak-

er's  mind  is  meant; but if we knew nothing of God beyond the mere

 page 17  name  and  wished  to  commune with Him, and be assured of

His  existence,  I  fail  to  see  how our wish would be satisfied by the

declaration  of  a  created thing (depending on God neither more nor

less  than  ourselves),  "I am the Lord."  (1:31)  If God contorted the lips

of  Moses, or, I will not say Moses, but some beast, till they pronoun-

ced  the  words,  "I  am  the  Lord,"  should  we apprehend the Lord's

existence therefrom?



(1:32) Scripture seems clearly to point to the belief that God spoke Him-

self,  having  descended from heaven to Mount Sinai for the purpose

—and  not  only that the Israelites heard Him speaking, but that their

chief men beheld Him (Ex:xxiv.)  (1:33) Further the law of Moses, which

might  neither  be  added to nor curtailed, and which was set up as a

national  standard of right, nowhere prescribed the belief that God is

without  body,  or  even without form or figure, but only ordained that

the  Jews  should  believe  in  His  existence and worship Him alone:

it forbade them to invent or fashion any likeness of the Deity, but this

was  to  insure  purity  of  service;  because, never having seen God,

they  could  not  by  means  of images recall the likeness of God, but

only  the  likeness  of some created thing which might thus gradually

take the place of God as the object of their adoration.  (1:34) Neverthe-

less,  the  Bible  clearly implies that God has a form, and that Moses

when  he  heard God speaking was permitted to behold it, or at least

its hinder parts.


(1:35)  Doubtless  some mystery lurks in this question which we will dis-

cuss  more fully below.  (1:36)  For the present I will call attention to the

passages  in  Scripture  indicating  the  means by which God has re-

vealed His laws to man.



(1:37) Revelation may be through figures only, as in 1 Chr xxi:16, where

God  displays  his  anger  to  David  by  means of an angel bearing a
                                                               ]See Shirley's footnote[ Bk.XIB:3775.
sword,  and  also in the story of Balaam.  (1:38) Maimonides and others

do  indeed  maintain  that  these  and every other instance of angelic

apparitions   (e.g.  to  Manoah  and  to  Abraham  offering  up  Isaac)

occurred during sleep, for that no one with his eyes open ever could
                                         Bk.XIA:9242.
see an angel, but this is mere nonsense. (1:39) The sole object of such

commentators  seems  to be to extort from Scripture confirmations of

Aristotelian  quibbles  and their own inventions, a proceeding which I

regard as the acme of absurdity.



(1:40)   In figures, not real but existing only in the prophet's   page 18   ima-

gination,  God  revealed  to Joseph  his future lordship, and in words

and  figures  He  revealed  to  Joshua  that  He  would  fight  for  the

Hebrews,  causing  to appear an angel, as it were the Captain of the

Lord's  host, bearing a sword, and by this means communicating ver-

bally.  (1:41)  The  forsaking  of  Israel  by  Providence was portrayed to

Isaiah  by  a  vision of the Lord, the thrice Holy, sitting on a very lofty

throne,  and  the  Hebrews,  stained  with the mire of their sins, sunk

as  it  were  in  uncleanness, and thus as far as possible distant from

God.  (1:42)  The  wretchedness  of  the people at the time was thus re-

vealed,  while  future  calamities  were  foretold in words.  (42a) I could

cite  from  Holy  Writ  many examples, but I think they are sufficiently

well known already.



(1:43)  However,  we get a still more clear confirmation of our position in

Num xii:6,7,  as  follows:  "If  there  be  any  prophet among you, I the

Lord  will  make  myself  known  unto  him in a vision" (i.e. by appear-

ances  and  signs, for God says of the prophecy of Moses that it was

a vision without signs), "and will speak unto him in a dream"  (i.e. not

with actual words and an actual voice).  (1:44) "My servant Moses is not

so;  with  him  will  I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not

in  dark  speeches,  and  the  similitude  of the Lord he shall behold,"
                                                                                   Bk.XIA:9874.
i.e.  looking  on me as a friend and not afraid, he speaks with me (cf.

Ex xxxiii:17).



(1:45)  This  makes  it  indisputable that the other prophets did not hear

a  real  voice, and we gather as much from Deut. xxxiv:10: "And there

arose  not  a  prophet  since in Israel like unto Moses whom the Lord

knew  face  to face," which must mean that the Lord spoke with none

other;  for  not  even  Moses saw the Lord's face.  (1:46)  These are the

only  media  of  communication  between  God  and  man which I find

mentioned  in  Scripture,  and  therefore the only ones which may be

supposed  or  invented.  (1:47)  We  may  be  able quite to comprehend

that G-D  can  communicate  immediately  with  man,  for without the

intervention  of  bodily  means  He  communicates  to  our minds His

essence;  still,  a  man  who  can by pure intuition comprehend ideas

which  are  neither  contained  in  nor deducible from the foundations

of  our  natural  knowledge,  must necessarily possess a mind far su-

perior  to  those  of  his  fellow  men,  nor  do  I believe that any have
                                  Bk.XIX:30136.
been  so  endowed  save  Christ.  (1:48) To Him the ordinances of G-D             Metaphors 

leading   page 19   men   to   salvation   were  revealed  directly  without

words  or  visions,  so  that  God  manifested Himself to the Apostles

through  the  mind  of Christ as He formerly did to Moses through the

supernatural  voice.  (1:49)  In  this  sense  the  voice  of Christ, like the

voice  which  Moses  heard,  may  be  called the voice of God, and it

may  be said that the wisdom of God (i.e. wisdom more than human)

took  upon itself in Christ human nature, and that Christ was the way
      Bk.XX:2909. 
of  salvation.  (1:50)  I must at this juncture declare that those doctrines

which  certain  churches  put  forward  concerning  Christ,   I  neither       
                                                                             TTP1:Smith:104109. 
affirm nor deny,  for  I  freely  confess  that  I do not understand them.  

(1:51)  What  I  have  just  stated  I gather from Scripture, where I never

read  that  God  appeared  to Christ, or spoke to Christ, but that God

was  revealed  to  the  Apostles  through  Christ;  that Christ was the

Way  of  Life,  and  that the old law was given through an angel, and

not  immediately  by God; whence it follows that if Moses spoke with

God  face  to  face as a man speaks with his friend (i.e. by means of
                                                                                        Bk.XIA:107125.
their   two   bodies)   Christ   communed   with   God   mind  to  mind.



(1:52)  Thus  we  may  conclude  that no one except Christ received the       Britannica—Christus

revelations  of  God  without the aid of imagination, whether in words
             {, but with the intuition of a Universal Religion and a Rational Morality.}
or  vision.  (1:53)  Therefore  the power of prophecy implies not a pecu-

liarly  perfect  mind,  but  a peculiarly vivid imagination, as I will show

more  clearly  in  the  next  chapter.  (1:54)  We  will now inquire what is

meant  in  the  Bible  by  the Spirit of God breathed into the prophets,

or  by  the  prophets  speaking  with the Spirit of God; to that end we

must  determine  the exact signification of the Hebrew word roo'-akh,             See Note 2A 

{Strong:7307}, commonly translated 'spirit'.



(1:55) The  word  roo'-akh,  {Strong:7307—wind,  breath,  life,  spirit,  the

vital principle, anger, blast; from the root roo-akh' Strong:7306—to blow,

breathe}, literally  means  a  wind,  e.g.  the  south   wind,  but  it  is fre-
                                                      Bk.XIA:9240.  
quently employed  in  other derivative significations.   (1:55a)   It is used as   

equivalent to,

(1.)   (1:56)  Breath: "Neither  is  there  any  spirit in his mouth, Ps. cxxxv:17.        Metaphors

(2.)   (1:57)  Life, or breathing: "And his spirit returned to him" 1 Sam. xxx:12;
        i.e. he breathed again.

(3.)   (1:58) Courage  and  strength:  "Neither  did  there remain any more
        spirit in any man," Josh. ii:11;  "And the spirit entered into me, and
        made  me  stand  on  my  feet,"  Ezek. ii:2.  

(4.)   (1:59)  Virtue  and  fitness:  "Days  should  speak,  and  multitudes
          page 20   of  years  should  teach  wisdom;  but  there  is a spirit in
        man, "Job xxxii:8;  i.e.  wisdom  is  not  always found among old
        men  for  I  now  discover  that  it  depends  on  individual virtue
        and  capacity.  (1:59a)  So, "A man in whom is the Spirit," Numbers
        xxvii:18. 

(5.)   (1:60)  Habit  of  mind:  "Because  he  had  another spirit with him,"
        Numbers xiv: 24; i.e.  another  habit  of mind. "Behold I will pour              Holidays
        out My Spirit unto you," Prov. i:23.

(6.)   (1:61)  Will, purpose, desire, impulse: "Whither the spirit was to go,
        they  went,"  Ezek. 1:12;  "That cover with a covering, but not of
        My  Spirit,"  Is. xxx:1;  "For  the  Lord hath poured out on you the
        spirit of deep sleep," Is. xxix:10; "Then was their spirit softened,"  
        Judges viii:3{?};   "He  that ruleth his spirit, is better than he that
        taketh  a  city," Prov. xvi:32;   "He that hath no rule over his own
        spirit,"   Prov. xxv:28;    "Your  spirit  as  fire  shall  devour  you," 
        Isaiah xxxiii:11.


(1:62)  From the meaning of disposition we get—

(7.)   (1:62a)  Passions  and  faculties. A lofty spirit means pride,  a lowly
        spirit  humility,  an  evil  spirit  hatred  and melancholy.  (1:62b)  So,
        too,  the  expressions  spirits  of  jealousy,  fornication,  wisdom,
        counsel,  bravery,  stand for a jealous, lascivious, wise, prudent,
        or  brave  mind (for we Hebrews use substantives in preference
        to adjectives), for these various qualities.

(8.)   (1:63)  The  mind  itself,  or  the life: "Yea, they have all one spirit,"
        Eccles. iii:19.   "The  spirit  shall  return  to  God  Who  gave  it."
        ]Eccles. 12:7[

(9.)   (1:64)  The  quarters  of  the  world  (from  the  winds  which  blow
        thence),  or  even  the  side  of  anything  turned  towards a par-
        ticular quarter—Ezek. xxxvii:9; xlii:16, 17, 18, 19, &c.
 

(1:65)  I  have  already  alluded  to  the way in which things are referred      Chain of Natural Events 
to G-D, and said to be of G-D.  


(1.)   (1:66)  As  belonging  to  His  Nature, and Being, as it were, part of        Spinozistic Scripture
        Him; e.g. the power of G-D, the eyes of G-D. {to speak as a Hebrew}         Metaphors

(2.)   (1:67)  As  under  His  dominion,  and  depending  on His pleasure; 
        thus  the  heavens are called the heavens of the Lord, as being
        His  chariot  and  habitation.  (1:67a)  So Nebuchadnezzar is called
        the servant of G-D, Assyria the scourge of God, &c.
page 21
(3.)   (1:68) As  dedicated  to Him, e.g. the Temple of G-D,  a Nazarene
        of G-D, the Bread of G-D.

(4.)   (1:69)  As  revealed  through  the  prophets  and  not  through  our
        natural  faculties.   (1:69a)  In  this  sense the Mosaic law  is called
        the law of G-D. 

(5.)   (1:70)  As Being in the superlative degree. (70a) Very high mountains 
        are  styled  the mountains of  G-D, a very deep sleep, the sleep 
        of  G-D,  &c.  (70b)   In  this  sense  we  must  explain  Amos  iv:11: 
        "I have overthrown you as the overthrow of the Lord came upon 
        Sodom and Gomorrah," i.e. that memorable overthrow, for since 
        G-D  Himself  is the Speaker, the passage cannot well be taken 
        otherwise.   (70c)  The wisdom of Solomon is called the wisdom of 
        God, or extraordinary.  (70d) The size of the cedars of Lebanon is 
        alluded to in the Psalmist's expression, "the cedars of the Lord."  

 
(1:71)  Similarly, if the Jews were at a loss to understand any phenome-

non, or were ignorant of its cause, they referred it to G-D.  (72) Thus a

storm  was  termed  the  chiding of G-D, thunder and lightning the ar-

rows  of  G-D,  for it was thought that G-D kept the winds confined in

caves,  His  treasuries;  thus differing merely in name from the Greek

wind-god  Eolus.   (1:73)  In  like  manner  miracles were called works of

G-D,  as being especially marvellous; though in reality, of course, all

natural  events  are  the  works  of G-D, and take place solely by His

power.   (1:74) The  Psalmist  calls  the  miracles  in Egypt the works of

G-D,  because  the  Hebrews  found  in  them  a way of safety which

they had not looked for, and therefore especially marvelled at.



(1:75)  As,  then,  unusual  natural phenomena are called works of G-D,

and trees of unusual size are called trees of God, we cannot wonder

that  very  strong  and  tall  men,  though impious robbers and whore
                                       Bk.XIA:9241.
mongers, are in Genesis called sons of G-D.



(1:76) This reference of things wonderful to God was not peculiar to the

Jews.  (1:77)  Pharaoh,  on  hearing  the interpretation of his dream, ex-

claimed  that the mind of the gods was in Joseph.  (1:78) Nebuchadnez-

zar  told Daniel that he possessed the mind of the holy gods; so also

in  Latin  anything  well  made is often said to be wrought with Divine

hands,  which  is  equivalent to the Hebrew phrase, wrought with the

hand of God.


page 22

(1:80)  We can now very easily understand and explain those passages

of  Scripture  which speak of the Spirit of God.  (81) In some places the

expression  merely  means a very strong, dry, and deadly wind, as in

Isaiah xl:7,  "The  grass  withereth,  the  flower  fadeth,  because  the

Spirit  of  the  Lord  bloweth  upon  it."  (1:82)  Similarly in Gen. i:2: "The

Spirit  of  the  Lord  moved  over the face of the waters." (1:83)  At other

times  it  is  used  as  equivalent  to  a high courage, thus the spirit of

Gideon  and of Samson is called the Spirit of the Lord, as being very

bold,  and  prepared  for  any emergency.  (1:84)   Any unusual virtue or

power is called the Spirit or Virtue of the Lord, Ex. xxxi:3: "I will fill him

(Bezaleel) with the Spirit of the Lord," i.e., as the Bible itself explains,

with talent above man's usual endowment.  (1:85)  So Isa. xi:2: "And the

Spirit  of  the Lord shall rest upon him," is explained afterwards in the

text  to mean the spirit of wisdom and understanding, of counsel and

might.



(1:86) The melancholy of Saul is called the melancholy of the Lord, or a

very  deep  melancholy,  the  persons  who applied the term showing

that  they  understood by it nothing supernatural, in that they sent for

a musician to assuage it by harp-playing. (1:87) Again, the "Spirit of the

Lord"  is  used  as  equivalent  to  the mind of man, for instance, Job.

xxvii:3:  "And  the  Spirit of the Lord in my nostrils," the allusion being

to Gen. ii:7: "And God breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life."              Metaphors
                                                                              {Eze 37:5}
(1:88)  Ezekiel  also, prophesying to the dead, says (xxvii:14), "And I will
                           {breath}
give  to  you  My  Spirit, and ye shall live;" i.e. I will restore you to life.

(1:89) In Job xxxiv:14, we read: "If He gather unto Himself His Spirit and

breath; " in Gen. vi:3:  "My  Spirit shall not always strive with man, for

that  he  also  is flesh," i.e. since man acts on the dictates of his body,

{passiveness}, and not the spirit which I gave him to discern the good,
                                                                            heart—Strong:3820 from 3824
I will let him alone.  (1:90) So, too, Ps. li:12: "Create in me a clean heart,

0 God, and renew a right spirit within me; cast me not away from Thy

presence,  and  take  not  Thy  Holy  Spirit from me."  (1:91)  It was sup-

posed that sin originated only from the body, and that good impulses

come  from  the  mind;  therefore the Psalmist invokes the aid of God

against  the  bodily appetites, but prays that the spirit which the Lord,

the Holy One, had given him might be renewed. (1:92) Again, inasmuch

as  the  Bible,  in  concession to  page 23  popular ignorance, describes

G-D  as  having  a  mind,  a  heart, emotions—nay, even a body and

breath—the expression Spirit of the Lord is used for God's mind, dis-

position, emotion, strength, or breath. (1:93) Thus, Isa. xl:13: "Who hath

disposed the Spirit of the Lord?" i.e. who, save Himself, hath caused

the  mind  of  the  Lord to will anything? and Isa. lxiii:10: "But they re-

belled, and vexed the Holy Spirit."



(1:94) The  phrase  comes  to  be  used of the law of Moses, which in a

sense  expounds  God's  will,  Is. lxiii. 11,  "Where  is  He that put His

Holy  Spirit  within him?" meaning, as we clearly gather from the con-

text,  the  law of Moses.  (1:95) Nehemiah, speaking of the giving of the

law,  says,  ix:20,  "Thou gavest also thy good Spirit to instruct them."

(1:96)  This  is referred to in Deut. iv:6, "This is your wisdom and under-

standing," and  in  Ps. cxliii:10,  "Thy good Spirit will lead me into the

land of uprightness."  (1:97) The Spirit of the Lord may mean the breath

of  the  Lord, for breath, no less than a mind, a heart, and a body are

attributed  to  God in Scripture, as in Ps. xxxiii:6.  (1:98) Hence it gets to

mean  the  power,  strength, or faculty of God, as in Job xxxiii:4, "The

Spirit  of  the  Lord  made  me,"  i.e.  the  power,  or, if you prefer, the

decree  of the Lord.  (1:99) So the Psalmist in poetic language declares,

xxxiii:6, "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the

host  of  them  by  the breath of His mouth," i.e. by a mandate issued,

as  it  were,  in  one  breath.  (1:100)  Also Ps. cxxxix:7, "Wither shall I go 

from  Thy  Spirit,  or  whither  shall  I  flee  from  Thy  presence?"  i.e.              Metaphors

whither shall I go so as to be beyond Thy power and Thy presence?       Schechinah - Pantheism 



(1:101)  Lastly,  the  Spirit of the Lord is used in Scripture to express the

emotions  of  God,  e.g.  His  kindness  and mercy, Micah ii:7, "Is the

Spirit  ]i.e. his mercy[ of the Lord straitened? (1:102) Are these cruelties

His doings?"  (103) Zech. iv:6, "Not by might or by power, but My Spirit

]i.e. mercy[,  saith  the  Lord  of hosts." (1:104)  The  twelfth verse of the

seventh  chapter  of the same prophet must, I think, be interpreted in

like  manner: "Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest

they  should  hear  the  law,  and  the  words which the Lord of hosts

hath  sent  in  His  Spirit  ]i.e. His mercy[  by  the  former  prophets."

(1:105) So also  page 24  Haggai ii:5:  "So My Spirit remaineth among you:

fear  not."  

(1:106)    The  passage  in  Isaiah  xlviii:16,   "And  now  the  Lord  and

His  Spirit  hath  sent  me"  may  be  taken to  refer  to God's mercy

or  His  revealed law; for the prophet says, "From the beginning" (i.e.

from  the  time  when  I  first came to you, to preach God's anger and

His  sentence  forth against you) "I spoke not in secret; from the time

that  it  was,  there  am  I," and now I am sent by the mercy of God as

a joyful messenger to preach your restoration. (1:107) Or we may under-

stand  him  to  mean  by the revealed law that he had before come to

warn  them  by  the  command  of  the  law (Levit. xix:17) in the same

manner under the same conditions as Moses had warned them, that

now,  like  Moses,  he  ends  by preaching their restoration.  (1:108) But

the first explanation seems to me the best.



(1:109)  Returning,  then,  to  the  main object of our discussion, we find

that  the  Scriptural  phrases, "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  was  upon  a

prophet,"  "The  Lord breathed His Spirit into men,"  "Men were filled

with  the  Spirit  of  God,  with  the Holy Spirit," &c., are quite clear to

us,  and  mean  that  prophets  were  endowed  with  a  peculiar and

extraordinary power,  and devoted themselves to piety with especial            See Note 3.

constancy;   that  thus  they  perceived   the  mind  or  the thought of

God,  for  we have shown that God's Spirit signifies in Hebrew God's

mind or thought, and that the law which shows His mind and thought

is  called His Spirit; hence that the imagination of the prophets, inas-

much  as  through  it were revealed the decrees of God, may equally

be   called  the  mind  of  God,  and  the  prophets  be  said  to  have

possessed  the  mind  of  God.  (1:109a)  On  our minds also the mind of

God  and  His  eternal  thoughts  are  impressed;  but  this being the

same   for  all  men  is  less  taken  into  account,  especially  by  the

Hebrews,  who  claimed  a  pre-eminence,  and  despised other men

and other men's knowledge.



(1:110)  Lastly,  the  prophets  were  said  to  possess  the Spirit of God

because  men  knew  not  the  cause of prophetic knowledge, and in

their  wonder  referred  it  with  other  marvels  directly  to  the  Deity,

styling it Divine knowledge.



(1:111)  We  need  no  longer  scruple to affirm that the prophets  page 25 

only  perceived  God's  revelation  by  the  aid of imagination, that is,
                                                                {or intuition}
by words and figures either real or imaginary ^ .  (112) We find no other           Popkin:59

means  mentioned  in  Scripture,  and  therefore must not invent any.

(1:113)   As  to the particular law of Nature by which the communications

took  place,  I  confess  my  ignorance.  (1:114)  I  might,  indeed, say as

others  do,  that  they took place by the power of G-D; but this would

be mere trifling, and no better than explaining some unique specimen

by a  transcendental term.  (1:115)  Everything takes place by the power 

of G-D.  (116)  Nature herself is the power of G-D under another name,              Metaphor

and our ignorance of the power of G-D is co-extensive with our ignor-

ance  of  Nature.  (1:117)  It  is  absolute  folly,  therefore,  to  ascribe an

event  to  the  power  of  G-D  when  we  know  not its natural cause,

which is the power of G-D.



(1:118)  However,  we are not now inquiring into the causes of prophetic

knowledge.  (1:119)  We  are only attempting, as I have said, to examine

the Scriptural documents, and to draw our conclusions from them as

from  ultimate  natural  facts;  the  causes  of  the  documents  do not

concern us.



(1:120)  As  the  prophets perceived the revelations of God by the aid of

imagination,  they  could  indisputably  perceive much that is beyond

the  boundary  of the intellect, for many more ideas can be construct-

ed  from  words  and  figures than from the principles and notions on
                                                                          Bk.XIX:29413.                                                          
which the whole fabric of reasoned knowledge is reared.



(1:121)  Thus  we  have  a  clue  to  the fact that the prophets perceived

nearly  everything  in  parables  and  allegories, and clothed spiritual

truths  in  bodily  forms,  for  such is the usual method of imagination.

(1:122)  We  need  no  longer  wonder  that  Scripture  and the prophets

speak  so  strangely  and obscurely of God's Spirit or Mind (cf. Num-

bers xi:17,  1 Kings xxii:21, &c.),  that  the  Lord  was  seen by Micah

as  sitting,  by Daniel as an old man clothed in white, by Ezekiel as a

fire,   that   the   Holy   Spirit   appeared  to  those  with  Christ  as  a

descending  dove,  to  the  apostles  as  fiery tongues, to Paul on his

conversion  as  a  great  light.  (1:123)  All these expressions are plainly

in harmony with the current ideas of God and spirits.



(1:124)  Inasmuch as imagination is fleeting and inconstant, we find that

the  power of prophecy did not remain with a  page 26  prophet for long,

nor  manifest  itself  frequently,  but  was very rare; manifesting itself

only in a few men, and in them not often.



(1:125)  We must necessarily inquire how the prophets became assured

of  the  truth  of  what they perceived by imagination, and not by sure

mental  laws;  but our investigation must be confined to Scripture, for

the  subject  is  one  on  which we cannot acquire certain knowledge,

and  which  we cannot explain by the immediate causes.  (1:126) Script-

ure  teaching  about  the  assurance  of prophets  I will treat of in the

next chapter.

page 27
CHAPTER II.—OF PROPHETS. { Revelation }
 

(2:1)  It  follows  from  the last chapter that, as I have said, the prophets
                                              Bk.XIA:9453.
were endowed with unusually vivid imaginations, and not with unusu-

ally perfect minds. (2) This conclusion is amply sustained by Scripture,

for  we  are told that Solomon was the wisest of men, but had no spe-

cial  faculty  of  prophecy.  (2:3) Heman, Calcol, and Dara, though men

of  great talent, were not prophets, whereas uneducated countrymen,

nay,  even  women,  such as Hagar, Abraham's handmaid, were thus

gifted.  (2:4)  Nor  is  this  contrary  to  ordinary  experience and reason.

(2:5)  Men of great imaginative power are less fitted for abstract reason-

ing,  whereas those who excel in intellect and its use keep their imag-

ination  more restrained and controlled, holding it in subjection, so to

speak, lest it should usurp the place of reason.



(2:6)  Thus  to suppose that knowledge of natural and spiritual phenom-

ena  can  be  gained  from  the  prophetic  books,  is an utter mistake,

which  I  shall  endeavour  to  expose,  as I think philosophy, the age,

and the question itself demand.  (7) I care not for the girdings of super-

stition,  for  superstition  is the bitter enemy of all true knowledge and

true  morality.  (2:8)  Yes;  it has come to this!  (2:9) Men who openly con-

fess  that  they can form no idea of God, and only know Him through

created things, of which they know not the causes, can unblushingly
                Bk.XIA:4076.      Bk.XIII:237221; Bk.XIX:25344, 45, & 46.
accuse philosophers of Atheism.



(2:10)  Treating  the  question  methodically, I will show that prophecies

varied,  not  only  according to the imagination and physical tempera-

ment  of  the  prophet,  but  also  according to his particular opinions;

and  further that prophecy never rendered the prophet wiser than he

was  before.  (2:11)  But  I  will first discuss the assurance of truth which

the  prophets  received,  for  this  is  akin to the subject-matter of the

chapter,  and  will  serve  to  elucidate  somewhat  our  present point.

page 28

(2:12)  Imagination  does  not, in its own nature, involve any certainty of

truth,  such as is implied in every clear and distinct idea, but requires
                                                                             Bk.XIA:9033.  
some  extrinsic  reason  to  assure  us  of  its objective reality: hence

prophecy  cannot afford certainty, and the prophets were assured of
                          Bk.XIA:9134; Bk.XIX:588.          
God's  revelation  by some sign, and  not by the fact of revelation, as
                             ] Gen 15:8 [
we  may see from Abraham, who, when he had heard the promise of

God,  demanded  a  sign, not because he did not believe in God, but

because  he  wished to be sure that it was God Who made the prom-
                                                                                                 ] Jdg 6:17 [
ise.  (2:13)  The fact  is  still  more evident in the case of Gideon: "Show

me," he says  to  God,  "show  me  a  sign,  that  I may know that it is

Thou that talkest with me."  (14)  God also says to Moses: "And let this

be  a sign that I have sent thee."  (2:14a)  Hezekiah, though he had long

known  Isaiah to be a prophet, none the less demanded a sign of the

cure which he predicted. (2:15) It is thus quite evident that the prophets

always  received  some  sign to certify them of their prophetic imagin-
                                                                                ] last verse [
ings;  and  for  this  reason  Moses bids the Jews (Deut. xviii.) ask of

the  prophets  a  sign,  namely,  the prediction of some coming event.

(2:16)  In  this  respect,  prophetic knowledge is inferior to natural know-

ledge, which needs no sign, and in itself implies certitude.  (2:17)  More-

over,   Scripture  warrants  the  statement  that  the  certitude  of  the

prophets was not mathematical, but moral.  (2:18) Moses lays down the

punishment  of  death for the prophet who preaches new gods, even

though  he  confirm  his  doctrine  by  signs and wonders (Deut. xiii.);

"For,"  he says, "the  Lord  also worketh signs and wonders to try His

people."  (2:19)  And Jesus Christ warns His disciples of the same thing

(Matt. xxiv:24).   (2:20)  Furthermore,  Ezekiel (xiv:9)  plainly  states  that
                                                                                           ] 1Ki 22:23ff [
God  sometimes  deceives  men  with  false revelations; and Micaiah

bears like witness in the case of the prophets of Ahab.



(2:21)  Although  these  instances  go to prove that revelation is open to

doubt,  it  nevertheless  contains,  as  we  have  said, a considerable

element  of certainty, for God never deceives the good, nor His chos-

en,  but  (according to the ancient proverb, and as appears in the his-

tory  of  Abigail  and  her speech), God uses the good as instruments

of   goodness,   and   the  wicked  as  means  to  execute  His  wrath.

(2:22)  This  may  be  seen  from the case of Micaiah above quoted; for

although   page 29   God   had  determined  to  deceive  Ahab,  through

prophets,  He  made  use  of  lying prophets; to the good prophet He

revealed the truth, and did not forbid his proclaiming it.



(2:23)  Still  the  certitude  of prophecy  remains,  as I have said, merely

moral;  for  no  one  can justify himself before God, nor boast that he

is  an  instrument  for  God's  goodness.  (2:24)  Scripture itself teaches

and  shows  that  God led away David to number the people, though

it bears ample witness to David's piety.



(2:25) The  whole  question  of  the certitude of prophecy was based on

these three considerations:

    1.  That  the  things revealed were imagined very vividly, affecting
         the prophets in the same  way as things seen when awake;

     2. The presence of a sign;  Bk.XIX:581. 

     3.  Lastly  and  chiefly,  that  the  mind  of  the  prophet was given
          wholly to what was right and  good.



(2:26)  Although  Scripture does not always make mention of a sign, we

must  nevertheless  suppose that a sign was always vouchsafed; for

Scripture  does  not  always relate every condition and circumstance

(as   many   have   remarked),   but  rather  takes  them  for  granted.

(2:27)  We  may,  however,  admit  that  no  sign  was needed when the

prophecy  declared  nothing  that  was  not  already  contained in the

law  of  Moses,   because  it  was  confirmed  by  that  law.    (2:28)  For

instance,  Jeremiah's  prophecy, of the destruction of Jerusalem was

confirmed  by the prophecies of other prophets, and by the threats in

the  law,  and,  therefore, it needed no sign; whereas Hananiah, who,

contrary  to  all  the  prophets,  foretold  the speedy restoration of the

state,  stood  in need of a sign, or he would have been in doubt as to
                                                                                                 ]Jer 28:9[
the  truth  of  his prophecy, until it was confirmed by facts.   (2:29)  "The
     
prophet  which  prophesieth  of peace, when the word of the prophet

shall  come  to  pass,  then  shall the prophet be known that the Lord

hath truly sent him."



(2:30)  As,  then,  the  certitude afforded to the prophet by signs was not

mathematical  (i.e.  did  not necessarily follow  from the perception of

the  thing  perceived  or seen), but only moral, and as the signs were

only  given  to  convince  the  prophet, it follows that such signs were

given  according  to  the  opinions  and  capacity of each prophet, so

that  a  sign  which  would  page 30  convince one prophet would fall far

short  of  convincing another who was imbued with different opinions.

(2:31)  Therefore  the  signs  varied  according to the individual prophet.



(2:32)  So  also did the revelation vary, as we have stated, according to

individual  disposition  and  temperament,  and according to the opin-

ions previously held.



(2:33)  It  varied  according  to  disposition,  in this way: if a prophet was

cheerful,  victories,  peace,  and  events  which make men glad, were

revealed  to  him; in that he was naturally more likely to imagine such

things.  (2:34)  If,  on the contrary, he was melancholy, wars, massacres,

and  calamities  were  revealed;  and so, according as a prophet was

merciful, gentle, quick to anger, or severe, he was more fitted for one

kind of revelation than another.  (2:35)  It varied according to the temper

of  imagination  in  this  way: if a prophet was cultivated he perceived

the mind of God in a cultivated way, if he was confused he perceived

it  confusedly.  (2:36)  And so with revelations perceived through visions.

(2:37) If a prophet was a countryman he saw visions of oxen, cows, and

the like; if he was a soldier, he saw generals and armies; if a courtier,
                         Bk.XIA:9454.
a royal throne, and so on.



(2:38)  Lastly,  prophecy  varied  according  to  the  opinions held by the

prophets;  for  instance,  to  the  Magi,  who  believed in the follies of

astrology,  the  birth  of  Christ  was  revealed through the vision of a

star  in  the  East.  (39)  To the augurs of Nebuchadnezzar the destruc-

tion  of  Jerusalem  was  revealed through entrails, whereas the king

himself  inferred  it from oracles and the direction of arrows which he

shot  into  the  air.  (2:40) To prophets who believed that man acts from

free  choice  and  by  his  own power, God was revealed as standing

apart from and ignorant of future human actions.  (2:41)  All of which we
      Bk.XIA:9136.  
will illustrate from Scripture.



(2:42)  The first point is proved from the case of Elisha, who, in order to

prophecy  to Jehoram, asked for a harp, and was unable to perceive

the  Divine  purpose  till  he  had  been  recreated  by its music; then,

indeed,  he  prophesied  to  Jehoram  and  to  his  allies  glad tidings,

which  previously  he  had  been  unable to attain to because he was

angry with the king,  and these who are angry with anyone can imag-

ine  evil  of  him, but  not  good.  (2:43)  The  theory  that  God does not

reveal  Himself  to  the  angry  or the sad, is a mere dream:  page 31  for

God  revealed  to  Moses  while  angry,  the  terrible  slaughter of the

firstborn,  and  did  so without the intervention of a harp. (2:44) To Cain

in  his  rage,  God was revealed, and to Ezekiel, impatient with anger,

was   revealed   the   contumacy   and   wretchedness   of  the  Jews.

(2:45)  Jeremiah,  miserable  and weary of life, prophesied the disasters

of  the  Hebrews,  so  that Josiah would not consult him, but inquired

of  a  woman,  inasmuch as it was more in accordance with womanly

nature  that  God  should reveal His mercy thereto.  (2:45a) So, Micaiah

never  prophesied  good  to  Ahab,  though  other  true prophets had

done  so,  but  invariably evil.  (2:46) Thus we see that individual proph-

ets  were  by  temperament more fitted for one sort of revelation than

another.



(2:47) The style of the prophecy also varied according to the eloquence

of  the  individual  prophet.  (48)  The  prophecies  of Ezekiel and Amos

are  not  written  in  a cultivated style like those of Isaiah and Nahum,

but more rudely.  (2:49)  Any Hebrew scholar who wishes to inquire into

this  point  more  closely,   and  compares  chapters  of  the  different

prophets  treating  of  the same subject, will find great dissimilarity of

style.  (2:50)  Compare, for instance, chap. i. of the courtly Isaiah, verse

11 to verse 20,  with chap. v. of the countryman Amos, verses 21-24.

(2:51)  Compare  also  the order  and  reasoning  of  the  prophecies of

Jeremiah, written in Idumæa (chap. xlix.), with the order and reason-

ing  of  Obadiah.   (2:52)  Compare, lastly, Isa. xl:19, 20, and xliv:8, with

Hosea viii:6, and xiii:2.  And so on.



(2:53)  A  due  consideration  of these passage will clearly show us that

God  has  no  particular style in speaking, but, according to the learn-

ing  and  capacity  of  the prophet, is cultivated, compressed, severe,

untutored, prolix, or obscure.



(2:54)  There  was,  moreover,  a  certain  variation in the visions vouch-

safed  to  the  prophets, and in the symbols by which they expressed

them,  for Isaiah saw the glory of the Lord departing from the Temple

in  a  different  form  from that presented to Ezekiel.  (2:55)  The Rabbis,

indeed,  maintain  that  both visions  were  really  the  same, but that

Ezekiel,  being  a  countryman,  was above measure impressed by it,

and  therefore  set  it  forth  in  full  detail;  but unless there is a trust-

worthy  tradition  on the subject, which I do not for a moment believe,

this  theory  is  plainly  an invention. Isaiah  page 32  saw seraphim with

six  wings,  Ezekiel  beasts  with  four wings; Isaiah saw God clothed

and  sitting  on  a  royal  throne, Ezekiel saw Him in the likeness of a

fire;  each  doubtless  saw  God  under  the form in which he usually

imagined Him.



(2:56)  Further,  the  visions varied in clearness as well as in details; for

the  revelations  of  Zechariah were too obscure to be understood by

the  prophet  without  explanation,  as  appears  from his narration of

them;  the  visions  of  Daniel  could  not  be understood by him even

after  they  had  been explained, and this obscurity did not arise from

the  difficulty  of  the matter revealed (for being merely human affairs,

these  only  transcended  human capacity in being future), but solely

in the fact that Daniel's imagination was not so capable for prophecy

while  he  was  awake  as  while  he  was  asleep;  and this is further

evident  from  the fact that at the very beginning of the vision he was

so  terrified  that  he  almost  despaired of his strength.  (2:57) Thus, on

account  of  the  inadequacy  of his imagination and his strength, the

things revealed were so obscure to him that he could not understand

them  even  after  they  had  been  explained.  (2:58) Here we may note

that  the   words  heard  by  Daniel,  were, as we have shown above,

simply  imaginary,  so  that it is hardly wonderful that in his frightened

state  he imagined them so confusedly and obscurely that afterwards

he could make nothing of them.  (2:59) Those who say that God did not

wish  to make a clear revelation, do not seem to have read the words

of  the  angel,  who expressly says that he came to make the prophet

understand   what   should   befall   his   people   in   the  latter  days

(Dan. x:14).



(2:60)  The  revelation  remained  obscure  because  no  one was found,

at  that  time,  with  imagination sufficiently strong to conceive it more

clearly.  (2:61)  Lastly,  the  prophets, to whom it was revealed that God

would take away Elijah, wished to persuade Elisha that he had been

taken  somewhere  where  they  would  find him; showing sufficiently

clearly that they had not understood God's revelation aright.



(2:62) There  is  no need to set this out more amply, for nothing is more

plain  in  the  Bible  than  that  God  endowed some prophets with far

greater  gifts  of  prophecy  than  others.   page 33   (2:63)  But I will show in

greater  detail  and  length,  for  I  consider  the  point more important,

that   the  prophecies  varied  according  to  the  opinions  previously

embraced  by  the  prophets,  and that the prophets held diverse and
                                              Bk.XIA:9455.
even contrary opinions and prejudices.  (64)  (I speak, be it understood,

solely  of  matters speculative, for in regard to uprightness and moral-

ity  the  case  is  widely  different.)  (2:65)  From thence I shall conclude

that  prophecy  never  rendered  the  prophets  more learned, but left
                                                                              Bk.XIA:6649. 
them  with their former opinions, and that we are, therefore, not at all
                                   Bk.XIA:9456—speculation.
bound to trust them in matters of intellect.



(2:66) Everyone has been strangely hasty in affirming that the prophets

knew  everything  within  the scope of human intellect; and, although

certain  passages  of  Scripture  plainly affirm that the prophets were

in  certain  respects  ignorant,  such  persons  would  rather  say that

they do not understand the passages than admit that there was any-

thing  which  the  prophets did not know; or else they try to wrest the
                                                         Bk.XIX:563.
Scriptural words away from their evident meaning.



(2:67)  If  either  of  these proceedings is allowable we may as well shut

our  Bibles,  for  vainly  shall we attempt to prove anything from them

if   their  plainest  passages  may  be  classed  among  obscure  and

impenetrable  mysteries,  or if we may put any interpretation on them

which  we fancy.  (2:68) For instance, nothing is more clear in the Bible
               Bk.XIA:6023—Joshua(10:12-14); Bk.XX:27385. 
than  that Joshua, and perhaps also the author who wrote his history,

thought  that  the  sun revolves round the earth, and that the earth is

fixed,  and  further  that  the  sun  for  a  certain  period remained still.

(2:69)  Many,  who  will not admit any movement in the heavenly bodies,

explain away the passage till it seems to mean something quite differ-

ent;  others,  who  have  learned  to philosophize more correctly, and

understand  that  the earth moves while the sun is still, or at any rate

does  not revolve round the earth, try with all their might to wrest this

meaning from Scripture, though plainly nothing of the sort is intended.

(2:70)  Such quibblers excite my wonder!  (71)  Are we, forsooth, bound to
                                                                     Bk.XIA:6024
believe  that Joshua the Soldier was a learned astronomer? or that a

miracle  could  not  be  revealed  to  him,  or  that  the light of the sun

could  not  remain  longer  than  usual above the horizon, without his

knowing  the  cause?  (2:72) To me both alternatives appear ridiculous,

and   page 34  therefore  I would rather say that Joshua was ignorant of

the  true  cause  of  the  lengthened  day,  and that he and the whole

host with him thought that the sun moved round the earth every day,

and that on that particular occasion it stood still for a time, thus caus-

ing the light to remain longer; and I would say, that they did not con-
                                                    Bk.XIA:6024
jecture  that,  from  the  amount  of  snow  in  the air (see Josh. x:11),

the  refraction  may  have been greater than usual, or that there may

have  been  some  other  cause  which  we  will  not now inquire into.



(2:73)  So  also  the  sign  of  the  shadow  going  back  was revealed to

Isaiah  according  to his understanding; that is, as proceeding from a

going  backwards  of the sun; for he, too, thought that the sun moves

and   that   the  earth  is  still;   of  parhelia  he  perhaps  never  even

dreamed.  (2:74)  We  may arrive at this conclusion without any scruple,

for  the  sign could really have come to pass, and have been predict-

ed  by Isaiah to the king, without the prophet being aware of the real

cause.



(2:75)  With  regard  to  the building of the Temple by Solomon, if it was

really  dictate  by  God  we  must maintain the same doctrine: namely,

that  all  the  measurements were revealed according to the opinions

and  understanding  of  the  king;  for as we are not bound to believe

that  Solomon  was  a  mathematician,  we  may  affirm  that  he  was

ignorant  of  the  true  ratio  between  the  circumference and the dia-

meter of a circle, and that, like the generality of workmen, he thought

that  it  was  as three to one.  (2:76)  But if it is allowable to declare that

we  do  not understand the passage, in good sooth I know nothing in

the Bible that we can understand; for the process of building is there

narrated  simply  and  as  a mere matter of history.  (2:77)  If, again, it is

permitted  to  pretend  that  the  passage  has another meaning, and

was  written  as it is from some reason unknown to us, this is no less

than  a  complete  subversal  of  the  Bible; for every absurd and evil

invention of human perversity could thus, without detriment to Script-

ural  authority,  be  defended  and fostered.  (2:78) Our conclusion is in

no  wise  impious,  for  though  Solomon,  Isaiah,  Joshua,  &c.  were

prophets,  they  were  none  the  less  men,  and as such not exempt

from human shortcomings.



(2:79)  According  to  the understanding of Noah it was revealed  page 35 

to  him  that  God  was  about  to  destroy the whole human race, for

Noah  thought  that  beyond  the  limits  of  Palestine  the world was

not inhabited.



(2:80)  Not only in matters of this kind,  but in others more important, the

prophets could be, and in fact were, ignorant; for they taught nothing

special  about  the  Divine  attributes,  but held quite ordinary notions
 Bk.XIA:9557.
about God,  and  to  these notions their revelations were adapted, as

I  will  demonstrate  by ample Scriptural testimony; from all which one

may easily see that they were praised and commended, not so much

for  the  sublimity and eminence of their intellect as for their piety and
 constancy of heart—Bk.XIA:9458.
faithfulness.



(2:81)   Adam,  the  first  man  to whom God was revealed, did not know
                                              Bk.XIX:5119; 564.
that  He  is  omnipotent  and  omniscient; for he hid himself from Him,

and  attempted  to  make excuses for his fault before God, as though

he had  had  to  do  with  a  man;   therefore  to  him  also  was  God

revealed  according to his understanding—that is, as being unaware

of  his  situation  or  his  sin,  for Adam heard, or seemed to hear, the

Lord  walking,  in  the  garden,  calling  him and asking him where he

was;  and  then, on seeing his shamefacedness, asking him whether

he  had  eaten  of  the forbidden fruit.  (2:82) Adam evidently only knew            Garden of Eden

the  Deity  as  the  Creator  of  all  things.  (82a) To Cain also God was

revealed,  according  to  his  understanding,  as  ignorant  of  human

affairs,   nor   was   a  higher  conception  of  the  Deity  required  for

repentance of his sin.



(2:83) To  Laban  the  Lord  revealed  Himself  as  the  God of Abraham,

because Laban believed that each nation had its own special divinity

(see  Gen. xxxi:29).  (2:84)  Abraham  also  knew  not  that  God is omni-

present,  and  has foreknowledge of all things; for when he heard the

sentence  against  the inhabitants of Sodom, he prayed that the Lord

should not execute it till He had ascertained whether they all merited

such  punishment;   for  he  said  (see  Gen. xviii:24),  "Peradventure

there  be  fifty  righteous  within the city," and in accordance with this

belief  God  was  revealed  to  him;  as Abraham imagined, He spake
           { Gen. xviii:21 }
thus: " I  will  go  down  now,  and  see  whether they have done alto-

gether  according  to  the  cry of it which is come unto Me; and, if not,

I  will  know."  (2:85)  Further, the Divine testimony concerning Abraham

asserts  nothing  but that he was obedient, and that he "commanded

 page 36   his  household  after him that they should keep the way of the

Lord"  (Gen. xviii:19);  it  does not  state that he held sublime concep-

tions of the Deity.



(2:86)  Moses,  also,  was  not  sufficiently aware that God is omniscient,

and  directs  human  actions  by  His  sole  decree,  for although God
           ] Exo 3:18 [
Himself  says  that  the  Israelites  should hearken to Him, Moses still
                                                                                ] Exo 4:1 [
considered  the  matter  doubtful  and  repeated,   "But if they will not

believe me, nor hearken unto my voice."  (2:87)  To  him  in like manner

God  was  revealed  as  taking  no  part  in, and as being ignorant of,
                                                                                                ] Exo 4:8 [
future  human  actions: the Lord gave him two signs and said, "And it

shall  come  to pass that if they will not believe thee, neither hearken

to  the  voice  of  the  first  sign, that they will believe the voice of the

latter  sign;  but  if  not,  thou  shalt take of the water of the river," &c.

(2:88)  Indeed,  if  any  one  considers  without  prejudice  the  recorded

opinions  of  Moses,  he  will  plainly  see  that  Moses conceived the

Deity  as  a  Being  Who  has always existed, does exist, and always

will   exist,    and   for   this   cause   he   calls   Him   by   the   Name
 Bk.XIV:1:144, 145.                                                             { I was, I am, I will be }
J---VAH,  which  in Hebrew signifies these three phases of existence:

as  to  His  Nature,  Moses  only  taught  that He is merciful, gracious,

and   exceeding  jealous,  as  appears  from  many  passages  in  the

Pentateuch.  (2:89)  Lastly,  he  believed and taught that this Being was

so  different from all other beings, that He could not be expressed by

the  image  of  any visible  thing;  also,  that  He  could not be looked

upon,  and  that  not  so  much  from  inherent  impossibility  as  from

human  infirmity; further, that by reason of His power He was without

equal  and  unique.   (2:90)  Moses  admitted,  indeed,  that  there  were

beings  (doubtless  by the plan and command of the Lord) who acted

as  God's  vicegerents—that  is,  beings  to whom God had given the

right,  authority, and power to direct nations, and to provide and care

for  them;  but  he  taught  that  this Being Whom they were bound to

obey  was  the  highest  and  Supreme  God,  or  (to use the Hebrew

phrase) God of gods, and thus in the song (Exod. xv:11) he exclaims,

"Who  is  like  unto Thee, 0 Lord, among the gods?" and Jethro says

(Exod. xviii:11),  "Now  I  know  that the Lord is greater than all gods."

(2:91)  That  is  to  say, "I am at length compelled to admit to Moses that

J-----H  is  greater  than  all  gods,  and  that His power is unrivalled."

(2:92)  We  must   page 37  remain  in  doubt  whether  Moses thought that

these  beings  who acted as God's vicegerents were created by Him,

for  he  has  stated  nothing, so  far  as we know, about heir creation

and  origin.  (2:93)  He  further  taught  that  this  Being had brought the

visible   world  into  order  from  Chaos,  and  had  given  Nature  her

germs {sic},  and  therefore  that  He  possesses  supreme  right  and

power  over  all  things;  further,  that by reason of this supreme right

and  power  He had chosen for Himself alone the Hebrew nation and

a  certain  strip  of territory, and had handed over to the care of other

gods  substituted  by  Himself  the  rest  of the nations and territories,

and  that  therefore  He  was called the God of Israel and the God of

Jerusalem,  whereas  the  other  gods  were  called  the  gods of  the

Gentiles.  (2:94)  For  this  reason  the  Jews  believed  that  the strip of

territory  which  God  had  chosen  for  Himself,  demanded  a Divine

worship  quite  apart  and  different  from the worship which obtained

elsewhere,  and  that  the  Lord would not suffer the worship of other

gods  adapted  to  other  countries.   (2:95)  Thus  they thought that the

people  whom  the  king  of  Assyria  had  brought  into  Judæa were

torn  in  pieces  by  lions  because  they  knew not the worship of the

National Divinity (2 Kings xvii:25).


                                 ]See Shirley's footnote[
(2:96)  Jacob,  according to Aben Ezra's opinion, therefore admonished

his  sons  when he wished them to seek out a new country, that they

should  prepare  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).



(2:97)  David,  in  telling Saul that he was compelled by the king's perse-

cution  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).  (2:98) Lastly, he believed that this Being or Deity had

His   habitation   in  the  heavens  (Deut. xxxiii:27),   an  opinion  very

common among the Gentiles.


(2:99)  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 com-
 {Deu 5:7 - Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.}
mandment).   (2:100)    Further  it  is  related  (Ex. xxxiii:18)   that   Moses

asked of God that he might behold Him, but as Moses (as  page 38   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.

(2:101)  This,  I  repeat,  was  because the imagination of Moses was un-

suitable,  for  other  prophets bear witness that they saw the Lord; for

instance,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  &c.  (2:102)  For this reason God an-
                             Exo. 33:20
swered  Moses,  "Thou  canst  not  see  My  face; " and inasmuch as

Moses  believed  that  God can be looked upon—that is, that no con-

tradiction  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.



(2:103)  When  God  would  reveal to Moses that the Israelites, because

they  worshipped  the  calf,  were  to be placed in the same category
                                                     Exodus
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).



(2:104)  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.



(2:105)  The  Israelites knew scarcely anything of God, although He was

revealed  to  them;  and this is abundantly evident from their transfer-

ring,  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.   (2:106)  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  page 39   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.

(2:107)  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
 Bk.XIA:9876.
the   Deity.   (2:108)   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
   Bk.XIA:10086.
as  parents  treat irrational children.  (2:108a) It is, therefore, certain that

they  knew  not  the  excellence  of  virtue  and  the  true  happiness.



(2:109)  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 Judæa to other substituted powers.  (2:110) No one

in  the  whole  of  the  {Hebrew Bible} speaks  more rationally of God

than  Solomon,  who  in  fact  surpassed  all  the  men  of  his time in
 Bk.XIA:104108. 
natural ability. (2:111) Yet he considered himself above the law (esteem-

ing  it  only  to have been given for men without reasonable and intel-

lectual  grounds  for  their  actions), and  made  small  account of the

laws  concerning  kings,  which  are mainly three: nay, he openly vio-

lated  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.

(2:112)  See  Proverbs xvi:22, 23.



(2:113)  But  let  us return to the prophets whose conflicting opinions we

have undertaken to note.



(2:114)  The  expressed  ideas of Ezekiel seemed so diverse from those

of  Moses to the Rabbis who have left us the extant prophetic books
                                           ]See Shirley's footnote[
(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 doubt-

less  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.  (2:115)  How he did so does not sufficiently

appear,  whether  it  was  by writing a commentary  page 40   which has

now  perished,  or  by altering Ezekiel's words and audaciously strik-

ing  out  phrases  according  to his fancy.  (2:116) However this may be,
     {Eze ?}
chapter xviii.  certainly  does  not  seem to agree with Exodus xxxiv:7,

Jeremiah xxxii:18, &c.



(2:117)  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.



(2:118)  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.  (2:121)  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
                         ]See Shirley's footnote[
we  learn  from  Josephus  and  the Scriptures, he never did so over-

come  them.  (2:122)   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.  (2:124) And

when  (Rom. iii:5 and vi:19)  he  attributes  righteousness to man, he

corrects himself as speaking merely humanly and through the infirm-

ity of the flesh.



(2:125)  We have now more than sufficiently proved our point, that God

adapted revelations to the understanding and opinions of the proph-

ets, and that in matters of theory without bearing on charity or moral-

ity  the prophets could be, and, in fact, were, ignorant, and held con-

flicting  opinions.  (2:126)  It therefore follows that we must by no means

go  to  the  prophets  for  knowledge,  either  of natural or of spiritual

phenomena.



(2:127) We have determined, then, that we are only bound to believe in

the prophetic writings, the object and substance   page 41  of the revel-

ation; with regard to the details, every one may believe or not, as he

likes.



(2:128)  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.  (2:129)   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.



(2:130) So, too, the revelation to Micaiah would only teach that God re-

vealed  to  him  the true issue of the battle between Ahab and Aram;

and  this  is  all  we are bound to believe.  (130a) Whatever else is con-

tained  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.   (2:131)  Everyone

may believe as much of it as his reason allows.



(2:132)  The  reasonings  by which the Lord displayed His power to Job

(if  they  really were a revelation, and the author of the history is nar-

rating,  and  not  merely,  as some suppose, rhetorically adorning his

own  conceptions),  would  come  under  the same category—that is,

they  were  adapted  to Job's understanding, for the purpose of con-

vincing  him,  and  are not universal, or for the convincing of all men.



(2:133)  We  can  come  to  no  different  conclusion  with respect to the
                                                                             ] See Shirley's footnote [
reasonings  of  Christ, by which He convicted the Pharisees of pride

and  ignorance,  and  exhorted  His  disciples  to  lead  the  true  life.

(2:134)   He   adapted   them   to  each  man's  opinions  and  principles.

(2:135) For instance, when He said to the Pharisees (Matt. xii:26), "And

if  Satan cast out devils, his house is divided against itself, how then

shall  his  kingdom  stand?"   (2:136)   He  only  wished  to  convince the

Pharisees  according,  to their own principles, not to teach that there

are devils, or any kingdom of devils. (137) So, too, when He said to His

disciples  (Matt. xviii:10),  "See that ye despise not one of these little

ones,  for  I  say unto you that their angels," &c.  (2:137a)  He merely de-

sired  to  warn  them against pride and despising any of their fellows,

not  to  insist  on the actual reason given, which was simply adopted

in order to persuade them more easily.

page 42

(2:138)   Lastly,  we  should  say exactly the same of the apostolic signs

and  reasonings,  but  there  is no need to go further into the subject.

(2:139)  If  I  were to enumerate all the passages of Scripture addressed

only to individuals, or to a particular man's understanding, and which

cannot,  without  great  danger to philosophy, be defended as Divine

doctrines,  I  should  go far beyond the brevity at which I aim.  (140) Let

it  suffice,  then,  to  have indicated a few instances of general appli-

cation,   and   let   the   curious  reader  consider  others  by  himself.

(2:141)  Although  the  points  we  have just raised concerning prophets

and  prophecy  are  the  only ones which have any direct bearing on

the  end  in  view,  namely, the separation of Philosophy from Theol-

ogy,  still,  as  I  have  touched  on  the general question, I may here

inquire  whether  the  gift  of  prophecy was peculiar to the Hebrews,

or whether it was common to all nations.  (2:142)  I must then come to a

conclusion about the vocation of the Hebrews, all of which I shall do

in the ensuing chapter.