Theologico-Political Treatise _ Part 1 Benedictus de Spinoza 2223 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Theologico-Political Treatise
— Part 1
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.

Title: Theologico-Political Treatise — Part 1

Author: Benedictus de Spinoza

Translator: R. H. M. Elwes

Release date: July 1, 1997 [eBook #989]
Most recently updated: January 6, 2021

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/989

Credits: Joseph B. Yesselman. HTML version by Al Haines.

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THEOLOGICO-
POLITICAL TREATISE — PART 1 ***

Sentence Numbers, shown thus (1), have been added by volunteer.

A Theologico-Political Treatise
Part 1 - Chapters I to V

Baruch Spinoza

A Theologico-Political Treatise

Part 1 - Chapters I to V

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

PREFACE.

Origin and consequences of superstition.

Causes that have led the author to write.

Course of his investigation.

For what readers the treatise is designed. Submission of author to the rulers
of his country.

CHAPTER I - Of Prophecy.

Definition of prophecy.

Distinction between revelation to Moses and to the other prophets.

Between Christ and other recipients of revelation.

Ambiguity of the word "Spirit."

The different senses in which things may be referred to God.

Different senses of "Spirit of God."

Prophets perceived revelation by imagination.

CHAPTER II - Of Prophets.

A mistake to suppose that prophecy can give knowledge of phenomena

Certainty of prophecy based on:
(1) Vividness of imagination,
(2) A Sign,
(3) Goodness of the Prophet.

Variation of prophecy with the temperament and opinions of the individual.

CHAPTER III - Of the Vocation of the Hebrews,
and whether the Gift of Prophecy was peculiar to them.

Happiness of Hebrews did not consist in the inferiority of the Gentile.

Nor in philosophic knowledge or virtue.

But in their conduct of affairs of state and escape from political dangers.

Even this Distinction did not exist in the time of Abraham.

Testimony from the Old Testament itself to the share of the Gentiles in the
law and favour of God.

Explanation of apparent discrepancy of the Epistle to the Romans.

Answer to the arguments for the eternal election of the Jews.

CHAPTER IV - Of the Divine Law.

Laws either depend on natural necessity or on human decree. The existence
of the latter not inconsistent with the former class of laws.

Divine law a kind of law founded on human decree: called Divine from its
object.

Divine law:
(1) universal;
(2) independent of the truth of any historical narrative;
(3) independent of rites and ceremonies;
(4) its own reward.

Reason does not present God as a law-giver for men.

Such a conception a proof of ignorance - in Adam - in the Israelites - in
Christians.

Testimony of the Scriptures in favour of reason and the rational view of the
Divine.

CHAPTER V - Of the Ceremonial Law.

Ceremonial law of the Old Testament no part of the Divine universal law,
but partial and temporary. Testimony of the prophets themselves to this
Testimony of the New Testament.

How the ceremonial law tended to preserve the Hebrew kingdom.

Christian rites on a similar footing.

What part of the Scripture narratives is one bound to believe?

Author's Endnotes to the Treatise.

A Theologico-Political Treatise
Part 1 - Chapters I to V

PREFACE.

(1)Men would never be superstitious, if they could govern all their
circumstances by set rules, or if they were always favoured by fortune: but
being frequently driven into straits where rules are useless, 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. (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.

(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. (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. (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. (6) Signs and wonders of this sort they
conjure up perpetually, till one might think Nature as mad as themselves,
they interpret her so fantastically.

(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 God: upbraiding
Reason as blind, because she cannot 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. (8) As though God 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, madmen, and
birds. Such is the unreason to which terror can drive mankind!

(9) Superstition, then, is engendered, preserved, and fostered by fear. 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); whereas after he had

conquered Darius he consulted prophets no more, till a second time
frightened by reverses. (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 victims." (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
dejected 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. (12) I think this is sufficiently plain to
all, and will therefore say no more on the subject.

(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 God, universal to mankind, and also tends to show, that it is no
less inconsistent and variable than other 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. (14) Furthermore, we may readily
understand how difficult it is, to maintain in the same course men prone to
every form of credulity. (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.

(16) This element of inconsistency has been the cause of many terrible wars
and revolutions; for, as Curtius well says (lib. iv. chap. 10): "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. (17) Immense pains have
therefore been taken to counteract this evil by investing religion, whether
true or false, with such pomp and ceremony, that it may rise superior to
every shock, and be always observed with studious reverence by the whole
people—a system 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.

(18) But if, in despotic statecraft, the supreme and essential mystery be to
hoodwink the subjects, and to mask the fear, which keeps them clown, with
the specious garb of religion, so that men may 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 a tyrant; yet in a free state no more
mischievous expedient could be planned or attempted. (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 domain of speculative thought, and opinions are put on
trial and condemned on the same footing as crimes, while those who defend
and follow them are sacrificed, not to public safety, but to their opponents'
hatred and cruelty. (20) If deeds only could be made the 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.

(20) Now, seeing that we have the rare happiness of living in a republic,
where everyone's judgment is free and unshackled, where each may
worship God as his conscience dictates, and where freedom 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.

(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 its legitimate rulers, and so bring
us again into slavery. (22) As to the order of my treatise I will speak
presently, but first I will recount the causes which led me to write.

(23) I have often wondered, that persons who make a boast of professing
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, rather than the virtues they
claim, is the readiest criterion of their faith. (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. (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. (26) The spread of this
misconception inflamed every worthless fellow with an intense desire to
enter holy orders, and thus the love of diffusing God's religion degenerated
into sordid avarice and ambition. (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. (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 compound 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! (29) Piety,
great God! and religion are become a tissue of 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. (30) Verily, if they had but one
spark of light from on High, they would not insolently rave, but would learn
to worship God 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 compassion.

(31) Furthermore, if any Divine light were in them, it would appear from
their doctrine. (32) I grant that they are never tired of professing 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 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 nature. (33) The very
vehemence 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. (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 no human
factions), and not be set up on the threshold, as it were, of inquiry.

(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. (36) With these precautions I constructed a
method of Scriptural interpretation, and thus equipped proceeded to inquire
- what is prophecy? (37) In what sense did God reveal himself to the
prophets, and why were these particular men - chosen by him? (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? (39) These questions being
answered, I was easily able to conclude, that the authority of the prophets
has weight only in matters of morality, and that their speculative doctrines
affect us little.

(40) Next I inquired, why the Hebrews were called God's chosen people,
and discovering that it was only because God had chosen for them a certain

strip of territory, where they might live peaceably and at ease, I learnt that
the Law revealed by God to Moses was merely the law of the individual
Hebrew state, therefore that it was binding on none but Hebrews, and not
even on Hebrews after the downfall of their nation. (41) Further, in order to
ascertain, whether it could be concluded from Scripture, that the human
understanding is naturally corrupt, I inquired whether the Universal
Religion, 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 God more surely and clearly
than events, which we understand plainly and distinctly through their
immediate natural causes.

(42) Now, as in the whole course of my investigation I found nothing taught
expressly by Scripture, which does not agree with our understanding, 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
God, I became thoroughly convinced, that the Bible leaves reason
absolutely free, that it has nothing in common with philosophy, in fact, that
Revelation 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. (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 to the Word of God. (44) I show that the
Word of God has not been revealed as a certain number of books, was
displayed to the prophets as a simple idea of the mind, namely, obedience to
God 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.

(45) Having thus laid bare the bases of belief, I draw the conclusion that
Revelation has obedience for its sole object, therefore, in purpose no less
than in foundation and method, stands entirely aloof from ordinary
knowledge; each has its separate province, neither can be called the
handmaid of the other.

(46) Furthermore, as men's habits of mind differ, so that some more readily
embrace one form of faith, some another, for what moves one to pray may
move another only to scoff, I conclude, in accordance with what has gone
before, that everyone should be free to choose for himself the foundations
of his creed, and that faith should be judged only by its fruits; each would
then obey God freely with his whole heart, while nothing would be publicly
honoured save justice and charity.

(47) Having thus drawn attention to the liberty conceded to everyone by the
revealed law of God, 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 cannot be withheld without great
danger to peace and detriment to the community.

(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. (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:
nevertheless, 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.

(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 points. (51) I
then prove, that the holders of sovereign power are the depositories and

interpreters of religious no less than of civil ordinances, and that they alone
have the right to decide what is just or unjust, pious or impious; lastly, I
conclude by showing, that they best retain this right and secure safety to
their state by allowing every man to think what he likes, and say what he
thinks.

(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 common places. (54) To the
rest of mankind I care not to commend my treatise, for I cannot expect that
it contains anything to please them: I know how deeply rooted are the
prejudices embraced under the name of religion; I am aware that in the
mind of the masses superstition is no less deeply rooted than fear; I
recognize that their constancy is mere obstinacy, and that they are led to
praise or blame by impulse rather than reason. (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. (56) They would gain no good themselves,
and might prove a stumbling-block to others, whose philosophy is
hampered by the belief that Reason is a mere handmaid to Theology, and
whom I seek in this work especially to benefit. (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 decide to be repugnant to the laws or
prejudicial to the public good. (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 accordance with the laws of my country, with loyalty, and
with morality.

CHAPTER I. - Of Prophecy
(1) Prophecy, or revelation is sure knowledge revealed by God to man. (2)
A prophet is one who interprets the revelations of God to those who are
unable to attain to sure knowledge of the matters revealed, and therefore
can only apprehend them by simple faith.

(3) The Hebrew word for prophet is "nabi,"[Endnote 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 interpreting 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.

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

(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 God and His eternal laws; but
ordinary knowledge is common to all men as men, and rests on foundations
which all share, whereas the multitude 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. (6)
Nevertheless it has as much right as any other to be called Divine, for God's
nature, in so far as we share therein, and God's laws, dictate it to us; nor
does it suffer from that to which we give the preeminence, except in so far
as the latter transcends its limits and cannot be accounted for by natural
laws taken in themselves. (7) In respect to the certainty it involves, and the
source from which it is derived, i.e. God, 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.

(8) But, although ordinary knowledge is Divine, its professors cannot be
called prophets [Endnote 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.

(9) Seeing then that our mind subjectively contains in itself and partakes of
the nature of God, and solely from this cause is enabled to form notions
explaining natural phenomena and inculcating morality, it follows that we
may rightly assert the nature of the human mind (in so far as it is thus
conceived) to be a primary cause of Divine revelation. (10) All that we
clearly and distinctly understand is dictated to us, as I have just pointed out,
by the idea and nature of God; not indeed through words, but in a way far
more excellent and agreeing perfectly with the nature of the mind, as all
who have enjoyed intellectual certainty will doubtless attest. (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.

(12) I will now pass on to, and treat more fully, the other ways and means
by which God makes revelations to mankind, both of that which transcends
ordinary knowledge, and of that within its scope; for there is no reason why
God should not employ other means to communicate what we know already
by the power of reason.

(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? (14) And since there
are, so far as I know, no prophets now alive, we have no alternative but to
read the books of prophets departed, taking care the while not to reason
from metaphor or to ascribe anything to our authors which they do not
themselves distinctly state. (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 godliness, refer all
things directly to the Deity. (16) For instance if they make money by a
transaction, they say God gave it to them; if they desire anything, they say
God has disposed their hearts towards it; if they think anything, they say

God told them. (17) Hence we must not suppose that everything is prophecy
or revelation which is described in Scripture as told by God to anyone, but
only such things as are expressly announced as prophecy or revelation, or
are plainly pointed to as such by the context.

(18) A perusal of the sacred books will show us that all God's revelations to
the prophets were made through words or appearances, or a combination of
the two. (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.

(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 and I will commune with thee
from the mercy seat which is between the Cherubim." (21) Some sort of
real voice must necessarily have been employed, for Moses found God
ready to commune with him at any time. This, as I shall shortly show, is the
only instance of a real voice.

(22) We might, perhaps, suppose that the voice with which God called
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. (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 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 called by
the Lord, Samuel supposed it to have been Eli.

(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. (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 Ten Commandments by pure intuition; to this
opinion I myself once inclined, seeing that the words of the Decalogue in
Exodus are 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. (27) However, unless we would do violence to
Scripture, we must certainly admit that the Israelites heard a 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. (28) The discrepancy of the two versions is treated
of in Chap. VIII.

(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 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."

(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 speaker's mind is meant; but if we knew
nothing of God beyond the mere 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." (31) If God contorted the
lips of Moses, or, I will not say Moses, but some beast, till they pronounced
the words, "I am the Lord," should we apprehend the Lord's existence
therefrom?

(32) Scripture seems clearly to point to the belief that God spoke Himself,
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.) (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. (34)
Nevertheless, 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.

(35) Doubtless some mystery lurks in this question which we will discuss
more fully below. (36) For the present I will call attention to the passages in
Scripture indicating the means by which God has revealed His laws to man.

(37) Revelation may be through figures only, as in I Chron:xxii., where God
displays his anger to David by means of an angel bearing a sword, and also
in the story of Balaam.

(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
see an angel, but this is mere nonsense. (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.

(40) In figures, not real but existing only in the prophet's imagination, 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 verbally. (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. (42) The
wretchedness of the people at the time was thus revealed, while future

calamities were foretold in words. I could cite from Holy Writ many similar
examples, but I think they are sufficiently well known already.

(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 appearances 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). (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," i.e. looking on me as a friend and
not afraid, he speaks with me (cf. Ex xxxiii:17).

(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. (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. (47) We may be able
quite to comprehend that God 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 superior to those of his
fellow men, nor do I believe that any have been so endowed save Christ.
(48) To Him the ordinances of God leading 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. (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 of salvation. (50) I must
at this juncture declare that those doctrines which certain churches put
forward concerning Christ, I neither affirm nor deny, for I freely confess
that I do not understand them. (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 their two
bodies) Christ communed with God mind to mind.

(52) Thus we may conclude that no one except Christ received the
revelations of God without the aid of imagination, whether in words or
vision. (53) Therefore the power of prophecy implies not a peculiarly
perfect mind, but a peculiarly vivid imagination, as I will show more clearly
in the next chapter. (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 ruagh, commonly translated spirit.

(55) The word ruagh literally means a wind, e.g. the south wind, but it is
frequently employed in other derivative significations. It is used as
equivalent to,

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

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

(58) (3.) 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.

(59) (4.) Virtue and fitness: "Days should speak, and multitudes of years
should teach wisdom; but there is a spirit in man," Job xxxii:7; i.e.
wisdom is not always found among old men for I now discover that
it depends on individual virtue and capacity. So, "A man in whom is
the Spirit," Numbers xxvii:18.

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

(61) (6.) 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 ru over his own spirit," Prov. xxv:28;
"Your spirit as fire shall devour you," Isaiah xxxiii:1.

From the meaning of disposition we get -

(62) (7.) Passions and faculties. A lofty spirit means pride, a lowly spirit
humility, an evil spirit hatred and melancholy. 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), or
these various qualities.

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

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

(65) I have already alluded to the way in which things are referred to God,
and said to be of God.

(66) (1.) As belonging to His nature, and being, as it were, part of Him; e.g.
the power of God, the eyes of God.

(67) (2.) 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. So Nebuchadnezzar is called the servant of God, Assyria
the scourge of God, &c.

(68) (3.) As dedicated to Him, e.g. the Temple of God, a Nazarene of God,
the Bread of God.

(69) (4.) As revealed through the prophets and not through our natural
faculties. In this sense the Mosaic law is called the law of God.

(70) (5.) As being in the superlative degree. Very high mountains are styled
the mountains of God, a very deep sleep, the sleep of God, &c. 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 God Himself is the Speaker,
the passage cannot well be taken otherwise. The wisdom of
Solomon is called the wisdom of God, or extraordinary. The size of
the cedars of Lebanon is alluded to in the Psalmist's expression, "the
cedars of the Lord."

(71) Similarly, if the Jews were at a loss to understand any phenomenon, or
were ignorant of its cause, they referred it to God. (72) Thus a storm was
termed the chiding of God, thunder and lightning the arrows of God, for it
was thought that God kept the winds confined in caves, His treasuries; thus
differing merely in name from the Greek wind-god Eolus. (73) In like
manner miracles were called works of God, as being especially marvellous;
though in reality, of course, all natural events are the works of God, and
take place solely by His power. (74) The Psalmist calls the miracles in
Egypt the works of God, because the Hebrews found in them a way of
safety which they had not looked for, and therefore especially marvelled at.

(75) As, then, unusual natural phenomena are called works of God, and
trees of unusual size are called trees of God, we cannot wonder that very
strong and tall men, though impious robbers and whoremongers, are in
Genesis called sons of God.

(76) This reference of things wonderful to God was not peculiar to the Jews.

(77) Pharaoh, on hearing the interpretation of his dream, exclaimed that the
mind of the gods was in Joseph. (78) Nebuchadnezzar 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.

(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." (82) Similarly in Gen. i:2: "The Spirit of the Lord moved
over the face of the waters." (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. (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. (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.

(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. (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." (88) Ezekiel also, prophesying to the
dead, says (xxvii:14), "And I will give to you My Spirit, and ye shall live;"
i.e. I will restore you to life. (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, and not the spirit which I gave him to discern the good,
I will let him alone. (90) So, too, Ps. li:12: "Create in me a clean heart, O
God, and renew a right spirit within me; cast me not away from Thy
presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from me." (91) It was supposed 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. (92) Again, inasmuch as the Bible, in concession to
popular ignorance, describes God 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, disposition, emotion, strength, or breath. (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 rebelled,
and vexed the Holy Spirit."

(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 context, the law of
Moses. (95) Nehemiah, speaking of the giving of the law, says, i:20, "Thou
gavest also thy good Spirit to instruct them." (96) This is referred to in
Deut. iv:6, "This is your wisdom and understanding," and in Ps. cxliii:10,
"Thy good Spirit will lead me into the land of uprightness." (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. (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. (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. (100) Also Ps. cxxxix:7, "Whither shall I go from Thy
Spirit, or whither shall I flee from Thy presence?" i.e. whither shall I go so
as to be beyond Thy power and Thy presence?

(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.
the mercy] of the Lord straitened? (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." (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. in His mercy] by
the former prophets." (105) So also Haggai ii:5: "So My Spirit remaineth
among you: fear not."

(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. (107) Or
we may understand 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. (108) But the first
explanation seems to me the best.

(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 constancy(3); 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, inasmuch 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.
(110) 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.

(111) 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.

(112) We need no longer scruple to affirm that the prophets only perceived
God's revelation by the aid of imagination, that is, by words and figures
either real or imaginary. (113) We find no other means mentioned in
Scripture, and therefore must not invent any. (114) As to the particular law
of Nature by which the communications took place, I confess my ignorance.
(115) I might, indeed, say as others do, that they took place by the power of
God; but this would be mere trifling, and no better than explaining some
unique specimen by a transcendental term. (116) Everything takes place by
the power of God. (117) Nature herself is the power of God under another

name, and our ignorance of the power of God is co-extensive with our
ignorance of Nature. (118) It is absolute folly, therefore, to ascribe an event
to the power of God when we know not its natural cause, which is the
power of God.

(119) However, we are not now inquiring into the causes of prophetic
knowledge. (120) 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.

(121) 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 constructed from
words and figures than from the principles and notions on which the whole
fabric of reasoned knowledge is reared.

(122) 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. (122) We need no
longer wonder that Scripture and the prophets speak so strangely and
obscurely of God's Spirit or Mind (cf. Numbers 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. (124) All these expressions are plainly in
harmony with the current ideas of God and spirits.

(125) Inasmuch as imagination is fleeting and inconstant, we find that the
power of prophecy did not remain with a prophet for long, nor manifest
itself frequently, but was very rare; manifesting itself only in a few men,
and in them not often.

(126) 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. (127) Scripture teaching about the assurance of
prophets I will treat of in the next chapter.

CHAPTER II. - OF PROPHETS.
(1) It follows from the last chapter that, as I have said, the prophets were
endowed with unusually vivid imaginations, and not with unusually perfect
minds. (2) This conclusion is amply sustained by Scripture, for we are told
that Solomon was the wisest of men, but had no special faculty of prophecy.
(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. (4) Nor is this contrary to ordinary
experience and reason. (5) Men of great imaginative power are less fitted
for abstract reasoning, whereas those who excel in intellect and its use keep
their imagination more restrained and controlled, holding it in subjection, so
to speak, lest it should usurp the place of reason.

(6) Thus to suppose that knowledge of natural and spiritual phenomena 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 superstition, for superstition is the
bitter enemy, of all true knowledge and true morality. (8) Yes; it has come to
this! (9) Men who openly confess that they can form no idea of God, and
only know Him through created things, of which they know not the causes,
can unblushingly accuse philosophers of Atheism.

(10) Treating the question methodically, I will show that prophecies varied,
not only according to the imagination and physical temperament of the
prophet, but also according to his particular opinions; and further that
prophecy never rendered the prophet wiser than he was before. (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.

(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 some
extrinsic reason to assure us of its objective reality: hence prophecy cannot
afford certainty, and the prophets were assured of God's revelation by some
sign, and not by the fact of revelation, as 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 promise. (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." (15) Hezekiah, though he had long known
Isaiah to be a prophet, none the less demanded a sign of the cure which he
predicted. (15) It is thus quite evident that the prophets always received
some sign to certify them of their prophetic imaginings; and for this reason
Moses bids the Jews (Deut. xviii.) ask of the prophets a sign, namely, the
prediction of some coming event. (16) In this respect, prophetic knowledge
is inferior to natural knowledge, which needs no sign, and in itself implies
certitude. (17) Moreover, Scripture warrants the statement that the certitude
of the prophets was not mathematical, but moral. (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." (19) And
Jesus Christ warns His disciples of the same thing (Matt. xxiv:24). (20)
Furthermore, Ezekiel (xiv:9) plainly states that God sometimes deceives
men with false revelations; and Micaiah bears like witness in the case of the
prophets of Ahab.

(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 chosen, but (according to the
ancient proverb, and as appears in the history of Abigail and her speech),
God uses the good as instruments of goodness, and the wicked as means to
execute His wrath. (22) This may be seen from the case of Micaiah above
quoted; for although 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.

(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. (24) Scripture itself teaches and shows that God led
away David to number the people, though it bears ample witness to David's
piety.

(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;

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

(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. (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. (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 the truth of his prophecy, until
it was confirmed by facts. (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."

(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 convince
one prophet would fall far short of convincing another who was imbued

with different opinions. (31) Therefore the signs varied according to the
individual prophet.

(32) So also did the revelation vary, as we have stated, according to
individual disposition and temperament, and according to the opinions
previously held.

(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. (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.
(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. (36) And so with revelations
perceived through visions. (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, a royal throne, and so on.

(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 destruction 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. (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. (41)
All of which we will illustrate from Scripture.

(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 imagine evil of him, but not good. (43) The
theory that God does not reveal Himself to the angry or the sad, is a mere
dream: for God revealed to Moses while angry, the terrible slaughter of the

firstborn, and did so without the intervention of a harp. (44) To Cain in his
rage, God was revealed, and to Ezekiel, impatient with anger, was revealed
the contumacy and wretchedness of the Jews. (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.
(46) So, Micaiah never prophesied good to Ahab, though other true
prophets had done so, but invariably evil. (46) Thus we see that individual
prophets were by temperament more fitted for one sort of revelation than
another.

(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. (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. (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. (51) Compare also the order and
reasoning of the prophecies of Jeremiah, written in Idumaea (chap. xlix.),
with the order and reasoning of Obadiah. (52) Compare, lastly, Isa. xl:19,
20, and xliv:8, with Hosea viii:6, and xiii:2. And so on.

(53) A due consideration of these passage will clearly show us that God has
no particular style in speaking, but, according to the learning and capacity
of the prophet, is cultivated, compressed, severe, untutored, prolix, or
obscure.

(54) There was, moreover, a certain variation in the visions vouchsafed 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. (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 trustworthy tradition on the subject, which I do not for a
moment believe, this theory is plainly an invention. Isaiah 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.

(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. (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. (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.
(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).

(60) The revelation remained obscure because no one was found, at that
time, with imagination sufficiently strong to conceive it more clearly. (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.

(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. (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 even contrary opinions and prejudices. (64) (I speak, be it

understood, solely of matters speculative, for in regard to uprightness and
morality the case is widely different.) (65) From thence I shall conclude that
prophecy never rendered the prophets more learned, but left them with their
former opinions, and that we are, therefore, not at all bound to trust them in
matters of intellect.

(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 anything which the prophets did not
know; or else they try to wrest the Scriptural words away from their evident
meaning.

(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. (68)
For instance, nothing is more clear in the Bible 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. (69) Many, who will not admit any movement
in the heavenly bodies, explain away the passage till it seems to mean
something quite different; 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.
(70) Such quibblers excite my wonder! (71) Are we, forsooth, bound to
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? (72)
To me both alternatives appear ridiculous, and 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
causing the light to remain longer; and I would say, that they did not
conjecture 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.

(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. (74) We may
arrive at this conclusion without any scruple, for the sign could really have
come to pass, and have been predicted by Isaiah to the king, without the
prophet being aware of the real cause.

(75) With regard to the building of the Temple by Solomon, if it was really
dictated 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 diameter of a circle, and that, like the
generality of workmen, he thought that it was as three to one. (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. (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 Scriptural authority, be
defended and fostered. (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.

(79) According to the understanding of Noah it was revealed to him that
God as about to destroy the whole human race, for Noah thought that
beyond the limits of Palestine the world was not inhabited.

(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 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 faithfulness.

(81) Adam, the first man to whom God was revealed, did not know 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. (82) Adam evidently only knew the
Deity as the Creator of all things. (83) 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.

(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). (84) Abraham also knew not that God is omnipresent, 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 thus: "I will go down now, and see whether they have done
altogether according to the cry of it which is come unto Me; and, if not, I
will know." (85) Further, the Divine testimony concerning Abraham asserts
nothing but that he was obedient, and that he "commanded his household
after him that they should keep the way of the Lord" (Gen. xviii:19); it does
not state that he held sublime conceptions of the Deity.

(86) Moses, also, was not sufficiently aware that God is omniscient, and
directs human actions by His sole decree, for although God Himself says
that the Israelites should hearken to Him, Moses still considered the matter
doubtful and repeated, "But if they will not believe me, nor hearken unto
my voice." (87) To him in like manner God was revealed as taking no part
in, and as being ignorant of, 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.
(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 Jehovah, 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. (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. (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, O Lord, among the gods?" and Jethro says (Exod.
xviii:11), "Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods." (91) That is
to say, "I am at length compelled to admit to Moses that Jehovah is greater
than all gods, and that His power is unrivalled." (92) We must 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 their creation and origin. (93) He further taught that this Being
had brought the visible world into order from Chaos, and had given Nature
her germs, 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. (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. (95) Thus they thought that the people whom the king of Assyria
had brought into Judaea were torn in pieces by lions because they knew not
the worship of the National Divinity (2 Kings xvii:25).

(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).

(97) David, in telling Saul that he was compelled by the king's persecution
to live away from his country, said that he was driven out from the heritage
of the Lord, and sent to worship other gods (1 Sam. xxvi:19). (98) Lastly,
he believed that this Being or Deity had His habitation in the heavens
(Deut. xxxiii:27), an opinion very common among the Gentiles.

(99) If we now examine the revelations to Moses, we shall find that they
were accommodated to these opinions; as he believed that the Divine
Nature was subject to the conditions of mercy, graciousness, &c., so God
was revealed to him in accordance with his idea and under these attributes
(see Exodus xxxiv:6, 7, and the second commandment). (100) Further it is
related (Ex. xxxiii:18) that Moses asked of God that he might behold Him,
but as Moses (as we have said) had formed no mental image of God, and
God (as I have shown) only revealed Himself to the prophets in accordance
with the disposition of their imagination, He did not reveal Himself in any
form. (101) This, I repeat, was because the imagination of Moses was
unsuitable, for other prophets bear witness that they saw the Lord; for
instance, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, &c. (102) For this reason God answered
Moses, "Thou canst not see My face;" and inasmuch as Moses believed that
God can be looked upon - that is, that no contradiction of the Divine nature
is therein involved (for otherwise he would never have preferred his
request) - it is added, "For no one shall look on Me and live," thus giving a
reason in accordance with Moses' idea, for it is not stated that a
contradiction of the Divine nature would be involved, as was really the
case, but that the thing would not come to pass because of human infirmity.

(103) When God would reveal to Moses that the Israelites, because they
worshipped the calf, were to be placed in the same category as other
nations, He said (ch. xxxiii:2, 3), that He would send an angel (that is, a

being who should have charge of the Israelites, instead of the Supreme
Being), and that He Himself would no longer remain among them; thus
leaving Moses no ground for supposing that the Israelites were more
beloved by God than the other nations whose guardianship He had entrusted
to other beings or angels (vide verse 16).

(104) Lastly, as Moses believed that God dwelt in the heavens, God was
revealed to him as coming down from heaven on to a mountain, and in
order to talk with the Lord Moses went up the mountain, which he certainly
need not have done if he could have conceived of God as omnipresent.

(105) The Israelites knew scarcely anything of God, although He was
revealed to them; and this is abundantly evident from their transferring, a
few days afterwards, the honour and worship due to Him to a calf, which
they believed to be the god who had brought them out of Egypt. (106) In
truth, it is hardly likely that men accustomed to the superstitions of Egypt,
uncultivated and sunk in most abject slavery, should have held any sound
notions about the Deity, or that Moses should have taught them anything
beyond a rule of right living; inculcating it not like a philosopher, as the
result of freedom, but like a lawgiver compelling them to be moral by legal
authority. (107) Thus the rule of right living, the worship and love of God,
was to them rather a bondage than the true liberty, the gift and grace of the
Deity. (108) Moses bid them love God and keep His law, because they had
in the past received benefits from Him (such as the deliverance from
slavery in Egypt), and further terrified them with threats if they transgressed
His commands, holding out many promises of good if they should observe
them; thus treating them as parents treat irrational children. It is, therefore,
certain that they knew not the excellence of virtue and the true happiness.

(109) Jonah thought that he was fleeing from the sight of God, which seems
to show that he too held that God had entrusted the care of the nations
outside Judaea to other substituted powers. (110) No one in the whole of the
Old Testament speaks more rationally of God than Solomon, who in fact
surpassed all the men of his time in natural ability. (111) Yet he considered
himself above the law (esteeming it only to have been given for men
without reasonable and intellectual grounds for their actions), and made
small account of the laws concerning kings, which are mainly three: nay, he

openly violated them (in this he did wrong, and acted in a manner unworthy
of a philosopher, by indulging in sensual pleasure), and taught that all
Fortune's favours to mankind are vanity, that humanity has no nobler gift
than wisdom, and no greater punishment than folly. (112) See Proverbs
xvi:22, 23.

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

(114) The expressed ideas of Ezekiel seemed so diverse from those of
Moses to the Rabbis who have left us the extant prophetic books (as is told
in the treatise of Sabbathus, i:13, 2), that they had serious thoughts of
omitting his prophecy from the canon, and would doubtless have thus
excluded it if a certain Hananiah had not undertaken to explain it; a task
which (as is there narrated) he with great zeal and labour accomplished.
(115) How he did so does not sufficiently appear, whether it was by writing
a commentary which has now perished, or by altering Ezekiel's words and
audaciously striking out phrases according to his fancy. (116) However this
may be, chapter xviii. certainly does not seem to agree with Exodus
xxxiv:7, Jeremiah xxxii:18, &c.

(117 ) Samuel believed that the Lord never repented of anything He had
decreed (1 Sam. xv:29), for when Saul was sorry for his sin, and wished to
worship God and ask for forgiveness, Samuel said that the Lord would not
go back from his decree.

(118) To Jeremiah, on the other hand, it was revealed that, "If that nation
against whom I (the Lord) have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will
repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. (119) If it do evil in my
sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good wherewith I
said I would benefit them" (Jer. xviii:8-10). (120) Joel (ii:13) taught that the
Lord repented Him only of evil. (121) Lastly, it is clear from Gen iv: 7 that
a man can overcome the temptations of sin, and act righteously; for this
doctrine is told to Cain, though, as we learn from Josephus and the
Scriptures, he never did so overcome them. (122) And this agrees with the
chapter of Jeremiah just cited, for it is there said that the Lord repents of the
good or the evil pronounced, if the men in question change their ways and
manner of life. (123) But, on the other hand, Paul (Rom.ix:10) teaches as

plainly as possible that men have no control over the temptations of the
flesh save by the special vocation and grace of God. (124) And when (Rom.
iii:5 and vi:19) he attributes righteousness to man, he corrects himself as
speaking merely humanly and through the infirmity of the flesh.

(125) We have now more than sufficiently proved our point, that God
adapted revelations to the understanding and opinions of the prophets, and
that in matters of theory without bearing on charity or morality the prophets
could be, and, in fact, were, ignorant, and held conflicting opinions. (126) It
therefore follows that we must by no means go to the prophets for
knowledge, either of natural or of spiritual phenomena.

(127) We have determined, then, that we are only bound to believe in the
prophetic writings, the object and substance of the revelation; with regard to
the details, every one may believe or not, as he likes.

(128) For instance, the revelation to Cain only teaches us that God
admonished him to lead the true life, for such alone is the object and
substance of the revelation, not doctrines concerning free will and
philosophy. (129) Hence, though the freedom of the will is clearly implied
in the words of the admonition, we are at liberty to hold a contrary opinion,
since the words and reasons were adapted to the understanding of Cain.

(130) So, too, the revelation to Micaiah would only teach that God revealed
to him the true issue of the battle between Ahab and Aram; and this is all we
are bound to believe. (131) Whatever else is contained in the revelation
concerning the true and the false Spirit of God, the army of heaven standing
on the right hand and on the left, and all the other details, does not affect us
at all. (132) Everyone may believe as much of it as his reason allows.

(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 narrating, 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 convincing him, and are not universal, or
for the convincing of all men.

(133) We can come to no different conclusion with respect to the reasonings
of Christ, by which He convicted the Pharisees of pride and ignorance, and
exhorted His disciples to lead the true life. (134) He adapted them to each
man's opinions and principles. (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?" (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. viii:10), "See that ye despise not one of these little
ones, for I say unto you that their angels," &c., He merely desired 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.

(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. (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 application, and let the curious
reader consider others by himself. (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 Theology, 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. (142) I must then come to a
conclusion about the vocation of the Hebrews, all of which I shall do in the
ensuing chapter.

CHAPTER III. OF THE VOCATION OF THE
HEBREWS, AND
WHETHER THE GIFT OF PROPHECY WAS
PECULIAR TO THEM.
(1) Every man's true happiness and blessedness consist solely in the
enjoyment of what is good, not in the pride that he alone is enjoying it, to
the exclusion of others. (2) He who thinks himself the more blessed because
he is enjoying benefits which others are not, or because he is more blessed
or more fortunate than his fellows, is ignorant of true happiness and
blessedness, and the joy which he feels is either childish or envious and
malicious. (3) For instance, a man's true happiness consists only in wisdom,
and the knowledge of the truth, not at all in the fact that he is wiser than
others, or that others lack such knowledge: such considerations do not
increase his wisdom or true happiness.

(4) Whoever, therefore, rejoices for such reasons, rejoices in another's
misfortune, and is, so far, malicious and bad, knowing neither true
happiness nor the peace of the true life.

(5) When Scripture, therefore, in exhorting the Hebrews to obey the law,
says that the Lord has chosen them for Himself before other nations (Deut.
x:15); that He is near them, but not near others (Deut. iv:7); that to them
alone He has given just laws (Deut. iv:8); and, lastly, that He has marked
them out before others (Deut. iv:32); it speaks only according to the
understanding of its hearers, who, as we have shown in the last chapter, and
as Moses also testifies (Deut. ix:6, 7), knew not true blessedness. (6) For in
good sooth they would have been no less blessed if God had called all men
equally to salvation, nor would God have been less present to them for
being equally present to others; their laws, would have been no less just if
they had been ordained for all, and they themselves would have been no

less wise. (7) The miracles would have shown God's power no less by being
wrought for other nations also; lastly, the Hebrews would have been just as
much bound to worship God if He had bestowed all these gifts equally on
all men.

(8) When God tells Solomon (1 Kings iii:12) that no one shall be as wise as
he in time to come, it seems to be only a manner of expressing surpassing
wisdom; it is little to be believed that God would have promised Solomon,
for his greater happiness, that He would never endow anyone with so much
wisdom in time to come; this would in no wise have increased Solomon's
intellect, and the wise king would have given equal thanks to the Lord if
everyone had been gifted with the same faculties.

(9) Still, though we assert that Moses, in the passages of the Pentateuch just
cited, spoke only according to the understanding of the Hebrews, we have
no wish to deny that God ordained the Mosaic law for them alone, nor that
He spoke to them alone, nor that they witnessed marvels beyond those
which happened to any other nation; but we wish to emphasize that Moses
desired to admonish the Hebrews in such a manner, and with such
reasonings as would appeal most forcibly to their childish understanding,
and constrain them to worship the Deity. (10) Further, we wished to show
that the Hebrews did not surpass other nations in knowledge, or in piety, but
evidently in some attribute different from these; or (to speak like the
Scriptures, according to their understanding), that the Hebrews were not
chosen by God before others for the sake of the true life and sublime ideas,
though they were often thereto admonished, but with some other object.
(11) What that object was, I will duly show.

(12) But before I begin, I wish in a few words to explain what I mean by the
guidance of God, by the help of God, external and inward, and, lastly, what
I understand by fortune.

(13) By the help of God, I mean the fixed and unchangeable order of nature
or the chain of natural events: for I have said before and shown elsewhere
that the universal laws of nature, according to which all things exist and are
determined, are only another name for the eternal decrees of God, which
always involve eternal truth and necessity.

(14) So that to say that everything happens according to natural laws, and to
say that everything is ordained by the decree and ordinance of God, is the
same thing. (15) Now since the power in nature is identical with the power
of God, by which alone all things happen and are determined, it follows that
whatsoever man, as a part of nature, provides himself with to aid and
preserve his existence, or whatsoever nature affords him without his help, is
given to him solely by the Divine power, acting either through human
nature or through external circumstance. (16) So whatever human nature
can furnish itself with by its own efforts to preserve its existence, may be
fitly called the inward aid of God, whereas whatever else accrues to man's
profit from outward causes may be called the external aid of God.

(17) We can now easily understand what is meant by the election of God.
(18) For since no one can do anything save by the predetermined order of
nature, that is by God's eternal ordinance and decree, it follows that no one
can choose a plan of life for himself, or accomplish any work save by God's
vocation choosing him for the work or the plan of life in question, rather
than any other. (19) Lastly, by fortune, I mean the ordinance of God in so
far as it directs human life through external and unexpected means. (20)
With these preliminaries I return to my purpose of discovering the reason
why the Hebrews were said to be elected by God before other nations, and
with the demonstration I thus proceed.

(21) All objects of legitimate desire fall, generally speaking, under one of
these three categories:

1. The knowledge of things through their primary causes.
2. The government of the passions, or the acquirement of the habit of virtue.
3. Secure and healthy life.

(22) The means which most directly conduce towards the first two of these
ends, and which may be considered their proximate and efficient causes are
contained in human nature itself, so that their acquisition hinges only on our
own power, and on the laws of human nature. (23) It may be concluded that
these gifts are not peculiar to any nation, but have always been shared by
the whole human race, unless, indeed, we would indulge the dream that
nature formerly created men of different kinds. (24) But the means which
conduce to security and health are chiefly in external circumstance, and are

called the gifts of fortune because they depend chiefly on objective causes
of which we are ignorant; for a fool may be almost as liable to happiness or
unhappiness as a wise man. (25) Nevertheless, human management and
watchfulness can greatly assist towards living in security and warding off
the injuries of our fellow-men, and even of beasts. (26) Reason and
experience show no more certain means of attaining this object than the
formation of a society with fixed laws, the occupation of a strip of territory
and the concentration of all forces, as it were, into one body, that is the
social body. (27) Now for forming and preserving a society, no ordinary
ability and care is required: that society will be most secure, most stable,
and least liable to reverses, which is founded and directed by far-seeing and
careful men; while, on the other hand, a society constituted by men without
trained skill, depends in a great measure on fortune, and is less constant.
(28) If, in spite of all, such a society lasts a long time, it is owing to some
other directing influence than its own; if it overcomes great perils and its
affairs prosper, it will perforce marvel at and adore the guiding Spirit of
God (in so far, that is, as God works through hidden means, and not through
the nature and mind of man), for everything happens to it unexpectedly and
contrary to anticipation, it may even be said and thought to be by miracle.
(29) Nations, then, are distinguished from one another in respect to the
social organization and the laws under which they live and are governed;
the Hebrew nation was not chosen by God in respect to its wisdom nor its
tranquillity of mind, but in respect to its social organization and the good
fortune with which it obtained supremacy and kept it so many years. (30)
This is abundantly clear from Scripture. Even a cursory perusal will show
us that the only respects in which the Hebrews surpassed other nations, are
in their successful conduct of matters relating to government, and in their
surmounting great perils solely by God's external aid; in other ways they
were on a par with their fellows, and God was equally gracious to all. (31)
For in respect to intellect (as we have shown in the last chapter) they held
very ordinary ideas about God and nature, so that they cannot have been
God's chosen in this respect; nor were they so chosen in respect of virtue
and the true life, for here again they, with the exception of a very few elect,
were on an equality with other nations: therefore their choice and vocation
consisted only in the temporal happiness and advantages of independent
rule. (32) In fact, we do not see that God promised anything beyond this to
the patriarchs [Endnote 4] or their successors; in the law no other reward is

offered for obedience than the continual happiness of an independent
commonwealth and other goods of this life; while, on the other hand,
against contumacy and the breaking of the covenant is threatened the
downfall of the commonwealth and great hardships. (33) Nor is this to be
wondered at; for the ends of every social organization and commonwealth
are (as appears from what we have said, and as we will explain more at
length hereafter) security and comfort; a commonwealth can only exist by
the laws being binding on all. (34) If all the members of a state wish to
disregard the law, by that very fact they dissolve the state and destroy the
commonwealth. (35) Thus, the only reward which could be promised to the
Hebrews for continued obedience to the law was security [Endnote 5] and
its attendant advantages, while no surer punishment could be threatened for
disobedience, than the ruin of the state and the evils which generally follow
therefrom, in addition to such further consequences as might accrue to the
Jews in particular from the ruin of their especial state. (36) But there is no
need here to go into this point at more length. (37) I will only add that the
laws of the Old Testament were revealed and ordained to the Jews only, for
as God chose them in respect to the special constitution of their society and
government, they must, of course, have had special laws. (38) Whether God
ordained special laws for other nations also, and revealed Himself to their
lawgivers prophetically, that is, under the attributes by which the latter were
accustomed to imagine Him, I cannot sufficiently determine. (39) It is
evident from Scripture itself that other nations acquired supremacy and
particular laws by the external aid of God; witness only the two following
passages:

(40) In Genesis xiv:18, 19, 20, it is related that Melchisedek was king of
Jerusalem and priest of the Most High God, that in exercise of his priestly
functions he blessed Abraham, and that Abraham the beloved of the Lord
gave to this priest of God a tithe of all his spoils. (41) This sufficiently
shows that before He founded the Israelitish nation God constituted kings
and priests in Jerusalem, and ordained for them rites and laws. (42) Whether
He did so prophetically is, as I have said, not sufficiently clear; but I am
sure of this, that Abraham, whilst he sojourned in the city, lived
scrupulously according to these laws, for Abraham had received no special
rites from God; and yet it is stated (Gen. xxvi:5), that he observed the
worship, the precepts, the statutes, and the laws of God, which must be

interpreted to mean the worship, the statutes, the precepts, and the laws of
king Melchisedek. (43) Malachi chides the Jews as follows (i:10-11.): "Who
is there among you that will shut the doors? [of the Temple]; neither do ye
kindle fire on mine altar for nought. (44) I have no pleasure in you, saith the
Lord of Hosts. (45) For from the rising of the sun, even until the going
down of the same My Name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every
place incense shall be offered in My Name, and a pure offering; for My
Name is great among the heathen, saith the Lord of Hosts." (46) These
words, which, unless we do violence to them, could only refer to the current
period, abundantly testify that the Jews of that time were not more beloved
by God than other nations, that God then favoured other nations with more
miracles than He vouchsafed to the Jews, who had then partly recovered
their empire without miraculous aid; and, lastly, that the Gentiles possessed
rites and ceremonies acceptable to God. (47) But I pass over these points
lightly: it is enough for my purpose to have shown that the election of the
Jews had regard to nothing but temporal physical happiness and freedom, in
other words, autonomous government, and to the manner and means by
which they obtained it; consequently to the laws in so far as they were
necessary to the preservation of that special government; and, lastly, to the
manner in which they were revealed. In regard to other matters, wherein
man's true happiness consists, they were on a par with the rest of the
nations.

(48) When, therefore, it is said in Scripture (Deut. iv:7) that the Lord is not
so nigh to any other nation as He is to the Jews, reference is only made to
their government, and to the period when so many miracles happened to
them, for in respect of intellect and virtue - that is, in respect of blessedness
- God was, as we have said already, and are now demonstrating, equally
gracious to all. (49) Scripture itself bears testimony to this fact, for the
Psalmist says (cxlv:18), "The Lord is near unto all them that call upon Him,
to all that call upon Him in truth." (50) So in the same Psalm, verse 9, "The
Lord is good to all, and His tender mercies are over all His works." In Ps.
xxxiii:16, it is clearly stated that God has granted to all men the same
intellect, in these words, "He fashioneth their hearts alike." The heart was
considered by the Hebrews, as I suppose everyone knows, to be the seat of
the soul and the intellect.

(51) Lastly, from Job xxxviii:28, it is plain that God had ordained for the
whole human race the law to reverence God, to keep from evil doing, or to
do well, and that Job, although a Gentile, was of all men most acceptable to
God, because he exceeded all in piety and religion. (52) Lastly, from Jonah
iv:2, it is very evident that, not only to the Jews but to all men, God was
gracious, merciful, long-suffering, and of great goodness, and repented Him
of the evil, for Jonah says: "Therefore I determined to flee before unto
Tarshish, for I know that Thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to
anger, and of great kindness," &c., and that, therefore, God would pardon
the Ninevites. (53) We conclude, therefore (inasmuch as God is to all men
equally gracious, and the Hebrews were only chosen by him in respect to
their social organization and government), that the individual Jew, taken
apart from his social organization and government, possessed no gift of God
above other men, and that there was no difference between Jew and Gentile.
(54) As it is a fact that God is equally gracious, merciful, and the rest, to all
men; and as the function of the prophet was to teach men not so much the
laws of their country, as true virtue, and to exhort them thereto, it is not to
be doubted that all nations possessed prophets, and that the prophetic gift
was not peculiar to the Jews. (55) Indeed, history, both profane and sacred,
bears witness to the fact. (56) Although, from the sacred histories of the Old
Testament, it is not evident that the other nations had as many prophets as
the Hebrews, or that any Gentile prophet was expressly sent by God to the
nations, this does not affect the question, for the Hebrews were careful to
record their own affairs, not those of other nations. (57) It suffices, then,
that we find in the Old Testament Gentiles, and uncircumcised, as Noah,
Enoch, Abimelech, Balaam, &c., exercising prophetic gifts; further, that
Hebrew prophets were sent by God, not only to their own nation but to
many others also. (58) Ezekiel prophesied to all the nations then known;
Obadiah to none, that we are aware of, save the Idumeans; and Jonah was
chiefly the prophet to the Ninevites. (59) Isaiah bewails and predicts the
calamities, and hails the restoration not only of the Jews but also of other
nations, for he says (chap. xvi:9), "Therefore I will bewail Jazer with
weeping;" and in chap. xix. he foretells first the calamities and then the
restoration of the Egyptians (see verses 19, 20, 21, 25), saying that God
shall send them a Saviour to free them, that the Lord shall be known in
Egypt, and, further, that the Egyptians shall worship God with sacrifice and

oblation; and, at last, he calls that nation the blessed Egyptian people of
God; all of which particulars are specially noteworthy.

(60) Jeremiah is called, not the prophet of the Hebrew nation, but simply
the prophet of the nations (see Jer. i.5). (61) He also mournfully foretells the
calamities of the nations, and predicts their restoration, for he says (xlviii.
31) of the Moabites, "Therefore will I howl for Moab, and I will cry out for
all Moab" (verse 36), "and therefore mine heart shall sound for Moab like
pipes;" in the end he prophesies their restoration, as also the restoration of
the Egyptians, Ammonites, and Elamites. (62) Wherefore it is beyond doubt
that other nations also, like the Jews, had their prophets, who prophesied to
them.

(63) Although Scripture only, makes mention of one man, Balaam, to whom
the future of the Jews and the other nations was revealed, we must not
suppose that Balaam prophesied only once, for from the narrative itself it is
abundantly clear that he had long previously been famous for prophesy and
other Divine gifts. (64) For when Balak bade him to come to him, he said
(Num. xxii:6), "For I know that he whom thou blessest is blessed, and he
whom thou cursest is cursed." (65) Thus we see that he possessed the gift
which God had bestowed on Abraham. Further, as accustomed to prophesy,
Balaam bade the messengers wait for him till the will of the Lord was
revealed to him. (66) When he prophesied, that is, when he interpreted the
true mind of God, he was wont to say this of himself: "He hath said, which
heard the words of God and knew the knowledge of the Most High, which
saw the vision of the Almighty falling into a trance, but having his eyes
open." (67) Further, after he had blessed the Hebrews by the command of
God, he began (as was his custom) to prophesy to other nations, and to
predict their future; all of which abundantly shows that he had always been
a prophet, or had often prophesied, and (as we may also remark here)
possessed that which afforded the chief certainty to prophets of the truth of
their prophecy, namely, a mind turned wholly to what is right and good, for
he did not bless those whom he wished to bless, nor curse those whom he
wished to curse, as Balak supposed, but only those whom God wished to be
blessed or cursed. (68) Thus he answered Balak: "If Balak should give me
his house full of silver and gold, I cannot go beyond the commandment of
the Lord to do either good or bad of my own mind; but what the Lord saith,

that will I speak." (69) As for God being angry with him in the way, the
same happened to Moses when he set out to Egypt by the command of the
Lord; and as to his receiving money for prophesying, Samuel did the same
(1 Sam. ix:7, 8); if in anyway he sinned, "there is not a just man upon earth
that doeth good and sinneth not," Eccles. vii:20. (Vide 2 Epist. Peter ii:15,
16, and Jude 5:11.)

(70) His speeches must certainly have had much weight with God, and His
power for cursing must assuredly have been very great from the number of
times that we find stated in Scripture, in proof of God's great mercy to the
Jews, that God would not hear Balaam, and that He changed the cursing to
blessing (see Deut. xxiii:6, Josh. xxiv:10, Neh. xiii:2). (71) Wherefore he
was without doubt most acceptable to God, for the speeches and cursings of
the wicked move God not at all. (72) As then he was a true prophet, and
nevertheless Joshua calls him a soothsayer or augur, it is certain that this
title had an honourable signification, and that those whom the Gentiles
called augurs and soothsayers were true prophets, while those whom
Scripture often accuses and condemns were false soothsayers, who
deceived the Gentiles as false prophets deceived the Jews; indeed, this is
made evident from other passages in the Bible, whence we conclude that
the gift of prophecy was not peculiar to the Jews, but common to all
nations. (73) The Pharisees, however, vehemently contend that this Divine
gift was peculiar to their nation, and that the other nations foretold the
future (what will superstition invent next?) by some unexplained diabolical
faculty. (74) The principal passage of Scripture which they cite, by way of
confirming their theory with its authority, is Exodus xxxiii:16, where Moses
says to God, "For wherein shall it be known here that I and Thy people have
found grace in Thy sight? is it not in that Thou goest with us? so shall we be
separated, I and Thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of
the earth." (75) From this they would infer that Moses asked of God that He
should be present to the Jews, and should reveal Himself to them
prophetically; further, that He should grant this favour to no other nation.
(76) It is surely absurd that Moses should have been jealous of God's
presence among the Gentiles, or that he should have dared to ask any such
thing. (77) The fact is, as Moses knew that the disposition and spirit of his
nation was rebellious, he clearly saw that they could not carry out what they
had begun without very great miracles and special external aid from God;

nay, that without such aid they must necessarily perish: as it was evident
that God wished them to be preserved, he asked for this special external aid.
(78) Thus he says (Ex. xxxiv:9), "If now I have found grace in Thy sight, O
Lord, let my Lord, I pray Thee, go among us; for it is a stiffnecked people."
(79) The reason, therefore, for his seeking special external aid from God
was the stiffneckedness of the people, and it is made still more plain, that he
asked for nothing beyond this special external aid by God's answer - for
God answered at once (verse 10 of the same chapter) - "Behold, I make a
covenant: before all Thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been
done in all the earth, nor in any nation." (80) Therefore Moses had in view
nothing beyond the special election of the Jews, as I have explained it, and
made no other request to God. (81) I confess that in Paul's Epistle to the
Romans, I find another text which carries more weight, namely, where Paul
seems to teach a different doctrine from that here set down, for he there
says (Rom. iii:1): "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is
there of circumcision? (82) Much every way: chiefly, because that unto
them were committed the oracles of God."

(83) But if we look to the doctrine which Paul especially desired to teach,
we shall find nothing repugnant to our present contention; on the contrary,
his doctrine is the same as ours, for he says (Rom. iii:29) "that God is the
God of the Jews and of the Gentiles, and" (ch. ii:25, 26) "But, if thou be a
breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. (84) Therefore
if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his
uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?" (85) Further, in chap.
iv:verse 9, he says that all alike, Jew and Gentile, were under sin, and that
without commandment and law there is no sin. (86) Wherefore it is most
evident that to all men absolutely was revealed the law under which all
lived - namely, the law which has regard only to true virtue, not the law
established in respect to, and in the formation of a particular state and
adapted to the disposition of a particular people. (87) Lastly, Paul concludes
that since God is the God of all nations, that is, is equally gracious to all,
and since all men equally live under the law and under sin, so also to all
nations did God send His Christ, to free all men equally from the bondage
of the law, that they should no more do right by the command of the law,
but by the constant determination of their hearts. (88) So that Paul teaches
exactly the same as ourselves. (89) When, therefore, he says "To the Jews

only were entrusted the oracles of God," we must either understand that to
them only were the laws entrusted in writing, while they were given to
other nations merely in revelation and conception, or else (as none but Jews
would object to the doctrine he desired to advance) that Paul was answering
only in accordance with the understanding and current ideas of the Jews, for
in respect to teaching things which he had partly seen, partly heard, he was
to the Greeks a Greek, and to the Jews a Jew.

(90) It now only remains to us to answer the arguments of those who would
persuade themselves that the election of the Jews was not temporal, and
merely in respect of their commonwealth, but eternal; for, they say, we see
the Jews after the loss of their commonwealth, and after being scattered so
many years and separated from all other nations, still surviving, which is
without parallel among other peoples, and further the Scriptures seem to
teach that God has chosen for Himself the Jews for ever, so that though they
have lost their commonwealth, they still nevertheless remain God's elect.

(91) The passages which they think teach most clearly this eternal election,
are chiefly: (1.) Jer. xxxi:36, where the prophet testifies that the seed of
Israel shall for ever remain the nation of God, comparing them with the
stability of the heavens and nature;

(2.) Ezek. xx:32, where the prophet seems to intend that though the Jews
wanted after the help afforded them to turn their backs on the worship of the
Lord, that God would nevertheless gather them together again from all the
lands in which they were dispersed, and lead them to the wilderness of the
peoples - as He had led their fathers to the wilderness of the land of Egypt -
and would at length, after purging out from among them the rebels and
transgressors, bring them thence to his Holy mountain, where the whole
house of Israel should worship Him. Other passages are also cited,
especially by the Pharisees, but I think I shall satisfy everyone if I answer
these two, and this I shall easily accomplish after showing from Scripture
itself that God chose not the Hebrews for ever, but only on the condition
under which He had formerly chosen the Canaanites, for these last, as we
have shown, had priests who religiously worshipped God, and whom God
at length rejected because of their luxury, pride, and corrupt worship.

(92) Moses (Lev. xviii:27) warned the Israelites that they be not polluted
with whoredoms, lest the land spue them out as it had spued out the nations
who had dwelt there before, and in Deut. viii:19, 20, in the plainest terms
He threatens their total ruin, for He says, "I testify against you that ye shall
surely perish. (93) As the nations which the Lord destroyeth before your
face, so shall ye perish." In like manner many other passages are found in
the law which expressly show that God chose the Hebrews neither
absolutely nor for ever. (94) If, then, the prophets foretold for them a new
covenant of the knowledge of God, love, and grace, such a promise is easily
proved to be only made to the elect, for Ezekiel in the chapter which we
have just quoted expressly says that God will separate from them the
rebellious and transgressors, and Zephaniah (iii:12, 13), says that "God will
take away the proud from the midst of them, and leave the poor." (95) Now,
inasmuch as their election has regard to true virtue, it is not to be thought
that it was promised to the Jews alone to the exclusion of others, but we
must evidently believe that the true Gentile prophets (and every nation, as
we have shown, possessed such) promised the same to the faithful of their
own people, who were thereby comforted. (96) Wherefore this eternal
covenant of the knowledge of God and love is universal, as is clear,
moreover, from Zeph. iii:10, 11: no difference in this respect can be
admitted between Jew and Gentile, nor did the former enjoy any special
election beyond that which we have pointed out.

(97) When the prophets, in speaking of this election which regards only true
virtue, mixed up much concerning sacrifices and ceremonies, and the
rebuilding of the temple and city, they wished by such figurative
expressions, after the manner and nature of prophecy, to expound matters
spiritual, so as at the same time to show to the Jews, whose prophets they
were, the true restoration of the state and of the temple to be expected about
the time of Cyrus.

(98) At the present time, therefore, there is absolutely nothing which the
Jews can arrogate to themselves beyond other people.

(99) As to their continuance so long after dispersion and the loss of empire,
there is nothing marvellous in it, for they so separated themselves from
every other nation as to draw down upon themselves universal hate, not

only by their outward rites, rites conflicting with those of other nations, but
also by the sign of circumcision which they most scrupulously observe.

(100) That they have been preserved in great measure by Gentile hatred,
experience demonstrates. (101) When the king of Spain formerly compelled
the Jews to embrace the State religion or to go into exile, a large number of
Jews accepted Catholicism. (102) Now, as these renegades were admitted to
all the native privileges of Spaniards, and deemed worthy of filling all
honourable offices, it came to pass that they straightway became so
intermingled with the Spaniards as to leave of themselves no relic or
remembrance. (103) But exactly the opposite happened to those whom the
king of Portugal compelled to become Christians, for they always, though
converted, lived apart, inasmuch as they were considered unworthy of any
civic honours.

(104) The sign of circumcision is, as I think, so important, that I could
persuade myself that it alone would preserve the nation for ever. (105) Nay,
I would go so far as to believe that if the foundations of their religion have
not emasculated their minds they may even, if occasion offers, so
changeable are human affairs, raise up their empire afresh, and that God
may a second time elect them.

(106) Of such a possibility we have a very famous example in the Chinese.
(107) They, too, have some distinctive mark on their heads which they most
scrupulously observe, and by which they keep themselves apart from
everyone else, and have thus kept themselves during so many thousand
years that they far surpass all other nations in antiquity. (108) They have not
always retained empire, but they have recovered it when lost, and doubtless
will do so again after the spirit of the Tartars becomes relaxed through the
luxury of riches and pride.

(109) Lastly, if any one wishes to maintain that the Jews, from this or from
any other cause, have been chosen by God for ever, I will not gainsay him if
he will admit that this choice, whether temporary or eternal, has no regard,
in so far as it is peculiar to the Jews, to aught but dominion and physical
advantages (for by such alone can one nation be distinguished from
another), whereas in regard to intellect and true virtue, every nation is on a

par with the rest, and God has not in these respects chosen one people rather
than another.

CHAPTER IV. - OF THE DIVINE LAW.
(1) The word law, taken in the abstract, means that by which an individual,
or all things, or as many things as belong to a particular species, act in one
and the same fixed and definite manner, which manner depends either on
natural necessity or on human decree. (2) A law which depends on natural
necessity is one which necessarily follows from the nature, or from the
definition of the thing in question; a law which depends on human decree,
and which is more correctly called an ordinance, is one which men have
laid down for themselves and others in order to live more safely or
conveniently, or from some similar reason.

(3) For example, the law that all bodies impinging on lesser bodies, lose as
much of their own motion as they communicate to the latter is a universal
law of all bodies, and depends on natural necessity. (4) So, too, the law that
a man in remembering one thing, straightway remembers another either like
it, or which he had perceived simultaneously with it, is a law which
necessarily follows from the nature of man. (5) But the law that men must
yield, or be compelled to yield, somewhat of their natural right, and that
they bind themselves to live in a certain way, depends on human decree. (6)
Now, though I freely admit that all things are predetermined by universal
natural laws to exist and operate in a given, fixed, and definite manner, I
still assert that the laws I have just mentioned depend on human decree.

(1.) (7) Because man, in so far as he is a part of nature, constitutes a part of
the power of nature. (8) Whatever, therefore, follows necessarily from the
necessity of human nature (that is, from nature herself, in so far as we
conceive of her as acting through man) follows, even though it be
necessarily, from human power. (9) Hence the sanction of such laws may
very well be said to depend on man's decree, for it principally depends on
the power of the human mind; so that the human mind in respect to its

perception of things as true and false, can readily be conceived as without
such laws, but not without necessary law as we have just defined it.

(2.) (10) I have stated that these laws depend on human decree because it is
well to define and explain things by their proximate causes. (11) The
general consideration of fate and the concatenation of causes would aid us
very little in forming and arranging our ideas concerning particular
questions. (12) Let us add that as to the actual coordination and
concatenation of things, that is how things are ordained and linked together,
we are obviously ignorant; therefore, it is more profitable for right living,
nay, it is necessary for us to consider things as contingent. (13) So much
about law in the abstract.

(14) Now the word law seems to be only applied to natural phenomena by
analogy, and is commonly taken to signify a command which men can
either obey or neglect, inasmuch as it restrains human nature within certain
originally exceeded limits, and therefore lays down no rule beyond human
strength. (15) Thus it is expedient to define law more particularly as a plan
of life laid down by man for himself or others with a certain object.

(16) However, as the true object of legislation is only perceived by a few,
and most men are almost incapable of grasping it, though they live under its
conditions, legislators, with a view to exacting general obedience, have
wisely put forward another object, very different from that which
necessarily follows from the nature of law: they promise to the observers of
the law that which the masses chiefly desire, and threaten its violators with
that which they chiefly fear: thus endeavouring to restrain the masses, as far
as may be, like a horse with a curb; whence it follows that the word law is
chiefly applied to the modes of life enjoined on men by the sway of others;
hence those who obey the law are said to live under it and to be under
compulsion. (17) In truth, a man who renders everyone their due because he
fears the gallows, acts under the sway and compulsion of others, and cannot
be called just. (18) But a man who does the same from a knowledge of the
true reason for laws and their necessity, acts from a firm purpose and of his
own accord, and is therefore properly called just. (19) This, I take it, is
Paul's meaning when he says, that those who live under the law cannot be
justified through the law, for justice, as commonly defined, is the constant

and perpetual will to render every man his due. (20) Thus Solomon says
(Prov. xxi:15), "It is a joy to the just to do judgment," but the wicked fear.

(21) Law, then, being a plan of living which men have for a certain object
laid down for themselves or others, may, as it seems, be divided into human
law and Divine law.

(22) By human law I mean a plan of living which serves only to render life
and the state secure. (23) By Divine law I mean that which only regards the
highest good, in other words, the true knowledge of God and love.

(24) I call this law Divine because of the nature of the highest good, which I
will here shortly explain as clearly as I can.

(25) Inasmuch as the intellect is the best part of our being, it is evident that
we should make every effort to perfect it as far as possible if we desire to
search for what is really profitable to us. (26) For in intellectual perfection
the highest good should consist. (27) Now, since all our knowledge, and the
certainty which removes every doubt, depend solely on the knowledge of
God;- firstly, because without God nothing can exist or be conceived;
secondly, because so long as we have no clear and distinct idea of God we
may remain in universal doubt - it follows that our highest good and
perfection also depend solely on the knowledge of God. (28) Further, since
without God nothing can exist or be conceived, it is evident that all natural
phenomena involve and express the conception of God as far as their
essence and perfection extend, so that we have greater and more perfect
knowledge of God in proportion to our knowledge of natural phenomena:
conversely (since the knowledge of an effect through its cause is the same
thing as the knowledge of a particular property of a cause) the greater our
knowledge of natural phenomena, the more perfect is our knowledge of the
essence of God (which is the cause of all things). (29) So, then, our highest
good not only depends on the knowledge of God, but wholly consists
therein; and it further follows that man is perfect or the reverse in
proportion to the nature and perfection of the object of his special desire;
hence the most perfect and the chief sharer in the highest blessedness is he
who prizes above all else, and takes especial delight in, the intellectual
knowledge of God, the most perfect Being.

(30) Hither, then, our highest good and our highest blessedness aim -
namely, to the knowledge and love of God; therefore the means demanded
by this aim of all human actions, that is, by God in so far as the idea of him
is in us, may be called the commands of God, because they proceed, as it
were, from God Himself, inasmuch as He exists in our minds, and the plan
of life which has regard to this aim may be fitly called the law of God.

(31) The nature of the means, and the plan of life which this aim demands,
how the foundations of the best states follow its lines, and how men's life is
conducted, are questions pertaining to general ethics. (32) Here I only
proceed to treat of the Divine law in a particular application.

(33) As the love of God is man's highest happiness and blessedness, and the
ultimate end and aim of all human actions, it follows that he alone lives by
the Divine law who loves God not from fear of punishment, or from love of
any other object, such as sensual pleasure, fame, or the like; but solely
because he has knowledge of God, or is convinced that the knowledge and
love of God is the highest good. (34) The sum and chief precept, then, of
the Divine law is to love God as the highest good, namely, as we have said,
not from fear of any pains and penalties, or from the love of any other
object in which we desire to take pleasure. (35) The idea of God lays down
the rule that God is our highest good - in other words, that the knowledge
and love of God is the ultimate aim to which all our actions should be
directed. (36) The worldling cannot understand these things, they appear
foolishness to him, because he has too meager a knowledge of God, and
also because in this highest good he can discover nothing which he can
handle or eat, or which affects the fleshly appetites wherein he chiefly
delights, for it consists solely in thought and the pure reason. (37) They, on
the other hand, who know that they possess no greater gift than intellect and
sound reason, will doubtless accept what I have said without question.

(38) We have now explained that wherein the Divine law chiefly consists,
and what are human laws, namely, all those which have a different aim
unless they have been ratified by revelation, for in this respect also things
are referred to God (as we have shown above) and in this sense the law of
Moses, although it was not universal, but entirely adapted to the disposition
and particular preservation of a single people, may yet be called a law of

God or Divine law, inasmuch as we believe that it was ratified by prophetic
insight. (39) If we consider the nature of natural Divine law as we have just
explained it, we shall see:

(40) I.- That it is universal or common to all men, for we have deduced it
from universal human nature.

(41) II. That it does not depend on the truth of any historical narrative
whatsoever, for inasmuch as this natural Divine law is comprehended solely
by the consideration of human nature, it is plain that we can conceive it as
existing as well in Adam as in any other man, as well in a man living among
his fellows, as in a man who lives by himself.

(42) The truth of a historical narrative, however assured, cannot give us the
knowledge nor consequently the love of God, for love of God springs from
knowledge of Him, and knowledge of Him should be derived from general
ideas, in themselves certain and known, so that the truth of a historical
narrative is very far from being a necessary requisite for our attaining our
highest good.

(43) Still, though the truth of histories cannot give us the knowledge and
love of God, I do not deny that reading them is very useful with a view to
life in the world, for the more we have observed and known of men's
customs and circumstances, which are best revealed by their actions, the
more warily we shall be able to order our lives among them, and so far as
reason dictates to adapt our actions to their dispositions.

(44) III. We see that this natural Divine law does not demand the
performance of ceremonies - that is, actions in themselves indifferent,
which are called good from the fact of their institution, or actions
symbolizing something profitable for salvation, or (if one prefers this
definition) actions of which the meaning surpasses human understanding.
(45) The natural light of reason does not demand anything which it is itself
unable to supply, but only such as it can very clearly show to be good, or a
means to our blessedness. (46) Such things as are good simply because they
have been commanded or instituted, or as being symbols of something
good, are mere shadows which cannot be reckoned among actions that are

the offsprings as it were, or fruit of a sound mind and of intellect. (47)
There is no need for me to go into this now in more detail.

(48) IV. Lastly, we see that the highest reward of the Divine law is the law
itself, namely, to know God and to love Him of our free choice, and with an
undivided and fruitful spirit; while its penalty is the absence of these things,
and being in bondage to the flesh - that is, having an inconstant and
wavering spirit.

(49) These points being noted, I must now inquire:

(50) I. Whether by the natural light of reason we can conceive of God as a
law-giver or potentate ordaining laws for men?

(51) II. What is the teaching of Holy Writ concerning this natural light of
reason and natural law?

(52) III. With what objects were ceremonies formerly instituted?

(53) IV. Lastly, what is the good gained by knowing the sacred histories
and believing them?

(54) Of the first two I will treat in this chapter, of the remaining two in the
following one.

(55) Our conclusion about the first is easily deduced from the nature of
God's will, which is only distinguished from His understanding in relation
to our intellect - that is, the will and the understanding of God are in reality
one and the same, and are only distinguished in relation to our thoughts
which we form concerning God's understanding. (56) For instance, if we are
only looking to the fact that the nature of a triangle is from eternity
contained in the Divine nature as an eternal verity, we say that God
possesses the idea of a triangle, or that He understands the nature of a
triangle; but if afterwards we look to the fact that the nature of a triangle is
thus contained in the Divine nature, solely by the necessity of the Divine
nature, and not by the necessity of the nature and essence of a triangle - in
fact, that the necessity of a triangle's essence and nature, in so far as they
are conceived of as eternal verities, depends solely on the necessity of the

Divine nature and intellect, we then style God's will or decree, that which
before we styled His intellect. (57) Wherefore we make one and the same
affirmation concerning God when we say that He has from eternity decreed
that three angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles, as when we say
that He has understood it.

(58) Hence the affirmations and the negations of God always involve
necessity or truth; so that, for example, if God said to Adam that He did not
wish him to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, it would have
involved a contradiction that Adam should have been able to eat of it, and
would therefore have been impossible that he should have so eaten, for the
Divine command would have involved an eternal necessity and truth. (59)
But since Scripture nevertheless narrates that God did give this command to
Adam, and yet that none the less Adam ate of the tree, we must perforce say
that God revealed to Adam the evil which would surely follow if he should
eat of the tree, but did not disclose that such evil would of necessity come
to pass. (60) Thus it was that Adam took the revelation to be not an eternal
and necessary truth, but a law - that is, an ordinance followed by gain or
loss, not depending necessarily on the nature of the act performed, but
solely on the will and absolute power of some potentate, so that the
revelation in question was solely in relation to Adam, and solely through his
lack of knowledge a law, and God was, as it were, a lawgiver and potentate.
(61) From the same cause, namely, from lack of knowledge, the Decalogue
in relation to the Hebrews was a law, for since they knew not the existence
of God as an eternal truth, they must have taken as a law that which was
revealed to them in the Decalogue, namely, that God exists, and that God
only should be worshipped. (62) But if God had spoken to them without the
intervention of any bodily means, immediately they would have perceived it
not as a law, but as an eternal truth.

(63) What we have said about the Israelites and Adam, applies also to all
the prophets who wrote laws in God's name - they did not adequately
conceive God's decrees as eternal truths. (64) For instance, we must say of
Moses that from revelation, from the basis of what was revealed to him, he
perceived the method by which the Israelitish nation could best be united in
a particular territory, and could form a body politic or state, and further that
he perceived the method by which that nation could best be constrained to

obedience; but he did not perceive, nor was it revealed to him, that this
method was absolutely the best, nor that the obedience of the people in a
certain strip of territory would necessarily imply the end he had in view.
(65) Wherefore he perceived these things not as eternal truths, but as
precepts and ordinances, and he ordained them as laws of God, and thus it
came to be that he conceived God as a ruler, a legislator, a king, as merciful,
just, &c., whereas such qualities are simply attributes of human nature, and
utterly alien from the nature of the Deity. (66)Thus much we may affirm of
the prophets who wrote laws in the name of God; but we must not affirm it
of Christ, for Christ, although He too seems to have written laws in the
name of God, must be taken to have had a clear and adequate perception,
for Christ was not so much a prophet as the mouthpiece of God. (67) For
God made revelations to mankind through Christ as He had before done
through angels - that is, a created voice, visions, &c. (68) It would be as
unreasonable to say that God had accommodated his revelations to the
opinions of Christ as that He had before accommodated them to the
opinions of angels (that is, of a created voice or visions) as matters to be
revealed to the prophets, a wholly absurd hypothesis. (69) Moreover, Christ
was sent to teach not only the Jews but the whole human race, and therefore
it was not enough that His mind should be accommodated to the opinions
the Jews alone, but also to the opinion and fundamental teaching common
to the whole human race - in other words, to ideas universal and true. (70)
Inasmuch as God revealed Himself to Christ, or to Christ's mind
immediately, and not as to the prophets through words and symbols, we
must needs suppose that Christ perceived truly what was revealed, in other
words, He understood it, for a matter is understood when it is perceived
simply by the mind without words or symbols.

(71) Christ, then, perceived (truly and adequately) what was revealed, and if
He ever proclaimed such revelations as laws, He did so because of the
ignorance and obstinacy of the people, acting in this respect the part of
God; inasmuch as He accommodated Himself to the comprehension of the
people, and though He spoke somewhat more clearly than the other
prophets, yet He taught what was revealed obscurely, and generally through
parables, especially when He was speaking to those to whom it was not yet
given to understand the kingdom of heaven. (See Matt. xiii:10, &c.) (72) To
those to whom it was given to understand the mysteries of heaven, He

doubtless taught His doctrines as eternal truths, and did not lay them down
as laws, thus freeing the minds of His hearers from the bondage of that law
which He further confirmed and established. (73) Paul apparently points to
this more than once (e.g. Rom. vii:6, and iii:28), though he never himself
seems to wish to speak openly, but, to quote his own words (Rom. iii:6, and
vi:19), "merely humanly." (74) This he expressly states when he calls God
just, and it was doubtless in concession to human weakness that he
attributes mercy, grace, anger, and similar qualities to God, adapting his
language to the popular mind, or, as he puts it (1 Cor. iii:1, 2), to carnal
men. (75) In Rom. ix:18, he teaches undisguisedly that God's auger and
mercy depend not on the actions of men, but on God's own nature or will;
further, that no one is justified by the works of the law, but only by faith,
which he seems to identify with the full assent of the soul; lastly, that no
one is blessed unless he have in him the mind of Christ (Rom. viii:9),
whereby he perceives the laws of God as eternal truths. (76) We conclude,
therefore, that God is described as a lawgiver or prince, and styled just,
merciful, &c., merely in concession to popular understanding, and the
imperfection of popular knowledge; that in reality God acts and directs all
things simply by the necessity of His nature and perfection, and that His
decrees and volitions are eternal truths, and always involve necessity. (77)
So much for the first point which I wished to explain and demonstrate.

(78) Passing on to the second point, let us search the sacred pages for their
teaching concerning the light of nature and this Divine law. (79) The first
doctrine we find in the history of the first man, where it is narrated that God
commanded Adam not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil; this seems to mean that God commanded Adam to do and to
seek after righteousness because it was good, not because the contrary was
evil: that is, to seek the good for its own sake, not from fear of evil. (80) We
have seen that he who acts rightly from the true knowledge and love of
right, acts with freedom and constancy, whereas he who acts from fear of
evil, is under the constraint of evil, and acts in bondage under external
control. (81) So that this commandment of God to Adam comprehends the
whole Divine natural law, and absolutely agrees with the dictates of the
light of nature; nay, it would be easy to explain on this basis the whole
history or allegory of the first man. (82) But I prefer to pass over the subject
in silence, because, in the first place, I cannot be absolutely certain that my

explanation would be in accordance with the intention of the sacred writer;
and, secondly, because many do not admit that this history is an allegory,
maintaining it to be a simple narrative of facts. (83) It will be better,
therefore, to adduce other passages of Scripture, especially such as were
written by him, who speaks with all the strength of his natural
understanding, in which he surpassed all his contemporaries, and whose
sayings are accepted by the people as of equal weight with those of the
prophets. (84) I mean Solomon, whose prudence and wisdom are
commended in Scripture rather than his piety and gift of prophecy. (85) Life
being taken to mean the true life (as is evident from Deut. xxx:19), the fruit
of the understanding consists only in the true life, and its absence
constitutes punishment. (86) All this absolutely agrees with what was set
out in our fourth point concerning natural law. (87) Moreover our position
that it is the well-spring of life, and that the intellect alone lays down laws
for the wise, is plainly taught by, the sage, for he says (Prov. xiii:14): "The
law of the wise is a fountain of life" - that is, as we gather from the
preceding text, the understanding. (88) In chap. iii:13, he expressly teaches
that the understanding renders man blessed and happy, and gives him true
peace of mind. "Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that
getteth understanding," for "Wisdom gives length of days, and riches and
honour; her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths peace" (xiiii:6,
17). (89) According to Solomon, therefore, it is only, the wise who live in
peace and equanimity, not like the wicked whose minds drift hither and
thither, and (as Isaiah says, chap. lvii:20) "are like the troubled sea, for them
there is no peace."

(90) Lastly, we should especially note the passage in chap. ii. of Solomon's
proverbs which most clearly confirms our contention: "If thou criest after
knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding . . . then shalt thou
understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God; for the
Lord giveth wisdom; out of His mouth cometh knowledge and
understanding." (91) These words clearly enunciate (1), that wisdom or
intellect alone teaches us to fear God wisely - that is, to worship Him truly;
(2), that wisdom and knowledge flow from God's mouth, and that God
bestows on us this gift; this we have already shown in proving that our
understanding and our knowledge depend on, spring from, and are
perfected by the idea or knowledge of God, and nothing else. (92) Solomon

goes on to say in so many words that this knowledge contains and involves
the true principles of ethics and politics: "When wisdom entereth into thy
heart, and knowledge is pleasant to thy soul, discretion shall preserve thee,
understanding shall keep thee, then shalt thou understand righteousness, and
judgment, and equity, yea every good path." (93) All of which is in obvious
agreement with natural knowledge: for after we have come to the
understanding of things, and have tasted the excellence of knowledge, she
teaches us ethics and true virtue.

(94) Thus the happiness and the peace of him who cultivates his natural
understanding lies, according to Solomon also, not so much under the
dominion of fortune (or God's external aid) as in inward personal virtue (or
God's internal aid), for the latter can to a great extent be preserved by
vigilance, right action, and thought.

(95) Lastly, we must by no means pass over the passage in Paul's Epistle to
the Romans, i:20, in which he says: "For the invisible things of God from
the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things
that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are
without excuse, because, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as
God, neither were they thankful." (96) These words clearly show that
everyone can by the light of nature clearly understand the goodness and the
eternal divinity of God, and can thence know and deduce what they should
seek for and what avoid; wherefore the Apostle says that they are without
excuse and cannot plead ignorance, as they certainly might if it were a
question of supernatural light and the incarnation, passion, and resurrection
of Christ. (97) "Wherefore," he goes on to say (ib. 24), "God gave them up
to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts;" and so on, through the
rest of the chapter, he describes the vices of ignorance, and sets them forth
as the punishment of ignorance. (98) This obviously agrees with the verse
of Solomon, already quoted, "The instruction of fools is folly," so that it is
easy to understand why Paul says that the wicked are without excuse. (99)
As every man sows so shall he reap: out of evil, evils necessarily spring,
unless they be wisely counteracted.

(100) Thus we see that Scripture literally approves of the light of natural
reason and the natural Divine law, and I have fulfilled the promises made at

the beginning of this chapter.

CHAPTER V. - OF THE CEREMONIAL LAW.
(1) In the foregoing chapter we have shown that the Divine law, which
renders men truly blessed, and teaches them the true life, is universal to all
men; nay, we have so intimately deduced it from human nature that it must
be esteemed innate, and, as it were, ingrained in the human mind.

(2) But with regard to the ceremonial observances which were ordained in
the Old Testament for the Hebrews only, and were so adapted to their state
that they could for the most part only be observed by the society as a whole
and not by each individual, it is evident that they formed no part of the
Divine law, and had nothing to do with blessedness and virtue, but had
reference only to the election of the Hebrews, that is (as I have shown in
Chap. II.), to their temporal bodily happiness and the tranquillity of their
kingdom, and that therefore they were only valid while that kingdom lasted.
(3) If in the Old Testament they are spoken of as the law of God, it is only
because they were founded on revelation, or a basis of revelation. (4) Still
as reason, however sound, has little weight with ordinary theologians, I will
adduce the authority of Scripture for what I here assert, and will further
show, for the sake of greater clearness, why and how these ceremonials
served to establish and preserve the Jewish kingdom. (5) Isaiah teaches
most plainly that the Divine law in its strict sense signifies that universal
law which consists in a true manner of life, and does not signify ceremonial
observances. (6) In chapter i:10, the prophet calls on his countrymen to
hearken to the Divine law as he delivers it, and first excluding all kinds of
sacrifices and all feasts, he at length sums up the law in these few words,
"Cease to do evil, learn to do well: seek judgment, relieve the oppressed."
(7) Not less striking testimony is given in Psalm xl:7- 9, where the Psalmist
addresses God: "Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire; mine ears hast
Thou opened; burnt offering and sin-offering hast Thou not required; I
delight to do Thy will, O my God; yea, Thy law is within my heart." (8)
Here the Psalmist reckons as the law of God only that which is inscribed in

his heart, and excludes ceremonies therefrom, for the latter are good and
inscribed on the heart only from the fact of their institution, and not because
of their intrinsic value.

(9) Other passages of Scripture testify to the same truth, but these two will
suffice. (10) We may also learn from the Bible that ceremonies are no aid to
blessedness, but only have reference to the temporal prosperity of the
kingdom; for the rewards promised for their observance are merely
temporal advantages and delights, blessedness being reserved for the
universal Divine law. (11) In all the five books commonly attributed to
Moses nothing is promised, as I have said, beyond temporal benefits, such
as honours, fame, victories, riches, enjoyments, and health. (12) Though
many moral precepts besides ceremonies are contained in these five books,
they appear not as moral doctrines universal to all men, but as commands
especially adapted to the understanding and character of the Hebrew people,
and as having reference only to the welfare of the kingdom. (13) For
instance, Moses does not teach the Jews as a prophet not to kill or to steal,
but gives these commandments solely as a lawgiver and judge; he does not
reason out the doctrine, but affixes for its non-observance a penalty which
may and very properly does vary in different nations. (14) So, too, the
command not to commit adultery is given merely with reference to the
welfare of the state; for if the moral doctrine had been intended, with
reference not only to the welfare of the state, but also to the tranquillity and
blessedness of the individual, Moses would have condemned not merely the
outward act, but also the mental acquiescence, as is done by Christ, Who
taught only universal moral precepts, and for this cause promises a spiritual
instead of a temporal reward. (15) Christ, as I have said, was sent into the
world, not to preserve the state nor to lay down laws, but solely to teach the
universal moral law, so we can easily understand that He wished in nowise
to do away with the law of Moses, inasmuch as He introduced no new laws
of His own - His sole care was to teach moral doctrines, and distinguish
them from the laws of the state; for the Pharisees, in their ignorance,
thought that the observance of the state law and the Mosaic law was the
sum total of morality; whereas such laws merely had reference to the public
welfare, and aimed not so much at instructing the Jews as at keeping them
under constraint. (16) But let us return to our subject, and cite other
passages of Scripture which set forth temporal benefits as rewards for

observing the ceremonial law, and blessedness as reward for the universal
law.

(17) None of the prophets puts the point more clearly than Isaiah. (18.)
After condemning hypocrisy he commends liberty and charity towards one's
self and one's neighbours, and promises as a reward: "Then shall thy light
break forth as the morning, and thy health shall spring forth speedily, thy
righteousness shall go before thee, and the glory of the Lord shall be thy
reward" (chap. lviii:8). (19) Shortly afterwards he commends the Sabbath,
and for a due observance of it, promises: "Then shalt thou delight thyself in
the Lord, and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and
feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the Lord
has spoken it." (20) Thus the prophet for liberty bestowed, and charitable
works, promises a healthy mind in a healthy body, and the glory of the Lord
even after death; whereas, for ceremonial exactitude, he only promises
security of rule, prosperity, and temporal happiness.

(21) In Psalms xv. and xxiv. no mention is made of ceremonies, but only of
moral doctrines, inasmuch as there is no question of anything but
blessedness, and blessedness is symbolically promised: it is quite certain
that the expressions, "the hill of God," and "His tents and the dwellers
therein," refer to blessedness and security of soul, not to the actual mount of
Jerusalem and the tabernacle of Moses, for these latter were not dwelt in by
anyone, and only the sons of Levi ministered there. (22) Further, all those
sentences of Solomon to which I referred in the last chapter, for the
cultivation of the intellect and wisdom, promise true blessedness, for by
wisdom is the fear of God at length understood, and the knowledge of God
found.

(23) That the Jews themselves were not bound to practise their ceremonial
observances after the destruction of their kingdom is evident from Jeremiah.
(24) For when the prophet saw and foretold that the desolation of the city
was at hand, he said that God only delights in those who know and
understand that He exercises loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness
in the earth, and that such persons only are worthy of praise. (Jer. ix:23.)
(25) As though God had said that, after the desolation of the city, He would

require nothing special from the Jews beyond the natural law by which all
men are bound.

(26) The New Testament also confirms this view, for only moral doctrines
are therein taught, and the kingdom of heaven is promised as a reward,
whereas ceremonial observances are not touched on by the Apostles, after
they began to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. (27) The Pharisees
certainly continued to practise these rites after the destruction of the
kingdom, but more with a view of opposing the Christians than of pleasing
God: for after the first destruction of the city, when they were led captive to
Babylon, not being then, so far as I am aware, split up into sects, they
straightway neglected their rites, bid farewell to the Mosaic law, buried
their national customs in oblivion as being plainly superfluous, and began
to mingle with other nations, as we may abundantly learn from Ezra and
Nehemiah. (28) We cannot, therefore, doubt that they were no more bound
by the law of Moses, after the destruction of their kingdom, than they had
been before it had been begun, while they were still living among other
peoples before the exodus from Egypt, and were subject to no special law
beyond the natural law, and also, doubtless, the law of the state in which
they were living, in so far as it was consonant with the Divine natural law.

(29) As to the fact that the patriarchs offered sacrifices, I think they did so
for the purpose of stimulating their piety, for their minds had been
accustomed from childhood to the idea of sacrifice, which we know had
been universal from the time of Enoch; and thus they found in sacrifice
their most powerful incentive. (30) The patriarchs, then, did not sacrifice to
God at the bidding of a Divine right, or as taught by the basis of the Divine
law, but simply in accordance with the custom of the time; and, if in so
doing they followed any ordinance, it was simply the ordinance of the
country they were living in, by which (as we have seen before in the case of
Melchisedek) they were bound.

(31) I think that I have now given Scriptural authority for my view: it
remains to show why and how the ceremonial observances tended to
preserve and confirm the Hebrew kingdom; and this I can very briefly do on
grounds universally accepted.

(32) The formation of society serves not only for defensive purposes, but is
also very useful, and, indeed, absolutely necessary, as rendering possible
the division of labour. (33) If men did not render mutual assistance to each
other, no one would have either the skill or the time to provide for his own
sustenance and preservation: for all men are not equally apt for all work,
and no one would be capable of preparing all that he individually stood in
need of. (34) Strength and time, I repeat, would fail, if every one had in
person to plough, to sow, to reap, to grind corn, to cook, to weave, to stitch,
and perform the other numerous functions required to keep life going; to
say nothing of the arts and sciences which are also entirely necessary to the
perfection and blessedness of human nature. (35) We see that peoples
living, in uncivilized barbarism lead a wretched and almost animal life, and
even they would not be able to acquire their few rude necessaries without
assisting one another to a certain extent.

(36) Now if men were so constituted by nature that they desired nothing but
what is designated by true reason, society would obviously have no need of
laws: it would be sufficient to inculcate true moral doctrines; and men
would freely, without hesitation, act in accordance with their true interests.
(37) But human nature is framed in a different fashion: every one, indeed,
seeks his own interest, but does not do so in accordance with the dictates of
sound reason, for most men's ideas of desirability and usefulness are guided
by their fleshly instincts and emotions, which take no thought beyond the
present and the immediate object. (38) Therefore, no society can exist
without government, and force, and laws to restrain and repress men's
desires and immoderate impulses. (39) Still human nature will not submit to
absolute repression. (40) Violent governments, as Seneca says, never last
long; the moderate governments endure. (41) So long as men act simply
from fear they act contrary to their inclinations, taking no thought for the
advantages or necessity of their actions, but simply endeavouring to escape
punishment or loss of life. (42) They must needs rejoice in any evil which
befalls their ruler, even if it should involve themselves; and must long for
and bring about such evil by every means in their power. (43) Again, men
are especially intolerant of serving and being ruled by their equals. (44)
Lastly, it is exceedingly difficult to revoke liberties once granted.

(45) From these considerations it follows, firstly, that authority should
either be vested in the hands of the whole state in common, so that everyone
should be bound to serve, and yet not be in subjection to his equals; or else,
if power be in the hands of a few, or one man, that one man should be
something above average humanity, or should strive to get himself accepted
as such. (46) Secondly, laws should in every government be so arranged
that people should be kept in bounds by the hope of some greatly desired
good, rather than by fear, for then everyone will do his duty willingly.

(47) Lastly, as obedience consists in acting at the bidding of external
authority, it would have no place in a state where the government is vested
in the whole people, and where laws are made by common consent. (48) In
such a society the people would remain free, whether the laws were added
to or diminished, inasmuch as it would not be done on external authority,
but their own free consent. (49) The reverse happens when the sovereign
power is vested in one man, for all act at his bidding; and, therefore, unless
they had been trained from the first to depend on the words of their ruler,
the latter would find it difficult, in case of need, to abrogate liberties once
conceded, and impose new laws.

(50) From these universal considerations, let us pass on to the kingdom of
the Jews. (51) The Jews when they first came out of Egypt were not bound
by any national laws, and were therefore free to ratify any laws they liked,
or to make new ones, and were at liberty to set up a government and occupy
a territory wherever they chose. (52) However, they, were entirely unfit to
frame a wise code of laws and to keep the sovereign power vested in the
community; they were all uncultivated and sunk in a wretched slavery,
therefore the sovereignty was bound to remain vested in the hands of one
man who would rule the rest and keep them under constraint, make laws
and interpret them. (53) This sovereignty was easily retained by Moses,
because he surpassed the rest in virtue and persuaded the people of the fact,
proving it by many testimonies (see Exod. chap. xiv., last verse, and chap.
xix:9). (54) He then, by the Divine virtue he possessed, made laws and
ordained them for the people, taking the greatest care that they should be
obeyed willingly and not through fear, being specially induced to adopt this
course by the obstinate nature of the Jews, who would not have submitted
to be ruled solely by constraint; and also by the imminence of war, for it is

always better to inspire soldiers with a thirst for glory than to terrify them
with threats; each man will then strive to distinguish himself by valour and
courage, instead of merely trying to escape punishment. (55) Moses,
therefore, by his virtue and the Divine command, introduced a religion, so
that the people might do their duty from devotion rather than fear. (56)
Further, he bound them over by benefits, and prophesied many advantages
in the future; nor were his laws very severe, as anyone may see for himself,
especially if he remarks the number of circumstances necessary in order to
procure the conviction of an accused person.

(57) Lastly, in order that the people which could not govern itself should be
entirely dependent on its ruler, he left nothing to the free choice of
individuals (who had hitherto been slaves); the people could do nothing but
remember the law, and follow the ordinances laid down at the good pleasure
of their ruler; they were not allowed to plough, to sow, to reap, nor even to
eat; to clothe themselves, to shave, to rejoice, or in fact to do anything
whatever as they liked, but were bound to follow the directions given in the
law; and not only this, but they were obliged to have marks on their door-
posts, on their hands, and between their eyes to admonish them to perpetual
obedience.

(58) This, then, was the object of the ceremonial law, that men should do
nothing of their own free will, but should always act under external
authority, and should continually confess by their actions and thoughts that
they were not their own masters, but were entirely under the control of
others.

(59) From all these considerations it is clearer than day that ceremonies
have nothing to do with a state of blessedness, and that those mentioned in
the Old Testament, i.e. the whole Mosaic Law, had reference merely to the
government of the Jews, and merely temporal advantages.

(60) As for the Christian rites, such as baptism, the Lord's Supper, festivals,
public prayers, and any other observances which are, and always have been,
common to all Christendom, if they were instituted by Christ or His
Apostles (which is open to doubt), they were instituted as external signs of
the universal church, and not as having anything to do with blessedness, or
possessing any sanctity in themselves. (61) Therefore, though such

ceremonies were not ordained for the sake of upholding a government, they
were ordained for the preservation of a society, and accordingly he who
lives alone is not bound by them: nay, those who live in a country where the
Christian religion is forbidden, are bound to abstain from such rites, and can
none the less live in a state of blessedness. (62) We have an example of this
in Japan, where the Christian religion is forbidden, and the Dutch who live
there are enjoined by their East India Company not to practise any outward
rites of religion. (63) I need not cite other examples, though it would be
easy to prove my point from the fundamental principles of the New
Testament, and to adduce many confirmatory instances; but I pass on the
more willingly, as I am anxious to proceed to my next proposition. (64) I
will now, therefore, pass on to what I proposed to treat of in the second part
of this chapter, namely, what persons are bound to believe in the narratives
contained in Scripture, and how far they are so bound. (65) Examining this
question by the aid of natural reason, I will proceed as follows.

(66) If anyone wishes to persuade his fellows for or against anything which
is not self-evident, he must deduce his contention from their admissions,
and convince them either by experience or by ratiocination; either by
appealing to facts of natural experience, or to self-evident intellectual
axioms. (67) Now unless the experience be of such a kind as to be clearly
and distinctly understood, though it may convince a man, it will not have
the same effect on his mind and disperse the clouds of his doubt so
completely as when the doctrine taught is deduced entirely from intellectual
axioms - that is, by the mere power of the understanding and logical order,
and this is especially the case in spiritual matters which have nothing to do
with the senses.

(68) But the deduction of conclusions from general truths a priori, usually
requires a long chain of arguments, and, moreover, very great caution,
acuteness, and self-restraint - qualities which are not often met with;
therefore people prefer to be taught by experience rather than deduce their
conclusion from a few axioms, and set them out in logical order. (69)
Whence it follows, that if anyone wishes to teach a doctrine to a whole
nation (not to speak of the whole human race), and to be understood by all
men in every particular, he will seek to support his teaching with
experience, and will endeavour to suit his reasonings and the definitions of

his doctrines as far as possible to the understanding of the common people,
who form the majority of mankind, and he will not set them forth in logical
sequence nor adduce the definitions which serve to establish them. (70)
Otherwise he writes only for the learned - that is, he will be understood by
only a small proportion of the human race.

(71) All Scripture was written primarily for an entire people, and
secondarily for the whole human race; therefore its contents must
necessarily be adapted as far as possible to the understanding of the masses,
and proved only by examples drawn from experience. (72) We will explain
ourselves more clearly. (73) The chief speculative doctrines taught in
Scripture are the existence of God, or a Being Who made all things, and
Who directs and sustains the world with consummate wisdom; furthermore,
that God takes the greatest thought for men, or such of them as live piously
and honourably, while He punishes, with various penalties, those who do
evil, separating them from the good. (74) All this is proved in Scripture
entirely through experience-that is, through the narratives there related. (75)
No definitions of doctrine are given, but all the sayings and reasonings are
adapted to the understanding of the masses. (76) Although experience can
give no clear knowledge of these things, nor explain the nature of God, nor
how He directs and sustains all things, it can nevertheless teach and
enlighten men sufficiently to impress obedience and devotion on their
minds.

(77) It is now, I think, sufficiently clear what persons are bound to believe
in the Scripture narratives, and in what degree they are so bound, for it
evidently follows from what has been said that the knowledge of and belief
in them is particularly necessary to the masses whose intellect is not
capable of perceiving things clearly and distinctly. (78) Further, he who
denies them because he does not believe that God exists or takes thought for
men and the world, may be accounted impious; but a man who is ignorant
of them, and nevertheless knows by natural reason that God exists, as we
have said, and has a true plan of life, is altogether blessed - yes, more
blessed than the common herd of believers, because besides true opinions
he possesses also a true and distinct conception. (79) Lastly, he who is
ignorant of the Scriptures and knows nothing by the light of reason, though

he may not be impious or rebellious, is yet less than human and almost
brutal, having none of God's gifts.

(80) We must here remark that when we say that the knowledge of the
sacred narrative is particularly necessary to the masses, we do not mean the
knowledge of absolutely all the narratives in the Bible, but only of the
principal ones, those which, taken by themselves, plainly display the
doctrine we have just stated, and have most effect over men's minds.

(81) If all the narratives in Scripture were necessary for the proof of this
doctrine, and if no conclusion could be drawn without the general
consideration of every one of the histories contained in the sacred writings,
truly the conclusion and demonstration of such doctrine would overtask the
understanding and strength not only of the masses, but of humanity; who is
there who could give attention to all the narratives at once, and to all the
circumstances, and all the scraps of doctrine to be elicited from such a host
of diverse histories? (82) I cannot believe that the men who have left us the
Bible as we have it were so abounding in talent that they attempted setting
about such a method of demonstration, still less can I suppose that we
cannot understand Scriptural doctrine till we have given heed to the quarrels
of Isaac, the advice of Achitophel to Absalom, the civil war between Jews
and Israelites, and other similar chronicles; nor can I think that it was more
difficult to teach such doctrine by means of history to the Jews of early
times, the contemporaries of Moses, than it was to the contemporaries of
Esdras. (83) But more will be said on this point hereafter, we may now only
note that the masses are only bound to know those histories which can most
powerfully dispose their mind to obedience and devotion. (84) However,
the masses are not sufficiently skilled to draw conclusions from what they
read, they take more delight in the actual stories, and in the strange and
unlooked-for issues of events than in the doctrines implied; therefore,
besides reading these narratives, they are always in need of pastors or
church ministers to explain them to their feeble intelligence.

(85) But not to wander from our point, let us conclude with what has been
our principal object - namely, that the truth of narratives, be they what they
may, has nothing to do with the Divine law, and serves for nothing except in
respect of doctrine, the sole element which makes one history better than

another. (86) The narratives in the Old and New Testaments surpass profane
history, and differ among themselves in merit simply by reason of the
salutary doctrines which they inculcate. (87) Therefore, if a man were to
read the Scripture narratives believing the whole of them, but were to give
no heed to the doctrines they contain, and make no amendment in his life,
he might employ himself just as profitably in reading the Koran or the
poetic drama, or ordinary chronicles, with the attention usually given to
such writings; on the other hand, if a man is absolutely ignorant of the
Scriptures, and none the less has right opinions and a true plan of life, he is
absolutely blessed and truly possesses in himself the spirit of Christ.

(88) The Jews are of a directly contrary way of thinking, for they hold that
true opinions and a true plan of life are of no service in attaining
blessedness, if their possessors have arrived at them by the light of reason
only, and not like the documents prophetically revealed to Moses. (89)
Maimonides ventures openly to make this assertion: "Every man who takes
to heart the seven precepts and diligently follows them, is counted with the
pious among the nation, and an heir of the world to come; that is to say, if
he takes to heart and follows them because God ordained them in the law,
and revealed them to us by Moses, because they were of aforetime precepts
to the sons of Noah: but he who follows them as led thereto by reason, is
not counted as a dweller among the pious or among the wise of the
nations." (90) Such are the words Of Maimonides, to which R. Joseph, the
son of Shem Job, adds in his book which he calls "Kebod Elohim, or God's
Glory," that although Aristotle (whom he considers to have written the best
ethics and to be above everyone else) has not omitted anything that
concerns true ethics, and which he has adopted in his own book, carefully
following the lines laid down, yet this was not able to suffice for his
salvation, inasmuch as he embraced his doctrines in accordance with the
dictates of reason and not as Divine documents prophetically revealed.

(91) However, that these are mere figments, and are not supported by
Scriptural authority will, I think, be sufficiently evident to the attentive
reader, so that an examination of the theory will be sufficient for its
refutation. (92) It is not my purpose here to refute the assertions of those
who assert that the natural light of reason can teach nothing, of any value
concerning the true way of salvation. (93) People who lay no claims to

reason for themselves, are not able to prove by reason this their assertion;
and if they hawk about something superior to reason, it is a mere figment,
and far below reason, as their general method of life sufficiently shows.
(94) But there is no need to dwell upon such persons. (95) I will merely add
that we can only judge of a man by his works. (96) If a man abounds in the
fruits of the Spirit, charity, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness,
faith, gentleness, chastity, against which, as Paul says (Gal. v:22), there is
no law, such an one, whether he be taught by reason only or by the
Scripture only, has been in very truth taught by God, and is altogether
blessed. (97) Thus have I said all that I undertook to say concerning Divine
law.

End of Part 1

AUTHOR'S ENDNOTES TO THE THEOLOGICO-
POLITICAL TREATISE

CHAPTERS I to V

Chapter I

Endnote 1. (1) The word nabi is rightly interpreted by Rabbi Salomon
Jarchi, but the sense is hardly caught by Aben Ezra, who was not so good a
Hebraist. (2) We must also remark that this Hebrew word for prophecy has
a universal meaning and embraces all kinds of prophecy. (3) Other terms
are more special, and denote this or that sort of prophecy, as I believe is
well known to the learned.

Endnote 2. (1) "Although, ordinary knowledge is Divine, its professors
cannot be called prophets." That is, interpreters of God. (2) For he alone is
an interpreter of God, who interprets the decrees which God has revealed to

him, to others who have not received such revelation, and whose belief,
therefore, rests merely on the prophet's authority and the confidence
reposed in him. (3) If it were otherwise, and all who listen to prophets
became prophets themselves, as all who listen to philosophers become
philosophers, a prophet would no longer be the interpreter of Divine
decrees, inasmuch as his hearers would know the truth, not on the authority
of the prophet, but by means of actual Divine revelation and inward
testimony. (4) Thus the sovereign powers are the interpreters of their own
rights of sway, because these are defended only by their authority and
supported by their testimony.

Endnote 3. (1) "Prophets were endowed with a peculiar and extraordinary
power." (2) Though some men enjoy gifts which nature has not bestowed on
their fellows, they are not said to surpass the bounds of human nature,
unless their special qualities are such as cannot be said to be deducible from
the definition of human nature. (3) For instance, a giant is a rarity, but still
human. (4) The gift of composing poetry extempore is given to very few,
yet it is human. (5) The same may, therefore, be said of the faculty
possessed by some of imagining things as vividly as though they saw them
before them, and this not while asleep, but while awake. (6) But if anyone
could be found who possessed other means and other foundations for
knowledge, he might be said to transcend the limits of human nature.

CHAPTER III.

Endnote 4. (1) In Gen. xv. it is written that God promised Abraham to
protect him, and to grant him ample rewards. (2) Abraham answered that he
could expect nothing which could be of any value to him, as he was
childless and well stricken in years.

Endnote 5. (1) That a keeping of the commandments of the old Testament is
not sufficient for eternal life, appears from Mark x:21.

End of Endnotes to PART I

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THEOLOGICO-
POLITICAL TREATISE — PART 1 ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be
renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law
means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States
without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying
and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a
registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook,
except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge
anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg
eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by
U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any
other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you
agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License
available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work,
you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement,
you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy
of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to
be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on
or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying
with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you
follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation”
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are

located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing
Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can
easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you
share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a
constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work.
The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied
or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in
the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from
texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice
indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the
work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a
work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on
the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs
1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the
permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the
copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License
terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently
displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or
immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the
official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no
additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of
exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work
in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format
must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph
1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply
with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in
this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project

Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works
not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and
the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription
errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that
damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except
for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to
you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you
can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund.
If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to

you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you
may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable
to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum
disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause
to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg
work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the

efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of
life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring
that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for
generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)
(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s
laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516,
Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment

including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort,
much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods
and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg
eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a

copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how
to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
newsletter to hear about new eBooks.