按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Exemplar of the true life； whether it be because He has a just and
merciful mind； or because all things exist and act through Him； and
consequently that we understand through Him； and through Him see what
is truly just and good。 （63） Everyone may think on such questions as he
likes；
（64） Furthermore； faith is not affected； whether we hold that God is
omnipresent essentially or potentially； that He directs all things by
absolute fiat； or by the necessity of His nature； that He dictates laws like
a prince； or that He sets them forth as eternal truths； that man obeys Him
by virtue of free will； or by virtue of the necessity of the Divine decree；
lastly； that the reward of the good and the punishment of the wicked is
natural or supernatural： these and such like questions have no bearing on
faith； except in so far as they are used as means to give us license to sin
more； or to obey God less。 （65） I will go further； and maintain that every
man is bound to adapt these dogmas to his own way of thinking； and to
interpret them according as he feels that he can give them his fullest and
most unhesitating assent； so that he may the more easily obey God with his
whole heart。
（66） Such was the manner； as we have already pointed out； in which the faith
was in old time revealed and written； in accordance with the understanding
and opinions of the prophets and people of the period； so； in like fashion；
every man is bound to adapt it to his own opinions； so that he may accept it
without any hesitation or mental repugnance。 （67） We have shown that faith
does not so much re quire truth as piety； and that it is only quickening and
pious through obedience； consequently no one is faithful save by obedience
alone。 （68） The best faith is not necessarily possessed by him who displays
the best reasons； but by him who displays the best fruits of justice and
charity。 （69） How salutary and necessary this doctrine is for a state； in
order that men may dwell together in peace and concord； and how many and how
great causes of disturbance and crime are thereby cut off； I leave everyone
to judge for himself！
（70） Before we go further； I may remark that we can； by means of what we
have just proved； easily answer the objections raised in Chap。 I。； when we
were discussing God's speaking with the Israelites on Mount Sinai。 （71） For；
though the voice heard by the Israelites could not give those men any
philosophical or mathematical certitude of God's existence； it was yet
sufficient to thrill them with admiration for God； as they already knew Him；
and to stir them up to obedience： and such was the object of the display。
（72） God did not wish to teach the Israelites the absolute attributes of His
essence （none of which He then revealed）； but to break down their hardness
of heart； and to draw them to obedience： therefore He did not appeal to them
with reasons； but with the sound of trumpets； thunder； and lightnings。
（73） It remains for me to show that between faith or theology； and
philosophy； there is no connection； nor affinity。 （74） I think no one will
dispute the fact who has knowledge of the aim and foundations of the two
subjects； for they are as wide apart as the poles。
（75） Philosophy has no end in view save truth： faith； as we have abundantly
proved； looks for nothing but obedience and piety。 （76） Again； philosophy is
based on axioms which must be sought from nature alone： faith is based on
history and language； and must be sought for only in Scripture and
revelation； as we showed in Chap。 VII。 （77） Faith； therefore； allows the
greatest latitude in philosophic speculation； allowing us without blame to
think what we like about anything； and only condemning； as heretics and
schismatics； those who teach opinions which tend to produce obstinacy；
hatred； strife； and anger； while； on the other hand； only considering
as faithful those who persuade us； as far as their reason and faculties will
permit； to follow justice and charity。
（78） Lastly； as what we are now setting forth are the most important
subjects of my treatise； I would most urgently beg the reader； before I
proceed； to read these two chapters with especial attention； and to take the
trouble to weigh them well in his mind： let him take for granted that I
have not written with a view to introducing novelties； but in order to do
away with abuses； such as I hope I may； at some future time； at last see
reformed。
CHAPTER XV … THEOLOGY IS SHOWN NOT TO BE SUBSERVIENT TO REASON；
NOR REASON TO THEOLOGY： A DEFINITION OF THE REASON WHICH
ENABLES US TO ACCEPT THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE。
（1） Those who know not that philosophy and reason are distinct； dispute
whether Scripture should be made subservient to reason； or reason to
Scripture： that is； whether the meaning of Scripture should be made to
agreed with reason； or whether reason should be made to agree with
Scripture： the latter position is assumed by the sceptics who deny the
certitude of reason； the former by the dogmatists。 （2） Both parties are； as
I have shown； utterly in the wrong； for either doctrine would require us to
tamper with reason or with Scripture。
（3） We have shown that Scripture does not teach philosophy； but merely
obedience； and that all it contains has been adapted to the understanding
and established opinions of the multitude。 （4） Those； therefore； who wish to
adapt it to philosophy； must needs ascribe to the prophets many ideas which
they never even dreamed of； and give an extremely forced interpretation to
their words： those on the other hand； who would make reason and philosophy
subservient to theology； will be forced to accept as Divine utterances the
prejudices of the ancient Jews； and to fill and confuse their mind
therewith。 （5） In short； one party will run wild with the aid of reason；
and the other will run wild without the aid of reason。
（6） The first among the Pharisees who openly maintained that Scripture
should be made to agree with reason； was Maimonides； whose opinion we
reviewed； and abundantly refuted in Chap。 VIII。： now； although this writer
had much authority among his contemporaries； he was deserted on this
question by almost all； and the majority went straight over to the
opinion of a certain R。 Jehuda Alpakhar； who； in his anxiety to avoid the
error of Maimonides； fell into another； which was its exact contrary。 （7） He
held that reason should be made subservient； and entirely give way to
Scripture。 （8） He thought that a passage should not be interpreted
metaphorically； simply because it was repugnant to reason； but only in the
cases when it is inconsistent with Scripture itself … that is； with its
clear doctrines。 （9） Therefore he laid down the universal rule； that
what