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！
God is a fire； or rather； lest we should seem to have taken leave
of our senses； let us pass the matter over and take another example。
（42） Samuel expressly denies that God ever repents； 〃for he is not a man
that he should repent〃 （I Sam。 xv：29）。 （43） Jeremiah； on the other hand；
asserts that God does repent； both of the evil and of the good which He had
intended to do （Jer。 xviii：8…10）。 （44） What？ （45） Are not these two
texts directly contradictory？ （46） Which of the two； then； would our author
want to explain metaphorically？ （47） Both statements are general； and each
is the opposite of the other … what one flatly affirms； the other flatly；
denies。 （48） So； by his own rule； he would be obliged at once to reject them
as false； and to accept them as true。
（49） Again； what is the point of one passage； not being contradicted by
another directly； but only by implication； if the implication is clear； and
the nature and context of the passage preclude metaphorical interpretation？
（50） There are many such instances in the Bible； as we saw in Chap。 II。
（where we pointed out that the prophets held different and contradictory
opinions）； and also in Chaps。 IX。 and X。； where we drew attention to the
contradictions in the historical narratives。 （51） There is no need for me to
go through them all again； for what I have said sufficiently exposes the
absurdities which would follow from an opinion and rule such as we are
discussing； and shows the hastiness of its propounder。
（52） We may； therefore； put this theory； as well as that of Maimonides；
entirely out of court； and we may； take it for indisputable that theology is
not bound to serve reason； nor reason theology； but that each has her own
domain。
（53） The sphere of reason is； as we have said； truth and wisdom； the sphere
of theology； is piety and obedience。 （54） The power of reason does not
extend so far as to determine for us that men may be blessed through simple
obedience； without understanding。 （55） Theology； tells us nothing else；
enjoins on us no command save obedience； and has neither the will nor the
power to oppose reason： she defines the dogmas of faith （as we pointed out
in the last chapter） only in so far as they may be necessary； for obedience；
and leaves reason to determine their precise truth： for reason is the
light of the mind； and without her all things are dreams and phantoms。
（56） By theology； I here mean； strictly speaking； revelation； in so far as
it indicates the object aimed at by Scripture namely； the scheme and manner
of obedience； or the true dogmas of piety and faith。 （57） This may truly be
called the Word of God； which does not consist in a certain number of books
（see Chap。 XII。）。 （58） Theology thus understood； if we regard its precepts
or rules of life； will be found in accordance with reason； and； if we look
to its aim and object； will be seen to be in nowise repugnant thereto；
wherefore it is universal to all men。
（59） As for its bearing on Scripture； we have shown in Chap。 VII。 that the
meaning of Scripture should be gathered from its own history； and not from
the history of nature in general； which is the basis of philosophy。
（60） We ought not to be hindered if we find that our investigation of the
meaning of Scripture thus conducted shows us that it is here and there
repugnant to reason； for whatever we may find of this sort in the Bible；
which men may be in ignorance of； without injury to their charity； has； we
may be sure； no bearing on theology or the Word of God； and may； therefore；
without blame； be viewed by every one as he pleases。
（61） To sum up； we may draw the absolute conclusion that the Bible must not
be accommodated to reason； nor reason to the Bible。
（62） Now； inasmuch as the basis of theology … the doctrine that man may be
saved by obedience alone … cannot be proved by reason whether it be true or
false； we may be asked； Why； then； should we believe it？ （63） If we do so
without the aid of reason； we accept it blindly； and act foolishly and
injudiciously； if； on the other hand； we settle that it can be proved by
reason； theology becomes a part of philosophy； and inseparable therefrom。
（64） But I make answer that I have absolutely established that this basis of
theology cannot be investigated by the natural light of reason； or； at any
rate； that no one ever has proved it by such means； and； therefore；
revelation was necessary。 （65） We should； however； make use of our reason；
in order to grasp with moral certainty what is revealed … I say； with moral
certainty； for we cannot hope to attain greater certainty； than the
prophets： yet their certainty was only； moral； as I showed in Chap。 II。
（66） Those； therefore； who attempt to set forth the authority of Scripture
with mathematical demonstrations are wholly in error： for the authority； of
the Bible is dependent on the authority of the prophets； and can be
supported by no stronger arguments than those employed in old time by the
prophets for convincing the people of their own authority。 （67） Our
certainty on the same subject can be founded on no other basis than that
which served as foundation for the certainty of the prophets。
（68） Now the certainty of the prophets consisted （as we pointed out） in these elements：…
（69） （I。） A distinct and vivid imagination。
（70） （II。） A sign。
（71） （III。） Lastly； and chiefly； a mind turned to what is just and good。 It was based on no other
reasons than these； and consequently they cannot prove their authority by any other reasons； either
to the multitude whom they addressed orally； nor to us whom they address in writing。
（72） The first of these reasons； namely； the vivid imagination； could be
valid only for the prophets； therefore； our certainty concerning revelation
must； and ought to be； based on the remaining two … namely； the sign and the
teaching。 （73） Such is the express doctrine of Moses； for （in Deut。 xviii。）
he bids the people obey the prophet who should give a true sign in the name
of the Lord； but if he should predict falsely； even though it were in the
name of the Lord； he should be put to death； as should also he who strives
to lead away the people from the true religion； though he confirm his
authority with signs and portents。 （74） We may compare with the above Deut。
xiii。 （75） Whence it follows that a true prophet could be distinguished from
a false one； both by his doctrine and by the miracles he wrought； for Moses
declares such an one to be a true prophet； and bids the people trust him
without fear of deceit。 （76） He condemns as false； and worthy； of death；
those who predict anything falsely even in the name of the Lord； or who
preach false gods； even though their miracles be real。
（77） The only reason； then；