A　Theologico…Political　Treatise　＇Part　III＇
  by　Benedict　de　Spinoza
  Also　known　as　Baruch　Spinoza
  Translated　by　R。　H。　M。　Elwes
  Part　III　…　Chapters　XI　to　XV
  TABLE　OF　CONTENTS：
  CHAPTER　XI　…　An　Inquiry　whether　the　Apostles　wrote　their
  Epistles　as　Apostles　and　Prophets；　or　merely　as　Teachers；
  and　an　Explanation　of　what　is　meant　by　Apostle。
  The　epistles　not　in　the　prophetic　style。
  The　Apostles　not　commanded　to　write　or　preach　in　particular　places。
  Different　methods　of　teaching　adopted　by　the　Apostles。
  CHAPTER　XII　…　Of　the　true　Original　of　the　Divine　Law；
  and　wherefore　Scripture　is　called　Sacred；　and　the　Word　of　God。
  How　that；　in　so　far　as　it　contains　the　Word　of　God；
  it　has　come　down　to　us　uncorrupted。
  CHAPTER　XIII　…　It　is　shown；　that　Scripture　teaches　only　very　Simple　Doctrines；
  such　as　suffice　for　right　conduct。
  Error　in　speculative　doctrine　not　impious　…　nor　knowledge　pious。
  Piety　consists　in　obedience。
  CHAPTER　XIV　…　Definitions　of　Faith；　the　True　Faith；　and　the　Foundations
  of　Faith；　which　is　once　for　all　separated　from　Philosophy。
  Danger　resulting　from　the　vulgar　idea　of　faith。
  The　only　test　of　faith　obedience　and　good　works。
  As　different　men　are　disposed　to　obedience　by　different　opinions；
  universal　faith　can　contain　only　the　simplest　doctrines。
  Fundamental　distinction　between　faith　and　philosophy　…
  the　key…stone　of　the　present　treatise。
  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。
  Theory　that　Scripture　must　be　accommodated　to　Reason　…
  maintained　by　Maimonides　…　already　refuted　in　Chapter　vii。
  Theory　that　Reason　must　be　accommodated　to　Scripture　…
  maintained　by　Alpakhar　…　examined。
  And　refuted。
  Scripture　and　Reason　independent　of　one　another。
  Certainty；　of　fundamental　faith　not　mathematical　but　moral。
  Great　utility　of　Revelation。
  Authors　Endnotes　to　the　Treatise。
  CHAPTER　XI　…　AN　INQUIRY　WHETHER　THE　APOSTLES　WROTE　THEIR
  EPISTLES　AS　APOSTLES　AND　PROPHETS；　OR　MERELY　AS　TEACHERS；
  AND　AN　EXPLANATION　OF　WHAT　IS　MEANT　BY　AN　APOSTLE。
  （1）　No　reader　of　the　New　Testament　can　doubt　that　the　Apostles　were
  prophets；　but　as　a　prophet　does　not　always　speak　by　revelation；　but　only；　at
  rare　intervals；　as　we　showed　at　the　end　of　Chap。　I。；　we　may　fairly　inquire
  whether　the　Apostles　wrote　their　Epistles　as　prophets；　by　revelation　and
  express　mandate；　as　Moses；　Jeremiah；　and　others　did；　or　whether　only　as
  private　individuals　or　teachers；　especially　as　Paul；　in　Corinthians　xiv：6；
  mentions　two　sorts　of　preaching。
  （2）　If　we　examine　the　style　of　the　Epistles；　we　shall　find　it　totally
  different　from　that　employed　by　the　prophets。
  （3）　The　prophets　are　continually　asserting　that　they　speak　by　the　command　of
  God：　〃Thus　saith　the　Lord；〃　〃The　Lord　of　hosts　saith；〃　〃The　command　of　the
  Lord；〃　&c。；　and　this　was　their　habit　not　only　in　assemblies　of　the　prophets；
  but　also　in　their　epistles　containing　revelations；　as　appears　from　the　epistle
  of　Elijah　to　Jehoram；　2　Chron。　xxi：12；　which　begins；　〃Thus　saith　the　Lord。〃
  （4）　In　the　Apostolic　Epistles　we　find　nothing　of　the　sort。　（5）　Contrariwise；
  in　I　Cor。　vii：40　Paul　speaks　according　to　his　own　opinion　and　in　many
  passages　we　come　across　doubtful　and　perplexed　phrase；　such　as；　〃We　think；
  therefore；〃　Rom。　iii：28；　〃Now　I　think；〃　＇Endnote　24＇；　　Rom。　viii：18；　and　so
  on。　（6）　Besides　these；　other　expressions　are　met　with　very　different　from
  those　used　by　the　prophets。　（7）　For　instance；　1　Cor。　vii：6；　〃But　I　speak
  this　by　permission；　not　by　commandment；〃　〃I　give　my　judgment　as　one　that
  hath　obtained　mercy　of　the　Lord　to　be　faithful〃　（1　Cor。　vii：25）；　and　so　on
  in　many　other　passages。　（8）　We　must　also　remark　that　in　the　aforesaid
  chapter　the　Apostle　says　that　when　he　states　that　he　has　or　has
  not　the　precept　or　commandment　of　God；　he　does　not　mean　the　precept　or
  commandment　of　God　revealed　to　himself；　but　only　the　words　uttered　by　Christ
  in　His　Sermon　on　the　Mount。　（9）　Furthermore；　if　we　examine　the　manner　in
  which　the　Apostles　give　out　evangelical　doctrine；　we　shall　see　that　it
  differs　materially　from　the　method　adopted　by　the　prophets。　（10）　The
  Apostles　everywhere　reason　as　if　they　were　arguing　rather　than　prophesying；
  the　prophecies；　on　the　other　hand；　contain　only　dogmas　and　commands。　（11）
  God　is　therein　introduced　not　as　speaking　to　reason；　but　as　issuing　decrees
  by　His　absolute　fiat。　（12）　The　authority　of　the　prophets　does　not　submit　to
  discussion；　for　whosoever　wishes　to　find　rational　ground　for　his　arguments；
  by　that　very　wish　submits　them　to　everyone's　private　judgment。　（13）　This
  Paul；　inasmuch　as　he　uses　reason；　appears　to　have　done；　for　he　says　in　1
  Cor。　x：15；　〃I　speak　as　to　wise　men；　judge　ye　what　I　say。〃　（14）　The　prophets；
  as　we　showed　at　the　end　of　Chapter　I。；　did　not　perceive　what　was　revealed　by
  virtue　of　their　natural　reason；　and　though　there　are　certain　passages　in　the
  Pentateuch　which　seem　to　be　appeals　to　induction；　they　turn　out；　on　nearer
  examination；　to　be　nothing　but　peremptory　commands。　（15）　For　instance；　when
  Moses　says；　Deut。　xxxi：27；　〃Behold；　while　I　am　yet　alive　with　you；　this　day
  ye　have　been　rebellious　against　the　Lord；　and　how　much　more　after
  my　death；〃　we　must　by　no　means　conclude　that　Moses　wished　to　convince　the
  Israelites　by　reason　that　they　would　necessarily　fall　away　from　the　worship
  of　the　Lord　after　his　death；　for　the　argument　would　have　been　false；　as
  Scripture　itself　shows：　the　Israelites　continued　faithful　during　the　lives
  of　Joshua　and　the　elders；　and　afterwards　during　the　time　of　Samuel；　David；
  and　Solomon。　（16）　Therefore　the　words　of　Moses　are　merely　a　moral
  injunction；　in　which　he　predicts　rhetorically　the　future　backsliding　of　the
  people　so　as　to　impress　it　vividly　on　their　imagination。　（17）　I　say　that
  Moses　spoke　of　himself　in　order　to　lend　likelihood　to　his　prediction；　and
  not　as　a　prophet　by　revelation；　because　in　verse　21　of　the　same　chapter　we
  are　told　that　God　revealed　the　same　thing　to　Moses　in　different　words；　and
  there　was　no　need　to　make　Moses　certain　by　argument　of　God's　prediction　and
  decree；　it　was　only　necessary　that　it　should　be　vividly　impressed　on
  his　imagination；　and　this　could　not　be　better　accomplished　than　by
  imagining　the　existing　contumacy　of　the　people；　of　which　he　had　had　frequent
  experience；　as　likely　to　extend　into　the　future。
  （18）　All　the　arguments　employed　by　Moses　in　the　five　books　are　to　be
  understood　in　a　similar　manner；　they　are　not　drawn　from　the　armoury　of
  reason；　but　are　merely；　modes　of　expression　calculated　to　instil　with
  efficacy；　and　present　vividly　to　the　imagination　the　commands　of　God。
  （19）　However；　I　do　not　wish　absolutely　to　deny　that　the　prophets　ever　argued
  from　revelation；　I　only　maintain　that　the　prophets　made　more　legitimate　use
  of　argument　in　proportion　as　their　knowledge　approached　more　nearly　to
  ordinary　knowledge；　and　by　this　we　know　that　they　possessed　a　knowledge
  above　the　ordinary；　inasmuch　as　they　proclaimed　absolute　dogmas；
  decrees；　or　judgments。　（20）　Thus　Moses；　the　chief　of　the　prophets；　never
  used　legitimate　argument；　and；　on　the　other　hand；　the　long　deductions　and
  arguments　of　Paul；　such　as　we　find　in　the　Epistle　to　the　Romans；　are　in
  nowise　written　from　supernatural　revelation。
  （21）　The　modes　of　expression　and　discourse　adopted　by　the　Apostles　in　the
  Epistles；　show　very　clearly　that　the　latter　were　not　written　by　revelation
  and　Divine　command；　but　merely　by　the　natural　powers　and　judgment　of　the
  authors。　（22）　They　consist　in　brotherly　admonitions　and　courteous
  expressions　such　as　would　never　be　employed　in　prophecy；　as　for　instance；
  Paul's　excuse　in　Romans　xv：15；　〃I　have　written　the　more　boldly　unto　you　in
  some　sort；　my　brethren。〃
  （23）　We　may　arrive　at　the　same　conclusion　from　observing　that　we　never　read
  that　the　Apostles　were　commanded　to　write；　but　only　that　they　went
  everywhere　preaching；　and　confirmed　their　words　with　signs。　（24）　Their
  personal　presence　and　signs　were　absolutely　necessary　for　the　conversion　and
  establishment　in　religion　of　the　Gentiles；　as　Paul　himself　expressly　states
  in　Rom。　i：11；　〃But　I　long　to　see　you；　that　I　may　impart　to　you　some
  spiritual　gift；　to　the　end　that　ye　may　be　established。〃
  （25）　It　may　be　objected　that　we　might　prove　in　similar　fashion　that　the
  Apostles　did　not　preach　as　prophets；　for　they　did　not　go　to　particular
  pl