BENEDICT DE SPINOZA: Theological-Political Treatise

Theological-Political Treatise
audacity to change the actual words and statements of Ezekiel and
embellish them at his own discretion Whatever the case, chapter 16
does not seem to agree with Exodus 34.7 or Jeremiah 32.18, etc.
[18] Samuel believed that God never repented of any decree he had
once made (see 1 Samuel 15.29), for even when Saul regretted his o¡ence
and was willing to adore God and seek forgiveness from him, Samuel
said that God would not change his decree against him. The opposite
was revealed to Jeremiah (see 18. 8^10), that God does repent of his
decree, whether he has decreed something good or something bad for a
people, if, after giving his sentence, they also change for better or for
worse. Joel however taught that God repents only of something bad (see
2.13.). Finally, from Genesis 4.7 it plainly emerges that a man can overcome
temptations to do wrong and can behave well; for Cain is told so,
though it is evident, from Scripture itself and from Josephus, that Cain
himself never overcame them.The same thing is also clearly indicated by
the chapter of Jeremiah just cited; for he said that God repents of any
decree he has made for men’s good or ill, if they are willing to change
their behaviour and way of life. Paul on the other hand teaches nothing
more plainly than that men have no power over the temptations of the
£esh except by the calling and grace of God alone. See the Epistle to the
Romans 9.10¡., and note that in 3.5 and 6.19, where he attributes justice
to God, he corrects himself by saying that he is speaking there in human
fashion and through the weakness of the £esh.
[19] Thus what we set out to prove is more than adequately established,
namely that God adapted his revelations to the understanding and
opinions of the prophets, and that the prophets could be ignorant of
matters of purely philosophical reasoning that are not concerned with
charity and how to live; and indeed they really were ignorant in this
respect and held contradictory views. Hence knowledge about natural
and spiritual matters is by no means to be sought from them.We therefore
conclude that we are not required to believe the prophets in anything
beyond what constitutes the end and substance of revelation; for the
rest, everyone is free to believe as he pleases. For example, the revelation
of Cain only teaches us that God admonished Cain to lead a true life;
43 that is the only aim and substance of the revelation; it is not intended to
teach freedom of the will or other philosophical matters. Hence,
40