BENEDICT DE SPINOZA: Theological-Political Treatise

On the prophets
although the words and reasonings of that admonition very clearly entail
freedom of the will, we are nevertheless permitted to adopt a contrary
opinion, since those words and reasons were merely adapted to Cain’s
understanding. Similarly, the revelation of Micaiah merely teaches that
God revealed to Micaiah the true outcome of the struggle between Ahab
and Aram, and therefore this is all we are obliged to believe; whatever else
is contained in this revelation we need take no notice of ^ whether concerning
the true and false spirit of God and the army of heaven standing
on either side of God, or the other details of the revelation; and thus
everyone is free to make his own judgment of them as seems most
acceptable to his own reason. The same should be said about the reasoning
by which God reveals to Job his power over all things (if indeed it
is true that they were revealed to Job, and that the author is intending to
narrate a history, and not, as some think, to elaborate his own ideas).
Being accommodated to Job’s understanding and meant merely to convince
him, these reasons are not universal ones intended to convince
everybody.
Nor should we think any di¡erently about the reasons with which
Christ convicts the Pharisees of obstinacy and ignorance and exhorts his
disciples to the true life: for clearly, he adapted his arguments to the
beliefs and principles of those individuals. For instance, when he said to
the Pharisees (see Matthew 12.26), ‘and if Satan casts out Satan, he is
divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand’, he meant only
to sway the Pharisees on the basis of their own notions and not to teach
men that demons exist or that there is some sort of realm of demons.
Equally, when he said to his disciples (Matthew 18.10),‘See that you do
not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in
heaven’, etc., the only thing he intends to teach is that they should not be
proud and should not despise anyone, but not the other things contained
in his arguments, which he only makes use of to better convince
his disciples of the main point. Precisely the same, ¢nally, should be said
about the arguments and signs of the Apostles about which I need not
speak any further. If I had to enumerate all the passages in Scripture that
are adapted to [the notions of ] particular persons or to the level of their
understanding, and which cannot be defended as divine doctrine without 44
great prejudice to philosophy, I would stray far from the brevity I aim at.
It su⁄ces therefore to cite just a few, general instances, and leave the
curious reader to ponder other instances for himself.
41