Spinoza I

Baruch Spinoza

1632-1677

The following are thoughts on several lines of Spinoza to be followed by Commentaries on Arithmetic and Mystery in part II.

 "When people declare, as all are ready to do, that the Bible is the Word of God teaching men true blessedness and the way of salvation. they evidently do not mean what they say (1); for the masses take no pains at all to live according to Scripture, and we see most people endeavoring to hawk about their own commentaries as the word of God (2), and giving their best efforts, under the guise of religion, to compelling others to think as they do: we generally see, I say, theologians anxious to learn how to wring their inventions and sayings out of the sacred text (3), and to fortify them with Divine authority. Such persons never display less scruple and more zeal than when they are interpeting Scripture or the mind of  the Holy Ghost; if we ever see them perturbed, it is not that they fear to attribute some error to the Holy Spirit, and to stray from the right path, but that they are afraid to be convicted of error by others, and thus to overthrow and bring into contempt their own authority. But if men really believe what they verbally testify of Scripture, they would adopt quite a different plan of life: their minds would not be agitated by so many contentions, nor so many hatreds (4)..."

"Ambition and unscrupulousness have waxed so powerful, that religion is thought to consist, not so much in respecting the writings of the Holy Ghost, as in defending human commentaries (5)..."

"...they dream that most profound mysteries lie hid in the Bible (6), and weary themselves out in the investigation of these absurdities, to the neglect of what is useful."

"If we would separate ourselves from the crowd and escape from theological prejudices, instead of rashly accepting human commentaries for Divine documents (7), we must consider the true method of interpeting Scripture and dwell upon it at some length..."
~ Baruch Spinoza, Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, Of the Interpretation of Scripture

Considering the seven notions completely (the numbers having been drawn in are mine),

I first gaze at notions one through four.

"When people declare, as all are ready to do, that the Bible is the Word of God teaching men true blessedness and the way of salvation. they evidently do not mean what they say (1); for the masses take no pains at all to live according to Scripture, and we see most people endeavoring to hawk about their own  commentaries as the word of God (2), and giving their best efforts, under the guise of religion, to compelling others to think as they do: we generally see, I say, theologians anxious to learn how to wring their inventions and sayings out of the sacred text (3)...But if men really believe what they verbally testify of Scripture, they would adopt quite a different plan of life: their minds would not be agitated by so many contentions, nor so many hatreds (4)..."

Significant to the integrity of the entire argument here is in point four. "...their minds would not be agitated..." We see very clearly from the principles outlined in the Old and New Testaments, that the religion claims to give peace to its adherents. It encourages through all plight and disadvantageous condition that there are greater principles than the transitory sort of suffering that affects people here episodically, at one time, to be relieved by joy in other times. It shows that there is a powerful Creator who identifies Himself to us as Our Father and who takes special interest in us when brought down by the cruelty of this world and age.

"...theologians anxious to learn how to wring their inventions and sayings out of the sacred text..."

But point three highlights a point of high importance to many moderners, but certainly in the time of Spinoza was much more grave. In a great deal of our world today, no one is threatened with ongoing religious conflict and death for contrarian positions. Of course, I refer to the Western world, and things are not quite this simple in the developing world where there is a great deal of turmoil due to religious differences, and others. But certainly in Spinoza's day, this threat was multipled, and even in the West there was great contention about which ideology was supreme, each with its corresponding force inflicting murder and violence on dissenters.

That so obviously contrasts with a religion thought to bring inner peace. For why is a person agitated into inquisitions and witchhunts unless he is not certain in his own understanding? Or even when he is convinced, he still cannot find peace without forcing others to come to the same belief. This contradicts the very idea of the peace of the Gospels, a steadfast peace that says to the world that tries to shake it, "I will not be moved." This sort of peace is not known to men who use tools of oppression and violence to further their ambitions.

Realm of ends

"...for the masses take no pains at all to live according to Scripture, and we see most people endeavoring to hawk about their own commentaries as the word of God (2)"

In Maslowian terms, the hierarchy of needs, I find among the highest of the spiritual needs of man is to be affirmed intellectually. "To be affirmed in the realm of ends" the way a gladiator's warmaking is affirmed in the cage. You see even among people who are not very bright, that nevertheless at times strike you with a clever idea from ingenuity, that they often are moved to convey intellectual ideas if they lack affirmation in those ideas. They are moved to pass on their thoughts because they personally esteem them very highly, even if no one else does. But they have to convey the thoughts, because nothing within them offers peace per se, of themselves, but they find especial peace in convincing others of their own ideas. But this is the same contradiction found in points three and four. The peace that God gives is contingent only on God giving it. It isn't contingent on you convincing others of it, of being given a special hat for discovering it, or any other thing that is commonly seen in men, though never by themselves, (or rather it's something we always witness in others and not ourselves). This peace is pure peace and it is not shaken by the world around it.

But more often than not, a person will not be corrected in any of their mistaken beliefs.

"...it is not that they fear to attribute some error to the Holy Spirit, and to stray from the right path, but that they are afraid to be convicted of error by others, and thus to overthrow and bring into contempt their own authority."

It is through the gift (?) of religion, that men who scarcely finished high school, will complete life with a long list of credentials after their names: Ph.D., Professor, M.A. You find these great distinguished men, who mostly only distinguish themselves, in the plethora of degree mills, often called seminaries, which make no pretension of accreditation, but still churn out 'students' with fake 'master's' and fake 'doctorates'. For the ignorant, who are experts in nothing, who have no authority in anything, whose knowledge for nothing is sought, religion has been a very useful maneuver. One should be suspicious of any institution that feeds the desire of men for recognition and esteem, such as seen within fundamentalist Christianity.

And Spinoza is very correct in saying that rather than accept that their own beliefs are in error, they would prefer to continue attributing 'error to the Holy Spirit.'

[4] "...religion is thought to consist, not so much in respecting the writings of the Holy Ghost, as in defending human commentaries."

Even in visiting the local Christian bookstore tonight, I was intrigued at the variety of authorings, many of which that shared very similar names, such as, 'Christian Theology', 'Systematic Theology', 'A Theology for the Church,' and so on. I saw they all had in common a few things: They were by different authors, they claimed to be derived wholly from writ, and were confused by their own authors to be the pure biblical  teachings rather than the authors' own opinions.

And finally, before the dissertation on arithmetic, point one...

"When people declare, as all are ready to do, that the Bible is the Word of God teaching men true blessedness and the way of salvation. they evidently do not mean what they say..."

Is the matter of men changed? Does religion have an effect on men? I recall in the past that many were  challenged by my unorthdox views of Paul and eternal hell, certainly. But some of the things that provoked  such great outrage in people were mostly innocuous. Some were threatened and greatly offended that I did  not eat pork. They used ambiguous terms to attack my integrity. And a few were even brought to sin because I did not speak as some from a poor upbringing but rather as one who had an education, as some blacks deride.

Spinoza is right. The matter of men is mostly unchanged. But his reasons were wrong, and that is another
story.

A Legacy of Spinoza

[7] "If we would separate ourselves from the crowd and escape from theological prejudices, instead of rashly accepting human commentaries for Divine documents (7), we must consider the true method of interpreting Scripture and dwell upon it at some length..."

"Revelation is predicated on the co-operation of the Holy Spirit, the autographs, the manuscripts, the  translations, the translating committees, finally the optic nerve, the co-operation of the neurological  structures, and lastly, the rational mind in comprehending it. Which of these stages is the Word (or is the  Word in its purest state), or at what stage does it cease to be the Word? Only in the primary stage could it be 'breathed' (the Word)..."

If it were possible for such a message to be relayed down the chain in a manner so that the meaning is not altered, even though it could be imagined how the words may deviate, but the meaning cannot, then it would  more or less be accurate to say that the pneuma is substantially the same at any point in the chain.

But that clearly cannot be. This is so obviously false that nothing could be more contrary to our reasoning. Even children understand this. Any communication predicated on this level of co-operation through this many parties is going to confront some degree of corruption.

But where is there a fault in the co-operation? It is in no way God's fault. It is the fault of abusive mistranslations by unqualified men who pretend they can render the meanings faithfully. And even if that is not right, then it is with the person who is simply reading his own opinion into the verses.

But men do not fathom how the words as they were first spoken can be different from the words that we have recorded today. They also misunderstand that their personal interpretation is different from the original  intent. What they dogmatically defend, and when given the opportunity have murdered to assert, is only a  personal opinion that the Bible does not fully support.

I understand this can be seen as a dissertation in itself, and notably draws attention away from the main  dissertation. I want to conclude here in saying that the word that you intuit is very low on that chain of  co-operation and therefore has the lowest value. Whether you rely on mistaken translations, a mistaken  understanding, or that you yourself are not so deficient in reading is so unclear, that your personal  interpretation has to take a back seat to tradition and the collective. Spinoza's attacks are mostly limited  to people who wrest meanings from scriptures that are not there and are used for selfish purposes.

The legacy of Spinoza for us to take should be that biblical interpretation should be endeavored upon cautiously, with all appreciation of our utter ability to arrive at clear conclusions in and of ourselves, to stray from dogmatism, and not rush to interpretive conclusions, as Spinoza says, not "rashly accepting human commentaries" as divine.