Image via Wikipedia
Reading through Spinoza’s Theologico-Political Tract is somewhat frustrating for two reasons:
1. The type. It is not that it’s small, but that they economized on paper and thus the type runs together. That is the simpler of reasons.
2. Spinoza thought that there was no way that the laws of nature were ever contravened or overruled. Thinking this led him to discount special revelation. He decided that miracles did not exist, that they were simply ways of ignorant people trying to explain things that happened according to natural laws, but could not then be explained. This led him to declare that special revelation was not special. It was natural, because anyone who sought to love and obey God could find out truth without God’s intervention.
What is the problem? Spinoza was trying in a round about way to affirm a universal negative: there are no miracles at anytime or any place. That is a logical fallacy.
Spinoza declared that he wanted to affirm the worthiness of religion, yet in denying special revelation he brought Scripture to the level of the documents of the rest of the world. He expressly stated this.
Now I’m not well versed in the critical tradition, but I do know that what little I’ve read over the past few years reminds me of Spinoza. That is not a good thing.
What is the issue with all of this? Why bring this up? Simply this one thing: Spinoza will probably not be labeled with any simple label, but he held to a deistic (maybe even pantheistic) sort of theology. Now look at your books that tell you that portions of Scripture are Ancient Near Easter myth, that other portions are so tainted by human failures that they cannot possibly be true, that there are so many historical errors that we cannot accept the Scripture as historically sound, then ask yourselves what the difference is between the things Spinoza said and the things that you read today. Ask yourself about the fundamental presuppositions that lead to these statements. Ask yourself if they are similar.
At this point, while I cannot totally validate this, I have a feeling that the ghost of Spinoza subtly walks through many of our seminaries, universities, and publishing houses.
The God of Scripture declares that He is nothing like Spinoza’s god.
“remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,’ calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of my counsel from a far country. I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have purposed, and I will do it.” (Isaiah 46:9–11, ESV)
Related articles
- Spinoza’s Thoughts on Law (oftasteanddiscernment.wordpress.com)
- Previously Unknown Copy of Spinoza’s ETHICS found (leiterreports.typepad.com)
