the evolution of theology-第3部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！



they　disbelieved　in　immortality；　for　I　am　not　aware　that　there

is　anything　to　show　that　they　thought　the　existence　of　the　souls

of　the　dead　in　Sheol　ever　came　to　an　end。　But　they　do　not　seem

to　have　conceived　that　the　condition　of　the　souls　in　Sheol　was

in　any　way　affected　by　their　conduct　in　life。　If　there　was

immortality；　there　was　no　state　of　retribution　in　their

theology。　Samuel　expects　Saul　and　his　sons　to　come　to　him

in　Sheol。



The　next　circumstance　to　be　remarked　is　that　the　name　of

Elohim　is　applied　to　the　spirit　which　the　woman　sees

〃coming　up　out　of　the　earth；〃　that　is　to　say；　from　Sheol。

The　Authorised　Version　translates　this　in　its　literal　sense

〃gods。〃　The　Revised　Version　gives　〃god〃　with　〃gods〃　in　the

margin。　Reuss　renders　the　word　by　〃spectre；〃　remarking　in　a　note

that　it　is　not　quite　exact；　but　that　the　word　Elohim　expresses

〃something　divine；　that　is　to　say；　superhuman；　commanding

respect　and　terror〃　（〃Histoire　des　Israelites；〃　p。　321）。

Tuch；　in　his　commentary　on　Genesis；　and　Thenius；　in　his

commentary　on　Samuel；　express　substantially　the　same　opinion。

Dr。　Alexander　（in　Kitto's　〃Cyclopaedia〃　s。　v。　〃God〃）　has　the

following　instructive　remarks：





＇Elohim　is＇　sometimes　used　vaguely　to　describe　unseen

powers　or　superhuman　beings　that　are　not　properly　thought　of　as

divine。　Thus　the　witch　of　Endor　saw　〃Elohim　ascending　out　of　the

earth〃　（1　Sam。　xxviii。　13）；　meaning　thereby　some　beings　of　an

unearthly；　superhuman　character。　So　also　in　Zechariah　xii。　8；　it

is　said　〃the　house　of　David　shall　be　as　Elohim；　as　the　angel　of

the　Lord；〃　where；　as　the　transition　from　Elohim　to　the　angel　of

the　Lord　is　a　minori　ad　majus；　we　must　regard　the　former　as　a

vague　designation　of　supernatural　powers。





Dr。　Alexander　speaks　here　of　〃beings〃；　but　there　is　no　reason　to

suppose　that　the　wise　woman　of　Endor　referred　to　anything　but　a

solitary　spectre；　and　it　is　quite　clear　that　Saul　understood　her

in　this　sense；　for　he　asks　〃What　form　is　HE　of？〃



This　fact；　that　the　name　of　Elohim　is　applied　to　a　ghost；　or

disembodied　soul；　conceived　as　the　image　of　the　body　in　which　it

once　dwelt；　is　of　no　little　importance。　For　it　is　well　known

that　the　same　term　was　employed　to　denote　the　gods　of　the

heathen；　who　were　thought　to　have　definite　quasi…corporeal　forms

and　to　be　as　much　real　entities　as　any　other　Elohim。　The

difference　which　was　supposed　to　exist　between　the　different

Elohim　was　one　of　degree；　not　one　of　kind。　Elohim　was；　in

logical　terminology；　the　genus　of　which　ghosts；　Chemosh；　Dagon；

Baal；　and　Jahveh　were　species。　The　Israelite　believed　Jahveh　to

be　immeasurably　superior　to　all　other　kinds　of　Elohim。　The

inscription　on　the　Moabite　stone　shows　that　King　Mesa　held

Chemosh　to　be；　as　unquestionably；　the　superior　of　Jahveh。　But　if

Jahveh　was　thus　supposed　to　differ　only　in　degree　from　the

undoubtedly　zoomorphic　or　anthropomorphic　〃gods　of　the　nations；〃

why　is　it　to　be　assumed　that　he　also　was　not　thought　of　as

having　a　human　shape？　It　is　possible　for　those　who　forget　that

the　time　of　the　great　prophetic　writers　is　at　least　as　remote

from　that　of　Saul　as　our　day　is　from　that　of　Queen　Elizabeth；　to

insist　upon　interpreting　the　gross　notions　current　in　the

earlier　age　and　among　the　mass　of　the　people　by　the　refined

conceptions　promulgated　by　a　few　select　spirits　centuries　later。

But　if　we　take　the　language　constantly　used　concerning　the　Deity

in　the　books　of　Genesis；　Exodus；　Joshua；　Judges；　Samuel；　or

Kings；　in　its　natural　sense　（and　I　am　aware　of　no　valid　reason

which　can　be　given　for　taking　it　in　any　other　sense）；　there

cannot；　to　my　mind；　be　a　doubt　that　Jahveh　was　conceived　by

those　from　whom　the　substance　of　these　books　is　mainly　derived；

to　possess　the　appearance　and　the　intellectual　and　moral

attributes　of　a　man；　and；　indeed；　of　a　man　of　just　that　type

with　which　the　Israelites　were　familiar　in　their　stronger　and

intellectually　abler　rulers　and　leaders。　In　a　well…known　passage

in　Genesis　（i。　27）　Elohim　is　said　to　have　〃created　man　in　his

own　image；　in　the　image　of　Elohim　created　he　him。〃　It　is　〃man〃

who　is　here　said　to　be　the　image　of　Elohimnot　man's　soul

alone；　still　less　his　〃reason；〃　but　the　whole　man。　It　is　obvious

that　for　those　who　call　a　manlike　ghost　Elohim；　there　could　be

no　difficulty　in　conceiving　any　other　Elohim　under　the　same

aspect。　And　if　there　could　be　any　doubt　on　this　subject；　surely

it　cannot　stand　in　the　face　of　what　we　find　in　the　fifth

chapter；　where；　immediately　after　a　repetition　of　the　statement

that　〃Elohim　created　man；　in　the　likeness　of　Elohim　made　he

him；〃　it　is　said　that　Adam　begat　Seth　〃in　his　own　likeness；

after　his　image。〃　Does　this　mean　that　Seth　resembled　Adam　only

in　a　spiritual　and　figurative　sense？　And　if　that　interpretation

of　the　third　verse　of　the　fifth　chapter　of　Genesis　is　absurd；

why　does　it　become　reasonable　in　the　first　verse　of　the

same　chapter？



But　let　us　go　further。　Is　not　the　Jahveh　who　〃walks　in　the

garden　in　the　cool　of　the　day〃；　from　whom　one　may　hope　to　〃hide

oneself　among　the　trees〃；　of　whom　it　is　expressly　said　that

〃Moses　and　Aaron；　Nadab　and　Abihu；　and　seventy　of　the　elders　of

Israel；〃　saw　the　Elohim　of　Israel　（Exod。　xxiv。　9…11）；　and　that；

although　the　seeing　Jahveh　was　understood　to　be　a　high　crime　and

misdemeanour；　worthy　of　death；　under　ordinary　circumstances；

yet；　for　this　once；　he　〃laid　not　his　hand　on　the　nobles　of

Israel〃；　〃that　they　beheld　Elohim　and　did　eat　and　drink〃；

and　that　afterwards　Moses　saw　his　back　（Exod。　xxxiii。　23）is

not　this　Deity　conceived　as　manlike　in　form？　Again；　is　not　the

Jahveh　who　eats　with　Abraham　under　the　oaks　at　Mamre；　who　is

pleased　with　the　〃sweet　savour〃　of　Noah's　sacrifice；　to　whom

sacrifices　are　said　to　be　〃food〃is　not　this　Deity　depicted

as　possessed　of　human　appetites？　If　this　were　not　the　current

Israelitish　idea　of　Jahveh　even　in　the　eighth　century　B。C。；

where　is　the　point　of　Isaiah's　scathing　admonitions　to　his

countrymen：　〃To　what　purpose　is　the　multitude　of　your　sacrifices

unto　me？　saith　Jahveh：　I　am　full　of　the　burnt…offerings　of　rams

and　the　fat　of　fed　beasts；　and　I　delight　not　in　the　blood　of

bullocks；　or　of　lambs；　or　of　he…goats〃　（Isa。　i。　11）。　Or　of

Micah's　inquiry；　〃Will　Jahveh　be　pleased　with　thousands　of　rams

or　with　ten　thousands　of　rivers　of　oil？〃　（vi。　7。）　And　in　the

innumerable　passages　in　which　Jahveh　is　said　to　be　jealous　of

other　gods；　to　be　angry；　to　be　appeased；　and　to　repent；　in　which

he　is　represented　as　casting　off　Saul　because　the　king　does　not

quite　literally　execute　a　command　of　the　most　ruthless　severity；

or　as　smiting　Uzzah　to　death　because　the　unfortunate　man

thoughtlessly；　but　naturally　enough；　put　out　his　hand　to　stay

the　ark　from　fallingcan　any　one　deny　that　the　old　Israelites

conceived　Jahveh　not　only　in　the　image　of　a　man；　but　in　that　of

a　changeable；　irritable；　and；　occasionally；　violent　man？

There　appears　to　me；　t