Hi All,

Spinoza has shown in the previous chapter (Ch. 3 - The Vocation of the
Hebrews) that any idea of a particular people, whether Jewish or otherwise,
being chosen by God..:

======= TPT03-P33:
...has no regard, in so far as it is peculiar to the Jews, to aught but
dominion and physical advantages (for by such alone can one nation be
distinguished from another), whereas in regard to intellect and true virtue,
every nation is on a par with the rest, and God has not in these respects
chosen one people rather than another.
=======

...yet many people assume that the Mosaic Law expressed in Hebrew Scripture
was "given by God" to the Hebrews supernaturally and so they imagine it as
"Divine Law". So, to what might the term Divine Law refer? In the current
chapter (Ch. 4 - The Divine Law), Spinoza examines more closely the nature
of Divine Law vs. Human Law and shows that the Mosaic Law is more properly
considered as a human law which served to render the Hebrew nation, and the
lives of the people living under the laws of that nation, secure. He will
show that natural Divine Law is universal or common to all men and does not
depend on the truth of any historical narrative such as Hebrew Scripture.

He starts by discussing law in the abstract sense:

====== TPT04-P01 [my CAPS -TNeff]:
The word LAW, taken in the abstract, means that by which an individual,
or all things, or as many things as belong to a particular species, act in
one and the same fixed and definite manner, which manner depends either on
NATURAL NECESSITY or on HUMAN DECREE.

A law which depends on NATURAL NECESSITY is one which necessarily follows
from the nature, or from the definition of the thing in question;

a law which depends on HUMAN DECREE, and which is more correctly called an
ordinance, is one which men have laid down for themselves and others in
order to live more safely or conveniently, or from some similar reason.
======

And then he points out that even though...:

====== TPT04-P02:
"...all things are predetermined by universal natural laws to exist and
operate in a given, fixed, and definite manner..."
======

...he still asserts that a law may be said to depend on HUMAN DECREE because
man is a part of the power of nature. However, since the human mind cannot
attain to absolute knowledge of the infinite chain of causes or of the
concatenation of things as determined by UNIVERSAL NATURAL LAWS, these HUMAN
LAWS are generally formed from a consideration of things as if they are
contingent (that is, as they are known through the Imagination as explained
in the Ethics) rather than necessary (as known only through Reason and
Intuition).

And so he moves on to a more common definition of law:

====== TPT04-P05:
Now the word LAW seems to be only applied to natural phenomena by
analogy, and is commonly taken to signify a command which men can either
obey or neglect, inasmuch as it restrains human nature within certain
originally exceeded limits, and therefore lays down no rule beyond human
strength. Thus it is expedient to define LAW more particularly as A PLAN OF
LIFE LAID DOWN BY MAN FOR HIMSELF OR OTHERS with a certain object.
======

...and, with this, he distinguishes two different PLANS OF LIVING or LAWS
based on the object involved:

====== TPT04-P07-10:
LAW, then, being a PLAN OF LIVING which men have for a certain object
laid down for themselves or others, may, as it seems, be divided into HUMAN
LAW and DIVINE LAW.

By HUMAN LAW I mean a plan of living which serves only to render life
and the state secure.

By DIVINE LAW I mean that which only regards the HIGHEST GOOD, in other
words, the true knowledge of God and love.
======

Spinoza now goes into some detail about the nature of the HIGHEST GOOD
with which DIVINE LAW is concerned, showing that it involves perfecting the
Intellect so as to come to the Knowledge of God. And, since without God
nothing can exist or be conceived, our knowledge of natural phenomena must
also involve and express the conception of God..:

====== TPT04-P11-13:
...So, then, our HIGHEST GOOD not only depends on the knowledge of God, but
wholly consists therein; and it further follows that man is perfect or the
reverse in proportion to the nature and perfection of the object of his
special desire; hence the most perfect and the chief sharer in the highest
blessedness is he who prizes above all else, and takes especial delight in,
the INTELLECTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF GOD, the most perfect Being (which knowledge
he shows in the Ethics involves Reason and Intuition, not
Imagination --TNeff).

Hither, then, our HIGHEST GOOD and our highest blessedness aim - namely,
to the knowledge and love of God; therefore the means demanded by this aim
of all human actions, that is, by God in so far as the idea of him is in us,
may be called the COMMANDS OF GOD, because they proceed, as it were, from
God Himself, inasmuch as He exists in our minds, and THE PLAN OF LIFE which
has regard to this aim may be fitly called the LAW OF GOD [or DIVINE LAW as
defined above --TNeff].

The nature of the means, and the PLAN OF LIFE which this aim demands,
how the foundations of the best states follow its lines, and how men's life
is conducted, are questions pertaining to general ethics. Here I only
proceed to treat of the Divine law in a particular application.
======

...and from this he points out that...:

====== TPT04-P15-21:
...If we consider the nature of natural DIVINE LAW as we have just explained
it, we shall see:

1. That it is universal or common to all men, for we have deduced it from
universal human nature.

2. That it does not depend on the truth of any historical narrative...

3. We see that this natural Divine law does not demand the performance of
ceremonies...

4. Lastly, we see that the highest reward of the Divine law is the law
itself, namely, to know God and to love Him of our free choice, and with an
undivided and fruitful spirit; while its penalty is the absence of these
things, and being in bondage to the flesh - that is, having an inconstant
and wavering spirit.
======

Now, keeping in mind that Spinoza's aim in this treatise is to help
those Philosophers who are hindered in their thinking by the belief that
Reason is a mere handmaid to Theology and that therefore Scriptures must be
considered superior to Reason, he goes on to inquire...:

====== TPT04-P23-27:
1. Whether by the natural light of reason we can conceive of God as a
law-giver or potentate ordaining laws for men?

2. What is the teaching of Holy Writ concerning this natural light of reason
and natural law?

3. With what objects were ceremonies formerly instituted?

4. Lastly, what is the good gained by knowing the sacred histories and
believing them?

Of the first two I will treat in this chapter, of the remaining two in
the following one.
======

As for the first point, he states that:

====== TPT04-P28:
Our conclusion about the first is easily deduced from the nature of
God's will, which is only distinguished from His understanding in relation
to our intellect - that is, the will and the understanding of God are in
reality one and the same, and are only distinguished in relation to our
thoughts which we form concerning God's understanding....
======

He then goes on to give a few examples to illustrate his meaning.
Basically he shows that man's thoughts about such things as "will" and
"understanding" do not at all apply to God but rather generally reflect
man's own confused imagination of things. Spinoza shows in the Ethics that
all things follow necessarily from God's Nature and cannot actually be other
than they are and so the ideas which we have of "free will" for instance are
merely confused ideas involving our own particular imagination. So, Adam
might imagine that God expressed the wish that he not eat of the tree of
knowledge of good and evil but he (Adam) also imagined that he was free to
choose to go against God's will in a manner similar to the way a parent
might express to a child the parent's wish that the child behave in a
particular way while the child believes that he may freely choose to do
otherwise. However, if we truly Understand God's nature and the Necessity by
which all things exist and operate (as proved by Reason in Spinoza's Ethics)
then we will see that God does not think about things like we do in order to
understand them and then do things based on his understanding. Nor does God
do one thing rather than another based on some whim (that is, by some act of
free will). And so, contrary to what our Imagination leads us to believe,
God's Understanding and God's Will are one and the same expression of
Eternal and Necessary Truth which cannot be other than it is. He goes on to
write:

====== TPT04-P30:
What we have said about the Israelites and Adam, applies also to all the
prophets who wrote laws in God's name - they did not adequately conceive
God's decrees as eternal truths. For instance, we must say of Moses that
from revelation, from the basis of what was revealed to him, he perceived
the method by which the Israelitish nation could best be united in a
particular territory, and could form a body politic or state, and further
that he perceived the method by which that nation could best be constrained
to obedience; but he did not perceive, nor was it revealed to him, that this
method was absolutely the best, nor that the obedience of the people in a
certain strip of territory would necessarily imply the end he had in view.
Wherefore he perceived these things not as eternal truths, but as precepts
and ordinances, and he ordained them as laws of God, and thus it came to be
that he conceived God as a ruler, a legislator, a king, as merciful, just,
&c., whereas such qualities are simply attributes of human nature, and
utterly alien from the nature of the Deity....
======

Spinoza again mentions Christ as differing from all the other persons
represented in scriptures. As he wrote earlier (in chapter 1), he believes
that Christ knew God (as Spinoza defines God, not "God" as represented in
scriptures) directly by Intuition (the Third Kind of Knowledge which Spinoza
defines and explains in the Ethics), rather than by Imagination (the First
Kind of Knowledge) as did Moses and all the others. And so, Christ perceived
the Laws of God directly as the Eternal Necessity of God's nature by which
all things are determined to exist and operate in a given, fixed, and
definite manner. Spinoza wrote:

====== TPT04-P30-31:
...Inasmuch as God revealed Himself to Christ, or to Christ's mind
immediately, and not as to the prophets through words and symbols, we must
needs suppose that Christ perceived truly what was revealed, in other words,
He understood it, for a matter is understood when it is perceived simply by
the mind without words or symbols.

Christ, then, perceived (truly and adequately) what was revealed, and if
He ever proclaimed such revelations as laws, He did so because of the
ignorance and obstinacy of the people, acting in this respect the part of
God; inasmuch as He accommodated Himself to the comprehension of the people,
and though He spoke somewhat more clearly than the other prophets, yet He
taught what was revealed obscurely, and generally through parables,
especially when He was speaking to those to whom it was not yet given to
understand the kingdom of heaven. (See Matt. xiii:10, &c.) To those to whom
it was given to understand the mysteries of heaven, He doubtless taught His
doctrines as eternal truths, and did not lay them down as laws, thus freeing
the minds of His hearers from the bondage of that law which He further
confirmed and established....
======

Spinoza closes his inquiry on the first point with:

====== TPT04-P31:
...We conclude, therefore, that God is described as a lawgiver or prince,
and styled just, merciful, &c., merely in concession to popular
understanding, and the imperfection of popular knowledge; that in reality
God acts and directs all things simply by the necessity of His nature and
perfection, and that His decrees and volitions are eternal truths, and
always involve necessity. So much for the first point which I wished to
explain and demonstrate.
======

As for the second point of inquiry; "What is the teaching of Holy Writ
concerning this natural light of reason and natural law?", Spinoza draws
most of his examples from the ideas expressed by Solomon which clearly
commend to us Wisdom and Understanding. He summarizes his conclusion on this
point with:

====== TPT04-P34:
...the happiness and the peace of him who cultivates his natural
understanding lies, according to Solomon also, not so much under the
dominion of fortune (or God's external aid) as in inward personal virtue (or
God's internal aid), for the latter can to a great extent be preserved by
vigilance, right action, and thought.
====== TPT04-P36:
Thus we see that Scripture literally approves of the light of natural
reason and the natural Divine law, and I have fulfilled the promises made at
the beginning of this chapter.
======

In the next chapter (Ch. 5 - Of the Ceremonial Law) Spinoza will address
the remaining points from the list above:

====== TPT04-P23-27:
3. With what objects were ceremonies formerly instituted?

4. Lastly, what is the good gained by knowing the sacred histories and
believing them?
======

Best Regards,
Terry