the evolution of theology-第1章

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！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！






The　Evolution　of　Theology：　An　Anthropological　Study

by　Thomas　Henry　Huxley








I　conceive　that　the　origin；　the　growth；　the　decline；　and　the

fall　of　those　speculations　respecting　the　existence；　the　powers；

and　the　dispositions　of　beings　analogous　to　men；　but　more　or

less　devoid　of　corporeal　qualities；　which　may　be　broadly

included　under　the　head　of　theology；　are　phenomena　the　study　of

which　legitimately　falls　within　the　province　of　the

anthropologist。　And　it　is　purely　as　a　question　of　anthropology

（a　department　of　biology　to　which；　at　various　times；　I　have

given　a　good　deal　of　attention）　that　I　propose　to　treat　of　the

evolution　of　theology　in　the　following　pages。



With　theology　as　a　code　of　dogmas　which　are　to　be　believed；　or

at　any　rate　repeated；　under　penalty　of　present　or　future

punishment；　or　as　a　storehouse　of　anaesthetics　for　those　who

find　the　pains　of　life　too　hard　to　bear；　I　have　nothing　to　do；

and；　so　far　as　it　may　be　possible；　I　shall　avoid　the　expression

of　any　opinion　as　to　the　objective　truth　or　falsehood　of　the

systems　of　theological　speculation　of　which　I　may　find　occasion

to　speak。　From　my　present　point　of　view；　theology　is　regarded　as

a　natural　product　of　the　operations　of　the　human　mind；　under　the

conditions　of　its　existence；　just　as　any　other　branch　of

science；　or　the　arts　of　architecture；　or　music；　or　painting　are

such　products。　Like　them；　theology　has　a　history。　Like　them

also；　it　is　to　be　met　with　in　certain　simple　and　rudimentary

forms；　and　these　can　be　connected　by　a　multitude　of　gradations；

which　exist　or　have　existed；　among　people　of　various　ages　and

races；　with　the　most　highly　developed　theologies　of　past　and

present　times。　It　is　not　my　object　to　interfere；　even　in　the

slightest　degree；　with　beliefs　which　anybody　holds　sacred；　or　to

alter　the　conviction　of　any　one　who　is　of　opinion　that；　in

dealing　with　theology；　we　ought　to　be　guided　by　considerations

different　from　those　which　would　be　thought　appropriate　if　the

problem　lay　in　the　province　of　chemistry　or　of　mineralogy。

And　if　people　of　these　ways　of　thinking　choose　to　read　beyond

the　present　paragraph；　the　responsibility　for　meeting　with

anything　they　may　dislike　rests　with　them　and　not　with　me。



We　are　all　likely　to　be　more　familiar　with　the　theological

history　of　the　Israelites　than　with　that　of　any　other　nation。

We　may　therefore　fitly　make　it　the　first　object　of　our　studies；

and　it　will　be　convenient　to　commence　with　that　period　which

lies　between　the　invasion　of　Canaan　and　the　early　days　of　the

monarchy；　and　answers　to　the　eleventh　and　twelfth　centuries　B。C。

or　thereabouts。　The　evidence　on　which　any　conclusion　as　to　the

nature　of　Israelitic　theology　in　those　days　must　be　based　is

wholly　contained　in　the　Hebrew　Scripturesan　agglomeration　of

documents　which　certainly　belong　to　very　different　ages；　but　of

the　exact　dates　and　authorship　of　any　one　of　which　（except

perhaps　a　few　of　the　prophetical　writings）　there　is　no　evidence；

either　internal　or　external；　so　far　as　I　can　discover；　of　such　a

nature　as　to　justify　more　than　a　confession　of　ignorance；　or；　at

most；　an　approximate　conclusion。　In　this　venerable　record　of

ancient　life；　miscalled　a　book；　when　it　is　really　a　library

comparable　to　a　selection　of　works　from　English　literature

between　the　times　of　Beda　and　those　of　Milton；　we　have　the

stratified　deposits　（often　confused　and　even　with　their　natural

order　inverted）　left　by　the　stream　of　the　intellectual　and　moral

life　of　Israel　during　many　centuries。　And；　embedded　in　these

strata；　there　are　numerous　remains　of　forms　of　thought　which

once　lived；　and　which；　though　often　unfortunately　mere

fragments；　are　of　priceless　value　to　the　anthropologist。

Our　task　is　to　rescue　these　from　their　relatively　unimportant

surroundings；　and　by　careful　comparison　with　existing　forms　of

theology　to　make　the　dead　world　which　they　record　live　again。

In　other　words；　our　problem　is　palaeontological；　and　the　method

pursued　must　be　the　same　as　that　employed　in　dealing　with　other

fossil　remains。



Among　the　richest　of　the　fossiliferous　strata　to　which　I　have

alluded　are　the　books　of　Judges　and　Samuel。　It　has　often　been

observed　that　these　writings　stand　out；　in　marked　relief　from

those　which　precede　and　follow　them；　in　virtue　of　a　certain

archaic　freshness　and　of　a　greater　freedom　from　traces　of　late

interpolation　and　editorial　trimming。　Jephthah；　Gideon　and

Samson　are　men　of　old　heroic　stamp；　who　would　look　as　much　in

place　in　a　Norse　Saga　as　where　they　are；　and　if　the　varnish…

brush　of　later　respectability　has　passed　over　these　memoirs　of

the　mighty　men　of　a　wild　age；　here　and　there；　it　has　not

succeeded　in　effacing；　or　even　in　seriously　obscuring；　the

essential　characteristics　of　the　theology　traditionally　ascribed

to　their　epoch。



There　is　nothing　that　I　have　met　with　in　the　results　of　Biblical

criticism　inconsistent　with　the　conviction　that　these　books　give

us　a　fairly　trustworthy　account　of　Israelitic　life　and　thought

in　the　times　which　they　cover；　and；　as　such；　apart　from　the

great　literary　merit　of　many　of　their　episodes；　they　possess　the

interest　of　being；　perhaps；　the　oldest　genuine　history；　as　apart

from　mere　chronicles　on　the　one　hand　and　mere　legends　on　the

other；　at　present　accessible　to　us。



But　it　is　often　said　with　exultation　by　writers　of　one　party；

and　often　admitted；　more　or　less　unwillingly；　by　their

opponents；　that　these　books　are　untrustworthy；　by　reason　of

being　full　of　obviously　unhistoric　tales。　And；　as　a　notable

example；　the　narrative　of　Saul's　visit　to　the　so…called　〃witch

of　Endor〃　is　often　cited。　As　I　have　already　intimated；　I　have

nothing　to　do　with　theological　partisanship；　either　heterodox　or

orthodox；　nor；　for　my　present　purpose；　does　it　matter　very　much

whether　the　story　is　historically　true；　or　whether　it　merely

shows　what　the　writer　believed；　but；　looking　at　the　matter

solely　from　the　point　of　view　of　an　anthropologist；　I　beg　leave

to　express　the　opinion　that　the　account　of　Saul's　necromantic

expedition　is　quite　consistent　with　probability。　That　is　to　say；

I　see　no　reason　whatever　to　doubt；　firstly；　that　Saul　made　such

a　visit；　and；　secondly；　that　he　and　all　who　were　present；

including　the　wise　woman　of　Endor　herself；　would　have　given；

with　entire　sincerity；　very　much　the　same　account　of　the

business　as　that　which　we　now　read　in　the　twenty…eighth　chapter

of　the　first　book　of　Samuel；　and　I　am　further　of　opinion　that

this　story　is　one　of　the　most　important　of　those　fossils；　to

which　I　have　referred；　in　the　material　which　it　offers　for　the

reconstruction　of　the　theology　of　the　time。　Let　us　therefore

study　it　attentivelynot　merely　as　a　narrative　which；　in　the

dramatic　force　of　its　gruesome　simplicity；　is　not　surpassed；　if

it　is　equalled；　by　the　witch　scenes　in　Macbethbut　as　a　piece

of　evidence　bearing　on　an　important　anthropological　problem。



We　are　told　（1　Sam。　xxviii。）　that　Saul；　encamped　at　Gilboa；

became　alarmed　by　the　strength　of　the　Philistine　army　gathered

at　Shunem。　He　therefore　〃inquired　of　Jahveh；〃　but　〃Jahveh

answered　him　not；　neither　by　dreams；　nor　by　Urim；　nor

by　prophets。〃　Thus　deserted　by　Jahveh；　Saul；　in　his

extremity；　bethought　him　of　〃those　that　had　familiar　spirits；

and　the　wizards；〃　whom　he　is　said；　at　some　previous　time；　to

have　〃put　out　of　the　land〃；　but　who　seem；　nevertheless；　to　have

been　very　imperfectly　banished；　since　Saul's　servants；　in　answer

to　his　command　to　seek　him　a　woman　〃that　hath　a　familiar

spirit；〃　reply　without　a　sign　of　hesitation　or　of　fear；　〃Behold；

there　is　a　woman　that　hath　a　familiar　spirit　at　Endor〃；　just　as；

in　some　parts　of　England；　a　countryman　might　tell　any　one　who

did　not　look　like　a　magistrate　or　a　policeman；　where　a　〃wise

woman〃　was　to　be　met　with。　Saul　goes　to　this　woman；　who；　after

being　assured　of　immunity；　asks；　〃Whom　shall　I　bring　up　to

thee？〃　whereupon　Saul　says；　〃Br