New Christian Bible Study

Commentary

 

Memorable Occurrences in Swedenborg's Writings

This list of Memorable Occurrences in Swedenborg's Writings was originally compiled by W. C. Henderson in 1960 but has since been updated.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Apocalypse Revealed #386

Study this Passage

  
/ 962  
  

386. To this I will append the following account:

When I once looked about in the spiritual world, I heard what sounded like the gnashing of teeth, and like a thumping, too, intermixed with a harsh noise. So I asked what I was hearing, and the angels who were with me said, "There are clubs, which we call taverns, where people argue with each other. This is the way their debates sound at a distance, but close by they sound only like arguments.

I went over and saw cottages constructed of interwoven rushes, with clay for mortar. I wanted to look through a window, but there wasn't one. I looked for a window because I was not permitted to enter through the door, as light from heaven would then flow in and befuddle the people.

Suddenly, however, a window materialized on the right side, and I heard the people complain then that everything had gone dark. But shortly a window materialized on the left side, with the window on the right side closing, and then the darkness was by degrees dispelled, and they saw each other in a state of light. After that I was allowed to enter through the door and listen.

There was a table in the middle of the room, with benches surrounding it, yet the people all seemed to me to be standing on the benches, and to be arguing sharply with each other about faith and charity, the people on one side saying that faith was the principal tenet of the church, and on the other side that charity was.

Those who made faith the principal tenet said, "Do we not deal with God as regards faith, and with people as regards charity? Is not faith therefore something heavenly, and charity something earthly? Are we not saved by what is heavenly, and not by anything earthly?

"Furthermore, cannot God confer faith from heaven, because it is something heavenly, and must not a person confer on himself charity, because it is something earthly? What a person confers on himself is unrelated to the church and is therefore not saving. Can works that are called works of charity justify anyone in that case before God?

"Believe us when we say that by faith alone we are not only justified but also sanctified, provided our faith is not contaminated by hopes for merit that spring up from works of charity."

And so on.

[2] In reply, the people who made charity the principal tenet of the church sharply refuted them, saying that charity is saving, and not faith. "Does not God hold all people dear and will good to all? How can God do this except through the agency of people? Does God enable people to speak with one another only about matters having to do with faith, and not enable them to do things for one another that are matters of charity?

"Do you not see how absurdly you spoke about charity, saying that it is something earthly? Charity is something heavenly, and because you do not do the good pertaining to charity, your faith is earthly. How do you receive faith other than as a log or rock? You say that it is simply by hearing the Word, but how can the Word do anything simply by being heard, and how can it have any effect on a log or rock? Perhaps you are animated without being aware of it. However, what is that animation except to enable you to say that faith alone is saving? Yet what that faith is, and what saving faith is, you do not know."

[3] But one among them then arose, whom an angel speaking with me called a syncretist. 1 He took the cap from his head and placed it on the table, but quickly replaced it, as he was bald. He said, "Listen, you are all wrong. The truth is that faith is spiritual, and charity moral; but still they are conjoined, and they are conjoined by the Word, by the Holy Spirit, and by the effect these have, without the person's knowing. Indeed, the person may be said to be a compliant form, but one in which the person has no part.

"I have thought to myself a long time about this, and I eventually found that God can enable a person to receive a faith that is spiritual, but cannot move him to a charity that is spiritual without his being like a pillar of salt."

[4] When he said this, the people caught up in faith alone applauded, while those espousing charity booed. And the latter said with annoyance, "Listen, my friend, you do not know that a moral life can be spiritual, and that it can be merely natural - being a moral life that is spiritual in the case of people who do good from the Lord, though doing it as if of themselves, and being a moral life that is merely natural in the case of people who do good from hell, though doing it as if of themselves."

[5] I said before that the arguing sounded like the gnashing of teeth, and like a thumping, too, intermixed with a harsh noise. The particular arguing that sounded like the gnashing of teeth came from those who were espousing faith alone; the arguing that sounded like a thumping came from those who were espousing charity alone; and the intermixed harsh noise came from the syncretist. I heard their voices at a distance thus because they had all argued in the world, but did not refrain from any evil and so did not do any moral good that was spiritual. Moreover, they also did not know at all that the totality of faith is truth, and that the totality of charity is goodness, and that truth without goodness is not truth in spirit, and that goodness without truth is not goodness in spirit; thus that one must form the other.

The reason everything became dark when a window materialized on the right side is that light flowing in from heaven on that side affects the will. And a state of light returned when the window on the right side closed and a window materialized on the left side, because light flowing in from heaven on the left side affects the intellect, and everyone can be in the light of heaven as regards his intellect, provided his will is closed as regards the evil in him.

Footnotes:

1. An espouser of syncretism, a system of belief that attempts to reconcile differing religious and philosophic positions. The term was applied especially to the views of George Calixtus, a Lutheran theologian in the 17th century, and to his followers.

  
/ 962  
  

Many thanks to the General Church of the New Jerusalem, and to Rev. N.B. Rogers, translator, for the permission to use this translation.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Apocalypse Revealed #294

Study this Passage

  
/ 962  
  

294. To this I will append the following narrative account:

In the natural world people possess two levels of speech, because they possess two levels of thought, one inward and one outward. For a person can speak from his inner thought and at the same time then from his outer one, or he can speak from his outer thought and not from his inner one, and even contrary to his inner one. This is what makes possible pretenses, flatteries, and hypocrisies.

In the spiritual world, however, people do not possess two levels of speech, but a single one. A person there speaks as he thinks. Otherwise his voice becomes grating and hurts the ears. Still, he can remain silent and so not divulge the thoughts of his mind. Consequently, when a hypocrite comes into the company of people who are wise, either he goes away, or he hurries to a corner of the room and makes himself inconspicuous, and sits silent.

[2] Many spirits once gathered in the world of spirits and discussed this circumstance with each other, saying that being unable to speak as one thinks in the company of good spirits was a hardship for those who had not thought correctly about God and the Lord.

At the center of the gathering were the Protestant Reformed, and many of their clergy, and next to them Roman Catholics with some monks. Both groups said at first that it was not a hardship. What need is there to speak otherwise than as one thinks? And if perchance one does not think correctly, can he not purse his lips and remain silent?

Moreover, one of the clergy said, "Who does not think correctly about God and the Lord?"

But some of the gathering said, "Still, let's put it to the test."

And regarding God, there were some who had confirmed themselves in a trinity of persons - particularly because of the statement in the Athanasian doctrine,

The person of the Father is one person, that of the Son another, and that of the Holy Spirit still another.

And,

As the Father is God, so is the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God.

These were told to say "one God." But they could not. They contorted their lips and twisted them into many convolutions, but they could not articulate the sound into any other words than those in keeping with the ideas of their thought, which were ideas of three persons and so of three Gods.

[3] Moreover, those who had affirmed a faith divorced from charity were told to say the name Jesus. But they could not, even though they could all say Christ, and also God the Father. They were surprised at this, and inquiring into the reason, they found that they prayed to God the Father for the sake of the Son, and did not pray to the Savior Himself. For Jesus means Savior.

[4] They were further told to speak from their thought about the Lord's humanity and say, "Divine humanity." But none of the clergy present there could do so, though some of the laity could, and therefore the subject was presented for a serious ventilation.

So then, 1. They had read to them these statements in the Gospels:

The Father... has given all things into (the Son's) hand. (John 3:35)

(The Father has) given (the Son) authority over all flesh... (John 17:2)

All things have been delivered to Me by My Father. (Matthew 11:27)

All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. (Matthew 28:18)

They were then told to retain in thought therefore the idea that Christ is God of heaven and earth, both in respect to His Divinity and in respect to His humanity, and so to utter the term, "Divine humanity." But still they could not. And they said that they even retained from the quotations some thought of the idea from an understanding of it, but nevertheless without any acknowledgment of it, and that for that reason they could not.

[5] 2. After that they had read to them statements from Luke 1:32, 34-35, 1 saying that the Lord in respect to His humanity was the Son of Jehovah God, and statements showing that in respect to His humanity He is everywhere in the Word called the Son of God, and also the only-begotten. 2 And the examiners asked them to retain this idea in their thought, along with the idea that the only begotten Son of God born into the world could not but be God, as the Father is God, and to utter the term, "Divine humanity."

But they said, "We cannot, because our spiritual thought, which is the inner one, does not allow into the thought nearest our speech any other than like ideas."

They said, too, that they perceived from this that it is now not possible to keep separate their levels of thought as in the natural world.

[6] 3. Next they had read to them the Lord's words to Philip:

Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father...." (And the Lord) said to him, ."..He who sees Me has seen the Father... Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" (John 14:8-11)

And moreover other passages, saying that the Father and He are one (John 10:30, and elsewhere). And they were told to retain this idea in thought and then say "Divine humanity." But because their thought was not rooted in an acknowledgment that the Lord was God even in respect to His humanity, therefore they could not. They contorted their lips into convolutions to the point of becoming irate, and they tried to force their mouths into uttering it and to spit it out. But without success. The reason was that mental ideas flowing from an acknowledgment unite with spoken words in people who live in the spiritual world; and when those ideas do not exist, words are lacking, for ideas become words when uttered in speech.

[7] 4. Then they had read to them statement from the church's doctrine accepted throughout the world, saying that the Divine and human in the Lord are not two but one, indeed one person, united altogether like soul and body - statements from the Athanasian Creed. And they were told, "You may take from this an idea in keeping with your acknowledgment, that the Lord's humanity is Divine, because His soul is Divine, for it comes from your church's doctrine which you acknowledged in the world. Moreover the soul is the underlying essence and the body the form, and the essence and form are united, like being and expression, or like the efficient cause of an effect and the effect itself."

The spirits retained this idea and tried in accord with it to utter the term, "Divine humanity." But they could not, for their inner idea of the Lord's humanity dismissed and expunged this novel new idea, as they called it.

[8] 5. Again they had read to them the following from John:

...the Word was with God, and the Word was God... And the Word became flesh... (John 1:1, 14)

And the following from Paul:

...in (Christ Jesus) dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:9)

And they were told to think hard that God, who was the Word, became flesh, and that all the Divine dwells in Him bodily. "Perhaps," they were told, "you can then utter the term, 'Divine humanity.'"

But they could not, saying openly that they could not entertain the idea of a Divine humanity, as God is God and man is man, and God is a spirit, "and we can think of a spirit only as being like a puff of wind or bit of ether."

[9] 6. Finally they were told, "You know that the Lord said, "Abide in Me, and I in you... He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. (John 15:4-5)" And because some of the English clergy were present, they had read to them also something from one of their prayers before Holy Communion:

For, when we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink the blood, then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us.

"If you now think that this would not be possible unless the Lord's humanity is Divine, utter then the term, "Divine humanity," from an acknowledgment in the thought."

But still they could not. For they had the idea so deeply impressed on them that the Lord's Divinity was one thing and His humanity another, so that His Divinity was like the Divinity of the Father, and His humanity like the humanity of any other man.

The examiners said to them, however, "How can you think so? Is it possible for a rational mind ever to think that God is three and the Lord two?"

[10] 7. After that the examiners turned to the Lutherans, saying that the Augsburg Confession and Luther taught that the Son of God and the Son of Man in Christ are one person, that He is also in respect to His human nature the true, almighty and eternal God, and that being in respect to that nature at the right hand of almighty God, He governs everything in heaven and on earth, fills everything, is present with us, and dwells and acts in us. Moreover, there is no difference in any worship of them, since through the nature that is seen, the Divinity that is not seen is worshiped. Thus in Christ, God is man, and man is God.

Hearing this, the Lutherans replied, "Is that right?" And having looked around, they presently said, "We have not known this before. Consequently we cannot."

But one or two of them said, "We have read this and written it, yet when we have thought about it to ourselves on our own, the words were still only words, of which we could not form an interior idea."

[11] 8. Finally, turning to the Roman Catholics, the examiners said, "Perhaps you can pronounce the term 'Divine humanity,' because you believe that Christ is wholly present in the bread and wine of your Eucharist and in every particle of it, and you also worship Him as God when you present the host and distribute it, and you call Mary the mother of God. Consequently you acknowledge that she gave birth to God, which is to say, to His Divine humanity."

They then tried to utter the term in accord with those mental ideas they had of the Lord. But they could not, because of the physical idea they had of His body and blood, and because of their assertion that it was human power and not Divine power that He conferred on the Pope.

A monk then rose and said that he could think of the term "Divine humanity" as applying to the Virgin Mary, mother of God, and also to the patron saint of his monastery.

And another monk came forward saying, "I can, in accord with my mental idea of it, say 'Divine humanity' as a term applying to our most holy Pope rather than to the Christ."

But at that other monks pulled him back and said, "Shame on you."

[12] After that I saw heaven opened, and I saw little flame-like tongues descending and flowing into some of those present, and they then began to celebrate the Lord's Divine humanity, saying, "Put aside the idea of three Gods and believe that in the Lord dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, that the Father and He are one as a soul and body are one, and that God is not a puff of wind or bit of ether, but human, and you will then be conjoined with heaven, and the Lord will enable you thereby to say the name Jesus and utter the term, "Divine humanity."

Footnotes:

1. "He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David... Then Mary said to the angel, 'How can this be, since I do not know a man?' And the angel answered and said to her, 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.'"

2. John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18

  
/ 962  
  

Many thanks to the General Church of the New Jerusalem, and to Rev. N.B. Rogers, translator, for the permission to use this translation.

©2024 New Christian Bible Study Corporation. All rights reserved. Printed from newchristianbiblestudy.org