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 #484

Study this Passage

  
/ 962  
  

484. To this I will append three accounts of events that occurred in the spiritual world.

The first event: I once heard in the spiritual world what sounded like the noise of a mill. It was in the northern zone there. I wondered at first what it was, but then I remembered that in the Word a mill and the grinding of grain means to seek from the Word something usable for doctrine (no. 794). Therefore I went over to the place that I heard the sound coming from, and when I drew near, the sound died away, and I saw a kind of domed structure over the earth, with an entrance leading into it through a cave. Seeing this, I went down and entered, and lo, I found a room in which I saw an elderly man sitting, surrounded by books, holding a copy of the Word in front of him and seeking from it something he could use for his doctrine. He had slips of paper lying all around, on which he recorded the texts he found. In an adjoining room there were clerks who would collect the slips of paper and copy them onto a whole sheet.

I began by asking him about the books he had around him. He said that they all dealt with justifying faith, profoundly so those from Sweden and Denmark, more profoundly those from Germany, and still more profoundly those from Britain, but most profoundly those from the Netherlands. And he added that though they differed on various points, they were all in agreement on the article of justification and salvation by faith alone.

After that he told me that he was now collecting from the Word texts in support of this first tenet of justifying faith, that God the Father turned away from grace toward the human race on account of its iniquities, and that to save the human race there arose a Divine need for someone to take upon himself the condemnation required by justice, in order to effect satisfaction, reconciliation, propitiation, and mediation, and that only His Son could possibly accomplish this. He said, too, that after that, a means of approach to God the Father was opened for the sake of the Son. Moreover he said, "I have seen and still see that this accords with all reason. How could God the Father be approached except by faith in this merit of the Son? I have also now found that this accords as well with Scripture."

[2] Listening to this, I was astounded to hear him say that it accorded with reason and with Scripture, when in fact it is contrary to reason and contrary to Scripture, and I also frankly told him so. At that his zeal moved him to hotly retort, "How can you say that?"

Therefore I told him my opinion, saying, "Is it not contrary to reason to think that God the Father turned away from grace toward the human race and rejected mankind? Is not Divine grace an attribute of the Divine essence? To turn away from grace, then, would be to turn away from His own Divine essence, and to turn away from His Divine essence would mean He was no longer God. Can God be estranged from Himself? Believe me, grace on the part of God - as it is infinite, so is it eternal. The grace of God can be lost on mankind's part if people do not accept it, but never on God's part. If grace should depart from God, it would be all over with the whole of heaven and with the whole human race, to the point that people would no longer be in the least bit human. Therefore grace on the part of God continues to eternity, not only toward angels and people, but also toward the devil himself.

"Since this accords with reason, why do you say that the only means of approach to God the Father is through faith in the merit of the Son, when in fact there is a continuing approach through grace?

[3] "Furthermore, why do you call it a means of approach to God the Father for the sake of the Son, and not to God the Father through the Son? Is not the Son the Mediator and Savior? Why do you not approach the Mediator and Savior Himself? Is He not God and man? Who on earth goes directly to some emperor, king, or prince? Must one not find a deputy or someone to introduce him? Do you not know that the Lord came into the world to Himself introduce people to the Father, and that the only means of approach is through Him? Search the Scripture now, and you will see that this accords with it, and that your way to the Father is as contrary to Scripture as it is contrary to reason. I say to you also that it is an act of impudence to climb up to God the Father directly 1 and not through Him who is in the bosom of the Father 2 and who alone is in Him. 3 Have you not read John 14:6?" 4

When he heard this, the elderly man became so angry that he leapt from his chair and shouted to his clerks to throw me out. And when I immediately left of my own accord, he threw out through the exit after me a book that his hand chanced upon, and that book was the Word.

[4] The second event: After I left, I heard the noise again, but this time it sounded like the noise of two millstones crashing into each other. I went in the direction of the sound and it died away, and I saw a narrow entryway leading gradually down to a kind of domed building divided into little compartments, in each of which two men were sitting, who were also collecting from the Word proof texts in support of faith. One of them would find them, and the other would write them down, and this by turns.

I went to one of the compartments and, standing in the doorway, asked, "What texts are you collecting and writing down?"

They said, "Texts about the act of justification or faith in act, which is faith itself, justifying, vivifying and saving - the principal tenet of doctrine in Christianity."

And at that I said to one of them, "Tell me some sign of the act when that faith is introduced into a person's heart and soul."

He replied, "A sign of the act exists the moment a person is moved, by grief at his being damned, to think about Christ as having taken away the condemnation of the Law, and when, conscious of that merit of Christ, with confidence in it, he turns with it in mind to God the Father and prays."

[5] "So that is how the act occurs," I said then, "and that is the moment."

And I asked, "How am I to understand what we are told about the act, that nothing in a person cooperates with it any more than if he were a stock or a stone? Or that as regards the act a person cannot initiate, will, understand, think, do, or contribute anything to it, and cannot conform or accommodate himself to it?

"Tell me how this agrees with what you said, that the act happens when a person thinks about the judgment of the Law, about his damnation having been taken away by Christ, about the confidence with which he is conscious of that merit of Christ, and with it in mind turns to God the Father and prays? Does the person not do all these things as though of himself?"

But he said, "The person does not do them actively, but passively."

[6] And I replied, "How can anyone think, have confidence, and pray passively? Take away a person's active or reactive participation - do you not also take away his receptivity, thus everything his own, and with that the act as well? What then does that act of yours become but something purely theoretical, which we call a figment of the imagination?

"I know that you do not believe in agreement with some that an act of this kind is possible only with those people predestined to it, who are not at all aware of the infusion of faith in them. These may as well cast dice to find out if it has occurred.

"Therefore believe, my friend, that in matters of faith a person operates and cooperates as though of himself, and that without that cooperation the act of faith, which you call the principal tenet of doctrine and religion, is no more than the pillar into which Lot's wife was turned, having the faint sound of nothing but salt when scratched with a writer's pen or fingernail (Luke 17:32 5 ). I say this because as regards that act you makes yourselves to be like statues."

When I said that, the man arose and picked up the lamp violently to throw it at my face. But suddenly then the lamp went out and the room became dark, so that he hurled it at the forehead of his companion. And I went away laughing.

[7] The third event: I heard in the northern zone of the spiritual world what sounded like the rushing of water. I went therefore in that direction, and when I drew near, the rushing sound stopped, and I heard what sounded like a gathering of people. Moreover a house full of holes then appeared, surrounded by a wall, from which I heard the sound coming. I approached and found there a doorkeeper, and I asked him who were inside. He said that they were the wisest of the wise, who were coming to conclusions together about metaphysical subjects.

He spoke as he did out of the simplicity of his faith, and I asked if I might be permitted to enter. He said that I could, provided that I not say anything.

"I can let you in," he said, "because I have permission to let in the gentiles here who are standing with me at the door."

I went in therefore, and lo, I found an amphitheater with a rostrum in the middle of it, and the company of the so-called wise were discussing mysteries of faith. The matter or proposition submitted for discussion then was whether the good that a person does in a state of justification by faith, or in the progress of that state after the act, constitutes the good of religion or not. They were unanimous in saying that the good of religion means good that contributes to salvation.

[8] It was an acrimonious discussion, but those prevailed who said that any good that a person does in a state of faith or its progression is only moral, civic, or political good, which contributes nothing to salvation, but that only faith contributes anything. They established this as follows:

"How can any work of man be coupled with something free? Is not salvation bestowed gratis? How can any good work of man be coupled with the merit of Christ? Is not Christ's merit the only means of salvation? And how can any operation of man be coupled with the operation of the Holy Spirit? Does not the Holy Spirit accomplish everything without the help of man? Are not these three elements the only saving ones in any act of faith? And not do these three also continue to be the only saving ones in the state or progression of faith?

"Therefore any additional good that a person does can by no means be called a good of religion, a good which, as we said, contributes to salvation. If, however, someone does that good for the sake of salvation, it must rather be called an evil of religion."

[9] Two of the gentiles were standing by the doorkeeper in the vestibule, and having heard this, they said to each other, "These people do not have any religion. Who does not see that to do good to the neighbor for God's sake, thus in association with God and impelled by God, is what we call religion." And one of them said, "Their faith has made them foolish." And they asked the doorkeeper who the people were.

The doorkeeper said, "They are wise Christians."

To which they replied, "Nonsense. You are wrong. They are buffoons. That is how they talk."

I then went away. And when after a time I looked back at the place where the house had stood, behold, it was a marsh.

----------

[10] These events that I saw and heard, I saw and heard while awake in both body and spirit, for the Lord has so united my spirit to my body that I am present in both simultaneously.

My visiting those houses, and the people's deliberations on those matters then, and its happening as described, came about under the Lord's Divine auspices.

Footnotes:

1. Cf. John 10:1.

2. John 1:18.

3. John 10:38.

4. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

5. "Remember Lot's wife."

  
/ 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 #462

Study this Passage

  
/ 962  
  

462. Since no one today knows what is meant by enchantments, we will briefly say what they are.

Enchantments are listed just above in place of the eighth commandment of the Decalogue, "You shall not bear false witness," for mentioned there are three other prohibited evils, namely, murders, sexual immorality, and thefts.

To bear false witness means, in the natural sense, to act as a false witness, to lie and defame; and in the spiritual sense it means to convince and persuade that falsity is true and that evil is good. It is apparent from this that to practice enchantment means, symbolically, to persuade someone of falsity and thus to destroy the truth.

[2] The practice of enchantments existed among ancient peoples, and they were accomplished in three ways:

First, they would keep someone else's hearing and thus his mind continually focused on their words and declarations, without letup on any part of them, while at the same time inspiring and instilling their thought then through their breathing, coupled with the affection in the tone of their discourse, with the result that the hearer could not form any thought of his own. Thus would speakers of falsehood forcibly infuse their falsities.

Second, they would infuse a persuasion, which they would do by keeping the mind from anything contrary, and by keeping it intent only on the idea in what they were saying. Thus the spiritual atmosphere of one person's mind dispelled the spiritual atmosphere of another person's mind and suffocated it. This was the spiritual witchcraft that magicians once employed, and they called it overcoming and binding the intellect. This kind of enchantment was an enchantment of the spirit or thought only, whereas the first kind was a enchantment of the mouth or speech as well.

[3] Third, a hearer would keep his mind so firmly in his own opinion that he would almost close his ears to hearing anything of what someone else was saying. He would accomplish this by holding his breath, and sometimes by a tacit muttering, and thus by a continual denial of his adversary's opinion. This kind of enchantment was practiced by people listening to others, while the first two kinds were practiced by people speaking to others.

These three kinds of enchantment were practiced among ancient peoples, and are still practiced among spirits in hell. In the case of people in the world, however, only the third kind remains, and this among people who have affirmed in themselves falsities of religion out of a conceit in their own intelligence. For when these people hear contrary views, they do not admit them any further into their thought than to superficial contact, and then they emit from the inner recess of their mind a kind of fire which consumes those views, of which the other person knows nothing beyond the indications of the facial expression and tone of voice in reply, if the enchanter does not contain that fire, that is, the anger of his conceit, by hiding it.

This kind of enchantment today causes truths not to be accepted, and in many cases, not to be understood.

[4] Many magical arts were practiced in ancient times, and that these included enchantments is apparent in the book of Deuteronomy:

When you come into the land..., you shall not learn to imitate the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found in you anyone who causes his son or his daughter to pass through fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a diviner or fortune teller, or a user of potions, or one who uses enchantments, or one who inquires of an oracle, or a reader of signs, or one who seeks the dead. For (all of these things) are an abomination to Jehovah. (Deuteronomy 18:9-12)

A persuasion to falsity and thus the destruction of truth is symbolically meant by enchantments in the following passages:

Your wisdom and your knowledge have led you astray... Therefore evil shall come upon you... Stay now in your enchantments, and in the multitude of your sorceries... (Isaiah 47:10-12)

...by (Babylon's) enchantment all the nations were deceived. (Revelation 18:23)

Outside are dogs and enchanters and the sexually immoral and murderers... (Revelation 22:15)

(Joram said to Jehu,) "Is it peace...?" He answered, ."..as long as the harlotries of your mother Jezebel and her enchantments are many?" (2 Kings 9:22)

Harlotries symbolize falsifications (no. 134), and her enchantments symbolize destructions of truth by persuasions to falsity.

[5] Conversely, an enchantment may symbolize a rejection of falsity by truths, which was also accomplished by tacitly thinking and muttering against falsity out of a zeal for the truth, as is apparent from the following:

...Jehovah... will take away from Jerusalem... the mighty man, the man of war..., the counselor, the practiced mutterer, and the expert in enchantment. (Isaiah 3:1-3)

Their poison is like the poison of a... deaf cobra; it stops its ear, so as not to hear the voice of mutterers, of the skillful user of enchantments. (Psalms 58:4-5)

...behold, I am sending basilisk 1 serpents among you, against which there is no enchantment... (Jeremiah 8:17)

...in distress they sought you, they cried out in their muttering... (Isaiah 26:16)

Footnotes:

1. A legendary serpent or dragon, whose breath and glance were said to be lethal. Formerly identified in English translations of the Latin Vulgate with the cockatrice, and retained as such in the King James Bible.

----------

  
/ 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