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

 

True Christian Religion #79

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

79. The fourth experience.

Once when I was thinking about the creation of the universe, some people from the Christian part of the world approached me, who in their time had been among the most famous philosophers and had a reputation for surpassing wisdom. 'We notice,' they said, 'that you are thinking about creation; tell us what is your opinion on that subject.'

'Tell me first,' I replied, 'what is yours.' 'My opinion,' said one of them, 'is that creation is the work of nature, and that nature therefore created itself, having existed from eternity. A vacuum does not and cannot exist. Yet what is it that we see with our eyes, hear with our ears, smell with our noses and breathe with our lungs, if not nature? Because nature is outside us, it is also within us.'

[2] Another person who heard this said: 'You speak of nature and regard it as the creator of the universe, but you do not know how nature made the universe; so I will tell you. It twisted itself into vortices which clashed together as clouds do, or like houses collapsing in an earthquake.' He explained that this collision caused the denser material to come together to form the earth; the more fluid parts separated out and came together to form the seas; and the lighter parts also separated out to form the ether and the air, the lightest of all formed the sun. 'Have you not seen how when oil, water and dust are mixed together, they spontaneously separate out and arrange themselves in order one above the other?'

[3] Then another listener said: 'What you say is mere imagination. Everyone knows that the first source of all things was chaos, which in size filled a quarter of the universe. In its midst was fire, with ether around that, and matter around the ether. This chaos split open and the fire burst forth through the cracks, as it does from Etna or Vesuvius, to form the sun. Next the ether expanded and spread around, to form an atmosphere. Finally the remaining matter condensed into a ball, to form the earth. As for the stars, they are merely lights in the expanse of the universe, which arose from the sun and its fire and light. For the sun was at first like an ocean of fire, which to avoid setting fire to the earth threw off from itself shining sparks; these took up their positions in the surroundings and so completed the universe by forming the sky.'

[4] But there was one of the by-standers who said: 'You are wrong. You think yourselves wise, and I seem to you simple. Yet in my simplicity I have believed, and still do, that the universe was created by God; and because nature is part of the universe, He created it at the same time as the whole of nature. If nature had created itself, would it not have existed from eternity? That is a fine piece of nonsense.'

Then one of the so-called wise men rushed up nearer and nearer to the speaker, and put his left ear to the other's mouth - his right ear was blocked with what looked like cotton-wool - and asked what he had said. He repeated the same statement, whereupon the man who had come up looked around him to see if any priest was present; he caught sight of one beside the speaker, and then twisted around saying: 'I too admit that the whole of nature comes from God, but -.' And he went off, whispering to his companions and saying: 'I said that because there was a priest present. You and I know that nature comes from nature, and because nature is therefore God, I said that the whole of nature comes from God, but - .'

[5] But the priest, hearing what they were whispering, said: 'Your wisdom is nothing but philosophy, which has led you astray and shut off the interiors of your minds so completely that no light from God and His heaven can penetrate and bring you enlightenment. You have put the light out. Consider therefore,' he went on, 'and decide among yourselves what is the origin of your souls, which are immortal. Do they come from nature, or were they at the same time in that mighty chaos?'

On hearing this the first man went off to his colleagues, to ask their help in solving this knotty problem. They came to the conclusion that the human soul is nothing but ether, and thought is merely a modification of the ether caused by sunlight; and ether is a part of nature. 'Surely everyone knows,' they said, 'that we talk by means of the air? And what is thought but speech in a purer sort of air, which is called ether? That is why thought and speech act as one. Anyone can observe this in children; a child first learns to talk, and then afterwards to talk to himself, and that is thinking. What then can thought be but a modification of the ether? Or what is the sound of speech but a modulation of it? From these considerations we deduce that the thinking soul is part of nature.'

[6] But some of them, while not disagreeing, cast light on the state of the question by saying that souls arose when the ether formed itself into a ball out of that mighty chaos, and then in the highest region divided itself into innumerable individual forms. These are infused into people, when they begin to think by that purer sort of air, and they are then called souls.

Another on hearing this said: 'I admit that the individual forms made from the ether in its highest region may have been innumerable, but still the number of human beings born from the creation of the world has exceeded the number of forms, so how could those ethereal forms be enough? This has led me to think that the souls which issue from people's mouths when they die return to the same people again after some thousands of years, so that they embark on and complete a life, similar to their previous one. It is well known that many wise men believe in the transmigration of souls and similar ideas.' In addition to these there were other guesses flung around, which I pass over as being crazy.

[7] After a short while the priest returned, and the one who had previously spoken about the creation of the universe by God told him their decisions concerning the soul. On hearing these the priest told them: 'You have spoken exactly as you thought in the world, unaware that you are not any longer in that world but another, which is called the spiritual world. All those who, by convincing themselves of the nature theory, have become immersed in the bodily senses, are not aware that they are no longer in the same world as that in which they were born and brought up. The reason is that there they had a material body, but here a substantial body; and a substantial person sees himself and his companions around him exactly as a material person sees himself and his companions around him, for the substantial is the starting-point of the material. Because you think, see, smell, taste, and speak just as you did in the natural world, you believe that nature here is the same. Yet the nature of this world is as different and remote from that of the former world as the substantial is from the material, or the spiritual from the natural, or what is prior from what is posterior. Because the nature of the world in which you previously lived is comparatively speaking lifeless, so by convincing yourselves of your belief in nature you too have become virtually dead as regards matters which relate to God, heaven and the church, as well as what concerns your souls. Still every person, bad as well as good, can have his understanding raised into the light enjoyed by the angels in heaven; and then he can see that God exists, that there is a life after death, that the human soul is not ethereal and thus of the nature of the material world, but spiritual, and so destined to live for ever. The understanding can enjoy that angelic light, so long as the natural loves are banished which came from the world, favouring it and its nature, and from the body, favouring it and the self 1 .

[8] At once those loves were banished by the Lord, and they were permitted to talk with angels. From their conversation in that state they perceived the existence of God and that after dying they were living in another world. This made them blush with shame and cry: 'We were mad, we were mad!' But since this state was not their own and after a few minutes became tiresome and unwelcome, they turned their backs on the priest and were unwilling to go on listening to him. Thus they reverted to their former loves, which were entirely natural, worldly and bodily. They went off to the left, from one community to another, and eventually reached a road where they caught a whiff of the delights of their own loves, and said: 'Let us take this road.' So they went along it, going down until they came to people who delighted in similar loves, and further still. Since their delight consisted in doing evil, and they harmed many on the way, they were thrown into prison and became demons. Then their delight was turned into misery, because they were restrained and prevented from enjoying what had previously delighted them, the behaviour which had formed their nature, by punishment and the fear of punishment.

They asked their companions in that prison whether they were to live like that for ever. Some of those there replied: 'We have been here for several centuries, and we are to remain for ever and ever, because the nature we acquired in the world cannot be changed or driven out by punishment. When it is driven out by this, it still comes back after a short interval.'

Footnotes:

1. Latin proprium, the term often used for the unregenerate self.

  
/ 853  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.

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