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

 

True Christian Religion #503

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

503. At this point I shall add some accounts of experiences. The first experience.

I heard that a meeting had been called to discuss man's free will in spiritual matters - this was in the spiritual world. There were present from every quarter learned men, who had thought about the subject in the world in which they had previously lived, and many of them had been at councils and synods, both before and after that of Nicaea. They gathered in a sort of circular temple, like the one at Rome known as the Pantheon, which was formerly dedicated to the worship of all the gods, but subsequently consecrated by the papacy to the cult of all the holy martyrs. Around the walls of the temple were what looked like altars; but each had chairs drawn up to it, on which those who had gathered sat, and rested their elbows on the altars as if they were so many tables. No one had been appointed to preside over their meeting, but one by one, as the fancy took them, they broke ranks and coming into the centre gave vent to and made known their opinion. To my surprise, all the members of this assembly were full of arguments in favour of man's complete lack of power in spiritual matters, and they ridiculed the idea of free will in this respect.

[2] When they were assembled one man suddenly rushed into the centre and cried out in a loud voice: 'Man has no free will in spiritual matters, any more than Lot's wife had after she was turned into a pillar of salt. For most certainly, if man had any more freedom, he would of his own accord claim as his own the faith of our church. This is that God the Father in complete freedom and at His good pleasure confers that faith as a free gift on whomever He wishes, whenever He wishes. God would never have this good pleasure nor make this free gift, if by some sort of freedom or good pleasure man could also claim it for himself. For if this happened, our faith, a star which shines before our eyes night and day, would be scattered into the air like a shooting star.'

He was followed by another man who jumped up from his seat and said: 'Man has no more free will in spiritual matters than an animal, or rather, than a dog, because, if he had, he would do good of his own accord, whereas all good comes from God, and man cannot get anything for himself but what is given to him from heaven.'

[3] He was followed by another who leaped up from his seat and spoke from the centre. He said that man has no more free will in spiritual matters, or even in discerning these, than an owl has in daylight, or rather, than a chick has while it is still hidden in the egg. 'In such matters he is as blind as a mole; for if he was a veritable Lynceus 1 to discern what has to do with faith, salvation and everlasting life, he would believe that he could regenerate and save himself, and would actually attempt it, thus profaning his thoughts and deeds with seeking more and more merit.'

Yet another ran out into the centre and delivered this utterance, that anyone of the opinion that he can will or understand anything in spiritual matters since the fall of Adam is raving and becoming deranged, since he would then believe himself to be a tin god or supernatural being, possessing in his own right some portion of God's power.

[4] He was followed by a man who came panting into the centre, carrying under his arm a book, called the Formula of Concord; the Evangelicals at the present time swear by what he called its orthodoxy. He opened it and read out the following passage:

Man with regard to good is utterly corrupt and dead, so that there has remained and subsists in man's nature since the fall before regeneration not so much as a spark of spiritual strength, to enable him to be prepared for God's grace or to seize it when it is offered; or to be capable of receiving that grace of his own accord by his own efforts; or in spiritual matters to understand, believe, endorse, think, will, begin, complete, act, work, co-operate or apply or adapt himself to grace, or to make any contribution, to the extent of a half or even the smallest part, to his conversion. In spiritual matters relating to the salvation of the soul man is like the pillar of salt which was Lot's wife, resembling a block of wood or stone devoid of life, without the use of the eyes, the mouth or any senses. However he has the power of movement and the control of his external members, so as to attend public gatherings and hear the Word and the Gospel. (pp. 656, 658, 661-663, 671-673 in my edition.)

After this all expressed their agreement, crying out together: 'This is true orthodoxy.'

[5] I was standing close by and listening intently to all this, and since in my spirit I was incensed I asked in a loud voice: 'If you make man in spiritual matters a pillar of salt, an animal, blind and mad, what then becomes of your theology? Is not everything in theology a spiritual matter?'

After a period of silence they replied to this: 'The whole of our theology contains nothing spiritual apprehensible by reason. Our faith is the only item in it which is spiritual. But we have carefully shut up our faith to prevent anyone looking into it, and have taken precautions to ensure that no gleam of spirituality escapes from it so as to become visible to the understanding. Moreover man does not by any choice of his own contribute a whit to it. We have also removed charity from any spiritual idea, making it purely a moral matter, and we have treated the Ten Commandments likewise. Neither do we teach that there is anything spiritual about justification, the forgiveness of sins, regeneration and salvation by this means. We say that faith brings these about, but how we have no idea. In place of repentance we have adopted contrition, but to prevent it being thought to be spiritual we have removed it from all contact with faith. Neither have we adopted any but purely natural ideas about redemption. These are, that God the Father placed the human race under sentence of damnation, His Son took that sentence upon Himself, and allowed Himself to be hung upon the cross, thus compelling His Father to have mercy; and we have many more such ideas, in which you will not be able to detect anything spiritual, but only what is completely natural.'

[6] But, so incensed had I already become, I went on to say: 'If man had no free will in spiritual matters, what would he be but a beast? Surely this is what gives him his superiority over mere beasts? What would the church be without it, but the blackened face of a wall-eyed fuller? What would the Word be without it, but a blank book? Is there anything the Word says and commands more often than that man is to love God and to love the neighbour, and he is to believe that his salvation and life depend upon how he loves and believes? Is there anyone who is unable to understand and do what is laid down in the Word and in the Ten Commandments? How could God have prescribed and commanded man to do such things, if He had not given him the capability to do them?

[7] Tell any peasant, someone whose mind is not bogged down in fallacies about theology, that in what concerns faith and charity and the salvation they bring he can no more understand and will than a block of wood or a stone, not even being able to devote himself to or fit himself for them, surely he will roar with laughter and say: "How crazy can you get? What need have I then of a priest and his sermons? How is a church then any better than a stable? How then is worshipping any better than ploughing? What madness it is to talk like that, piling folly on folly. Does anyone deny that all good is from God? Surely man is permitted to do good of himself by God's guidance? And it is much the same with believing."'

On hearing this they all cried: 'We gave an orthodox view based on orthodox principles, you have given a peasant's view based on peasants' principles.' Then suddenly a thunderbolt fell from the sky, and they rushed out in droves for fear it would burn them up, and they all went away, each to his own home.

Footnotes:

1. In Greek mythology a man famous for his acute vision.

  
/ 853  
  

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

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Conjugial Love #82

Study this Passage

  
/ 535  
  

82. After this a man came rushing from the northern zone in a rage, and looking at me with a threatening expression and speaking in a heated tone, he said, "You are the one who is trying to lead the world astray by establishing a New Church, which you take to be meant by the New Jerusalem that will come down out of heaven from God, and by teaching that people who embrace the doctrines of this church will be blessed by the Lord with truly conjugial love, whose delights and happiness you exalt to the sky! Is that not something you just made up? Are you not just saying it as a snare and inducement to get people to go along with your new ideas?

"Tell me in short, however, what these New Church doctrines are, and I will see whether they hang together or not."

So I replied, "The doctrines of the church that is meant by the New Jerusalem are as follows:

"1. There is one God, in whom is the Divine Trinity, and that God is the Lord Jesus Christ.

"2. Saving faith is to believe in Him.

"3. Evils must be abstained from because they are of the devil and from the devil.

"4. Good deeds must be done because they are of God and from God.

"5. These good deeds must be done by a person as though he were doing them from himself, but he must believe that they are from the Lord in him and by means of him."

[2] When he heard this, the man's rage subsided for several minutes. But after some consideration, he again looked at me with a fierce expression, saying, "These five precepts - are they doctrines of the faith and charity of the New Church?"

And I answered, "Yes."

Then he asked me gruffly, "How are you able to demonstrate the first one, that there is one God, in whom is the Divine Trinity, and that He is the Lord Jesus Christ?"

"I demonstrate it," I said, "in this way. Is God not one and indivisible? Is there not a Trinity? If God is one and indivisible, is He not one person? If He is one person, is the Trinity not in that person?

"That He is the Lord Jesus Christ I demonstrate by the following points: Jesus Christ was conceived by God the Father (Luke 1:34-35), so that in regard to His soul He was God. And therefore, as He Himself says, the Father and He are one (John 10:30). He is in the Father and the Father in Him (John 14:10-11). He who sees Him and knows Him, sees and knows the Father (John 14:7,9). No one sees and knows the Father but He who is in the bosom of the Father (John 1:18). All things belonging to the Father are His (John 3:35, 16:15). He is the way, the truth, and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6), thus by Him, because the Father is in Him. And, according to Paul, all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily (Colossians 2:9). And furthermore, He has authority over all flesh (John 17:2), and He has all authority in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28:18).

"From all this it follows that He is God of heaven and earth."

[3] The man then asked how I demonstrate the second precept, that saving faith is to believe in Him.

"I demonstrate it," I said, "by these words of the Lord:

This is the will of the Father..., that everyone who...believes in (the Son) may have everlasting life. (John 6:39-40)

God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone who believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:16,15)

He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; but he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. (John 3:36)"

[4] After that he said, "Demonstrate as well the third precept, and the ones that follow."

Then I replied, "What need is there to establish that evils must be abstained from because they are of the devil and from the devil, that good deeds must be done because they are of God and from God, and that these good deeds must be done by a person as though he were doing them from himself, but that he must believe they are from the Lord in him and by means of him? The Holy Scripture from beginning to end attests throughout that these three precepts are true. What else does it teach in sum but to abstain from evils and do good deeds, and to believe in the Lord God?

"And besides, there is not any religion without these three precepts. Religion has to do with a way of life, does it not? And what is that life but to abstain from evils and do good deeds. How can a person do these things and believe in them unless he does so as though he were doing them from himself?

"If you dismiss these precepts from the church, therefore, you dismiss the Holy Scripture from the church, and you also dismiss religion. And if you dismiss these, the church is not a church."

On hearing these things, the man withdrew and considered them. But still he went away in annoyance.

  
/ 535  
  

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