5025.“说，你给我们带来的那希伯来仆人到我这里来”表那仆人或卑贱之物。这从前面的阐述（参看5013节）清楚可知。此处“那仆人或卑贱之物”表示在此由“约瑟”所代表的属灵的真理与良善；这真理与良善被非属灵的属世人视为一个仆人或某种卑贱之物。例如，属灵的真理与良善渴望人不要以显赫的职位或胜过别人的任何优越感为快乐，而是以为他的国家、社区（无论集体还是个体）所提供的服务为快乐，因而以重要职位所发挥的功用为快乐。纯属世人完全不知道这种快乐是什么，并否认它的存在。它虽然也能虚伪地说同样的话，然而却使得从为自我而存在的重要职位那里所获得的快乐成为主人，使得从为社区（无论集体还是个体）而存在的重要职位那里所获得的快乐成为仆人。因为他在他所行的一切事上都首先关注自己，在他自己之后才关注社区，并且仅在它们利益他的情况下才去利益它们。
再举一例。若有人说，功用和目的决定了某个事物是属灵的还是非属灵的，并且当功用和目的是为了公共利益、教会和神的国度时，是属灵的；但当为自己及其家人、朋友的功用和目的胜过前一种功用和目的时，就不是属灵的；属世人口头上的确承认这一点，但心里却不承认。他由于通过其理解力所接受的教导而口头上承认，却由于被恶欲所毁灭的理解力而从心里否认。他出于这后者使得为自我的功用和目的成为主人，使得为公共利益、教会和神国度的功用和目的成为仆人。事实上，他从心里会说，人如何能由此而有什么不同？
简言之，凡属世人视为与自己分离之物，他都视之为一文不值，并弃之；凡他视为与自己结合之物，他都视之为宝贵，并且是可接受的。属世人不知道，也不想知道，要关注自己与处于良善的每个人（无论认识还是不认识）结合，与陷入邪恶的每个人（无论认识与不认识）分离才是属灵的思维方式。因为当人的思维方式是这样时，他便与天堂里的人结合，与地狱里的人隔绝。但由于属世人因不接受任何属灵的流注而由此感受不到任何快乐，所以他视这种思维方式为某种令人完全讨厌和卑贱之物，因而与他所体验到快乐相比，简直一文不值；而他所体验到的快乐是通过身体感官和爱自己爱世界的恶欲流入的。这种快乐是死的，因为它来自地狱；而由属灵的流注所带来的快乐是活的，因为它经由天堂来自主。
Potts(1905-1910) 5025
5025. Saying, The Hebrew servant whom thou hast brought unto us, came unto me. That this signifies that servant, is evident from what was said above (see n. 5013); here by that servant is meant spiritual truth and good, which here is "Joseph," and which appears to the natural not spiritual as a servant. For example, spiritual truth and good desire that a man should not take pleasure in dignities or in any preeminence over others, but in services rendered to his country, and to societies in general and in particular, and thus should take pleasure in the use of dignities. The merely natural man is wholly ignorant what this pleasure is, and denies its existence; and although he too can hypocritically say the same thing, he nevertheless makes pleasure from dignities for the sake of self the lord, and pleasure from dignities for the sake of societies, in general and particular, the servant; for he regards himself in everything he does, and societies after himself, favoring them only insofar as they favor him. [2] Let us take another example. If it is said that the use and the end make a thing spiritual or not spiritual-use and end for the common good, the church, and the kingdom of God, making it to be spiritual, but use and end for the sake of self and one's own prevailing over the former use and end, making it to be not spiritual-this indeed the natural man can acknowledge with the mouth, but not with the heart; with the mouth from an instructed understanding, not with the heart from an understanding destroyed by evil affections. From this latter he makes use and end for the sake of self a lord, and use and end for the sake of the common good, of the church, and of the kingdom of God, a servant; nay, he says in his heart, Who can ever be otherwise? [3] In a word, the natural man regards as utterly worthless and rejects whatever he regards as separate from himself, and he values and accepts whatever he regards as conjoined with himself-not knowing nor wishing to know that it is spiritual to regard everyone as conjoined with himself who is in good, whether he is unknown or known; and to regard everyone as separate from himself who is in evil, whether he is known or unknown; for he is then conjoined with those who are in heaven, and disjoined from those who are in hell. But because the natural man feels no pleasure from this (for he receives no spiritual influx), he therefore regards it as utterly vile and servile, and thus as of no account in comparison with the pleasure he feels that flows in through the senses of the body and through the evil affections of the love of self and of the world; yet this pleasure is dead because it is from hell, whereas the pleasure from spiritual influx is living because it is from the Lord through heaven.
Elliott(1983-1999) 5025
5025. 'Saying, The Hebrew slave whom you have brought to us came to me' means that servile thing. This is clear from what has been stated above in 5013. Here 'that servile thing' is used to mean spiritual truth and good, which at this particular point is represented by 'Joseph'. This truth and good is seen by the unspiritual natural man as something servile. For example, the desire on the part of spiritual truth and good is that a person's delight should lie not at all in eminent positions or any kind of superiority over others but in the services rendered by him to his country and to communities corporately and individually, thus that a person's delight should lie in the purpose that positions of importance are meant to serve. The merely natural man is entirely ignorant of what this delight is and denies the existence of it. Although he too can in a hypocritical manner say much the same thing, he nevertheless makes 'a lord' out of the delight received from important positions existing for his own benefit and 'a slave' out of such positions existing for the benefit of communities corporately and individually. For in every single thing he does he regards himself first and communities only after himself, promoting their welfare only insofar as they promote his.
[2] Take another example. If one says that the purpose and end in view determine whether something is spiritual or unspiritual - spiritual when the purpose and end have the common good, the Church, and God's kingdom in view, but unspiritual when the purpose and end have, preponderating over these, oneself and one's own family and friends in view - the natural man is indeed able to affirm this with his lips but not in his heart. He can do so with his lips because of the instruction received by his understanding, but he cannot do so in his heart because his understanding has been ruined by evil desires. Consequently he makes 'a lord' out of the purpose and end that has himself in view, and 'a slave' out of the purpose and end that has the common good, the Church, and God's kingdom in view. Indeed he says in his heart, How can anyone possibly be any different from this?
[3] In short, everything that the natural man regards as being separated from himself is considered utterly worthless by him and is cast aside; and everything that he regards as being linked to himself is considered by him to be valuable and acceptable. The natural man neither knows nor wishes to know about any spiritual way of thinking in which a person sees himself linked to everyone who is governed by good, whether or not he is actually acquainted with him, and separated from everyone who is governed by evil, whether or not he is actually acquainted with him. For when this is a person s way of thinking he is linked to those in heaven and cut off from those in hell. But since the natural man does not experience any delight in that spiritual attitude, for the reason that he does not entertain any spiritual influence, he therefore looks upon it as something utterly base and servile, thus something worthless compared with the delight he experiences, coming to him through his physical senses and through the desires of his selfish and worldly love. But this delight is a dead one because it originates in hell, whereas the delight brought by a spiritual influence is living, since this delight, which comes by way of heaven, begins in the Lord.
Latin(1748-1756) 5025
5025. `Dicendo, Venit ad me servus Hebraeus quem adduxisti nobis': quod significet servum illud, constat ex illis quae supra n. 5013 dicta sunt; hic per servum illud intelligitur verum et bonum spirituale, quod hic jam est `Josephus'; hoc naturali non spirituali apparet ut `servum', ut pro exemplo: verum et bonum spirituale vult ut homo nihil voluptatis habent in dignitatibus et in aliqua supereminentia super alios, sed in officiis erga patriam, et erga societates in communi et {1} particulari, ac ita {2} voluptatem habeat in dignitatem usu; mere naturalis homo prorsus ignorat quid sit haec voluptas et negat quod sit, tametsi is ex hypocrisi etiam simile dicere potest, at usque voluptatem ex dignitatibus propter se `dominum' facit, et voluptatem ex dignitatibus propter societates in communi et particulari facit `servum'; se enim in singulis quae facit, intuetur, et societates post se, quibus tantum favet quantum illae sibi. [2] Sit quoque pro exemplo: si dicitur quod usus et finis faciat ut sit spirituale vel non spirituale, usus et finis propter commune bonum, Ecclesiam, et regnum Dei quod sit spirituale, at usus et finis propter se et suos praevalens super priorem quod sit non spirituale, hoc quidem naturalis homo agnoscere potest ore sed non corde, ore ex intellectuali instructo, non corde ex intellectuali per cupiditates destructo; ex hoc facit usum et finem propter se dominum, (c)ac usum et finem propter commune bonum, Ecclesiam, et regnum Dei, servum, immo dicit corde, Quis usquam aliter esse potest? [3] Verbo, naturalis homo quicquid aspicit ut separatum a se, hoc prorsus vilipendit et rejicit, et {3} quicquid aspicit ut sibi conjunctum, hoc aestimat et acceptat, non sciens nec scire volens quod spirituale sit aspicere unumquemvis ut sibi conjunctum qui in bono est, sive ignotus sive notus sit; et aspicere unumquemvis ut a se separatum qui in malo est, sive notus sit sive ignotus;conjungitur enim tunc cum illis qui in caelo sunt, et disjungitur ab illis qui in inferno; sed quia naturalis homo voluptatem inde non sentit, non enim recipit influxum spiritualem, ideo spectat illud ut prorsus vile et servum, ita sicut nihili respective ad voluptatem quam sentit, quae influit per sensus corporis et per cupiditates amoris sui et mundi; sed haec voluptas est mortua quia ex inferno, at voluptas ex influxu spirituali est viva quia per caelum a Domino. @1 i in$ @2 i ut$ @3 at$