----中文待译----
114. Who was dead and is alive. That this signifies that He is rejected, and yet that eternal life is from Him, is evident from the signification of being dead, when said of the Lord, as denoting to be rejected (concerning which see above, n. 83), and from the signification of being alive, as denoting that eternal life is from Him in (concerning which see also above, n. 84). The Lord is said to be rejected when He is not approached and worshipped, and also when He is approached and worshipped only as to His Human, and not at the same time as to the Divine. At this day therefore He is rejected by those within the church who do not approach and worship Him, but pray to the Father to have compassion on them for the sake of the Son, although no man, or angel, can ever approach the Father, and worship Him directly, the Divine being invisible, with which no one can be conjoined in faith and love. For that which is invisible cannot come into the thought, nor, consequently, into the affection of the will; and what does not come into the thought, does not enter into the faith, for what pertains to faith must be an object of thought. So also what does not enter into the affection of the will, does not enter into the love, for the things which pertain to the love must affect a man's will, as all a man's love resides in the will (see The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem 28-35). But the Divine Human of the Lord can be thought of and enter into the faith, and thence into the affection of the will, or into the love.
[2] It is therefore evident, that there can be no conjunction with the Father unless from the Lord, and in the Lord. This the Lord Himself teaches very clearly in the Evangelists.
In John:
"No one hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath brought him forth to view" (1:18).
Again:
"Ye have neither heard the Father's voice at any time, nor seen his shape" (5:37).
In Matthew:
"Neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him" (11:27).
In John:
I am the way, the truth and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me" (14:6).
Again:
"If ye know me, ye know my Father also; he that seeth me seeth the Father"; (Philip) "believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? believe me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in me" (14:7-11);
and that the Father and the Lord are one (10:30, 38).
Again:
"I am the vine, ye are the branches; without me ye can do nothing" (15:5).
[3] It is therefore evident, that the Lord is rejected by those within the church who approach the Father directly, and pray to Him to have compassion for the sake of the Son; for these cannot but think of the Human of the Lord, as of the human of another man, thus they cannot think of His Divine in the Human, and still less of His Divine united with His Human as the soul is conjoined with the body, according to the doctrine universally received in the Christian world (see above, n. 10 and 26).
Who is there in the Christian world, that acknowledges the Divine of the Lord that desires by this acknowledgment to separate His Divine from His Human? Nevertheless, to think of the Human alone, and not at the same time of the Divine in the Human, is to regard them as separate, which is not to think of the Lord, or of both as one person, although the doctrine received in the Christian world is, that the Divine and Human of the Lord make not two persons but one person.
[4] Those who constitute the church at this day do, indeed, think of the Divine of the Lord in His Human, when they speak from the doctrine of the church; but it is quite otherwise when they think and speak within themselves apart from doctrine. But let it be known, that a man is in one state when he thinks and speaks from doctrine, and another when he thinks and speaks apart from it. When a man thinks and speaks from doctrine, he thinks and speaks from the memory of his natural man; but when he thinks and speaks unfettered by doctrine, his thought and speech are then from his spirit. For to think and speak from the spirit, is to think and speak from the interiors of one's mind, therefore, what he then speaks is his real faith. The state of a man also after death is such as were the thought and speech of his spirit within himself unfettered by doctrine, and not such as were his thought and speech from doctrine, if the latter has not become one with the former.
[5] Man has two states as to faith and love, one while he is in doctrine, and another when he is unfettered by it, but the state of his faith and love apart from doctrine saves him, and not the state of his speech concerning faith and love derived from doctrine, unless the latter has become one with the former. Man does not know this, although to think and speak from doctrine concerning faith and love, is to speak from the natural man and its memory, is evident from this circumstance alone, that both the evil and the good can think and speak in this way when they are with others. And it is for this reason that evil equally with good prelates, or prelates who have no faith equally with those who have faith, can preach the gospel, to all appearance with a similar zeal and affection. The reason is, that, in such case, a man, as stated, thinks and speaks from his natural man and its memory; but to think from the spirit is not to think from the natural man and its memory, but from the spiritual man, and from the faith and affection of this man. From this alone it is evident, that there are two states pertaining to man, and that the former state just referred to does not save him, but the latter. For after death a man is a spirit, therefore such as he was in the world as to his spirit, such does he remain after his departure out of the world.
[6] Moreover, that there are two states pertaining to the man of the church, it has been granted me to know from much experience; for after death a man can be brought into either state, and also is actually brought into both; many, when they have been brought into the former state, have spoken like Christians, and from their speech were believed by others to be Christians, but as soon as they were brought back into the latter state, the state of their own spirit, they then spoke like diabolical spirits, and in complete opposition to what they had spoken before (see the work Heaven and hell, n. 491-498, and n. 499-511).
[7] From these considerations it also is evident how it is to be understood that the Lord is repudiated at this day by those who are within the church, that is, that from doctrine indeed the Divine of the Lord must be acknowledged and believed equally as the Divine of the Father; for the doctrine of the church teaches, that, "as is the Father, so also is the Son, uncreate, infinite, eternal, omnipotent, God, Lord, neither of them greater or less, before or after the other" (see the creed of Athanasius). Notwithstanding this, however, they do not approach and worship the Lord as Divine, but they worship the Divine of the Father, as is the case when they pray to the Father that He may have compassion on them for the sake of the Son. When they use these words, they do not in the least think of the Divine of the Lord, but of His Human separate from the Divine, thus of His Human as similar to that of another man. They then think not of one God, but of two, or three. To think in this way of the Lord, is to repudiate Him; for not to think of His Divine in conjunction with His Human, which nevertheless are not two persons but one person, and make a one as soul and body, is by separation to exclude the Divine.
[8] I have occasionally talked with spirits who, whilst they lived in the world, were of the Popish religion, and I inquired whether they ever thought in the world concerning the Lord's Divine? They said that they had thought on the subject as often as they were in doctrine with insight, and that then they acknowledged His Divine to be equal with that of the Father, but apart from doctrine, they thought of His Human alone, and not of His Divine. They were asked why they say that the power, which belonged to the Human of the Lord, was given Him by the Father, and not by Himself, since they acknowledged His Divine to be equal to that of the Father? They then turned away, without answering; but they were told that the reason was, that they arrogated to themselves all His Divine power; which they could not have done, unless they had separated the Divine from the Human. That the Lord is repudiated by them, every one may conclude from this circumstance, that they worship the Pope as the Lord, and that they no longer ascribe any power to the Lord.
[9] I will here relate a great scandal uttered by the Pope who was called Benedict XIV. He declared openly that he believed, when he lived in the world, that the Lord had no power, because He had transferred it all to Peter, and thence to his successors; adding that he believed that the Romish saints have more power than the Lord, because they retain it from God the Father, but that the Lord abdicated it entirely, and conferred it on the Popes; but that still He must be worshipped, because without such worship the Pope would not be worshipped with sanctity. But this Pope, because he arrogated to himself what was Divine, even after death, was, after some days, cast, into hell.
114. Who was dead and is alive, signifies that He has been rejected, and yet eternal life is from Him. This is evident from the signification of being "dead," as being, in reference to the Lord, to have been rejected (of which see above, n. 83; also from the signification of "being alive," as being that eternal life is from Him (of which also above, n. 84. The Lord is said to have been rejected when He is not approached and worshiped; and also when He is approached and worshiped in respect to His Human only, and not at the same time in respect to the Divine; therefore He is rejected at the present time within the church by those who do not approach and worship Him, but pray to the Father to have compassion for the sake of the Son, when yet neither man nor angel can ever approach the Father and worship Him immediately; for the Divine is invisible, and with it no one can be conjoined by faith and love; since what is invisible does not come into the idea of thought, nor, consequently, into the affection of the will; and what does not fall into the idea of thought does not fall within the faith; for the things that are to be of faith must be thought of. So also what does not enter into the affection of the will does not enter into love, for what is to be of the love must affect man's will, for all the love that man has resides in the will (See The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem 28-35).
[2] But the Divine Human of the Lord does come into the idea of the thought and thus into faith, and from that into the affection of the will, that is, into love. From this it is clear that there is no conjunction with the Father except from the Lord, and in the Lord. This the Lord Himself teaches with the utmost clearness in the Evangelists, as in John:
No one hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath brought Him forth to view (John 1:18).
In the same:
Ye have neither heard the Father's voice at any time, nor seen His shape (John 5:37).
In Matthew:
No one knoweth the Father save the Son, and he to whom the Son willeth to reveal Him (Matthew 11:27).
In John:
I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man cometh unto the Father but through Me (John 14:6).
In the same :
If ye know Me ye know My Father also; he that seeth Me seeth the Father. Philip, believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? Believe Me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me (John 14:7-11).
And that the Father and the Lord are one (John 10:30, 38).
I am the vine, ye are the branches; apart from Me ye can do nothing (John 15:5).
[3] From this it can be seen that the Lord has been rejected by those within the church who approach the Father immediately and pray to Him to have compassion for the sake of the Son; for these cannot do otherwise than think of the Lord's Human as they think of the human of another man, thus they cannot think at the same time of His Divine as being in the Human, still less of His Divine as conjoined with His Human as the soul is conjoined with the body, according to the doctrine received throughout the universal Christian world (See above, n. 10, 26). Who is there in the Christian world, acknowledging the Divinity of the Lord, that is willing to be one who would place the Lord's Divine outside of His Human? When yet to think of the Human only, and not at the same time of His Divine in the Human, is to view the two as separated, which is not to view the Lord, nor the two as one person; and yet the doctrine received throughout Christendom is, that the Divine and the Human of the Lord are not two persons but a single person.
[4] It is true that men of the church at this day, when they speak from the doctrine of the church think of the Divine of the Lord in His Human; but when they think and speak by themselves aside from doctrine, it is altogether otherwise. But be it known, that man is in one state when he is thinking and speaking from doctrine, and in another when he is thinking and speaking aside from doctrine. When man is thinking and speaking from doctrine, his thought and speech are from the memory of his natural man; but when he is thinking and speaking aside from doctrine, his thought and speech are from his spirit; for to think and speak from the spirit, is to think and speak from the interiors of one's mind, from which is his real faith. Moreover, man's state after death becomes such as were the thought and speech of his spirit by himself aside from doctrine, and not such as they were from doctrine, if the latter was not one with the former.
[5] Man does not know that he has two states in respect to faith and love; one when in doctrine and another aside from doctrine; but that the state of his faith and love aside from doctrine is what saves him, and not the state of his speech respecting faith and love from doctrine, unless the latter state makes one with the former. Yet to think and speak from doctrine respecting faith and love is to speak from the natural man and its memory, as is evident merely from this, that the evil, when with others, can think and speak thus equally with the good. For the same reason also evil preachers equally with good, or preachers that have no faith equally with those that have faith, can preach the Gospel, and, to appearance, with similar zeal and affection. This is because the man, as has been said, then thinks and speaks from his natural man and its memory. But to think from one's spirit is not to think from the natural man and its memory, but from the spiritual man, and from its faith and affection. Merely from this it is clear that man has two states, and that it is the latter state, not the former, that saves him; for man after death is a spirit; therefore such as he was in the world in respect to his spirit, such he remains after his departure out of the world.
[6] Moreover, it has been given me to know from much experience that the man of the church has these two states. For after death, man can be let into either state, and is also actually let into both. Many of these, when they have been let into the former state, have spoken like Christians, and from such speech have been believed by others to be Christians; but as soon as they were remitted into the latter state, which was the real state of their spirit they spoke like devilish spirits, and altogether in opposition to what they had spoken before (See the work on Heaven and Hell 491-498, 499-511).
[7] From this it can be seen how the statement is to be understood that the Lord has been at this day rejected by those within the church; namely, that although it is held from doctrine that the Divine of the Lord must be acknowledged and believed in the same degree as the Divine of the Father, for the doctrine of the church teaches that "As is the Father so also is the Son, uncreate, infinite, eternal, omnipotent, God, Lord, and neither of them greater or less, before or after the other" (See the Creed of Athanasius); yet they do not approach and worship the Lord and His Divine, but the Divine of the Father; this they do when they pray to the Father to have mercy for the sake of the Son; and when they say this they do not think at all of the Divine of the Lord, but they think of His Human as separated from the Divine, thus of His Human as similar to the human of any other man; and then they also think not of one God, but of two, or three. To think in this way of the Lord is to reject Him; for by not thinking of His Divine at the same time that they think of His Human, by the separation they thrust out the Divine. Yet these are not two, but one person, and make one as soul and body do.
[8] I once spoke with spirits who when they lived in the world were of the popish religion, and I asked whether in the world they ever thought about the Divine of the Lord? They said that they thought about it whenever they saw from doctrine, and that they then acknowledged His Divine to be equal with the Divine of the Father, but that apart from doctrine, they thought of His Human only, and not of His Divine. They were asked why they say that the power which His Human had was given to it by the Father and not by Himself, since they acknowledged His Divine to be equal with that of the Father? At this they turned away, making no answer. But it was said to them, that it was because they transferred to themselves all His Divine power, and that they could not have done this unless they had separated the Divine from the Human. That with them the Lord has been rejected, everyone may conclude from this, that they worship the pope instead of the Lord, and that they no longer attribute any power to the Lord.
[9] I will here also mention a great scandal heard from the pope called Benedict XIV. He openly declared that when he lived in the world he believed that the Lord had no power, because He had transferred it all to Peter, and after him to his successors; adding his belief that their saints have more power than the Lord, because they hold it from God the Father, while the Lord resigned it all and gave it to the popes; yet that He is still to be worshiped, because otherwise the pope is not worshiped with sanctity. But because this pope even after death claimed the Divine for himself, after a few days he was cast into hell.
114. "Qui fuit mortuus et vivit." - Quod significet quod rejectus et tamen ab Ipso vita aeterna, constat ex significatione "mortuus" esse, cum de Domino, quod sit rejectus esse (de qua supra, n. 83); et ex significatione "vivere", quod sit quod ab Ipso vita aeterna (de qua etiam supra, n. 84). Dominus rejectus dicitur cum non aditur et colitur, et quoque dum aditur et colitur solum quoad Humanum suum et non simul quoad Divinum; quare rejicitur hodie intra ecclesiam ab illis qui non Ipsum adeunt et colunt, sed orant Patrem ut misereatur propter Filium; cum tamen nusquam aliquis homo nec angelus potest adire Patrem, et Ipsum immediate colere, est enim Divinum invisibile, cum quo nemo conjungi fide et amore potest: quod enim invisibile est, hoc non cadit in ideam cogitationis, et ideo nec in affectionem voluntatis; et quod non cadit in ideam cogitationis, hoc nec cadit in fidem, nam quae fidei erunt, cogitabuntur; et quoque quod non intrat in affectionem voluntatis, hoc nec intrat in amorem, nam quae amoris erunt, afficient voluntatem hominis, in hac enim residet omnis amor qui est homini (videatur Doctrina Novae Hierosolymae, n. 28-35).
[2] At Divinum Humanum Domini cadit in ideam cogitationis et sic in fidem, et inde in affectionem voluntatis seu amorem. Inde patet quod nulla conjunctio sit cum Patre nisi a Domino et in Domino. Hoc perquam clare docet Ipse Dominus apud Evangelistas:
- Apud Johannem,
"Deum nemo vidit unquam; Unigenitus Filius qui in sinu Patris est, Ipse exposuit" (1:18);
apud eundem,
"Neque vocem Patris audivistis unquam, neque speciem Ipsius vidistis" (5:37);
apud Matthaeum
"Nemo cognoscit Patrem nisi Filius, et cui Filius vult revelare" (11:27);
apud Johannem,
"Ego sum via, veritas, et vita; nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per Me" (14:6);
apud eundem,
"Si Me cognoscitis, etiam Patrem meum cognoscitis;... is qui Me videt, videt Patrem." ...Philippe, "Nonne credis quod Ego in Patre et Pater in Me? ...Credite Mihi quod Ego in Patre, et Pater in Me" (14:7-11);
et quod
Pater et Dominus unum sint (cap. 10:30,, 38);
apud eundem,
"Ego sum, Vitis, vos palmites;... sine Me non potestis facere quicquam" (15:5).
[3] Inde constare potest quod Dominus rejectus sit ab illis intra ecclesiam qui immediate adeunt Patrem, et Ipsum orant ut misereatur propter Filium; hi enim non aliter possunt quam cogitare de Humano Domini sicut de humano alius hominis, ita non simul de Divino Ipsius in Humano, minus de Divino Ipsius conjuncto Humano Ipsius sicut conjuncta est anima corpori, secundum doctrinam in universo Christiano orbe receptam (videatur supra, n. 10 et 26). Quis usquam in Christiano orbe, qui Divinum Domini agnoscit, talis vult esse ut Divinum Ipsius ponat extra Humanum Ipsius? cum tamen cogitare de solo Humano et non simul de Divino Ipsius in Humano, est intueri illa separata, quod non est intueri Dominum, nec utrumque ut unam Personam; cum tamen doctrina in Christianismo recepta etiam est, quod Divinum et Humanum Domini non sint duo sed unica Persona.
[4] Homines ecclesiae hodie quidem cogitant de Divino Domini in Humano Ipsius, cum ex doctrina ecclesiae loquuntur; at prorsus aliter dum cogitant et secum loquuntur extra doctrinam. Sed sciatur quod alius status sit homini cum ex doctrina cogitat et loquitur, et alius cum extra doctrinam. Dum ex doctrina cogitat et loquitur, tunc ex memoria naturalis sui hominis cogitat et loquitur; at cum extra doctrinam, tunc ex spiritu suo; nam ex spiritu cogitare et loqui, est ex interioribus mentis suae, unde est ipsa fides ejus. Hominis etiam status post mortem fit qualis ejus spiritus cogitatio et loquela secum fuit extra doctrinam, et non qualis ejus cogitatio et loquela fuit ex doctrina, si non haec una fuerit cum illa.
[5] Quod bini status homini quoad fidem et amorem sint, unus dum in doctrina est et alter cum extra doctrinam, at quod status ejus fidei et amoris extra doctrinam salvet illum, et non status ejus loquelae de fide et amore cum ex doctrina nisi hic unum faciat cum illo, homo nescit; cum tamen cogitare et loqui ex doctrina de fide et amore est loqui ex naturali homine et ejus memoria, ut constare potest ex eo solo, quod aeque mali quam boni ita cogitare et loqui possint quando cum aliis; quapropter etiam antistites mali aeque ac boni, seu antistites qui nullam fidem habent aeque ac qui fidem habent, possunt praedicare Evangelium cum simili ad apparentiam zelo et affectione. Causa est, quia tunc homo, ut dictum est, ex suo naturali homine et ejus memoria cogitat et loquitur; at cogitare ex suo spiritu non est ex naturali homine et ejus memoria, sed ex spirituali homine et hujus fide et affectione. Ex hoc solum constare potest quod bini status sint homini, et quod prior status non salvet illum, sed posterior: est enim homo post mortem spiritus; ergo qualis homo fuit in mundo quoad spiritum, talis manet post excessum e mundo.
[6] Praeterea, quod bini illi status homini ecclesiae sint, ex multa experientia datum est scire; homo enim post mortem mitti potest in utrumque statum, et quoque actualiter in utrumque mittitur: multi ex illis, cum missi sunt in priorem statum, locuti sunt sicut Christiani, et ex loquela illa ab aliis crediti sunt quod Christiani essent; sed ut primum in Statum posteriorem, qui proprius erat spiritus eorum, remissi sunt, tunc locuti sunt sicut spiritus diabolici, et prorsus contra illa quae prius (videatur in opere De Caelo et Inferno 491-498, et 499-511).
[7] Ex his constare potest quomodo etiam intelligendum est quod Dominus rejectus sit hodie ab illis qui intra ecclesiam: nempe, quod quidem ex doctrina sit quod agnoscendum et credendum sit Divinum Domini in eodem gradu quo Divinum Patris, nam docet doctrina quod Sicut est Pater, etiam est Filius increatus, infinitus, aeternus, omnipotens, Deus, Dominus, ac nemo Eorum maximus et minimus, primus et ultimus; (videatur Symbolum Athanasii;) et usque tamen non adeunt et colunt Dominum et Ipsius Divinum, sed Patris; quod fit dum orant Patrem ut misereatur propter Filium; et cum hoc dicunt, prorsus non cogitant de Divino Domini, sed de Humano Ipsius separato a Divino, ita de Humano Ipsius simili cum humano alterius hominis; et quoque simul tunc non de uno Deo sed de duobus aut tribus. Ita cogitare de Domino est rejicere Ipsum, nam non simul cogitare de Divino Ipsius cum de Humano Ipsius, per separationem tunc excludunt Divinum; quod tamen non duo sunt sed una Persona, ac unum faciunt sicut anima et corpus.
[8] Locutus sum quondam cum spiritibus, qui dum vixerunt in mundo, fuerunt ex religione Pontificia; et quaesivi num in mundo usquam cogitaverint de Divino Domini. Dixerunt quod cogitaverint quoties in doctrina cum visu essent, et quod tunc agnoverint Divinum Ipsius par Divino Patris; at cum extra doctrinam, quod solum de Humano Ipsius et non de Divino. Quaerebantur cur dicunt quod potestas, quae fuit Humano Ipsius, data sit ei a Patre et non a Se Ipso, quia Divinum Ipsius agnoverunt par Divino Patris: tunc averterunt se, nihil respondentes. Sed dictum illis est quod causa fuerit quia transtulerunt in se omnem Divinam Ipsius potestatem, quod non potuissent nisi separavissent. Quod Dominus apud hos rejectus sit quisque potest ex eo concludere, quod pro Domino colant Papam, et quod nullam potestatem Domino amplius tribuant.
[9] Hic etiam referre velim magnum scandalum auditum a Papa qui vocatus Benedictus XIV dixit aperte quod crediderit, cum in mundo vixit, quod Domino nulla potestas sit, quia omnem transtulit in Petrum et inde in ejus successores; addens quod crediderit quod sancti eorum plus potestatis habeant quam Dominus, quia illi a Deo Patre illam retinent; at quod Dominus omnem Sibi abdicaverit et dederit Pontificibus; sed quod usque colendus sit, quia absque eo non sancte colitur Papa. Sed is quia Divinum sibi arrogavit etiam post mortem, post aliquot dies in infernum conjectus est.