318、现在我需要按下列顺序说明人的状态是如何因证实和由此而来的说服而被改变的：
①没有什么东西不能被证实；虚假比真理更容易被证实。
②一旦证实虚假，人就看不见真理；不过，一旦证实真理，人就能看见虚假。
③随心所欲证明一切的能力不是聪明，仅仅是灵巧，就连最坏的人也可能有这种灵巧。
④有一种证实是知识上的，同时不是意志上的；但一切意志上的证实也都是知识上的。
⑤对邪恶的证实既是意志上的，也是知识上的，它使得人以为他自己的谨慎是一切，圣治什么都不是；但这不适用于唯独知识上的证实。
⑥凡既被意愿也被理解力证实的东西都会存到永远；但仅被理解力证实的东西则不然。
①没有什么东西不能被证实；虚假比真理更容易被证实。当无神论者证明神不是宇宙的创造者，自然是它自身的创造者，宗教无非是对简单人和普通民众的一种束缚；人就像动物，并像动物那样死去时，尤其当他们证明奸淫是可允许的，暗中偷窃、欺诈和阴谋诡计同样如此；狡猾是聪明，城府是智慧时，还有什么东西是不能被证实的呢？每个人不都在证实自己的异端邪说吗？有些书卷不是充满对基督教界两个主要异端邪说的证明吗？编出十种异端邪说，无论它们多么晦涩难懂，吩咐一个灵巧的人去证明它们，他会把它们都证明出来。然后你若单单基于他的证明来看待它们，难道不会视虚假为真理吗？一切虚假皆由于其表象和幻觉或谬论而在属世人里面发光，而真理只在属灵人里面发光。由此清楚可知，虚假比真理更容易被证实。
举例说明一切虚假和一切邪恶都能被证实到虚假看似真理，邪恶看似良善的地步。例如证明光就是暗，暗就是光。难道我们不会问，光到底是什么？它不就是照着眼睛的状态而出现在眼前的某种东西吗？在闭着的眼睛面前，光又是什么呢？蝙蝠和猫头鹰不是有这种眼睛，以致它们看光为暗，看暗为光吗？我听说，有些人就有这种视觉；他们说，地狱里的人就能看见彼此，尽管他们住在黑暗里。人在午夜的梦中不是有光吗？这岂不意味着暗就是光，光就是暗吗？但我们可以回答说：“你在说什么？光就是光，正如真理就是真理；暗就是暗，正如虚假就是虚假。”
另举一例。让人证明乌鸦是白色的。难道他不会说，乌鸦的黑色只是阴影，这阴影不是它真实的样子吗？它里面的羽毛是白的，它的身体也是白的；这些才是实际构成这只鸟的物质，由于乌鸦的黑色是一种阴影，所以它变老时就会变白；我见过这种乌鸦。黑色本身不就是白色吗？把黑玻璃碾碎，你就会发现粉末是白色的。这意味着你若称乌鸦是黑色的，就是在谈论它的阴影，而不是它真实的样子。但我们可以回答说：“你在说什么？这意味着所有的鸟都是白色的。”这些例子都是非理性的，我列举它们是为了说明，人能证明与真理直接对立的虚假，以及与良善直接对立的邪恶，
②一旦证实虚假，人就看不见真理；不过，一旦证实真理，人就能看见虚假。一切虚假都处于黑暗之中，一切真理都处于光明之中。我们在黑暗中什么也看不见，所以若不用手摸，就不知道是什么东西；在光中则不然。因此，在圣言中，虚假被称为黑暗；论到那些相信虚假的人，经上说他们在黑暗和死荫之地行走（诗篇23:4；以赛亚书9:2；50:10；59:9；约翰福音12:35）。另一方面，真理在圣言中被称为“光”，故论到那些相信真理的人，经上说他们在光中行走（以赛亚书2:5；约翰福音11:9；启示录21:24），被称为光明之子（约翰福音12:36）。
有许多迹象表明，一旦证实虚假，人就看不见真理；不过，一旦证实真理，人就能看见虚假。例如，没有圣言的教导，谁能看见任何属灵真理呢？若不通过圣言所在的光，且只在愿意被光照的人里面，岂不是只有无法被驱散的黑暗吗？在向教会的纯正真理敞开之前，有哪个异教徒能看见自己的虚假呢？在此之前，他看不见它们。我曾与那些确信与仁分离之信的人交谈过，当问他们是否看见圣言中有大量的话论及爱和仁，行为和作为，遵守诫命，凡遵行的人就被称为有福的，是聪明的，凡不遵行的人就是愚蠢的时，他们告诉我说，当读到这一切话时，他们只是将其视为信的事，因而都略过去了，就好像他们的眼睛闭上了一样。
那些确信虚假的人就像看见墙上的裂缝之人；在傍晚的阴影中，他们在自己的幻想中把它们看成一个骑马的人，或一个人；但当白昼之光照进来时，这种错觉就被驱散，消失不见。除了感觉到贞洁的属灵洁净之人外，谁能发觉奸淫的属灵污秽呢？除了出于对邻之爱而处于良善的人外，谁能发觉报复的残忍呢？一个奸淫者，或一个渴望报复的人，岂不嘲笑那些称这些事的快乐为属地狱的，另一方面称婚姻之爱和对邻之爱的快乐为属天堂的人吗？诸如此类。
③随心所欲证明一切的能力不是聪明，仅仅是灵巧，就连最坏的人也可能有这种灵巧。有些人非常善于证明，他们虽不知道任何真理，却既能证明真理，也能证明虚假。其中一些人就问，什么是真理？有这种东西吗？无论什么东西，我认为它是真理，它不就是真理吗？然而，这种人在世上却被视为聪明；尽管他们不过是粉刷工。只有那些感知真理就是真理的人才是聪明的，他们通过对真理的不断感知而证实真理。这两种人之间的区别几乎难以分辨，因为证实或确认之光与对真理的感知之光之间的区别几乎难以分辨。那些处于证实或确认之光的人似乎也处于对真理的感知之光；然而，他们之间的区别就像幻光和真光之间的区别；幻光具有这种性质：在灵界，当真光流入时，它就转化为黑暗。地狱里的人许多人就住在这种幻光之中；当这些人被带入真光时，他们什么也看不见。由此清楚可知，随心所欲证明一切的能力仅仅是灵巧，就连最坏的人也可能有这种灵巧。
④有一种证实是知识上的，同时不是意志上的；但一切意志上的证实也都是知识上的。举例说明这一点。那些坚信与仁分离之信，却过着仁爱生活的人，以及一般来说那些坚信教义的虚假，却没有照之生活的人，就是处于知识上的证实，同时未处于意志上的证实之人；而那些证实教义的虚假，并照之生活的人，则是处于知识和意志上的证实之人。原因在于，理解力不流入意愿，而是意愿流入理解力。这也说明什么是邪恶的虚假，什么是非邪恶的虚假。非邪恶的虚假能与良善结合，邪恶的虚假则不能，因为非邪恶的虚假是在理解力而非意愿中的虚假，而邪恶的虚假是由于意愿中的邪恶而在理解力中的虚假。
⑤对邪恶的证实既是意志上的，也是知识上的，它使得人以为他自己的谨慎是一切，圣治什么都不是；但这不适用于唯独知识上的证实。有许多人因世上的表象而确信自己的谨慎，但也不否认圣治，这种人只有知识上的证实；而那些同时也否认圣治的人还有意志上的证实。这种偏见和说服主要存在于那些敬拜自然和自己的人当中。
⑥凡既被意愿也被理解力证实的东西都会存到永远；但仅被理解力证实的东西则不然。因为仅在理解力中的东西不在这个人里面，而是在他之外。它只在思维中；除了被意愿接受的东西外，没有什么东西会进入人，并成为他的一部分，因为被意愿接受的东西会变成他生命之爱的一部分。下一节会解释，这种东西会存到永远。
318. But we must now say how a person's state is changed by affirmations and consequent persuasions, and this under the following series of headings:
1. There is nothing that cannot be defended, and falsity more easily than truth.
2. Truth is not seen by confirmed falsity, but confirmed truth causes falsity to be seen.
3. To be able to affirm whatever one pleases does not constitute intelligence, but only ingenuity, possible even in the worst of people.
4. It is possible to have an intellectual affirmation that is not at the same time an affirmation of the will, but every affirmation of the will is also an intellectual one.
5. An affirmation of evil by the will that is at the same time an intellectual one causes a person to believe that his own prudence is everything and Divine providence nothing, but an intellectual affirmation alone does not.
6. Everything affirmed by the will and intellect together remains to eternity, but not something affirmed only by the intellect.
[2] As regards the FIRST, that there is nothing that cannot be defended, and falsity more easily than truth: What cannot be defended, when atheists argue that God is not the creator of the universe, but that nature is the creator of it? That religion is simply a shackle, and one for the simple and the masses? That man is a species of animal, and dies the same death? When they argue that adulterous affairs are allowable, and so, too, secret thefts, fraudulent practices, and deceitful schemes; that guile constitutes intelligence, and maliciousness wisdom?
Who does not defend his own heresy? Are there not volumes full of arguments in defense of the two reigning heresies in the Christian world? Concoct ten heresies, even abstruse ones, and tell an ingenious person to defend them, and he will defend them all. If you were to then view them in the light of his arguments alone, would you not see falsities as truths?
Since every falsity shines in the natural self with its appearances and illusions, and truth only in the spiritual self, it is apparent that falsity can be defended more easily than truth.
[3] To see that every falsity and every evil can be defended to the point that falsity appears as truth, and evil as good, take for example the following. Argue that light is darkness, and darkness light. Can one not say, "What in itself is light? Is it not just something appearing in the eye, according to the eye's condition? What is light to a closed eye? Do not bats and owls have such eyes? Do they not see light as darkness, and darkness as light? I have been told that some people see in this way, and that even though people in hell live in darkness, they still see each other. Do people not have light in their dreams in the middle of the night? Is darkness in that case not light, and light darkness?"
But someone may answer, "What is this? Light is light as truth is truth, and darkness is darkness as falsity is falsity."
[4] Take this further example. Argue that a raven is white. Can one not say, "Its blackness is only an opaqueness to light, which is not its real color. Its feathers inside are white, and so, too, its body. These are the stuff of which it consists. Because a raven's blackness is an opaqueness to light, therefore it turns white when it becomes old. We have seen them. What is blackness in itself but white? Grind a piece of black glass and you will see that the powder is white. Therefore when you call a raven black, you are speaking in accordance with the opaqueness, and not the reality."
But someone may answer, "What is this? In that case you would say that all birds are white."
Even though these arguments are contrary to sound reason, we have presented them to make it possible for people to see that a falsity may be defended that is quite opposite to the truth, and an evil that is quite opposite to good.
[5] SECOND, that truth is not seen by confirmed falsity, but confirmed truth causes falsity to be seen: Every falsity resides in darkness, and every truth in light; and in darkness nothing is seen, indeed neither is anything known, except by feeling. It is different in the light. Therefore in the Word falsities are called darkness, and accordingly those who are caught up in falsities are said to walk in darkness and in the shadow of death. And conversely, truths are called light there, and accordingly those who are guided by truths are said to walk in the light and are called the children of light. 1
[6] The fact that truth is not seen by confirmed falsity, and that confirmed truth causes falsity to be seen, is apparent from many considerations. For instance, who would see any spiritual truth if the Word did not teach it? It would be nothing but thick darkness, which could not be dispelled except by the light possessed by the Word, and only in the case of someone willing to be enlightened.
What heretic can see his falsities without admitting the genuine truth of the church? Before that he does not see them. I have spoken with people who have confirmed themselves in faith apart from charity, and I have asked them whether they had seen the many statements in the Word regarding love and charity, regarding works and deeds, and about keeping the commandments, saying that the blessed or wise man is one who does them, and a foolish man one who does not. They have replied that when they read these things, they saw only that they constituted faith, and thus passed them by as though with eyes shut.
[7] People who have confirmed themselves in falsities are like people who see streaks on a wall, and in the dusk of evening see that streaking in their imagination as a horseman or person, a fanciful image which is dispelled by the dawning of the light of day.
Who can feel the spiritual uncleanness of adultery but one who possesses the spiritual cleanliness of chastity? Who can feel the cruelty of vengeance but one who is governed by good from a love of the neighbor? What adulterer and what person eager for revenge does not deride people who call their delights infernal, and the delights of married love and love of the neighbor on the other hand heavenly? And so on.
[8] THIRD, that to be able to affirm whatever one pleases does not constitute intelligence, but only ingenuity, possible even in the worst of people: There are some very skillful debaters who do not know any truth, and yet can defend either truth or falsity. Some of them even say, "What is truth? Is there such a thing? Is not that true which I make true?" And yet in the world these people are reckoned intelligent, even though they are merely plasterers plastering a wall. Only those people are intelligent who perceive truth to be true, and who confirm it by a continual perception of truths.
There is little discernible difference between the two kinds of people, because the difference between the light of affirmation and the light of a perception of truth is not discernible. Nor does it appear otherwise than that people who possess the light of affirmation possess also the light of a perception of truth, even though the difference is like that between an illusory light and a genuine one. And an illusory light in the spiritual world is such that it turns to darkness when genuine light flows in. Such an illusory light is the light for many people in hell, and when they are brought out into genuine light, they see nothing at all.
It is apparent from this that to be able to affirm whatever one pleases is only ingenuity, possible even in the worst of people.
[9] FOURTH, that it is possible to have an intellectual affirmation that is not at the same time an affirmation of the will, and that every affirmation of the will is also an intellectual one: Let examples serve to illustrate. People who affirm a faith apart from charity, and yet live a life of charity - in general, people who affirm a doctrinal falsity and yet do not live according to it - are people who possess an intellectual affirmation and not at the same time one of the will. On the other hand, people who affirm a doctrinal falsity and do live according to it are people who possess both an affirmation of the will and an intellectual one. That is because the intellect does not flow into the will, but the will into the intellect.
It is apparent from this what the falsity of evil is, and falsity not of evil. Falsity not of evil can be joined with good, but not the falsity of evil, and the reason is that falsity not of evil is falsity in the intellect and not in the will, while the falsity of evil is falsity in the intellect from evil in the will.
[10] FIFTH, that an affirmation of evil by the will that is at the same time an intellectual one causes a person to believe that his own prudence is everything and Divine providence nothing, but an intellectual affirmation alone does not: Many people affirm in themselves their own prudence owing to appearances in the world, but still do not deny Divine providence. They possess only an intellectual affirmation. But people who at the same time deny Divine providence possess also an affirmation of the will. This latter affirmation, however, with its accompanying persuasion, is found principally in people who are worshipers of nature and at the same time worshipers of themselves.
[11] SIXTH, that everything affirmed by the will and intellect together remains to eternity, but not something affirmed only by the intellect: For that which belongs to the intellect only does not exist in the person, but about him. It exists only in thought, and nothing enters into a person and is adopted by him but that which is taken up by the will, for this becomes part of his life's love. That this remains to eternity is something we will explain in the following number.
Footnotes:
1. Luke 16:8, John 12:36. See also Ephesians 5:8, 1 Thessalonians 5:5.
318. Now, though, I need to say how our state changes as a result of our justifications and the convictions that they yield, in the following sequence. (a) There is nothing that we cannot rationalize, and we can rationalize falsity more easily than truth. (b) Once we have justified what is false, we cannot see what is true; but once we have justified what is true, we can see what is false. (c) Our ability to justify whatever we please is not intelligence. It is only cleverness, which even the worst of us may have. (d) There is a kind of intellectual justification that is not volitional as well, but all our volitional justification is intellectual as well. (e) Our justification of what is evil, both volitionally and intellectually, is what makes us believe that our own prudence is everything and that divine providence is nothing. Intellectual justification alone does not do this, however. (f) Anything that we have justified both volitionally and intellectually lasts forever, but not what we have justified only intellectually.
[2] (a) As to the first point, that there is nothing that we cannot rationalize, and we can rationalize falsity more easily than truth, is there anything that we cannot justify? Especially when atheists can "prove" that God is not the creator of the universe, but that Nature is her own creatress; that religion is nothing but chains for simple people and commoners; that we are animals and die the way they do? And especially when they can prove that there is nothing wrong with adultery or with surreptitious theft, fraud, and deceptive plots, and that shrewdness is intelligence and malice is wisdom? We all justify our own heresies. Are there not volumes full of proofs of the two primary heresies in Christendom? Make up ten heresies, as obscure as you like, ask clever people to prove them, and they will prove them all. If you then look at them solely on the basis of their proofs, will you not be seeing false things as true? Given the fact that anything false may shine in our earthly self because of its superficialities and illusions, while truth shines only in our spiritual self, we can see that what is false is easier to prove than what is true.
[3] Let me offer an example to show that anything false and anything evil can be justified to the point that what is false seems to be true and what is evil seems to be good. Let us prove that light is darkness and that darkness is light. Can we not ask what light really is? Is it anything but what we see in our eyes because of their state? What is light to a closed eye? Do not bats and owls have eyes, and do they not see light as darkness and darkness as light? I have heard that some people have sight like this, and they say that hellish people see each other even though they are living in darkness. Do we ourselves not have light in our dreams at midnight? Does this not mean that darkness is light and that light is darkness?
We can answer, though, "What are you talking about? Light is light the way truth is truth, and darkness is darkness the way falsity is falsity."
[4] For another example, let us prove that crows are white. Can we not say that a crow's blackness is simply shadow that is not its real being? Its feathers are white inside, and so is its body. These are the substances that it is actually made of. Since its blackness is a shadow, it becomes white when it gets old. I have seen crows like this. What is blackness, essentially, if not whiteness? Grind up black glass and you will see that the powder is white. This means that if you call a crow black, you are talking about its shadow and not about its real self. We can answer, though, "What are you talking about? This would mean that all birds are white."
I offer these examples, even though they are irrational, to show that we can "prove" the falsity that is opposite to what is true and the evil that is opposite to what is good.
[5] (b) Once we have justified what is false, we cannot see what is true; but once we have justified what is true, we can see what is false. Everything false is in darkness and everything true is in the light. We cannot see anything in darkness, so we do not know what anything is unless we feel it. It is different in the light. That is why falsities are called "darkness" in the Word, and why it describes people who believe falsities as walking in darkness and the shadow of death [Psalms 23:4; Isaiah 9:2; Isaiah 50:10; Isaiah 59:9; John 12:35]. By the same token, truths are called "light" in the Word, so it describes people who believe truths as walking in the light [Isaiah 2:5; John 11:9; Revelation 21:24] and as "children of light" [John 12:36].
[6] There are many indications that once we have justified what is false, we cannot see what is true; but once we have justified what is true, we can see what is false. Can anyone see anything that is spiritually true without being taught by the Word? Would there not be nothing but darkness that can be dispelled only by light from the Word, and then only for people who are willing to be enlightened? Are there any heretics who can see their errors unless they are open to real truth from the church? Until they are, they cannot. I have talked with people who had convinced themselves of faith separate from charity, asking whether they had seen how much it says in the Word about love and caring, about works and deeds, and about keeping the Commandments, to the effect that people who kept them were blessed and wise and that people who did not were stupid. They have told me that when they read such things, all they could see was that they were about faith, so they skipped over them as though their eyes were closed.
[7] People who have convinced themselves of falsities are like people who see streaks on a wall, and when they do so in the evening shadows, they see the streaks in their imagination as a rider or some other human figure, an optical illusion that disappears when daylight shines in. Can anyone feel how spiritually filthy adultery is who does not feel the spiritual purity of chastity? Can anyone feel the cruelty of vengefulness who is not engaged in doing good out of love for his or her neighbor? Is there an adulterer or anyone eager for vengeance who does not ridicule the people who call these pleasures hellish--the people who say that the pleasures of marriage love and love for their neighbor are heavenly? The list could go on.
[8] (c) Our ability to justify whatever we please is not intelligence. It is only cleverness, which even the worst of us may have. There are people who are brilliant at justifying things who do not know anything true. They can still justify both truth and falsity. Some of them say, "What is truth? Is there any such thing? Anything is true if I make it true." In this world, these people are considered intelligent, but they are nothing but whitewashers. The only people who are intelligent are the people who can tell that a truth is true and who corroborate this by a constant awareness of truths. It is hard to tell the two kinds of person apart because it is hard to tell the difference between the light of rationalization and the light of a genuine sense of truth. It can seem as though the things we see in the light of rationalization are being presented in the light of a genuine sense of truth; and yet the difference is like the difference between a deceptive light and real light. In the spiritual world, that deceptive light turns into darkness when real light shines in. It is the light that many people in hell live in; and when they are let out into real light, they cannot see a thing. We can see from this that the ability to justify whatever we please is only cleverness, which even the worst of us may have.
[9] (d) There is a kind of intellectual justification that is not volitional as well, but all our volitional justification is intellectual as well. Some examples may serve to illustrate this. There are people who firmly believe in faith separated from charity but who live caring lives. In general, there are people who firmly believe in a false theology but do not live by these false beliefs. They are people who engage in intellectual justification but not volitional justification along with it. However, people who justify a false theology and live by it are engaged in both volitional and intellectual justification. This is because our discernment does not flow into our volition, but our volition does flow into our discernment.
This enables us to see what malicious distortion is and what distortion is that is not malicious, to see that nonmalicious distortion can be united to what is good, but that malicious distortion cannot. This is because nonmalicious distortion is distortion in our discernment but not in our volition, while malicious distortion is distortion in our discernment because of malice in our volition.
[10] (e) Our justification of what is evil, both volitionally and intellectually, is what makes us believe that our own prudence is everything and that divine providence is nothing. Intellectual justification alone, however, does not do this. There are many people who inwardly are convinced of their own prudence because of the way things seem in this world but who still do not deny divine providence. Their conviction is intellectual only. If they also deny divine providence, though, they are engaged in volitional justification as well. This attitude and bias are found primarily among people who deify the material world and themselves.
[11] (f) Anything that we have justified both volitionally and intellectually lasts forever, but not what we have justified only intellectually. Anything that is only in our discernment is not within us but outside us. It is only in our thought, and nothing really comes into us and becomes part of us except what is welcomed by our volition. This becomes part of our life's love. The next section will explain that this stays with us forever.
318. But how man's state is changed by the confirmations of falsities and persuasions derived from them will now be explained in the following order:
1. There is nothing that cannot be confirmed, and falsity more readily than truth.
2. Truth does not appear when falsity is confirmed, but falsity appears from confirmed truth.
3. To be able to confirm whatever one pleases is not intelligence but only ingenuity, which may exist even with the worst of men.
4. There is confirmation that is intellectual and not at the same time voluntary; but all voluntary confirmation is also intellectual.
5. The confirmation of evil that is both voluntary and intellectual causes man to believe that his own prudence is everything and the Divine Providence nothing, but not the confirmation that is only intellectual.
6. Everything confirmed by both the will and the understanding remains to eternity; but not what has been confirmed only by the understanding.
[2] With respect to the First: There is nothing that cannot be confirmed, and falsity more readily than truth. What may not be confirmed, when it is confirmed by atheists that God is not the Creator of the universe, but that nature is the creator of herself; that religion is only a restraining bond, and for the simple and the common people; that man is as a beast, and dies like one; and when it is confirmed that adulteries are allowable, likewise secret theft, fraud and treacherous devices; that cunning is intelligence and wickedness is wisdom? Everyone confirms his own heresy. Are there not volumes filled with confirmations of the two heresies prevailing in the Christian world? Formulate ten heresies even of an abstruse nature, and tell an ingenious person to confirm them, and he will confirm them all. If you then regard them only from their confirmations will you not see falsities as truths? As every falsity shines clearly in the natural man from appearances and fallacies, and truth shines only in the spiritual man, it is evident that falsity can be confirmed more readily than truth.
[3] In order that it may be known that every falsity and every evil can be confirmed even to the point that falsity appears as truth and evil as good, take this as an example: let it be confirmed that light is darkness and darkness light. May it not be urged, What is light itself? Is it not only something that appears in the eye according to its state? What is light when the eye is closed? Have not bats and owls such eyes that they see light as darkness and darkness as light? I have heard it said of some persons that they see in this way; and that infernal spirits, although they are in darkness, still see one another. Has not man light in his dreams in the middle of the night? Is not darkness therefore light, and light darkness? But it may be answered, What of this? Light is light as truth is truth; and darkness is darkness as falsity is falsity.
[4] Take another example: let it be confirmed that a crow is white. May it not be said that its blackness is only a shade which is not the reality? Its feathers are white within, and so is its body; and these are the substances of which the bird is formed. As its blackness is only a shade, therefore, the crow becomes white when it grows old, and some such have been seen. What is black in itself but white? Grind down black glass and you will see that the powder is white. Therefore, when you call a crow black you speak from the shadow and not from the reality. But it may be answered, What of this? At this rate it might be said that all birds are white. These examples, although they are contrary to sound reason, are set forth to show that it is possible to confirm falsity that is directly opposite to the truth, and to confirm evil that is directly opposite to good.
[5] Second: Truth does not appear when falsity is confirmed, but falsity appears from confirmed truth. All falsity is in darkness and all truth in light; and in darkness nothing is seen, nor indeed is it known what anything is unless by touching it; but it is not so in the light. For this reason in the Word falsities are called darkness; and consequently those who are in falsities are said to walk in darkness and in the shadow of death. On the other hand, truths are there called light, and consequently those who are in truths are said to walk in the light, and are called the children of light.
[6] From many things it is evident that when falsity is confirmed, truth does not appear, and that from confirmed truth falsity appears. For example, who would see any spiritual truth if the Word did not teach it? Would there not be merely darkness which could not be dispelled, unless by means of the light in which the Word is, and only with him who desires to be enlightened? What heretic can see his falsities unless he accepts the genuine truth of the Church? He does not see them before. I have conversed with some who have confirmed themselves in faith separated from charity, and who were asked whether they saw the many things in the Word concerning love and charity, about works and deeds, and about keeping the Commandments, and that he is blessed and wise who keeps them but foolish who does not. They replied that when they read those things they only saw them as matters of faith and so passed them by as it were with their eyes shut.
[7] Those who have confirmed themselves in falsities are like those who see streaks on an inner wall in a house; and in the shades of evening they see in their fancy the marked part like a man on horse-back or simply as a man, a visionary image which is dispelled by the light of day when it pours in. Who can perceive the spiritual defilement of adultery but one who is in the spiritual purity of chastity? Who can feel the cruelty of revenge but one who is in good arising from love of the neighbour? Who that is an adulterer, or who is revengeful, does not sneer at those who call the delights of such things infernal, and who, on the other hand, call the delights of marriage love and the love of the neighbour heavenly? and so on.
[8] Third: To be able to confirm whatever one pleases is not intelligence but only ingenuity, which may exist even with the worst of men. There are some very skilful in confirming who know no truth and yet can confirm both truth and falsity. Some of them say, What is truth? Does it exist? Is not that true which I make true? Yet these are considered intelligent in the world, although they are only plasterers of the wall. 1None are intelligent but those who perceive truth to be truth, and confirm truth by individual truths continually perceived. These two classes of men are not easily distinguished, because it is not possible to distinguish between the light of confirmation and the light of the perception of truth. There is the appearance that those who are in the light of confirmation are also in the light of the perception of truth, when nevertheless the difference between them is like that between illusive light and genuine light; and in the spiritual world illusive light is such that it is turned into darkness when genuine light flows in. There is such illusive light with many in hell; and when these are brought into genuine light they see nothing at all. Hence it is evident that to be able to confirm whatever one pleases is only, ingenuity which may exist even with the worst of men.
[9] Fourth: There is confirmation that is intellectual and not at the same time voluntary, but all voluntary confirmation is also intellectual. Take these examples by way of illustration. Those who confirm faith separate from charity and yet live the life of charity, who in general confirm falsity of doctrine and yet do not live according to it, are those that are in intellectual confirmation and not at the same time in voluntary confirmation. On the other hand, those who confirm falsity of doctrine and who live according to it are those that are in voluntary confirmation and at the same time in intellectual confirmation. This is because the understanding does not flow into the will, but the will flows into the understanding. Hence it is also evident what the falsity of evil is, and what the falsity which is not of evil. Falsity which is not of evil can be conjoined with good, but falsity of evil cannot; because falsity which is not of evil is falsity in the understanding and not in the will, while falsity of evil is falsity in the understanding arising from evil in the will.
[10] Fifth: The confirmation of evil that is both voluntary and intellectual causes man to believe that his own prudence is everything and the Divine Providence nothing, but not the confirmation that is only intellectual. There are many who confirm in themselves their own prudence from appearances in the world but yet do not deny the Divine Providence; and theirs is only intellectual confirmation. With others, however, who at the same time deny the Divine Providence there also exists voluntary confirmation; but this, together with persuasion, is chiefly to be found with those who are worshippers of nature and also worshippers of self.
[11] Sixth: Everything confirmed by both the will and the understanding remains to eternity, but not what has been confirmed only by the understanding. For that which pertains to the understanding alone is not within the man but outside him: it is only in the thought. Moreover, nothing enters into man and is appropriated to him but what is received by the will, for it then comes to be of his life's love. It will now be shown in the following number that this remains to eternity.
Footnotes:
1. plasterers of the wall. See above, No. 318:7.
318. But how man's state is changed by confirmations and consequent persuasions shall now be told, and in the following order: (1) There is nothing that cannot be confirmed; and falsity is confirmed more readily than the truth. (2) When falsity has been confirmed the truth is not seen; but from confirmed truth falsity is seen. (3) An ability to confirm whatever one pleases is not intelligence, but only ingenuity, which may exist even in the worst of men. (4) There is confirmation that is intellectual and not at the same time voluntary; but all voluntary confirmation is also intellectual. (5) The confirmation of evil that is voluntary and also intellectual causes man to believe that his own prudence is everything and the Divine providence nothing; but this is not true of intellectual confirmation alone. (6) Every thing confirmed by the will and also by the understanding remains to eternity; but not what has been confirmed by the understanding only.
[2] As regards the first: There is nothing that cannot be confirmed, and falsity is confirmed more readily than the truth. What is there that cannot be confirmed, when it is confirmed by atheists that God is not the Creator of the universe, but that nature is the creator of itself; that religion is merely a restraint, and for the simple and the common people; that man is like a beast, and dies like one; also when it is confirmed that adulteries are allowable, likewise clandestine thefts, frauds, and deceitful contrivances; that cunning is intelligence and shrewdness is wisdom? Does not every one confirm his own heresy? Are there not volumes filled with the confirmations of the two heresies that reign in the Christian world? Make up ten heresies, however abstruse, ask an ingenious man to confirm them, and he will confirm them all. If afterwards you look at them solely from the confirmations will you not see the falsities as truths? As all falsity is visible in the natural man from its appearances and fallacies, and truth is visible in the spiritual man only, it is clear that falsity can be confirmed more readily than truth.
[3] To make clear that every falsity and every evil can be so confirmed as to make the falsity appear like truth and the evil like good, let it be proved, for example, that light is darkness and darkness light. May it not be asked, What is light in itself? Is it anything more than a something that appears to the eye according to its state? What is light to the closed eye? Have not bats and birds of night such eyes that they see light as darkness and darkness as light? I have been told that some men see in this way; and that the infernals, although they are in darkness, still see each other. Does not man have light in his dreams in the middle of the night? Thus is not darkness light, and light darkness? But it may be answered: What of this? Light is light as truth is truth; and darkness is darkness as falsity is falsity.
[4] Take another example: It is to be proved that a raven is white. May it not be said that its blackness is only a shade that is not its real self? Its feathers are white within, so is its body; and these are the substances of which the bird is formed. As its blackness is a shade, so the raven grows white when it gets old-such have been seen. What is black in itself but white? Pulverize black glass, and you will see that the powder is white; therefore when you call the raven black you speak from the shadow and not from the reality. But the reply may be, What of this? In this way all birds might be called white. Although all this is contrary to sound reason it has been presented to show how confirmations can be found for falsity that is directly opposite to the truth, and for evil that is wholly opposite to the good.
[5] Secondly: When falsity has been confirmed the truth is not seen, but from confirmed truth falsity is seen. All falsity is in darkness, and all truth is in light; and in darkness nothing is seen, and what any thing is is known only by handling it; in light it is otherwise. For this reason, in the Word falsities are called darkness, and thus those that are in falsities are said to walk in darkness and in the shadow of death. On the other hand, truths are there called light, and therefore those who are in truths are said to walk in the light, and are called children of light.
[6] There are many things to show that when falsity has been confirmed truth is not seen, and that from confirmed truth falsity is seen. For example, who could see any spiritual truth if it were not taught in the Word? Would there not be merely thick darkness that could be dispelled only by means of the light in which the Word is, and only in him who is willing to be enlightened? What heretic can see his falsities unless he admits the genuine truths of the church? He does not see them before. I have spoken with those who have confirmed themselves in faith separate from charity; and when asked whether they saw how much is said in the Word about love and charity, about works and deeds, and keeping the commandments, and that he is called blessed and wise who does them, and foolish who does them not, they said, that while reading all this they saw it only as a matter of faith, and thus they passed it by with their eyes shut, as it were.
[7] Those that have confirmed themselves in falsities are like those who see cracks in a wall; and in the shades of evening they see them in their fancies as a horseman or a man, but this fanciful image is dispelled by the inflowing light of day. Who can have a sense of the spiritual uncleanness of adultery except one who is in the spiritual cleanness of chastity? Who can have a sense of the cruelty of revenge except one who is in good from love of the neighbor? Who that is an adulterer, or that is eager for revenge, does not sneer at those who call the delights of such things infernal, and on the other hand, call the delights of conjugial love and of love for the neighbor heavenly? And so on.
[8] Thirdly: An ability to confirm whatever one pleases is not intelligence, but only ingenuity, which may exist even in the worst of men. There are some who are very skilful in confirming, who have no knowledge of any truth and yet are able to confirm both truth and falsity; and some of them ask, What is truth? Is there any? Is not that true that I make true? And yet such are believed in the world to be intelligent; although they are but wall plasterers. Only those who perceive truth to be truth are intelligent, and they confirm truth by verities continually perceived. There is little discernible difference between these two classes, because there is little discernible difference between the light of confirmation and the light of the perception of truth; and those who are in the light of confirmation seem to be also in the light of the perception of truth; and yet the difference between them is like that between illusive light and genuine light; and illusive light is such that in the spiritual world it is turned into darkness when genuine light flows in. Such illusive light prevails with many in hell, and when these are brought into genuine light they see nothing at all. From all this it is clear that the ability to confirm whatever one pleases is mere ingenuity, and may exist even in the worst of men.
[9] Fourthly: There is confirmation that is intellectual and not at the same time voluntary; but all voluntary confirmation is also intellectual. This may be illustrated by examples. Those who confirm the doctrine of faith separate from charity and yet live a life of charity, or in general those who confirm falsity of doctrine and yet do not live according to it, are those that are in intellectual confirmation and not at the same time in voluntary, while those that confirm falsity of doctrine and live according to it are those that are in both voluntary and intellectual confirmation. The reason of this is that the understanding does not flow into the will, but the will flows into the understanding. This also shows what falsity of evil is, and what falsity not of evil is. Falsity not of evil can be conjoined with good, but falsity of evil cannot, for the reason that falsity not of evil is falsity in the understanding and not in the will; while falsity of evil is falsity in the understanding from evil in the will;
[10] Fifthly: The confirmation of evil that is voluntary and also intellectual causes man to believe that his own prudence is everything and the Divine providence nothing; but this is not true of intellectual confirmation alone. There are many who by worldly appearances confirm in themselves, their own prudence and yet do not deny the Divine providence; with such there exists only intellectual confirmation; while with those who at the same time deny the Divine providence there exists also voluntary confirmation; but this, together with persuasion, exists chiefly with those who are worshipers of nature and also worshipers of self.
[11] Sixthly: Every thing confirmed by the will and also by the understanding remains to eternity, but not what has been confirmed by the understanding only. For that which pertains to the understanding alone is not within the man but is outside of him; it is merely in the thought; and nothing enters into man and is appropriated to him except what is accepted by the will, for it then comes to be of his life's love. That this remains to eternity will be considered in the following number.
318. Sed quomodo status hominis ex confirmationibus et inde persuasionibus mutatur, nunc dicetur, sed in hoc ordine. 1. Quod nihil non confirmari possit, et quod falsum plus quam verum. 2. 1Quod confirmato falso non appareat verum, sed quod ex confirmato vero appareat falsum. 3. Quod posse confirmare quicquid lubet, non sit intelligentia, sed solum ingeniositas, dabilis etiam apud pessimos. 4. Quod detur confirmatio intellectualis et non simul voluntaria, at quod omnis confirmatio voluntaria etiam sit intellectualis. 5. Quod confirmatio mali voluntaria et simul intellectualis faciat, ut homo credat propriam prudentiam esse omne, et Divinam Providentiam non aliquid; non autem sola confirmatio intellectualis. 6. 2Quod omne confirmatum ex voluntate et simul intellectu permaneat in aeternum, non autem id quod modo confirmatum est ab intellectu.
[2] Quod attinet PRIMUM. Quod nihil non confirmari possit, et quod falsum prae vero: quid non potest confirmari, cum ab atheis confirmatur, quod Deus non sit Creator universi, sed quod natura sit creatrix sui; quod Religio sit modo vinculum, ac pro simplicibus et pro vulgo; quod homo sit sicut bestia, et quod moriatur similiter: cum confirmatur quod adulteria sint licita, similiter furta clandestina, fraudes, et machinationes dolosae, quod astutia sit intelligentia, 3ac malitia sapientia: quis non confirmat suam haeresin; annon volumina confirmationibus plena sunt pro binis regnantibus in Christiano Orbe: fac decem haereses etiam abstrusas, et dic ingenioso ut confirmet, et confirmabit omnes; si illas dein videris solum ex confirmatis, annon visurus es falsa ut vera. Quoniam omne falsum lucet in naturali homine ex apparentiis et fallaciis ejus, et non verum nisi in spirituali homine, patet, quod falsum prae vero possit confirmari.
[3] Ut sciatur, quod omne falsum et omne malum possit confirmari usque ut falsum appareat sicut verum, ac malum sicut bonum, sit pro exemplo [hoc]; confirmetur, quod lux sint tenebrae et tenebrae lux; potestne dici, quid lux in se; num sit nisi quoddam apparens in oculo secundum statum ejus; quid lux clauso oculo; annon vespertilionibus et noctuis tales oculi sunt; videntne lucem ut tenebras, ac tenebras ut lucem; audivi de quibusdam quod similiter viderint, deque infernalibus quod tametsi in tenebris sunt, usque se mutuo videant; annon lux est homini in somniis in media nocte; annon sic tenebrae sunt lux, et lux tenebrae: sed responderi potest, quid hoc; lux est lux sicut verum est verum, et tenebrae sunt tenebrae sicut falsum est falsum.
[4] Sit adhuc exemplum; confirmetur quod corvus sit albus; annon potest dici, nigredo ejus est modo umbra, quae non est reale ejus; sunt pennae ejus intus albae, corpus similiter; sunt haec substantiae ex quibus ille; quia nigredo ejus est umbra, ideo albescit corvus cum fit senex; visi sunt tales; quid nigrum in se nisi quam album; mole vitrum nigrum, et videbis quod pulvis sit albus; quare cum vocas corvum nigrum, loqueris ex umbra, et non ex reali: sed responderi potest, quid hoc; sic dicerentur omnes aves albae. Haec tametsi contra sanam rationem sunt, adducta sunt, ut videri possit, quod falsum prorsus oppositum vero, ac malum prorsus oppositum bono, possit confirmari.
[5] SECUNDUM. Quod confirmato falso non appareat verum, sed quod ex confirmato vero appareat falsum: omne falsum est in tenebris, et omne verum in luce, ac in tenebris non apparet aliquid, imo nec scitur quid, nisi palpando; aliter in luce; quare etiam in Verbo falsa vocantur tenebrae, 4et inde illi qui in falsis sunt, dicuntur ambulare in tenebris et in umbra mortis; et vicissim ibi vera vocantur lux, et inde illi qui in veris sunt, dicuntur ambulare in luce, et vocantur filii lucis.
[6] Quod confirmato falso non appareat verum, et quod ex confirmato vero appareat falsum, patet a multis; ut, quis videret aliquod verum spirituale, nisi Verbum id doceret; foretne mera caligo, quae non discuti potuit, nisi quam per lucem in qua Verbum est, et nisi apud illum, qui vult illustrari: quis haereticus potest falsa sua videre, nisi admittat genuinum Ecclesiae verum; prius non videt illa: 5loquutus sum cum illis, qui se in fide separata a charitate confirmaverunt, ac interrogati numne viderint tam multa in Verbo de amore et charitate, de operibus et factis, de custodiendis praeceptis, et quod beatus et sapiens sit qui facit, ac stultus qui non facit; dixerunt quod illa dum legerunt, non viderint aliter quam quod sint fides, et sic illa sicut occlusis oculis praeteriverint.
[7] Illi qui in falsis se confirmaverunt, sunt sicut qui in pariete vident striaturas, 6et cum in umbra vesperae sunt striatum illud in phantasia vident sicut equitem aut hominem, quae imago visionaria dissipatur a luce diei influente. Quis potest sentire immundum spirituale adulterii, nisi qui est in mundo spirituali castitatis; quis potest sentire crudele vindictae, nisi qui in bono ex amore proximi est; quis adulter et quis cupidus vindictae non subsannat illos, qui jucunda illorum vocant infernalia, ac vicissim jucunda amoris conjugialis et amoris proximi coelestia, et sic porro.
[8] TERTIUM. Quod posse confirmare quicquid lubet, non sit intelligentia, sed solum ingeniositas, dabilis etiam apud pessimos: dantur confirmatores dexterrimi, qui non sciunt aliquod verum, et usque possunt confirmare et verum et falsum, et aliqui eorum dicunt, quid verum; num sit; annon id est verum quod facio verum; et usque hi in mundo creduntur intelligentes, et tamen non sunt nisi quam incrustatores parietis; non alii sunt intelligentes, quam qui percipiunt verum esse verum, et hoc per veritates continue perceptas confirmant: hi et illi parum discerni possunt, quia non discerni potest inter lucem confirmationis et lucem perceptionis veri, nec apparet aliter quam quod illi qui in luce confirmationis 7sunt, etiam in luce perceptionis veri sint, cum tamen discrimen est sicut inter lucem fatuam et lucem genuinam, et lux fatua in Mundo spirituali est talis, ut vertatur in tenebras influente luce genuina; talis fatua lux est apud multos in inferno, qui dum in lucem genuinam emittuntur, prorsus nihil vident; ex quibus patet, quod posse confirmare quicquid lubet, sit modo ingeniositas, dabilis etiam apud pessimos.
[9] QUARTUM. Quod detur confirmatio intellectualis et non simul voluntaria, et quod omnis confirmatio voluntaria etiam sit intellectualis: sint exempla Illustrationi; illi qui confirmant fidem separatam a charitate, et usque vitam charitatis vivunt, 8in genere qui confirmant falsum doctrinae, et tamen non vivunt secundum illud, sunt qui in confirmatione intellectuali sunt, et non simul in confirmatione voluntaria: at qui confirmant falsum doctrinae, et vivunt secundum illud, illi sunt qui in confirmatione voluntaria et simul in intellectuali sunt: causa est, quia intellectus non influit in voluntatem, sed voluntas in intellectum. Ex his etiam patet quid falsum mali est, et quid falsum non mali; quod falsum non mali possit conjungi cum bono, non autem falsum mali, causa est, quia falsum non mali est falsum in intellectu et non in voluntate, et falsum mali est falsum in intellectu ex malo in voluntate.
[10] QUINTUM. Quod confirmatio mali voluntaria et simul intellectualis faciat, ut homo credat propriam prudentiam esse omne, et Divinam Providentiam non aliquid; non autem sola confirmatio intellectualis. Sunt plures qui apud se confirmant propriam prudentiam ex apparentiis in mundo, sed usque non negant Divinam Providentiam; his est modo confirmatio intellectualis; at qui simul negant Divinam Providentiam, illis quoque est confirmatio voluntaria; at haec una cum persuasione est praecipue apud illos qui cultores naturae et simul cultores sui sunt.
[11] SEXTUM. Quod omne confirmatum voluntate et simul ab intellectu permaneat in aeternum, non autem id quod modo confirmatum est ab intellectu: id enim quod solius intellectus est, non est 9in homine, sed est extra illum; est solum in cogitatione, et nihil intrat hominem, et ei appropriatur, nisi quod excipitur a voluntate, hoc enim fit amoris vitae ejus; quod hoc permaneat in aeternum, in nunc sequenti numero dicetur.
Footnotes:
1 Prima editio: 3,
2 Prima editio: 9.
3 Prima editio: intelligentia,
4 Prima editio: tenehrae,
5 Prima editio: illud:
6 Prima editio: stricturas,
7 Prima editio: confirmationis
8 Prima editio: vivunt;
9 Prima editio: est,