3581. I discussed with them their objections and arguments against the truths of religion, describing them as mere shadows that can turn the light of truths into a shadow and by a multitude of objections, can place the clear higher knowledge of faith in such doubt that it is afterwards hard to believe - when yet truth is truth, and higher knowledge of faith is higher knowledge of faith, in which the light is.
I portrayed this by imagery and by thought, simultaneously, thus inwardly, according to their method of speaking and understanding, and it seemed to me that others near my head were producing that kind of speaking as if within me.
[2] A sparrow was portrayed that I know is alive, and is a sparrow. Now if I should like to consider its internal organs, and its brain, and then ponder whether the sparrow is alive, and whether it is indeed a sparrow, the fact will be denied - namely, if upon seeing its brain I should argue that it is like porridge, and should ask how this could be living and cause the bird to live with bodily senses; then, if I should look at its internal organs - such as the liver, the pancreas, the intestines, and especially the vessels and tissues and their interconnections - and then reason whether it could be alive, because such a complexity could never so cohere, conspire, and function together in such a tiny little body, as to cause it to live:
3581. I spoke with them concerning objections and reasonings against the truth of faith, that they were mere shadow, and could turn the light of truth into shade, and could place the clear knowledges of faith, by a multitude of objections, in such doubt, that it was afterwards very difficult to believe, when yet truth is truth, and the knowledge of faith is the knowledge of faith, and that there [only] is light. I represented this at the same time by means of imagination and thought, thus inwardly according to their mode of speaking and understanding, and it seemed to me as if others about my head uttered such a speech as was within myself. There was represented a sparrow, as to which I know that such a bird actually lives, and is of such and such a quality. Now if I should contemplate its viscera and its brain, and thence reason whether the sparrow be alive, and whether it be such as it is, the fact will be denied; namely, if upon seeing its brain, and perceiving that it is like a jelly, I should reason [with myself] how this [brain] could live, and cause [the bird] to live with senses and a body, -then [again] if I should inspect the viscera, as the liver, the pancreas, the intestines, and also the vessels, with the fibers and their connections, and should thence reason whether [the bird] could live, when such and such things could never cohere, conspire, and operate to cause it to live, and so of all the contents of the body;-
3581. Loquutus cum iis, de objectionibus et ratiociniis contra veritates fidei, quod merae umbrae essent, et lucem veritatum in umbram possint vertere, et cognitiones claras fidei per multiplices objectiones ponere in tanto dubio, ut postea vix credatur, cum tamen usque veritas est veritas, et cognitio fidei est cognitio fidei, et ibi lux. Repraesentabam [hoc] simul imaginative et cogitative, sic intus secundum eorum modum loquendi et intelligendi, et videbatur mihi alii circa caput educere talem loquelam sicut intra me; repraesentabatur passer, quem scio quod vivat, et talis sit, si vellem viscera ejus contemplare, et cerebrum ejus, et inde ratiocinari num vivat passer, et num sit passer et talis, usque negabitur, si nempe ratiocinarer videndo cerebrum, quod pultis instar sit, quomodo hoc potest vivere, et facere ut vivat sensibus et corpore, tum si spectarem viscera, sicut hepatem, pancreatem, intestina, et insuper si vasa, et fibras, earum consociationes, et inde ratiocinarer num vivere possit, cum tamen talia nusquam in tam parvo corpusculo possent cohaerere, conspirare,