Bible

 

創世記 20

Studie

   

1 亞伯拉罕從那裡向南遷去,寄居在加低斯和書珥中間的基拉耳。

2 亞伯拉罕稱他的妻撒拉為妹子,基拉耳王亞比米勒差人把撒拉取了去。

3 但夜間,,在夢中對亞比米勒:你是個人哪!因為你取了那女人;他原是別人的妻子

4 亞比米勒卻還沒有親近撒拉;他:主阿,連有的國,你也要毀滅麼?

5 那人豈不是自己對我他是我的妹子麼?就是女人也自己:他是我的哥哥。我作這事是心正手潔的。

6 在夢中對他:我知道你作這事是心中正直;我也攔阻了你,免得你得罪我,所以我不容你沾著他。

7 現在你把這妻子歸還他;因為他是先知,他要為你禱告,使你存活。你若不歸還他,你當知道,你和你所有的都必要

8 亞比米勒清起來,召了眾臣僕來,將這些事都說給他們聽,他們都甚懼

9 亞比米勒召了亞伯拉罕來,對他:你怎麼向我這樣行呢?我在甚麼事上得罪了你,你竟使我和我國裡的人陷在罪裡?你向我行不當行的事了!

10 亞比米勒又對亞伯拉罕:你見了甚麼才做這事呢?

11 亞伯拉罕:我以為這地方的人總不懼怕,必為我妻子的緣故殺我。

12 況且他也實在是我的妹子;他與我是同父異母,後來作了我的妻子

13 叫我離開父家、飄流在外的時候,我對他:我們無論走到甚麼地方,你可以對人:他是我的哥哥;這就是你待我的恩典了。

14 亞比米勒把牛、、僕婢賜亞伯拉罕,又把他的妻子撒拉歸還他。

15 亞比米勒又:看哪,我的都在你面前,你可以隨意居住

16 又對撒拉:我哥哥子,作為你在閤家人面前遮羞(原文作眼)的,你就在眾人面前沒有不是了。

17 亞伯拉罕禱告就醫好了亞比米勒和他的妻子,並他的眾女僕,他們便能生育。

18 耶和華亞伯拉罕的妻子撒拉的緣故,已經使亞比米勒家中的婦人不能生育。

   

Ze Swedenborgových děl

 

Arcana Coelestia # 2506

Prostudujte si tuto pasáž

  
/ 10837  
  

2506. Abraham said. That this signifies thought, is evident from the signification of “saying,” in the historicals of the Word, as being to perceive, as well as to think (see n. 1898, 1919, 2061, 2080, 2238, 2260, 2271, 2287).

  
/ 10837  
  

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

Ze Swedenborgových děl

 

Arcana Coelestia # 1919

Prostudujte si tuto pasáž

  
/ 10837  
  

1919. Abram said unto Sarai. That this signifies perception, is evident from what was said above (n. 1898). The Lord’s perception was represented and is here signified by this which Abram said to Sarai; but His thought from the perception, by that which Sarai said to Abram. The thought was from the perception. They who are in perception think from nothing else; but still perception is one thing and thought another. To show that this is the case, take conscience as an illustration.

[2] Conscience is a kind of general dictate, and thus an obscure one, of the things that flow in through the heavens from the Lord. Those which flow in present themselves in the interior rational man and are there as in a cloud, which cloud is from appearances and fallacies concerning the truths and goods of faith. But thought is distinct from conscience, and yet it flows from conscience; for they who have conscience think and speak according to it, and the thought is little else than an unfolding of the things which are of conscience, and thereby the partition of them into ideas and then into words. Hence it is that they who have conscience are kept by the Lord in good thoughts respecting the neighbor, and are withheld from thinking evil; and therefore conscience can have no place except with those who love their neighbor as themselves, and think well concerning the truths of faith. From what has been advanced we may see what the difference is between conscience and thought; and from this we may know what the difference is between perception and thought.

[3] The Lord’s perception was immediately from Jehovah, and thus from the Divine good; but His thought was from intellectual truth and the affection of it, as before said (n. 1904, 1914). The Lord’s Divine perception cannot be apprehended by any idea, not even of angels, and therefore it cannot be described. The perception of the angels (spoken of n. 1354, etc., 1394, 1395) is scarcely anything in comparison with the perception which the Lord had. The Lord’s perception, being Divine, was a perception of all things in the heavens, and therefore also of all things on earth, for such is the order, connection, and influx, that he who is in the perception of the former is also in the perception of the latter.

[4] But after the Lord’s Human Essence had been united to His Divine Essence, and at the same time had become Jehovah, the Lord was then above that which is called perception, because He was above the order that is in the heavens and thence on the earth. It is Jehovah who is the source of order, and hence it may be said that Jehovah is Order itself, for He from Himself governs order; not as is supposed in the universal only, but also in the veriest singulars, for the universal comes from these. To speak of the universal, and to separate from it the singulars, would be nothing else than to speak of a whole in which there are no parts, and therefore to speak of a something in which there is nothing. So that to say that the Lord’s Providence is universal, and is not a Providence of the veriest singulars, is to say what is utterly false, and is what is called an ens rationis [that is, a figment of the imagination]. For to provide and govern in the universal, and not in the veriest singulars, is to provide and govern absolutely nothing. This is true philosophically, and yet wonderful to say, philosophers themselves, even those who soar the highest, apprehend the matter differently, and think differently.

  
/ 10837  
  

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