Bibliorum

 

创世记 5

Study

   

1 亚当的後代记在下面。〈当造人的日子,是照着自己的样式造的,

2 并且造男造。在他们被造的日子,神赐福给他们,称他们为人。〉

3 亚当活到一三十岁,生了一个儿子,形像样式和自己相似,就给他起名塞特。

4 亚当生塞特之,又在世年,并且生儿养女。

5 亚当共活了三十岁就死了

6 塞特活到一零五岁,生了以挪士。

7 塞特生以挪士之,又活了年,并且生儿养女。

8 塞特共活了一十二岁就死了

9 以挪士活到九十岁,生了该南。

10 以挪士生该南之,又活了十五年,并且生儿养女。

11 以挪士共活了零五岁就死了

12 该南活到七十岁,生了玛勒列。

13 该南生玛勒列之,又活了四十年,并且生儿养女。

14 该南共活了岁就死了

15 玛勒列活到六十五岁,生了雅列。

16 玛勒列生雅列之,又活了三十年,并且生儿养女。

17 玛勒列共活了九十五岁就死了

18 雅列活到一六十岁,生了以诺

19 雅列生以诺,又活了年,并且生儿养女。

20 雅列共活了六十岁就死了.。

21 以诺活到六十五岁,生了玛土撒拉

22 以诺玛土撒拉,与同行年,并且生儿养女。

23 以诺共活了六十五岁。

24 以诺同行,将他取去,他就不在世了。

25 玛土撒拉活到一八十岁,生了拉麦。

26 玛土撒拉生拉麦之,又活了八十年,并且生儿养女。

27 玛土撒拉共活了六十岁就死了

28 拉麦活到一八十岁,生了一个儿子

29 给他起名挪亚,说:这个儿子必为我们的操作和中的劳苦安慰我们;这操作劳苦是因为耶和华咒诅地。

30 拉麦生挪亚之,又活了五九十五年,并且生儿养女。

31 拉麦共活了岁就死了

32 挪亚五岁生了、含、雅弗。

   

from the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg

 

Arcana Coelestia #2417

Studere hoc loco

  
/ 10837  
  

2417. Look not back behind thee. That this signifies that he should not look to doctrinal things, is evident from the signification of “looking back behind him,” when the city was behind him and the mountain before him. For by “city” is signified what is doctrinal (n. 402, 2268, 2392); and by “mountain,” love and charity (n. 795, 1430). That this is the signification will be evident in the explication at verse 26, where it is said that his wife “looked back behind him,” and became a pillar of salt. Everyone may know that in this expression, “looking back behind him,” there is some Divine arcanum, and that it lies too deep to be seen. For in looking back behind him there appears to be nothing criminal, and yet it is a matter of importance so great that it is said he should escape for his life, that is, should take thought for his eternal life by not looking back behind Him. But what it is to look to doctrinal things will be seen in what follows; in this place we shall merely state what these doctrinal things are.

[2] Doctrine is twofold: that of love and charity, and that of faith. At first, while it is still a little maid and a virgin, every church of the Lord has no other doctrine, and loves no other, than that of charity; for this belongs to life. But successively the church turns itself away from this doctrine, until it begins to hold it cheap, and at length to reject it; and then it acknowledges no other doctrine than that which is called the doctrine of faith; and when it separates faith from charity, this doctrine conspires with a life of evil.

[3] Such was the case with the Primitive Church, or that of the Gentiles, after the Lord’s coming. In its beginning it had no other doctrine than that of love and charity, for this the Lord Himself taught (see n. 2371 at the end). But after His time, successively, as love and charity began to grow cold, there arose the doctrine of faith, and with it dissensions and heresies, which increased as men came to lay stress on this doctrine.

[4] The like was the case with the Ancient Church that was after the flood, and was extended through so many kingdoms (n. 2385): this church also in its beginning knew no other doctrine than that of charity, because this looked to and affected the life, and by so doing they had regard for their eternal welfare. And yet after some time the doctrine of faith too began to be cultivated with some, and at length to be separated from charity; but those who did this they called “Ham,” because they were in a life of evil (see n. 1062, 1063, 1076).

[5] The Most Ancient Church which was before the flood and which in preeminence to all others was called “Man,” was in the very perception of love to the Lord and of charity toward the neighbor; thus it had the doctrine of love and charity inscribed on itself. But even then there were those who cultivated faith, and when they separated it from charity they were called “Cain;” for by “Cain” is signified such faith, and by “Abel,” whom he killed, charity (see the explication of chapter 4).

[6] This shows that there are two doctrines, the one of charity, and the other of faith, although in themselves the two are one; for the doctrine of charity involves all things of faith. But when the doctrine comes to be from those things alone which are of faith, it is then called twofold, because faith is separated from charity. That these doctrines are separated at the present day may be seen from the fact that it is altogether unknown what charity is, and what the neighbor is. They who are solely in the doctrine of faith are not aware that charity toward the neighbor consists in anything beyond giving of their own to others, and in feeling pity for anybody who may seem to need it, because they call everybody the neighbor without distinction; and yet charity is all good whatever there is in a man: in his affection, and in his zeal, and from these in his life; and the neighbor is all the good in others by which one is affected, consequently those who are in good; and this with every possible distinction.

[7] For example: that man is in charity and mercy who exercises justice and judgment by punishing the evil and rewarding the good. There is charity in punishing the evil, for to this are we impelled by our zeal to amend them, and at the same time to protect the good, lest these suffer injury at the hands of the evil. In this way does a man consult the welfare of one who is in evil, or his enemy, and express his good feeling toward him, as well as to others, and to the common weal itself; and this from charity toward the neighbor. The case is the same with all the other goods of life; for the good of life is never possible unless it comes from charity toward the neighbor, because it looks to this, and involves it.

[8] Seeing then that there is obscurity so great as regards the true nature of charity and of the neighbor, it is clear that the doctrine of charity (the doctrine of faith having assumed the first place) is among the things that are lost; when yet it was this alone that was cultivated in the Ancient Church; and that to such a degree that they reduced into classes all the goods that belonged to charity toward the neighbor, that is, all those who were in good; and this with many distinctions, to which they also gave names, calling them the poor, the miserable, the oppressed, the sick, the naked, the hungry, the thirsty, captives or those in prison, strangers, orphans, and widows; some also they called the lame, the blind, the deaf, the dumb, the maimed; besides many other names. In the Word of the Old Testament the Lord has spoken in accordance with this doctrine, on which account such terms so often occur there; and He himself again spoke in accordance with the same doctrine, as in Matthew 25:35-36, 38-39, 40, 42-45; Luke 14:13, 21 and in many other places. Hence it is that in the internal sense these names have quite a different signification. In order therefore that the doctrine of charity may be restored, it will of the Lord’s Divine mercy be stated in the following pages who those denoted by these names are, and what charity is, and what the neighbor is, both generally and specifically.

  
/ 10837  
  

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