The Bible

 

创世记 21

Study

   

1 耶和华按着先前的话眷顾撒拉,便照他所的给撒拉成就。

2 亚伯拉罕年老的时候,撒拉怀了孕;到的日期,就给亚伯拉罕生了一个儿子

3 亚伯拉罕给撒拉所生的儿子起名以撒

4 以撒生下来第八日,亚伯拉罕照着所吩咐的,给以撒行了割礼

5 儿子以撒生的时候,亚伯拉罕年一岁。

6 撒拉使我喜笑,凡见的必与我一同喜笑;

7 :谁能预先对亚伯拉罕撒拉要养婴孩呢?因为在他年老的时候,我给他生了一个儿子

8 孩子渐长,就断了奶。以撒断奶的日子,亚伯拉罕设摆丰盛的筵席。

9 当时,撒拉见埃及人夏甲给亚伯拉罕所生的儿子戏笑,

10 就对亚伯拉罕:你把这使女和他儿子赶出去!因为这使女的儿子不可与我的儿子以撒一同承受产业。

11 亚伯拉罕因他儿子的缘故很忧愁。

12 亚伯拉罕:你不必为这童子和你的使女忧愁。凡撒拉对你的话,你都该从;因为从以撒生的,才要称为你的後裔。

13 至於使女的儿子,我也必使他的後裔成立一国,因为他是你所生的。

14 亚伯拉罕起来,拿饼和一皮袋了夏甲,搭在他的肩上,又把孩子交他,打发他走。夏甲就走了,在别是巴的旷野走迷了路。

15 皮袋的用尽了,夏甲就把孩子撇在小树底

16 自己走开约有一箭之远,相对而:我不忍见孩子,就相对而,放声大哭。

17 见童子的声音的使者从呼叫夏甲:夏甲,你为何这样呢?不要害怕已经见童子的声音了。

18 起来!把童子抱在怀(原文作)中,我必使他的後裔成为国。

19 使夏甲的眼睛明亮,他就见一口,便去将皮袋盛满了,给童子喝。

20 保佑童子,他就渐长,旷野,成了弓箭手。

21 在巴兰的旷野;他母亲埃及给他娶了一个妻子

22 当那时候,亚比米勒同他军长非各对亚伯拉罕:凡你所行的事都有的保佑。

23 我愿你如今在这里指着对我起誓,不要欺负我与我的儿子,并我的子孙。我怎样厚待了你,你也要照样厚待我与你所寄居这的民。

24 亚伯拉罕:我情愿起誓。

25 从前,亚比米勒的仆人霸占了一口亚伯拉罕为这事指责亚比米勒。

26 亚比米勒:谁做这事,我不知道,你也没有告诉我,今日我才见了。

27 亚伯拉罕和牛了亚比米勒,人就彼此立约。

28 亚伯拉罕只母羔另放在一处。

29 亚比米勒问亚伯拉罕:你把这只母羊羔另放在一处,是甚麽意思呢?

30 :你要从我里受这只母羊羔,作我这口的证据。

31 所以他给那地方起名别是巴,因为他们人在那里起了誓。(别是巴就是盟誓的井的意思)

32 他们在别是巴立了约,亚比米勒就同他军长非各起身回非利士去了。

33 亚伯拉罕在别是巴栽上一棵垂丝柳树,又在那里求告耶和华─永生神的名。

34 亚伯拉罕非利士人寄居了多日。

   

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #2619

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

2619. 'As He had spoken' means as He had thought. This is clear from the meaning of 'speaking' as thinking, dealt with in 2271, 2287. Perception, which is meant by 'Jehovah said', flowed from the Divine celestial, but thought, which is meant by 'Jehovah spoke', flowed from the Divine celestial by way of the Divine spiritual. This explains why in the sense of the letter there occurs an apparent repetition, namely 'as He had said' and 'as He had spoken'. But what perceiving from the Divine celestial is, and what thinking from the Divine celestial by way of the Divine spiritual, does not come within the range of even the most enlightened capacity to understand by means of the things which belong to the light of the world. This shows how infinite everything else [in the Word] must be. The fact that thought stems from perception, see 1919, 2515. With man the position is that good is the source from which he perceives, but truth the means by which he thinks. Good exists in love and its affections, and for that reason is the source of perception, whereas truth exists in faith, and for that reason faith goes with thought. The former is meant in historical parts of the Word by 'saying', but the latter by 'speaking'. When only the expression 'saying' is used however, it sometimes means perceiving and sometimes thinking, because 'saying' includes both.

  
/ 10837  
  

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

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #1919

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

1919. That 'Abram said to Sarai' means perception is clear from what has been stated above in 1898. The perception which the Lord had was represented and is here meant by 'Abram said to Sarai', but thought which sprang from that perception is meant by 'Sarai said to Abram' - perception being the source of thought. The thought possessed by those who have perception comes from no other source. Yet perception is not the same as thought. To see that it is not the same, let conscience serve to 'illustrate this consideration.

[2] Conscience is a kind of general and thus obscure dictate which presents those things that flow in from the Lord by way of the heavens. Those things that flow in manifest themselves in the interior rational man where they are enveloped so to speak in cloud. This cloud is the product of appearances and illusions concerning the goods and truths of faith. Thought is, in truth, distinct and separate from conscience; yet it flows from conscience, for people who have conscience think and speak according to it. Indeed thought is scarcely anything more than a loosening of the various strands that make up conscience, and a converting of these into separate ideas which pass into words. Hence it is that the Lord holds those who have conscience in good thoughts regarding the neighbour and withholds them from evil thoughts. For this reason conscience can never exist except with people who love the neighbour as themselves and have good thoughts regarding the truths of faith. These considerations brought forward here show how conscience differs from thought, and from this one may recognize how perception differs from thought.

[3] The Lord's perception came directly from Jehovah, and so from Divine Good, whereas His thought came from intellectual truth and the affection for it, as stated above in 1904, 1914. No idea, not even an angelic one, is adequate as a means to apprehend the Lord's Divine perception, and thus this lies beyond description. The perception which angels have - described in 1384 and following paragraphs, 1394, 1395 - adds up to scarcely anything at all when contrasted with the perception that was the Lord's. Because the Lord's perception was Divine, it was a perception of everything in heaven; and being a perception of everything in heaven it was also a perception of everything on earth. For such is the order, interconnection, and influx that anyone who has a perception of heavenly things has a perception of earthly as well.

[4] But after the Lord's Human Essence had become united to His Divine Essence, and had become at the same time Jehovah, the Lord was then above what is called perception, for He was above the order which exists in the heavens and from there upon earth. It is Jehovah who is the source of order, and therefore one may say that Jehovah is Order itself, for from Himself He governs order, not merely, as is supposed, in the universal but also in its most specific singulars, for it is these singulars that make up the universal. To speak of the universal and then separate such singulars from it would be no different from speaking of a whole that has no parts within it and so no different from speaking of something consisting of nothing. Thus it is sheer falsity - a figment of the imagination, as it is called - to speak of the Lord's Providence as belonging to the universal but not to its specific singulars; for to provide and govern universally but not specifically is to provide and govern absolutely nothing. This is true philosophically, yet, strange to say, philosophers themselves, including the more eminent, understand this matter in a different way and think in a different way.

  
/ 10837  
  

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