20. (ii) THE ONE GOD IS SUBSTANCE ITSELF AND FORM ITSELF, AND ANGELS AND MEN ARE SUBSTANCES AND FORMS DERIVED FROM HIM; TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY ARE IN HIM AND HE IN THEM, SO FAR ARE THEY IMAGES AND LIKENESSES OF HIM.

Since God is Being, He is also substance, for unless being is substance, it is an imaginary entity, for substance is a subsisting entity. One who is substance must also be form, for substance without form is an imaginary entity. Both can therefore be predicated of God, but on condition that He is the sole, very and prime substance and form. It was proved in THE WISDOM OF THE ANGELS ON THE DIVINE LOVE AND THE DIVINE WISDOM (published at Amsterdam in 1763) that this form is the very form of man, that is, God is very man, and all of his attributes are infinite; and likewise that angels and men are substances and forms created and ordered so as to receive the Divine influences reaching them through heaven. In the Book of Creation they are therefore called images and likenesses of God (Genesis 1:26-27); elsewhere they are called His sons and begotten of Him. It will be proved at length in the course of this book that in so far as a man lives under Divine guidance, that is, allows himself to be led by God, so far does he become, more and more inwardly, an image of God.

[2] If the minds of men did not form the idea that God is prime substance and form, and that His form is the very form of man, they would easily fall into fantastic, ghost-like, ideas about God Himself, the origin of man and the creation of the world. They could not avoid thinking of God as the primeval nature of the universe, and consequently as its expanse, or as it were a void or nothingness. They would think of the origin of man as if it were a fortuitous concourse of atoms to make such a form; of the creation of the world as owing its substances and forms to geometric points and lines, which since they lack attributes are in themselves non-existent. In the case of such people everything relating to the church is like the river Styx or the thick darkness of Tartarus.

1712. That 'he divided himself against them by night' means the shade which the apparent goods and truths were in is clear from the meaning of 'night' as a state of shade. It is called a state of shade when a person does not know whether good and truth are apparent or genuine. While a person is limited to apparent good and truth he imagines that these are genuine good and truth. It is the evil and falsity present in apparent good and truth that produce the shade and cause them to be seen as genuine. What else can people who are in ignorance know than that the good they do is their own, and that the truth they think is their own? The same applies to people who ascribe the good deeds they do to themselves and place merit in them, unaware of the fact that in this case those deeds are not good though they appear to be so, and that the proprium and the self-merit they place in them are evils and falsities that cause obscurity and darkness. And the same applies in many other instances.

[2] What evil and falsity are like, and how much evil and falsity lie concealed in such deeds, cannot possibly be seen so clearly in the life of the body as in the next life, where these are presented to view altogether as in broad daylight. But it is different if a person acts out of ignorance that has not been confirmed, for in that case those evils and falsities are easily dispersed. But if people confirm themselves in the notion that they are able to do good and to withstand evil by their own powers, and that thus they merit salvation, such a notion remains attached, and causes the good to be evil, and the truth to be falsity. Yet for all this, order requires that a person should do good as though from himself, and ought not therefore to stay his hand and think to himself, 'If I am unable to do anything good at all from myself I must wait for immediate influx' and so remain inactive. This is also contrary to order. Man ought to do good as though from himself; but when he stops to reflect on the good he is doing or has done, let him think, acknowledge, and believe that the Lord present with him has accomplished it.

[3] If by thinking as described he gives up acting as of himself he is not a subject into whom the Lord can operate. The Lord cannot flow into anyone who deprives himself of everything into which power has to be introduced. He is like someone who is not willing to learn anything except through a revelation made to him; or like someone who is not willing to teach anything unless the words are put into his mouth; or like someone who is unwilling to attempt anything unless he is directed as one without a will. But if this were done he would be more indignant still at being like an inanimate object. In fact however that which is animated by the Lord in a person is the very thing which makes it seem as though it were from himself. That man does not live from himself is an eternal truth; yet if he did not appear to do so he could not possibly live at all.