-i^'A: 
 
 »- •--:'■•; ^rv^*. 
 
K _,_^ f I ■ » I i - I I 
 
 5:::^ a 5^a o^ ^£^ Q^ "'^^ 
 
 OF THK 
 AT 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 ^^z^t^ez 
 
 SAMUEL AGNEW, 
 
 or PHILADKLPHIA, PA. 
 
 t=3«c-'c;trct /^"^n /7 
 
 BX 8723 ,115 17 9 2 - 
 Hindmarsh, Robert, 1759- 
 
 1835. 
 Letters to Dr. Priestley 
 
LETTERS 
 
 T O 
 
 Dr. PRIESTLEY: 
 
 CONTAINING PROOFS OF THE 
 
 SOLE, SUPREME, and EXCLUSIVE 
 
 DIVINITY OF jESUS CHRIST, 
 
 WHOM THE SCRIPTURES DECLARE TO BE 
 
 The Only God of Heaven and Earth ; 
 
 And of the Divine Miflion of 
 
 EMANUEL SJVEDENBORG. 
 
 BEING A 
 
 DEFENCE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 NEW CHURCH fignified by the NEW JERUSALEM 
 IN THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 By ROBERT HINDMARSH. 
 
 The Time cometh wlien I Tnall fhew yoa plainly of the Father. 
 
 John xvi. 25. 
 
 L N D K: 
 Printed and Sold by R. HINDMARSH, 
 
 PRINTER TO HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE OF T»ALES, 
 
 No, 32, Clerkenwell-Clol'e. 
 
 1 1792. 
 
 [PriviC Fr^e Skill'ngt.^ 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 
 Preface - • . v 
 
 Letter I. 
 
 Of Miracles y and the divine MiJJion of Baron 
 Swedenborg - - - t 
 
 L E T T E R 11. 
 
 On the foUy fupreme^ and exdufive Divinity 
 ofJefusChrifi - - - 76 
 
 Letter IIL 
 
 . Mifcellaneous, 
 
 i. Of the Connexion between Religion and 
 
 the Civil Power - - - 209 
 
 IL Of the Human Form of God - 217 
 
 IIL Of the Union of Divinity and Hu^ 
 manity in the Perfon of Jefus Chrifiy 
 and at the fame "Time of the Divine 
 Omnifoiencc ~ - - 238 
 
 Si % IV. Of 
 
IV CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 
 IV. Of the Holy Scripture, and the Sd- 
 
 ence of Correfpondetices - - 266 
 
 V. Of the Second Commg of the Lord - 303 
 
 VI. Of the Laft Judgment - - 310 
 
 VII. Of the Refurr cation - - 322 
 
 VIII. Of Marriages in Heaven - 337 
 
 IX. That Love and Wifdom are Sub- 
 ftanceSy and not mere Properties - 351 
 
 X. Of the Divine Influx - - 362 
 
 XI. Of the Difcovery of the Georgium 
 
 Sidus - - - - 3^9 
 
 XII. Of Time and Space in the Spiritual 
 World - - - 
 
 
 373 
 
 XIII, Of Charity; and how it is to he 
 
 underfioody that neither Arians nor 
 Socinians can be admitted into Heaven 388 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
^eoe««oee8eooeee6<«eoeoweeoeeoMeooa«)05»eocoocooooooco«o«t6M6oeeoce6o»eeeeo9eoeoeeooocee©o^ 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 ON the firft appearance of Dr. Prieft- 
 ley s Letters to the Members of the 
 New Jeriifalem Church, I was requefled 
 by feveral perfons to draw up an anfwer 
 to him. This I dedined for a confider- 
 able time, not doubting but fome abler 
 hand, with more leifure than myfelf, 
 would undertake the tafk. But a meeting 
 of the Society in London being called to 
 take into confideration the expediency of 
 a public reply, it was their unanimous 
 requefl, that I would immediately take 
 up the pen, and defend the doctrines of 
 the New Jerufalem againfl the attack 
 which had been fo recently made upon 
 them. Finding myfelf thus called upon. 
 I no longer hefitated, but promifed that 
 I would devote the few leifure hours 1 
 
 had 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 had to fpare from bufinefs, to the fupport 
 of thofe great truths, which from many 
 years clofe attention I have good reafon 
 to believe of heavenly extraftion. How 
 far I have fucceeded in the attempt, muft 
 be left to the judgment of the candid and 
 impartial reader, who, no doubt, is fuflfi- 
 ciently aware, that on every poffible occa- 
 fion it is his duty to examine both fides of 
 a queftion, before he ventures to decide 
 in favour of either. 
 
 I may jufl obferve here, that the fol- 
 lowing Defence of the New Church has 
 been read in manufcript, from time to 
 time, to the above-mentioned Society, 
 who fo far approved of it as to requeft, 
 that I would pubHfli it as an avowal of 
 their fentiments, as well as of my own. 
 Some others have alfo given it a perufal, 
 of whole judgment I entertain a very high 
 opinion ; and the fatisfaftion, which 
 thefe have expreffed on the occafion, 
 encourages me to hope, that my feeble 
 endeavours in fupport of truth will not 
 
 prove 
 
PREFACE. VU 
 
 prove altogether ufelefs. Yet as it is 
 very pofTible there may be fentiments 
 contained in this work, which do not in 
 all refpefts accord with the views of every 
 individual member of the New Church, 
 on the fame fubjecls, I do not wifli to 
 have it imderftood, that any errors dif- 
 coverable in me are to be charged upon 
 them; having fimply ftated my own 
 opinions, with the reafons that have inr 
 duced me to adopt them. 
 
 It is a common remark, that perfons, 
 who take up contrary fides of a queftion, 
 too frequently treat each other with un- 
 becoming afperity; imagining, no doubt, 
 that their arguments vi^ill thereby gain a 
 confiderable acceffion of ftrength ; or at 
 leaft, that, as opponents, they have a right 
 to indulge themfelves in perfonal reflec- 
 tions, merely on account of their dif- 
 ference in opinion. But I hope nothing 
 pf this kind will appear in the following 
 Defence. I have endeavoured, as much 
 ^ poflible, to avoid it. Yet fhould there 
 
 be 
 
VIU PREFACE* 
 
 be any thing in it that will admit of fuch 
 a conflruftion, I beg it may be confidered 
 as unintentional ; for I can affure the 
 reader, I have no view to offend any 
 perfon ; having, to the beft of my know- 
 ledge, been influenced by no other motive 
 in writing, than the love of truth, that it 
 may be firfl difcovered, and then pr-ac^ 
 tifed. 
 
 As human creatures born in ignorance, 
 and defigned by the great Creator of the 
 ujiiverfe to pafs through various flages of 
 intehigence, from the obfcurity oifenfual 
 npprehevjion, to the brightnefs of pure 
 inteUeclual truth, we are all, while in 
 this firft or prefent ftate of exiftence, con- 
 tinually expofed to error and deception. 
 So many are the falfe appearances of 
 things without, and fo many are the 
 prejudices and palfions within, which 
 combine to obftruft our progrefs in men* 
 tal perfeflion, that unlefs we tread the 
 ground of inquiry with the utmoft circum- 
 fpeftion and caution, paying every atten- 
 tion 
 
1* R E F A C E. 
 
 IX 
 
 tion that is due to the fentiments of others, 
 as well as entertaining the moft fcrupulous 
 diftruft of our own hearts and underftan- 
 dings, inftead of difcovering what we all 
 profefs to be in fearch of, we fhall only 
 bewilder ourfelves in the mazes of conjec- 
 ture, and having the door of our mind 
 fliut againft the light of truth, continue 
 to grope in the dark. 
 
 The fallacies arifing from the appear- 
 ances of natural objefls, when prefented 
 to the bodily fenfes, may eafily be recti- 
 fied, becaufe of thefe the learned are fuf- 
 ficiently aware. But it is not fo eafy to 
 deteft the fallacies which arife from the 
 appearance of intellefiual objefts, becaufe 
 few confider, that the human mind is fur- 
 nifhed with fenfes peculiar to itfelf, jufl 
 as the body is; and that for the moft 
 part, our firft apprehenfions of fpiritual 
 things are as imperfect and foreign to the 
 real truth, as the firft notions we enter- 
 tain of natural things. The faft, how- 
 ever, is as here ftated: and therefore it 
 
 b behoves 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 behoves us, if we are in earnefl to obtain 
 the prize of wifdom, to be perpetually on 
 our guard againfl the delufion of appear- 
 ances, ever holding our minds open for 
 the reception of further light, and more 
 juft information. 
 
 As moft of the objeftions, which Dr. 
 Prieftley has urged againfl: the doQrines 
 of the New Church, are the fame as are 
 ufually made by many other perfons on 
 their firfl: reading the writings of Baron 
 Swedenborg, in confequence of not tho- 
 roughly underftanding them ; I have been 
 the more particular, on that account, in 
 obviating all his objeclions ; fo that the 
 following Defence of the New Church may 
 be confidered not only as an anfwer to 
 Dr. Priefl;ley's Letters, but likewife to all 
 other opponents who tread on limilar 
 ground. I have not Ihunned, in the 
 fmallefl: degree, an examination of any 
 quedion, but have allowed to every ar-. 
 gument of oppofition it's full weight and 
 importance. Thofe paffages of fcripture, 
 
 which 
 
PREFACE. xi 
 
 which the doftor has urged as the moft 
 decifive proofs in favour of his own fyf- 
 tem, and againft the dodrines of the 
 New Jerufalem, are confidered with all 
 the attention and candor I am mafter of; 
 and fuch anfwers and explanations are 
 given, as I hope will prove fatisfa6lory 
 to every unprejudiced reader, who is in 
 fearch of truth purely for it's own fake. 
 Particularly I have taken pains to demon- 
 ftrate, as the fundamental article of the 
 true chriftian religion, the fole, fupreme, 
 and exclufive divinity of our Lord and 
 Saviour Jefus Chrift ; proving by the 
 moft undeniable authority of the general 
 tenor of the fcriptures, that their grand 
 defign is, to reveal to mankind, not 
 merely that there is a God, who created 
 the univerfe and all it's furniture, but 
 that this God is in a Human Form, that 
 out of pure love and mercy he himfelf 
 came down from heaven into the world 
 to redeem and fave mankind, and that 
 he is no other than the Divine Man 
 Tesus Christ. And here I mufl fay, 
 ^ b2 if 
 
Xll PREFACE. 
 
 if Jefus Chrift be not the true, the ojily 
 God, that the defign of the fcriptures 
 is yet unfulfilled, and that chriftians to 
 this day are as ignorant of, and unac- 
 quainted with, the fupreme Governor of 
 the univerfe, as the Athenians were, 
 when Paul faw them pay their devotions 
 to the unknown God; for to all who 
 Gonfider the Divine Being as fuperior 
 to Jefus, or in any refpeft different from 
 him, he is ftill a God unmanifefted, in- 
 vifible, unknown. But the great Jehovah 
 hath manifefted himfelf in the flefh, and 
 thereby made himfelf vifible and known to 
 his creatures, not by any mere deputation, 
 commilTion, or meffage, through the me- 
 dium of another, but by his own perfonal 
 and aftual incarnation. Thus he, who in 
 ancient times was the objeft of patriarchal 
 worfhip, as Jehovah the Father in ^ human 
 form, became in later times the objeft 
 of apoRolic worfhip, as the MeflTiah, Son, 
 Redeemer of the world ; and laflly, in 
 his New Church is now worfhipped as 
 
 Jetevah 
 
PREFACE. xiii 
 
 Jehovah the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, 
 infeparably united in one divine perfon. 
 
 The fcriptures throughout teflify of 
 Jef'us, as he himfelf teaches in John v. 39; 
 and this teftimony is evidently the burden 
 of all revelation. The hiftorical, pro- 
 phetical, and evangelical books are full 
 of it, infomuch that it may with truth be 
 faid, they are m labour to bring forth 
 their only Son, their only Man, Jesus 
 Christ; the acknowledgment of whom, 
 both in dodlrine and life, as the alone 
 Creator and Saviour of the world, is that 
 new birth in every individual, which they 
 fo flrenuoufly inculcate, and which is fo 
 worthy of their divine contents. But on 
 the fuppofition that Jefus is a mere man, 
 according to the view of Socinians, I muft 
 candidly confefs, that the perpetual re- 
 ference to the Meffiah in the Old Tef- 
 lament, and to Jefus in the New, which 
 is fo Itriking as to efcape the notice of 
 perhaps none, would appear to me to 
 be little better than a burlefque on the 
 
 fallen 
 
XIV PREFACE. 
 
 fallen condition of the human race, if after 
 
 allj the perfon, through whom they are to 
 
 look for redemption and dehverance, is 
 
 no greater, no abler, no wifer, no better 
 
 than themfelves. For if Jefus be a mere 
 
 man, nay if he be any thing (hort of the 
 
 fupreme God himfelf, he mufl have been 
 
 unworthy of that high and exaked cha- 
 
 rafter which we find uniformly afcribed to 
 
 him by prophets and apoftles ; unworthy 
 
 to be called by them the Saviour of the 
 
 world, or to be confidered by us as the 
 
 fingle Hero of divine revelation. 
 
 This fubjeft, however, with a variety 
 of others clofely connefted with it, will 
 be found treated more at large in the 
 following fheets. I have here only to add, 
 that the fole, fupreme, and exclufive di- 
 vinity of Jefus Chrifl will admit of a 
 thoufand times more abundant proof 
 from the fcriptures, than could poffibly 
 be comprized within ' the limits of the 
 prefent work : and although this Defence 
 of the New Church confiderably exceeds 
 
 the 
 
PREFACE, XV 
 
 the bounds I at firfl propofed to myrdf, 
 when I fat down to write an anfwer to 
 Dr. Prieftley, yet, when compared with 
 the magnitude of the fubjeQs I have un- 
 dertaken to defend and explain, perhaps 
 it fcarcely amounts to the value of a mite 
 thrown into the increafing treafury of the 
 New Church. However, fuch as it is, I 
 offer it to the world. What kind of re- 
 ception it may meet with, or what effeft 
 it may produce in the mind of the reader, 
 I do not pretend to anticipate : yet fliould 
 it become the means, under divine provi- 
 dence, of conveying truth to the breaft of 
 a fingle individual, or of guarding one 
 mind againfl the dangerous errors of So- 
 cinianifm, I (hall think myfelf happy in 
 the refleftion, that I have not fpent my 
 time in vain, but that as a member of 
 . fociety I have been in fome fmall degree 
 an inftrument of ufe. 
 
 ROBERT HINDMARSH. 
 London, Jan. 7, 1792=36. 
 
( xvi ) 
 
 N O T A BENE. 
 
 IN the following Defence^ many of the quotation?! 
 from fcripture are rendered fomewhat differently from 
 the common Englilh tranflation. But thefe variations 
 are all made with a view to exprefs more accurately the 
 true fenfe of the original. The word Jehovah , for 
 example, which in the Old Tedament is for the moft 
 part tranllated Lordy is here retained : for although both 
 terms evidently denote the fame Divine Being, yet each 
 conveys a peculiar idea diftincl from the other. Thus, 
 the term Jehovah means the Lord not yet Incarnate ; and 
 the term Lord means Jehovah incarnate ^ or In the fiejh, 
 ■which is the fame thing as Jehovah in his Divine Hu- 
 manity. This is the reafon why in thofe pafTages of 
 the New Teftament, which are parallel to others in the 
 Old, the term Lord is ufed inftead of Jehovah ; as in 
 Deut. vi. 4, 5 ; and Mark xii. 29, 30. Ifaiah xl. 3 ; and 
 Matt. iii. 3 : for when the Old Teftament was written, 
 the Lord was Jehovah ; but when the New Teftament 
 ,was written, Jehovah was the Lord, 
 
 C^ To thofe who may have occafion to quote the 
 Works of Emanuel Swedenborg, it may be proper to 
 obferve, that all references ought to be to the numbers 
 of the paragraphs, and not to the pages ; for in different 
 editions the pages vary, but the numbers remain the 
 fame. 
 
 A DE- 
 
DEFENCE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 New Church, meant by the New Jerufalem 
 IN THE apocalypse; 
 
 LETTER L 
 
 Of Miracles^ and the divine MiJJion of 
 Baron Sivedenborg. 
 
 TT is unneceflary. Sir, to make any apology 
 for calling your attention to the following 
 flieets, as I conceive myfelf in fome meafure en- 
 titled to that indulgence, in confequence of the 
 Letters you have lately addrclTed to the Members 
 of the New Jerufalem^ among the number of 
 whom I profefs myfelf an humble individuaL 
 As it is my intention to obviate every objedlion 
 you have brought againfl: the credibility of Baron 
 gwedenborg's teilimony, as well as againft the 
 dodrines of the New Church, I fliall take the 
 liberty of making my obfervations in that order 
 which appears to me mofl likely to clear the 
 ground as we go. I therefore propofe, in the 
 prcfent letter, to confider what is the moll pro- 
 \ B pel? 
 
2 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 per evidence of a man's infpiration and divine 
 miffion, and how far the pretenfions of Barorr 
 Swedenborg are fupported by fuch evidence as 
 is at once both rational and fatisfacflory. In the 
 courfe of this examination, I fhall naturally be 
 led to inquire into the true nature and tendency 
 of miracles. 
 
 But here give me leave to^ make one obfcrva- 
 tion, previous to my entering on the fubjecl^ 
 which 1 wifli both you and myfelf to bear m 
 mind, and to coniider as the condition of our 
 correfpondence. It is this, that during the pre- 
 fent controverfy (if fuch it muft be called) no 
 difference of fentimenr, no oppofition of argu- 
 ment, no ftrength of expreflion in favour of our 
 refpediive opinions, fliall by any means be 
 deemed a breach of charity, or a perfonal re- 
 fledlion. With this condition in view, I no\v' 
 proceed with my fubjedl^ 
 
 In the firfl part of your Preface, you pay an 
 handfome compliment to thofe member>s of the 
 New Church, with whom you are acquainted ; 
 for which I am fure they have politenefs enough 
 to make you a fuitable acknowledgment. I hope 
 " the evident good fenfe,, and good condud:,'*' 
 which you are pleafed to fay you difcovered in 
 
 thenv 
 
^Sigiiijied by the New Jerufalem. 3 
 
 them, will not be confidered as any proof of 
 their weaknefs and fuperftition, in having cm- 
 braced a fyilem of divinity, which has been 
 proved by Baron Swedenborg to be the only 
 true chriftian religion, although in page xii 
 you pronounce it to be a mere " vifionary 
 " fcheme, and deftitute of all rational evidence." 
 
 To prevent the imputation of unfair conduct 
 in mifreprefenting any of your afTcrtions, and 
 that every reader may judge of the propriety or 
 impropriety of my anfwers ; I think the mofl 
 candid, as well as mofb jufl mode of procedure 
 will be, firft to flate your own words, and then 
 to make my remarks. 
 
 In page xii of your Preface you obferve as 
 follows : " To many perfons it will appear 
 *^ not a little extraordinary, that a fcheme of 
 *' religion fo vifionary, and fo deftitute of all 
 *' rational evidence, as that of Baron Sweden- 
 ** borg, Ihould be fo firmly believed by fuch 
 *' numbers of perfons of unqueftionable good 
 *' fenfe, and the moll upright intentions ; and 
 " fome may be difpofed to fay, that chrijliamty 
 ** it/elf jnighi have had no better an origin. — 
 " There is nothing, however, fo improbable in 
 " itfelf, but what perfons of a certain turn of 
 
 B 2 " niind 
 
4 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 *' mind may not be pre-difpofed to believe. And 
 *' they who ah'eady believe the infpiration of 
 ** fome perfons, will eafily admit that of others, 
 *' who, in their idea, carry on the fame fcheme, 
 *^ or one fimilar to it. Thus the jniracles of the 
 ^^ pop ijh faints zvere received without much diffi- 
 " culty, after thofe of the apofiles and primitive 
 " chriftians. — Any perfon of reputable charac- 
 ** ter> and not apparently infane, gravely and 
 " repeatedly alTcriing his infpiration, and his 
 ** intercourfe with God or angels, and advan- 
 ** cing nothing contrary, or fuppofed to be con- 
 " trary, to what other acknowledged prophets 
 " had advanced before him, will be believed by 
 " fome ; and the credit of thefe may in time be 
 ** the means of procuring him credit with 
 «' others. And thus it appears to me, tjiat 
 « credit was acquired to the preteniions of Ma- 
 ** homet, and has been to thofe of Baron Swe- 
 [^ denborg.'* 
 
 In reply to the above, I fliall take the liberty 
 to offer a few refledlions as they occur. In the 
 firft place then, if, as you acknowledge, *^ fuch 
 *' numbers of perfons of unqucftionable good 
 " fenfe, and the mofl upright intentions," do 
 aQually and firmly believe the teftimony of 
 Baron Swedenborg; this is certainly a ftrong 
 
 prcfump- 
 
Signified hy the Nezv Jeriifalem, r 
 
 prefumption that they can fee a reafonabJenefs 
 in his aflertions, as well as a manifeft agreement 
 'with divine revelation in all the doctrines of 
 the New Church, which by your own confef- 
 lion you have neither eyes nor underflanding tQ 
 difcern. 
 
 But, Sir, I do not know how to reconcile your 
 ifnode of accounting for our embracing the 
 ^dodrines of Baron Svvedenborg, page xiii, with 
 your police alTertions in page xii. You firft fay 
 we are men of " unquefiionahle good Jenje^' and 
 in the very next page pafs us off as a fet of the 
 isoeakeft enthnfiajis in the world, who are prepared 
 to give credit to any idle talc, provided it be 
 but gravely and repeatedly affertcd. One would 
 imagine, that no perfon polfelTed of good fenfe, 
 or in other words, of a found underftanding and 
 folid judgment, (as you allow fome of the 
 members of the New Church to be,) would fuf- 
 fer himfelf to be deluded, either by the predif- 
 pofition of his own mind, or the grave and 
 repeated aifertions of another, into fuch a vilion- 
 ary fcheme as you fuppofe our's to be, unlcfs 
 he faw it had it's bafis in truth, and was capa- 
 ble of being fupported by rational evidence, as 
 well as by the acknowledged oracles of divine 
 revelation. Still Icfs is it to be fuppofcd, that 
 
 whole 
 
6 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 whole focieties and communities of men would 
 embrace the doctrines of the New Jerufalem, 
 (and that too even in oppofition to former pre- 
 judices inftilled into them from infancy by 
 -education and example,) unlefs they perceived 
 in them an internal evidence of their own truth, 
 and felt the firmnefs of the ground on which 
 they fland. 
 
 There feems to be fomething very lingular in 
 the obfervation you make, when you fay, that 
 " fomc may be difpofed to fay, that chriftianity 
 *' itf elf might have had no better an origin^' than the 
 fyftem of religion which is now beginning to 
 dawn upon the earth, under the name of the New 
 Church, or New Jeridfalem. You do not furely 
 mean to iniinuate your doubts concerning the 
 truth of the chriftian religion, by faying fo? 
 Indeed, Sir, one would be almoft ready to con- 
 clude as much, particularly as you add, " They 
 ** who already believe the infpiration of fome 
 " perfons, will eafily admit that of others, who> 
 ** in their idea, carry on ihzfame Jcheme, or one 
 *^ Similar to it. Thus the miracles of the popifh 
 ** faints were received without much difficulty^ 
 f* after thofe of the apojiks and primitive chnjiians." 
 This certainly amounts (at lead in my view) to 
 the fame thing, as if you had in plain terms 
 
 faid. 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalcnu n 
 
 faid, * The miracles of the popifh faints would 
 
 • never have received any credit, unlefs men 
 ^ had been weak enough firft to believe thofe of 
 
 ♦ the apoftles and primitive chriilians.* It alfo, 
 I think, fairly implies, that as you yourfelf have 
 too much fenfe to believe the popifh miracles, 
 fo you do not acknowledge thofe of the apof- 
 tles ; for the one, you feem to fay, is a natural 
 confequence of the 'other. — I do not wifh to 
 prefs you too hard on this point; I rather 
 hope I may have mifapprehended your meanings 
 But really. Sir, I could not help making thefe 
 refle(5lions in my own mind, while I was reading 
 the above, and various other paffages in your 
 Letters. 
 
 As to the infmuation that the pretenfions of 
 Baron Sv/edenborg are no better than thofe of 
 Mahomet, merely becaufe he did not fupport 
 them by miracles, if it proves any thing, it 
 proves too much ; for on this ground you will 
 find yourfelf put to the necefTity of denying the 
 divine miflion of many of the prophets, as well 
 as of John the Baptift. What miracle, let mc 
 alk, did Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, 
 Habakuk, Zephaniah, or Haggai, with feveral 
 others v/hcm I could name, perform, in order 
 to convince the people, that they were the true 
 
 melTengers 
 
8 A Defence of ihe New Churchy 
 
 meffengers of Jehovah ? Not a iingle one that I 
 know of. Will you therefore infer, that they 
 ^vere impollors, becaufe they did not come with 
 miracles in their hands ? Had you lived in their 
 day, you might with as good reafon have ob- 
 jecfted to ihoAV Jingle teftimony of their own divine 
 miflion, as you now do to that of Baron Swe- 
 denborg. With equal propriety you might have 
 faid to Jonah, when he was proclaiming the 
 deflruclion of Nineveh, ^ Unlefs you will con- 
 
 * vince me by a miracle, that you are fent of 
 
 * God, I will not believe a word you fay/ Had 
 the Ninevites reafoned in this manner, in all 
 probability they would not have lived to lament 
 their folly. 
 
 Again, what miracle did John the Baptifl do, 
 to convince the Jews that he was more than a 
 prophet i as being the immediate forerunner of our 
 Lord ? If, as you fay, p. 8, '^ the only proper 
 " evidence of a divine commifTion is doing fome- 
 " thing that God alone could enable a man to 
 " do,'* (meaning a miracle,) how happened it, 
 that John, whofe commilTion and charadter were 
 more dignified, than thofe of any former pro- 
 phets, did not difplay the necelTary requifites 
 for commanding the public attention ? If to 
 gain credit /imply as a prophet^ it is indifpcnfa- 
 2 bly 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. g 
 
 bly neceffary to work a miracle ; what may wc 
 not expedl from him who comes to us as more 
 than a prophet F John the Baptift, however, per- 
 formed no miracle as a proof of his milTion, and 
 yet he w^as pronounced by the Lord himfelf to 
 be greater than Mofes, or any of the prophets, 
 notwithftanding all the miracles w^hich they 
 performed. In proof of thefe afTertions, I fhall 
 jufl beg leave to tranfcribe the following pafiage 
 from Matthew. Speaking of John the Baptill, 
 Jefus fays, " What went ye out to fee ? a prophet ? 
 •* yea, I fay unto you, and more than a prophet, 
 ** Among them that are born of women, there 
 ** hath not rifen a greater than John the Bap- 
 «' tift," Matt. xi. 9, 1 1 . And in John x. 41, 42, 
 it is faid, *' John did no miracle ; but all things 
 *' that John fpake of this man, (Jefus,) v/ere 
 " true. And many believed on him there." 
 The truth is, rational evidence is Jlronger than 
 any miracle, becaufe it reaches xkit iinderfianding^ 
 which no miracle ever did, or can do. I am 
 therefore furprized, how any man, that calls 
 himfelf a lover of truth, and a Jearcher after 
 truth, can yet turn his hack on truth, together 
 with found reafon, the proper evidence of truth, 
 and call out for a miracle ! 
 
 C Having 
 
10 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 Having feen that feveral of the prophets gave 
 no proofs of their divine million by working 
 miracles, and that their tedimony in many cafes 
 is admitted merely on their own bare affertions; 
 let us now inquire whether it has been the gene- 
 ral cuftom of mankind to give implicit credit to 
 thofe who had the powTr of working miracles; 
 and after viewing the effccls naturally produced 
 by them on the human mind, togethor with 
 their real ufes and defign, we (hall be the better 
 prepared to take into conlideration the divine 
 million of Baron Swedenborg. 
 
 In page 8, you fay, •' When Mofes was ap- 
 " pointed by God to carry a melTage to his na- 
 " tion, and to the king of Egypt, he naturally 
 " faid, Exod. iv. i. But behold they will not be- 
 " lieve me, 7tor hearken unto my voice ; for they will 
 **y^, the Lord hath not appeared unto thee. In 
 " anfwer to this, God bade him throw down the 
 " rod that was in his hand, when it was inllantly 
 " changed into a ferpent, and he was ordered to 
 " fhew the fame lign to his countrymen, and to 
 ** Pharaoh, iv. 5, that they may believe that the 
 
 Lord God of their fat hers, the God of Abraham^ 
 *' Ifaac, and Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. Ac-* 
 
 cordingly he did exhibit this fign, and by this 
 " means fatisfied them, that God had fent him.** 
 
 It 
 
 cc 
 
 cc 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 1 1 
 
 It is true that the Lord enabled Mofes to per- 
 form many miracles before his countrymen, in 
 order to convince them that God had fent him. 
 But that this convidion of their's was a mere 
 fuperficial impreffion upon their outward fenfes, 
 and carried with it nothing of rational evidenct 
 to their underftandings, is plain from almoft 
 every part of their hiftory. As foon as ever they 
 had fairly efcaped from the Egyptians, and were 
 got into the wildernefs, the people ahfolutely mur- 
 mured againft Mofes and Aaron who had performed 
 the miracles, and thereby brought them into a 
 fituation where they dreaded being deftroycd 
 by hunger and thirft. See Exod. xv. 24. Chap, 
 xvi. 2, 3. They even accufed Mofes of a dcfign 
 and intention to kill them, and were on that 
 account juft on the point of floning him to 
 death, Exod. xvi. 4. If the miracles, which 
 Mofes and Aaron performed, had really operated 
 upon their minds a full and rational convidion 
 that they were fent by God, hov/ is it pofTible 
 they could fo foon forget them, notwithftanding 
 their greatnefs and frequency ? The truth is, they 
 only believed (or rather, were compelled againft 
 their wills to acknow ledge) the miracles for the 
 moment, while they were prefent before their 
 Jtnjes. How elfe are we to account for their 
 fucceflively and almoft continually rebelling 
 
 C 2 againft 
 
1-2 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 again fl Jehovah, in whofe name all the miracles 
 were performed ? 
 
 It was from a principle of felfifhnefs and fear 
 only, that they followed Mofes out of Egypt 
 and through the vvildernefs ; felfijhnefs^ becaufe 
 they expected at laft to arrive in a land of plenty ; 
 and/f^r, left they fhould be deftroyed by that 
 power, which had fo wonderfully manifefted 
 itfelf in the miracles. But no fooner did this 
 fear fubfide in confequence of their temporary 
 cefTation, than they returned to the natural 
 hardnefs of their hearts, and fell into the grolTelt 
 fpecies of idolatry, namely, that of worfhipping 
 a molten calf, the work of their own hands; 
 and what is fingular, even Aaron, who had 
 himfelf performed the miracles, joined with the 
 people who were witnefTes of them, m afcribing 
 all the power to the calf, and faying, *^ l^bejebe 
 thy godsy O Ifraely which hr ought thee up out of the 
 land of Egypty' Exod. xxxii. 4. Nothing then 
 can be produced as a, more plain and undeniable 
 fad, than that the miracles v/hich were per- 
 formed before the children of Ifrael, w ere con^ 
 fidered by them as downright ads ol compulfive 
 (luihorhy; and that the convidion arifing from 
 |;h.cn:i was a Yfitxcfuperjicial imprejfwn upon their 
 
 outward 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, 13 
 
 mfzvard fenfes, and carried with it. nothing of 
 rational evidence to their imderfidjidiitgs. 
 
 But if I underfland you right, you fay, page 9, 
 that ivlofes fatisfied Pharaoh, as well as his 
 countrymen, by the change of his rod into a 
 ferpeni", th^ir God had fent him. This, how- 
 ever, was not the cafe ; for, Exod. vji. 8 to 13, 
 Jehovah faid unto Mofes and Aaron, When 
 
 Pharaoh fliail fpeak unto you, faying, Shevu a 
 miracle for you j then thou fhalt fay unto Aaron, 
 " Take the rod, and caft it before Pharaoh, and 
 " it ihall become a ferpent. And Mofes and 
 " Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did fo, 
 " as Jehovah had commanded. And Aaron caft 
 ** down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his 
 " fervants ; and it became a ferpent. But Je- 
 " hovah hardened Pharaoh's heart, that he 
 " hearkened not unto them,'* Your alTertion, there- 
 fore, that the fign which Mofes exhibited be- 
 fore Pharaoh, " fatisfied him that God had 
 *^ fent him,'' is in direct oppofition to the plain 
 matter of fa6t. Pharaoh faw with unconcern 
 the miracle of the rod being turned into a fer- 
 pent ; for " the magicians of Egypt did in like 
 " manner with their inchantmcnts.'' So that 
 he could not tell by that 'fign alone, whether 
 he was fent by God, or by the devii Neither 
 
 J was 
 
14 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 was he convinced of the divine miffion of Mofes 
 and Aaron, by their fmiting the waters, and 
 turning them into blood; for " the magicians 
 •* of Egypt did fo with their inchantments." 
 So, after the plague of the frogs, which the 
 magicians likewife produced, Pharaoh **har- 
 *' dened his heart, and hearkened not unto 
 *' them." Nay, even on the dull of the earth 
 being turned into lice, (which was a miracle 
 that baixled thefkill of the magicians, for " with 
 ** all their inchantmicnts they could not bring 
 " forth lice,*') ftiil " Pharaoh's heart was har- 
 "dened, and he hearkened not unto them.*' 
 It was the fame with the plague of fiies, the 
 murrain, the boils, the hail and fire, the lo- 
 cufts, and the thick darknefs ; for he would not 
 let the Ifraelites go, till he was abfolutely com- 
 pelled to do fo, by the flaying of the firft-born : 
 and laft of all he purfued them, till he, with all 
 his hofl, was drowned in the red fea. Now as 
 you have, in page 2, exprefsly renounced any 
 faith in the calviniftic plan, you cannot with any 
 propriety avail yourfelf of that fyflem, by fay- 
 ing, that Pharaoh's unbelief was not chargeable 
 on him, but on Jehovah, who had previoully 
 hardened his heart, on purpofe that bejhould not 
 let the people go ^ Deut, iv. 21. 
 
 By 
 
Signijied by the Ntto Jerufalan, iz 
 
 By >vay of digrelTion, I will here put a quef- 
 tion to you. If you can anfwer it, well; if nor, 
 then acknowledge fairly and openly, that there 
 are myfteries in the holy word of the Lord, of 
 which you are entirely ignorant, and which can 
 only be underftood by a knowledge of it's fpi- 
 ritual fenfe. The queftion I have to propound 
 is this. How and why was it, that the ma- 
 gicians, as well as Mofes and Aaron, could turn 
 their rods into ferpents, and all the waters of 
 Egypt into blood, and bring up frogs upon the 
 land, and yet could noty zviih all their inchant^ 
 merits and mighty po'werSy produce lice f See Ex- 
 odus, chap. vii. and viii. You cannot furely 
 fay, that it is a greater miracle to produce 
 lice, than to bring forth frogs, and to turn rods 
 into ferpents, and rivers of water into blood ? 
 Still lefs, I apprehend, will you venture to af- 
 fert, as your moft ferious and deliberate judg- 
 ment, that the produdlion of lice is in itfelf a 
 more rational and fatisfadory proof of a divine 
 miflion, or more worthy of the great Jehovaby than 
 the miraculous converfion of all the rivers, ponds, 
 and pools of water in Egypt, into blood. Ac- 
 cording to the literal and obvious itn^t of the 
 paflage, however, by which you fay you muft 
 in other cafes be guided, it would appear that 
 fuch a miracle is really greater, and more worthy 
 
 of 
 
i6 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 of God. But how and why it is, remains for 
 you to explain. 
 
 To return. You fay, p. 9, '' Our Saviour did 
 " not expefl to be believed upon his ovv^n word, 
 " when he declared that God had fent him ; 
 "but faid, John v. 36, " The works which the 
 " Father hath given me to finifli, the fame works 
 ** that I do bear witnefs of me, that the Father 
 " hath fent me ;" and we find that this was 
 " the circumftance that convinced the Jews that 
 " he was a real prophet.'' Immediately after 
 which you quote, as a proof of your affertion, 
 the words of Nicodemus to Jefus, " Rabbi, we 
 *«know that thou art a teacher come from God; 
 ** for no man can do thefe miracles which thou 
 " doefl, except God be with him," John iii. 2, 
 Thefe palTages, you feem to think, eftablifh your 
 pofition, That* miracles are more effectual in 
 procuring credit to the divine million of a pro- 
 phet, than any other means. In this, however, 
 you are again moil egregioufly miftaken. The 
 Jews in general were not anvinced by any or all 
 the miracles which Jefus performed, that he 
 was a real prophet, much lefs that he was the 
 true Meffiah, or Son of God. Of this they are 
 Handing proofs againft your hypothefis to the 
 prefcnt day. It is not even true, that Nicodemus 
 
 believed 
 
Signijiedby the New Jerv/alem, 17 
 
 believed the teftimony of Jefus, although you 
 have brought his own words in fupport of your 
 dodrine ; for in verfe 1 1 of the fame chapter 
 our Lord in exprcfs terms tells him, " Te receive 
 " 720 i ourwitntJsJ'* 
 
 But why do you take upon you to fay/ that 
 " our Saviour did not exfe^l to be believed upon 
 " his own word,^ but on account of his works 
 only ? The evangelift John fays, chap. iv. 41, 
 that *' many helievedy becauje of his ozscn word.*' 
 And the Lord himfelf fays, *' He that heareth 
 ** my wordy and believeib on him that fent me, 
 ** hath everlafling life,'* John v. 24. " He that 
 ** receiveth not my zvords, hath one that judgeth 
 *^him,'' John xii. 48. Again, it is faid, ''As 
 ** he /pake ihefe words, many believed on him,** 
 John viii. 30. Was this unexpected by the Lord? 
 No, truly ,• " for Jefus knew from the begin7ting 
 ** who they were that believed not," John vi. 64. 
 And belides, " the words that he fpakc, are 
 '*fpirit, and are life,** verfe 63. It is very clear, 
 then, that the Lord called the attention of 
 the people more to his words, than to his works ; 
 the reafon of which was, becauf^e his words were 
 calculated to inform, inftrud:, and convince the 
 underftanding, in a more effedlual manner than 
 the mort miraculous of his works. When he 
 
 D found. 
 
i8 A Defmice of the Neto Church, 
 
 found, they would not hearken to his words, he 
 then referred them to his works : " 'Though yc 
 ** believe not me^ (fays he,) believe the zvorks,'* 
 John X. 38. *' Beheve me, that I am in the Fa- 
 *' ther, and the Father in me; orel/e believe me 
 *^ for /he very zvorks' fake," John xiv. 11. 
 
 That the Jews in general did not acknow- 
 ledge Jefus to be a real prophet, and fcnt of 
 God, notwithftanding all the miracles he per- 
 formed, is eafily proved by the following paf- 
 fages in the gofpels. 
 
 I. After Jefus had cafl out the devils, and 
 permitted them to enter into the herd of fwine, 
 ** the whole city came out to meet Jefus, and 
 ** when they faw him, they befought him that 
 " he would depart out of their coaflsy' Matt. viii. 
 34. Mark v. 17. Luke viii. 37. If they had 
 believed him to be a true prophet, it is probable 
 they would rather have befought him to dwell 
 sipongfl: them, than to depart from them. 
 
 1, When Jefus healed the man with the 
 withered hand, " the pharifees went out, and 
 ** held a council again/} him, how they might 
 ** dejhoy him," Matt. xii. 14. Markiii. 6. Luke 
 vi. II. Would they have done fo, if that mi- 
 racle 
 
Signijicd by the New Jeriifalem. ig 
 
 rack had convinced them he was a prophet, and 
 fent of God? 
 
 3. y\gain, when Jefus healed a blind and dumb 
 man, who was pofTelTed of a devil, «* the pha- 
 ^' rifees faid. This fellow doth not caft out devils, 
 " but by Beelzebub the prince of the deuilsy' Matt. 
 xii. 24. Mark iii. 22. Luke xi. 15. Here the 
 pharifees were fo far from acknowledging the 
 divine million of Jefus on account of this mi* 
 raculous cure, that they even afcribed it to the 
 power of the devil I 
 
 4. Again, when Jefus returned into his own 
 country, and the people faw his *' mighty works ^ 
 *' they were offended in him. And he did not 
 " many mighty works there, becauje of their un^^ 
 ^^ belief,'' Matt. xiii. 37, 38. Mark vi. 3,5. But 
 according to your doclrine. Sir, their unbelief 
 ought to have been the very reafon why he fhould 
 have done mighty works, if he wilhcd to con- 
 vince them that he was a prophet ; for it is cer- 
 tainly unnecelTary, and even abfurd, to work a 
 miracle in order to convince a man that already 
 believes, 
 
 5. When Jefus healed the woman who had 
 an infirmity eighteen years, *' the ruler of the ^y- 
 
 D 2 " nagogue 
 
20 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 " nagogue anfwered with indignaiion, becaufe he 
 " had healed on the fabbath-day/* Luke xiii. 14. 
 Thus we fee, a fuperftitious prejudice in favour 
 of the Jewifh fabbath, fo blinded the eyes of the 
 chief ruler of the fynagogue, that he could dif- 
 cern no traces of a divine hand in this extraor- 
 dinary cure, 
 
 6. Although Jefus healed the high priell's 
 fervant's ear, in the prefence of thofe ^^ho came 
 to apprehend him, yet fo far was this miracle 
 from convincing them of his divine miffion, that 
 they immediately " took him, and led him, and 
 ** brought him into the high priefi^i houje^' ^z, 
 Luke xxii. 54. 
 
 7. Jcfus perform.ed a miracle on the fabbath 
 day, by healing an impotent man; '^ and there- 
 ^^ fore did the Jews perfecuie him, and fought to 
 ^^ flay him,'' And when Jefus thereupon took 
 occaiion to inform them, that his miracles were 
 performed by the Father and himfelf conjointly, 
 " the Jews fought the more to kill him, not only 
 '* becaufe he had broken the fabbath, but bc- 
 *' caufe he faid alfo, that God was his Father, 
 ^' making himfelf equal with God," John v. 
 
 x6, 17, 18. 
 
 8. On 
 
Signified by the Nezv Jerufalem. 2 1 
 
 8. On Jefus raifmg Lazarus from the dead, 
 many of the Jews who were prefent, and faw 
 that extraordinary miracle, believed indeed on 
 him ; but fome of them, it appears, did not ; 
 for they went their ways to the pharifees, and 
 told them what things Jefus had done. And 
 the chief priefts and the pharifees convened a 
 council, to confult how they might put him to 
 death, for z^orking fo many miracles. See John 
 ^i. 45 to 57. Nay, the chief priefts were fo 
 hardened, and incenfed, that they even fought 
 to put Lazarus alfo to death, ahhough he had jufb 
 been fo miraculoufly raifed from the grave, 
 John xii. 10. 
 
 9. Notwithftanding all the miracles which 
 Jefus performed before the Jews, it is fa id in 
 Luke xxiii. i, 2, that " the whole multitude of 
 them arofe, and led him unto Pilate, and began 
 to accufe him," Pilate, however, remonftrated 
 with them ; and declaring that he found no fault 
 in him, propofed to fet him free. But " they 
 all fay unto him. Let him be crucified,'' Matt, 
 xxvii. 22. Luke informs us, " they cried out 
 all at once, faying, Away with this man, crucify 
 him, crucify him,'' Luke xxiii. 18, 21. 
 
 10. Laftly, 
 
22 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 lo. Laflly, As a plain and pofitive proofs that 
 the Jews in general did not believe on Jefus, 
 nor acknowledge him as a real prophet, and 
 divinely commiflioned, it is exprefsly faid, John 
 xii. 37, '* But though he had done fo many mi- 
 ** racks before them, jd"/ ibey believed not on him,'" 
 
 It is true, indeed, there are various pafTages 
 to be found in the gofpels, which inform us, 
 that great multitudes followed and careffed him 
 after they had ^t^n. his miracles : but it is very 
 evident from our Lord's own declaration con- 
 cerning fuch perfons, that they followed him, 
 not fo much from any conviction of his divine 
 midion, wrought in their minds by the miracles 
 which he performed, as from a principle of low 
 and grofs fenfuality ; for he fays in plain terms, 
 •• Verily verily I fay unto you. Ye feck nle, 
 mt hecauje ye fazv the miracles ^ but hecaujc ye did 
 eat of the loaves^ and were filled ^'^ John vi. 26. 
 
 Agreeable hereto, it is obfervcd in John ii. 
 23, 24, that although *' many believed in his 
 "name, when they faw the miracles which he 
 **did/' yet " Jefus did not commit himfelf unto 
 them, hecaiife he knew all men-y" plainly implying, 
 that the faith which is founded merely on 
 miracles, is not the true and genuine faith which 
 
 the 
 
Signified by the New Jerufakm. 23 
 
 the Lord wifhes to efiablidi, becaufe it refides 
 only in the external man, and enters not into 
 the internal, fo as to form the rational chrijlian^ 
 
 Miracles then avail nothing towards a ra- 
 tional and permanent convidion of the tiuth. 
 This is likewife particularly evident in the cafe 
 of the poor cripple at Lyftra, who was mi-^ 
 raculouily cured by Paul. " When the people 
 ** faw what Paul had done, they hfted up their 
 " voices, faying, The gods are come down to 
 •* us in the likenefs of men;*' and they imme- 
 diately prepared to pay him divine honours, 
 Ac1:s xiv. 8 to 18. But ia the very next verfe we 
 are informed, that ** there came thither certain 
 '* Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who per- 
 " fuaded the people, and having ftoned Paul, 
 *^ drew him out of the city, fuppofing he had been 
 ^* dead,'* 
 
 Where is it afTerted in the Word of Go^^ 
 that no man ever was or will be divinely com- 
 miflioned, without having the power of working 
 miracles committed to him, as an undeniable 
 proof of his miflion ? If fuch a condition is no 
 where eftabliflied, why do you take upon you 
 to urge it as indifpcnfably necefTary ? Our Lord 
 fays, " There Ihall arife falfe Chrifis, and falje 
 
 ^^ prophets, 
 
24 * A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 ** prophet Sy who fhall fhew great fjgns and vuon-^ 
 " dersy infomuch that (if pofTible) they Ihall 
 *' deceive the very eledl," Matt. xxiv. 24. Mark 
 xiii. 22. If fo, then figns and wonders, or 
 miracles, are no certain proofs of a divine mif- 
 lion; which is further evident from the fol- 
 lowing paffage in the Apocalypfe, " And I faw 
 ** three unclean fpirits like frogs come out of 
 *' the mouth of the dragon, and out of the 
 " mouth of the bead, and out of the mouth of 
 the falfe prophet ; for they are the fpirits of 
 devilsy zvcrking miracksy which go forth unto 
 the kings of the earth, and of the whole w^orld, 
 to gather them to the battle of that great day 
 "of God almighty," Apoc. xv. 13, 14. Here 
 the power of working miracles is plainly and ex- 
 prefsly attributed to devils. Again, when the 
 pharifees and fadducees deiired that he would 
 fhew them a fign from heaven, Jefus anfwered, 
 •* A wicked and adulterous generation feeketh after 
 •' a iign,** Matt. xvi. 4. From v/hich it appears, 
 that it is a mark of wickednefs and adultery to re- 
 quire figns and miracles as the proper evidences 
 of divine infpiration. Therefore he told them, 
 they fhould have no fign, Mark viii. 12. 
 
 It would anfwcr no valuable end, to adduce 
 more palTages from the Word on this point ; it 
 
 having 
 
Signified hy the New Jerufalevi. 25 
 
 having been already clearly proved, that miracles 
 in former ages were of themfelves infufficienc 
 to work either faith or convidion in the human 
 bread ; that in many cafes they rather proved 
 the occafion of men*s hardeninor their hearts, 
 by clofing the interiors of the rational mind; 
 and that frequently they were not at all con- 
 iidered as any genuine evidences of a divine 
 mifTion, becaufe they were equally within the 
 power of wicked men and forcerers. 
 
 You may perhaps fay, * Then for what end 
 * and purpofe were miracles performed ?' I 
 anfwer. Among others, for thefe great purpofes; 
 firfl, that the Word of God might be written: 
 fecondly, to compel the Ifraelites to do fo and 
 io, in order to reprefent the date and progrefs of 
 the fpiritual church ; for they being merely 
 external and fenfual men, having their interiors 
 clofcd, could, without danger of prophanation, 
 be formed by miracles into the reprefe7itative of 
 a church, but never into a real church. The 
 third ufe of miracles was, to point out man's 
 regeneration, v/hich is the cure of his fpiritual 
 maladies, and a miracle of miracles, being ef- 
 fected folely by the omnipotence of the Lord's 
 divine human perfon. It was for this grand 
 purpofe, that fo many miracles were wrought 
 
 E among 
 
26 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 among the Ifraelites, by means of Mofes and 
 the prophets ; and that the Lord himfelf, during 
 his abode in the world, performed fo many 
 miraculous cures upon the blind, the deaf, the 
 dumb, the lame, and the fick. For as all dif- 
 eafcs originate in the vices of thq fpirit, and are 
 no lefs than reprcfentative thereof; fo the 
 cure of men's bodily infirmities denoted the 
 removal of thofe fpi ritual evils to which they 
 correfpond, and from which, as from their 
 proper fountain, they have ever been derived. 
 
 ♦ * * ' » 
 Having thus demonftrated, that figns and 
 miracles are not the only proper evidences of a 
 divine commiflion, becaufe they are equally 
 capable of being performed by means of magical 
 inchantments ; having alfo proved, that the 
 witnelTes to fuch miracles in general gave little 
 or no credit to the workers of them, but were 
 merely ilruck with aftonifhment and awe during 
 the moment of performance, though fome even 
 made it the occafion of hardening their hearts, 
 attributing all the power to the devil ; and having 
 likev/ife feen the nature, end, and ufe of miracles; 
 I fhall now inform you on^what authority the 
 members of the New Church receive the tefti- 
 mony of Baron Swedenborg, and acknowledge 
 him as divinely infpired, notwithilanding the 
 
 difpenfatioA 
 
Signified by the New Jtrufalem, 21 
 
 difpenfation he announces has nothing mira- 
 culous to accoRipany it. In doing this, I Ihall 
 take the liberty of making fuch further remarks 
 on the fubjedl: of miracles, as the nature of 
 your objections may appear to require. 
 
 In p. XV. of your Preface, you tell us a flory 
 of " a Quaker going about the country, and 
 " giving an account of a trance he was thrown 
 " into, in which he had a fight of heaven and 
 ** hell :'* and although you " do not remember 
 " much of the vifion at prefent,'* yet you fay 
 ** it was entirely unlike any of the memorable 
 " relations of Baron Swedenborg:" after which 
 you add, " Now here is vifion againft vifion, 
 " or rather dream againft dream, and which of 
 " thefe are we to believe?** 
 
 Had you been kind enough to favour us with 
 a fpecimen of what you do remember of the 
 Quaker's vifion, we might pofTibly have been 
 enabled to form fome judgment about it: but 
 in the way you have ftated it, it is out of any 
 perfon's power to tell whether your inference be 
 a juft one or not, when you fay, '* Here is vilion 
 " againft vifion;" for you muft admit it to be 
 poflible, that what appears inconjifient or abjurd 
 10 you y may appear juft the contrary to another. 
 
 E 2 And 
 
28 A Defence of the Neio Church, 
 
 And I apprehend you are at prefent fo little 
 apprized of the infinite variety of appearances, 
 which both the heavens and the hells are ca- 
 pable of prefenting, that were two different 
 accounts of either the one or the other, as related 
 by Baron Swedenborg, or by any other perfon 
 whofe teflimony might be depended on, to be 
 laid before you in a detached flate, in all pro- 
 bability you Vv'ould not hefitate to pronounce 
 theqi abfolutely heterogeneous and contradic- 
 tory :■ and yet for all this I fay it \% pojfible^ that 
 both accounts may m themielves be true, and 
 in the view of fome perfons clearly reconcile- 
 able to the lav^s of the fpiritual world, although 
 to you and others they may appear oppofed to 
 the nature and fitnefs of things. However, as 
 in your comparifon of Baron Swedenborg with 
 your old friend the Quaker, you liave brought 
 fprward no fpccific point for confideration, 
 except the credibility of his lingle teftimony, 
 which you think not fufficient without concurrent 
 evidencey of the want of which you complain, I 
 ftiall for the prefent confine myfclf more par- 
 ticularly to this objection. 
 
 Now, I fay, in fupport of the memorable 
 relations which Baron Swedenborg has given 
 relative to his intercourfe with the fpiritual 
 
 world. 
 
Signified by the Neto JernfaUvi, 29 
 
 world, there is a great deal of concurrent evidence, 
 and that too of the very beft fort; which, if 
 you are delirous of feeing it in preference to the 
 evidence of truth rcfuking frona rational argu- 
 ments, I will now lay before you, not only for 
 your own meditation, but becaufe I believe it 
 may prove ufeful to fome others of my readers. 
 The evidence I allude to is that of the holy 
 fcriptures, which you, in common with the 
 members of the Nev/ Church, profefs to believe. 
 And I am the more inclined to adduce that 
 evidence on the prefent occaiion, becaufe I 
 obferve you have omitted to take any notice of 
 it, although in p. 6 8 of the Appendix to youx Lei^ 
 iersyyon have tranfcribed a part of the very fame 
 fedion, n. 85 1, of Baron Swedenborg's TrueChrif- 
 tian Religion^ in which it is to be found, and of 
 the weight and importance of which one would 
 think you muft have been fenfible at the time. 
 
 " That fuch things (fays he) do really appear 
 in the heavens, as are defcribed in the above 
 memorable relations, is clearly evident from 
 limilar things being feen and defcribed by John 
 in the Apocalypfe, and alfo by the prophets in 
 the Word of the Old Teftament. In the Apo- 
 calypfe wx read, that John faw the Son of Man 
 in the midft of feven candlcfticks ; that he faw 
 
 a taber- 
 
30 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 a tabernacle, a temple, an ark, and an altar in 
 heaven ; a book fealed with {cwcn fcals, the 
 book opened, and in confequence thereof hor- 
 fes going forth j four animals about the throne ; 
 twelve thoufand chofen out of each tribe ; lo- 
 cufls afcend from the bottom lefs pit ; a woman 
 bringing forth a man-child, and flying into a 
 wildernefs by reafon of the dragon ; two beads, 
 one afcending out of the fea, the other from the 
 earth; an angel flying in the midft of heaven, 
 having the everlafling gofpel ; a glafly fea mixed 
 with fire; feven angels having the feven plagues ; 
 vials poured out by them on the earth, on the 
 fea, on the rivers, on the fun, on the throne of 
 the beafl, on Euphrates, and on the air; a 
 woman fitting on a fcarlec beafl ; a dragon cafl 
 cut into a lake of fire and fulphur; a white 
 ^orfe ; a great fupper ; a new heaven and new 
 earth ; the holy Jerufalem coming down from 
 heaven, dcfcribed as to it's gates, it's wall, and 
 foundations ; alfo a river of the water of life, 
 and trees of Hfe bearing fruit every month ; 
 mth many things beiides, which were all feen 
 by John, whilH as to his fpirit he was in the 
 fpi ritual world and in heaven. Not to mention 
 what things v, ere fctn by the apoftles after the 
 Lord's refurredion, as by Peter, Ad;s xi. and 
 by Paul ; and alfo by the prophets in the Old 
 
 Tefl:ament : 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalevu oi 
 
 Teftament; as by Ezechiel, that he faw four 
 animals, which were cherubs, chap. i. and x. 
 and a new temple, and a new earth, and an 
 ^gei meafuring them, chap. xl. to xlviii ; that 
 he was carried to Jerufalcm, and faw there 
 abominations, and alio to Chaldea, chap. viii. 
 and xi ; the cafe was the fame with Zechariah, 
 in that he faw a man riding amongft myrtle- 
 trees, chap, i, 8 ; that he (iiw four horns, and 
 afterwards a man with a meafu ring-line in his 
 hand, chap, iii ; that he faw a flying roll and 
 an ephah, chap. v. r, 6 ; that he faw four 
 chariots and horfcs between two mountains, 
 chap. vi. I, &c. So again with Daniel, in that 
 he faw four beafts afcending out of the fea, 
 chap. vii. i, &c. ; that he faw the Son of Man 
 coming in the clouds of heaven, whofe domi- 
 nion (hall not pafs away, and whofe kingdom 
 fhall not be dellroyed, chap. vii. 13, 14; that 
 he faw the fighting of the ram and the he-goat, 
 chap. viii. i, &c. ; that he faw the angel Ga- 
 briel, and converfed him, chap, ix ; that the 
 young man of Eliflia faw chariots and horfes 
 of fire about Elifha, and that he faw them when 
 his eyes were opened, 2 Kings vi. 17. From 
 thefe, and feveral other mitances in the Word, 
 it is evident, that the things which exift in the 
 fpiritual world have appeared to many, both 
 
 before 
 
32 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 before and fince the coming of the Lord: what 
 wonder then is it, that the fame things fhould 
 now alfo appear, at the commencement of the 
 church, or when the New Jerufalem is coming 
 down out of heaven ?'* 
 
 Such is the concurrent teftimony of the holy 
 fcriptures, relative to the appearances in ano- 
 ther life. Now, as the memorable relations of 
 Baron Swedenborg are precifely of the fame 
 fort, having a fimilar tendency, and admitting 
 of a fimilar (I do not fay, ^^W degree of) illuf- 
 tration, it would appear, that a plain and down- 
 right oppofition to the one, ftrongly implicates 
 a fecret denial of the other. But, do not think, 
 Sir, that I mean to bring a charge of this kind 
 againft you, or any other perfon. It may be, 
 that, in confequence of being educated from in- 
 fancy in the belief of whatever is recorded^ in 
 the fcriptures, without any examination at all, 
 many of us have never yet coniidered or ventured 
 to call in queflion the evidence, which the pro- 
 phets give of their ov/n memorable relations. 
 Much of what they faid, you know, depended 
 upon their own (ingle teflimony : yet their vifions 
 are univerfally admitted by the chriftian church 
 to be true, whether they are comprehenfible or 
 not. What concurrent evidence is there, for 
 
 example. 
 
Sigmfied by tlie New Jerufalein, gg 
 
 example, to prove the vifions of John the Di- 
 vine, as related in the Apocalypfe ? You will 
 perhaps fay, that they accord with thofe of 
 Daniel, Ezckiel, and the reft of the prophets ; 
 and that from this harmony, together with the 
 high character and eminent piety of the writer, 
 refults the proof of their divinity. Admitted: 
 then, upon the fame principle, why may not 
 the harmony, which is plainly to be difcerned 
 in Baron Svvedenborg's memorable relations, 
 with thofe of the ancient prophets and apoQles, 
 be likevvife admitted as fatisfaclory proof and 
 evidence of their reality ? efpecially as you allow 
 the Baron to have been a man of acknowledged 
 piety, and unimpcached charadler ? 
 
 Suppofing a great number of travellers, whofe 
 veracity we had no juft reafon to fufpedl, fhould 
 in fucceihon arrive in this country, and each of 
 them alTure us, that fuch and fuch w^ere the 
 laws, cuftoms, and manners of a diftant nation 
 hitherto unknown ; if there were an evident 
 agreement in all their acc©unts, though related 
 at diiferent times, a reafonable man could not 
 refufe his alTent to their united affertions, how- 
 ever fingular or ftrange the cuftoms and man- 
 ners of that diftant nation might at firft fight 
 appear. And if, after an interval of feventeen 
 
 F hundred 
 
34 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 hundred years fince the other travellers had 
 arrived, another fliould come from the fame 
 country, and by authority of the reigning prince^ 
 bring the fame kind of teftimony as his prede- 
 ceflbrs had done before him ; together with an 
 explanation of thofe former accounts, which to 
 many were before unintelligible, but which tag 
 lad traveller, in confequence of his acquain- 
 tance and familiar intercourfe with the inhabi- 
 tants of that diftant nation for upwards of 
 twenty-fcven years, was enabled moft complete!/ 
 and fatisfa6lorily to do ; what man is there, 
 poffefTed of a found under ft anding, and ac- 
 quainted with the rules of evidence, that would 
 objedl to this traveller's teflimony, merely be- 
 caufe he had no fellow-travellers, as witneiTes, 
 to atteft the truth of his affertions ? Yet, 
 (excufe the liberty) you appear to me to be pre- 
 cifely in the fituation of fuch an objed:or. The 
 prophets and apoftlcs are the travellers fivik 
 mentioned ; the diftant country is the fpiritual 
 world ;* the laft traveller from that world is 
 Baron Swedenborg, who, by commiilion from 
 the Lord our Saviour, comes after a lapfe of 
 feventeen hundred years iince the time of the 
 
 apoflles, 
 
 * The fpiritual world is here compared to a dillant 
 country, not becauie it is fuch in reality, for it is clofe 
 to us ; but becaufe it is fo little known in the prefent day, 
 and generally fuppofed to be at a diltance. 
 
Signijied by the New JerufaUm. 35 
 
 apoftlcs, with a teftimony concerning that 
 Vv'orld, and it's inhabitants, fimilar to what they 
 had before given ; but in confequence of up- 
 wards of twenty-fevcn years' converfe with 
 angels and fpirits, enriched with additional il- 
 lufbrations, and ftill further difcoveries of the 
 fame. 
 
 If you refleQ ferioufly on the above, I hope 
 you will no longer have occafion to ** wonder 
 " at the ftrength of faith of Baron Swedcnborg's 
 *' followers," but rather, with us, lament the 
 iniidelity of the times, when fo many, w ho 
 profefs to believe the fcriptures, refufe their 
 aifent to the firft and fundamental principles 
 Gf the chriftian religion. 
 
 : Another proof of the divine million of Baron 
 Swedenborg arifes from the manifeft good ten- 
 dency of all his writings, in almoil every page 
 of which he inculcates the ntcti^ny of leading a 
 lifeof holinefs and virtue. The tv/o elTentials, 
 on which depends the whole of the law and the 
 prophets, viz. an acknowledgment of the unity 
 of God, and the lovin^y him above all ihinors, and 
 our neighbour as ourfelves, are in like manner 
 infilled upon by Baron Swedenborg as the fum 
 and fubftancc of all religion, and the only 
 
 F 2 means 
 
36 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 means whereby our future happinefs can be 
 fecured. Now as every man, as well as every 
 tree, is known by his fruits, it follows, that that 
 fyftem of dodlrines, which afcribes all glory and 
 honour to the Creator and Saviour of the world, 
 and which teaches love to him, and charity to 
 all mankind, muft proceed fronn God ; and con- 
 fequently, the meffage itfelf being proved divine, . 
 the bearer thereof mud be eftimated accor- 
 dingly. 
 
 * * * 
 
 I now proceed to obviate fome other objec- 
 tions you have ftated againil the teftimony of 
 Baron Swedenborg, and the want of miracles to 
 fupport his pretenfions : but as I obferve there 
 are many palTages in your Letters^ that require 
 redification, 1 Ihall be as brief as poffibie with 
 each. 
 
 Page 10, you fay, '* Do we not objedl to the 
 " divine miflion of Mahomet, that he worked 
 *^ no miracles ?'' Sir, if you have nothing more 
 to objecl againft the Mahometan religion 
 than this, it appears to me, a Turkifh ma- 
 gician might very eafily convert you into a good 
 MulTulman, by fhewing you a few of his in- 
 chantments. Do you really fuppofc, that no 
 miracle can pojjihly he wrought y except in favour 
 
 of 
 
Signified by the Neio Jerufalcm. gy 
 
 of the true religion f If you do, ( which indeed you 
 acknowledge in the fame page,) then your rea- 
 fon and judgnnent are no guard either againft 
 the miracles of magicians, or the lying wonders 
 of falfe Chrifts ; but you are liable to be« 
 come a prey to every delufign. A member of 
 the New Church, Sir, has other objections to 
 Mahometanifm, than that of the want of 
 miracles; and thofe objedtions are of an intel- 
 ledlual, rational kind, and not ariling from the 
 groflhefs of the bodily fenfes. But though the 
 religion of Mahomet is far inferior to that of 
 Jefus Chrifl, yet it was permitted by the Lord's 
 divine providence to be eftablifhed among the 
 eaftern nations, as being the only one they wxre 
 capable of embracing. And it is remarkable, 
 that they acknowledge one fupreme God, and 
 Jefus Chrift as his Son, whom they call the 
 wifeft of men, and the grand prophet, that came 
 into the w^orld in order to inftrudl mankind, 
 A conliderable part of the Mahometans allow 
 Jefus Chrifl to be greater than Mahomet : and, 
 if I am not miflaken, there is a particular fed: 
 among them, branded with the name of heretics, 
 who acknowledge him as the only God of 
 heaven and earth. 
 
 Again, 
 
38 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 Again, you obferve, p. 10, '^ In the Old 
 " Teftament we read of numbers of prophets 
 " from Mofes to Malachi, nioft of whom either 
 " worked what we ufually call miracles, or fore- 
 " told future events, which is exactly of the 
 "fame nature, being equally within the pro- 
 " vince of God alone.'* Here you virtually ac- 
 knowledge, that at \t2i?ifome of the prophets 
 neither worked miracles, nor foretold future 
 events. But in p. 11 you fay, that " to come 
 *' from God with a melTage to man, is a very 
 *' ferious and important thing, for which 710 man, 
 " however excellent , hath any right to exped: 
 *' that his own word only iliould be taken." 
 May it not then be hence fairly inferred, that, 
 to be coniiftent with yourfelf, you muft rejed: 
 the teftimony of all thofe prophets who gave no 
 fupernatural proofs of their divine miflion ? 
 Whether you really do reject their prophecies 
 on that account, or not, I cannot take upon 
 myfelf to declare ; but you have certainly given 
 the world juft reafon to fufpetft your belief in 
 the fcriptures, together with the whole fyftem 
 of the chriftian religion. 
 
 You further remark in p. 61, " This great 
 '' Being (God, of whofe efience you fay you 
 know nothing at all J " has at different times 
 
 " com- 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, gg 
 
 <' commiffioned various men, and efpecially Jefu3 
 '* Chrift, to communicate his will to mankind ; 
 *^ and he always fandioned their miffions by the 
 *' power of working miracles, or doing fuch 
 " things, as no man could have done, if God 
 ** had not been with him." Several of the pro- 
 phets, we have feen, made no appeal to the 
 ted of miracles; and as for the circumftancc of 
 fome of them foretelling future events, this 
 could carry no weight or authority with it, until 
 the accompliilimenc of their predidion. It is 
 plain, therefore, that fome prophets, at the 
 moment of their announcing themfelves to be 
 the melTengers of Jehovah, made no fuch mira- 
 culous difplay of fupernatural powers, as you 
 alfert to have been invariably the cafe ; and yet 
 the fame perfons were accepted as prophets by 
 the Jewifh nation, and are ftill accounted fuch 
 by chriftians. 
 
 In the preceding part of this letter it was 
 proved, that miracles may be, and have been 
 wrought by the power of the devil, or what 
 amounts to the fame thing, by magical inchant- 
 ments. Your aflertion, therefore, that the 
 performance of miracles is within the province 
 of God alone, falls to the ground, and cannot 
 
 be 
 
40 A Defence of the Neio Chiirck 
 
 4 
 
 be maintained, except in oppofition to the 
 fads already ftated. 
 
 You quote Deiit. xviii. to prove, that the 
 true prophets were to be diilinguifhed from the 
 pretended ones, by their foretelling things to 
 come. They \vej:e fo; and in verfe 22 of that 
 chapter it is faid, '^ When a prophet fpeaketh in 
 « the name of Jehovah, if the thing follow not^ 
 " nor come to pafs, that is the thing which Je- 
 " hovah hath not fpoken, but the prophet hath 
 " fpoken it prefumptuoufly; thou fhalt not be 
 " afraid of him." Now the prophet Jonah, by 
 command of Jehovah, ^ent through the ftreets 
 of Nineveh, and without any conditions pro^ 
 claimed it's overthrow within forty days. Yet 
 fuch an event did not come to j)afs s for God re- 
 pented of the evil th^t he had faid he would do 
 unto them, and he did it not ; at which clemency 
 of the Lord, Jonah his prophet was highly of- 
 fended. How you, who confine your ideas to 
 the 7nere letter of fcripture, reconcile thefe, and 
 many other palTages, in all appearance more 
 contradidory ftill, I know not. In my view, 
 they are reconcileable only by means of the 
 fpiritual fenfe, which is in every part of the 
 Word, the real exiftence of which you never- 
 thelefs deny. 
 
 Gom- 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufakvu 41 
 * * * 
 
 Complaining of the want of miracles in fup- 
 port of the dodrines of the New Church, you 
 make the following remark in p. 1 1. ** To fay, 
 " that though the former difpenfations of re- 
 " ligion required to be eflablifhed by miracles, 
 " this new one, the mofi: magnificent of them 
 *' all, and which is to continue for ever, requires 
 " none, is no better than faying, that though a 
 ** cottage may require to ft and upon a rock, a 
 •« palace, or a temple, like that of Solomon, 
 ** may be built upon the fand, or (land without 
 " any foundation at all.'* On this fubjed: I 
 reafon in quite a different manner from you, and 
 fay. As former difpenfations required the aid 
 and afliftance of miracles in order to induce 
 mankind to acknowledge them, this argues at 
 ieail, that they did not carry with them that 
 clear and rational evidence of their truth, which 
 was of itfelf fufficient to gain credit among men : 
 for wherever the truth of a thing cannot be 
 eftablifhed by any other means than by miracles, 
 it plainly implies, that it is involved in ob- 
 fcurity, doubt, and uncertainty. Such was the 
 cafe with all former difpenfations, which only 
 Jhadowed forth znd' reprefejited the laft and moft 
 magnificent of all, the New Jerufalem. This 
 laft and greateft of difpenfations requires no 
 
 G miracle. 
 
42 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 miracle, becaufe the truths it difplays are of 
 themfelves clear, rational, and fatisfadory. It 
 is too dignified to ftoop down to the earth for 
 any thing that refembles a miracle ; for by fo 
 doing, it's heaven-born glory would be tar- 
 nifhed, and a cloud would overfpread the fky, 
 fo as to interrupt the beams of celeflial light 
 proceeding from him who is the fun of right- 
 eoufnefs. ^ 
 
 He that requires a miracle to convince him 
 of truth. In preference to rational inveftigation, 
 afTifted by light from the holy Word, may be 
 compared to a man, who takes a tinder-box 
 out of his pocket, and in mid-day with flint 
 and fteel ftrikes a light, to enable him to fee 
 whether the fun is ihining or not. The flint 
 and fteel are his natural fcience ; the match with 
 brimfl:one at the end of it is felf-love and felf- 
 derived intelligence ; the tinder-box is the 
 natural mind, where all his fcientific know- 
 ledge is treafured up ; and his dark pocket is 
 himfelf. ti 
 
 In the darknefs of midnight a lighted torch, 
 vvhofe virtues are derived from the earth, may 
 be ufeful where there is no other luminous 
 body to emit light ; it may even reprejenty du- 
 ring 
 
Signified b;^ the New JtruJUem. 43 
 
 ring the darknefs of the night, the fun itfelf. 
 Yet when the moon arifcs, which is only ano- 
 ther, though more perfedt reprefentative of the 
 fun, the light of the torch is loft. But when 
 the fun itfelf is rifen, and fhines with the full 
 fplendor of day, both the torch and moon, 
 together with the ftars, are no more thought of, 
 their light being completely fwallowed up by 
 the fuperior brightnefs of the fun. Juft fo, 
 in the midnight of the church univerfal, tnira^ 
 clesy which do not go beyond the earthly or 
 fenfual principle, were granted to mankind, as 
 a torch to lighten their footdeps, in the abfencc 
 of heavenly truth. This was the time when the 
 Ifraelitifh and Jewifh nation were led out of 
 Egypt into the wildernefs. Soon after, the moon 
 arofe, and fomey?^r5, as a ftill further light to 
 their benighted pofterity. I allude to the time 
 when they were in polTeflion of the land of 
 Canaan, and were governed by judges, kings, 
 and prophets. Laft of all the Sun himfeif, the 
 true light that enlightens every man coming 
 into the world, rofe upon the face of the earth ; 
 but before he arrived at the meridian, a thick 
 cloud obfcured him from the fight, and foon 
 after he went down. This was the birth and 
 crucifixion of our blelTed Lord and S:xw\our Je/us 
 Chrift, by whpm the primitive chriAian church 
 
44 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 was founded, and preferved in it's purity until 
 the third century, when the dangerous errors of 
 Arius and his adherents began to prevail. But 
 now he comes a fecond time with all that fulnefs 
 of meridian fplendor, which is capable of dif- 
 perfing the thick clouds of darknefs from every 
 mind that is in love with truth^cr it's ownfake^ 
 and who is defirous of receiving illumination, 
 not from eanhly torches ^ hwifrom heavenly light. 
 
 Our Lord fays, *^ He that believeth on me, 
 *' the works that I do, fhall he do alfo, and 
 ^* greater works than thefe lliall he do, becaufe I 
 " go unto my Father," John xiv. 12. It may 
 be fuppofed, that the Lord here alluded to the 
 miracles which he would enable his difciples to 
 perform after his departure out of the world, 
 in order to give effeft to their miniflerial la- 
 bours. But as there can be no greater miracle, 
 literally fpeaking, than the raifing of ihe dead, 
 which the Lord himfelf more than once per- 
 formed ; it is plain, that the works here fpoken 
 of, as greater than miracleSy muft be of a fpiritual 
 kind ; in which cafe the above paifage will bear 
 the following interpretation. He that believeth 
 on the Lord, that is, in heart and life acknow- 
 legeth him as one with the Father, and the only 
 Gpd of heaven and earth, iliall, by virtue of his 
 
 continual 
 
Signtjied by the New Jervfalem. 45 
 
 continual ailifl:ance, not only remove from 
 himfelf, but alfo be the means of removing 
 from others, all thofe evils and falfes which in- 
 feft the human mind, and which to fubdue 
 requires more of a divine agency, than the per- 
 formance of any vifible miracle whatever. To 
 convert a iinner from the evil of his ways, and 
 inflead of the unclean delights of felf-love and 
 the love of the world, to infufe the pure and 
 chafte delights of heaven, fuch as the love of 
 the Lord, and neighbourly love, is certainly a 
 much greater work than healing the lame, the 
 blind, and the deaf, or even railing a thoufand 
 dead bodies. But as this miraculous work of 
 regeneration could not be effeded, unlefs the 
 Lord had glorified his Humanity, which is 
 meant by his going to the Father ; and as the 
 Holy Spirit was promifed to the church after 
 his glorification, by which is underftood the 
 more effeclual operation of Divinity when 
 united to Humanity, therefore the Lord fays of 
 the true believer, " Greater works than thefe 
 •* fhall he do, becaufe I go unto my lather,''' 
 
 I will jufl add here what a late ingenious 
 writer, a philojopherof thenorthy fays, in anfvver 
 to thofe who bring againfl Baron Swedenborg 
 fuch an objedtion as the following : " But he 
 
 ''did 
 
46 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 "did no miracles!" — "The miracle of all 
 miracles (fays he) is truth. That is the ef- 
 fence of them all. When God did miracles in 
 former ages, it was not to prove truth : for, one 
 and one is three, cannot be true by a thoufand 
 miracles; nor, one and one is two, lefs clear 
 without any. God, then, did miracles — only to 
 ftrike with awe the hard hearts of mortals, and 
 awake their attention. This was not neceffary in 
 an age of fcience and reafoning as now, when 
 God has prepared all for the full perception of 
 truth. From this obfervation you may fee, that 
 miracles are only for fools, for men ftill brutes, ftill 
 favage. For when all the miracles are palTed, 
 there ftill remains the fame great duty^-^to fee 
 and perceive the truth in your mind, without 
 which neither faith nor worfhip exift." 
 
 Upon the whole, then, we may fafely con- 
 clude, that the ufliering in and eftablijGiment of 
 a new difpenfation of divine truth, like that of 
 the New Jeruftlem, which requires not the aid 
 of miracles or other extraneous evidence to fup- 
 port it, but depends folely on it's own intrinfic 
 merit for recommendation, from it's manifeft: 
 conformity to the true fenfe of holy fcripture, 
 and the principles of found reafon, is an unr 
 
 deniable 
 
Signified by the New Jeru/alem. 47 
 
 deniable proof of it's fuperiority over every 
 other fyflem of religion in the known world. 
 
 In page 11 you hint, that Baron Swedenborg's 
 comniunications with the fpirirual world were 
 no more than the eifedt of a warm imagination ; 
 and feem to infmuate, that " his intcrcourfe with 
 " God and the invifible world was by night. 
 In this cafe (you fay) fuch a perfon /eetjjg aft 
 ajjgel m a dream, is nothing more than his 
 dreaming he Jaw an angel/' Now had you care- 
 fully examined Baron Swedenborg's writings, 
 you would have found, that his intercourfe with 
 the fpiritual world was when he was Iroad awake, 
 and not during his fleep, which was like that of 
 other men. In this particular, therefore, you 
 have not done him juftice. But if, as you fay, 
 a per [on' s fee i?ig an angel in a dream, is nothing 
 more than his dreaming hejazv an angel, what do 
 you make of the dreams of the prophets ? In 
 what light do you coniider thofe parts of the 
 fcripture, where it is faid, that the angel of the 
 Lord appeared to men in dreams, and foretold 
 future events in dreams F When the angel of the 
 Lord appeared to Jofeph in a dream, and 
 warned him againfl: Herod, Matt. ii. 12, 13, 
 was this nothing more than dreaming he Jaw an 
 angelf And when it is faid, Jehovah himfclf 
 
 I appeared 
 
48 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 appeared to Solomon in a dream hy nighty i Kings 
 iii. 5, does this imply nothing more, than that 
 Solomon dreamed he Jaw Jehovah f Witticifms 
 may do very well in fome cafes 5 but I hope 
 you do not mean to apply them to fubjecfls of a 
 divine nature. I cannot help thinking, how- 
 ever, but many, on reading this part of your 
 Letters y will be ready to conclude in their own 
 minds, that you dilbelieve and even defpifc the 
 prophetical dreams, which are recorded in the 
 
 fcriptures. 
 
 ♦ * * • 
 
 You well obferve, p. 12, that Swedenborg 
 was aware of the objedlion which you and others 
 might make to his teftimony, namely, that he 
 wrought no miracles in confirmation of it. But 
 I am rather furprized, that you treat his anfwer 
 fo lightly, particularly that part where he fays, 
 that miracles carry compulfion with them, 
 and take away a man's free-will in fpiritual 
 matters. " The fame objedlion (you fay) might 
 " have been made to the miracles of Mofes and 
 " of Chrift. It is the nature of all evidence to 
 " compel the alTent. For no man can refufe 
 •* his alTent to what appears to him to be fuf- 
 " ficient evidence. Whatever be the cafe of 
 •' the will with refpedl to motives, the judg-- 
 " went is univerfally allowed to be necejfarily 
 
Sigyiijied by the Nero Jerufalem, 49 
 
 ** determined by the force of arguments." If it 
 is the nature of all evidence to compel the 
 allent, why did not the evidence, which our 
 Lord gave to the Jews, concerning himfelf, 
 compel them to aiTent to his being the Son of 
 God, and the true MelTiah ? Nay, why are 
 you not compelled, by the miracles which Jefus 
 performed, to believe him to be one with the 
 Father, that is, very God ^ And why do you 
 not find yourfelf compelled to afTent to the 
 dodrines of the New Jerufalcm, by the rational 
 and fcriptural evidence which Baron Sweden- 
 borg has given? Sir, herein lies the excellence 
 of rational evidence, that it never compels the 
 human mind ; but as it is itfelf free, fo it cannot 
 impart any thing contrary to liberty. It mufi: 
 be in a (late of freedom that it gains admiflion 
 to the underftanding; and it will never make 
 that man a flave, who has opened his houfe for 
 it's reception- On the contrary, miracles, if 
 they do not find men flaves, will foon make 
 them fuch. 
 
 To fay, that *' no man can refufe his afTent 
 " to what appears to him to be fufficient cvi- 
 " dence,'* is quite befide the quellion, and a 
 mere play of words. You think there is a 
 power in arguments capable of necejjarily deter^ 
 
 H mining 
 
50 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 mining the judgment y independent of the will ; 
 but herein you only difcover what little atten- . 
 tion you -mult have paid to the human mind, 
 and how imperfedl your knowledge is of the 
 fecret workings of man's heart. The Lord fays, 
 ** If any man will do his zvill, he fhall know of . 
 *' the do^rine, whether it be of God," John vii. , 
 17. That is, if any man's will is inclined to good, 
 then his underjlanding is fit for the reception of 
 fpiritual truth, and not before. Without this 
 previous requifite, all the arguments in the world 
 will have no weight with fome minds. This is a 
 truth fo univcrfally admitted, that it is even 
 become a proverb to fay, " There are none {& 
 ^< bli7td as them that will not fee.'' Alfo, " What 
 *' a man iirfl wijhes or wills to be true, he can 
 " foon make himjelf believe true.'* On this very 
 principle it is, that the civil laws of every 
 country will allow no man to be a competent 
 judge in any cafe, wherein he himfelf is in- 
 terefled by pajfion or affection ; it being one of 
 the firft didates of wifdom, founded on the 
 uniform experience of ages, that the will of 
 liian is capable of exercifing fuch a malignant 
 influence over the judgment or underjlanding^ as 
 even to deprive it of the faculty of perceiving 
 and acknowledging genuine truth. 
 
 But 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, c i 
 
 But fomething further feems to be implied in 
 your afTertion, that ** the judgment is neccffarily 
 '"^ determined by the force of arguments ;'* 
 namely, that all who have read your Letters, or 
 other writings, are convinced of their truth, 
 and confequently agree with you at lead in 
 judgment ; for- 1 dare fay you think you have 
 ufed weighty and powerful arguments to fup- 
 port your various hypothefcs. Bur in this 
 matter I believe you are much miftaken ; and 
 fo {hall I be too, if your Letters convince a 
 Jingle member of the New Church, either that 
 Jefus Chrift is not the fupreme God, or that 
 Baron Swedenborg was not infpired by him, 
 
 * * * 
 
 After quoting fome excellent and highly ra- 
 tional remarks of the Baron on the fubjedl of 
 miracles, in \\hich he particularly fliews th^ 
 reafon why they were wrought previous to the 
 Lord's coming into the world, and are not now, 
 viz. becaufe men were then mere natural men, 
 incapable of feeing the fpintual or internal 
 things of the church, whereas now they have a 
 capacity of difccrning them ; you objedt as 
 follows : *' That any change was made in the 
 " nature of men at the hrll coming of Chrift, 
 *' or that any further chanpe has been made in 
 <* man fince w hat you call his fecond comhig, is 
 
 H 2 " an 
 
52 A Defence of ike New Church, 
 
 "an arbitrary fuppofition of Mr. Swedenborg's, 
 " for which he produces no evidence whatever.'' 
 In anfwer to this I fliall obferve, that when 
 any change takes place in fo large a community 
 of men as that of the chriftian world in general, 
 it is not eafily to be difcovered from any par- 
 iicular a5ls of particular individuals, or par- 
 ticular focieties ; but may be feen by a compre- 
 hcniive mind, that is capable of collecling into 
 one view the apparently detached operations of a 
 thoufand contemporary and fucceflive focieties. 
 This is the way to judge of that fpiritual light 
 and liberty, which has lately made it's appear- 
 ance in the world. The i)Yecife vioment when it 
 began, may be as difficult to determine, as it 
 would be for you to point out xh^firfi day in 
 which Frenchmen began to think of civil 
 liberty. That fome change or other has adually 
 taken place among the nations of Europe, with 
 refpecl to what are called the natural rights of 
 many you yourfelf are one of the firft to publifh. 
 This you can fee and acknowledge, becaufe it 
 is made manifeft to the outward Jenjes. But being 
 unwilling to elevate your mind above the fphere 
 of external objedls, you do not perceive, that 
 there is an equal degree of fpiritual liberty, 
 operating within that which is natural, and 
 <iven producing it as it's offspring ; which latter,, 
 
 however,- 
 
Signified, by the Nexo Jervfalcm, 53 
 
 however, too often degenerates into licentiouf- 
 nefs ; and then, fo far from deferving the 
 name of liberty, it breaks the bonds of fociety, 
 and while it pretends to fuppoi t the facred rights 
 of man, adlually tramples them under it's pro- 
 fane foot. 
 
 The great change that took place at the time 
 of the Lord's fird coming, confifted not fo much 
 in the adoption of any new external forms of 
 worfhip, as in a new capacity men received for 
 underftanding the interior things of heaven and 
 the church. Every thing before was typical or 
 reprefentative : but Vv hen he came, of whom all 
 the fcriptures teftify, and to whom they all 
 referred, then the w hole cloud of fliadow^s and 
 reprefentations that veiled the light of the fun, 
 difappeared, and the minds of men received new- 
 illumination ; as it is written, " The people that 
 " walked in darknefs, have fcen a great light ; 
 ** they that dwell in the land of the fliadow of 
 ** death, upon them hath the light Ihincd," 
 Ifaiah ix. 2. 
 
 A limilar change has taken place in the minds 
 of men fmcc the year 1757, the period when 
 (according to Baron Swedenborg) fpiritual 
 liberty was rellored by the accomplifliment of 
 
 the 
 
54 -^ Defence of the Nexo Clmrch, 
 
 the lafl judgment in the fpiritual world. And 
 it may even be it^in in the evident decline of 
 ecclefiaftical power, particularly in Roman 
 Catholic countries. It may be feen in the ge- 
 neral fpirit of free inquiry that begins to pervade 
 the world ; in the expulfion of Jefuits from dif- 
 ferent kingdoms; in the comparatively timid 
 and cautious proceedings of the inquifition, in 
 thofe countries where it is not yet abolifhed ; in 
 the fuppreffion of monafteries ; in the pope's 
 filent and humble reiignation of thofe more 
 than regal powers, which his predecefTors had 
 ufurped and impioufly exercifed over kings and 
 princes ; in the benevolent exertions of the 
 friends of humanity for the abolition of flavery ; 
 in the new and fuccefsful inftitutions for the 
 gradual inftrudion and reformation of the poor; 
 in the improved regulations of prifons, and 
 numerous other inflances of national police; 
 in the humane focieties formed for the recovery 
 of perfons apparently dead ; and, laftly, it may 
 be feen plainly and decidedly in the adlual 
 commencement of the New Church, called the 
 New Jerufalem, whofe members require no 
 miracles to convince them of truth, being in 
 polTefTion of what is a thoufand times more 
 excellent and fatisfaclory, namely, the true in- 
 cerpretation of the fcriptures, fupportcd by clear 
 
 and 
 
Signified by the Nezo jernijakni, r r 
 
 and rational evidence. A community of this 
 kind, rifing up in the prefenc day, and fpread- 
 ing itfelf over the face of the whole earth, is 
 the niofl undeniable proof of Baron Sweden- 
 borg's aflertions concerning the new light and 
 liberty that has rifen on mankind ; for being a 
 matter of fad:, it bears down, by it's own 
 weight, ten thoufand arguments of oppolition. 
 
 * * * 
 Speaking further of miracles, you fay, p. 14, 
 " If other methods fail to produce a general 
 " convi6tion of the truth of your doctrine, 
 *• which you fay is to fill the whole earth, 
 ** recourfe mufl: be had to the old, but effec- 
 ** tual method of miracles after all ; and fhould 
 ** each of your temples be filled with the glory 
 ** of the Lord at the time of their confecration, 
 " as was the tabernacle and temple of Solomon, 
 " you would, I dare fay, exult not a little. As 
 '* a limilar glory inverted our Saviour at his 
 " transfiguration, all the three great difpenfa- 
 " tions of religion, you might then fay, were 
 " diflinguifhed by a limilar divine atteftation." 
 We do not fay, that our dodlrine is to fill the 
 whole earth, fo as to become the profelTed re- 
 ligion of all nations, to the exclufion of ever/ 
 other; for we confider the real vifible church 
 of Chrift to be like the heart and lungs to the 
 
 Grand 
 
q6 a Defence of the New Church, 
 
 Grand Man of the world, the church univerfal 
 being viewed by the Lord as One Man, or 
 rather as One JVornan, Apoc. xxi. 2. It is not 
 in any wife necefTary, that the heart and lungs 
 ihould adlually or literally fill the whole body ; 
 it is fufficient if life is conveyed from them to 
 every part of it. So likewife in refped to the 
 New Church ; there is no neceflity for it's 
 literally filling the whole earth, while life is 
 communicated therefrom, like blood from the 
 heart, to every nation and people of the world. 
 But of this kind of reafoning I know you will 
 require a miracle to be convinced, for I per- 
 ceive nothing elfe will go down. As it is not, 
 however, in my power to fatisfy you in this par- 
 ticular, I mull beg your indulgence while I 
 deliver the fentiments of the New Church in 
 her own language, even though the half of my 
 remarks fhould be thrown away upon you. 
 
 Should pur temples be filled with the glory of 
 the Lord, like the tabernacle and temple of 
 Solomon, we fhould, you think, exult not a 
 little, and confider it as a divine atteflation of 
 the truth of our religion. Sir, our temples are 
 filled zviih the glory of the Lord; for as at his 
 transfiguration before Peter, James, and John, 
 •* bis face did fhine as the fun, and his raiment was 
 
 " white 
 
Signified by the New Jerujalem, 57 
 
 *' iiohite as the lights* Matt. xvii. 2, fo in his 
 New Church he is worfhipped and adored, in 
 his Divine (transfigured) Humanity, as the 
 glorious fun of righteoufnefs, the fource and 
 fountain of life and light, and the one only and 
 fupreme God of heaven and earth. When ^ve 
 hear his holy Word read, we hear himfelf fpeak 
 in his own divine language ; and when, *^ begin- 
 " ning at Mofes and all the prophets, he ex- 
 " pounds (by his miniflers) in all the Jcripturea 
 ** the things concerning himfelf ^^ we fall down iri 
 filent adoration at his feet, and having our 
 *' underllanding opened to underfiand the fcrip- 
 " turcs," we perceive, by the glory that vifibly 
 furrounds him, that in his glorified perfon ** all 
 *' things are fulfilled which were written in the 
 *' law of Mofes, and in the prophets, and in 
 " the pfalms concerning him," Luke xxiv. 27, 
 44, 45 . Thus all former difpenfations of divine 
 truth have their central point and full accom- 
 plifhmcnt in this laft and moft magnificent of 
 all ; their glory and honour is brought into the 
 holy city. New Jerufalem ; and the Lord God 
 almighty, even the Lamb, Jefus Chrift, is him- 
 felf both the fight and the temple of it. Apoc. 
 
 \Y.'\, 21, 22. 
 
 Your 
 
58 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 Your next obfervation, p. 15, is concerning 
 Swedenborg's alTertion, that in the center of 
 Africa a revelation, fimilar to the dodlrines of 
 the New Jerufalem, is begun among the in- 
 habitants of that country; and you feem ta 
 think, that we coniider this circumftance " as 
 ^ a proof that he was really infpired.** But in 
 this point you are again miftaken ; for we can- 
 not confider any thing as a proofy before the 
 truth of it be fully afcertained. Neither does 
 Baron Swedenborg himfelf relate the narrative 
 with any view to eftablifh his divine commiflion 
 by fuch a kind of evidence. He limply declares 
 the fadl to be fo, and leaves thofe who chufe to 
 make inquiry into the truth of it. We embrace 
 the dodlrines he has publiflied upon quite another 
 groundy namely, becaufe vjefee with our own eyes 
 or underfiaiidingSy that they are the dodlrines of 
 eternal truth, founded on the Word of God^ 
 and demonft rated by the acknowledged prin- 
 ciples of right reafon. We alfo, in cafes where 
 we have no other means of judging for our- 
 feives, and in points that are not eflential ta 
 falvation, receive his teftimony on the credit 
 of his own word ; becaufe v^e believe, both from 
 his writings and his perfonal good charadler, 
 that he was incapable of any fraud or decep- 
 tion. And in thus giving credit to Baron Swe- 
 denborg 
 
Signified by the New Jcriifalem, ^g 
 
 denborg for what he folemnly declares he was 
 an eye and ear witnefs of, we conceive we do 
 no more than you yourfelf do, and every other 
 perfon who admits the truth of hijlGrical fa^s 
 upon the linglc evidence of one writer or tra- 
 veller. 
 
 But in p. 1 6 you obfcrve, ** that neither Mr. 
 ^* Bruce*s late travels into Abyflinia, nor the 
 ** proceedings of the aflbciation for promoting 
 '^ the difcovery of the interior parts of Africa, 
 '* give us as yet any reafon to think, that what 
 " Mr. Swedenborg defcribes as exifting in his 
 *^ time, is to be found at prefent. But we ex- 
 " pecfl foon to have further accounts from that 
 ** hitherto unexplored part of the world ; and if 
 *' it ihould appear, which I ftrongly fufpecl, 
 *' that there neither is, nor ever was any thing 
 ^' like a New Jerufaiem Church in the center of 
 " Africa, your faith in Mr. Swedenborg's in- 
 " fpiration muft be very flrong indeed, if it be 
 " not well fhaken." 
 
 AbyiTmia, you will be pleafed to obferve, is 
 not the country in which Swedenborg alTerts 
 that the new revelation has commenced. It 
 ought not therefore to be expected, that Mr. 
 Bruce, who penetrated no farther than Abyf- 
 
 1 2 ^ii'^i^i 
 
6p A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 finia, fliould give the requifite information, 
 Yet even the travels of that gentleman fur^ 
 nifh us with ftrong prefumptive evidence, that 
 the inhabitants of Africa have a much better 
 knowledge of the exigence of the fpi ritual 
 world, and a life after death, than many of 
 thofe who fancy themfelves to be in the full en- 
 joyment of the light of chriftianicy. But as 
 neither the travels of Mr. Bruce, nor the pro- 
 ceedings of the African alTociation, give the 
 leaft proof of there being no Juch a people in the 
 interior parts of Africa, as Baron Swedenborg 
 defcribes, it is certainly too foon to conclude 
 about the fadt. From a -negative^ to infer a 
 pofitivey is no lign of wifdom ; it is beginning at 
 the Avrong end^ and out of nothing attempting 
 to produce fomeihing. 
 
 As to the particular name of Nezv Churcby or 
 Nezv Jtrujalem, I do not know that we are to 
 exped ever to find a fet of people exprefsly fo 
 called m the center of Africa ; but if it fhould 
 at any timiC hereafter appear, that there is ac- 
 tually a race of men in the part alluded to by 
 Baron Swedenborg, who worfliip one God in a 
 Human Form, and who have any knowledge 
 of his having been born a Man on this earth, 
 and at the fame time live in mutual love and 
 
 peace. 
 
Signijied by the New Jeriifakm. Si 
 
 ■peace, we may then fafely conclude, that they 
 are the people among- whom the revelation has 
 taken place, whether they be diftinguilhed as 
 the Nezv Jernjalemy or by any other name. But 
 until this matter is fully afcertained, it will 
 not admit of an argument on either fide i though 
 even when fully eitablilhcd, I would not by any 
 means wilh the Baron's afTertions to be confidered 
 of a miraculous nature, but fimply as evidences 
 that he had converfe vvith angels and fpirits. 
 It is jult in this point of view that he himfelf 
 delired his friends to regard the many ex^ 
 traordinary particulars that tranfpired during 
 his life-time, and which proved him to be pof- 
 fefTed of fupernatural knowledge. Some of 
 thefe are already related in his theological 
 works; but there are otiiers, the truth of which 
 has been attefted by perfons of undoubted 
 charadler. 1 lliall take the liberty of men- 
 tioning a few of thtm in this place. 
 
 I. Count Hopken, a Swedifli nobleman, has' 
 confirmed the truth of the two following tranf- 
 actions. After the deceafe of the Count De 
 Marteville, certain perfons came to demand a 
 debt of his widow, of a confiderable fum of 
 money, that they laid was due to them by her 
 deceafed hulband. This Ihe knew was not a 
 
62 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 juft one, bccaufe h had been paid during his 
 life-time ; yet could not tell where the acquit- 
 tance or receipt v/as put. In her trouble ilie 
 applied to Mr. Swedenborg ; and underftanding 
 that he had the privilege of converfing with the 
 deceafed, requefted that (if poffible) he would 
 afk her late hulband Where the acquittance was. 
 On the next day Mr. Swedenborg informed 
 her, that he had feen and fpokcn to her deceafed 
 bulband, who told him where he had put the 
 acquittance, and that The would find it in the 
 particular place he defcribed. It was accor- 
 dingly found in the fame place; and this ac- 
 count was univerfaily known to be true both at 
 Court, and 'in Stock-holm. The queen of 
 Sweden herfelf, being afterwards on a vifir at 
 Berlin, confirmed the truth of this relation to 
 feveral Academicians, whom fhe had invited to 
 her table. 
 
 2. The fecond remarkable tranfadlion is the 
 following. The queen dowager of Adolphus 
 Frederick, and lifter to the late king of Pruflia, 
 foon after having heard of the foregoing 
 account, and feveral others concerning Mr. 
 Swedenborg, told the Senator Count Hopken, 
 that fhe wifhed to fpeak to him. The Count, 
 in going to carry the queen's orders, met 
 
 Mr. 
 
Signijied by the New Jerufalem^ 63 
 
 Mr. Swedenborg, who was on his way to the 
 palace, v/ith a dt^ign to fpeak to that prin- 
 cefs. After having converfed on various Tub- 
 jeCts, the queen informed him, that fhe had 
 lately written a letter to her brother, a prince of 
 Pruflia, who had fince died. The contents of 
 her letter, fhe obferved, were of fo fecrer a 
 nature, that no perfon in the world had any 
 knowledge of them, but that brother ; and fhe 
 wiflied Mr. Swedenborg to afk him, whether 
 he had received her letter before his death ; to 
 which he replied, that he would give her an 
 anfwer in a. few days. At the time appointed 
 Mr. Swedenborg waited on the queen, and 
 related to her the whole contents of the faid 
 letter, word for w ord, at which ihe was flruck 
 with the greateft aftonifnment. He further in- 
 formed her majefty, that her brother had re- 
 ceived her letter, and begun an anfwer to it, 
 and that in the efcrutoire of the prince, was an 
 unfmifhed letter, which he intended to have 
 fent her before his deceafe. On this Ihe fent 
 to the king of Prulua, and the letter was found 
 as Mr. Swedenborg had direded, which the 
 king fent to her. This circumflance was aifa 
 publicly known at Stockholm, and much talked 
 of out of the kiiigdom. The Baron, in a letter 
 to the Landgrave of Heife Damftadt, dated 
 
 July 
 
64 ^ Defence of the New Church, , 
 
 July 13, 1771, confirms the truth of this re- 
 lation, yet fays, " It is not ro be accounted as 
 " any kind of miracle, but only as a memorable 
 " tranfadion, like thofe found in the -w ork en- 
 " titled. True Chrifiian Religion^ concerning Lu- 
 " ther, Melandhon, Calvin, and others; which 
 '^ are only to be confidered as evidences, that as 
 *' to the fpirit I have been introduced by the 
 " Lord into the fpiritual world, and that I 
 " converfe both with angels and fpirits.'' 
 
 3. A third memorable occurrence. On ar- 
 riving at Gottenburg from London, Sweden- 
 borg was told that his houfe had been deftroyed 
 by the flames, in the great fire that burnt 
 almoft all the fouth fuburb of Stockholm, in 
 1759. *' No," anfwered Mr. Swedenborg, 
 " my houfe is not burnt, the fire only reached 
 " to fuch and fuch a part.'* What he faid was 
 true; and the thing was then of fo recent a nature, 
 that he could have had no particular account 
 of it, either by letter or any perfon ; for it was 
 about three days before the arrival of the port. 
 
 4. Mr. Springer, a Swedifli gentleman, whofe 
 refidence for many years was in London, in a 
 letter to the Abbe Fernetty, librarian to the 
 late king of Pruflia, dated Jan. 18, 1782, 
 
 I relates 
 
Signijied by the New Jerufalem. 6^ 
 
 relates the following particulars. " Fifteen 
 years ago, Mr. Swedenborg was about to deoart 
 for Sweden, and deiired me to procure him a 
 good captain, which I did. I made the agree- 
 ment w ith a perfon named Dixon ; and Mr. 
 Swedenborg's eifeclis were carried on board the 
 vefiel. When the captain came for Mr. Swe- 
 denborg, I took my leave of him, and wilhed 
 him a happy voyage. Having then afked the 
 captain, if he was provided with good and 
 necefTary provilions, he anfv/ered me, that he 
 had as much as was needful for the voyage. 
 On this Mr, Swedenborg faid, " My friend, we 
 have not need of a great quantity ; for this day 
 week we Ihall, by the aid of God, enter into 
 the port of Stockholm, at two o'clock." On 
 captain Dixon's return, he related to me, that 
 this happened exadlly as Mr. Sw edenborg had 
 foretold." 
 
 Mr. Springer continues his letter in thefe 
 w ords : " The whole of what he ha§ related to 
 me, concerning my deceafed friends and ene- 
 mies, and of the fecrets which exifled only 
 between them and me, is almoft paft belief. He 
 even explained to me in what manner the 
 peace was concluded between Sweden and the 
 king of Pruilia, and praifed my conduct on that 
 
 K occalion. 
 
C( 
 
 cc 
 
 66 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 occafion. He pointed out to me the three 
 great perfonages, whofe fervices I made ufe of 
 in that circumftance, which was neverthelefs a 
 great fecret betwixt us. I alked him how he 
 could be inftruded of thefe particulars, and who 
 had difcovered them to him ? To which he 
 replied, " Who informed me of your affair 
 
 " with Count de C E- d ? You cannot 
 
 deny the truth of what I have juft related to 
 you. Continue," added he, " to merit his re- 
 proaches ; depart not from the good way, 
 *^ either for honours or money ; but contrari- 
 ** wife, continue as conftant therein, as you 
 •* have been hitherto, and you will profper.'* 
 
 5. By the affidavit of Richard and Elizabeth 
 Shearfmith, at whofe houfe Baron Swedenborg 
 lived and died, it appears, that a month before 
 his death he predidled the very day on which he 
 lliould depart this life, which happened accor- 
 dingly. See a copy of the affidavit in the 
 Magazine of Knowledge^ &c. vol. ii. p. 300. 
 
 Befides the above extraordinary eircum- 
 flances, which I have related only for the fake 
 of thofe who will believe nothing without fuch 
 kind of evidence, there are many others oi a 
 fimilar nature, the truth of which has been fo 
 
 full/ 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalevi. 67 
 
 fully attefled, that none but an infidel can con- 
 trovert thenn. Thefe things, however, arc not 
 regarded by the members of the New Church, 
 who look for and aifhially fee better and flronger 
 evidence of truth, than any miracle can afford. 
 But as you. Sir, have called out for fupernatural 
 evidences, fuch as miracles, and the predidion 
 of future events, here they are ; make what ufe 
 you can of them. We fhall fee whether they 
 produce that convidion in your mind, which 
 you fay miracles unavoidably produce. If they 
 do not, you will then be left without excufc. 
 Without wifhing to be confidered as a prophet, 
 I will neverthelefs venture to prophefy, in the 
 words of the evangelift, of all thofe who require 
 ligns and miracles, ** If they hear not Mofes 
 ** and the prophets, neither will they be 
 ** perfuaded, though one rofe from the dead," 
 Luke xvi. 31, 
 
 Thus have I gone through all the objedlions 
 you have urged againfl Baron Swedenborg, on 
 the fcore of his not working miracles as a proof 
 of his divine miflion. You have feen, and are 
 bound to acknowledge, that neither figns, nor 
 wonders, nor miracles^ avail any thing towards 
 producing a rational convi8ion of truth in the 
 underftanding ; confequently that fuch things 
 
 K 2 are 
 
68 A Defence of the New Oiurch, 
 
 are not the proper evidences of a man's infpi- 
 ration. You may alio be well fatisfied, if you 
 will only be at the pains of examining, that the 
 defcriptions which the Baron gives of the fpiri- 
 tual world, exadliy refcmble thofe given by the 
 prophets and apofties in the Old and New 
 Teftament ,- which, if the one be true, is a 
 llrong prefump'tive proof that the other is a!fo. 
 This evidence, however, is only external ; yet 
 it is of great weight ^o far as it goes. But v/e 
 have better ftill, and that is of an internal 
 nature ; being an evidence that arifes from the 
 fpiritual fenfe of the holy Word, by virtue of 
 which we are enabled to fee what was never 
 feen before, viz. that there is not only no real 
 contradlclion in that volume of infpiration, but 
 that enjery part, even the rood minute, and ap- 
 parently trivial and ludicrous circumftance 
 therein recorded, is divine and zvorthy of God., 
 containing within it's bofom fuch treafures of 
 divine wifdom as cannot be exhauftcd to eter- 
 nity. It is the evidence arinng from this 
 internal fcnie of the fcripture, proved and con- 
 firmed by it's literal fenfe, that principally 
 authorizes us to acknowledge Baron Sv>eden- 
 borg not only as a divinely-GommiiTioned mef- 
 fengcr from the Lord, but as the grealeft and 
 mofl-tnlighlened of any that has hitherto ap- 
 peared 
 
Signified by the New Jenifalevi, 6g 
 
 peared in the world. For as John the Baptifl 
 was declared to be greater than any that had 
 preceded him, on account of his being the im- 
 mediate fore-runner of the Lord at his firji 
 advent ; fo we conlidcr Baron Swedenborg to 
 be fuperior to John, or any other prophet or 
 apodlc, and that bccaufe he is the mefTenger 
 appointed to announce the Lord's fecond and 
 moji glcrlous advent, 
 
 I know you will fay, as you have already 
 faid, p. 17, that the " fpiritual fenfe of the 
 " fcriptures cannot be attended to, till there be 
 ** fome evidence of the reality of fuch a fenfe." 
 And, *' If you fay that I am incapable of per- 
 ** ceiving this fenfe of the fcriptures, you muft 
 " allow that you have no means of convincing 
 ** me, or any others who are in the fame iitua- 
 ** tion with me, how well foever you, w^ho have 
 *' the illumination that I want, may be fatisfied 
 " with refpe6l to all your do8rines." Were a 
 blind man obftinately to deny the exiftence of 
 the fun's light, until he had fome evidence of it's 
 reality, would you not pity him, and with a 
 fmile fay, * Why what evidence of the light can 
 • you have, while you are totally immerfed in 
 ^ darknejsf Go to the oculift, let him cure you 
 *of your blindnefs, and then you will have fuf- 
 
 * hcient 
 
70 A Defence of the New Church, ■ 
 
 * ficient evidence of the reality of light.' It is in 
 this way I would (without meaning any offence) 
 addrefs myfelf to you. Sir, and to all others 
 who are in a (imilar lituation. Get the eyes of 
 your fpirit or underftanding opened, and then 
 you will have ocular demonftration of the acftual 
 cxiftence of fpiritual light ; this being at obvious 
 to the fight of a fpiritual or intelledual eye, as 
 natural light is to a bodily eye. It is true, the 
 membcis of the New Church have no pow er to 
 communicate to you a perception of the internal 
 fenfe of the Word; but for ourfelves, we as 
 certainly know the reality of it, as you do the 
 exigence of the fun's natural light. We alfo 
 know how you may obtain fuch a perception, 
 if you are fo difpofed ; and that is folely by 
 applying in fincerity of heart to the one only 
 true God Jefus Chrifb, and by keeping his 
 commandments. It is he alone that can open 
 the eyes of the blind, and communicate that 
 light which we all ftand in need of for our 
 diredtion to heaven. He giveth liberally to them 
 that aj^ him, and upbraideth none. And " if 
 ** any man will do his will, he Ihall know of the 
 ** dodrine, whether it be of God,'- John vii. 17. 
 
 I cannot conclude this fubjed better than by 
 referring you to a memorable paflage in Earon 
 
 Swedenborg's 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalerii. 7 1 
 
 Swedenborg's Arcana Coslejlia^ n. 7290, where 
 he treats of the nature of miracles. But as the 
 original of that aftonifliing work is in few hands, 
 being fo fcarce as not to be eafily procured, 
 and the part alluded to not yet publifhcd in 
 Englifh, I fhall therefore take the liberty of 
 tranflating and inferting it in this place, 
 ** With refped to prodigies and figns, it is to 
 be obfervcd, that they were performed amongft 
 fuch perfons as were in external worihip, and 
 were not defirous of knowing any thing about 
 internal worfhip ; for they, who were in fuch 
 worfhip, were to be compelled by external 
 means : hence it was, that miracles were per- 
 formed amongft the IfraclitiHi and Jewilh peo- 
 ple, who were merely in external worihip, and 
 in none that was internal. It was alfo necclTary 
 for them to be in external worihip, when they 
 would not be in that which is internal, in order 
 that they might reprefent holy things in ex- 
 ternals, and thus that communication might be 
 given with heaven, as by fomething of a 
 church ; for correfpondences, reprefentatives, 
 and fignificatives, conjoin the natural world to 
 the fpiritual. Hence now it was, that fo many 
 miracles were performed among that nation. 
 But with thofe who are in internal worfhip, that is, 
 in charity and faith, miracles are not performed, 
 
 being 
 
72 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 being to fuch perfons hurtful; for miracles 
 force or compel to believe, and whatfoever is of 
 compulfion doth not remain, but is diflipated. 
 The internal things of worfhip, which are faith 
 * and charity, ought to be implanted in freedom, 
 for then they are appropriated ; ajid the things 
 which are appropriated, remain: but the things 
 which are implanted by compulfion, abide with- 
 out the internal man in the external; for nothing 
 enters into the internal man, except by intel- 
 lectual ideas, which are reafons, the ground 
 which receives them there being the rational 
 principle enlightened: hence it is, that no 
 miracles are performed at this day. That they 
 are alfo of a hurtful nature, may appear from 
 the following confideration ; they compel to 
 believe, and fix in the external man an idea that 
 a thing is fo or fo ; if the internal man after- 
 wards denies what the miracles have confirmed, 
 then there commences an oppofition and col- 
 lifion between the internal and external man, 
 and at length, when the ideas produced from 
 miracles are diflipated, the conjundion of 
 falfhood and truth takes place, which is pro- 
 phanation. Hence it is evident, how dangerous 
 and hurtful miracles would be at this day in 
 the church wherein the internals of worfliip are 
 difclofed. Thefc things are alfo fignified by 
 I the 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 73 
 
 the Lord's words to Thomas, '' Becaufe thou 
 •* haft ^t^n me, Thomas, thou haft believed ; 
 " blefled arc they wh© fee not, and believe,** 
 John XX. 29 ; confequently they alfo are blef- 
 fed, who believe, not by mnacles. But mi- 
 racles are not hurtful to thofe, who are in 
 external worfliip without internal, for with 
 fuch there cannot be any oppofition between 
 the internal and external man, thus no col- 
 lifion, and confequently no prophanation. 
 
 ** That miracles do not contribute any thing 
 towards faith, may appear fufficiently plain 
 from the miracles performed with the Ifraehtifh 
 people in Egypt, and in the defert, in that 
 they were utterly inefficacious of any fuch thing 
 as faith amongft them : that people, although 
 a fliort time before they faw fo many miracles 
 in Egypt, afterwards the red fea divided, and 
 the Egyptians immerfed therein, the pillar of a 
 cloud going before them by day, and a pillar 
 of fire by night, manna daily rained down from 
 heaven, and although they faw the mount Sinai 
 fmoking, and heardjehovahfpeaking thence, with 
 other things, yet notwithftanding all this, and in 
 the very midft of fuch things, they fell away from 
 all faith, and from the worfliip of Jehovah to the 
 
 L worflu'p 
 
74 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 worfhip of a calf, Exod. xxxii. i to the end. 
 Hence it is evident, what effedl miracles have. 
 Still lefs would they be effedtual at this day, 
 when men do not acknowledge that there is any 
 thing from the fpi ritual world, and when every 
 fpiritual effecft is denied, and attributed to 
 nature; fgr a negative principle univerfally 
 prevails, in refped: tp the divine influx and 
 government in the earths : wherefore in the 
 prefent day, if the man of the church were to 
 fee the moft eflentially divine miracles, he 
 would firfl: refer them to nature, and there 
 ^efile them, afterwards he would rejev5l them as 
 phantafms or mere illufions, and laftly he 
 would hold in derifion all who fhpuld attribute 
 them to a divine power, and not to nature. 
 That miracles effed nothing, appears alfo from 
 the Lord's words in Luke, *^ If they hear not 
 *^ Mofes and the prophets, neither will they be 
 ** perfuaded, though one rofe from the dead," 
 chap. xvi. 31." 
 
 To the above I will juft add the following 
 remark. Although the miracles recorded in 
 the Word were, at the time of performance, 
 of a compulfive nature, becaufe prefented before 
 the pnmediate vieiv of the fpeQator, yet povv 
 
 they 
 
I 
 
 Signified by the New JerufaleTfi. 75 
 
 they are not fo, becaufe they do not manifeftly 
 operate upon the fenfes of the external man, 
 and there remain, as before, but may gain 
 admifTion to the internal man, and there be 
 rationally underflood. 
 
 ROBERT HINDMARSH. 
 
 "X"* /> *VS *?• ^ '7^ 
 
 _^'iC..5ii..^lt..y■t. 
 
 L 2 LET- 
 
76 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 LETTER IL 
 
 On thefole,fupreme^ and exclujive Divinity 
 of Jejus Chrijl. 
 
 T NOW come to confider the grand, the fun- 
 •*- damental, and mofl important fubjed in 
 the whole fyftem of chriftian theology, namely, 
 the fole yfupr erne y and exclufive divinity ofourbleffed 
 Lord and Saviour Jefus Chriji. That it fhould 
 be my lot to ftand up in this public manner as 
 an alTerter and defender of this great truth, is 
 an honour that I did not expecfl to be called to, 
 particularly as I know there are others much 
 better qualified for fuch an undertaking than 
 inyfelf. However, as I have been earneflly 
 invited, by many lincere lovers of genuine 
 truth, to the talk of defending the fole divinity 
 of our Saviour againft the objedions which 
 you have raifed in your Letters to the Members 
 of the New Church; and as I believe there is 
 no employment, in which the faculties of 
 the human mind can be more worthily 
 engaged, than in magnifying the adorable 
 Creator of the univerfe, an4 in publilhing his 
 
 name 
 
signified by the New Jerufalenu 77 
 
 name among men as their Father, Redeemer, 
 and Saviour ; it is my intention to fliew, accor- 
 ding to the bell of my ability, by a fair appeal 
 10 the Word of God, and a confident inter- 
 pretation of the fame, i. That all the argu- 
 ments you have urged againft the divinity off 
 Jefus Chrill, are no other than falfe reafonings 
 from the mere appearances of things in the 
 literal fenfe of the Word ; and confequently 
 that your whole fyftem is built on the fallacy 
 of thefenfes. 2. I will then prove, by fcripture 
 and reafon united, that the Lord-Man Jefus 
 Chrift is the one fupreme and only God of 
 heaven and earth, who in his Divine Human 
 Perfon is, and may be called, Jehovah-Man. 
 
 But as I cannot do this by my own ftrength, 
 being utterly incapable, of myfelf, either to do 
 a iingle adion, or to think a lingle thought, it 
 behoves me to apply for wifdom and ability to 
 him who is the fountain of life, and the giver 
 of every good and perfect gift. May He there- 
 fore, who is the grand fubjedl of this letter, 
 afiift in it's produdion, and afterwards ac- 
 company it with his divine blelling. 
 
 Before I enter upon the fubjecl, I fhali beg 
 leave to make a few preliminary remarks on your 
 
 mode 
 
78 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 mode of addrefling the members of the Nc^v 
 Jerufalem ; in which I propofe to ihew, that a 
 Socinian has fco right to the name of a chriftian. 
 As I cannot do this more effecflually, than by 
 addrefling myfelf to one who avowedly profefles 
 himfelf to be fuch, you will excufe me, if, in 
 oppofing the errors of Socinianifm, I alfo appear 
 to oppofe the Socinian himjelf. My defign is not 
 to wage war with the per/on of any man, but 
 only with thofe Jentiments which I think con- 
 trary to truth, and dangerous to chriftian 
 focieties. But as fentiments or opinions, ab- 
 flradted from the perfons who maintain them, 
 are confidered by many as mere nothings ; and 
 as the man and his opinions are fo clofely united, 
 as, generally fpeaking, to be taken indifcrirni- 
 nately the one for the other ; I hope I may be 
 allowed without offence to make my obfer- 
 vations to you as a perfony while at the fame 
 time I would have them confidered as diredled 
 againft your tenets only. 
 
 Your firft letter to the members of the New 
 Church begins with thefe words : " M^ fellow^ 
 ** chriJiianSy it is with peculiar pleafure that I 
 " addrefs any clafs of perfons by this appel- 
 " lation ; and I am happy to obferve, that you 
 •* value chrifttanity as much as I do.** 
 
 Were 
 
Signified hy the New Jerufakvu yg 
 
 Were an indifferent perfon to read this, he 
 would naturally fuppofe, that it is from the 
 great veneration in which you hold the perfon 
 of Jefus Chrifl, that you thus congratulate any 
 fet of people who make profeflion of his name. 
 Such a reader would doubtlefs fay to himfelf, 
 
 * Surely Dr. Prieftley is a zealous advocate for 
 
 * the divinity of Chrift; and finding that the 
 
 * world in general begins to think too lightly of 
 
 * his facred perfon, he feizes the prefent op- 
 
 * portunity of declaring his own faith in the 
 
 * Lord, and confirming others in the fame 
 
 * duty/ This refledlion would naturally occur to 
 the mind of a perfon unacquainted with your 
 peculiar tenets, on reading your firft addrefs to 
 the members of the New Church : but were 
 he to read your Letters throughout, it appears 
 to me, he would have good reafon to complain 
 that you held out falfe colours at the beginning, 
 by calling yourfelfa chrijiiany when in reality 
 you have no juft claim to the title. 
 
 Without intending the fmallell offence, give 
 me leave to afk you a few queftions. In the 
 firfl place. Why do you call yourftlf a chnf- 
 tian ? Is it becaufe you acknowledge the divinity 
 of Chrift? youanfv\cr. No. Is it becaufe you 
 J^elieve the hiftoj-y of Chrift, as related by the 
 
 evangeiifts ? 
 
8a A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 cvangeliils ? You reply. Yes. Then by the 
 fame rule you are a Jew, if you believe the 
 biftory of the Jews; and a Mahometan, if you 
 believe the hiflory of Mahomet. Chriitianity, 
 if 1 apprehend it aright, h a fyftem of religion 
 that acknowledges the divinity of Chrift, or in 
 other words, that Chriji is God, In what fenfe, 
 then, can a perfon be called a chriftian, who 
 does not acknowledge him as fuch ? Does the 
 bare belief of his being a pVophet^ like Mofes or 
 any other man, entitle you to be called after 
 his name, any more than after the names of 
 other prophets ? Why, let me afk, do you call 
 yourfelf a chriftian, or a follower of Chriil:, if 
 you believe Chrift to be a mere man f I really 
 think. Sir, you expofc yourfelf in this particular 
 more than you are aware of. You think it 
 idolatry to worfhip Chriil:, and yet you con- 
 fider it an honour to be called after his name ! 
 
 If! dwell longer on this part of your addrefs 
 to the members of the Nr w Church, than you 
 expeded, it is bccaufe I conceive it to be of 
 great importance, that we know each other on 
 the firfl: fetting out on this bufinefs; for as you 
 have thought proper to fend us a friendly mef- 
 fage, it is expedient that an explanation ofcha- 
 raders take place as foon as may be ; otherwife 
 
 we 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, 81 
 
 wc fiiall be talking to one another in the dark. 
 Now, I can with fafety and confidence take 
 upon ine to declare, in the name of all the 
 inembers of the New Church, or New Jerufa- 
 lem, that they are cbrijiians in the proper fenfc 
 of the word, and that for the following reafon, 
 viz. becaufe they acknowledge no other God in 
 heaven, or on earth, but the Lord Je/us Chriji. 
 Thus they derive their name from the God they 
 worfliip, and from no other inferior being, be 
 he man, or be he angel. 
 
 Having given you this candid and explicit 
 charaBer of the members of the New Church, 
 with the fimple, plain, and obvious reafon of 
 their laying claim to the denomination of chrif^ 
 tians s I hope I may be allowed to make a little 
 further inquiry into your religious profellion, 
 and again repeat my former queftion. Why 
 do you ftyle yourfelf a chriflian? It is not 
 becaufe you acknowledge Chrift to be the on/y 
 and fupreme God j for this you rejed: with 
 horror, and confider as no lefs than blaf- 
 phemy. It is not becaufe you allow Chrift 
 to be a Jharer in divinity ; for this you alfo 
 deny with all your might, and openly declare 
 him to be no more than a mere man^ like 
 Mofes or any other prophet. What then can 
 
 M be 
 
82 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 be the reafon ? Perhaps it is becaufe you hap- 
 pened to be born in a country, where the in- 
 habitants call themfelves chriftians ; and fo 
 the name being popular, you may think it 
 prudent to retain it ? Or perhaps it is (as 
 Ixfore obferved) becaufe you believe the fafts 
 recorded in the New Teftamcnt, while the 
 Jews give credit only to thofc in the Old ? But 
 1 hear you fay, * No, it is not for any of thcfe 
 ' reafons alone; it is alfo becaufe Chrift deli- 
 * vered fuch plain maxims and precepts of mo- 
 f ralily as no other prophet had done before 
 f him.' 1 anfwcr. It is true, the Lord mani- 
 fefted his divine will more plainly than had been 
 revealed by the prophets ; but ftili the principle 
 of all his words and acftions may eafily be traced 
 through every book of the Old Teftament, and 
 is particularly to be feen in the ten command- 
 rnents. Therefore the circumdance of Chrift's 
 teaching moral duties, alone, is no jufl reafon 
 why a perfon fhould be called after his name ; 
 feeing that previous to his appearance on earth 
 the world was already in polFedion of more per- 
 fect maxims of morality, than the generality of 
 mankind were difpofed to put in practice, 
 
 Frorn the above obfervations, you will readily 
 perceive, Sir, that I do not acknowledge you 
 
 as 
 
Signified hy the New Jerufalem, 83 
 
 as a chriftian in the proper fenfe of that word j 
 and yet, from principles of civility, 1 am wiU 
 ling to allow you every thing that I can, con- 
 liftently with truth. You profefs yourfe f to be 
 a Sociniany that is, one who completely and to 
 all intents and purpofes denies the divinity of 
 Jefus Chriil:, making him a mere man, like 
 any of us. You even virtually accufe the Arian 
 for exalting him to a rank in creation above the 
 higheft angel,asif he was not fufficiently degraded 
 by being coniidered as the highelt creature^ 
 without pulling him down below the rank of 
 angels, and placing him on a level with your- 
 felf. So inveterate and perfonal appears to be 
 your prejudice againft Him, by whofe fole 
 goodncfs and power you \\ as firft created, and 
 are flill fuftained in exiftence; in whom you 
 now live, move, and have your being ; and 
 from whom you derive that very faculty 
 of reafoning, which you exercife (I truft igno- 
 rantly) to his difhonour I 
 
 The chriftian world in general acknowledges 
 a trinity of divine perfons ; among whom it 
 ranks as fecond in dignity, though fometimes 
 as equal, our blelTed Lord. It is for this reafon 
 alone, viz. becaufe they with their lips annex 
 Jomething of divinity to theperfon of Jefus Chrifl, 
 
 M 2 that 
 
84 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 that they are diflinguifhed by the name of 
 chriftians. But as their divifion of the Deity 
 into didlncft perfons, amounts to httle lefs than 
 a plain denial of the elTential properties of the 
 Godhead, they cannot be called chriftians in 
 the true fenfe of that word. If then they, who 
 nominally afcribe divinity to the perfon of 
 Chrift, cannot with truth and propriety be 
 ranked under the denomination of chriftians, 
 how much lefs can you, who openly, avowedly, 
 and barefacedly degrade him below the cha- 
 racter of an angel, and challenge him as a ?iiere 
 man I I do not by any means wifh to offend you. 
 Sir ; but from the obfervations already made, 
 I think even you yourfelf muft fee the impro- 
 priety of addrefling the members of the New 
 Church as yourfellozv chriftians^ feeing that they 
 difagrec with you in all rejpe5is concerning the 
 perfon of Chrift. 
 
 You believe that Chrift is not pofTefTed of any 
 real divinity inherent in himfelf as his own, but 
 only what may have been communicated to him 
 by infpiration : We, on the contrary, believe, 
 that Jefus Chrift is God-Man, and Man-God, 
 having elTential divinity redding in him as his 
 proper own, for which he is beholden to no 
 other being either in heaven or earth. You 
 
 believe 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalevi. 85 
 
 believe he was no more than a prophet, like 
 Mofes and the reft, fent of God to teach man- 
 kind his will : We, on the contrary, believe he 
 is more than a prophet, bccaufc, agreeable to 
 his own words in Matt, xxiii. 34, // is be that 
 fends prophets. You believe in the fimple hu- 
 manity of Chrifl, or in other words, that he 
 was a mere man, like yourfelf : We, on the 
 contrary, believe in his Divine Humanity ; in 
 which he is the fupreme and only God of 
 heaven and earth, confequently the Only Man, 
 and that all other men are men only by deri- 
 vation from him. You believe he was the 
 Saviour of the world in no other fenfe than 
 Mofes was of the Ifraelitcs, that is, under another 
 who is God : We, on the contrary, believe, 
 that Jefus was the Saviour of the world, by 
 virtue of his own perfonal power, and that 
 falvation or redemption was eifedled by no 
 other power or authority in heaven or earth, 
 but his own divine arm. You confider him 
 to be now the Son of Mary, if not of Jofeph : 
 but \\ e confider fuch an idea as impious and 
 blafphemous. You believe that divine honours 
 ought not to be paid to him : Wc, on the con- 
 trary, account all vvorlhip directed to any other 
 than to Jefus Chrift, to be downright idolatry. 
 In fliort, though you do not with your lips 
 
 exprcfijly 
 
8S A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 cxprefsly deny that he is Lord * and Mafler^ 
 you adually embrace every opportunity to de- 
 grade and difhonour him ; while the members 
 of the New and True Chriftian Church unite 
 every faculty of their fouls to exalt his name 
 alone, to celebrate his praife alone, and to hail 
 him alone as the one God over all, blclTed for 
 ever. 
 
 Such being the contrafl between the chrif- 
 tianity profelled by Socinians, and that of the 
 New Jerufalem, I leave you and all the world 
 to judge with what propriety or truth you ftyle 
 us your fellow-chrifiians I 
 
 Having thus animadverted on your way of 
 addreffing us, I now proceed to conlider the 
 
 arguments 
 
 * It is remarkable, that Dr. Prieftley no where in his 
 Letters calls Jefus Lord, Whenever that expreffion is 
 mentioned by him, it is always by way of quotation either 
 from the fcriptures, or from Baron Swedenborg's writings, 
 and never proceeds from him as an efFe6l of his own fenti- 
 ments. This circumftance brings to my recolleftion the 
 words of Paul in i Cor. xii. 3 : " No man can fay that 
 "Jefus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghoft." The Holy 
 Gholl is the divine proceeding from Jefus : the lin againfl. 
 the Holy Ghoft is the denial of his divinity ; Arians and 
 Socinians are guilty of this ; therefore I judge that no 
 Arian or Socinian can call Jefus Lord, without feeling a 
 certain internal repugnance to the expreflion. 
 
Signified by the Nezv Jerufalem. 87 
 
 arguments you have brought again (1: the divinity 
 of Jefus Chriii, and to Ihew that they are all 
 fallacious, being grounded in the mere appear* 
 ances of truth in the literal fenfe of the Word. 
 
 Page 1 8, you fay, " I own that when I firft 
 " heard of this tenet of your's, that Jefus Chrifl: 
 " was the fame perfon with God the Father, 
 " and that there is no other God than he, I 
 " was exceedingly furprized." That you was 
 exceedingly furprized on hearing it alTerted, 
 that Jefus Chriii; is the fame perfon with God 
 the Father, and that there is no other God than 
 he, I make no doubt ; and I fhould not have 
 wondered much, had you gone backward and 
 fallen to the ground, as the band of armed 
 men did, when Jefus declared the fam^ thing 
 by faying, 1 Aniy John xviii. 6. But what will 
 you fay or do, w^hen you find ihis grand truth 
 proved and demonft rated beyond the iliadow of 
 contradiction, as I hope, by the divine mercy 
 of the Lord, I fhall be enabled to do in the 
 following pages ! 
 
 " It is certainly no uncommon thing,'* 
 (you fay, p. 19,) *' for the fame thing, or the 
 " fame perfon, to be fignified by two different 
 5* names, Jefus, for example, and Chrift, Simon 
 
 *'and 
 
88 A Defence of ike Nezo Church, 
 
 " and Peter ; but then we always find, that the 
 " fame charader and defcription will apply to 
 " both, and except the literal fignifications of 
 " the term be referred to, we may, in any fen- 
 " tence, fubftitute the one in the place of the 
 ** other; every thing that can be alTerted of the 
 ** one, being equally true of the other. Nothing 
 •* is ever afierted concerning either of them, 
 •* that is incompatible with the other; nor zvill 
 ** ariyfpeaker or Tcriier^ knowing the ufe of lan- 
 *' p^uap-e, ever connect tzvo names which denote 
 "only \k\t fame perjon by the conjundlive par- 
 ** tide and. We fay, for example, that Peter 
 " and John did this or that ; but we never fay, 
 ** that Simon and Peter, Jefus and Chrifl:, did 
 *^ this, ufing the plural number; becaufe Peter 
 •^ and John are diiferent perfons. But Simon 
 *' and Peter;, Jefus and Chrill, are the fame 
 '* perfons ; and therefore we naturally fay Simon 
 " or Peter, Jefus or Chrift, or elfe, joining the 
 '' names, we fay, Simon Peter, or Jefus Chrift, 
 " did this or that, ufing the fingular number 
 " only. Now look through the whole New 
 " Tefi:ament, where God and Chrift are fpoken 
 "of, and you will find by thefe plain rules 
 *' concerning the ufe of words, which every 
 ** body underflands, and in fpeaking or writing 
 " firicHy conforms to, that God and Chrift^ in 
 I '' the 
 
Signified by the New Jenifalem. 89 
 
 «* the ideas of the perfons who wrote thofe 
 ** books, were as different perfons as Chrilt 
 ** and Peter, James and John." 
 
 The above argument, however plaulible it 
 may appear to fome at firft fight, with rcfped 
 to the ftriclnefs of grammatical didion, is 
 neverthelefs not a true one, becaufe it is 
 founded on falfe prcmifes. To fay that " no 
 Ipeaker or writer, knowing the ufe of language^ 
 ever conneds two names which denote only 
 the fame perfon by the conjundtive particle 
 and,'* is an aflertion that militates againd, and 
 is confuted by perhaps a thoufand palTages in 
 the holy fcriptures, as v/ell as in the apoflollc 
 writings. I fhall produce only a few, which 
 will be fufficient to fliew your inattention to 
 the language of infpiration, and how vain a thing 
 it is to build a fyftem of theology upon fuch a 
 Tandy foundation as the mere rules of grammar. 
 
 I. Abraham faid to his fervant, '' I will 
 " make thee fwear by the God of heaven a7jd 
 " the God of the earth," Gen. xxiv. 3. Here 
 the God of heaven and the God of the earth 
 iire certainly the /^w^ ^^r/o;f ; arid yet they are 
 «onnecT:ed together by the conjun^live particle 
 
 N ^nd. 
 
go A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 and. See alfo Gen. xxxi. 53. Chap, xxxii. 9. 
 Exod. iv. 5. 
 
 2. It is faid in the Apocalypfe, that Jefus 
 Chrifl: " hath made us kings and priefls unto 
 " God and his Father/' chap. i. 6. God and 
 the Father are undoubtedly one and the fame 
 perfon ; but if we are to form our dodlrine 
 from conjunSJive particles^ we muft make two 
 diftintfl perfons of them. 
 
 3. John the Apocalyptift fays to the feven 
 churches ia Afia, " Grace be unto you, and 
 " peace, from him which is, and which was, 
 " and which is to come ; and from Jefus 
 " Chrift/' Apoc. i. 4, 5. Now in verfe 8 
 of the fame chapter, the Lord Jefus faith, 
 " I am Alpha and Omega, which is, and 
 *' which was, and which is to come, the Al- 
 •' mighty." Whence it follows, that he which 
 is, and which was, and which is to come, and 
 Jefus Chrifl, are one and the fame perfon, 
 notvvithftanding the interpofition of the con- 
 jundive particle and. 
 
 4. So again* ^' The kingdoms of this world 
 ** are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and 
 *« of his Chrift, and he fhall reign for ever and 
 
 •'ever," 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, gi 
 
 "ever," Apoc. xi. 15. Here, although it is 
 faid, the Lord and his Chriji, as if they were 
 two difl:in6l perfons, jret the pafTage cannot be 
 fo underftood, as is evident from the words 
 immediately following, wherein both Lord and 
 Chrift are united in one perfon, viz. afid he 
 Jhall reign for ever and ever. Befides, the term 
 Lord is conflantly applied to Jefus Chrift in 
 the New Teftament as his peculiar and dif- 
 tinguidiing title, of which he was alfo pleafed 
 to exprefs his approbation in thefe words : 
 *' Ye call me Mafter, and Lord ; and ye fay 
 " well, for fo I am," John xiii. 13. 
 
 5. " And they remembered, that God was 
 ** their Reck, and the high God their Redeemer," 
 Pfalm Ixxviii. 35. Here again God the Rock 
 and the high God the Redeemer are one and 
 the fame perfon. 
 
 6. The apoftle James, In his general epiftle, 
 fays, '* Pure religion, and undefiled before God 
 " and the Father is this," &c. James i. 27. 
 Paul faith, that " Jefus Chrift gave himfelf for 
 ** our fins, according to the will of God and 
 " our Father," Gal. i. 4. '\ Giving thanks al- 
 " w^iys for all things unto God and the Father,'* 
 Ephef V. 20. " Now unto God and our Father 
 
 N 2 " t>c 
 
'92 A Defence of the Neio Church, 
 
 <* be glory for ever and ever, Amen," Philip. 
 iv. 20. ** We give thanks to God, and the 
 " Father of our Lord Jefus Chrifl:," Coi. i. 3. 
 "That their hearts rnight be comforted, being 
 " knit together in love, and unto all riches of 
 ^' the full afilirance of underftanding to the 
 *' acknowledgment of the myliery of God, 
 ^' and of the Father, and of Ghrift,'' Col. ii. 2. 
 ** Whatfoever ye do in word or deed, do all in 
 *' the name of the Lord Jefus, giving thanks 
 " to God and the Father by him," Col. iii. 17. 
 *5 Remembering without ceafmg your work of 
 " faith, and labour of love, and patience of 
 *' hope in our Lord Jefus Chrifb, in the light of 
 " God^ and our Father," i ThelT, i. 3. " Now 
 *^ God himfelf, and our Father, and our Lord 
 *' Jefus Chrifl dired * our way unto you," 
 
 I Their. 
 
 * It is remarkable that the Greek word xoiltv^vvon, may 
 hs direci, is the 3 perfon fingular of the 1 aor. opt. ancj not 
 the 3 perfon plural. If God and Jelus C'nrift were twQ 
 diftinft perfons, it would be more grammatical to ufe a 
 plural verb ; but as they are only one perfon, therefore it 
 is with great propriety faid in the Tingular number, " Now 
 «' God himfelf, and our Father, and our Lord Jefus Chrifl: 
 ^^ [Kccltf^vvcii) direct our way unloyou." Something fimil^^r 
 to this is found in the firil chapter of Genefis, verfe 1, 
 *' In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," 
 In the Hebrew the noun DM'^N Elo/iim, is plural, Dii, the 
 
 Cods^ 
 
Signified by the New J^^rufalem. gg 
 
 X ThciT. iii. ii. — In all thefe paflages, and 
 many others of a limilar kind which might be 
 adduced, God and the Father are fpoken of 
 apparently as diilind beings or perfons; and in 
 fome of them Jefus Chrift is no more dillin- 
 guifhed from the Father, than the Father is 
 from himfelf ; for the conjundive particle and^ 
 on which you lay fo much ftrefs, is equally 
 interpofed between all the three names. Thus 
 the myftery of the incarnation is faid to be the 
 myftery of God, and of the Father, atjd of 
 Chrifl. And Paul prays to be diredled by 
 <jod, and by the Father, and by the Lord 
 Jefus Chrift. 
 
 7. Again, " The great dragon was cafl: out, 
 *' that old ferpent, called the devil ^«(i fatan," 
 Apoc. xii. 9. chap. xx. 2. Here the terms devil 
 and fatan are applied to one and the fame 
 dragon : and it is called the devil and fatan, not 
 
 the 
 
 Gods, and the verb ^"1^5 ^ara, is fingular, creavit, he created; 
 literally in EnglifTi, The Gods [he] created the heavens and the 
 earth. The realon of this peculiarity in the Hebrew lan- 
 guage, is to fhew, that the regeneration of man as to his 
 internal and external, (which is meant by the creation of 
 heavens and the earth,) although condufted through the 
 mediation of angels andfpirits^ (called Gods,) is yet after 
 jdl effeded by the Lord alone. 
 
94 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 the devil or fatan, as you feem to think it ihould 
 be, in order to be conformable to the rules of 
 gran^innar, which is a fcience, not of things, 
 but of meic words. 
 
 Perhaps you will fay, that the Greek word 
 x«i ought, in the foregoing palTages, to have 
 been tranilated even^ inllead of and ^ in which 
 cafe the phrafe God and the Father will read, 
 God EVEN the Father ; and the devil and fatan 
 will be the devil ew en fatan. But this is granting 
 more than I afk, and in fadl giving up the 
 point; for then inflead of being, CW, and the 
 Father, and fefis Cbrift, it would uniformly be, 
 Chdy EVEN the Father, even Jefus Chrifl, agree- 
 able to the tranflation of 2 Cor. i. 3 ; and i 
 Their, iii. 13. So that, take the words which 
 way you pieafe, you are reduced to a perfect 
 dilemma. If you make choice of the affirma- 
 tive conjunction even, ini^ead oi and, you then 
 acknowledge the fupreme divinity of Jefus 
 Chrilf, and that he is the high God, even the 
 FatKer; but if, as I expecl, you vvould rather 
 retain the conjuncnve particle and, you muil at 
 leaft be confcious, that your obfcrvations con- 
 cerning the ufe of that word in the fcriptures 
 lire not well founded. 
 
 \ 8. In 
 
Signified by the Nezo Jerufalem. (Str 
 
 8. In the following paflage the prcpofition 
 from is ufed : " Then Jehovah * rahied upor» 
 ** Sodom, and upon Gomorrah, brim (lone and 
 " fwtfrom Jehovah out of heaven," Gen. xix. 
 24. Here it appears as if there were two Je- 
 hovahs, the one raining brimftone and fire 
 from the other ; which muft neceffarily em- 
 barrafs the perfon, who confines his ideas to 
 the mere literal expreflions. Such a one, in a 
 thoufand inllances, muft either give up his 
 underftanding to be the tool of a blind faith, or 
 elfe he muft in his own mind conclude that the 
 infpired writers did not know the ufe of language^ 
 or, what is worfe than all, he mud abfoluteJjr 
 deny the fandtity and divinity of the Word. 
 
 The next thing I have to animadvert upon^ 
 is your aflertion, that ** through the whole New 
 ** Teftament, where God and Chrift are fpoken 
 " of, they are, in the ideas of the perfons who 
 " wrote thofe books, as different perfons as 
 *' Chrift and Peter, James and John." There 
 is nothing like bringing you to the teft. Let 
 us fee what the language of the New Teftament 
 
 is 
 
 * The Englifh tranflation has the word LorA, inftead of 
 Jehovah, in this and other paffagcs of the Old Teftament. 
 £ut I think it beft to retain the word Jchovahy as in the 
 original Hebrew, 
 
g6 A Defence of the New Church , 
 
 is in this matter. If I have any undcr- 
 flanding at all, the great God and our Lord 
 Jefus Chrift mufl, in the following palTages, be 
 one and the fame per/on, according to the idea of 
 the writers. 
 
 I. In the Apocalypfe it is faid, " We give 
 thee thanks, O Lord God almighty ^ zvhich arty 
 and wajiy and art to corner becaufe thou hafi 
 taken to thee thy great power, and haft reigned,* 
 chap. xi. 17. "I heard a loud voice faying in 
 ** heaven. Now is come falvation, and ftrength, 
 *'and the kingdom of our God^* chap. xii. to.< 
 " Great and marvellous are thy works. Lord 
 *' God almighty ; juft and true are thy ways, 
 *' thou King of faints,'' chap. xv. 3. *' Allelujah, 
 " for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth,' chap. 
 xix. 6. In thefe paflages falvation, and power, 
 and the kingdom, are afcribed to the Lord God 
 omnipotent. But in the following the very fame 
 things are afcribed to Jefus Chrift, who is alfo 
 called the Lamh, Jefus fays, '* I am Alpha and 
 *' Omega, which is, and which was, and which 
 *' is to come, the Almighty,'* Apoc. i. 8. " The 
 " kingdoms of this world are become the king- 
 " doms of our Lord, and of his Chrift, and he 
 ^'ftjall reign for ever and ever," chap. xi. 15. 
 •' The Lamb fhall overcome them ; for he is 
 
 « Lord 
 
Signified by the New JeriifaUvi, gj 
 
 " Lord of lords, and Kingof kivgs."' chap. xvii. 
 14. " Salvation to our God which fitteth upon 
 •* the throne, and unio the Lamb** chap, vii- 
 10. " The Lannb uhich is in the midft of the 
 ** throne, flmil teed them," verfe 17. 
 
 Now let any unprejudiced perfon compare 
 the a^bove palTages together, and he cannot but 
 acknowledge, that in the idea of the writer God 
 and the Lamb, or God and Jefus Chrifl, are 
 o?ie and the fame -perfon. It is faid of God, that 
 he is, was, and is to come: the fame is faid of 
 Jefus Chrift. God is called almighty: fo is^ 
 Jefus Chrifl. God is faid to have taken his 
 great power, and to reign, as King of faints : of 
 Chrifl: it is faid, that the kingdoms are his, and 
 he fhall reign for ever and ever; and of the Lamb, 
 that he is in the midfl of the throne. Lord of Jords, 
 and King of kings. Under all thefe circum-- 
 liances, is it poffible that God and Chrift carl 
 be tw^o different perfons ? Can we for a moment 
 fuppofe, that all the hofts of heaven fhould 
 agree in dividing their worfliip between two 
 Kings, two Lords, two Almighties, two Firft 
 Caufes, two Alphas and Omegas ? — The very 
 idea fhocks me beyond defcription, and pre- 
 vents my purfuing it any further. 
 
 O 2, The 
 
gS A Defence of the Nezv Church, 
 
 2. " The Lord God of the holy prophets fent 
 •* his angel to fhew unto his fervants the things 
 "which muft: fnortly be done/* Apoc. xxii. 6. 
 In verfe 1 6 of the fame chapter it is faid, " / 
 ** y^^i have fent mine angel to tedi fy unto you 
 " thcfe things in the churches." As thefe two 
 palTages occur fo near to each other, in one 
 chapter, I cannot think with you, that in the 
 idea of the writer '* God and Chrift are as dif- 
 " ferent perfons as James and John ;'* but have 
 a clear perception given me to fee, that the 
 Lord God of the holy prophets and Jefus are 
 one and the fame divine perfon. 
 
 3. " And I faw no temple in the New Jeru- 
 •* falem, for the Lord God almighty and the 
 *' Lamb are the temple of it," Apoc. xxi. 22. 
 A temple is one fingle building : how then can 
 the Lord God almighty and the Lamb conflitute 
 that one fingle building, if they are divided into 
 two diiierent and diftind perfons? But if we 
 confider them as united in one perfon, then we 
 fhall plainly fee, that the body of Jefus is that 
 glorious temple. See Jahn ii. 21. 
 
 4. In the New Jeru falem *' there fhall be no 
 " night, and they need no candle, neither light 
 •' of the fun ; for the Lord God giveth them 
 *' light/' Apoc. xxii. 5, In the preceding chap- 
 ter 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalevi. gg 
 
 ter it is faid, " The Lamb is the light thereof/ 
 Apoc. xxi. 23. Whence 1 conclucie, that the 
 Lord God and the Lamb are the fame perfon, 
 and in the idea of the writer muft have been 
 confidered as fuch. 
 
 5. " BlelTed are they which are called to the 
 <* fnarriage-fupper of the Lamb;' Apoc. xix. 9. 
 In the 17th verfe of the fame chap-er it is faid, 
 " Come and gather yourfclves together unto 
 " 'C^q: flipper of the great God,'* The marriage- 
 fupper of the Lamb, and the fupper 01 the 
 great God, are the fame thing; therefore the 
 Lamb and the great God are one and the fame 
 perfon. 
 
 6. " We know that the Son of God is comc^ 
 " and hath given us an undcrlianding that we 
 " may know him that is true ; and we are m 
 " him that is true, even in his Son Jefjs Chrift: 
 ** This is the true God, and eternal life,'* i John 
 V. 20. Here it is evident, that John made no 
 diilinclion between Jefus Chrift and God; for 
 he exoref^ly lays, that he is the true God and 
 eternal life. And to caution us againlt wor- 
 fliipping any other than Jefus Chrift, he im- 
 mediately adds, " Little children, keep your- 
 *f felves from idols,*' verfe 21. 
 
 O2 7. Jefus 
 
i 00 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 7. Jefus fays, " Whatfoever ye fhall aik in 
 *^ my name, that will I doy that the Father may 
 '^ be glorified in the Son. If ye (hall aik any thing 
 'Mn my name, I will do it ^'^ John xiv. 13, 14. 
 In chapter xvi. 23, he fays, *' Whatfoever ye 
 <' fhall afk the Father in my name, he will give 
 it you." If there be any confiftency in the 
 view? or ideas of the fpeaker and v/rirer, thefe 
 palTages, compared toget-feer, evidently prove 
 that Jefus himfelf was the Father. 
 
 8. Laftly, Jefus faid, " I and my Father are 
 " one^'' John x. 30. " PhiUp fiiith unto him, 
 ** Lord, fhew us ihe Father, and it fufiiceth us. 
 " Jefus faith unto him. Have I been fo long 
 " time Vv'ith you, and yet haft thou not known 
 *' me^ Philip ? He that hath feen me^ hath {z^n 
 " the Father^'' John xiv. 8, 9. There needs no 
 further proof in this matter ; for Jefus himfelf 
 exprefsly declares, that he and the Father are 
 one and the fame perfon. Philip, it feems, en- 
 tertained an idea, as many others have done 
 iince him, that God the Father M^as a diftincSt 
 perfon from Jefus ; and obferving that the 
 Lord generally fpake in parables, fometimes in 
 pretty plain terms, and at other times obfcurely, 
 he was determined to put a direcl queftion to 
 him about the Father, He did fo, and our 
 
 Lord's 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalevi. loi 
 
 Lord's anfwer Mas as explicit as it could be : 
 •" He that hath feen ;//f, hath feen the Faiher.*' 
 Still, however, the Lord {aw^ that the church 
 at that time was incapable of receiving a full 
 and clear revelation of this greateft and moll 
 fublime of all truths ; therefore he continued 
 to fpeak in parables and proverbs, refer ving 
 till a future day the glorious maniieftation of 
 himfelf, as bemg the everlajiing Father^ as weU 
 as the Son that was born in time. ** Thefe 
 things," fays he, " have I fpokert unto you 
 in proverbs : the time cometh when I Hiall 
 no more fpeak unto you in proverbs, but 
 *■ I Jball Jhezv you plainly of the Father^' John 
 xvi. 25. The great day alluded to, in which 
 he no longer fpeaks in proverbs, is the prefent; 
 we now know for a certainty, who is the 
 Father, having feen him more clearly and 
 fatisfaclorily than ever Philip did ; and for the 
 firfl time the prefent day beholds the accom- 
 plifliment of Ifaiah's prophecy concernmg the 
 perfon of Jefus, " Unto us a Child i^ born, unto 
 ^' us a Son is given, and the government ihall be 
 "upon his /boulder; and hi.s name fhall be 
 " called Wonderful, Counfellor, God, Hero, 
 " Father of eternity, Prince of peace," Ifaiah 
 
 jx. 6. 
 
 * * * 
 
 In 
 
102 A Defence of ike New Church, 
 
 In page 20 you fay, " Chrifl uniforrriiy fpeaks 
 *' of himfelf as having been fent fronri God, 
 ** jufl as much as John the Baptifl was ; fo that 
 " if the pci[on /ending can be the fanne with the 
 " perfony^///, John the Baptifl naay be God as 
 ** well as Jefus Chrift. I may fay that 1 g§ 
 ** from one place to another, but it is mani- 
 ** f^.i:tiy improper to fay that I fei^d myfelf from 
 ** one place to another. On your principles, 
 ** Chrifl: and his apoftles might be the fame 
 ** perfons.' For Chrilt, addrefling himfelf to 
 ** his Father, fays, John xvii. i 8, As thou hafi 
 ** fent me into the zvorld, even Jo have I alfofent 
 ** them into the world. It is evident, therefore, 
 ** that Chriif was a perfon as different from 
 ** him whom he addreiTed as his Father^ as his 
 ** difciplcs were different from himfelf." 
 
 The whole of this objeclion arifes from the 
 want of knowing the difference between natural 
 and fpiritual language, and that fpiritual ideas, 
 in their defcent from heaven, clothe them- 
 fclves with fuch cxprefHons as are accommo- 
 dated to the ftatc of men in the natural world. 
 The garments of a man are not the real man ; 
 fo neither is the liieral {tw^c cf the Word, in 
 many cafes, real naked truth, but truth clothed 
 with appearances, which may indeed prove a 
 
 ftumbling- 
 
Signified hy the New Jerufal.cm, 103 
 
 ftumbling-block to fome, while to others they 
 adminifter the delights of ufe. That Jcfus 
 Chrid, although faid to be fent by God the 
 Father, was yet that very Father, may plainly 
 appear from due attention to, and a right under- 
 Handing of, the holy fcripturcs. 
 
 In all places where the Lord is faid to be 
 fent by the Father, we are to undcrlland that 
 God himfelf defcended into the world as divine 
 truth ; which defcent Vv as effected by the af- 
 fumption of the Humanity from the Virgin 
 Mary. For the fake of diftinclion, the fcrip- 
 turcs call divine good the Father, and divine 
 truth the Son ; becaufc divine truth proceeds 
 from divine good, comparatively as a fon pro- 
 ceeds from a father. Hence it is faid, that the 
 Son of God defcended, or was fent by the 
 Father, meaning that God aflumed the Hu- 
 manity more particularly in refped. to divhie 
 truth, than to divine good, although the latter 
 was not feparated from the former. By the 
 word fent is alfo fignificd the fame thing as 
 angel ; for the word angel in the original lan- 
 guage fignifies fent; as in Ifaiah, ''Th(t angel 
 of his prefencc faved them," chap. Ixiii. 9; 
 that is, divine truth proceeding from Jeliovah 
 faved them. The power of falvation is nor 
 
 predicabie 
 
104 -^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 prcdicable of any one but a Divine Being, nop 
 of any thing but a divine attribute. 
 
 Jefus faid to his difciples, " It is expedient: 
 ^ for you that I go away ; for if I go not aw ay, 
 *^ the Comforter will not come unto you ; but 
 "if I depart, I will fend him unto you,'' John 
 xvi. 7. Here Jefus promifes to fend the Com- 
 forter, which is the Holy Spirit. Afterwards, 
 " Jefus Ireathed on his difciples, and faith unto 
 " them, Receive ye the Holy Spirit," John xx. 
 22. From which it is plain, that by the Holy 
 Spirit is meant fomething proceeding from 
 Jefus ; and that fending fignifies the fame as 
 hreaihing or proceeding. Again, the Lord having 
 told his difciples, that he wouldy^/^ithem another 
 Comfortery which fhould abide with them for 
 ever, immediately adds, " I will not leave you 
 •^ comfortlefs, I will come to youy' Johnxiv. 18. 
 He like wife fays, '•' And lo, / mn with you, 
 •^ ahmy even unto the end of the world," Matt, 
 xxviii. 20. No terms can be more exprefs than 
 thefe ; which therefore clearly and undeniably 
 prove, that the perfon fending and the perfon 
 fent are, in this inftance at leafV, one and the 
 fame Being. 
 
 Bui 
 
Signijied by the New Jeriifalcnu 105 
 
 But you fay, that, according to this way of 
 fpeaking, John the Baprirt m^y be God, as 
 well as Jefus Chrift, becaufe it is equally faid 
 of him, that he was fent by God : alfo that 
 Chrift and his apoftles may be the fame pcr- 
 fons, becaufe they were fent by him : and it is 
 very natural for you to afk, ' How fhall we 
 'know whether they are, or not?' I will tell 
 you : the method is eafy and fimple. Look 
 through the gofpels, look through the epiflles, 
 look through the Apocalypfe, or any part of 
 fcripture, and fee whether John the BaptifV, oi* 
 any of the apoftles, is any where called 
 Jehovah, Alpha and Omega, the Firft and the 
 Lafl", the Beginning and the Ending, who is, 
 who was, and who is to cornc, the Almighty, 
 the I Am, the Mighty God, the Everlafting 
 Father, the King of kings, and Lord of lords. 
 If you can find none of thefe appellations given 
 to any of them, you may reft alFured they are 
 neither God nor Chrift, but that in di^nitv of 
 pcrfcn they all fall infinitely fhort o( Him whd 
 alone is God- Man. John the Baptift fays, 
 •' I am not ibe Chrift : he muft increafe, but I 
 " muft decfeafe : he that cometh from above, 
 *' is above all," John iii. 28, 30, 31. He that 
 is ahve all, muft be God alone. ** Behold the 
 ** Lamb of God chat taketh azi:av the Jin of the 
 
 P *^ world," 
 
io6 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 " world," John i. 29. Who can take away fins ^ 
 but God ? " The Son of Man hath power on 
 "earth io forgive fins ,' Matt. ix. 6. *' None 
 " C2in forgive fins, but God alone," Luke v. 21. 
 Therefore Jefus Chrift alone is God. 
 
 There is no impropriety, you obferve, in 
 faying, " that I go from one place to another;" 
 but a manifeft one, you think, to fay, ** that I 
 ^^ fend myfelf from one place to another." 
 Strange as this may appear to you, and dif- 
 ficult of compreheniion, it is neverthelefs true, 
 and what you yourfelf have adually done. By 
 fending me your Letters to the Members of the 
 Nezv Jerufalem, you have in facl feni yourfelf 
 and I have you this moment before me. I do 
 not fo much conlider your material body to be 
 Dr. Prieftlcy, as youv foul which is within that 
 body ; and I know the foul or mind to confift of 
 will and underftanding, or affedion and thought, 
 and nothing elfe. Now I find your book contains 
 your will and underftanding, or your alfedion and 
 thought, juft as your perfon contains them; info- 
 much that it may with propriety be called another 
 felf exifting without yourfelf ^ or Dr. Prieftley 
 proceeding fro7n Dr. Prieftley. Thus whenever Dr. 
 Prieftley, or any other perfon, publifhes a book 
 of his own writing, he thereby adually fends 
 
 himfelf 
 
Signified by the Nero Jertifalem. 107 
 
 himfelf into the world ; for the works of every 
 man both contain and exhibit the real man, his 
 will being therein by virtue of the defign, motive, 
 or end in view, and his underfianding by virtue 
 of the wifdom or thought whereby he expreffes 
 himfelf, as means to promote that end. 
 There is this difference, however, between Dr. 
 Priefiley as a man or per/on, and Dr. Prieftley 
 as a book or work. As a vian^ he may change 
 his ftate, and, rejeBing his prefcnt errors, re- 
 ceive new life and new wifdom from the Lord. 
 But as a i-^O/v, or work\ he cannot; that remains 
 fixed and permanent, as an eternal monument 
 of his prcfent and pill ilate of mind, to the 
 produdlion of which all the interior principles 
 of his life confpired. 
 
 To render the fubjevft now under difculTion 
 a little more familiar and plain, I will jufl 
 relate a fact, which ve»-y lately happened ; and 
 you know fads are often more powerful than 
 arguments. A gentleman came into my houfc, 
 and feeing a book m my hand, faid without any 
 apparent reflection, *' If^hm have you got 
 <* there ?" '' Is that Dr. Pneftley ? or who elfe 
 " is it ?" I told him, // was Dr. Priefllcy^ and 
 thac 1 was hearing what he had to fay agaiiill: 
 Baron Suedenkr^. ''Well," added he, ''and 
 
 p. 2 " ^^ hit 
 
io8 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 <' what does he Jay f When the gentleman \th 
 me, I began to reflecl on hi§ mode of accoiling 
 nie, and foon found, that it is the common Ian-, 
 gnage of every perfon, to fpeak precifely in the 
 fame manner. Perfonification is congenial to 
 the human mind ; the ancients were fond of it, 
 and the moderns are Hill in the habit of it, 
 without being always confcious of the circum- 
 ftance. " IVhom^' i. e. what perfon, (not wha^ 
 book,) *' have you got there?— O, I fee you 
 *' have Dr. Priellley in your hand," (not the 
 writings or book of Dr. Prieftley.) *^ What does he 
 fay againd Baron SwedenhorgV (Not what 
 has he writ ten acrainft the icT/7//?^i of Baron 
 Swedenborg ?j Such is the mod familiar and 
 common mode of fpeech. The reafon of this 
 perfonification is, [■)ecaufe there is an influx 
 general from the fpi ritual world into the minds 
 of men, leading and diredling them to reduce 
 every thing to it's jirft principles, and thus in 
 their very language to return eifecls back again 
 to their' caufes, from whence they proceeded ; 
 {q that in every eifeil they may contemplate 
 the caufe, and in every caufe the end, which 
 is man. This general iniiux is derived from 
 one univerfal, which inculcates the unity of 
 God, and teaches that^ as all things came forth 
 ifom him, fo With refped to ufes they muil: all 
 
 return 
 
Signified by the Nciojtritfalem, 109 
 
 return back to him ; ^* for all things were 
 " created by him and for him/' CoL i. 16. 
 
 The common confeiit of mankind, in fpeak- 
 ing of the zvorks of any perfon, exadtly as if 
 they were the perfon him/elf, and this without 
 any previous agreement among themfelves to 
 do fo, is therefore to me a plain and clear de- 
 monftration, that fuch language is agreeable to 
 the order impreffed on creation, and that it is 
 an effe6t produced in the natural world from 
 caufes originating in the fpiritual world, where 
 all ideas fpontaneouHy fall into cone/ponding 
 natural exprelTions. 
 
 It is for this reafon, that the facred fcciptures, 
 being written according to the laws of the fpi- 
 ritual world, do frequently fpeak of what pro- 
 ceeds from the Divine Being as though it were 
 the Divine Being himfclf. Thus to the Holy 
 Spirit, which is the divine proceeding of the 
 Lord, John xx. 22, the fame attributes and 
 powers are afcribed, as to the Lord himfelf. 
 Lying to the Holy Gbojl is called lying unto 
 God, Ads v. 3, 4. He that is born of the 
 Spirit, John iii. 5, 8, is faid to be born of God^ 
 John i. 13. Not to mention many other paf- 
 fagcs to the fame effect. Again, the hifioncal 
 
 part 
 
no A Defence of the Neto Churchy 
 
 part of the Word is called Mofes, Luke xvi. 
 31. chap. xxiv. 27 In hke manner the Word 
 of God itfelf, which proceeded from God, is 
 alfo called God, John i. i. It is further dc- 
 fcribed as a Man, with eyes like a flame of fire, 
 and having on his head many crowns, whofc 
 name is King of kings, and Lord of lords, 
 Apoc. xix. 12 to 16. 
 
 As you feem to think there is fuch a great 
 impropriety in faying, God Jenl him/elf mio the 
 world, though none in fuppofing that ht fent 
 another per/on, a prophet, for inliance ; 1 will 
 reafon a little with you on your own ground. 
 To fend a melTenger on any errand, literally 
 implies, that the \)Qx{o\-\ fending is at fome dif- 
 tance from the perfons to whom the mefiage 
 isfent. God is iht fender, and men the perlons 
 to whon^ fent , Now you certainly acknowledge 
 the omniprefence of Qo(^, that he is equally 
 prefent here and every where. W^ith what 
 propriety then, let me afk, can it be faid on 
 your principles, that God y^^/^ij a mtflenger to 
 thofc, with whom he is to the full aspieient 
 as with any meffenger whom he can [-jriibly 
 fend ? Wc is already prefent with th m, before 
 the melTeni^er arrives; na , at e very o ^ent 
 he fends him. To /e?hi further im^jiies, in die 
 
 mere 
 
Signified by the Nezo Jeriifalem, 1 1 1 
 
 mere literal fenfe of the word, that the mef- 
 fenger fent quits the prcfence of him uho fends, 
 and during his journey is in an intermediate 
 Hate between the fender and the perfons to 
 whom he is fent. But this is abfoiutcly im- 
 pollible in refpet5t to him who is omniprefent, 
 for if God, as you fay, p. 50, fills infinite 
 fpace, being alfo in the form of infinite fpace^ 
 then the fending of any meffenger to mankind 
 can be nothing more than fending him from 
 one part of bin f elf to another part ofhimfef; or^ 
 what is the fame thing in your idea, from one 
 part of infinite fpace to another part of the fame 
 infinite fpace. The doctrine, therefore, which 
 you maintain from the mere literal and gram- 
 matical fenfe of fcripture, is on the very face 
 of it the mofi: abfurd, unphilofophical, and 
 impolTible, than can be fuppofed. For take 
 it which way you will, look at it in every 
 diredion which your hypothefis of mere words, 
 and fpace, and matter, will permit, and after all 
 you mud confefs it amounts to nothing. It 
 your ideas are derived from words, they will 
 end in words ; if from fpace, they will be 
 dilTipated like fpace; and if from matter, they 
 will terminate in \\iz grave. 
 
 All 
 
112 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 All thcfe things put together, and well con- 
 fidered, work, at lead in my mind, a full and 
 clear conviclion, that God iht/cnder^ and Jefu^ 
 Chrifl: ihtfenty are always in the idea, and in 
 many cafes in the exprefs language of fcrip- 
 ture, one and the fame Divine Being. But, for 
 your fatisfadion, if you flill doubt it, I will 
 bring further proof in what follows. 
 
 * * * 
 
 Becaufe Jefus, previous to his glorification, 
 or union with the Father, prayed to him /// all 
 appearance as to a perfon diftindl from himfelf ; 
 therefore you conclude, that he could not in 
 reality be that Father. " Chrift," you fay, p. 
 21, ** conftantly prayed to the perfon whom he 
 " called his Father, and he direded his dif- 
 " ciples to pray to the fame perfon. Father^ 
 ** fays he, John xvii. j, glorify thy Son, that thy 
 " Son alfo may glorify thee. Was Jefus then only 
 ** fpeaking to himfelf? Sometimes, no doubt, 
 " perfons do fo ; but not in this manner.'* You 
 acknwvledge, then, that a perfon may and 
 does fpeak to himfelf: but you fay not in that 
 manner. It is a pity but you had told us in 
 zvhat manner a man may fpeak to himfelf. 
 David addreifes his foul in the following man- 
 ner. *' Blefs Jehovah, O my foul; and all that 
 " is within me, blefs his holy name. Blefs 
 
 •' Jehovah, 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 1 13 
 
 ** Jehovah, O my foul, and forget rot all his 
 ''benefits; who forgiveth all thine iniquities; 
 who healeth ail thy difeafes ; who redeemeth 
 thy life from deftruclion ; \\ ho crowneth thee 
 with loving. kindnefs and tender mercies ; 
 " who fatisfieth thy mouth with good things, 
 *' fo that thy youth is renewed like the eagles." 
 Pfalm ciii. i to 5* '' Why art thou call: down, 
 •* O my fculf And why art thou difquieted 
 ^^ zvilhin me F Pfalm xlii. 5, i f * xliii. 5. David 
 here evidently fpcaks to his foul, and to all 
 that is within him. Will you therefore infer, 
 that David and his foul mud neccffarily be two 
 different perfons ? As well may you do this, as 
 conclude, that Jcfus and the Father within him 
 Were two, merely becaufe he prayed to him 
 as if he were different from him. 
 
 As this fcems to be one of yourgreatefl ob- 
 jedions to Chrifl being God, viz. his praying 
 to him as to a different perfon, it may be proper" 
 to explain the rcafon of it ; for until we under- 
 hand fomcthingof that wonderful circumdance, 
 wc may rcafon to eternity, and never be a whit 
 the wifer. And perhaps I cannot do it better, 
 than by comparing it to the regeneration of an 
 individual man. Every man, you know, con- 
 iids of an internal and an externaL The internal 
 
 Q^ we 
 
114 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 we will here call enlightened reafon, and the 
 external man's vicious propenlities or incli- 
 nations. This comparifon is alfo juft, for the 
 internal of the mind is the feat of rationality, 
 and the external of the mind is the feat of vice 
 or evil. Now this view of a fingle individual 
 man at once prefents the idea of an apparent 
 duality, although we know for a certainty that 
 both the internal and external conftitute only 
 §ne man. 
 
 Whenever a perfon is inftigated by his lufts 
 
 to commit a crime, the inclination commences 
 
 in the external man, and would immediately 
 
 rufh into ad:ion, were it not for the check 
 
 received from reafon in the internal, which 
 
 dilates to him, that the evil ought not to be 
 
 done. If the man is difpoied to be virtuous, 
 
 he will conftantly have recourfe to this reafon; 
 
 and particularly in times of danger from his 
 
 pallions, he will appeal to reafon, and as it 
 
 were cry out with earneftnefs for ali the powers 
 
 which his rational faculty can afford him m 
 
 the fubjedtion of his evil propcnfities. Now 
 
 what is all this, but the external of a man 
 
 praying to the internal of the fame man ? And 
 
 when by divine ailiftance he has fucceflively 
 
 refilled and overcome thofe evil inclinations. 
 
Signified by the Nezo Jenifalem. 1 15 
 
 he at length comes into the habit and pradicc 
 of virtue, fo that it nnay with truth be faid, 
 his internal and external are united^ or in other 
 words, the man is regenerated. 
 
 The above is a faint and very imperfcdt 
 image of the Lord's glorification, or union 
 with the Father. His internal was Jehovah, 
 purity itfelf, life itfelf; his external was a 
 Humanity or body derived from the Mother 
 Mary, and confequendy inhrm, fubjecl to 
 temptations, hunger, thirfl, death. By virtue 
 of inclinations hereditarily received from the 
 Mother, he was tempted to evils of various 
 kinds, being in this refpeCt like another man. 
 But by virtue ot the Divinity within him, in 
 which he differed from every other man, he 
 condantly relifted, oppofed, overcame, and 
 finally exterminated from his Humanity every 
 thing derived from Mary. During this pro- 
 cefs, it was necelTary for his external man, 
 when affaulted by temptations, to pray to his 
 internal man for that aid and adiftance which 
 no other power or piinciplc could afford. It 
 was in rcfped to his external man, previous 
 to It's full union with his internal man, that 
 he fays, that of him/elf he could do nothings and 
 that the Father is greater than he: for his 
 
 O 2 internal 
 
iiS A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 internal being always perfectly divine, could 
 not but be greater, while the external remained 
 unglorified. But when the internal Bowed fully 
 into the external, which it could do uhen all 
 hereditary evil or the maternal infirmities Merc 
 exterminated therefrom, then the external was 
 alfo made fully divine, or glorified, that is, 
 perfectly united with the internal, fo that the 
 Lord is in all rcfpedis equal to the Father, 
 being abfolutely one and the fame as the Father. 
 This is what we are to underfband by all power 
 leing given uulo him in heaven and in earlh^ 
 fvilatt, xxyiii. i^. 
 
 But there is another reafon vvhy the Lord 
 prayed to the Father as to a perfon different 
 from himfelf; and that is, becaufe he came 
 ii'ltto the world not only to elfed our redemption 
 by fubduing the powers of hell which pre- 
 vailed at that time, but alfo to teach us fof 
 ever after how we oqght to pray. The whole 
 procefs of man's regeneration is only a faint 
 image of the Lord's glorification. If he had 
 pot been glorified, we could not be regenerated ; 
 jf he had not prayed to the Father, we fliould 
 not have known how to pray ; for in all things 
 he is ouf head and pattern. It may indeed 
 appear, as if two diftind principles of intel- 
 ligence 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalevt. i\n 
 
 ligence were necelTarily implied in all the 
 prayers which the Lord uttered, the one prin- 
 ciple being that which didated the prayer, 
 and the other that to which the prayer was 
 direv^ed. But this is a mere appearamey and 
 not really Jo i as will be proved in another 
 place, when I come to fpeak more particularly 
 of the one and only divine fource of all intel- 
 ligence. So again it appears in all our prayers, 
 as if there were a principle of intelligence 
 helongmg to us as our proper own, abfolutely 
 diftinct and underived from that of the one in- 
 telledlual Being to whom we pray. But this 
 alfo is a viere appearance, and a fallacy ariling 
 from our wl^rior Jenfes.* A man can of bim- 
 felf no more pray to the Lord, than he can 
 hold the fun in his hand. It is the Lord alone 
 in us that prays to himjelf : although it is done 
 
 apparently 
 
 * It is generally fuppofed, that man is endued with 
 only the five bodily renf;;s q^ ftdn^^ hearing, JmzUing^ tajting, 
 touching. But he is alfo in the enjoyment of an equal 
 number of fpiritual fcnfes, perfeftly diftinft from the 
 former, though united together by correfpondence. The 
 fenfe of feting correfponds to the affeflion of undcrfianding 
 and becoming zvijc ; the fenfe of hearing, to the affeftion of 
 learnings and alfo obedience; the fenfe of fnelling, to the 
 zf^tEtion of perceiving ; the fenfe of i<2/?tw^, to the affeflion 
 pf knowing, or offcience\ and the fcnfb of touching^ m 
 general to the affcftion of what is good. 
 
1 18 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 apparent iy from the man ; and no other prayer 
 can have ihe leaf! pofnble degree of efficacy or 
 virtue in it. It is the fame with praifey tbankf- 
 giving^ and every other part of divine worjhip, 
 which arc only fo far real acls of worfiiip, and 
 acceptable to the Lord, as the Lord himfelf 
 is in them. So true are the Lord's words, 
 " No man can come unto me, except it were 
 " ?-i'L;en unto him of my Father y* John vi. 65. 
 ** As the branch cannot bear fruit of i if elf 
 ** except it abide in the vine ; no more can ye, 
 " except ye abide in me. For without me ye 
 " can do nothing. If ye abide in me, and my 
 " w&nis abide in you, ye Ihall ajk what ye will, 
 *^ and it ihall be done unto you,*' John xv. 4, 5,7^ 
 Thus the Lord alone is the Laj?, as well as the 
 Firfi, the Omega as well as the A/pha, the 
 All and in all. All comes Jrom him ; all is 
 direded to him ; and from Jirji to iaji it is the 
 Lord alone who operates in us and by us, from, 
 to, and for himfelf. See Col. i. 16. 
 
 As I am now on the fubjeifl of prayer, I 
 will here introduce a remark concerning our 
 Lord's words in John xvi. 23, ** Whatfoever yc 
 *' fnall aik the Father in my nam.e, he will 
 " give it you." The conftrudion generally put 
 upon this pafTage is, that wc ought to pray to 
 
 the 
 
Signified by the New Jerufdem, i in 
 
 the Father for the fake of the Son, thus to the 
 Father out of, and fepararc from the Son* 
 Hence the prayers of ahnoll all chrKli.in con- 
 gregations are addrelTcd to the Father aluiie, 
 and conclude with words to this efFed:, thrvfgb 
 Jefus Chrijl, ov for the fake of Jtfus Gmft^ his 
 fufferings, death, and meritSy &c. &c. But that 
 this is not praying hi his name, nor according 
 to his dire^ions, is very plain from the form of 
 fupplication, ufually called the Lord's prayer^ 
 which he didated to his difciplcsi when the/ 
 afked him to teach them how to pray. ** After 
 *' this manneF," fays he, " pray ye. Father of us * 
 " in the heavens," &c. This, compared with 
 the above-mentioned paffage in John, clearly 
 points out, that the name of Jefus is Father ; 
 which is further confirmed by the prophet 
 Ifaiah, " Unto us a child is born, unto us a 
 " Son is given, and his name fhall be called the 
 ** Everlajiing Father^'' ciiap. ix. 6. To pray 
 therefore in his name, means to call upon him 
 in the true ipirit of prayer ns our heavenly 
 Father, who can alone fupply ail our neceflities, 
 alone redeem, regenerate, and fave. And this 
 
 we 
 
 * My reafon for beginning the Lord's prayer thus, Father 
 of us, and not Our Father, may be feen in the MagaztM of 
 Knowledge^ &c. vol. xi, p. 413. 
 
1 20 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 we are to do, not for the fake of any perfon 
 or thing diftincl from hwiy but as the pfalmift 
 David exprefles it, for his 7nercys fake^ Pfalrn 
 vi. 4 ; or for his name*s fake^ Pfalm xxv. 1 1 ; 
 or as the prophet fays, for his ozvn fakcy I fa. 
 xliii. 25. Jefus faid to his difciples, "Hitherto 
 •' have ye aiked nothing in my name : aik, 
 and ye fhall receive. The time cometh, 
 when I Ihall lliew you plainly of the Father. 
 At that day ye fhall afk in my name: and I 
 ** fay not unto you, that I will pray the Father 
 ^* for you ; for the Father himfelf loveth you, 
 •* hecaufeye have loved me J* John xvi. 24 to 27. 
 From all which it is evident, that Jefus him- 
 felf is tlikc Father ; and that when the time 
 ihould come for him to be plainly known as 
 fuch, the members of his tfue chriftian church 
 would no longer confider him as a Mediator 
 or Inter uffor diftinct from the Father, but pray 
 to him as the Father himfelf "^'ho loveth them. 
 
 I am aware that many of thefe fcntimcnts 
 will appear novel, becaufe hitherto the learned 
 as well as the fimple-minded have been ufed 
 to confider things in a very different point of 
 view; not knowing the true nature either of 
 the Divine Being, or of the exigence of man 
 as a rational and free agent by continual deriva- 
 tion 
 
Signified by the New Jerufakm. 1 2 1 
 
 tion from him, nor wherein human liberty 
 ciTentially confifts, and how it is compatible 
 with the fovcreignty of him in whofe hands is 
 the difpofal of all events from the day of crea- 
 tion to eternity. To Baron Swedcnborg, as an 
 inftrument in the Lord's hands, the prefent age 
 is indebted for the difcovery of thefe more than 
 mctaphyfical truths ; and I freely acknowledge, 
 that all my prefent views have been opened in 
 my mind through the medium of his writings, 
 which appear to me to contain more true and 
 fohd wifdom, than the writings of all philofo- 
 phers and all divines, in all ages, put together; 
 I therefore from the (incerity of my heart, and 
 as an adl of the greateft friendfhip I am capable 
 .of (hewing, earneftly recommend the cool, de- 
 liberate, unprejudiced, attentive 7?/<ii)' of them 
 to Dr. Priefllcy, and all others into whofe 
 hands this Defence of the Nezv Church may fall. 
 
 * * * 
 To return again to your objecflions. You go 
 on, in p. 2 1, to obfcrve as follows. *' When 
 " Chrill diredled his difcipks to pray to their 
 " Father who feetb in fccret, he furcly did not 
 " mean that they fhould pray to himfelf If 
 •* he did, he certainly did not fpeak very in- 
 " telligibly." \^ l\iQ feeing in fecret is a proof 
 of divinity, and of being the Father, then Jcfus 
 
 R is 
 
122 A DefeJice of the New Church, 
 
 is the divine Father ; for he knew all meUy John 
 ii. 24. He /aze; iV^//j^w^^/ before Philip called 
 him, when be was under the fig-tree, John i. 48. 
 He knew their thought s, Luke vi. 8 ; and manj 
 other places. I admit that fuch language as 
 the Lord ufes may not be intelligible to Jhme 
 winds,' for *' he hath Minded their eyes, and 
 ** ha?'dened their hearts, that they Jloould not fee 
 ** vvith their eyes, nor underftand with their 
 •* heart, and be converted, and I fliould heal 
 •* them," John xii. 40. That is, he permits 
 feme pciTons to remain in darknefs, to prevent 
 their being guihy of profanation, for no one 
 can profane a thing, of which he is ignorant. 
 But a time was to come, when he would fpeak 
 more plainly of the Father, than ever he had 
 done ; when he would reveal to , mankind, 
 without any ihadow of doubt, that h^e himfelf 
 was the Father as w ell as the Son ; and then 
 men w^ould fee and underftand more clearly 
 than heretofore all that he had faid when he 
 was in the world. That day is at length come, 
 and we have feen it. 
 
 Y.ou continue in the fame page, " Befides, he 
 
 \*** plainly diftinguifnes between praying to the 
 
 «« Father, and afking any thing of himfelf, 
 
 *' when he fays, John xvi. 23, ** In that day yc 
 
Signified by the Nezv Jerufalem. 1 23 
 
 "JLall ajk me nothing. Verily ^ verily I fay unto you, 
 *• whalfoevcr ye /hall aJk the Father in my name^ 
 *^ he will give it you." Was fuch language as 
 *' this, which he conftantly uics, calculated to 
 ** lead the difciples to confidcr the Father and 
 " himfelf as the fame perfon ?" I anfvver, It 
 certainly v,as not calculated to give them an 
 immediate and full idea of his being the Father; 
 for this idea can only be brought ^bout gradually. 
 Men muft firll: believe Jefus to be the Son of 
 Gody before they are capable of acknowledging 
 him as God the Father him/elf If Jefus had 
 conftantly and plainly told his difciples that 
 he was Jehovah the great God of heaven and 
 earth, they would not have believed him, be- 
 caufe he had all the appearance of being a man 
 like themfclves. He therefore ufually called 
 himfelf the Son^ of God, and thus gradually 
 infinuated into their minds an idea of the di- 
 vinity of his Humanity ; w hich idea, however, 
 was not fo clear as to be without all doubt ; 
 for, as before obferved, they were not prepared 
 for fo full and open a revelation. Hence it was, 
 that the Lord, who beft knov.s the times and 
 feafons, becaufe he alone knows the flates of 
 all hearts, almoil immediately after the words 
 already quoted by you, adds, " Ihclc things 
 *' have 1 fpoken unto you /;/ ^roierls : the ti»ii2 
 
 I^ 2 ** coiiicth 
 
1 24 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 " Cometh vhen I fhall no more /peak unto you in 
 ^' proverbs, but I fnall Jhezv you plainly of the 
 ^y lather^' John xvi. 25. 
 
 Now here 1 would beg leave to afk you what 
 
 the Lord meant by fpeaking in this manner, if 
 
 he had not fome grand truth in referve rcfpec- 
 
 ting the Father, v/hich was improper to be 
 
 full/ communicated at that time, and which 
 
 men would not have believed, had it been 
 
 plainly avowed ? Surely he could not allude to 
 
 the doctrine maintained by you, that God the 
 
 Father was a great unbiozvn Being diftindt from 
 
 himfelf : for there were enough at that time of 
 
 day who already believed in this manner. 
 
 There could be no reafon for fpeaking to the 
 
 difciples on that fuhject in parables, if all the 
 
 while he meant no more than what was generally 
 
 believed by the fcribes and pharifees his per- 
 
 fecutors, as well as by the bulk of the Jevvifh 
 
 nation. He muit therefore have alluded to 
 
 fuch a doctrine concerning the Father and the 
 
 Son, as was not then underflood, but which 
 
 v;a3 to be made known at a future day, by a 
 
 further and plainer revelation. Now we know 
 
 not of any plainer revelation having taken place 
 
 concerning the Father, than the words fpoken 
 
 by the Lord to his difciples^ until the writings 
 
 of 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufalem. j ? c 
 
 of Baron Swcdenborg appeared in th- world; 
 iand thefe do contain a manifeft and plain re- 
 velation from the Lord himfclf, that He and 
 the Father are One Divine Ferjon, juft as the 
 foul and body are one man. Thus his own 
 words are now for the firlt time verified in his 
 New Church, in that he hath Jhewn us plainly of 
 the Father ; which evident accomplifhment of 
 the fcripture, is, among many others, one Itri- 
 king proof of tlie divme commilfion of Baron 
 Swedenborg. 
 
 « « « 
 But you objed, p. 22, againft Jefus being 
 the fame with the Father, bccaufc, " fpeakmg 
 *• of the day of judgment, he fays, Mark xiii. 
 "32, that the time of it was not known 
 " Cither to the angels or to himfelf, but to the 
 ** Father only. If the Son was the iame with 
 ** the Father, furely every thing that was known 
 *' to the one, mult have been known to the 
 ^* other alfo ; efpecially as you fuppofe there 
 " was no principle of intelligence in Chrifl 
 " belides that of the Father, he having no 
 " human fouL 
 
 This is a very natural objeclion, and re- 
 quires a particular anfwer. I fhall therefore, 
 Siccording to my little mcai'ure of ability, 
 
 endeavour 
 
1 26 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 endeavour to remove the veil that hangs over 
 this grand myltf ry, by a difclofure of the true 
 fource of intelligence, and the laws of it's 
 defcent from heaven to earth, from God to 
 man. Afterwards I will apply the whole rea- 
 foning to illuftrate the circumliance of the 
 Lord's fpeaking of the Father as if he were a 
 perfon different from himfelf, and the appear- 
 ance of his having within him two diflind: 
 principles of intelligence, although in reality 
 he had but one, which was his own divine 
 wifdom. To do this effectually, would indeed 
 require a volume of itfelf ; but as 1 have not 
 leifure for fuch an ample difquifition of the 
 fubject, I ihall comprefs my ideas into as fmall 
 a compafs as poilible. 
 
 Firft, then, it will be ncceffary to ftate, 
 that in reality there is only one principle of inteU 
 Ugeftce in the univerjcy which is God. Every 
 other principle of intelligence is only apparently 
 fuch. Neveithclefs fuch appearances are agree- 
 able t© the laws of divine order inlHtuted at 
 the creation, which require that every man 
 fliould Jecm to himfelf and others, to think, 
 will, and a6l, of himfelf Without fuch an 
 appearance he could not exilf one fmgle mo- 
 ment as a rational man, becaufc there would 
 
 be 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 121 
 
 be nothing in him that could appropriate the 
 life flowing from God. Hence it is faid in 
 Gen. i. 26, 27, that God created man in bis 
 ozvn image, after his ozvn likene/s : that is, he 
 made him in all refpetls to have t\\Q' appearance 
 of being a God, to have the appearance of 
 thinking, willing, and acling of himfelf, and 
 confequently to have the appearance of a prin- 
 ciple of intelligence within him diftind: from 
 God. Now as this was not a real, geniiiiu 
 truth, but only an apparent one, it is evident, 
 that the confirmation of that appearance mud 
 have been highly criminal, becaufe it amounted 
 to a denial and rejecliion of the real truth, viz. 
 that God only has lite, love, and wifdom Irv 
 himfelf. This was the origin of evil. 
 
 From thefe premifes I infer, that all intel- 
 ligence, whether in angels or men, comes 
 fromj and belongs to, God alone ; that in order 
 to be communicated to, and fenfibly perceived 
 by others, there mud: of neceflity be in them 
 forms or velTels receptive thereof; and that in 
 it's defcent from God it is varied according to 
 the recipient forms into which it flows. 
 
 Man is born in^utter ignorance, dcftituce 
 of all thought and ideas, there being nothing 
 
 connate 
 
128 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 connate in him, but the faculty of fcience, 
 intelligence, and wifdom, together with an 
 inclination to love not only fuch things, but 
 alfo himfclf, his neighbour, and God. This 
 being the conftitution of man at his birth, he 
 is utterly incapable of forming an idea, without 
 the aid of his external fenfes, which are the 
 inlets of all impreflions from without, and the 
 means v/hereby his internal connate faculties 
 may come into a6lual exercife. Thefe faculties 
 in man may be called the jirji principles of his 
 thought and affedion, which cannot properly 
 be faid to exijl^ until they have a body wherein 
 to exifl, and this body is formed by fcientifics 
 from the fenfes, and by inflrudlion. Hence 
 no one can think a thought, or have any idea, 
 ■without imprefiioiiS from external objedls which 
 may ferve as a body for his thought to dwell 
 in ; jufl: as there can be nojight, which is fome- 
 thing fpiritual, without an eye^ which is fome- 
 thing natural. 
 
 But it ought to be well obferved, thatt 
 although impreflions from external objects are 
 made on us through the fenfes, yet they do not 
 penetrate to the rational prii^ciple which re- 
 lides in the internal, but flop in the natural 
 principle, where they are met by the intellcdlual 
 
 faculty,. 
 
Signified by, the New Jenifalem. 1 29 
 
 faculty, and alTumcd merely as it's inflruments 
 of ufe. Thus the light of the fun flows into 
 the eye, but not into the internal mind ; yet 
 the underftanding meets that natural light, and 
 being as it were cloathed v/ith it, is thereby 
 enabled to fee the objects of the natural world, 
 which it could not oihervvife do. For what 
 is natural or material cannot flow into what is 
 fpiritual, nor material ideas into immaterial or 
 intelledlual ideas ; fcience cannot flow into 
 reafon, nor fpcech into thought ; neither can 
 the external flow into the internal ; for this 
 would be like the craflx^r flow^ing into the 
 purer, the poflerior in the prior, and the eflect 
 into the caufe, which arc all impofllbilities. 
 It appears indeed, in a thoufand inflances, as 
 if that was the true order of influx ; but it 
 is a mere fallacy of the fenfes. All influx^ 
 on the contrary, is from the fpiritual into the 
 rtatural w^orld, confequently all intelligence is 
 jb likewife ; but the nearer it is to the external 
 or fenfual principle, and the fewer and more 
 imperfed: the velfels or fciences which any 
 man has to contain it, fo much the more obfcure 
 and faint is his intelligence. Hence the new- 
 born infant, having no fcience or experience 
 as a veflTel for the adual reception of reafon, 
 has of courfe neither reafon nor intelligence, 
 
 S but 
 
130 A Defence of the Neap Church, 
 
 but only the faculty or capacity of acquiring 
 veflels for a future reception. As he grows 
 up, he accumulates fcience by the ufe of his 
 fenfes, and from the inftrudions of his teachers, 
 every day furnifhing him with an additional 
 Hock of knowledges, into which, as into their 
 proper veiTels, reafon, intelligence, and wif- 
 dom, continually flow from the fpiritual world. 
 But all this while the principle of intelligence 
 is the fame in it's origin ; it only waits for the 
 formation of a veiTel to flow into ; till that is 
 effected, it cannot make it's appearance, nor 
 even be perceived by man ; but as fcientifics 
 are provided by him from the external things of 
 the natural world, light from heaven gradually 
 flows into them, and the man becomes more 
 and more intelligent and wife. Such then is the 
 law of the defcent of intelledlual light from 
 God into the minds of men. 
 
 Having made thefe remarks on the nature of 
 influx in general, and on the progrefs of man 
 from mere ignorance to a fl:ate of wifdom and 
 'ffitelligence, I fhall now apply the fubftance 
 of what has been faid to the cafe of the Lord, 
 with a view to illufl:rate, in fome fmall degree, 
 the procefs of his glorification, and thereby 
 fatisfaclorily to account for his fpeaking of the 
 
 Father 
 
Signified by the Nexo Jcrufalem, 131 
 
 Father as of a pcrfon that knew all things, 
 but of the Son as of one who was ignorant of 
 the day of the laft judgment, while at the fame 
 time he himfclf was both that Father and that 
 Son. 
 
 God from eternity was a man in Jirjl prin- 
 cipleSy but not adually fuch /;; the ullimates * 
 till the incarnation. He often declared by the 
 prophets, that he himfclf wo.uld defcend into 
 the world, alTume human nature, be born as a 
 child, and during his abode in the work! be 
 called the Mefliah, the Son of God, ImmanucI, 
 Redeemer, &c. At the appointed time he 
 came ; a virgin conceived without the aid of 
 man ; Divine Truth itfelf, fuch as is contained 
 in the Word, impregnated her ; and a God- 
 Man was born; at which all the hofts of 
 heaven rejoiced. This divine child was called 
 Jefus Chrift. In aifuming this form, the 
 pure Divinity defcended from his high abode, 
 firil: into the angelic heaven, from, thence into 
 
 S 2 the 
 
 * Paul, in his epifllc to the Hebrews, chap. vii. g, lo, 
 fays of Levi, that '• he paid tiihcs in Abraham ; for he 
 *' was yet in the loins of his father when Melchiledec met 
 " him." This is as much as faying, that Levi was a man 
 in firjl principles, long before he was ,\i\\iz\\y a man :n the 
 uliimaUs^ 
 
132 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 the womb of Mary in the natural world, where 
 he cloathed himfelf with material fubflances 
 from her body; and at lafl: was born as any 
 other child. Thus the divine principle of in- 
 telligence became as it were obfcurcy in con- 
 fequence of being furrounded with fuch grofs 
 fubflances from Mary, as were not capable of 
 receiving the full influx of divine life from 
 within. Therefore, agreeable to the efta- 
 blilhied laws of influx, as before mentioned in 
 page 129, the divinity could not fully manifefl 
 itfelf in the infant form, until by inflrudions, 
 and fcientifics derived from the natural world, 
 proper veilels were formed to receive it. 
 Hence it is written, that " Jefus increafed in 
 *^wifdom andflature, and in favour with God and 
 ** man," Luke ii. 52. As the fame falfe ap- 
 pearances of things prefented themfelves to 
 him,' as do to every other man, thefe furnifhed 
 him with occafions for meditating upon them, 
 and detedling their fallacy ; v/hich he w^as always 
 enabled to do, by appealing to that divine 
 principle he was confcious refided within him. 
 While he was in the act of appealing or praying 
 to the Father within him, it would indeed 
 appear as if the principle of intelligence in 
 the Son was diitinct from that of the Father; 
 but they were in reality no more dillind in 
 
 Jefus, 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalein, i^g 
 
 Jefus, than in David when he called upon his 
 foul, and all that was within him, to praifc 
 the Lord. 
 
 For further illuftration, we will confider the 
 Lord, as having three degrees of perception of 
 truth; a fir ft or internal, QdiWtd intellef/ual ; a 
 fecond or middle, called rational ^ and a third 
 or lowed, called fcientific. When he thought 
 from the latter, he was ignorant of many 
 things, and therefore needed inflru^ion : when 
 from the rational, he was in the clear per- 
 ception of truth, as the Son of God, yet by 
 afTiftance from a fuperior principle called his 
 Father : but when he thought from the intd- 
 ledtual, (if that can be called thought, which 
 is efiential and perfed: wifdom and love united) 
 he fpake as Jehovah the Father himfelf, who 
 knew all things, even the hour of the lad 
 judgment. From the fhade of the fcientific 
 man, he advanced to the light of the rational 
 man, and from this to the full perception of 
 the divine intclle^nal man. During the whole 
 procefs of his glorification, he continually 
 removed the impcrfecflions and infirmities ne- 
 celfarily attendant on the grofs human nature, 
 till atlafl: he completely united in himfelf the 
 infinite perfcBions of Divinity with the ulti- 
 mate 
 
134 ^ Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 mate form of Humanity. Thus he that was 
 God, became perfect Man ; and he that was 
 Man, became perfect God. 
 
 Now let us fee what ufe can be made of the 
 foregoing obfervations, in illuftrating the paf- 
 fage of fcripture alluded to in Mark xiii. 32, 
 " But of that day and hourknoweth no man, no 
 " not the angels which are in heaven, neither 
 " the Son, but the Father." Here, you fay, 
 Jefus evidently diftinguiflies between himfelf 
 and the omnifcient God, attributing to the 
 Father what he denies to himfelf. Not fo; 
 Jefus, in this pafTage, no more diflinguifhes 
 between himfelf and the Father, than he does 
 between himfelf and the Son; and for all that 
 is expreffed to the contrary, he might as well 
 have alluded to himfelf as being the Father to 
 whom the time was known, as to himfelf as 
 being the Son to whom it was not known. If 
 merely his fpeakir*g of ike Father be a fuffi- 
 cient proof that he was not that Father, then 
 his fpeaking of the Son is to the full as good a 
 proof that he was not that Son. To fay that 
 he meant himfelf by the term Son, and another 
 diliind from himfelf by the term Father, is 
 a mere pet'itio principii, a begging of the quef- 
 tion. He fpcaks of the Father, I will admit, 
 
 appareyitly 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. lor 
 
 apparently as of a third perfon ; but he alfo 
 fpeaks in like manner of the Son. Therefore 
 according to this view of the fubjecl, the whole 
 of the objedion has loft it's weight, and falls 
 to the ground ; for although it is true, that 
 the Lord in other places frequently calls 
 himfelf the Son of God, yet it is equally true 
 that he is fometimes declared to be the Father^ 
 and the very God. 
 
 But not to take this advantage of the wcak- 
 ftefs of the objecflion, I will, for argument's 
 fake, (or rather for the fake of manifefting 
 the truth,) allow it all the importance, whicb 
 you feem to think it carries with it. How 
 eafy is it to fee, from the preceding remarks 
 on the various difcrete degrees of intelligence 
 in one mind, that the Lord meant to inftruct 
 us, that truth not yet fully united to divine 
 good (lignified by the Son as diftinguifhcd from 
 the Father) was not pofiefTed of that infinitely- 
 complete perception of all things, which it 
 would have when the perfecl: union was accom- 
 plifhed ; or, in other words, that himfelf, in 
 the capacity of Son^ could not manifcftly 
 exhibit thofe full perfections of divinity, which 
 the laws of order required him to cxercife as 
 Father. That Jefus is the Father, as well as the 
 
 Son, 
 
136 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 Son, is alfo plain from this circumflance, that 
 he is the fole judge of the living and the dead, 
 for into his hands all judgment is committed*- 
 Now as no one can be a competent judge of 
 every creature in the univerfe, who is fo de- 
 fe6live in capacity as not to kmzv even the time 
 when to commence it ^ and as the fitting in judg- 
 ment over the thoughts, intentions, and motives 
 of all hearts, as well as over their every word 
 and a6lion, implies to the full as much an 
 infinite capacity, if not more fo than the mere 
 knowledge of the day when fuch an event is to 
 take place ; I infer, that he who knows the 
 greater, cannot be ignorant of the lefs ; that 
 he, v» ho is equal to the one, is fufficient for the 
 other alfo; confequently that Jefus being quali- 
 fied to ^;^^^///^ judgment, muft know the proper 
 time when to do it ; and that therefore he him- 
 felf was that very Father to whom he alluded, 
 as alone knowing the day and hour of that 
 great event. 
 
 There is one circumflance highly necefTary 
 to be obferved in reading the holy fcriptures, 
 if we would attain to a right underftanding of 
 their contents ; without a due attention to 
 which, manypaflages will unavoidably appear 
 dark, perplexed, and contradictory to others. 
 
 I Wnat 
 
signified by the New Jcritfalcm, 
 
 1^. 
 
 What I allude to, is, the frequent ufe of ap~ 
 parent truths in the literal fenfe, inRead of 
 thofe that are genuiucy together with the ne- 
 cellity of an inverfion of the terms, in order 
 CO obtain the fpiritual fenfe. Mv meaning will 
 be bell explained by an example. It is fre- 
 quently faid in the Word, that God is angry, 
 that he puniflies, cafts into hell, and deflroys 
 the wicked. Thefe are only apparent truths, 
 not real or genuine ; for rhe Lord is love itfelf, 
 and mercy itfelf, and it is not within the power 
 of love and mercy to punidi, or bring evil upon 
 any one. To come at the genuine truth, 
 then, there muil be an inverfion or chan<^c 
 of terms, at leaft in our idea. Thus, inflead 
 of fjppoftng that the Lord is angry and cajis 
 into belly v,e mufl: underfland that he is vicrcjfid 
 and does goody and that it is man who is angry 
 with the Lord, and cads himfelf into hell; 
 for fuch is the genuine truth, as is particularly 
 evident in Pfalm cxxxvi. lo, 15 to 20, where 
 the dedrudion of the Egyptians, &c. is at- 
 tributed to his everlafling mercy. The Lord, 
 in his own perfon, when on earth, reprefenred 
 not only the Word itfelf, but alfo the flate 
 of the church on earth ; fo that what is fpoken 
 of the Lord, will in many cafes admit of being 
 applied to man. Take an exam.ple : " Jcfus 
 
 T "charged 
 
138 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 " charged his difciples, that they fliould tell no 
 '' man that he was Jefus the Chrifl," Matt. 
 xvi. 20. Here it is faid of Jefus, that he 
 charged his difciples not to publiili him abroad, 
 althoLicrh he came into the world and chofe his 
 difciples for that very purpofe. This paflage, 
 therefore, appears to be one that is more im- 
 mediately applicable to the ftate of the church, 
 and defcriptive of it's non-reception of truth, 
 than to the Lord, who certainly willed that all 
 men fhould receive and acknowledge him. In 
 another place it is faid, that he could do no mighty 
 zvork there i bccauje of their unbeliefs Mark vi. 5, 6; 
 where non-ability is afcribed to the Lord, on 
 account of unbelief in the people. From thefe 
 and other palTages of a fimilar nature, it is very 
 evident, that many things fpoken of Jefus have 
 a relative application to the flate of the church 
 at that time, and ought to be interpreted ac- 
 cordingly. 
 
 Agreeable to thefe obfervations, the circum- 
 flance of the day and hour of the laft judgment 
 being hid from the Son, and known only to 
 the Father, will admit of the following ex- 
 planation. The Father fignifies the Lord as to 
 divine good, and in refpedl to the church the 
 reception thereof under the defcription of. 
 
 I charity. 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalcm. 139 
 
 charity. The Son fignifics the Lord as to 
 divine truth, and in refpcct to the church 
 the reception thereof under the form of faith. 
 Now the end of the church, fignified by the 
 lad judgment, being principally in confequence 
 of the dcftrudion of charity, which has im- 
 mediate reference to divine good or to the Lord 
 as Father, it is therefore faid, that the Father 
 only knoweth the time, and not the Son ; by 
 which is fignified, that the lalt lUte of the 
 church is determined by the defection of 
 charity, and not fo much by the ^^ ant of faith ; 
 for immediately on the expiration of charity, 
 the church ceafes to be any longer a church, 
 not^^ithftanding all it's faith. As long as 
 charity remained, the church remained; but 
 as foon as ever that was loll, the judgment 
 took place. This is a fliort fketch of the 
 fpiritual fenfe of the above paffage. But for 
 a further and more particular explanation, I 
 refer you to the Magazine of Knowledge concerning 
 Heaven and Heily vol. ii. p. 1 87, where you 
 will find the fubjcci: treated, I hope, in a fatif- 
 faclory manner, by a writer undv^* the fignature 
 
 of M. B, G. 
 
 * * ♦ 
 
 In Matt, xxviii. j 8, Jefus fays to his dif- 
 ciplcs, " jill poii'cr is giv -n u-ilo m ' /// ftaven aij 
 
 T 2 
 
140 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 '* in earth,'' 'And in Luke x. 22, *•' AH things are 
 *' delivered to me 9/ my Father.*' You quote 
 thcfe two paiTages, in p. 22, as a proof of the 
 diftindion between the Father who gave the 
 power, and Jefus who received it ; and then 
 immediately you put the following queilion, 
 f Can the giver and receiver be the fame perfon, 
 " any more than the perfon fendingy and the 
 " perfony?;// /*" 1 have already fhewn, that the 
 perfon fending and the perfon Jcnt may be one 
 and the fame; I will now prove, from the au- 
 thority of fcripture, that the giver and receiver y 
 in the following inftances, not only may he one 
 and the fame perfon, but clearly and abfolutely 
 can be no other. 
 
 Jehovah fays by the prophet Ifaiah, " I ani 
 ''Jehovah, tliat is my name, and my glory will 
 ** / not give to another ^'^ I fa. xlii. 8. The glory 
 of Jehovah coniifts in his being poifcifed of all 
 divine and infinite perfections, of which om^ 
 iiipotence is one. Jehovah the Father gave to 
 Jefus all poller, as is exprcfsly declared; there- 
 fore unlefs Jefus was the fame perfon as the 
 Father, Jehovah gave his glory of omnipotence 
 ro another. But as this cannot poffibiy be 
 true, I conclude that Jefus and Jehovah 
 t:"o ovi^ and the fame perfon, confequently 
 
 ih^l; 
 
Signijied by the Ntw^Jtrufalcm, 141 
 
 that the giver and receiver are one and the 
 fame alfo. 
 
 Peter fays, that Jefus Chrifl " received from 
 *' God the Father, honour and glory," 2 Pet. 
 i. 17. As God cannot give his glory to another^ 
 and it is here faid that Jefus received it from 
 God, it is plain that Jefus himfelf muft be 
 God, and thus that the giver and receiver are 
 one and the fame perlbn. 
 
 When Jefus would inftruct his difciples of 
 the union fubiifting between himfelf and the 
 Father,, that it was like the union fubfifting 
 between the foul and body of one man, he did 
 It in fuch terms as thefe : " As the Father 
 *' hath life in himfelf, fo hath he given to the 
 " Son to have life in himfelf,'' John v. 26. 
 Now he that hath life in himfelf^ muft be 
 effentially God : and as it is impolTible for God 
 to communicate to another being the cflentially 
 divine property of having life in himfelf for 
 this would be one God creating aiwther God, 
 which is a manifefr abfurdity; and as it is faid 
 that the Father gave to the Son (meaning to 
 Jefus Chrift) that divine property of having life 
 in himfelf in all rcfpeds as God the Father 
 had ; it is evident, that the Father and the Son 
 
 can 
 
S42 A Defence n/ the New C/iurc/i, 
 
 can be no other than one and the fame God, 
 confequently that the giver and receiver are one 
 and the fame peiTon. 
 
 It is faid of the Lord God almighty, that 
 he has taken to himjelf his great power, Apoc. xi, 
 17. Now although it may feem, according 
 to the literal fcnfe of thefe words, that there 
 was a time when the Lord God almighty had 
 ihot that great power which he now has, but 
 that it was lodged in fome other hands-, juft as, 
 when it is faid of Jefus, that all pozver is given 
 unto hiniy it may appear as if he received it 
 from another^ there being no greater impropriety 
 in the one Cfifc, than in the other; yet no one 
 will pretend to build an argument on fuch 
 ground againd the real divinity of the Lord 
 God almighty. Why then. Dr. Prieilley, do 
 you make that an argument againll the fole 
 and fupreme divinity of Jefus Chrift, which 
 equally and as llrongly operates againft the 
 great Jehovah himfelf ? 
 
 Jefus not only hath all pozver in heaven and 
 in earth, but everv other attribute of divinitv 
 that can poflibly be conceived. Infinity, im- 
 menfity, and eternity are his. He is felf- 
 effcnt aiid fcli-cxilknt; the I Am, Indepen- 
 dent, 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. i^g 
 
 Jent, Sole, Supreme, from eternity the Firft, 
 and to eternity the Laft ; for, fays he, *' All 
 " things that the Father hath, are viinc,' John 
 xvi. 15. No divine attribute then can be wan- 
 ting in him. Th^fiihiefs of the Godhead mud 
 necelTarily dwell in him, not as a power or 
 principle diftind from him, but as one with 
 hiiUy like the foul and body in man. Were wc 
 to fuppofe it pqlJible for the Father to be a God 
 diilindl from Jefus Chrift, then, agreeable to 
 the above paflage in Matthew, he muft have 
 refigned his kingdom and power to Jefus 
 Chrift, and confequently is no longer the God 
 of heaven and earth. But Jehovah will not, 
 cannot give either his glory or omnipotence 
 to another. He may and hath given it to 
 hivijelf ; that is, the Divinity of Jehovah hath 
 given it to the Humanity of the fame Jehovah ; 
 for Jefus, who is God in the Humanity, and 
 who received all power from the Father, fays, 
 " / and my Father are one,'' John x. 30; one, 
 not by unanimity, but abfolutely and infe- 
 parably, being as incapable of divifion without 
 a complete and total denial of the whol^ 
 Godhead, as the foul and body of man are, 
 without deatji. 
 
 The 
 
/ 
 
 144 ^ Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 The next thing I have to remark upon, is 
 the conclufion you draw from the following 
 pafTage in John, *' This is life eternal, that 
 " they might know thee the only true Gody and 
 **Jefus Chrifl: whom thou haft fent/* chap, 
 xvii. 3. What has already been advanced con- 
 cerning the apparent diflindtion between the 
 perfon of the Father and that of the Son, may 
 equally be applied to this and many other 
 palTages in the Word. Permit me, however, 
 to bring to your recolledion the tefiimony of 
 John in refpecl to Jefus Chrift the Son of God. 
 He fays, i Epid. v. 20, " Tbis * is the true God, 
 "and eternal life." Now you know there can^ 
 not be tivo true Gods. Jefus calls his Father 
 the true God, and John calls Jefus the true 
 God. If both propoiitions be admitted, then 
 no conclulion can be more regular or certain, 
 than that the Father and Jefus are one and the 
 fame God, The apoftle Jude like wife agrees 
 with us of the New Church in afcribing 
 "glory and majefly, dominion and power both 
 
 " now 
 
 ♦ It will avail nothing to fay, that the definitive pro- 
 noun fAu refers not to Jefus Chrift, but to the Father; 
 the plain fenfe of the words being evidently fuch as they 
 are h^re taken, viz. that Jefus Chrift is the true God 
 an4 eternal life. 
 
ce 
 
 u 
 
 Signified by the New ^erufalein, 14/: 
 
 now and ever, to the only 'wife God our Sa^ 
 viour,* veiTe 25. 
 
 Our Lord fays, that life etenmt confifts in 
 knowing the Father and Jefus Chrifl. This 
 appears to me exceedingly unfavourable to the 
 Socinian fcheme; for if Jefus Chrift be no 
 more than a vicre mauy I cannot fee how the 
 knowledge of him, any more than of any 
 other prophet, can be one of ihe eflcntial con- 
 ditions and conftituents of life eternal. To 
 know the true God^ one might naturally expc(5l 
 to be necelTary to falvation ; but that i\\t 
 knowledge of a mere man^ be he who he 
 tnay^ fhould be to the full as neccffary and as 
 effential to our future happincfs, as the know- 
 ledge of the only true God, is a fuppofition 
 which, I think, even a Mahometan or a Pagan 
 \vouid blufh to maintain. And is this the 
 jcheine of chrijlianity which Dr. Prieftley in^ 
 vites the members of the New Jcrufalem to 
 embrace 1— My good friend, let me inn eat you 
 to re-conlider this matter, and fcrioufly weigh 
 in your mind the confequenccs of fuch a 
 delulion. If jefus be no more than a prophet, 
 like Mofes, or Jonah, or Amos, or any others, 
 what virtue can there be in the know ledge oi 
 Jhim, any more than of them ? But if he be 
 
 U the 
 
146 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 the Divine Human Form of God, then th«r 
 acknowledgment of him muft be as effcnUal to 
 falvation, as the acknowledgment of the Father^ 
 feeing that both the Father and tlie Son, the 
 ej^ence and the Jorm, together conftitute only 
 c?ie God^ 
 
 In John rii. 1 6, and other places, Jefus calls 
 himfclf the only -begot ten Son of God : but in 
 what fenfe this is to be underftood, defervcs 
 fome Gonfideration. If Jefus was a mere man, 
 it would not be faying the truth to call him 
 the only^hegotten Son of God, feeing that all 
 men, who are born again, are equally faid to 
 be begotten of God, and even called the fons 
 of God* The cxprelTion, however, of 0;//)- 
 hegotten is repeatedly applied to Jefus Chrifr, 
 which is therefore evidently repugnant to the 
 fuppofition of his being a mere man. But if 
 we confider Jefus Chrift as the Humanity of 
 Jehovah, then it is with great propriety faid 
 of him, that he is the only-hegotten of the Father ; 
 for the divine eJTence^ which is meant by the 
 Father, being individual, has begotten to itfelf a 
 divine/orw, which is alfo individual ; and thus 
 Divinity and Humanity are united in one God, 
 as foul and body arc united in one man, 
 
 which 
 
Signified by the Nczo Jerufalem. 147 
 
 which union is fignificd by the only-bcgot- 
 t-cn Son dwelling in the bofom of the Father. 
 
 It is onacGoutu of this ftrid union between 
 the Father and the Son, that it is faid, " Fk 
 *' that honourcth not the Son, honoureth not the 
 '•' Feather," John v. 23. '* He that believeth 
 •^ on the Souy hath everlading life," John iii. 
 36. ** This is the will of the Father, that 
 "' every one w ho fecth the So?j, and believeth 
 *' on Jj'nn, may have everlafling life," John vi. 
 4Q. *^ Whofo denieth tfje Son^ the fame hath 
 « not the Father,'' i John ii. 23- '* God hath 
 " given to us eternal life ; and this life is in his 
 ^* Son. He that hath the Son, hath life ; but he 
 ** that hath not the Son, hath not life," i John 
 V. 11,12. From all thefe paflages the following 
 plain conclufion naturally refults, viz. That 
 the Son is the continent of the Father, jufl as- 
 light is the continent o^ heat, as the form is the 
 continent of the eflence, or as the body is th? 
 continent of the foul ; and he that fees the one, 
 (ees all that can be feen of the other. If I wiih 
 to converfe with a man's foul, I muft approach 
 his body ; for there the foul is, and no where 
 elfe. And while I addrefs the body, I at the 
 fame time addrefs the whole man, both foul 
 and body together. But were I to attempt 10 
 
 y 2 addrefs 
 
1^8 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 addrefs the foul feparately or diflind from 
 ihe body, it would not only be abfurd ia 
 itfelf, but could not poiTibly be attended with 
 any efFed: ; for if the fuhiefs of the fouly or the 
 'whole fouly refides in the body, and not out of it^ 
 to the body alone mull the dire 8 and immediate 
 approach be made. On this very principle 
 it is, that the members of the New Jerufalem 
 approach Jefus Chrift alone, as knov/ing that 
 X^cfulnefs of the Godhead^ or tho: whole Divinity^ 
 centers in his Humanity, and is no where eUe 
 to be found. Thus by approaching him, they 
 at the fame time approach the Father, becaufe 
 the Father is in him, as the foul is in the body. 
 Were we to attempt to " climb up any other 
 *' way,** by addrelTing the Divinity feparate 
 from the Humanity, we believe we fhould be 
 '* thieves and robbers y' inafmuch as fuch a 
 condudt would be no lefs than robbing the 
 Lord's Humanity of all it's Divinity. See 
 John X. I. 
 
 * ¥ * 
 
 Another flumbling-block, which feems to lie 
 in your way, is the palTage in John xx. 17, 
 ** I afcend to my Father and your Father, 
 " to my God and your God.'* *' Here furely," 
 you fay, p. 22, ** are two different perfons in- 
 '* dicated. Can any perfon be faid to afcend 
 
 '< to 
 
Signified by the Nexo Jcrufalem. 149 
 
 ''to himfelf?" — I anfvver in the affirmative. 
 If you will not believe me, hear what Paul fays : 
 " Without conrroverfy great is the myftery of 
 ** godlinefs ; God was manifeft in the flefli, 
 " God was juftified in the fpirit, God was feen 
 " of angels, God was preached unto the gen- 
 ** tiles, God was believed on in the world, 
 ** God was received up into glory," i Tim. iii. 
 16. God was received up into glory 1 Who 
 received him there ? Doubtlefs God received 
 biw/e if there, Je/us, I know, was manifeft in 
 the flelh, Je/us was juftificd in the fpirit, 
 Je/iis was feen of angels, Je/us was preached 
 unto the gentiles, Je/us was believed on in the 
 world, and Je/us was received up into glory. 
 Therefore Je/us was God, and afc ended up to 
 himfelf. 
 
 Again, David fays, *^ God is gone up zvith a 
 ^^ floouty' Pfaim xlvii. 5, Where, I pray you, 
 could He go to ^ who is omnipre/enty if not up 
 to himfelf? Parallel with this is the palTagc 
 in John xx. 17, where Jefus fays, ^* / a/cend 
 " unto my Father and your Father, and to my 
 " God and your God." In the firft pafTage, 
 God goes upff^in the fecond, Je/us a/cends. Now 
 as God cannot go any where, but where he was 
 before by virtue of his omnipre/enccy it mufl: 
 J be 
 
150 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 be underftood that God went up to God^ that 
 is, to himfelf. And as In veiTe 28 of the 
 fame chapter of John, Jefus is called God in 
 exprefs terms, I therefore conclude, and I 
 truft without any violence to truth, that the 
 meaning of the fecond paflage is, that Jefus 
 afcendcd to himfelf^ or which is the fame thing, 
 though in other words, that God went up to 
 Cod, 
 
 As I have already explained, according to 
 my view of the fubjed:, the internal fenfe of 
 John XX. 17, refpeding the Lord's afcenlion 
 into heaven, and publiihed it in the Magazine 
 of Knowledge concerning Heaven and Helly vol. i. 
 p. 273 to 277, there is no neceflity for inferting 
 it here ; neither do I conceive it would be of 
 much ufe to thofe who deny the reality of 
 fuch a fenfe, as \ am forry to obferve is the 
 cafe with the gentleman, to whom thefe Let- 
 ters are more immediately addreffed. I fhall 
 therefore proceed to the examination of othe^ 
 objedions. 
 
 At the foot of p. 2 2, you fay, *' Laftly, our 
 "Saviour fays, John xiv. 28, that bis Father 
 *' zvas greater than he. Can any perfon be greater 
 *^than himfelf?" There arc fome in cafes in 
 
 which 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 
 
 151 
 
 which a man may be greater than himfclf; 
 and of this you yourfelf fccm to be apprized, 
 for you continue, ** The fame perfon may, 
 " no doubt, be greater at one time than he 
 " was at another; but here he fpeaks of the 
 ** fame time. Alfo, a man in one capacity 
 ^*may be greater than he is in another; as a 
 ** general at the head of his army may be faid 
 " to be greater than he is at his fire-fide. But 
 '* here our Saviour fpeaks abfohitcly.'' Rather 
 fay, he fpeaks relatively ^ for fo the truth is.. 
 He was telling his difciples, that he was about 
 to afcend to the Father ; which was as much as 
 0o fay, that his Humanity v,-^^ not yet perfect ly 
 united to his Divinity ; and «;//// this was the 
 cafe, and 4y ^^^<^ much it was not united, juft 
 fofar he was inferior to the Father : but by hozv 
 7nuch it "jcas united, fo far he was equal to, and 
 one with the Father. Hence we find him 
 j'peaking in two ways ; at one time having 
 refpedb to the Hunjanity as not yet glorified, in 
 which ftate he fpeaks of the Father as greater 
 than himfelf : and at another time having refpc(5l 
 to the Humanity as glorified, in which (late he 
 fays, " I and my Father are sne,*' 
 
 Before a man's pafTions are properly fubdued, 
 and when he is tempted to commit a rafh 
 
 action^ 
 
152 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 adion, if he is a wife man, or in purfuit of 
 wifdom, he will look up ta his reafon and 
 underftanding for affiftance, hereby virtually 
 acknowledging that his reafon is greater than 
 himfelf In this fituation of mind he may 
 with great propriety fay, ' Of myjelf I cannot 
 
 • refill thefe temptations, being as it were im- 
 
 • merfed in all kinds of vicious inclinations, 
 
 • which have their abode in the lowed regions 
 
 • of the mind : I will therefore afcend into it's 
 
 • fuperior regions, and elevate myfelf into the 
 
 • light of reafon, for my reafon is greater than my 
 
 • pajfion' Now here, notwithflanding the man's 
 reafon is greater than his paflion, and thus the 
 man himfelf greater in one refped: than he is in 
 another refped, ftill both his reafon and paflion 
 conflitute but one perfon. It was juft fe^^ 
 comparatively fpeaking, with the Lord : hii 
 Father was the Divinity within him ; himfelf 
 was the Humanity. While the Humanity was 
 fubjed to temptations, the Father was greater 
 than him, becaufe the Divinity could not be 
 tempted. But when the Humanity was fully 
 united to the Divinity, then neither could the 
 Humanity be tempted, any more than the 
 Divinity, becaufe all the properties of the 
 latter centered bodily in the former. Hence 
 
 'the Lord fays, ** I and my Father are oneT 
 
 There 
 
Signzjied by the New jeriifalan. 
 
 Jv 
 
 V 
 
 There is therefore no difficulty at all in com- 
 prehending how and in what refpedt the Father 
 was greater than Jefus ; and yet after all, that 
 both he and the Father were one and the fame 
 
 divine perfon. 
 
 * * * 
 
 The explanation you give, p. 23, of our 
 Lord's words in John x. 29^ is to me very ex- 
 traordinary and unnatural, implying confe- 
 quences not only irrational and abfurd, but even 
 blafphemous, utterly deftrudlive of the univerfe, 
 and together with it the Creator of the univerfe 
 himfelf. I cannot indeed think you was aware 
 of any fuch inferences being deduciblc from 
 your docliine ; but I fee they neceflarily refulc 
 from the Socinian method of interpreting 
 fcripture. Our Lord's words are as follow : 
 " My flieep hear my voice, and I know them^ 
 *' and they follow me. And 7 ^/Vit unto them 
 " eternal life, and they fhall never pcrilli, 
 " neither fhall any pluck them out of 77iy hand. 
 " iVIy Father who gave them me, is greater 
 ** than all ; and none is able to pluck them out 
 " of 7ny Father's hand. I and my Father are one^^ 
 John X. 27 to 30. I and my Father are cit, 
 ** that is,*' you fay, " no perfon can overpower 
 ** Wd*, but he muft overpower the Father alfo.*^ 
 Here let us paufe a moment to cortfider the 
 
 X ccnfc- 
 
154 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 confequences of fuch an interpretation as this, 
 according to the Socinian faith. You, Sir, as 
 a Socinian, maintain that Jefus Chrifl: was a 
 fnere man, both as to his foul and his body ; 
 that in confequence of this mere humanity, 
 he was, like any other man, liable to fufferings 
 and death; and that the Jews, whofe preju- 
 dices he oppofed, at laft adually crucified him, 
 or, agreeable to your own expreiTion, over- 
 powered him. Now if, as you fay, the meanin<y 
 of the Lord's words above recited is, that 
 ** no one can overpower him, but he muft over- 
 *' power the Father alfo," it will then follow, 
 that the Jews, by crucifying the mere man JefuSy 
 at the fame time adually overpozvercd the Ju-^ 
 preme God! Such is the unavoidable confequence 
 of interpreting the Lord's words in the way 
 you have done. 
 
 But if we purfue your notions a little^ 
 further, we fhall fee fomething, if pofTible,. 
 flill more abfurd. You believe, that when a 
 man dies as to the body, all confcioufnefs of 
 life or exigence pcrifhes with him; thus that 
 both foul and body together lie dead in the 
 grave. Now, if the Father was overpowered 
 at the fame time that Jefus was overpowered, 
 ^hen he was crucified and buried, then the. 
 
 father 
 
I 
 
 Signijied hy the Nav Jcrufaleriu -[^c 
 
 Father muft have been in a flate of torpor 
 and death, as well as Jefus : I would therefore 
 beg leave to afk, By what power was it that 
 Jefus was raifed from the grave ? He could not 
 raife himfelf, becaufc you fay he was a mere 
 man ; and befides, he had been fo overpozvered 
 by the Jews, that all his own powers were 
 become extincl. Neither could the Father 
 faife him, bccaufe his powers were alfo extinct, 
 in confequence of the Jews overpowering Jefus; 
 for " no perJoHy' you fay, *' can overpower Jefus y 
 " but he muft ovcrpoz^er the Father alfo." Again, 
 if, as you fay, p. 50, God has no other form 
 or Ihape, than that of infinite f pace y it will 
 follow, that when Jefus was overpowered, 
 infinite fpace alfo was overpowered ; fince what- 
 ever misfortune befals the effence of any being, 
 muft likev. ife neceffarily happen to his form. 
 Hence it is plain to fee, that the method of 
 interpreting the fcriptures, which Socinians are 
 obliged to have recourfe to, is the moft ir- 
 rational, abfurd, and fclf-contradidory, that can 
 poflibly be imagined; nay, that it even militates 
 againfl the very being o't a God, againft the 
 exigence of a heaven and a hell, or a life after 
 death, and againtl every thing fpiritual or 
 divine; inlkad of God, fetting up nature, or, 
 what amounts to the fame thing, infinite fpace ^ 
 
 Ji 2 as 
 
1^6 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 as ^he objeft of worfliip, of which neverthelefs 
 no proper idea can be formed in the human 
 mind. 
 
 After having made thefe remarks on your 
 
 mode of interpreting our Lord's words, I will 
 
 now point out what appears to me to be a 
 
 much more rational and conliftent explanation. 
 
 Jefus fays, '^ My Jheep hear my voice ^ and follow 
 
 " me. And / give unto them eternal life, 
 
 ** neither ihall any pluck them out of my hand, 
 
 " My Father who gave ihem me^ is greater 
 
 *5 than all, and none is able to pluck them out 
 
 •* of my Fatbers hand, I and my Father are 
 
 *^ 07ie," Here it is plain, the flieep belong to 
 
 Jefus ^ and he gives them eternal life. He 
 
 indeed fays, that no one can pluck them out 
 
 of his Faihe-i's hand ; but he alfo fays. None 
 
 Ihall pluck them out of my hand, \Vherefore 
 
 the Father's hand, and the hand of Jefus, mull 
 
 be one and the fame ; for the flieep cannQt be 
 
 in two different per/ons' hands at the fame time. 
 
 If the Father be a different peffon from Jefus, 
 
 then the fnecp are not in the Father's hand at 
 
 all ; for he gave them away out of his own hand 
 
 into the hand of Jefus. But as the palTage plainly 
 
 implies, that,notwithflanding the Father's giving 
 
 them away into the band of J.efus^ they flill 
 
 remained 
 
Signijiedby the New Jemfalem. 157 
 
 remained /;/ his ozvn hand likewife ; no othej* 
 concluiion cnn be fairly drawn, than that 
 Jefus and the Father are one and the fame 
 perfon. And this is the very concluiion that 
 our Lord himfelf has drawn; for immediately 
 after mak* ng the apparent diftindion between 
 himfelf and the Father, he teaches us how to 
 undcrfland him, and in cxprefs terms fays, 
 " I and my Father are One.*' 
 
 It is therefore impoflible to reconcile our 
 Lord's words concerning the Father and him- 
 felf, in any other way, than by confidering 
 the Father to be the Divinity, and Jefus the 
 Humanity, of one and the fame God. For 
 as in the cafe of an individual man, the foul 
 gives or transfers all it's power to the body, 
 and yet at the fame time retains it to itfelf; 
 fo the Divinity gives or transfers all it's power 
 to the Humanity, and yet at the fame time 
 retains it to itfelf; or in other words, the 
 Father gives all his power to the Son Jefus, 
 and yet retains "\t to himfelf; for after all they 
 are only one and the fame divine perfon. 
 
 * * * 
 
 You fay, p. 23, that the conjiani language 
 which the apoftles ufed, when they fpake of 
 our Saviour and God, **' demonflratcs, that they 
 
 ** confider^ 
 
358 A Defence of the Nevj Chiirch, 
 
 ** confidered him as being a perfon different 
 ** from God.'* I allow, that the greatefl: part 
 of their writings wears this afpedt; and I have 
 ah'eady hinted the reafon why it could not be 
 otherwife, viz. becaufe it is agreeable to order, 
 that divine truth, like every thing elfe, fhould 
 be gradual in it's manifeftation. The light 
 of the natural day does not come on inffan- 
 taneoufly ; firfl: of all the twilight, then the 
 day-dawn, and lair of all the direct beams of 
 the fun. It is the fame with every art and 
 fcience hitherto difcovered ; the fame with the 
 growth of man, both as to his intelledtual 
 a-nd animal powers ; the fame with the pro- 
 duction of plants and trees from fmall feeds 
 till they arrive at their full maturity, and arc 
 capable of bearing fruit ; in fnort, it is the 
 fame with every thing in nature that furrounds 
 us. Why then Ibould the Hght of revelation 
 alone be deemed fudden or inftantaneous .'^ Is 
 not the underfranding (which is the eye of the 
 mind) as fufccpciblc of injury from the too 
 precipitate influx of divine truth into it, as the 
 eye K^t'i the bodv is from that of natural ligjht ? 
 Mofl certainly it is. For this reafon our Lord 
 faid to his difciples, ** I have yet many things 
 " to fay unto you, but ye cannot bear them noWy* 
 John xvi. 12. liencc alfo he fpake to them 
 
 moRlv 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, i^g 
 
 moftly in parables, at the fame time informing 
 them, that a day was coming when the para- 
 bles, which he then uttered, would be clearly 
 unfolded, and when by his Holy Spirit (a new 
 fpiritual revelation) he would fpeak more 
 plainly to his Church, than it was as yet 
 capable of bearing. 
 
 But although the apoftles were not fo clear 
 concerning the union of the Father and Son in 
 one perfon, yet it is remarkable, that many 
 palTages are to be found in their writings to 
 confirm this grand truth. Such are the fol- 
 lowing among many others. " Hereby per- 
 •• ceive we the love of God, becaufe he laid doijon 
 ^^ his life for us,'* i John iii. i6. Jefus Chrid: 
 alone laid down his life for us : therefore Jefus 
 Chrifb alone is God, and this according to the 
 plain declaration of John. — •* Jefus Chrifl: is 
 " the true God, and eternal life," 1 John v. 20. 
 Jude fays, that certain men " deny the onh 
 "Lord God, and our Lord Jefus ChrifV," 
 verfe 4. Paul fays, there is " one Lord, one 
 " God and Father," Eph. iv. 5, 6. Now Jefus 
 Chrift is conltantly called the Lord by all the 
 apoftles : therefore the Lord Jefus and the only 
 Lord God muft be ^ne and the fame perfon ; 
 otherwife Paul was miftakcn when he faid there 
 
 was 
 
i6o A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 was only one Lord. — Again, ** Jefus Chrifl the 
 *' fame yejkrday, to-day, and for ever,' Heb. 
 xiii. 8. This is a character applicable only to 
 Jehovah that changeth not, Mai. iii. 6. ** In Jefus 
 ** Chrifl dwelleih all the fulnejs of the Godhead 
 " hodily," Col. ii. 9. All the fulnefs of the God- 
 head cannot dwell in Jefus Chrifl, in any other 
 way, than as all the fulnefs of the foul dwells 
 in the body : therefore God and Jefus Chrift 
 mud be one and the fame perfon, as the foul 
 and body are one man. The fame apoille 
 further fays of our Lord Jefus Chrift, that 
 " he is the bleffed and only Potentate, the King 
 " of kings, and Lord of lords ; who only hath 
 *' immortality, dwelling in the light which no 
 " man can approach unto, whom (as the 
 " Father) no man hath feen, nor can fee ; to 
 " whom be honour and power everlafting, 
 "Amen,'* i Tim. vi. 15, 16. I might fill 
 many pages with paflages of a fimilar tendency, 
 all feledted from the apoRolic epiftles; but the 
 above are fufficient to efiablifh the fole, exclu- 
 live divinity of Jefus, and to difprovc your 
 alfertions in p. 23 and 24, that ** the apoftles 
 *' conftantly fpake of him as a perfon different 
 *^ from God ;" for they very often fpeak of him 
 in fuch terms, as can hav€ no other meaning 
 than that he is God. 
 
 *' I have 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufalem, iQi 
 ♦ * * 
 
 " I have confidered (you fay, p. 24,) all that 
 " you alledgc/* in favour of Jefus Chrift beincr 
 the fame perfon as God the Father, *^ and find 
 ** them only to be a few pajjages, which, 
 " literally interpreted, might indeed imply as much, 
 *' but which very eafily admit of a very dif- 
 ** fei*ent interpretation ; and in all cafes we in- 
 ** tcrpret what is figurative and oh/cure, by Vv hat 
 ^'is clear and exprefs.'* By your faying we 
 have only a few pajfages by which to fupport 
 the excluiive divinity of Jtfus Chrill, I am 
 convinced you have not informed yourfelf fuf- 
 ficiently of the evidence which Baron Swc- 
 denborg adduces from the fcriptures, in proof 
 of this matter. And if you have not paid a 
 proper attention to the evidence, it is impof- 
 (ible you could have digefted the fubjed, or 
 formed a right judgment about it. The paf- 
 fages of fcripture, on which the exclufive di- 
 vinity of our Saviour is founded, are exceed- 
 ingly numerous ; and, when viev/ed in their 
 true light, afford the moft fa:isfucl:ory proof, 
 that God the Father and Jefus Chrift arc 
 one and the fame perfon. Many of rhefe 
 paiTages are adduced in the prcfent Defe?jce ; 
 bat many more might be pointed out in aid 
 of the fame dodrine, were it ncccffary. Let 
 
 V w hat 
 
i62 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 what has been faid, and what ftill remains to 
 be faid on the fame fubjed^ anfwer in this^ 
 behalf. 
 
 You admit that what is figurative and ob- 
 fcure ought to be interpreted by what is clear 
 and exprefs : but it is remarkable you will 
 allow nothing to be clear and exprefs, except 
 fuch paflages as appear in the literal {zw'i^ to 
 favour your own fentiments. Thofe which jwi 
 fay are ohjcurcy aie to others clear and explicit ; 
 ■while thofe which you take to be genuine truths ^ 
 are evidently no more than the appearances of 
 truth, the confirmation of which is like grafping 
 at the lliadow^ and lofing the fubftance. So 
 long therefore as you continue to view the fcrip- 
 tures from a negative principle, I fear it w ill be 
 impofTible for you to fce your miitakc. By a 
 ^te^ative principle I mean a pre-concehved denial 
 and rejection of the divinity of Jefus Chrifi:. 
 My reafons for thinking that you are really 
 influenced by fuch a principle, are grounded 
 on the whole tenor of your theological writings^ 
 and particularly on the following palTages in 
 your Letters to the Members of the New Jeru^ 
 falenu *' Whatever particular pafTage may 
 " feem to intimate'* that Chrift and God are 
 one perfon, " muft have fomc other meaning ; 
 
 ** and 
 
Signijied by the New Jerufalem, 163 
 
 <* and even if we could not explain it other- 
 *' wife, we ought to conlcnt our/elves ^^ ith ac^ 
 *^ knozvledgirjg the difficulty^ or fuppofe fome error 
 **to have crept into the text^^ p. 25. *' Should 
 *' any being, in the complete form of an angel, 
 *"^ tell me, that God had the form of a Man, 
 " and that this God was Jcfus Chrifl, I fhould 
 ** tell him that he was a lying fpiril^' p. 60. 
 Such is the language you hold out concerning 
 our blelTed Saviour, which, for your fike, I 
 was extremely forry to read, bccaufe it carried 
 fo much the appearance of a fixed, determined 
 refolution not to be convinced, by any argument 
 whatever, of the divinity of Jefus Chrift. 
 And I well know, that where the will tyrannizes, 
 the underftanding muft be a (lave. 
 
 ^ ^ ^ 
 
 You feem, p. 25, to be aware of the great 
 firength of our Lord's words to Philip, and 
 how completely they overthrov/ your whole 
 fyftem. *' Philip faith unto him, Lord, fhew 
 *^ us the Father, and it fufficeth us, Jefus faith 
 *' unto him, Have / been fo long time with you, 
 ^' and yet haft thou not known Me, Philip ? 
 'f He that hath {(ttw Me, hath feen the Father,'* 
 John xiv. 8, 9. Of which palTage you give the 
 following explanation. " Jcfus, you cannot 
 *^ deny, was ufed to fpeak in figurative lan^ 
 
 y 2 "guage. 
 
on 
 
 164 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 " cruagc ; and where is there a more common 
 ** figure of fpeech than to fay, zve fee a perfc 
 *' in his liorks, and efpecially in tlrfi per^ 
 ** Jons who are commiffioned to fay or do any 
 *' thing in his name ? We even fay, that God, 
 "who is invifible, is to be feen in his zvorks. 
 " Nov/ the power and wifdom of God were 
 " manifeft in Chriil, who fpake and adled by 
 " immediate commilTion from him ; and feeing 
 " the manifeftations of divine wifdom and 
 «* power either in the works of nature, or in 
 " the fayings and maracles of the prophets, is 
 " all that we can fee of God, who is himfelf 
 V invifible." 
 
 This explanation of our Lord's words appears 
 to me to be a mere evalion, and in the end 
 deflroys itfelf. For, in the firlt place, you 
 arbitrarily fubititute the zvorks of Jefus, inflead 
 of his per/on. When Philip faid, Shezv us the 
 Father, our Lord di reded him to hinifelfy m 
 his own proper per/on, and not to his zvorksy as 
 you endeavour to make your readers believe. 
 Had it been the Lord's de%n to anfwer Philip 
 by a reference m.erely to the works of the Father, 
 he would certainly have pointed him to the 
 vifible creation, or elfe to the fayings and mi- 
 racles of the prophets, which, you fay, is all 
 
 that 
 
Signified by the New Jentfalevu 165 
 
 that we can fee of God, But inftead of this, he 
 told Philip, that the fight of him was the fame 
 thing as feeing the Falba-y and that becaufc the 
 Father dwelt in him, as the foul docs in the 
 body. Afterwards, indeed, he defired Philip 
 to believe him/cr the very zvorks* fake, verfc 1 1 ; 
 but then what was he to believe? Why, he 
 was to believe the truth of what the Lord had 
 juft before told him, viz. " He that hath feen 
 " Me, hath feen the Father." And if, by 
 reafon of his having the appearance of a mere 
 man, Philip could not difcern the divinity of 
 \i\%perfon, he was neverthclefs enjoined to be- 
 lieve it /«r the very zvorks fake. 
 
 But again : You believe, that Jefus was no 
 more than a common man, like any of the pro- 
 phets or apoftles : and you fay, that all we can 
 fee of God, is either in his v.'orks, or in thofe 
 perfons who are commifiioned to fay or to do 
 any thing in his name. Upon this fuppofition, 
 then, it will follow, that when Philip defired 
 to fee the Father, the ^ord might with as 
 much propriety have referred him to John the 
 Baptift, or any other of the prophets, as to 
 himfelf. Nay, 10 come clofer Hill, and more 
 evidently expofe the fallacy of your principles, 
 he mieht have faid, < He that hath feen PhiUp, 
 ° * hath 
 
i66 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 * hath feen the Father / for Philfp alfo (being 
 an apoftle) had the power of working miracles 
 committed to him, and in this refpedl equally 
 nianifefled the works of God, from whom, you 
 fay, as from a Being different from either of 
 them, they derived all their power. But the 
 ^bfurdity of fuch an hypothelis as this, needs 
 only to be brought to light, to be rejected by 
 every rational chriftian. And I doubt not 
 but the judicious reader already agrees with me, 
 that the explanation you have given of the fore- 
 going palTage, is forcqd, unnatural, and de- 
 ftrudive of itfelf. 
 
 Another paffage which you obfcrve we quote 
 in proof that Jefus and the Father arc one and 
 the fame perfon, is that of Paul, ColoiT. ii. 9. 
 ^' In him dzvelleth all the fulnefs of the Godhead 
 ** bodily:' '' But this,'* you fay, p. 26, '' might 
 **be the cafe without Jefus himfelf being God, 
 ^* when the divine power was manifelted by 
 *' him. Nay, the very phrafeology of this 
 ^' paffage is unfavourable to your hypothefis, 
 ** for that which dwells in a perfon cannot be 
 '* the fame thing with himfeli^ but; muft bq 
 ^* different from him." 
 
 I wonder^j 
 
Signified by the New Jemfalcm, 167 
 
 I wonder. Sir, how you could run the riik 
 of expoling yourfelf, by letting fuch unguarded 
 exprelTions efcape your pen. Have you for- 
 gotten, that the /o/// of every man dwells in his 
 body P Or do you mean to fay, that a man's 
 foul is not the man himfelf, but fomething 
 differeni from him f Are all your ideas of hu- 
 manity confined to the mere corporeal frame ? 
 If fo, you muft be a maierialiji with a witnefs, 
 admitting nothing to enter into the conftitution 
 of man, but what you can fee with your eyes, 
 hear with your ears, fmell with your nofe, tafte 
 with your tongue, or touch with your hands. 
 The apoftle James fays, " Th^fplrit that diveU 
 " leth in us, lufteth to envy ;" and he makes no 
 diftindion between the fpirit of a man, that 
 dwells in him, and the man himfelf. See chap, 
 iv. 2, 5. Here the phrafeology of James, ref- 
 peding a man and his foul, agrees with that 
 of Paul, concerning Jefus, that in him dwells 
 all the fulnefs of the Godhead ; and in both 
 cafes, by that which dwells in the perfon, is 
 iignified the fame thing as the perfon himfelf. 
 
 I have already obferved in a former part of 
 this Defence, p. 142, that Jefus was polfelled of 
 all poiver in heaven and earth, with every 0! her 
 attribute of divinity, agreeable to his own words 
 
 in 
 
i68 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 in John xvi. 15, ** All things that the Father 
 " hath, are mine.'* With this paflage the faying 
 of Paul perfecfUv coincides : therefore what has 
 been advanced concerning the one, will equally 
 apply to the other alfo. But as a proof that the 
 fulnejs of the Godhead is the fame thing as the 
 fulnefs of JefiiSy I iliall here adduce the fol- 
 lowing paflage from John i. 16, •* And of to 
 ^'fuhefs have all we received, and grace for 
 " grace." Thefc words were fpoken of Jefus 
 Chrifl, and, compared with thofe of Paul, 
 plainly tefli fy, that he and God the Father 
 are one and the fame perfon. 
 
 * * * 
 You acknowledge, p. 27, that the fame titles 
 are given to Chrifl, as to God. But you add, 
 •* Beings the mofl different in their natures may, 
 ** in feveral refpecSts, refemble one another, and 
 " a<fl a fimilar party fo as to be entitled to xkszfame 
 " appellationSy without being the fame perfons.'* 
 And in anfwer to the arguments we urge from 
 thofe paflTages in the prophets, in which Jehovah 
 is fo frequently and fo folemnly declared to be the 
 only Saviour y and the only Redeemer y you fay, that 
 ** both he who faves by another, and that other 
 " who faves by his orders and directions, may 
 ** be equally called a Saviour/* thus that Jefus 
 Chrift was no more a Saviour by his own 
 
 power. 
 
Signified by the New Jenifalem. i6g 
 
 power, than Mofes Was, who under God de- 
 livered the Ifraelites from Egypt, or than the 
 judges who delivered them from their various 
 enemies. But you forget what the prophet 
 Ifaiah fays concerning Jefus who was to come 
 into the world, that he is a Redeemer and 
 Saviour l>y his ozvn proper power, ** Who is this that 
 ** Cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from 
 *•' Bozrah ? this that is glorious in his apparel, 
 •'travelling in the greatnefs of his JlrengthT' 
 Who ? It is no lefs than Jehovah himfelf, '^ / 
 that /peak in righteoufnefs^ mighty to fave. I 
 •* have trodden the wine-prefs aloney and of the 
 " people there was none zvitb me. The day of 
 ^' vengeance is in my heart, and the year of 
 ** 7}iy redeemed is come. And I looked, and 
 ** there was none lo help ; and I wondered that 
 ** there was none to uphold: therefore mine ozvn 
 ** arm brought falvation unto me, and my fury 
 '^ it upheld me. 1 zvill tread dozvn the people in 
 ** mine anger, and / zz^ill bring down their 
 ** ftrength to the earth. He faid. Surely they 
 " are my people y children that will not lye. So 
 ** hezvas their Saviour,'' Ifa. Ixiii. i to 8. 
 
 Now it is no where faid of Mofes, that he 
 faved or delivered by his ozjon proper pozver, but 
 always by a power which he derived from 
 
 Z another 
 
 %c 
 
ijo A Defence of the New Church,' 
 
 another different from himfelf, namely, Jehovah^ 
 in whofe name, and by whofe exprefs command 
 he brought the Ifraelites out of Egypt. But 
 of Jefus it is faid, that he faved and redeemed /^jn 
 bis own juighty arm /. and when any of the apoftles 
 performed miracles, it was always in the name of 
 JefuSy which is a plain and full acknowledge 
 ment,. that their power fo to do w^as derived 
 from him alone. To do any thing in the name of 
 the kingy implies by the authority of the kingT 
 hence to heal the fick, the lame, the deaf, and 
 the blind, /';/ the 7iame of Jefus^ means to per-^ 
 form thofe cures by the file pazver and authority 
 of JefiiSy which neverthelefs cannot belong to 
 any mere man, but exclufively to him who is 
 both God and Man in one perfon. 
 
 Of Jefus it is remarkable, that whenever 
 he performed a miracle, or delivered a precept,, 
 it was always in his own name, and by bis own 
 authority; in this refped differing from both 
 prophets and apoflles, who conftantly fpake 
 and adled in the name of another^ attributing 
 all their wifdom, power, and authority, to God 
 from whom they derived them. When the 
 chief priefts and elders of the people demanded 
 of Jefus, by what authority he did fuch and 
 fuch things, and who gave him that authority,. 
 
 he 
 
^ignijied by the New Jerufalem, i y i 
 
 ht refufcd to tell them ; plainly intimatino-, 
 that it was by his own authority, and by 7tone 
 other ; for had it been derived from any other 
 being, or had he himfelf been a perfon dif- 
 ferent from God, as a faithful prophet and 
 mefTenger, be would doubtlefs have taken that 
 opportunity of acknowledging his mafter, and 
 -afcribing honour to whom honour was due. 
 But no fuch language as this was held forth by 
 him : on the contrary, he fpake as one having 
 \Jelf -derived^ authority ^ and not as the (cribes. 
 
 Moreover, it is faid of Jefus, that " heJJjall 
 *^ Jave his people from their Jins,** Matt. i. 2r. 
 A mere man cannot furely do this. Noah, 
 Daniel, and Job, could deliver only their own 
 fouls by their righteoufnefs, Ezek. xiv. 14, 20; 
 and even this could not be effedled without the 
 Lord's righteoufnefs imparted to them. But 
 Jefus is the Lamb of God that taketh away the 
 Jifis of the zvorld. He hath power to forgive fins, 
 and adlually did forgive ihem. Yet none can 
 forgive fins, but God only. See Mark ii. 5, 7, 
 9. Luke V. 21. Herein then is Jefus diftin- 
 guilhed from all other prophets, and, by his 
 divine prerogative of forgiving fins, known to 
 t)e God alone, 
 
 z 3 yov 
 
172 A Defence of the New C/iurek^ 
 
 You juftly obferve, p. 27, that we lay great 
 flrefs on Chriil being called the Alpha and ihs 
 Omcza, We do fo, and conlidcr the title as a 
 
 o 
 
 ftriking charadleriflic of the great Jehovah. 
 *' But," fay you, *' this is na more a proper 
 ** name of God, than Saviour^ or Father, It 
 " may fignify the chief, or founder of any 
 ^* thing; as Chrift is, under God, of the chriftian 
 ** difpenfation." This interpretation, however, 
 is by no means applicable to the term Alpha, 
 which being ahjolutely the firft letter of the 
 Greek alphabet, muft imply that Jefus is ah- 
 jolutely the primary and Jole founder of the chrif- 
 tian religion, not as a fubordinate minifter 
 under another, but as the real felf-exident foun- 
 tain and fource of all life, from whom, by 
 whom, and for whom all things are. To put 
 any other fenfe upon the appellation Alpha, 
 would be to deny the import of the word, and 
 to fubflitute another [Beta, for inftance,) in it's 
 ftead. Mofes was the founder, under God, of 
 the Jewifh difpenfation. Was he therefore the 
 Alpha ? You muft know, that fuch a title can- 
 not belong to any one who adls under the direc- 
 tions of another, but exclufively to that other 
 who gives the directions, from whom the dif- 
 penfation originates, and who makes ufe of 
 fiich inftruments, as in his divine wifdom he fees 
 
 molt 
 
Signijied by tJie New Jeritfalem, 1 73 
 
 moft fie to promote his grand end, the faU 
 vation of mankind. 
 
 The true iignification of Alpha and Omgga, 
 as applied to Jefus Chrid, is, that he is the 
 cfTential and only Being from firfl: to lafl, from 
 whom ail things derive their exigence j con^ 
 fequently that he is the eflenrial and only love, 
 the elTential and only wifdom, the eflential and 
 only life in himfelf ; and thus the elTential and 
 only Creator, Saviour, and llluftrator from him- 
 felf; hence that he is the all in all both of 
 heaven and the church, who alone is Inlinite 
 and Eternal, and Jehovah the Lord. All this 
 and infinitely more is implied in the name 
 Alpha and Omega, which is given to Jefus 
 Chrifi: excluiive of every other being whether 
 in heaven or on earth, as in Apoc. i. 8, 11. 
 fhap. xxi. 6. chap. xxii. 13. 
 
 * * * 
 
 You fay, p. 2 8, that a perfon being occa- 
 
 fionally denominated by the name of God, is 
 
 no proof that he is God ,- and that Chrifi is no 
 
 more Jehovah our righleoii/jje/s, bccaufe he is fo 
 
 called in Jer. xxiii. 6, than the city Jerufalem 
 
 is, Ihe being alfo called by the fame name in 
 
 Jer. xxxiii. 16. But you, who confine your 
 
 jfdcas to the literal fcnfe pf the Word only, 
 
 give 
 
174 -^ Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 give no iiiformation what we are to underfland 
 hy Jerufalem being called Jehovah our righieouf^ 
 nefs; having, I apprehend, no method of re- 
 conciling the palTage to your reafon, but that 
 which you mention in p. 25, of fuppofing Jome 
 error to have crept into the text. This may be 
 the fhorteft way of getting rid of the difficulty, 
 but by no means a fatisfacftory one to thofe 
 who believe the Word of God to be perfedl, 
 as we have it in the originals. It is, however, 
 a curious circumftance, that you, whole whole 
 fyllem is founded on the mere appearances in 
 certain parts of the literal Jenje^ fhould yet urge 
 the apparent inconfiftency of one paflage againfl: 
 us, who maintain that every part of the Word 
 is to be underftood^/'nV//^//)' ; jufl as liwe were 
 the perfons who rclted in the letter y and you the 
 advocate for the Jpiritl But, Sir, the argument 
 is our's, not your's ; and the above (if taken 
 according to the common tranflation*) is one 
 of the many palTages which we have to bring 
 forward, as proofs that the fcriptures, in a 
 thoufand inftances, are not to be uaderllood 
 literally, but fpiritually. For that Jerufalem 
 
 the 
 
 * Commentators arc not all agreed about the true tran- 
 flation of Jer. xxxiii. 16 : but in which ever way it is taken 
 literally, the internal fenfe muft be, that the Lord alone i-s 
 entitiedto the name o^ Jehovah our ri^htcoufnefs. 
 
Signified by the New Jtriifalevi. lyrj 
 
 the city cannot be Jehovah the Creator, is felf- 
 evident ; and therefore, if there be any mean- 
 ing at all in calling a city by the name of 
 Jehovah, we muft have recourfe to the fpi- 
 ritual fenfe, which being abftracted from perfons 
 and places, can alone afford a rational and true 
 interpretation of the words. In this fenfe, 
 Jehovah our righteoufnefs is the Lord as to 
 divine good ; the city Jerufalem is the New 
 Church in refpecl: to it's dodlrine of charity and 
 faith united ; her name denotes her quality. 
 Thus combining the different fignifications 
 into one fentence, the fpiritual meaning is 
 fimply this, That ths New Church will receive 
 it's quality of love and wifdom, good and 
 truth, charity and faith, from the Lord alone, 
 who is himfelf the all of love and wifdom, 
 the all of good and truth, and the all of 
 charity and faith, both in the church univerfal, 
 and in every individual member thereof. See 
 what was advanced and proved concerning the 
 Lord praying in man, p. 117; and concerning 
 the one only fource of intelligence in the uni- 
 verfe, p. 126. 
 
 Still you cannot believe that Jefus was God 
 himfelf; for you fay, " Though it fliould be 
 "Chrift, and not the prophet's /of!, that was 
 
 " called 
 
ijS A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 " called Emmanuel, which fignifies God with uS\ 
 •' it will not follow that he was God ;" becaufe 
 " princes are fometirnes called gods, to denote 
 •* their power, and men are called devils to 
 " exprefs their bad difpofitions.'* That you 
 write under the influence of a Jlrong prejudice 
 againft Jefus Chrift, is very manifeft from the 
 above words ; although I admit you may not 
 be fenfible of it, on account of it*s having be- 
 come habitual to your mind ; and whatever is 
 habitual or natural to a man, is not fenfibly per- 
 ceived by him. It feems you would rather 
 allow the prophet's Jon to be called Emmanuel^ 
 or God with us, than Jefus ; notwithftanding 
 it is exprefsly declared at the birth of Jefus, 
 that then " was fulfilled that which was fpoken 
 «« of the Lord by the prophet, faying, Behold, 
 «f a virgin Ihall be with child, and Ihall bring 
 «* forth a Son, and they fhall call his name 
 " Emmanuel, which being interpreted, is God 
 «* zvith us,'' Matt. i. 22, 23. How can it be, 
 that a mere man (as you together with the Jews 
 fuppofc Jefus to be) could be born of a virgin 
 mother ^ Since the creation of the world, fuch 
 a thing was never heard of, except in the 
 fingle injiance of our bleffed Lord, who for that 
 very reafon could not be a mere man ; for 
 having no human father, the interior eflcnce 
 
 3 of 
 
Signijied by the New Jenifcikin, 177 
 
 of his life or foul mufl be different from that 
 of all other men; and ir is well known, that 
 every man's foul is derived from his father, 
 and the body from his mother. 
 
 But to bring the matter to an iflue. Either 
 you believe that Jefus had a mere man for his 
 fatheTy or you do not. If you believe the 
 former, you are, in this refpeOl, a downright 
 Jew : I know no difference between you. If 
 the latter, then you allow Jefus to be more than 
 a mere man, in which cafe all you have written 
 againfl: him falls to the ground, and has no 
 more weight in it than a flraw. But you 
 exprcfsly maintain, that Jefus was no more 
 than a mere man ; therefore the whole world 
 has a right to infer, that your private creed 
 is, that Jofeph, his fuppofed father, was his 
 a^ual father.* Your fyftem of materialifm 
 
 alfo 
 
 * Since writing the above, I have found to my great 
 furprize, that you have publicly declared in your firft Let- 
 ters to the Jews, that you " do not believe in the mira- 
 " culous conception of Jefus; but that you arc of opinion 
 <' he was the legitimate fon of Jofeph." From your prin- 
 ciples, I always fuppofed, that this mufi: be your private 
 creed ; but I did not apprehend, you would venture to go 
 the length of publifhing it to the world ; for I undcrfland, 
 the trme was, when you thought it dangerous to your 
 
 A a charafter, 
 
178 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 alfo implies as much ; for whoever afcribes to 
 matter the fource of intelHgence, by fuppofing 
 that fpirit is incapable of thinking, unlefs 
 while aded upon by an influx from material 
 fubftances, virtually afcribes the produdtion of 
 a foul, which in itfelf is fpiritual, to caufes in 
 themfclves merely natural : and by the fame 
 rule, the creation of the univerfe is by fuch a 
 perfon attributed to nature, inftead of God. 
 Nay, the very idea which he has of the being 
 of a God, when explained by himfelf, is no 
 other than that of nature, or which amounts 
 to the fame thing, infinite fpace, as expreffed 
 
 in 
 
 eharafter, to be fufpeSed of fuch an antichriflian fen- 
 timent. You deny the authenticity of the firfl chapter of 
 Matthew's gofpel, pofilbly becaufc Jefus is there faid to 
 be born of a virgin, and called Emmanuel, God with us. 
 But if you admit the fecond of Luke to be genuine, that 
 fufficiently proves that Jefus was not the fon of Jofeph, 
 When Jofeph and Mary his mother returned from Jeru- 
 falem, the child Jefus tarried behind. So they turned 
 back, to feek him. " And when they faw him, his mother 
 *' faid unto him, Son, why haft, thou thus dealt with us?Be- 
 " hold, thy father (meaning Jofeph) and I have fought thee 
 " forrowing. And he faid unto them, How is it that ye 
 " fought me ? Wift ye not that I muft be about 7?iy Father's 
 ** bufmefs ?" Luke ii. 48, 49. Here Jefus plainly denied 
 that Jofeph was his Father ; for when he was in the tem- 
 ple, teaching the doftors, he was not about Jofeph's bu- 
 fmefs, but his Father Jehovah's. 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. i ^9 
 
 in your Letters to the Members of the Nezv Churchy 
 p. 50. But while the Word of God endures 
 it mufl remain an eternal truth, that Jefus was 
 conceived without the mediation of a inan, 
 deriving his foul from Jehovah the Father, 
 and a body only from the Virgin Mary ; which 
 foul, being of itfelf indivifihU, and therefore 
 unlike the foul of a finite man, mull be Jehovah 
 himfelf. Confcquently the whole Divinity was 
 included in the Lord's Humanity from his firft 
 conception ,- but on the glorification of his 
 human eflence, that alfo was made completely 
 divine, by the putting off or divefting himfelf 
 of every thing that was derived from Mary; 
 and by virtue of it's pcrfed union with the 
 Father, w ho v» as it's foul, it became the Divine 
 Humanity, or in other w^ords, the Vilible Je- 
 hovah in a Human Form. 
 
 As to the circumftance of princes being 
 fometimes called g<)dsy on account of their 
 great power, which you think is the reafon why 
 the name God is occafionally given to Jefus, 
 without however any intention in the writer 
 of fctting him forth as the true God ; 1 have 
 to obferve, that an evident diftinction is made 
 in the ufe of the term, when applied to men or 
 angels, and when applied to the living God. 
 
 A a 2 ill 
 
i8o A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 In the former cafe, it is ufually faid, that fuch 
 an one is a god, or fuch and fuch perfons are 
 gods. But in the latter cafe, Jehovah is em- 
 phatically (lyled Godj or /he God, viz. of heaven 
 and earth. And although in the originals the 
 ufe of the particles, a, the, &c. may not be ^o 
 certain and precife as in Englifh, yet the con- 
 text will invariably point out when they are to 
 be undcrfipod, and when omitted, according to 
 the nature of the fubiect treated of. Now 
 it is worthy of notice, that v/henever the term 
 God is applied to Jefus, it is done ra the fam.e 
 manner, and with the fame degree of cmphafis, 
 as when applied to the great Jehovah. So in 
 the following pallages : " They Ihall call his 
 *' name Emmanuel^ which being interpreted, is, 
 ''God with us,'' Matt. i. 2, 3. " In the be- 
 " ginning Vvas the Word, (Jefus,j and the Word 
 "was with God, and God zvas the IFord. And 
 '' the Woid was made fiefh," viz. in the perfon 
 of Jefus, John i. i, 14. " God (i. e. Jefus) was 
 " manifeil in the fiefli," i Tim. iii. iG. " This 
 f' (Jefus Chi-iii) is the true God and eternal life,'* 
 I John V. 20. ** Thy throne, GW, is for 
 " ever and ever," Pfalm. xlv. 6. Thefe words 
 were fpoken of Jefus Chrifl, and quoted by 
 Paul, Hcb. i. 8, who applies them to him as the 
 Son of God. Whence it follov*s, that Jefus 
 
 being 
 
Signified by the New Jervfalevi, i8l 
 
 being diftinguifhed by the title God in a man- 
 ner widely different frooi that in which either 
 angels or men arc fpoken of; and having alfo 
 names and qualities attributed to him, which 
 can belong to none other than to the great 
 Jehovah, he muft of confequence be the fole, 
 the fupremc, the everlafting God of heaven 
 
 and earth. 
 
 ♦ * * 
 
 You think it fomething extraordinary, p. 28, 
 that we, who ftrenuoufly aflerr the unity of God, 
 and rejedl the idea of three divine perfons^ as 
 manifeftly implying three Gods, ihould yet con- 
 tend for a trinity, although the expredion is not 
 to be found in the fcriptures. And you con- 
 clude, rather haftily, that we have adopted the 
 term merely as a facnfice to popular prejudice. 
 In this, however, you are much miftaken, as I 
 hope to fhew you prefently. You even bring 
 a charge againfl: the writer of the Preface to the 
 Summary Viezv of the Heavenly Do&rines of the 
 Nezv Jerufdlem, for urging as a plea in favour 
 of Baron Swcdenborg's writings, that he af- 
 ferts and defends the divinity of our Lord and 
 Saviour Jefus Chrift -, which plea you treat as 
 a mere apology addrelTed to the weaknefs and 
 prejudices of the multitude. But you forget, 
 or perhaps never confidered, that that fmall 
 I pamphlet 
 
i82 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 pamphlet was principally intended for thofc 
 who profefs to believe in the divinity of Jefus 
 Chrift, and not fo much for Arians or Socinians, 
 who deny it. It was therefore with great pro- 
 priety that the writer addrefled his readers in 
 the language he did. Had he intended it as an 
 appeal to Socinians, he would, without doubt, 
 have introduced the fubjedl in a different 
 jnanner, and reafoned with them on principles 
 more fuited to their ftate of mind. But be 
 this as it might, you may red affured, that 
 neither that writer, nor any other member of 
 the New Church, feeks a fhelter for truth in 
 the prejudices of mankind ; of which your 
 prefent oppofition to the dodlrines we main- 
 tain, is at lead one ftriking proof; for had 
 we in view fecretly or infenfibly to infinuate 
 our tenets into the public mind, by flattering 
 either the weaknefs or errors we difcovered, 
 we fhould hardly have declared ourfelves in fo 
 plain and open a manner as vve have done. 
 And I believe nothing but the love of truth 
 for it's own fake, together with a defire to 
 contribute to the general happinefs of mankind, 
 has induced the members of the New Church 
 to exert themfelves in publifhing and fpreading 
 through the kingdom at large thofc new but 
 grand difcovefics of divine truth, of which 
 
 they 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, 183 
 
 they have received the mod deliberate and 
 powerful convidion in their own minds. 
 
 I before obferved, that you objcvfl to the 
 
 dodtrine of a trinity^ becaufe that expreflion is 
 
 not found in the fcriptures. On the fame 
 
 principle you may objed to a rhoufand other 
 
 words equally in ufe, when the fubjed of con- 
 
 verfation is theology. But I apprehend it is 
 
 fufficient, if the thing fignified by trinity is 
 
 clearly difcoverable in the facred writings ; 
 
 and that it is fo, I think will appear from the 
 
 following paflagcs : " The angel faid unto Mary, 
 
 The Holy Spirit fhall come upon thee, and 
 
 the power of the Higbeji fliall overdiadow 
 
 thee : therefore alfo that holy thing that fhall 
 
 *' be born of thee fliall be called the Son of God;' 
 
 Luke i. 35. Here mention is made of three, 
 
 viz. the Holy Spirit, the Highejl, and the Son of 
 
 God, which is evidently the fame thing as a 
 
 trinity. Again, " When Jefus was baptized, 
 
 " lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and 
 
 " he faw the Spirit of God defcending like a 
 
 ** dove, and lighting upon him. And lo, a 
 
 ** voice from heaven faying, This is 7?iy beloved 
 
 *' Son, in whom I am well pleafed," Matt. iii. 
 
 16, 17. Mark i. 10, 11. "John the Baptift 
 
 " bare record, faying, He that fent me to bap- 
 
 *' tizc 
 
 fc 
 
184 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 " tize with water, the fame faid unto nic. Upon 
 '* whom thou fhak fee the Spirit defcending and 
 ** remaining on him, the fame is he which bap- 
 " tizeih with the Holy Spirit. And I faw, and 
 ** bare record, that this is the Son of Gody* 
 John i. 32, 1^2* 34* ^" ^^^^ ^^efe pafTages a 
 trinity, though not exprefled by the very term, 
 is yet difcernible by every reader. But it is 
 more plainly declared in the following words 
 of our Lord to his difciples, " Go ye, and teach 
 **^ all nations, baptizing them in the name of 
 " the Father^ and of the Son^ and of the Holy 
 "Spirit,** Matt, xxviii. 19. Alfo in thefe words 
 of John, " There are three that bear record in 
 *' heaven, the Father^ the IVord, and the Holy 
 *' Spirit ; and thefe three are one,* i John v. 7. 
 To this may be added the further evidence 
 arifing from the circumftance of the Lord's 
 praying to his Father, and fpeaking of him, 
 and with him, and declaring that he would 
 fend the Holy Spirit. The apoftles alfo, in 
 their epiftles, make frequent mention of the 
 Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Hence 
 then it is evident, that there is fuch a thing as 
 a divine trinity, confifting of Father, Son, and 
 Holy Spirit.* The 
 
 * See this fubjeft more fully treated of in Emanuel 
 Swcdenborg's True Chriflian Religion, containing the Uni-- 
 virfal Theology of the New Churchy n. 163 to ^88. 
 
Signified by the Nczo Jerufalan. igr 
 
 The aclual exiP^ence of a trinity being thus 
 eftabliflicd, it only remains to be confldercd in 
 what fcnfe we arc to underlland it, whether 
 as a trinity of dillincl perfons in the Godhead, 
 or as a trinity of elTcntials in one divine perfon. 
 And as this cannot be better illiiftrated, than 
 by a reference to the three general eircntials of 
 man, who is faid to have been created in ibe 
 imagCy and after ibe likenefs of God, let us firft 
 fee how far a human trinity can be difccrned m 
 him as a fingle individual, and then we fliall 
 be able in fome meafure to comprehend how 
 the divine trinity exifls in the lingle perfon 
 of our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chrilf. 
 
 ** There are (Hiys Baron Swedenborg) general, 
 and alfo particular elTefitials of every one thing, 
 which all together conllitute one eifenee. The 
 general elTencials of every one man, are his foul, 
 body, and operation ; and that thefe conftitute 
 one elFence, is evident from this circumfhmce, 
 that one exifleth by derivation from the other, 
 and for the fiike of the other, in a continued 
 ferics ; for man hach his beginniog from the 
 foul, which is the very eiK ncc of the kQ^^ and 
 which is not only the initiating, but alfo the 
 producing caufe of all the parts of the body 
 in their rcfpeclive order, and afrcrwanli of all 
 
 B b a;.ts 
 
1 86 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 acfts proceeding from the foul and body united^ 
 -which are called operations ; wherefore, from 
 4;his circumftance of the produciion of one from 
 another, and their confcquent infertion and 
 conjunction one w ith another, it is evident, that 
 thele three are of one eflence, and therefoFC they 
 are called three elTentials. 
 
 ** That thefe three eflentials, viz. foul, body^ 
 
 and operation, did, ctn<^ do exift in the Lord 
 
 God the Saviour, is univcrfally acknowledged. 
 
 That his foul was from Jehovah the Father^ 
 
 can only be denied by Antichrift, for in the 
 
 Word of both the Old and New Teftament he 
 
 is called the Son of Jehovah, the Son of the 
 
 Moft High God, the Only-begotten; Vvhere- 
 
 fore the divinity of the Father, anfwering to 
 
 the foul in man, is his firji effentiaL That the 
 
 Son, who was born of the mother Mary, is 
 
 the body of that divine foul, is a confequence 
 
 of that birth, inafmuch as nothing is provided 
 
 in the womb of the mother except a body, 
 
 conceived by, and derived from the foul ; this, 
 
 therefore, is a fecond effential. That operations 
 
 conftitute a third, effential, is a confequence o^ 
 
 their proceeding from foul and body together ; 
 
 for the things that proceed are of the fame 
 
 elTence with the things from which they pro-^ 
 
 CGCd. 
 
Signified hy iJie New Jerufalem. 187 
 
 cecd. That the three cffentials, which arc 
 Father, Son, and HoJy Spirit, are one in the 
 Lord, hkc foul, body, and operation in man, 
 is evident from the words of the Lord, de- 
 claring that he and the Father are one, and that 
 the Father is in him, and he in the Father; 
 and that in like manner he and the Holy Spirit 
 are one, inafmuch as the Holy Spirit is the 
 divine proceeding out of the Lord from the 
 Father." See ^rue Chrifiian Religion^ &:c. n. 
 166, 167- 
 
 From the above obfervations it is plain, that 
 a trinity, confiding of three effentials, is ne- 
 ccfTary to the full conflitution of every fingle 
 man ; for were we to fuppofe any one of the 
 ^fTentials to be wanting, in that cafe man would 
 not be man, in the proper fcnfc of the word. 
 As for example, let us pidlure to our imagination 
 a man deftitute of his fird eifential, which 
 is the foul ; what is he but a lifelefs corpfe, a 
 ipere lump of earth ? So in refped to the 
 fecond efTential, what idea fhould we form of a 
 foul without an organized body, wherein it 
 may refide and be manifefted, as in it's proper 
 form ? Or how could it exift in fuch a flare 
 of abflradion from all fubftance, as to have 
 neither eyes to fee, cars to hear, nor any other 
 
 B b ? organ* 
 
i88 A Lefaice of the Neio Church, 
 
 organs by which it might perceive the delights 
 of life ? VVouia it even amount to fo much as 
 a vapour, or breath of wind ? We know that 
 fuch a mere JquI as this never did nor can exifl: ; 
 for v/ithout a fubftance there can be no pro- 
 perty ; and that, of which nothing can be pre- 
 dicated, mull be a non-^entity. Again, fup- 
 pofing both a foul and body to exifl, without 
 a third eflential called operation, what would a 
 man in fuch cafe be, but a m.cre ftatue ? Nay> 
 would not the two firft eifcntials, viz. foul and 
 body, fall into decay, and periili, without the 
 third, which is their proceeding operation ; 
 juft as love and wifdom would perifli, without 
 i ir third elTential, which is ufe ? 
 
 A trinity, then, is abfolutely neceflary to the 
 exiftence of mian, as well as of every created 
 fubjedl in the univerfe ; and notwithflanding 
 your affertion, p. 30, that ** the three terms,'* 
 or three eilentials, " are not correlative, having 
 ** no proper correfpondence," it is manifeft 
 that they bear the m.oll intimate and ilrid: 
 relation to each other, and form the mod per- 
 fect correfpondence, that unity of elTence can 
 produce. As you do not admit, any more than 
 myfelf, the doctrine of a trinity of divine perfons, 
 fuch an idea evidently amounting to a trinity 
 
 of 
 
Signified by the Nezv Jerufalcin. i8g 
 
 of Gods ^ it is unncceiTary, in writing to vou. 
 Sir, to point out the abfurdity of fuch a notion, 
 which even rriiiny of the Athanafian trinitarians 
 thcmfelves now begin to be afhamcd of.* Suf- 
 fice it to obfcrve, that as man was created in 
 the image and likenefs of God, and as in him 
 is clearly difcernible a human trinity of foul, 
 body, and operation, and yet he is but one man 
 both in efTence and pcrfon ; {o we have both 
 reafon and fcripture to conclude, that in the 
 Lord God and Saviour Jefus Chrifl: there is a 
 divine trinity, coniifting of Father, Son, and 
 
 Holy 
 
 * Some of the mofl eminent among the Athanafian 
 trinitarians, feeing the abfurdity of fuppofmg, that the one 
 God can exill in thret ptrfons^ inftcad of this phrafc fub- 
 ftitute that of thnt offices or charaEicrs. Hereby indeed 
 they evade one abfurdity ; but they entangle themfelves 
 in another, namely, in praying to one office for the fake of 
 another ojfice^ that it would be pleafed to fend a third ojicc 
 to fanftify and regenerate them. Thus inftead of ad- 
 dreffing God as an object, difubjlance, and a form, they call 
 upon three offices one after another, when yet an office, as 
 fuch, has neither eyes to fee, nor ears to hear their wants. 
 God, then, does not confift in three offices, any more tifan 
 in three perfons ; but he confids in divinity and humanity 
 united in one perfon, from which proceeds holy operation ; 
 and thefe three, when diftinftly conceived by the human 
 intellect, may moft properly be termed three ejfentials of 
 one God, anfwering to a fimihir dilUnttion in man, of 6uZ, 
 body^ diud fpirit J ov proceeding operativn. 
 
igo A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 Holy Spirit, and yet he is but one God both 
 in eiience and in perfon. 
 
 « * « 
 Having now refuted, either diredly or in« 
 diredtly, every objedtion you have urged againft 
 the divinity of Jefus Chrift ; and having proved, 
 that he alone is the fupreme Lord of heaven 
 and earth, in whom the complete trinity 
 refides, or, as Paul exprelTes it, in whom dwel- 
 leth all the fulnefs of the Godhead bodily ; I 
 will add a few remarks on the clofing part of 
 your third Letter. 
 
 You addrcfs the members of the New 
 Church in the following terms, p. 30. *' With 
 " a change in your phrafeology, and very little 
 ** in your ideas, you are as proper unitarians, 
 '* as we who are ufually called Socinians. For 
 " we fay, that the JVo7'd^ by w hich all things 
 " were created, and which dwelt in Chrift, was 
 *' the ote true God, befides whom there is no 
 ** other, and that without this divine principle 
 " Chrift was a mere man, as other men are," 
 That we are unitarians, and that in the true 
 and proper fenfe of the word, (though not as 
 generally underftoodj I admit; for we infift 
 upon the abfolute, unequivocal unity of God, 
 as the fundamental principle of all religion, 
 
 par- 
 
Signified by the New Jernfalem. igi 
 
 particularly of the new and true chriftian 
 religion, which we profefs. But while we 
 allert the unity of God, we alfo maintain a 
 divine trinity, not of pcrfons, like the Atha- 
 nafian trinitarians, but of three eilentials in one 
 perfon, as already explained. Why then do 
 you endeavour to make the world believe, that 
 the principles of the New Church are but 
 a (lep removed from thofe of Socinianifm ? I 
 hope you do not mean to rank every one amonp- 
 the number of Socinians, who believes that 
 there is only one God. Jews, Mahometans, 
 and Pagans, agree in this point ; and what is 
 more, they, in common with Socinians, and too 
 many others who call themjdves chrifiianSy all 
 unite in worfhipping the fame unknozvn God ; 
 with this difference, however, that chriftians 
 might know, if they would, in preference to 
 all others in the world, who the one living 
 and true God is, namely, the Saviour and 
 Redeemer of the world, Jefus Chrifl:. Ima- 
 gining that it was fcarcely poffible for any 
 defcription of chridians to fland forward in 
 defence of the abfolute unity of God, except 
 thofe of fimilar principles with yourfelf, it 
 fecms you have thought yourfelf jufti liable in 
 declaring that the menxbers of the New Jc- 
 xufalem mufl: be fomething akin to Socinians, 
 
 becaufc 
 
ig2 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 becaufe the divine unity is their firft and fun* 
 damental article. But you have certainly been 
 too hafly in drawing fuch a conciufion j for I 
 alTure you, that no two defcriptions of men in 
 the univerfe are more oppofed to each other, 
 with refped: to theological principles, than the 
 Socinian and the meinher of the Nczv Jernjalem* 
 I will not even except the Je%v; for he, not 
 having received a chriitian education, does not 
 fc^rm fo full and perfe(:l a contrafi: to the true 
 chriftian, as a Socinian dees, and is therefore 
 on that account lefs guilty than him, for 
 denying the divinity of Jefus Chrifl", and 
 ranking him as a mere man. Nay, it appears 
 very plainly from Mr. David Levi's Letters 
 to you. Sir, that did he but believe the au- 
 thenticity of the New Teflament, he would 
 not hclitate a moment to acknowledge the 
 divinity of Jefus Chrifl, becaufe he fays it is 
 therein afferted from beginning to end ; and 
 he wonders, v/ith great reafon and juftnefs, 
 how any perfon can call himfelf a chriilian, 
 who, like you. Sir, rejeds the chief corner- 
 ftone of chriflianity. The immenfe difference 
 between your fyftem and our's, I have already 
 noticed in a former part of this 'Defence ; to 
 which I fhall here add the following obfer- 
 vation. That fo far from there being any agree- 
 ment. 
 
Sign ijied by the Nczv Jeriifalcm, i qq 
 
 ment, cither in words or in reality, between 
 Sociniunifm and the religion of the New 
 Church, the relation which the former bears 
 to the latter is like that of darknefs to light, 
 cold to heat, the nadir to the zenith, Ihadow 
 to fubRance, naatter to fpirit, faldiood to truth, 
 the worfliip of a God in the fhape of infinitely- 
 extended fpacc, (which is the fame thing as 
 no God at all,) to the m orfhip of the true and 
 living God in a Human Form, who is the 
 adorable and ever-blclTed Lord of the univcrfc, 
 Jefus Chrift. 
 
 You acknowledge, that the Word, by which 
 all things were created, and which dwelt in 
 Chrift, was the one true God, beiides whom 
 there is no other; but you do not allow that 
 Jefus Chrift was himfelfthat Word, he being, 
 as you fay, no more than a mere man that had 
 no exiftence till his birth in this world. Now 
 if it can be made to appear from fcripturc, 
 that Jefus Chrift himfelf \\d.s that Word, by 
 whom all things were created, I hope you 
 will be candid enough to renounce your errors, 
 embrace truth for the fake of truth, and like 
 a man and a chriftian, fubmit to acknowledge 
 him as your creator and fovereign, who con- 
 defccnded fo far as to clothe himfelf with 
 
 C c ficfti 
 
1^4 -^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 fiefh and bones for the redemption and falva- 
 tion of you, in common with all his other 
 fallen creatures. 
 
 The cvangelifl John fays, *' In the beginning 
 *' v/as the Word, and the Word was with God, 
 " and God was the Word.* All things were 
 *' made by him ; and without him was not any 
 *' thing made that was made. And the IFoni 
 " zvas made fiejh^ and dwelt among us," John i. 
 I, 3, 14. Here it is exprefsly declared, firft, 
 that God was the Vv^ord, by whom all things 
 were created; and fecondly, th^t the fame God 
 'Was made fleflj^ and dwelt among us. To be. 
 made flefh can have no other meaning, thar^ to 
 become a Man, God therefore, having become 
 fiejhy when the IVord became fiejlo^ muft at the 
 fame time have actually become a Man- This, 
 Sir, is a concluiion drawn even from your ozvn 
 premifeSy to which I wiili you to pay particular 
 attention. How you will reconcile it to your 
 declaration, p. 50, v/here you deny that God 
 has any thing of a human form, I mud leave 
 to your ingenuity. I own I am incapable of 
 doing it for you ; and I fear the dilemma, in 
 which I fee you involved, is fo abfolute, that 
 
 you 
 
 * This tranHatlon is according to the original Greek. 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, igr 
 
 you have no way Icfc to extricate yourfclf, but 
 by an honefl: and candid confcllion of your 
 miftakc. 
 
 Again, Jefus Chrifl, you acknowledge, was 
 the only man in whom the Word dwelt. But 
 there was in him no flcfli belonging to the 
 Word, different from his own lieih. There- 
 fore, both by fcripture and your own con- 
 ccflions, the flefh of Jefus Chrift muft be that 
 very flelli which John meant, when he faid, 
 '*' 1'he Word zvas made fiejh.'' Hence I infer, 
 that Jefus Chrift, who was the Word made 
 fleih, was alfo the true God that created heaven 
 and earth. 
 
 In Apoc. iv. II, the four and t\^cnty elders 
 fell down, and faid, *' Thou art worthy, O 
 ** Lord^ to receive glory, and honour, and 
 ** power : for thou haft created all things, and 
 *' for thy pleafure they are, and were created." 
 In chap. V. i 2, ten thoufand times ten thoufand 
 cried out, " faying with a loud voice. Worthy is 
 ** the Lamb ih.2ii v^'2LSjJain^ to receive power, and 
 " riches, and wifdom, and ftrength, and honour, 
 '* and glory, and blelTing." Here the fame glory, 
 honour, and power, are afcribed to the Lamb 
 that was flain, (i. e. to Jefus who was crucified,) 
 
 C c 2 »s 
 
ig6 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 as to the Lord the Creator of all things. 
 Therefore I conclude in the words of Paul, 
 thau " by hini (Jcfus Chrift) were all things 
 *^ created tliat are in heaven, and that are in 
 ^' eanh, vifible and invifible, whether they be 
 ^' thrones, or dominions, or principahties, or 
 ** puv, ers : ail things were created by him, and 
 *' lot hnn/' Col. i. i6. 
 
 Further : *^ In 'the IVord was life, and the 
 ^^ life was the light of men," John i. 4. Jefus 
 fays, " / am the way, the truth, and the Irfey* 
 John xiv. 5. " / am the l/gbl of the w^orld," 
 chap. viii. 12. You fay the Word only dwelt 
 in Jeius, as fomething dillinct from him, but 
 was not in realiiy Jeius, But by the above 
 palia;_j!,es ic is evidenc, tnat Jefus, wiio was the 
 life and light of men, was m ihe Wordy as well 
 as the Vv'ord in him: fo that whatever is faid 
 of the one, may be equally applied to the 
 otiier alfo. Hence again refults my firfl: and 
 lall: poiition, viz. That Jefus Chnit alone is 
 Go.c^. 
 
 It is faid of the Word of God, that he fat 
 upon a white hcrfe ; that he is called Faith- 
 ful and True ; that he doth judge and make 
 war; that he had eyes like a hame of fire; 
 
 thac 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalcvi. igj 
 
 that on his bead were many crowns ; that he 
 4iad a name written which no man knew but 
 him/elf; that he was clothed in a vefture dipt in 
 hlood ; that out of /?/> motith went a fharp fword ; 
 that he treadelb ihe zvine-prefs ot the tiercenefs 
 and wrath of alm.ghty God ; and that he hath 
 on his vejliire and on his thigh a name written. 
 King of kings, ami Lord of lords, Apoc. xix. 1 1 to 
 1 6. The whole of the above is evidently the 
 defcription of one in a Human Form ; and yet it 
 is exprefsly faid to be that of the fford of God. 
 The Word of God is therefore a Man — a Kino; 
 
 o 
 
 — a Lord. But that it is no other than the 
 Divine Man Jcfus Chrift, is plain from the 
 particulars of the defcription, which are elfe- 
 where appUcd to him in nearly the very fame 
 terms. As for inltance, it is (aid of Jefus, 
 that he is the faithful and true witnefs, Apoc. 
 i. 5. chap. iii. 14; that all judgment is com- 
 mitted unto the Son, John v. 22 ; that the 
 Lamb fhall overcome, in war, the ten kings, 
 for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings, h^ioc. 
 xvii. 14 ; that the eyes of the Son of Man were 
 as a fame of jire, Apoc. i. 14 ; that out of his 
 mouth went a fbarp two-edged fzvord, verfe iG ; 
 that he had a nezv name written, which no man 
 knoweth, but he who recciveth it, Apoc. ii. 17; 
 and of our Saviour jelus Chnll it is faid, in 
 
 all u lion 
 
 <^r 
 
ig8 A Defence of the Nexjo Church, 
 
 allufion to the work of redemption accom- 
 pliflied by him, that he trod the wine-prcfs 
 alone, and that his garments zvere Jiained zvith 
 hlood, Ifaiah Ixiii. 3. Seeing then the very- 
 fame things are alike fpoken of the Word, 
 which you have acknowledged to be God, and 
 of Jefus Chrifi: whom you confider as a mere 
 man, it follows, that the Son of God and the 
 IFord of God are one and the fame divine 
 principle, both having been made liefh in 
 the fmgle perfon of our Lord Jefus Chrifi. 
 
 To make it, if pofTible, (till more manifeft 
 and undeniable, that the Word of God and 
 Jefus Chrift are the fame, I fhall add the fol- 
 lowing confiderations. In the firll chapter of 
 John's gofpel, it is faid of John the Baptid, 
 that he came to bear witnefs of the fVord, as 
 it's immediate fore-runner, " and he cried, 
 '* faying. This was he of whom I fpake. He 
 " that cometh aficr me, is preferred before me; 
 ** for he was before me," verfe 15. In the 
 fame chapter the fame words are applied to 
 Jefus Chriil, in the mofi: decided and un- 
 equivocal manner : *' The next day John feeth 
 " J(f^s coming unto him, and faith. Behold 
 ** the Lamb of God which takech away the 
 " fia of the world. This /s be of whom I faid, 
 I " After 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. ipg 
 
 " After me cometh a Man, which is preferred 
 
 ** before me ; for he zvas before ;/;<?," verfe 29, 
 
 30. In the firil palTage John evidently fpeaks 
 
 of the J Ford ; and in the latter he fays ex- 
 
 prefsly that Je/us is be of whom he fpake. It 
 
 is alfo faid, verfe 14, that the Word was full of 
 
 grace and truth ; and in verfe 16, that grace and 
 
 truth came by Jefus Chrift, The Word is called 
 
 the true light which lighteth every man that 
 
 Cometh into the world, verfe 9 : and Jefus fay5, 
 
 *^ I am the light of the world,'* chap. viii. 12. 
 
 And further, Paul declares, i Cor. i. 24, that 
 
 Chrift is the wifdom of God, Now the wifdoin 
 
 of God can be no other than the IVord of God. 
 
 Therefore the truth of my propolition again 
 
 appears, That the Word of God, and Jefus 
 
 Chrift the Son of God, are one and the fame 
 
 divine principle mianifefted in the flefh; con- 
 
 fequently, that as the Word of God is the 
 
 true God, who was made fie(h, {o Jefus Chrift 
 
 is the, fame God who manifefted himfclf in 2. 
 
 Human Form. 
 
 * * * 
 
 You aik, p. 30, " W^hat is the difference, 
 " excepting in words, between faying that 
 ** Jefus was a man united to God, and a man 
 ** infpired by God, when in this cafe you can- 
 *' not pretend to have any proper idea to the 
 
 " word 
 
20O A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 *' word united, or can fay wherein it differs 
 " from infpired?'' If there be no difference 
 in the meaning of the two expreflions united 
 and infpircdy why do you objccl fo much to 
 the ufe of the former, when fpeaking of Jefus, 
 and inlift that the latter only is appHcable to 
 him ? You know that the term union imph'es 
 fuch an incorporation of two principles into 
 one, as to preclude every idea of feparability : 
 whereas the term mfpiration bears no fuch fig- 
 nification. A man may be in/pired by God, 
 as the prophets were, to write or utter what- 
 ever may be dictated to him : but he is not 
 therefore uiiited to God ; for it is poffible he 
 may ftill be an ungodly or difobedient man, as 
 was- the cafe with feveral of the prophets 
 mentioned in the Old TeRament, viz. Balaam, 
 Jonah, Hofea, &:c. To be united is to become 
 one like foul and body in man, or like heat 
 and light in the fun's rays, or like effcnce 
 and form, affedtion and thought, caufe and 
 effedl. Thefe comparifons, though they may 
 fufficiently explain my meaning, yet fall in- 
 finitely fhort of conveying a perfedl idea of 
 the intimate union fubfifting between the 
 Lord's Divinity and Humanity; for the fub- 
 jedl being in itfelf divine, and of courfe in- 
 finite, the full knowledge thereof muft ever 
 
 tranfcend 
 
Signified by the Nezo Jeriifalem. 201 
 
 tranfcend all finite capacities, whether human 
 or angelical. Neverthelefs, as we are fo con-t 
 Ititured, that an idea of the Divine Eeino- 
 can in fome fmall degree be formed in a 
 finite underftanding, it is lawful for us to 
 illuftrate the mode of his exiftenc^ by fuch 
 things in the created world as may be fup- 
 pofed moft to refcmble it* 
 
 Such then being our idea of the unioH fub- 
 filling between Jefus and the Father, or the 
 Humanity and the Divinity, and fuch the dif- 
 ference between it and mere iujpiration, fay not 
 that we confound the one with the other, or 
 that we are incapable of diflinguifliing between 
 them. We know how to afcertain the dif- 
 ference between union^ conjii'nclion^ and infpi^ 
 Yution; union having refped: to Jefus and the 
 Father, conjunclion to man and the Lord, and 
 injpiraiion to the defcent of divine truth from 
 heaven to earth, particularly as manifeftcd in 
 the holy Word. No mere man can ever be 
 fo united to Jehovah, as to be one with him. 
 In the perfon of Jefus alone fuch union was 
 effedled ; for , he fays, ^' All things that the 
 ** Father hath are raine^' John xvi; 15. "I 
 " and my Father are oney' chap. x. 30. Where- 
 fore he alone mufl be a Divine Man. The 
 
 D d union 
 
202 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 union fubfifting between the Lord and his 
 church, confidered as mere men, is more 
 poperly termed conjunct ion ^ becaufe it is be- 
 tween two parties who are ftill feparace and 
 diftindl from each other, and muft for ever 
 remain fo; for the ardour of the divine efTence 
 is fo intenfe, that were any mere creature to 
 approximate too near it, he would inftantly < 
 be confumed like a ftick thrown into the body 
 of the fun. In/piration, again, differs both 
 from union and conjuncition in this, that the 
 perfon infpired may have no perception in 
 himfelf of the truth of what he allerts, being 
 no more than a kind of paflive organ for 
 fpirits to fpeak by and through. SeveraLof 
 the prophets were, during the time of their 
 infpiration, pojjfeffed of fpirits, who occupied 
 their bodies according to their own pleafure ; 
 in which fituation fome appeared to be in fane, 
 as Saul, when he ftripped himfelf, and lay 
 down naked all day and all night ; fee i Sam, 
 xix. 24. Others received their infpiration by 
 dreams and vifions, confequently when they 
 were not in the ufe of their external faculties. 
 But thofe prophets, by whom the Word was 
 written^ for the mo ft part merely wrote down 
 what was dictated to them by fpirits from 
 the Lord^ the very words which they wrote 
 
 having- 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufalem. 203 
 
 having been firft audibly pronounced in their 
 cars. 
 
 After faying, that Man and God are more 
 different in their natures, than the iron and 
 clay in Nebuchadnezzar's image, and as in- 
 capable of forming any proper union, as thofe 
 fubflances; from your great deiire for our 
 converfion, you add, p. 31, *' Say then, in in- 
 '' telligible language, that Jefus was a man, 
 ** but that God was with him, and acted by 
 *'him;' and we ihall be agreed in words, as 
 " well as in reality, and every dclirable con- 
 *' fequence will flow from it. You will then, 
 ** as now, difclaim all plurality of Gods, to- 
 " gether with different perfons in the trinity, 
 '' and you will effectually fecure the truth of 
 " all the declarations of Chrift, as proceeding 
 ** from God, juft as viuch as if he hlmfelf had 
 " been God,'' We already declare, in language 
 fufficiently intelligible, that Jefus is a Man ; 
 but we go further, and acknowledge him to 
 be the Only Man in the univerfe, from whom 
 all other men derive thofe very faculties which 
 conftitute them men. Every rational and 
 confiderate perfon knows, that man is not mvi 
 merely by virtue of his external form or body, 
 but principally by virtue of his fpirit or foul, 
 which is a form recipient of love and wifdom 
 
 D d 2 from 
 
204 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 from God, This form we call the will and 
 underllanding, his will being a receptacle of 
 love with all it's derivative affedtions, and his 
 underftandmg being a receptacle of wifdom 
 with all It's derivative thoughts. Thefe arc 
 the fundamental conftituent principles of hu- 
 manity, without vyhich man would be no 
 better than a brute beafl, but in proportion to 
 his reception of which he becomes more and 
 more a man. If then love and wifdom, or, 
 which is the fame thing, good and trurh, are 
 phe only proper llanaard of humanity, from 
 which even the human form icfclf is derived; 
 how plain is it to fee, that God, who is the fole 
 V fpiintain of love and wifdom, muft be the O/ify 
 Mauy from vv hom all OLliers are by derivation 
 called men ! And how rational to fuppofe, 
 that as the human foul, which is a mere re- 
 ceptacle of life, ailames to itfelf a body which 
 it forms into it's own iikenefs, fo Jehovah, 
 who is elfential life, has aiTumcd to himfelf an 
 actual Kuinanicy, by virtue of which he is 
 now the only fclf-exiftent Man in ultimate or 
 laft principles, as he was from all eternity the 
 pnly Man iq firlf principles. 
 
 From the above fpecimen of our fentiments 
 concerning the Humanity of Jefus Chrirt, you 
 
 will 
 
Signified by the New Jervjalem. 205 
 
 will readily perceive. Sir, that the members 
 of the New Church agree with you neither in 
 words, nor in rcaliry. And akhough with 
 you we difclaim a trinity of divine perfons, 
 as amounting to the iiimc thing as a trinity of 
 Gods, yet we do it upon quite different prin- 
 ciples from thofe or a Socinian. The prin- 
 ciples on which we build, are the following : 
 I. That there is one God only, whofe eifcncc 
 is love and wrfdom. 2. That love and wifdotH 
 mud belong to a fubilance, whofe form is 
 •verily Human ; confequencly that the one God, 
 the Creator cf the univerfe, is a Divine Man. 
 3. That the Lord and Saviour Jcfus Chrifl is 
 that one God. 4. That the Word of God con- 
 tains a fpiritual as well as a literal fcnfe ; that it 
 is holy and divine in every part ; that there is 
 nothing in it redundant by human interpola- 
 tions, or defedlive by omiilions of negligence; 
 the Divine Providence of the Lord having pre- 
 fer ved it entire, in the original languages, till 
 the prefent day. Thefe are all affirmative prin- 
 ciples, leading the mind to the true knowledge 
 of things as they are, and thus to thepofitive 
 perception of the delights of vvifdom, as mani- 
 fefted in the two kingdoms of fpirit and 
 nature. But the principles from which you 
 reafon, are all of a iiegalive quality, and in 
 
 direcl: 
 
2o6 A Defence of the Neiv Church, 
 
 dired oppofition to our's, being as follow : 
 J, That there is one God, of whofe elTence we 
 know nothing at all, p. 6i. 2. That the fub- 
 ftance of this God is equally unkno\^n to us; 
 that he has wo fjrm at all, much leis a human 
 form ; but if he has any form, it can be no other 
 xhan that of infinite fpace, p. 44, 49, 50. 3. That 
 Jcfus Chrift has nothing of divinity refiding in 
 him as his own, being no more than any com- 
 mon man, p. 21, 24, 30, 60. 4. That the 
 Word of God does not contain a fpiritual 
 fenfe ; that in various parts it is neither holy 
 nor divine, but abfolutely falie, in confequence 
 of the interpolations and dangerous gloffes of 
 deOgning men, which the Divine Providence 
 has never interfered to prevent, p. 37, 57.* 
 
 Such is the difference between your prin- 
 ciples and thofe of the Nev/ Church, which 1 
 have thus contrafled, for the purpofe of pre- 
 venting any perfon miflaking the one for the 
 other. You feem indeed to think it is of no 
 confequence whether Jefus be God or not ; for 
 you fay, that if we will but fet him down as a 
 
 mere 
 
 * SeealfoDr. PrieRley's firfl Letter to the Jews, p. 41 ; 
 and his fecond Letter, paiL 2, p. 10, where he aflerts, that 
 the firft chapter of Matthew is not authentic, and that the 
 gofpel of Luke •♦ abounds with the mod manifeft i.npro- 
 babililies.'"* 
 
Signified by th New Jcrufakm. 207 
 
 mere man, by whom God aifled, we Hialt 
 " efFedually fccurt? the truth of all the declara- 
 « tions of Chrid, as proceeding from God,. 
 ">/ ^s much as if he bimjelf had been God/' 
 which declaration of your's, if it has any 
 meaning at all, mull argue, that you confider 
 it the fame thing whether we woriliip the true; 
 God, or a falfe God ; for in either cafe, you^ 
 intimate, the confequences will be the fame,. 
 Thus you make no diftinclion between truth 
 and error, and that in a point which is of the 
 higheft moment, and on which our everlafiing 
 welfare depends. 
 
 The confedion of a God, and the declaration 
 that he is one, without knowing or caring wbo 
 he is, may do very well for a Socinian, but 
 never for a member of the New Jerufaiem. 
 With us it is by no means an indifferent mat- 
 ter whether Jcfus Chrifl, or any other, be the 
 true God ; for according to the idea we en- 
 tertain of God, fuch muft the Vv hole fyflem of 
 our theology be, which is founded thereon. 
 If Jefus be not God, then the fcripturcs fall 
 to the ground, and pcriHi ; revelation mud be 
 a dream, and all religion a farce. But if Jcfus 
 be God, then the fcripturcs remain in their 
 purity, and we can underfland them, as tefli- 
 
2o8 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 fying, from beginning to end, of Him alone. 
 Therefore Hmi only are we bound to acknow- 
 ledge ; Him only to worfliip, as Creator from 
 eternity. Redeemer in time, and Regenerator 
 for evermore. He alone is Father, He alone 
 is Son, and He alone is Holy Spirit. Jehovah 
 of hofls is his name, the Holy One of Ifrael, 
 the mighty God of Jacob. He is Alpha and 
 Omega, the Firft and the Laft, the Beginning 
 and the Iind, the I Am, who is, who was, and 
 who is to come, the Almighty. Thus there is 
 one Lord, one God in the church, who out of 
 his great love and mercy hath, by the alTump- 
 tion of Humanity, made himfelf vifible, ap- 
 proachable, and in fome meafure comprehen- 
 lible as a Divine Man. To Him be glory 
 and dominion for ages of ages. Amen. 
 
 ROBERT HINDMARSR 
 
 mmmmmKmam 
 
 LET- 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifakiiu 269 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 Mifcellaneous. 
 
 HAVING in the preceding Letters, I truft^ 
 fufficiently obviated the objeclions which 
 you raife againft the divinity of Jcfus Chrift^ 
 as well as againft the extraordinary commiftion 
 of Baron Swedenborg, I propofe, Sir, in the 
 prefent Letter, to make fiich further remarks as 
 the remainder of your objedions fhall appear 
 to require. The fubjecls, on which I may be 
 led to fpeak, being various, my obfervations 
 will naturally be of a mifcellaneous kind. 
 
 ^ sj: « * :|t 
 
 I, Of the ConneBion hetzveett Religion and the 
 Civil Power, 
 
 In p. 2, you fay, that the members of the 
 New Church ** aftign the fame fource to the 
 ** corruptions of chriftianity," as you do, viz. 
 «' falfe philofophy, and the interference of the 
 " civil powers in matters of religion." From 
 -what authority you take upon you to afTcrt this, 
 
 E e I know 
 
giQ A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 I know not. This, however, is mofl: certain, that 
 we by no means agree with you in thefe points. 
 Falfe philofophy, indeed, or fiich as is founded 
 on the mere fellacies of nature, as your fyftem 
 of materialifm moil evidently is, has been one 
 great caufe of excluding from the human mind 
 all perception of fpiritual and divine truth; 
 for while the underftanding is fhackled by, 
 and confirmed in, the appearances of truth, 
 every thing will be feen in an inverted point 
 of view. So far therefore as men have rea- 
 fpned from fallacious principles, fo far have 
 they contributed to the corruption of chrif- 
 tianity as exifting in the prefent day, whether 
 ip has been done in favour of a trinity of divine 
 perlbns, or in oppofition to the one and only 
 true God Jefus Chrift. 
 
 But I cannot pafs over in filence your alTer- 
 tion, that we aiTign, with you, as the caufe 
 of the corruptions of chriftianity, <* the in- 
 ^' terference of the civil powers in matters of 
 ^* religion;" which interference of the civil 
 powers you call, in the fame page, a ^* moft 
 ^' unnatural alliance with the church of Chrirt." 
 Nqw, Sir, if you had given the writings of 
 Baron Sy.edenbprg a deliberate and attentive 
 perufal, and thereby informed yourfelf of the 
 
Signified by the New Jentfalan. 
 
 211 
 
 ^fue drift of the New Jcrufalcm doarines, 
 (which, previous to any attempt to confute 
 them, you certainly ought to have done,) you 
 might cafily have difcovercd, that even in this 
 particular we difler very eflcniially from you. 
 We confider religion, or what in the prcfent 
 cafe amounts to the fame thing, chriflianity, 
 to be an aS^live principle in man, influencing 
 his hfe and condud in all I be civil concerns of 
 Jocieiy ; and not as an abftrafl theory floating in 
 the brain, without any application to ufes of 
 life. Hence it is, that we confider an alliance 
 between the church and flatc, in any country, 
 to be fimilar to the alHance between the foul and 
 body; and that as in the latter cafe both ought to 
 COFrefpond and act in conjunction for the good 
 of an individual, fo likewife in the former cafe 
 both ought to be united in giving energy and 
 efFeci: to the welfare of a community. 
 
 Of thefe fentiments of our's you might have 
 been apprized before now ; for having occafion 
 to write on this very fubjcct in the Preface to 
 the Englifti tranllation of }3aron Svvedenborg's 
 Brief Expofit ion of the Doctrine of the New Church , 
 publifiied more than two years ago, I there in 
 a few words flatcd the wifdom and propriety ot 
 there being an eftablillied religion in every 
 
 E e 2^ naiiuni 
 
212 A Defeiice of the New Churchy 
 
 nation ; though I did not take upon me to point 
 out what that religion ought to be in each coun- 
 try. If you will give me leave, I will here tran- 
 fcrtbe what 1 then afferted, and ftill acknowledge, 
 as my lincere opinion, and moll mature judgment. 
 
 " Every government in every country is infiuenced 
 hy the religion -prevalent therein. This is a truth^ 
 which, the more it is confidercd, will, 1 be- 
 lieve, the more fully be acknovvledged. Agree- 
 able hereto, all wife governments have feen the 
 neceuity of having an eflablifhed church, which 
 fhould be fo united to the civil ftate, as to 
 conftitute it's very life or foul ; for the relation 
 fubfidino; between the church and ftate, in 
 every country, exadily refembies that which 
 fubfifts between the foul and body in man. 
 The operations of both are likewife fimilar. 
 Thus the laws and cuftoms of civil life are to 
 the religious principles of a nation, jufl what 
 the actions of the body are to the fccret pur- 
 pofes of the foul. Hence it is, that penetrating 
 ftatefn^.en dread the frnallcft alteration in the 
 - ecclefitiflical laws, as dangerous to the prefent 
 fyflcm of politics ; becaufe they know, that if 
 the main fpring of aQion receives a new incli- 
 nation, all the wheels of government mull: 
 ncceffarily fubmit to a diftcrent motion. On 
 
 this 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 213 
 
 this ground it was, that a noble Lord (Lord 
 North, now the Earl or Guildford,) in the Britifli 
 fcnate, on a late occafion, with great propriety 
 alTerted, " That the church and fiate were fo 
 intimately connected, that they have ever gone, 
 and ftill go, hand in hand, and mufl both 
 fland or fall together." Preface to Brief Ex^ 
 fofiliouy page xlvii. 
 
 In addition to the above, I would here 
 obferve, that every fociety of men, whether 
 large or fmall, conlidered as to the ufcs 
 ^vhich they mutually perform to each other, 
 and viewed interiorly, is adually in a human 
 form ; fo much fo, that all the individuals 
 therein, taken colledively, are viewed by an 
 intelleclual mind as forming only one man.* 
 
 The 
 
 * Mr. Paine, in his Rights of Man, part 2, p. 34, fays, 
 *' A nation is not a body, the figure of which is to be re- 
 *' prefentcd by the human body; but is like a body contained 
 " within a fircle, having a common center, in which every 
 ff radius meets; and that center is formed by reprefcnta- 
 ?' tion." Such is the principle, upon which a great part of 
 this author's reafoning is founded. But it is fallacious, 
 becaufe contrary to the true order of things both in the 
 fpiritual and the natural world : for to fuppofe, that the 
 pircumference of a circle produces the center, is the fame 
 fhing as to fuppofe, that the outer gives birth to the inner, 
 
 that 
 
214 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 The cafe is prccifely the fame with a whole 
 nation, which is a large fociety of men uniting 
 together in one common intereft, and thus con- 
 ftituting one body, of which the king (where 
 monarchical government prevails) is the head ; 
 the executive power, or magiftrates, the arms ; 
 merchants, manufadurers, and produdors, con- 
 ftitute the trunk of the body; women the loyns ; 
 and labourers the legs and feet. Such is the 
 viev/ of a whole nation, when conQdered as to 
 the general ufes of life : and as it is ufe which 
 forms the individual into the human likenefs, fo 
 is it ufe aifo v\hich reduces a whole nation into 
 the complete form of a fingle man. The fame 
 may be faid of all the nations of the earth : as 
 to the ufes they perform, they arc all viewed by 
 the Lord as one man. 
 
 Now, 
 
 that the trunk and feet produce the head, that the body 
 produces the foul, or that the cffcft, which is poflerior, 
 produces the caufe, which is prior. Nay, upon the fame 
 principles the vifible world muft be confidered as having 
 derived it's exiflencc from a general fortuitous conflux of 
 particles or atoms from the wide expanfe of infinitely-ex- 
 tended fpace, till at laft they arranged themfelves into fh^ 
 prefent orderly fy/lem, and produced the fun as their 
 center. Thus the affumptioa of one falfe principle, 
 founded on fallacious appearances, and confirmed by rea- 
 fonings of ingenuity, leads to the perverfion and utter ex- 
 tinction of truth, by afcribing the ti cation of the univerfe 
 to nature, and not to God, 
 
Signijied by the Nexo Jerufalenu 2 1 5 
 
 Now, as it is liighly proper, that every in- 
 dividual man fhould be pofTefTed of a deliberate 
 and fettled judgment in matters of religion, 
 which may ferve as the fecret fpring from 
 whence all the a:lions of his life ought to be 
 derived ; fo fnould the grand man of the nation 
 have a fettled, eflabliflied religion, from which, 
 as from an internal didlate of juilice, which 
 may be called the national confcience, all his 
 adts of legiOation and jurifprudencc ought 
 to flow. The nation that is without an 
 eftablifhed religion, is like a man deftitute of 
 any fixed principle; what he does to-day, he 
 may undo to-morrow ; and every action dif- 
 covers ignorance, caprice, and folly. But 
 while I fay thus much, do not fo far mifunder- 
 ftand me, as to fuppofe, that I prefer the 
 prcfent ertablifhed religion to the religion of 
 the New Church. By no means. Yet, I con- 
 ceive it to be a duty incumbent on every 
 rriember of the community to contribute, as 
 a citizen, towards the fupport of that religion, 
 which the government, legally conlHtuted, has 
 thought proper to approve and adopt ; for 
 on any other principle, I do not fee how the 
 general intcrcds and peace of the nation can 
 be fecured, which neverthclefs every indi- 
 yidjual is bound to fupport, in return for the 
 
 protcdion 
 
2i6 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 protcdion afforded him by the laws. No 
 fociety can exilt, unlefs it*s members are kep^ 
 in due obedience to thofe in office; and fo 
 long as the government will allow to the people 
 the free and peaceable enjoyment of their own 
 religious opinions, it is all that can or ought to 
 be expeded. As m.embers of the New Church, 
 we no doubt could wifh that our religion were 
 the eflablifhed religion of the land, becaufe we 
 believe it to be more pure and univerfal than 
 any other. But we are far from forcing our opi- 
 nions on any man, as knowing that nothing 
 fhort of a deliberate, rational convic1:ion of the 
 truth can be of any fervice. We therefore reft 
 contented with the prefent difpenfation of di- 
 vine providence, and, thankful for the many blef- 
 fmgs we already enjoy, pray for a more general 
 reception of divine truth in the world at large, 
 that men may freely and of their own accord 
 embrace the new and true chriftian religion, as 
 defcribed in the Apocalypfe under the charadler 
 of the holy ciry New Jerufalem. 
 
 Such are the politics of the New Churchy 
 which I believe none of her members arc 
 afhamed to avow. Liberty of confcience is 
 all we demand ; and as for the honours and 
 emoluments of civil or ecclefiaftical offices, we 
 leave them to thofe who can confcientioufly 
 I comply 
 
Signified by the Nezv Jeriifalem, o 1 7 
 
 comply with the conditions on which they 
 are bcdovvcd. The Church of England n^ay 
 have enemies among certain DiITeiitcrs ; but I 
 hope it will never find one among the mem- 
 bers of the New Jerufalem ; for b^ing men of 
 peace, we wage v/ar with neither Jew nor 
 Gentile; the \^alls of our city are a fufiicient 
 bulwark againft all that may alfaulr us ; and we 
 are not fo over-anxious about the fuccefs of our 
 dodtrines, as to ufe compuHive mcafurcs i'or 
 their propagation, were it even in our power 
 fo to do, becaufe we know that no other re- 
 ception of them than fuch as is grounded in 
 freedom and raliviality can be either genuine or 
 permanent ; and befides, our confidence in the 
 truth is fo great, that we doubt not but it will 
 effedually, though gradually, clear it's own 
 wav, againft all oppolition, purely by dint of 
 it's own native authority. Magnd eft veritaSy 
 et pr^vakbit. 
 
 jj: ^c :Jc ^ i'fi 
 
 II., Of the H'ivian Form of God. 
 
 Page 3 and 61,, you fay you agree w ith us 
 " in the important belief of one God, and oi'o/:e 
 ** perfon in the Godhead." A pcrfoji, you knou, 
 is a 7?iaiJ, the word never conveying any other 
 
 F f idea 
 
2i8 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 idea than that of a human fubfiance and form. 
 But in p. 50, you exprefsly deny that God has 
 any fuch form, though you have no objeclion to 
 his being in a globular form ; for by attributing 
 to him the fhape of infinite /pace ^ you in facft 
 acknowledge that his form is that of a perfedt: 
 Jphere ox globe. The phantafy of fuch a notion 
 as this, fcarcely requires a ferious thought ; it 
 is it's own reproach, and a difgrace to human 
 underftanding. To fuppofe, that He, whofe 
 wifdom produced all the various forms of ani- 
 mated beauty, and, as the very perfeBion of ali 
 beauty and fublimity united, the human form^, 
 fhould yet himfelf be in the fliape of inanimate 
 matter, like this globe of earth, or the vad 
 fpace in which it revolves, is an idea fo abfurd, 
 ib irrational, fo degrading to a being of infinite 
 wifdom, that I am aflonifhed how any one can 
 lor a moment give it a place in his mind. But 
 I perceive, the reafon of your falling into this 
 grofs error is, becaufe you form all your ideas 
 of the divine omniprefence from and according 
 to time and fpace, which, however, bear no 
 proper relation to what is fpiritual or divine, 
 as I hope prefcntly to demonftrate. 
 
 With what propriety you fay of yourfelf^ 
 that you agree with us in afcribing perfonalily 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalcm. 219 
 
 to God, while at the fame time you deny him 
 ihcforin of a per/on, is not eafy to be conceived. 
 The form and fubllance of a brute is never 
 called a perfon by any judicious v\rirer that I 
 know of; flill lefs proper would it be to call 
 inanimate matter a per/on, let it's form be what 
 it may : the term, therefore, is folcly applicable 
 to a human form, and by no means to a being 
 of an infinitely extended lliape, as you fuppofe 
 God to be. " The greateft puzzle of all," you 
 fay, '* is, to afcribe to him the form of a man:" 
 yet by pronouncing the Divine Being to be a 
 perfon^ and by informing the world that you 
 a^ree zvilh lis in fuch a belief, you have, at Icalt 
 in this particular, virtually acknowledged that 
 he is a Man^ and thereby admitted a fentiment 
 plainly contradictory to the reft of your notions. 
 
 But that this fentiment forms no part of 
 your real creed, (having, as I apprehend, crept 
 into your Letters by mere accident, without 
 delign or rcflcclion,) is pretty evident from 
 the great pains you hive taken to aboliih the 
 idea of God's exifting in a human form. For 
 "this opinion," you fay, p. 50, '* befides being 
 «* hio-hlv deizradino; to the Divine Being, has no 
 «' countenance from the fcriptures. or from 
 " reafon." But herein you lie under a grofs 
 
 p f 2 nulla kc; 
 
/ 220 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 «c.**. inifiake; for both the fcripturcs and found 
 reafon teflify that God is a Man. Whenever 
 inention is made of Jehovah in the Old Telia- 
 ment, or of the Lord God in the New Tefla- 
 mcnt, he is uniformly reprefented and fpoken 
 of as having the form of a man or an angel, 
 which is one and the fame thing. The fol- 
 lowing proofs vsill reheve me from the cenfure 
 o^ dealing in mere affertions. 
 
 I. In the very firfl chapter of Genefis, it is 
 
 cxprefsly faid, that God created man i?i his own 
 
 image ; the flmplefl and plained inference frani 
 
 which is, that God himfelf muft be in a human 
 
 form. Hovv' elfc can it be faid, that man is an 
 
 image and likenefs of God ? Were a fla' uary to 
 
 form the image of a man, and when he had 
 
 finimcd it to fay, that he had made a (latue /// 
 
 bis own image and likenefs ; would not every 
 
 perfon who faw the work, and doubted not the 
 
 accuracy of the performance, naturally conclude 
 
 concernuig the perfon of the artifl, that it was 
 
 cxadly fuch, as to rorm and appearance, as his 
 
 image reprefented ? Why then fnould we dif- 
 
 pure the Word of God hinafelf, when he fo- 
 
 Icmnly and exprefsly declares that he created 
 
 man in his own in^ai?-e and likenefs ? If the form 
 
 of God bC; as VOL] fay, no other than that of 
 
 infinite 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufalem, 22 1 
 
 infinite fpace, why was not man created in fuch 
 a form, that is, (as before o'oferved,) in the form 
 of a perfee'l fphere or globe ? for \ cannot con- 
 ceive that any other finite form is at all repre- 
 fentativc of infiniie extenfion on all fides. But 
 man was not created in fuch a form ; therefore 
 God, of v\hom he is an image and fikenefs, 
 is not inhnitely extended, but in the complete 
 form of a Alan. 
 
 2. la Gen. iv. 4, Cain faid to Jehovah, 
 " Behold, thou haft driven me out this day 
 " from the face of the earth; and from thy face 
 " fhall I be hid." And, verfe iG, '' Cain went 
 " out from the prcjence of Jehovah,** Here 
 Jehovah is addrelTed and confidered in all ref- 
 pcvfls as if he was in a human form. 
 
 3. When men began to build the city and 
 tower of Babel, " Jehovah came down to fee 
 *' the city and the tower, which the children 
 " of men builded," Gen. xi. 5. Here again 
 Jehovah is fpoken of, not as a being infinitely 
 .extended, but as a Man coming dozuu from 
 heaven, with eyes to fee the building. In many 
 other places he is reprefented ^^fpeakitig^ ficing^ 
 jjearingy zvalking.flanding, thinking, wriling, eatings 
 fwcaringy repent ingy coming dozvn, going up, &c. 
 
 &:c. 
 
222 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 &c. all which exprellions evidently imply a 
 form, and feverai of them denote acls that ex- 
 clufivcly indicate the human form. See Gen. 
 xvii. I, 9 to 22. chap, xviii. i, 8, 13, 21, ';^^, 
 Exod. xxiv. 12. chap, xxxii. 14. 
 
 4. As you feem to ridicule the idea of God 
 being in a human form before the incarnation, 
 as well as lince, and wonder whether he had 
 arms and legs, and whether he ever made ufe of 
 them in removing from place to place, I (hall 
 refer you, for an anfwer to your curious in- 
 quiries, to thofe prophets v.ho have feen God, 
 and were fent by him. " Mofes and Aaron, 
 " Nadab and Abihu, and feventy of the elders 
 ''oflfrael, faw the God of Ifrael : and there 
 ** was under his feet as it were a paved work of 
 ^* fapph ire- (lone, and as it were the body of 
 " heaven in his clearncfs. And upon the nobles 
 *' of the children of Ifrael he laid not his hand: 
 '* alfo they faw God, and did eat and drink," 
 Exod. xxiv. 9, iQ, II. Jehovah himfelf faid 
 to Mofes, who deiired to fee his glory, " Be- 
 ^' hold, there is a place by me, and thou fnalt 
 '' fiand upon a rock. And it Iball come to 
 " pafs, while my glory paffelh by, that I will 
 " put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover 
 " thee with my hand while / pafs by. And I 
 
 '' will 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalcm. ooo 
 
 ** will take away my band, and thou flialt fee my 
 
 " back-parts ; but wy face ihall not be feen " 
 
 Exod. xxxiii. 2[, 22, 23. •* God came from 
 
 " Teman," fays Habakkuk, " and the Holy 
 
 " One from mount Paran. He flood, and niea- 
 
 *' fured the earth. Thou did ft march through 
 
 ** the land in indignation ; thou went eft forth 
 
 "for the falvation of thy people; thou didft 
 
 ** walk through the fea with thine horfcs," 
 
 Hab. iii. 3 to 15. The prophet Nahum fays, 
 
 " The clouds are the duft of i^/V/t-^/," chap, i, 3. 
 
 And " the Lord flood upon a wall made by a 
 
 ** plumb-line, with a plumb-line in his band^" 
 
 Amos vii. 7. Laftly, the prophet Ezekiel, in 
 
 his amazingly fublime vifion of the four living 
 
 creatures and the wheels, defcribes the great 
 
 Jehovah in refpedl to the Word as having the 
 
 form and likenefs of a Man. " This was their 
 
 " appearance," fays he, " they had the likenefs 
 
 " of a Man, And above the firmament that 
 
 ** was over their heads, was the likenefs of a 
 
 " throne, as the appearance of a fapphire-ftone, 
 
 " and upon the likenefs of the throne was the 
 
 ** likenefs as the appearance of a Man above 
 
 " upon it. And I fav, as the colour of amber, 
 
 "as the appearance of fire round about within 
 
 ** it : from the appearance of his loyns even 
 
 " upward, and from the appearance of bis loyns 
 
 ** even 
 
224 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 ^ even downward, I faw as it Vv ere the ap- 
 ** pearance of fire, and it had brightnefs round 
 " about. This was the appearance of the like- 
 *^ nefs of the glory of Jehovah. And when I 
 " faw it, 1 fell upon my face, and I heard a 
 '« voice of one that /pake." Ezek. i. 4, 26, 27, 28. 
 
 In all thefe paffages Jehovah, even before 
 the incarnation, is fpoken of as a Man. A 
 face, hands, feet, loyns, and back-parts, are 
 afcribed to him. He came, marched, went 
 forth, walked, flood, pafied by, and fpake. 
 Nay, he is even exprefsly declared to have the 
 likenejs and appearance of a Man upon a throne. 
 Then blame not the members of the New 
 Church fcr afcribing to Jehovah a Divine 
 Human Form ; for while they give credit to 
 the holy fcriptures, they cannot help believing 
 that God is a Man. I do not here enter 
 into the fpiritual {t\\[z of the above palTages, 
 becaufe I believe you are not difpofed to ac- 
 company me into regions which are fo far 
 elevated above time and fpace. I muft, there- 
 fore, in a great meafure confine myfelf to the 
 material fyftem, and fpeak to you in your own 
 language, that is, according to the mere literal 
 fenfe of fcriptMre ; though I dare fay, that in 
 the above and fimilar pallages which do not 
 I agree 
 
Signified hy the New Jerufalem, 225 
 
 agree with your idea of an infinitely extended 
 Beings you have rccourfc to figure and me- 
 taphor. The holy fcriptures, however, are 
 not written, in any part whatever, by mere 
 tropes y figures y or nietaphorsy but cvery-whcre 
 by correfpondences ; the difference between 
 which and bare ligurative expreifion 1 mufl 
 referve for explanation in another place. 
 
 *' To give to God the form of man," you 
 fay, p. 50, " is to adign him all the fundtions 
 ** of man, and a mode of life fimilar to that of 
 '^ man. The form of any particular animal, 
 "" bead, fowl, or fi(li, is adapted to it's own 
 •' occafions, and to nothing elfe. If the form 
 " be changed, as from a catterpillar to a but- 
 " tej'fly, the whole mode of life is changed in 
 " proportion. In fadl, therefore, to give to the 
 ** Divine Being the form of a man, is to make 
 ** him a man, and nothing m.ore. In like man- 
 ** ner iliould the form of a horfe be given to a 
 •* man, it would be nothing lefs than changing 
 ** the man into a horfe." 
 
 When we aiTign to God the form of a Man, 
 you fhould recollect that we confider him as a 
 Divine and Infinite Man, whofe fundions and 
 mode of life muA alfo be infinite and divine. 
 
 G g VVe 
 
226 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 We are the fartheft in the world from afcribing 
 to him mere human properties, or any thing 
 that borders on mutability and imperfedion. 
 We fay he is and muft be a fubftance^ becaufe 
 all other fubliances are derived from him ; and 
 as we are alTured that no fubftance can exift 
 without a formy therefore we are under the ne- 
 ceflity of afcribing to God fome form or other. 
 But we know of none equal in dignity and 
 majefty to the human form ; and our concep- 
 tions of divinity are fuch, as to lead us to feled:, 
 ,out of the infinite variety of forms with which 
 the univerfe abounds, that which alone appears 
 the fittcfl: for an intelligent Being to refide in, 
 namely the Humane as being the very fcrfe^lion 
 of form y and that to which all other forms bear 
 fome reference or analogy. Hence we take 
 up the fentiments of the wifeft among the 
 ancients, and fay with them, that Man is a 
 mortal God, and God an hnmorial Man. 
 
 This idea of God being in the form of a 
 Man, is univerfal, having it's refidence in the 
 interiors of every rational creature, in confc- 
 quence of an univerfal in Rax from Kim who 
 is the Only Man. Even you yoiirfclf, Sir, al- 
 though by external reafonuigs and perfuafions 
 you may endeavour to liiHc tlie conviclion, can- 
 not 
 
Signified hy the Neio Jcriifalevu 227 
 
 not pofTibly divert yourfelf of it. Ir appears, 
 when you are Icalt aware of it, in your writings, 
 difcourfes, and converfuion. You attribute to 
 him will, underiranding, eyes, ears, a mouth, 
 hands, &:c. &c. for thefe are all implied in 
 your acknowledging that he is merciful and 
 wifey that he fees and hearsy /peaks and a^/s^ 
 &c. ^c. In iliort, you fpcak of him in all ref- 
 pedls as a Man, afligning him functions of life 
 that in many cafes are only predicable of the 
 human form ; and although you ridicule the 
 notion of his being either male or female^ yet 
 your conllant language charadcrizcs him as a 
 male. " He is inviiible,*' you fay, p. 61, " but 
 " be is the maker and conllant preferver of all 
 *' things. This great Being has commiflioncd 
 " various men, and Specially Jefus Chrirt, to 
 " communicate his \\ ill to mankind, and he 
 " always fan(fcioncd their milTions by the power 
 " of working miiracles," &c. Again, " God, 
 *^ zvbo is invifible and omniprefent, fees and 
 *^ hears us wherever we are, and his power 
 ^* extends to all perfons, and all things," p. 6}, 
 Many other pafTagcs might be quoted, wherein 
 you equally admit, by implication, that God is 
 a Man. if you fiiy you d^vc obliged 10 ufe luch 
 ^xprelfions on account of the niipcrfedion ol 
 human language; 1 anfwer. It is no fuch thing, 
 
 G g 2 but 
 
228 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 but an t^^difpoiitaneoufly, unprcmedilatedly, and 
 naturally flowing from an interior perception, 
 cornraon to all men, of the true human form of 
 God. Nor is our language fo impcrfedl, but it 
 will readily admit of the variation of your 
 terms from the majculine to the neuter gender. 
 Thus, if you really think, that God is neither 
 male nor female, nor in any other fnape than 
 that of iniinite fpace, you are at perfect liberty 
 to fpeak of him in the following manner : 
 ' God, zvbich is invifible, fees and hears us 
 
 * wherever we arc, and it' s power extends to 
 
 * all perfons and things. Although // is in- 
 
 * vifible, yet // is the maker and confrant pre- 
 
 * fervcr of all things. // has commifTioned va- 
 
 * rious men to communicate /7'j Vvill to man- 
 
 * kind, and // always fandioned their millions 
 
 * by the power of working miracles,' &c. But 
 I apprehend you would not venture to fpeak 
 in fuch terms of any being polTefled of common 
 rationality ; much lefs of him who is the fole 
 fountain and fource of all wifdom. And yer, 
 to be confident with yourfclf as a philolbpher 
 and grammarian, acknowledging God under no 
 form but that of infinite extenlion, which is 
 undoubtedly neuter y you are certainly bound tq 
 adopt this new ffyle of writing for the future. 
 
 % 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 229 
 
 If, as you Hiy, our giving to God the form 
 of a man, be to make him a man, and nothin'^ 
 more ; it follows by parity of reafon, that your 
 giving him- the form of infinite fpace, is to 
 make him infinite fpace, and nothing more; 
 for, according to your own dodrinc, whatever 
 the form be, fuch is the true denomination of 
 the fuhliance or being, of which it is the form. 
 In confequence of our acknowledging God as 
 exiiiing in a human form, we, in Itricfl con- 
 formity to our principles, declare him adually 
 to be a Divine Man. So you, in your turn, 
 to fhew your confiftency, ought without refcrve 
 plainly to avow your belief, that God, being in 
 the form of infinite fpace, is in fact nothing 
 elfe but infiiiile fpace ; or, if you reafon agree- 
 -abiy to your declaration in p. 50, you muft 
 naturally conclude, that as God cannot pof- 
 fi§ly have any form, fo he cannot have any 
 exigence at all. Such are the confequences 
 neceHarily attendant on the falfe premifes which 
 you have chofcn as the bafis ot your religion ; 
 a fcheme fo vifionary, and defiitute of all ra- 
 tionality, that I wonder you are not alhamcd 
 of lending your name to it's fupport. 
 
 The li^ht of reafon is of itfclf fufficicnt to 
 pverthrow your whole fyftem : but if we come 
 
 to 
 
230 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 to examine your afTertions by the Word of God, 
 we ihall find them no lefs oppofed to the plain 
 language of divine infpiration, than to the dictates 
 of found reafon. You fay, " fhould the form 
 "of a horfe be given to a man, it would be 
 *' nothing lefs than changing the man into a 
 ** horfe.'* Now in Apoc. ix. 7, it is faid, that 
 *' the Jbapes of the lociifts were like unto horfes 
 *' prepared unto battle." Here I would afk 
 you, whether the locufts, in confequence of 
 being in the form of horfes, were real horfes; 
 or whether they remained locufls ftiU ? Again, 
 the devil is reprcfented as being in the form 
 of a dragon ov ferpent, Apoc. xii. 3, 9. Is he 
 therefore no more than a dragon or ferpent ? 
 And is the whole mode of his life thereby fo 
 changed, that he cannot perform any other 
 fundions, than fuch as are proper to a rep- 
 tile of the earth ? So again, the feven churches 
 were k&n by John in the form of feven golden 
 candlejiicks, Apoc. i. 12. Is the church there- 
 fore nothing more than a candleflick ? Jefus 
 Chrifl:, whom you allow to oe a man, is fpoken 
 of as appearing in the form of a Lamb Handing 
 upon mount Sion, Apoc. xiv. i. Do you, on 
 that account, confider him as having been 
 adually transformed into a lamb ? Again, the 
 xSpirir 0^ God defcended from heaven like ^ 
 
 dove^ 
 
Signified by the Nezo Jerufakvu 231 
 
 dovcy and refted on Jcfus, John i. 32. Will 
 you therefore inlift upon it, that the Spirit of 
 God is no n"Lore than a dove? Laftly, you 
 yourfelf have acknowledged, p. i^Oy that " the 
 " one true God, belides whom there is no other, 
 ** is the IFord,'* Now the Word has made it's 
 appearance among men literally in the form of 
 a book : from your own principles therelore it 
 necelfarily follows, that the one true God, who 
 is the Word, is nothing clfe but a book. I 
 Ihould be very forry to draw any unfair con- 
 clulions from the premifes you lay down ; but 
 really. Sir, according to the bell of my under- 
 ftanding I cannot help judging, that both your 
 theological and philcfophical fv ftcms are radi- 
 cally defedlive; and therefore, as I am myfelf 
 in purfuit of tiuth, 1 hope I may be permitted, 
 without oilence, to inform my neighbours where 
 I think It is Jioi to be found. The traveller, 
 who avoids the paths of error, cannot iail to 
 take the right road. 
 
 Before I quit this fubjed, I find tnyfclf dif- 
 pofed to anlwer with leMuurncfs a qucftion, 
 which you apparently put by Wiy of ridicule. 
 Your ^ords aie as foibw : " Was the divine 
 *' form male or fimah f Since the two fexcs 
 "correfpond to each other, he ought fo be 
 
 «• Doth, 
 
«c 
 
 232 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 both, or neither." To which you add, 
 " Indeed, gentlemen, it is impoffible to con- 
 *' lider your opinions on ferious fubje^fls with 
 "perfe(5l ferioufnefs." Now, Sir, if for a 
 moment you will put away the fmile that 
 fits upon your countenance, 1 will endeavour 
 to give you all the fatisfadion in my power, 
 by ftating, in a few words, my reafons for 
 confidering the great Creator of the univerfe to 
 be a Male Man, and not a female. But as every 
 queflion relative to the Divine Being ought 
 to be treated with all the reverence due to his 
 holy name, I hope no expreffion that may 
 drop from my pen, will give any juil oc- 
 calion of offence to the reader. 
 
 The diftinguiihing charaderiftic of a male is 
 GcJivity; while that of a female is re-aElvity\ 
 Thus God, as an active Creator, is properly 
 male ; and the whole creation, as a re-a^ive 
 fubjecl, is properly female. In a more par- 
 ticular point of view, the Lord is the Bride-^ 
 groom, and the church his Bride ; or, to be dill 
 more explicit, primary love, which is a love 
 that produces wifdom, is mafcidine, while fe- 
 condary love, which is the love of that wif- 
 dom when produced, is feminine. The Lord, 
 as to his proper perfon^ is divine love or 
 1 divine 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, 233 
 
 divine good, not however to the cxclufiou 
 of wifdom or truth, but rather to it's propaga- 
 tion ; for divine truth is not fo much in the 
 Lord, as proceeding from the Lord, juH: as light 
 is not in the body of the fun, but proceeds from 
 the fun. Now as divine good, or primary love, 
 •conftitutes the perfon of the Lord, while divine 
 truth, together wirhit's fecondary love, is only a 
 proceeding from the Lord, it follows, that the 
 male principle elTentially relides in hiniy and that 
 the female principle commences out of him. 
 Thus the hmnaii foul, although it came from 
 God, and is alfo conjoined to God, yet being 
 out of God y and confequently y^w^/d" in refpccl to 
 God, is not a part of God, Hence 1 infer, 
 that God, as Creator, Redeemer, and Regene- 
 rator, is truly and properly a Divine Male Man ; 
 and that the whole angelic heaven, as created, 
 redeemed, and regenerated, is truly and pro- 
 perly a Grand Female Man ; or in other words, 
 that the Lord God Jefus Chrill is an Hnfoand, 
 who hath taken to himfelf, in celeftial mar- 
 riage, the church univerfal for his IVife. 
 
 To enter more fully into the difcufTion of 
 this grand fubjed, perhaps may not be prudent 
 in the prcfent inllance, as I know not how 
 my readers may be affedted with what has been 
 already advanced. For my own part, fuch an 
 
 H h invefliga- 
 
234 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 invcfligation would be highly agreeable, and 
 I think equally fcrviceable in afTifting us to 
 form juft conceptions of the perfon and attri- 
 butes of the Creator, and the ncceflary dif-* 
 tindion between him and his creatures. But 
 as I have neither time nor ability to do jufticc 
 to the fubjed, I mud leave all deficiencies to be 
 fupplied in the mind of the true fpiritual 
 philofopher. I may however jufl remark, that 
 that mufl be a grofs fy flem of matcrialifm 
 indeed, which excludes from the Divine Being 
 all form or perfonality whatever, and reduces 
 to a (late of mere neutrality that God, from 
 whom both the male and female principles of 
 humanity, with all their innumerable felicities, 
 arc continually derived. 
 
 To fay, that love, wifdom, and life, have no 
 relation to form, as you do p. 51, appears to 
 me the fame as if you had alTerted, that fight 
 has no relation to the eye, nor hearing to the 
 car; yet in both cafes the faculty is infeparably 
 united with it's organ. But the fentiments you 
 now cxprefs fccm in dired: oppofition to the 
 h^^othcfis laid down in your Difquifitions on 
 Matter and Spirit. You there afTert, vol. k p. 48, 
 •* that the powers of fenfation and thought are 
 ♦' the mcejlfary rejult of a particular organization ** 
 
 of 
 
Signified hy the New Jericfalem. 235 
 
 of the brain; that is, of a particular form* 
 But here you afk, *' What relation have wif. 
 " dom, love, and life, to form?*' and then add, 
 •* It refembles Addifon*s apparition, which wai 
 " in the fhape of the found of a drum.*' Really, 
 Sir, I cannot but think you have been ridiculing 
 our fyftcm, at the expcnce of your own. If 
 neither thought nor fcnfation can exift in man, 
 without being connected with form, which is a 
 doctrine you have taken great pains to cftablilh; 
 how comes it to pafs, that you fhould have fo 
 far forgotten your own principles, as to declare, 
 that wifdom, love, and life, when predicated 
 of the Divine Being, cannot poffibly have any 
 relation to form? Perhaps you will fay, it is 
 true of man, but not of God. I afk. How do 
 you know this? Sound philofophers, I have 
 ever underftood, reafon from and according to 
 what they adually know. But here you diaw 
 conclufions plainly repugnant to your premifcs, 
 and form a judgment in defiance of evidence. 
 
 In the aforefaid volume of your Difquiftions 
 on Matter and Spirit, throughout, particularly in 
 p. 177, 182, 185, your avowed fentimcnts arf, 
 that God is fubjc:t 10 extcnfion, that he has 
 properties in common with matter, that he 
 bears relation to fpace, and lalUy, that he is 
 
 W\i 2 hinilcit 
 
2^6 A JOefcnce of the New Church, 
 
 himfelf abfolutcly material. Now all matter 
 is form ; it follows therefore from your own 
 principles, that God, if he be material, muft 
 alfo have a form ; for as an individual atom 
 cannot exifl: without it's particular form, fo 
 neither can the univerfal bulk of matter, of 
 which the individual atom is a part, exift 
 without it's form. And God, you fay, is ex- 
 tended through ail matter, inlbmuch that \'\t is 
 in all relpeds material, having nothing of im- 
 material iiy about him ; wherefore it again fol- 
 lows, according to your hypothefis, that God 
 is in the exa^l form of the univerfal bulk of 
 matter. If you fuppofe matter to be infinitely 
 extended, then you alfo allow God to be in- 
 finitely extended along with it. But if your 
 feheme admits of a limitation to the extenfion 
 of matter, then God himfelf mufl: be limited 
 to that form, be it what it may ; for fuch is 
 the neccHary confcquence of afcribing to God 
 a material exigence, or allowing him no pro- 
 perties but fuch as are infeparably connected 
 with matter. 
 
 .3 to the fhape of the found of a drum, 
 to which you plcafantly enough refemble the 
 form of wifdom, love, and life ; give me leave 
 to obfcrvc, that by inch a companfon you only 
 
 expofe 
 
Signified by the Nezu ycrufalevi. 237 
 
 expofe, your own principles, and furnifli mc 
 with an ..addiripnal occafion of pointing out 
 their abfurdity. The found of a drum, you 
 know, is propagated in all direcflions from 
 the center of pcrcuflion. Confequently it's 
 fhape can be no other than that of a circle, 
 the nearcd refemblancc of infinite fpace, 
 among all the forms with which we are ac- 
 quainted. Now you have already acknowledged, 
 that God, if he has any form at all, muft be 
 in the form of infinite fpace ; therefore I have 
 a right to turn the tables upon you, and fay, 
 that the God, whom Dr. Prieftlcy worfliips, 
 exadly ** refembles Addifon's apparition, which 
 " was in ihe floape of the found of a drwm." 
 
 But waving thefe confiderations, let me fe- 
 rioufly hope, that you will re-examine your 
 peculiar tenets, and on pure convidion be led 
 to adopt a more rational fyftem of religion ; 
 a fyftem that can prefcnt to your view a God 
 arrayed in all the glory of a Divine Human 
 Form, and as fuch vifible, acceflible, and in 
 fomc fort comprchenfible by his linite crea- 
 tures ; a fyikm that reprcfents God as the mild 
 and gracious Father of the human race, re- 
 joicing in their joy, and fympathizing with 
 them in their (brrows, from thofe bonr/s of 
 
 infinite 
 
238 A Defence of the N-ew Churchy 
 
 infinite mercy and compafTion, which are alone 
 prcdicablc of a Divine Humanity^ and Human 
 Divinity, You will then perceive the true 
 import of thofe words in John's gofpel, " In 
 *' the beginning was the Word, and the Word 
 ** was with God, and God was the Word. 
 " And the Word was made Fiefi, and dwelt 
 ** among us, (and we beheld his glory, the 
 *' glory as of the only-begotten of the Father,) 
 ^* full of grace and truth," Johni. i, 14. 
 
 4: :$: 4e :!: ♦ 
 
 III. Of the Union of DiiAnity and Hur/ianiiy in 
 ihe Perfon of Jefus Chriji^ and at the fame 
 ^ime of ihe Divine Omnipotence, 
 
 It may naturally be cxpedled, that the per- 
 fon, who denies the pofTibility of the Divine 
 Being afTuming to himfelf a human form, will,^ 
 object likewife to the means whereby fuch an 
 event was accomplifhed. Accordingly in p. 
 34, you take occafion to remark, " that of 
 •* what kind foevcr was the union that was to 
 " be formed between the divine efTence and the 
 " human body, and whatever purpofe it was 
 ** intended to anfwer, it is extraordinary that 
 ** he who is omnipotent, and who made all 
 ** things by a word fpeaking, fliould not have 
 
 ^» effeded 
 
Signijied by the Nezv Jerufalcm. 239 
 
 «* cffedled this union but in a courfe of time ; 
 " and Mr. Swedenborg gives us no af!i (lance 
 ** U'hatcver in forming any idea of the manner 
 ** in which trials or temptations promoted this 
 ** union, or why one degree of union (if chere 
 •• be fuch degrees) might not havcanfwered the 
 ** porpofc as well as another. But, admitting 
 " all this, why different modes of fpeaking 
 ** fhould be adopted by our Saviour in the 
 '* different llages of this union, is particularly 
 ** incomprehenfible, iince, in all the cafes, both 
 " the perfon fpeaking, and the perfon fpoken 
 ** to, muft have been the very fame, the divine 
 •♦ mind." 
 
 I have already explained, in a preceding 
 part of this Defence of the New Church, p. 111 
 to 118, and 125 to 136, how the perfon fpeak- 
 ing, and the perfon fpoken to, may with 
 propriety be faid to be one and the fame. It 
 is therefore unnecefTary to repeat what was 
 there advanced, or even to add any thing fur- 
 ther on the fame fubjedl; for if the principle 
 on which I rcafoned bejuft, it will of icfclf be 
 fufficient to clear up all the apparent diffi- 
 culties refpe(fling the dilfercnt modes oi fpeak- 
 ing, which our Lord adopted during the M^ 
 fe/cnt ftagcs of his union with the Father; 
 
 but 
 
240 A Defence of the -New Church'^ 
 
 but if, on the contrary, the truth of my obfer- 
 vations be not admitted, any further reafon'- 
 ing on the fame principle would b.e needlet% 
 and fuperfluous. ■* 
 
 You feem to think it an extraordinary thing, 
 that fuch union, if it ever took place, was not 
 cffecled inftantaneoufly, but gradually. But 
 herein you only difcover how crude and un- 
 digefled your ideas of the divine omnipotence 
 are ; imagining no doubt, that God, becaufe 
 he is omnipotent, can do whatever is propofed, 
 even though the proportion fhould imply a 
 breach of divine order. This, indeed, is the 
 common belief of the prefcnt day, from whence 
 have arifen fo many phantafies refpeding the 
 power of God, as, that he created the univerfe 
 out of nothing merely " by a word fpeaking ;'* 
 and that this creation was eifeded in an in- 
 ftant ; that God, by virtue of his omnipotence. 
 Is able to fave all the human race, nay even to 
 turn devils into angels, and hell into heaven ; 
 that man cannot dive after death, until the 
 foul is re-united with the body, and again 
 endued with it's external fenfes ; and tfeat the 
 material body, although devoured by worms 
 and fifh, and in a variety of forms entering 
 into the conftitution of other bodies, will by a 
 I fovereign 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, 241 
 
 fovereigri adt of divine omnipotence be again 
 
 raifed and coileded together, at the fuppofcd 
 
 time of the general judgment^ when the vifible 
 
 heavens and the whole habitable earth are to 
 
 pafs away and perifh. Thefe and many other 
 
 groundlefs notions about the divine omnipotence 
 
 are in daily circulation both among the learned 
 
 and the fimple ; few being able to fee, that the 
 
 power of God is bounded by the laws of his 
 
 own order, which cannot be tranfgreffcd even 
 
 by omnipotence itfelf; becaufe this would 
 
 imply^ that God, who is efTential order, could 
 
 go out of himfelf, and thereby ad: contrary to 
 
 himfelf, which is a manifeft abfurdity. 
 
 Of all fuch as entertain an idea of God's 
 abfolute, unlimited power, and who fuppofc 
 that the univerfe was created by the mere 
 utterance of a word, I would afk, i . Why was 
 the omnipotent hand of God employed fix* 
 days in arranging the work of creation, when 
 " a word fpeaking'' could as completely and as 
 inftantaneoufly have brought it to it's prefent 
 
 I i order, 
 
 • The creation fpoken of in the firfl chapter of Grnefig, 
 does not at all allude to the creation of the vifible univci fr, 
 but folely to the regeneration of man, as may be Icen aburt- 
 danily proved by Emanuel Swedenborg in his Arcana 
 
242 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 order, as originally called it into being ? 2, Why 
 did not God, on the creation of man^ imme-^ 
 diately place him in heaven, without laying 
 him under the necefity oi firfb pafling through 
 this prefent ftate of probation ? particularly as 
 it is his deiire, that all men fbould be faved, 
 snd be happy forever? 3. If he needs muft 
 place him i-n this rtatural world, why has he 
 ordained, that he fnall p^.fs fo many years in 
 a Hare of helpkfs infancy, before he can pof- 
 £bly have any true knowledge of him as his= 
 Creator and adorable BenefaBor ? 4. Why has 
 not God, by hk omnipotence, eftablifhed one 
 true religion over the whole earth ? And why 
 has he permitted fo many herefies to diRra6t 
 the chriftian world in particular ? 5, Why did 
 he not fend the Melliah into the world imme- 
 diately after the fall, in c-rder to recover man. 
 from the loft ftate into which he had plunged^ 
 himfclf, without waiting lor the hpfe of fo 
 many ages ; when frcHU the beginning he fore- 
 faw that wickedncfs would increafe on the 
 earth, and that all the endeavours of his pro- 
 phets, forerunners of the Meiliah, would be 
 inefFedual to reclaim the world ? 6. Why 
 docs not God miraculoufly and ip:eliftibly 
 compel every rational being to acknowledge 
 him alone as the fovcrcign of the univerfe, and 
 
Signified hy the New Jerufalcm, 24:5 
 
 hy a iudden intcrpofition of divine authority 
 *t once put an end to the prefent controvcrfy, 
 iind reR:iovc every poflibie doubt from every 
 human mind with refpedl to the true and 
 proper divinity of Jcfus Chrifl ? Thefc, and 
 a great variety of other queftions of a limilar 
 nature, will be found extremely difficult to be 
 anfvvered by any perfon who imagines, that the 
 divine cwnnipotenc-e has no bounds or limits, 
 but that it can be equally exerted in th<! per- 
 formance of what is contrary to order, as of 
 what is agreeable to ord^r. h\l th-efe things, 
 however, are ealily accounted for, when we 
 know the laws of divine order, within and 
 according to which every ad: of omnipotence 
 muft nccelTarily be confined and determined. 
 The reafon why the angels of heaven fo far 
 excel the fpirits of hell in refpcdl to power, is 
 becaufe the former adl agreeable to order, while 
 the latter are in oppofition to it ; and in pro- 
 portion to their love of, and agreement with 
 order, fuch invariably is their power. Were 
 they to depart from order, their power would 
 depart from them at the fame time. Juft fo, 
 God, being infinite and elTential order, is in 
 confcquence theieof poircircd of infinite and 
 eflential power. Were he in any menfurc to 
 depart from his own order, he would in the 
 
 I i 2 fame 
 
244 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 fame proportion immediately lofe his omnipo- 
 tence. But as to depart from order would be 
 the fame thing as to depart from himfelf, it 
 is evident, that the divine omnlporcnce can 
 perform nothing but what is confident with 
 the laws of order, and that every fuppolition 
 to the contrary is both irrational and abfurd. 
 
 With refpecl to the union of the divine ef-» 
 fence with the human, which you objedl againft 
 not only in point of fad:, but alfo as to the 
 mtmncr of it's completion, in that it is ftatcd 
 to have been gradual, and not inftantaneous, 
 the following pafTages from the Word will be 
 fufficicnt to ertablifh the truth of the propo- 
 fition. " The child ( Jefus) grezv and waxed 
 ^^ firong injpirity filled with wifdom j and the 
 " grace of God was upon him. And Jefus 
 " mcreajci in wifdom and ftature, and in favour 
 •* with God and man.*' Luke ii. 40, 52. Jefus 
 faid, ^^ Father, glorify thy name. Then came 
 •^ there a voice from heaven, faying, 1 have both 
 ^^ glorified it, and "joill glorify it again^^ John xii. 
 28. " When Judas was gone out, Jefus faid, 
 ** Now is the Son of man glorifiedy and God is 
 " glorified in him. If God he glorified in him^ 
 ^* God jhall alfo glorify him in himfelf , and fhall 
 " firaighiway glorify binu' John xiii. 31, 32. 
 
 HcncQ 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalcm. 245 
 
 Hence it is plain, that the union of the Humaniiy 
 and the Divinity, which by the evangeliils is 
 .called glorification^ was not elfeiftcd all at one?, 
 but by degrees ; and that it became more and 
 more perfedl by means of temptations or fuf- 
 ferings which the Lord underwent during his 
 continuance upon earth, until by the palHon 
 of the crofs it was pcrfedly completed. Where- 
 fore the Lord, after his refurredion, faith, 
 " Ought not Chrift to hdiWtfuffered thefe things, 
 *' and to enter into his glory /" Luke xxiv. 26. 
 
 But you objcd:, p. 35, ''It happens unfor- 
 *' tunatcly for your hypothcfis, that when Chrift 
 ** fpakc of the Father as being one zvith bimfelf, 
 ^' it was at a period prior to his laft fuffcrings, 
 '' by which you fay this union was completed.*' 
 To which I anfwer, His laft fuffering was in- 
 deed the laft act of glorification in this world; 
 )3ut as the union of Humanity and Divinity 
 was gradually cifedlcd, in every ftage of his 
 fufferings the Lord was fo far one with the 
 Father, as th^t union was promoted, and no 
 farther. This is the fenfe in which we uni- 
 formly underhand the Lord's words prior to 
 his laft futfcrings : but after his refurrcdion he 
 fays, " All poijcer is given unto mc in heaven 
 " and in earth," Matt, xxviii. 18 ; plainly im- 
 ^ pl)ing. 
 
14^ A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 plying, that a full union had taken place be- 
 xwccn his divine and human nature. It may 
 •iiot, however, be amifs here to remark, that 
 ,as the gofpels were written a confiderable time 
 after the Lord's full glorification and afcenfion, 
 <x>nfequemly at a time when he was perfedily 
 one with the Father, the terms of infpiration 
 are occalicnally fuch as to have feme refped: to 
 fhat circumflance^ as w;ell as to the gradual 
 |)rocefs of the glorification under an hiftorical 
 point of view ; and it is not unufual for the 
 preciiion of the literal fenfe to give way to the 
 fpiritual (enfe, which is within or above it. 
 Two or three remarkable inflances of ,this kind 
 niay be {ecn in the note below.^ 
 
 I am 
 
 * 1. It is faid, Exod. xii. 40, that *^ the rejourning of the 
 '* children of Ifrael, who dwelt in Egypt, w^as four hun- 
 ** died and thirty years." But according to the fcripture 
 chronology they were in Egypt no more than 215 years, 
 which is only half of the time iiated in the above palfage; 
 for Mofes fpruitg from Amram, Amram from Kohath, and 
 Kohath from Levi, and Kohath wtnt with his father Levi 
 into Egypt, Gen. xlvi. 11. Now the age of Kohath was 
 i33years, Exod. vi. 18; the age of Amram 137 years, 
 vcrfe 20 ; and the age of Mofe% when he flood before 
 Pharaoh, 80 years, Exod. vii. 7. All thefe years added 
 together make only 350, which are confiderably fhort of 
 430 ; and therefore it is impoflible the children of IfracI 
 could ha.vc been 430 years in Egypt. No mention is made 
 
 ho\'/ 
 
Signified by the New Jerufcdem. 247 
 
 I am fenfible, that while you deny the fad 
 of the Lord's glorification, or union with the 
 Divinity, it will be to little purpofe to explain 
 the mode of it's accomplilhmeMt. However, 
 
 as 
 
 how old Kohath was when Amram was born, nor liow 
 old Amram was when Ivlofes was born; but in all proba- 
 bility they were advanced in years. If we fuppofe them 
 to have been about the age of 67, and for both their ages 
 dedufl: 135 from 350, it will leave 213, the real number of 
 years the liraelites fojourned in Egypt, according to the 
 chronology of the fcriptures. This variation from the 
 hiftorical trutii of the faft, is on account of the internal 
 fenie, which requires the number 430 as it's proper cor- 
 rcfpondent exprefl'ion, and not 215, although this latter 
 would have been more ftridly conformable to the literal 
 tranfaclion. But as in the fpiritual world there is neither 
 time nor fpace, and the Word of God is written as well 
 for the ufe of angels ar>d fpirits, as of men •, therefore the 
 literal fcnfc, which is in time and fpace, occafionally givea 
 way to the fpiritual fenfe, which is above time and fpace, 
 juft as a fervant or an inferior gives way to his mafter or 
 fuperior. 
 
 2. Another in.^ance, wherein the literal fenfe of the 
 Word diverges from the flriftnels ofhiflorical facl, by way 
 of fubmiflion to it's fpiritual I'enfe, is the following in 
 Matt, xxvii. 9, 10. •' Then was fulfilled that which was- 
 '* fpokcn by Jeremy the prophet, faying, And they took the 
 ♦* thirty pieces of filver, the price of him that was valued, 
 " whom they of the childrea of Ifrael did value ; and gave 
 *' them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed mc." 
 Now this paffage is not to be found in J.rtmiah, but m 
 
 Zuh^Txahy 
 
24S A defence of tlu New Church, 
 
 as you have thought proper to ftate your cbjec- 
 tions to the manner, as well as to the thing itfelfs 
 I mufl: beg leave to add a few more obfervations 
 on this very important fubjedl. 
 
 AJl 
 
 Zechariah, cliap. xl. 12, 13 ; yet fo far is this circumftance 
 fiom invalidating the authority of Matthew's gofpel, that, 
 when properly underflood, it rather fumifhes a proof of 
 the evangelill's divine infpiration, as i have already fhewn 
 in the Magazine of Knowledge, &c. vol. i^ p. 451 ; the fub- 
 fLance of which explanation I fhall here tranfcribe. It is 
 to be obferved, that all the prophets reprefent the Word, 
 or doQrine drawn from the Word, or the flate of the 
 church as to it's reception of the Word. Confequently 
 every particular prophet reprefents fome fpecific do6lrine 
 taught by the Word, and deducible therefrom. Thus the 
 prophet Jeremiah leprefents that doftrinq of the Word, 
 which treats of the rejeftion of the Lord by the Jews, and 
 the vaftation of the church; and this not only in the par- 
 ticular prophecy which bears his name, but in every other 
 bock of the Word where that is the fubjeft treated of. 
 Hence it is, that Matthew, being under the burden of 
 divine infpiration, when he would quote that part of the 
 Word, which points out the low eflimation in which the 
 children of Ifrael valued the Lord, (flgnified by the thirty 
 pieces of filver given for the potter's field,) brings forward 
 a paffage to that puport from Zechariah, and fays, " Then 
 <» was fulfilled that which was fpoken by Jeremy the pro- 
 •' phet ;" for that doEirine is the prophet Jeremy wherever it 
 occurs throughout the Word, whether it be, according to 
 the letter, in Ifaiah, or in Jeremiah, or in Ezekiel, or in 
 Daniel, or in Zechariah, or in any other of the prophets. 
 
 In 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem, 249 
 
 All temptation arifes from a difagrecment 
 between the internal and external man, and is 
 permitted for the purpofe of promoting their 
 union. But this union cannot be etfcdied, unlefs 
 the fatisfadions or delights of the external man, 
 w hich are in oppofition to the delights of the 
 internal man, be refilled, overcome, and re- 
 moved. Now as it is impollible for thofe 
 delights to be relilied, except during the mo- 
 ments of their excitation; therefore, by the 
 Divine Providence of the Lord, which operates 
 for the fake of falvation, they are permitted 
 occafionally to affedt every man, who has en- 
 tered upon a flate of regeneration. He who 
 is influenced by the love of what is good and 
 rrue, will not at fuch times fuifer himfelf to be 
 
 fcduced 
 
 In like manner Mofcs means all the hiftorical part of the 
 Word, and Elias all the prophetical part. 
 
 3. Of the many other inltanccs of a fimilar nature io 
 be found in the fcripfures, I (hall only adduce a third. 
 In Gen. xiv. 14, 16, Lot is called the brother of Abram, 
 although in reality he was Abram's brother's fon, as may 
 be feen in verfe 12 of the fcjmc chapter. This likewilc 
 was for the fake of the internal lenfe, which rctjaired that 
 Lot fhould firft be confidered as the nephew of Abram, and 
 afterwards as his brother. Had it been expredcd other- 
 wife, the feries of the internal fenfe would iiave been 
 interrupted, which is yet more necelfary to beobfeivcd 
 than that of the literal fenfe. 
 
 K k 
 
250 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 feduccd by the delights of the fenfes ; but 
 throwing them as it were behind his back, he 
 breaks the force of habitual evil, and by degrees 
 elevates his mind to plcafures of a more rational 
 and fpiritual nature, into the full enjoyment of 
 which he at length enters. This comparifon 
 may help to give a faint idea how and in what 
 manner the Lord's Humanity and Divinity 
 were united by means of repeated temptations, 
 trials, or confliQs with the powers of hell : for 
 as the regeneration of man is an image of the 
 Lord's glorification, or union with the Divinity, 
 fo the orderly accomplilhment of the one marks 
 out the gradual proccfs of the other. 
 
 It is an undoubted truth, that the Lord 
 could not be tempted as to his divinity; for it 
 is impcffible that the powers of hell fhould 
 alTault what is divine. For which reafon, and 
 fhat he might put himfelf into a capacity of 
 fighting againft them as it ^v ere upon their ozvn 
 groundy he was pleafed to affume the human 
 nature by a^fiual birth from a virgin ; which 
 human nature, fo received from a woman, was 
 fuch that it might be tempted, fuffer hunger 
 and third, and lafily die. To this Humanity 
 adhered the evils not only of Mary his mother, 
 but of the whole human race ; in confequcncc 
 
 of 
 
Signified by the Ndzv Jcnt/alcm. 25 1 
 
 of which his temptations were, more terrible 
 and grievous than thofe of any other man ; for 
 fingly and by his own power he fought againd, 
 and overcame all hell. This is expreHcd by 
 Ifaiah in the following terms : *' Surely he hath 
 ^^ borne our griefs ^ and carried our forroivs : he 
 *' was wounded for our tranfgreffions^ he was 
 " bruifed /ijr our iniqailies: tlic chaflifement of 
 ** our peace wdi"^ upon him, and with his ftripcs 
 " we are healed. Jehovah hath laid on him 
 ** the iniquity of us all : for the Iranfgreffion of my 
 *^ people was he flricken." Ifaiah liii. 4, 5, 6, 8. 
 Without an adherence of evil it would have 
 been impofTible for the Lord to be tempted at 
 all ; for evil is that by which temptation comes, 
 and which at fuch times is excited by the ap- 
 proach of infernal fpirits. With the Lord 
 however, let it be well remarked, there zvas no 
 a^ual or proper e-vil, as there is with all men, 
 but only hereditary evil from the mo: her; and 
 even this hereditary evil, which is barely an 
 inclination or incitement to evil,' the Lord aifo 
 afterwards completely exterminated from his 
 Humanity, infomuch that he is now no longer 
 in any wife the fon of Mary, there not being in 
 him the fmalleil particle ofduR, or any thing clfe 
 derived from her. So that, as from the beginning 
 he was never the {on of Jofeph, Matt. i. 25. 
 
 K k 2 Lukic 
 
252 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 Luke ii. 49, in like manner after the cruci-^ 
 fixion he was not the fon of Mary, according 
 to his own words in John xix. 26, 27. 
 
 There is therefore a great difbirK5liof> to be 
 made between the Humanity derived from 
 Mary, and the Humanity derived from Je- 
 hovah. The former Humanity had an ad- 
 herence of hereditary evil, and was capable 
 of being tempted and of fufFering death : but 
 the latter, which is properly the Divine Hu- 
 manity, was, like the pure Divinity iifelf, 
 ever incapable of both. The Humanity from 
 Mary was infirmy like that of any other man : 
 but the Humanity from Jehovah was omnipotent^ 
 being the very arm of Jehovah^ Ifaiah liii. i. 
 The Humanity from Mary was put off: but 
 the Humanity from Jehovah was put on. The 
 Humanity from Mary was a receptacle of life: 
 but the Humanity from Jehovah was, like the 
 Divinity, life itfef^ John v. 26. chap. vi.. 48. 
 chap. xi. 25. chap. xiv. 6. The Humanity 
 from Mary was forty days in the wildernefs 
 tempted of the devil, who carried him ahout^ 
 placed him on the pinnacle of the temple, and 
 took him to an exceeding high mountain : but 
 the Humanity from Jehovah, when Jefus took 
 himfelf into an high mountain,^ and was there 
 
 trans- 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufalcnu 253 
 
 transfigured before Peter, James, and John, 
 did ihine as the fun in it's brightncfs. Such 
 was the appearance of his face ; and as to his 
 raiment, it was white as the light, Matt. xvii. 
 I, 2. The fame Humanity from Jehovah, fo 
 far from being tempted or allaultcd by devils, 
 put them to mHant conflernaiion and flight; 
 " and they cried out, faying. What have i^e /a 
 *' do with thecy Jefus, thou Son of Godf An 
 **' thou come hither to torment us before the 
 «» time ?" Matt. viii. 29. Luke iv. 41. chap- 
 viii- 28. Again, the Humanity from Mary 
 was material, and as fuch, fubjedt to the Laws 
 of material vifibility, tangibility, gravity, and 
 locality; witnefs his apprehenfion, crucifixion, 
 a.nd burial. But the Humanity from Jehovah 
 is not material, but fubfiantiai, and as fuch, in* 
 capable of being feen by a material eye, or 
 touched by a material hand ; neither is he fub- 
 jed: to any laws of gravity or locahty, but is 
 onmipre/ent with his Humanity as well as his 
 Divinity. 
 
 In proof of thefe affertions, I need only 
 bring the following paflages from the New 
 Teftament. That the Humanity of Jefus, 
 after his refurreclion, was w/ material, is plain 
 from John xx. 19, where it is faid, that Jcfuj 
 
 came 
 
254 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 came and flood in the midfl: of his difciples^ 
 when the doors zvere jhut. That his Humanity 
 is neverthelefs fubfiantialy is declared in thefe 
 words : Jefus faid, *' Behold my hands and my 
 *\feet, that it is I myfelf: handle me, and fee; 
 '* for a fpirit hath not fiefi ami boneSy as ye fee 
 ** me have^' Luke xxiv. 39. He alfo took a 
 piece of a broiled fiih, and of an honey-comb^ 
 and did eat before them, verfe 42, .43, of the 
 fame chapter. 
 
 That the Divine Humanity of the Lord is 
 incapable of being jcen by a material eye, is 
 proved from this circumftance, that his apoflles, 
 even before his crucifixion, could not fee it, 
 except when they were in the fpirit ; as at the 
 time of the transfiguration before Peter, James, 
 and John, they could not fee his glorified 
 body until their fpiritual eyes w ere opened ; 
 for it is faid, **As he prayed, the fafliion of 
 ** his countenance was altered, and his raiment 
 " was white and gliflering. But Peter, and 
 " they that were with him, were heavy with 
 *^ Jleep : and zvhen they zvere awake, they favv 
 ** his glory, and the two men that flood with 
 '* him,*' Luke ix. 29, 32. Their being heavy 
 with fleep, and afterwards waking, denotes 
 their change from a natural fiate to a fpiritual 
 
 one ; 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalem. 255 
 
 one; for the life of the body, with all it** 
 external fenfations, compared to the life of the 
 fpirir, is like a Hate of flcep compared to a 
 Hare of wakcfulnefs. But that the Divine 
 Humanity is incapable of being feen by a 
 iTiateriai eye, is further evident from the cir- 
 cumilance of the Lord's being invifible to all 
 afcer his refurredion, except to thofe whofe 
 fpi ritual eyes were fir ft opened for the exprcfs 
 purpofe of beholding him : wherefore it h 
 written, that ** their tyes zvere opened y and they 
 ** knew him ; and he vanijhed out of their^^ght** 
 Luke xxiv. 31. The cafe was the fame with 
 the wcmen ^\ho viiitcd his fepulchre after 
 his refurrc<5lion, and faw two angels, whom it 
 was impofTible to fee with the material eye, 
 but with the eyes of their fpirit only ; for it is 
 a true maxim. That like only can fee it's like. 
 
 That the Divine Humanity cannot be touched 
 by a material hand, is a confcquence of it's not 
 being material, but fubftantial, as already 
 proved. A material hand can touch nothing 
 but what may equally as well be touched or 
 obtruded by material doors and walls. But 
 Jefus entered among his difciples when the 
 doors were Ihut : therefore as his glorified 
 body had no relation to the materiality of a 
 I dQor, 
 
256 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 door, fo neither can it have any relation to 
 the materiality of an hand. Whence it fol- 
 lows, that the Divine Humanity is not tan- 
 gible by material hands. It may poffibly be 
 objecled, * Did not JeCus himfelf fay to his 
 * difciples, *^ Handle me^ and fee;" and to 
 ' Thomas in particular, " Reach hither thy 
 *^ finger y and behold my hands ; and reach 
 ** hither thy hand^ and thrujl it into my fide?'' 
 I anfwer. He did fo; but not till the difciples 
 and Thomas were in the fpirit; and a fpiritual 
 eye, and a fpiritual hand, can fee and touch a 
 fpiritual or fubflantial body, but a jnaterial 
 eye and hand cannot. 
 
 That the Divine Humanity is not Juhje^l to 
 the laijos of gravity^ is evident both from his 
 refurretlion out of the grave, and from hi^ 
 afcenlion into heaven. Concerning his afcen- 
 fion it is thus v/rirten: *^ And it came to 
 " pafs, while he bieffed them, he was parted 
 " from them, and carried up into heaven^* Luke 
 xxiv. £1. Now no material body ever did or 
 can afcend to heaven j but the divine body 
 that came down from heaven, that alone hath 
 returned back to heaven. The circumllance 
 of Enoch and Elijah being tranflated to heaven, 
 js not to be undcrilood literally, but fpiritually; 
 
 for 
 
Sigirijied by the New Jeriifalem, 257 
 
 ftr our Lord fays, '* A^^ vian hath afccnded 
 ** up to heaven, but he that came dozvu from 
 " heaven^ even the Son of Man who is in heaven,*' 
 John iii. 13. 
 
 Laftly, That the Divine Humanity is ovini-* 
 prefenty may not only be gathered from the 
 pailage in John lafl quoted, where it is faid, 
 that the Son of Man, even while on earth, 
 was ftill in heaven, but alfo from the following 
 words, which Jefus uttered immediately before 
 his afcenfion : " Lo, I am with yon always cs an 
 " unto the confummation of the age," Matt, 
 xxviii. 20. It alfo appears from the promife 
 which the Lord made to his difciples, that on 
 his leaving them he would fend the comforter 
 to abide with them for ever ; which comforter 
 or fpirit of truth, he at the fame time gave 
 them to underftand, was no other thanhimfelf : 
 ** I will not leave you comfortlcfs; I will come 
 *' to you,'' John xiv. 18. From which it is 
 plain, that although the Lord hath afcendcd 
 up into heaven, yet he is ftill upon earth ; con- 
 fequently that his Divine Humanity is cmni- 
 prefcnt. 
 
 Such is the dodtrine of the New Church con- 
 cerning the Divine Humanity, and it's dif- 
 
 1_^ 1 tindion 
 
258 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 tindlion from the infirm humanity derived 
 from Mary; the former being the objedl of 
 our worfhip, and noi the latter. All therefore 
 that you have faid in p. 6^^ about the union 
 of an infirm human body to the divine nature, 
 and the neceffiry of it's impeding, inftead of 
 facilitating the' divine operations, as it does 
 not apply to our dodrines, when rightly under- 
 ftood, falls to the ground of it's own accord, 
 and lofcs itfelf among thofe numerous other 
 objed:ions, which are frequently ftarted by 
 perfons who have not made themfelves mailers 
 of the fubjed. 
 
 To be well acquainted with the dodlrines 
 of the New Church, particularly in refpe(fl to 
 the glorification of the Lord's Humanity, it 
 is neceifary to ftudy Baron Swedenborg's Arcana 
 Ccekfiia with great attention ; for therein not 
 only the fad itfelf is clearly demonftrated, 
 but the reafons are alfo ftated why fuch a 
 procefs was infeparable from the work of 
 redemption. I {hall here only quote the fol- 
 lowing palTages refpeding the infirm humanity 
 which the Lord derived from Mary. *' The 
 Lord,'* fays he. Arc. Ca^L n. 1414, " w^as as 
 another man in every refped but as he was 
 conceived of Jehovah; neverthelefs he was 
 
 born 
 
Signified by the New Jcriifalevu 259 
 
 born of a woman, a virgin, and confcquently 
 by his nativity contracled infirmities from 
 rhe virgin mother, fuch as are common to 
 other men; which infirmities were corporeal. 
 There are two hereditary principles connate in 
 man, one derived from the father, the other 
 from the mother; the hereditary principle of 
 the Lord derived from the Father was divine, 
 but that from the mother was an infirm hu- 
 manity. This inhrm part or principle, which 
 man deriveth hereditarily from the mother, is 
 fomewhat corporeal, which is difperfed during 
 regeneration ; but what man deriveth from 
 the tather, remaineth to eternity." And again, 
 explaining Gen. xiii. 7, where it is faid, that 
 the Canaanite and Perizite were then in the 
 land, by whom are undcrftood evils and falfes 
 in the Lx)rd's external man, he adds, n. 1573, 
 " It may be matter of furprize to many to hear 
 fpcak of hereditary evil from the mother being 
 with the Lord ; but whereas it is here declared 
 {o manifefily, and the fubjed: treated of in an 
 internal fenfe is concerning the Lord, there 
 can be no reafon at all to doubt it's being fo. 
 For it is altogether impcfiible for one man 
 to be born of aiiorher man, but he muft thence 
 derive evil : ncvcrthelds there is a dificrencc 
 betv.een hereditary evil which is derived from 
 
 I. 1 2 the 
 
sSo A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 the father, and that which is derived from 
 the mother : hereditary evil from the father 
 is of a more interior nature, and remaineth to 
 eternity, for it cannot by any means be eradi- 
 cated. The Lord, however, had no fuch evil 
 appertaining to him, inafmuch as he was born 
 of the Father Jehovah, and was thus divine 
 or Jehovah as to his internals: but hereditary 
 evil from the mother apperraineth to the ex- 
 ternal man, and this evil was with the Lord, 
 and is called the Canaanite in the land, the 
 falfe thence derived being called the Perizite. 
 Thus the Lord was born as another man, and 
 had infirmities as another man. That he 
 derived hereditary evil from the mother, ap- 
 pears evidently from the circumllance of his 
 enduring temptations; for it is impoliible that 
 any one fhould be tempted who hath no evil, 
 evil being that in man which tempteth, and by 
 which he is tempted. That the Lord was 
 tempted, and that he endured a thoufand times 
 more grievous temptations than any man can 
 poiTibly endure, and that he endured them 
 fingly, and by his own proper power overcame 
 evil, or the devil and all hell, is alfo manifefl; 
 concerning thefe temptations it is thus written 
 in Luke, *' Jefus was led in the fpirit into the 
 " wildcrncfs, being forty days tempted of the 
 
 '* devil. 
 
Signified by the New Jemfalem. 261 
 
 *' devil, fo that he did not eat in thofc days; 
 " but when the devil had finifhed all the temp- 
 ** tation, he defifted from him for a time; 
 " thence Jefus returned in the power of the 
 " fpirir into Galilee," iv. i, 2, 13, 14: and in 
 Mark, *' The fpint dr^vina Jefus, caufid him 
 •' to go forth inro the wildernefs, and he was 
 " in the wildernefs forty days, being tempted, 
 "and was with the wild heads," i. 12, 13; 
 where by wild beads is lignified hell ; not to 
 mention further, that he was tempted even 
 unto death, fo that his fwcat was drops of 
 blood : '* And being in an agony, he prayed more 
 *' earneftly, and his fweat was as drops of 
 " blood falling to the ground," Luke xxii. 44. 
 It is not pofTible for any angel to be tempted 
 by the devil, becaufc whilft he is in the Lord, 
 the evil fpirits cannot approach him even 
 diRantly, being inftantly feized with horror 
 and fright; much Icfs could hell approach 
 to the Lord, if he had been born divine, that 
 is, without an adherence of evil from the 
 mother. That the Lord alfo bore the iniquities 
 and evils of mankind, is a form of fpeaking 
 commonly ufcd in the pulpit; but to derive 
 iniquities and evils upon himfelf, was impof- 
 fible, except in an hereditary way from his 
 mother. The divine nature or principle is noc 
 I fuf. 
 
262 A Deft lice of the New Church, 
 
 fufceptible of evil ; wherefore that he might 
 overcome evil by his own proper ftrength, 
 which no man ever could, or can do, and 
 might thus alone become rightcoufnefs, he was 
 willing to be born as another man ; otherwifc 
 there would have been no need that he ihould 
 be born ; for he might have alTumed the 
 human elTencc without nativity, as he alfo did 
 alTume it occafionally, when he appeared to 
 the mod ancient church, and likevvife to the 
 prophets. But he came into the w^orld for this 
 reafon, that he might alfo put on evil, in order 
 to fight againft and overcome it, and might 
 thus join together in himfelf the divine efTcnce 
 and the human eflence. The Lord however 
 had no adual or proper evil, as he himfelf 
 declareth in John. " Which oi you convinceth 
 ^' me of fm ?'* viii. 46." 
 
 Before I clofe this fubje^l, I will jufl: add 
 a fhort remark on the forty days which palTcd 
 between .our Lord's refurredion and afcenfion 
 into heaven. After quoting an explanation of 
 that circumftance from the Magazine of Know - 
 hdgCy vol. i. p. 277, wherein, among other 
 things, the reafon is frated 10 be, bccaufe the 
 number forty correfponds to temptations, you 
 fay, p. 36, *' What authority this writer had 
 
 " for 
 
Signified by the Ncxo Jeriifalem. 263 
 
 " for this ingenious fpeculation, docs not ap- 
 ** pear. But a much more obvious ufc of 
 ** Jefus continuing on earth thefc forty days, 
 *• and one that is plainly indicated in the fcrip- 
 *' cures, was, that time might be given for a 
 " fuificient number of fucccllive appearances to 
 ** the dilciples, in order to give them the mod 
 ** com.plete fatisfadiion concerning the refur- 
 " redlion of their mailer." The ingenious J pecu- 
 lation, as you are pleafcd to call it, having 
 flowed from my pen, it may not be improper 
 to inform you from what authority I derived 
 it. After flating that the fpiritual rcafon why 
 the Lord's afcenlion was protracled till forty 
 days afrer his refurredlion, was bccaufe the 
 number forty correfponds to temptations, and 
 fignifies complete deliverance therefrom, and 
 vidcry over all enemies, thus a plenary (late of 
 glorification ; I afierted, that the Lord afcendcd 
 above all the heavens into the fun of the 
 fpiritual world, in the midft whereof he eter- 
 nally refides, as Jehovah God, in glorious 
 human form. As you do not agree with mc 
 in admitting the tellimony of Baron Sweden- 
 borg on this matter, 1 (liall produce fuch 
 other authority as I hope you have no objcclion 
 to aclaiowiedge. David fays, " God is go;je 
 " up with a fnour, Jehovah with the found of 
 
 *' a truiu- 
 
204 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 ** a trumpet," Pfalm xlvii. 5. '* Thou hail 
 ** afcended on high, thou hafl led captivity cap- 
 " tive/' Pfahii Ixviii. 18. And Paul, alluding 
 to the lafl cited paflage, fays, " He that de- 
 " fcended is the fame alfo that afcended up far 
 " above all heavens, that he might fill all things,** 
 Eph. iv. io. And further, he calls our Lord 
 Jefus Chriil *' the bleffed and only Potentate, 
 ** the King of kings, and Lord of lords ; who 
 " only hath immortality, dwelling /;/ the light 
 *' zvhich no man can approach unto,'' i Tim. vi. 15, 
 16. This inacceffible light, in which Jefus 
 dwells, can furely be no other than the fun of 
 the fpiritual world. But to make it more 
 evident fliil, John in the Apocalypfe exprefsly 
 fays, *^ I favv an angel fianding in thefun^' Apoc. 
 xix. 17. Now it is not poilible for any angel 
 to (land in the fun of the fpiritual world ; 
 for that fun is fpiritual fire, the intenfity of 
 which is fo great, that were any finite crea- 
 ture to approximate too near it, he would in- 
 flantly be confumed, in like manner as would 
 a man, were he to approach the fun of the 
 natural world, which is material fire. Where- 
 fore it follows, that the angel, whom John 
 faw landing in the fun of the fpiritual world, 
 could be no other than Jehovah God himfelf, 
 who in Pfolm Ixxxiv. 11, is even called a Smu 
 
 Again, 
 
Sigmjled by the New Jeru/alem, 265 
 
 Again, " O Jehovah our Lord, how exccllcnc 13 
 *' thy name in all the earth ! who haft fct thy 
 *' glory ahve the heavens,'' Pfalni viii. i. «« Be 
 " thou exalted, O God, above the heavens ; thy 
 " glory above all the earth,/' Plalm Ivii. 5, i.i. 
 ^' Jehovah is high above all nations, his glory 
 " above ihe hea:vens. Who is like unto Jehovah 
 ** our God, who dwellcth on high P Who to/;- 
 •' l?/e/h himfcif to behold the things that are in 
 ** heaven^' Pfalm cxiii. 4, 5, 6. From all thefe 
 paiTages it appears, that the Lord's moil: im- 
 mediate and perfonal rcfidence is far above all 
 the heavens, and confequently in the fun of the 
 Spiritual world, which is the proximate fphcre 
 of his divine emanation. 
 
 With refpedl to the number/or/)' fignifying a 
 plenary ft ate of temptations from beginning to 
 end, this is plain from all thofe palfagcs of the 
 Word where that number occurs; as where 
 it is faid, that the flood continued y^r/y days 
 upon the earth ; that Mofes abode forty days 
 upon mount Sinai ; that the children of Ifrael 
 fojourned forty years in the wildernefs ; and 
 that the Lord was tempted by the devil /;r/y 
 days in the wildernefs. But you fay, a much 
 more obvious ufe of Jefus continuing on earth 
 forty days after his refurredion, was, that time 
 
 M m might 
 
265 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 migbt be given for a fufficient number of fuc- 
 cefTive appearances to the difciples, in order to 
 convince them he was rifen. Now it appears 
 from the gofpels, that the Lord was feen only 
 a few times by his difciples : therefore it is 
 evident, that the protradlion of his afcenfion 
 for forty days, could not be merely for the 
 reafon which you ailign ; for three or four days 
 only would have been fufficient for the purpofe 
 you mention, without waiting forty. His Lift 
 appearance to his difciples, as recorded in Luke 
 and John, is by the latter declared to be *' the 
 '* /bird time that Jefus fhewed himfelf to his 
 *' difciples, after that he was rifen from the 
 •* dead," John xxi. 14. There muft therefore 
 have been fome other fecret and particular 
 reafon why the Lord did not afcend till forty 
 days after his refurredion ; and I know of 
 none more likely to be the true one, than thac 
 already offered, as coinciding fo perfedly with 
 other parts of the facred fcripture, where the 
 number forfy is ufed. 
 
 ^> JjC ^C ^ •j» 
 
 IV. 0/ the Holy Scripture, and the Science of 
 Correfpondences. 
 
 One of the objedlions, which you bring 
 againft the members of the New Jerufalem 
 
 is. 
 
Signified by the New Jem/akm. 267 
 
 is, that they believe the holy fcriptures con- 
 tain a rpiritual fenfe, different from, though 
 concealed under, the fcnfe of the letter. But 
 it is your opinion, that th"ere is no fuch fenfe ; 
 for you fay, p. 1 7, ** As to any fpiritual fenfe 
 *' of the fcriptures, // cannot be attended to, till 
 ** there be fome evidence of the reality of fucli 
 " a fenfe of them." And again, p. 57, '* The 
 " facred writers are far from faying that they 
 ^' had any other meaning than that which ap- 
 ** pears on the face of their writings y and which 
 *• is to be found in the cnftomary fenfe of their 
 " 'joords ; * and if other fenfes be once admitted, 
 " there is no end of diverfity of opinion. Dif- 
 
 " ferenc 
 
 * This parage reminds me of a little anecdote, which 
 I will here fubjoin. Some time ago, a perfon was relating 
 to me, that a letter was fent to a didant friend by his 
 Majefty's {loop the Bull-Dog. A child about feven years 
 of age was prefent, and, as 1 afterwards found, was ftruck 
 with aftoniQiment at the difcourfe ; for immediately on the 
 perfon's retiring, the child with great fimplicity faid to mc, 
 »' What, papa, can a hdl-dog carry a letter for any one ?" 
 I told him, that the Bull-Dog we had been fpcaking about, 
 was not a dog, but a/n>, fo called to diftinguilh it from 
 other fhips.— It then occurred to mcj how common it was 
 for mankind, as it were by general confent, to adopt fuch 
 kind of language, and to convey in their difcourfe ideas 
 very different from the firft or cu/lomary Jcft of their 
 zcords, 
 
 M m 2 
 
268 A Defence of the New Church 
 
 " ferent perfons interpret even the literal fenfe 
 ** differently. What then will be the cafe, if, 
 *' befides this litei^l fenfe, there be another 
 ** concealed one, with refpetl to w hich every 
 **perfon will, of courfe, think himfelf at li- 
 *' berty to form his own conjectures?" From- 
 this and other paffages of your Letters it is 
 very plainly to be feen, that you have not fuffi- 
 ciently informed yourfelf of what Baron Swe- 
 denborg advancesvvith refpedl to the fpi ritual 
 fenfe of the Word ^ You feem to think it is a 
 mere arbitrary meaning put upon words,, with- 
 out any certain rule to determine their fignifica- 
 tion. In this, however, you are gready mif- 
 taken ; and therefore all you have faid about 
 the uncertainty of the fpiritual^ fenfe, is no 
 better than breath fpent in the air. Peihaps- 
 you have yet to be informed, that the Jcience 
 af correjpondenccs is now difcovered, which is 
 the only true key that can unlock the cabinet 
 of the literal ^cvS.^ of fcripture, within v.-hich 
 are contained the jewels of it's fpiritual and 
 celeftlal izvS.^, The great diverfity of opinions 
 refpeding the letter, of which you are fuffi- 
 ciently apprized, is in a great meafure owing^ 
 to the want of fuch a key ; for the more we 
 are acquainted v.ith the fcience of correfpon- 
 dences, fo much the more fliall wc be agreed 
 
 ii^. 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufalcnu oQg 
 
 injudginenr, and in the true underftanding of 
 the fcriptures. Indeed fo regular and certain 
 is that fcience, that were any given number 
 of perfons, properly acquainted with it, re- 
 quired to give their opinion of any part of 
 Icripture, they would all uniformly agree in 
 the fame explanation, if not in words, yet in 
 iubflance; which is a circumftance not even 
 pretended to by thofe who rejedl the fpiritual 
 fenfe, but at the fame time a ftriking proof of 
 the reality of correfpondences, and that the 
 Word of God is written according to that 
 fcience. 
 
 It is a well-known facl, that the facred wri- 
 tings abound with parables. The prophets 
 make frequent ufe of them ,♦ and of our Saviour 
 it is faid, that " without a parable fpake he not,** 
 Mark iv. 34. Now the fenfe of a parable is 
 not that which appears on the face of it, nor 
 is it to be underftood according to the cuf- 
 tomary fenfe of the words ; but it conveys, 
 in many cafes, a very different meaning. Paul 
 likewife informs us, that the hiftory of Abraham 
 and his two fons, Iflimacl and Ifaac, is an al- 
 legory, Gal. iv. 24: and in the fame chapter 
 he explains what is meant by it ; (hewing, thac 
 it was reprcfentative of the two difpcnf.itions 
 
 ©f the law and the gofpel. 
 
 That 
 
270 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 That the Word of God, in many inflanceSj, 
 cannot polfibly be underllood according to the 
 fenfe of the let: cr, may appear evident from 
 the following palfages* 
 
 1. In the prophecy of Ifrael it is faid of Dan, 
 " Dan fliall be a ferpent on the way, a darting- 
 *^ Jerpent on the path, biting the heels of the 
 " horfey and his rider fhall fill backwards/' 
 Gen. xlix. 17, 18. It is impoflible for any 
 one to underftand the meaning of this prophecy 
 without fome knowledge of the fcience of cor- 
 refpondences, w hich teaches what is meant by 
 a ferpent, and what by a horfe and his rider. 
 
 2. The prophet Habakkuk fays to Godj 
 " Thou did ft ride upon thme horfe s^ thy chariots 
 " of falvation : thou did ft walk through the 
 ** fea with thy horjes,'" Hab. iii. 8, 15. Heie 
 again the fcience of corrcfpondences only can 
 inform us what is meant by the horfes of God, 
 and by his riding upon them through the fea. 
 The mere literal {t\\{^ gives us no fatisfadtion 
 at alL 
 
 3. " In that day, faith Jehovah, I will fmite 
 *' every horfe with aftoniftiment, and his rider 
 "with madnef^ ; and I will open mine eyes 
 
 I *' upon 
 
Signified by the New Jenifalem. 271 
 
 *^ upon the houfe of Judah, and will finite 
 " every horfe of the people with blindnefs," 
 Zech. xii. 4. Without a fpiritual fenfe, what 
 can be meant by fmiting every horfc with 
 aftonifliment, and the horfc of the people with 
 blindnefs ? 
 
 4. When EliHia faw Elijah carried up by a 
 whirlwind into heaven, he cried out to him, 
 *f My father, my father, the chariot of Ifrael, 
 **and the horfemen thereof,'* 2 Kings ii. 12. 
 Joafh the king alfo faid to EliHia, ** O m/ 
 " father, my lather, the chanot of Ifracl, and 
 « the horfemen thereof," 2 Kings xiii. 14. Here 
 both Elijah and Eliflia are called the chariot of 
 Ifrael, and the horfemen thereof, which, if 
 taken '' according to the cuQomary fenfe of the 
 words," would be ridiculous and abfurd. 
 
 5. " And I faw an angel (landing in the fun; 
 *< and he cried with a loud voice, faying to all 
 " the folds that fly in the midft of heaven. 
 '' Come and gather yourfelves together to the 
 ''/upper of the great God; that ye may eat the 
 « fieQi of kings, and the flefli of captains, and 
 " the fleili of mighty men, and the ticlh of 
 " horfes, and of them that fit on them, and the 
 '' flelh of all men, both free and bond, both 
 
 '•frnall 
 
272 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 "fmall and great/' Apoc. xix. 17, 18, This 
 is another pafTage that cannot by any means be 
 taken in the literal fenfe ; and therefore it muft 
 be plain to every unprejudiced mind, notwith- 
 ilanding your aflertion to the contrary, that 
 the facred writers had fome other meaning than 
 that which appears on the face of their wri^ 
 jings. 
 
 6. ^' Thou fhalt fuck the milk of the gen- 
 ** tiles, and flialt fuck the hre^ijt of kmgs, and 
 ** thou fhak know that I Jehovah am thy Sa- 
 ** viour, and thy Redeemer, the mighty One 
 "of Jacob," Ifaiah Ix. 16. Here mention is 
 rnade of Ricking the breaft of kings ; which 
 jn the literal fenfe muft appear ftrange and 
 unaccountable, but in the fpi ritual fenfe i$ 
 beautiful beyond defcription. 
 
 7. ** My well-beloved hath a vineyard in a 
 " horn the fon of oil^' Ifaiah v. i. This is the 
 proper tranflation of the original Hebrew, 
 though in our common bibles it is rendered, 
 " My beloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful 
 ^' hill:" But taking the paifage as it really is, 
 what can be made of a vineyard in a horn the 
 fon of oil, if we confine ourfelves to the mere 
 literal {^\\{z of the exprefiions ? 
 
 8. " The 
 
Signified by the Nezu Jerufalem, 273 
 
 8. ''The city (New Jerufalcm) licth four- 
 " fquare, and the length is as large as the 
 " breadth: and he ineaiured the city with the 
 " reed, hvehe thoufand furlongs : the length, and 
 ** the breadth, and the height of it are equal,'* 
 Apoc. xxi. 16. If this dcfcription be under- 
 ftood literally, the city mud be no Icfs than 
 fifteen hundred miles in fquare dimenfions. Eut 
 on what fpot of ground can fuch a city as this 
 defcend ? Not on this ifland, for it is not large 
 enough to contain the half of it's bafc. And 
 although the height of the city is reprefcnted as 
 fifteen hundred miles', yet it"s w-all is only an 
 hundred and forty-four cubits, (216 feet, J 
 which is likewifc faid to be according to the 
 incafure of a man, or an angel. Such are the 
 difficulties attendant on the mere literal con- 
 flruBion of the fcriprures, which, however, do 
 not in, the leaft incumber their fpi ritual fenfe. 
 
 A great variety of other paflages might be 
 produced from the facred writings, ot whi^h 
 we can form no juft idea, without having 
 recourfe to a dilferenc lignification oi the 
 words from that which they ufually bear. But 
 the above are fufficient to prove the foci: : and 
 it only requires a proper knowledge o( the 
 fcience of correfpondences, to be polTeircd of a 
 
 >; n rational. 
 
274 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 rational, fatisfadory, and determinate man- 
 ner of explaining them. For example, w here- 
 ever mention is made of a kor/e, it inva- 
 riably fignifies the underjianding ; and a chariot 
 means doflrine. Hence God is faid to ride 
 on a horfe, and in a chariot, when he com- 
 municates to man an underftanding to under- 
 Hand the dodrine of his Word ; and hence to 
 fmite every horfe with aftonilhment, and every 
 horfe of the people with blindnefs, denotes that 
 there is no longer in the church the under- 
 ftanding of truth. The reafon why Elijah and 
 Eliflia were called the chariot of Ifrael, and 
 the hcrfemen thereof, is becaufe each repre- 
 fented the Lord as to the Word ; and by chariot 
 is fignified dodrine drawn from the Word, 
 and by horfemen intelligence. To this I iliall 
 take the liberty of adding a further remark of 
 Baron Swedenborg, in explanation of the fame 
 fubje6l. 
 
 ** That fuch was the (ignification of chariot 
 and horfe, was perfectly well known in the 
 ancient churches, for thofe churches were re- 
 prefentative churches, and with the people 
 thereof the fcience of correfpondences and re- 
 prefentations was the chief of all fciences. 
 From thofe churches the {ignification of horfe, 
 
 as 
 
Signified by the New Jenifalem, 275 
 
 as exprefTive of the underftanding, was derived 
 to the wife men round ab®ur, even ro Greece. 
 ^ Hence it was, when they would defcribe the 
 fun, in which they placed the God of their 
 w'ifdom and intelligence, that they attribuced 
 to it a chariot and four horfes of lire: and when 
 they would defcribe the God of the fea, fincc 
 by the fea were fignified fciences derived from 
 the underftanding, that they alfo attributed 
 horfes to him. And when they would defcribe 
 the rife of the fciences from underftanding, 
 that they alfo feigned a winged horfe, which 
 with it's hoof broke open a fountain, at which 
 were nine virgins called the fciences ; for from 
 the ancient churches they received this know- 
 ledge, that by horfe is fignilied the undcr- 
 flanding, by wings fpiritual truth, by hoof 
 what is fcientific from the underftanding, and 
 by fountain dodlrine from which fciences are 
 derived. Nor is any thing elfe fignified by 
 the Trojan horfe, than artifice or cunning 
 cxercifed by their underftanding in defiroying 
 the walls. Indeed, in our day, when the un- 
 derftanding is defcribcd after the manner re^ 
 ceived from thofe ancients, it is ufual to figure 
 it by a flying horfe or Pcgafus ; fo likewifc 
 dodrine is defcribed by a founcain, and the 
 fciences by virgins ; but fcarce any one knows, 
 
 Nn 2 ^hai 
 
276 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 that by horfe in the myftic fenfe is fignified. 
 the underftanding; ftiil iefs that thofe iignifi- 
 catives were derived from the ancient repre- 
 Tentative churches to the gentiles." Treat if e 
 en the White Horfe^ n. 4. 
 
 You fuiiher objecl: again ft the fanae great 
 author, p. 57, that ** he finds Chrift in every 
 ^' paiTage of the fcriptures, even thofe in which 
 " before hirn they who made the moft of the 
 *' doclrine of types, never fufpcvfted any fuch 
 ** reference." This is certainly one of the 
 trueil charges you have brought againft him, 
 and forms a llriking contrafl: between his 
 ■doctrine of chrifiianity and your's. Let us 
 examine it again. Baron Svvedenborg is' fo 
 much a cnriilian, as to make Chrift all in all, 
 feeing nothing but him and his kingdom in 
 every pailage of the fcriptures : Hut Dr. 
 PricRley has fo little of Chrift in his doc- 
 trines, that he is fcarcely to be found in them j 
 or if he be there, there is no room for him, 
 but in the charad^r of a mere man. Baron 
 Swedenborg acknowledges the divinity and 
 fanftity of the Word, becaufe in the fupreme 
 {zi\^^ it treats fulely of the Lord Jeius Chrift : 
 But Dr. Pricftley admits of it's fandity upon 
 no fuch principle; for in the firft place, (as 
 
 might 
 
Signijied by the New Jernfalcvu 277 
 
 tnight naturally be ex peeled from his cienying 
 the divinity of th<- Lord's perfon, and af- 
 ferting that he was no more than a mere man, 
 becaufe he had the appearance of one,) he 
 denies that the fc Tiptures have any other mean^ 
 ing than that ** which is to be found in the 
 " cufliomary f nfe of the words;" and in the 
 fecond pbce, he fuppofcs, that Jefus Chrifl: 
 was typified and fpoken of in no other lighc 
 than as a mere man, like the reft of his bre- 
 thren the prophets. That the fcriptures, how- 
 ever, in every part treat of the Lord, agreeable 
 to the aflertion of Baron Swedenborg, is plain 
 from the following paliages in the evangelift: 
 Jefus faid unto his difciples, " O fools, and 
 *' flow of heart to believe all that the prophets 
 ** have fpoken ! And beginning at Mofes, and 
 " all the prophets, he expounded unto them 
 " /;/ a'l ihe fcriptures the things concerm'ng hifru- 
 *^ Jelf, And he faid unto them, Thefe are 
 " the words which I fpake unto you, while 
 " I was yet with you, that all things mult be 
 '* fulfilled which were written in the law of 
 '* MofeSy and in the prophets^ and in the pfalms, 
 ^' concerning rne^' Luke xxiv. 25, 27, 44. In 
 the Apocalypfe alfo it is written, ** The tefli^ 
 '^ mony of Jefus is the fpirit of prophecy y* Apoc. 
 xix, 10. To object, therefore, again ft this 
 
 part 
 
27S A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 part of the dodlrines of the New Church, is 
 in fad to objccl againfl: the fcriptures them- 
 felves, as well as againfl: their divine Author, 
 from whom they are derived, and of whom 
 they conftantly treat. 
 
 It is alTerted by the New Church, not only 
 that the Wqrd treats of the Lord, but that the 
 Lord himfelf is the Word : on which you 
 remark, p. 58, *' that it is a manifeft abfurdity 
 ^* to make a real perfon, whether God or man, 
 *' to" be the fame thing wiih a writing con- 
 '' cerning him/* However ftrange this may 
 appear at the firfl mention of it, like many 
 other things equally difficult of compreheniion, 
 it will, v/hen rightly undcrfl:ood, be found to be 
 a great truth. It is faid in John i. i, " In the 
 *' beginning was the Word, and the Word was 
 " with God, and God nas the Word.'' Here 
 the very thing which you object to, is plainly, 
 afierted of God. God is a real per/on, as you 
 have acknowledged, p. d^ ; yet he is declared 
 to be the fame as the Word, which is a zvriting 
 concerning him ; and what is fingular enough, 
 even you yourfelf have fubfcribed to the fame 
 fentiment in p. 30, although in the prefent cafe, 
 p. 58, you reject it as a manifed abfurdity, 
 
 Tq 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 279 
 
 To obtain a clear comprehcnfion of this Tub- 
 jeB, it ^\'iIl be necefiary to attend to the fol- 
 lowing confiderations. Every man is a man by 
 virtue of his two conflituent principles of life, 
 which are the will and undcrflanding. Thcfe two 
 principles in union, or what amounts to the 
 fame thing, the good and the truth of which 
 he is receptive, form the very fubftance of his 
 fpiritual body, and arc what diftinguifli him 
 from all others. So that it may with propriety 
 be faid, that every man is his own particular 
 love, and his own particular wifdom : and 
 wherever thcfe are manifel^ed, whether in his 
 works or words, in his life or writings, they 
 are of the fame elTcnce with himfclf, and in 
 this refpecl are really the man himfclf cxilhng 
 as it were out of himfelf; every thing that is 
 predicable of the one, being (generally fpcaking) 
 equally fo of the other. It is upon this prin- 
 ciple, and this alone, that the laws of juflicc 
 in every nation take cognizance of a man's 
 condud in life, and puniih or reward \\\s pajon 
 according to the quality of his zvords and aliens ; 
 for there is in all jullice, as fuch, an intuitive 
 difcernmcnt, that whatever proceeds from a 
 man is of the fame elfcnce with the man him- 
 felf, and that his perfon, principles, and prac- 
 tice, are infeparably united. For tiic fame 
 
 rcalca 
 
28o A Defence of the New Chufch, 
 
 reafon alfo it is faid in the fcripture, that after 
 death men will be judged according to their 
 words and w'orks. " 1 fay unro you, that 
 *' every idle zvord that men fiiall fpcak, they 
 ** fhall give account thereof in the day of judg- 
 ** ment/* Matt. xii. 36. " Bleffed are the dead 
 " which die in the Lord, from henceforth ; 
 ** their works do follow them," Apoc. xiv. i^,, 
 " They were judged every man according to 
 ^^ thxw works ," Apoc. xx. 13. Now if it be 
 true of every man, that he is his own particular 
 good and truth, the human form being the 
 continent thereof, and that whatever proceeds 
 from him is of the fame elTence with himfelf; 
 how plain is it to fee, that the Lord muft, in a 
 fapereminent degree, be his own eflential good 
 and elTential truth, or effential love and eflential 
 wifdom; and that when thefe are faid to pro- 
 ceed from him,- being of the fame cfTence with 
 himfelf, they are in this reipecfc the fame thing 
 as himfelf. Agreeable hereto, the evangelift 
 John declares, that the Word, which proceeded 
 forth from God, is neverthelefs fliil God. 
 And when it is faid, that the Word was made 
 flefh, it is the fame thing as if it had been 
 declared, that God was made flefh. From all 
 which the following coDclufion may be fairly 
 drawn. That as the Word, when made flelli, 
 I ftill 
 
Signijied by the New Jerufalem. 28 1 
 
 ftill continued to be the Word ; fo flcfli, after 
 the Word became fuch, was and is the fame 
 with divine truth ; confequently that God and 
 his Word are infeparably one. 
 
 * * * 
 I obferved, in a former part of this Defence^ 
 p. 225, that the holy fcriptures are not written, 
 in any part whatever, by mere tropes, figures, 
 or metaphors, but every-where by correfpon- 
 dences ; the difference betueen which and 
 bare figurative exprefTion, I alfo promifcd to 
 point out. This 1 fhall now attempt to do in 
 the bed manner I am able. 
 
 Corrcfpondcnce in general may be defined, 
 the relation fubfilling between the effence of a 
 thing and it's form, or between the caufe and 
 it's effecl : thus the whole natural world cor- 
 refponds to the fpiritual world ; the body of a 
 man, with all it's parts, correfponds to his 
 foul ; and the literal fenfe of the Word corref- 
 ponds to it's fpiritual fenfe. So that wherever 
 there is a correfpondencc, there is necclfarily 
 implied fuch an njiion between two things, as 
 only takes place when the one is derived from 
 the other, in the fame manner as an cliec't is 
 derived from it's efhcient caufe, or as fpccch is 
 derived from thought, and the gerturcs o^ the 
 body from the attections of the mind; in all 
 
 O o which 
 
282 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 which cafes the exterior forms can no more 
 be feparated from the interior efTcnces, without 
 lofing their exigence, than the body of a man 
 can be feparated from his foul without death* 
 Such is the nature and po%ver oi correfpondcnces. 
 Let us now fee whether the fame can be faid of 
 mere figure and metaphor^ 
 
 A mere figure or metaphor is the refem- 
 blance, in fome certain way, which one thing 
 bears to another, not according to the true 
 nature and fitnefs of things, fo much as by the 
 arbitrary choice of a fpeaker or writer, who is 
 defirous of illufl: rating his fubjecl, and ren- 
 dering it familiar to the comprehenfion. Con- 
 fequentiy there is no necelTary union between 
 the fubjed: and the figure, nor is the one an 
 effed of the other, or in any wife dependent 
 on it for it's exigence and fubfillencc, as is 
 the cafe in all correfpondenccs. An example 
 will illuftrate the truth of my obfervation. 
 Virgil, in his ^Eneid, lib. 2, likens the def- 
 trudion of Troy, with her lofty fpircs, to the 
 fall of an aged oak on being hewn down by the 
 woodman's hatchet. This is a fimile, or 
 figure, but not a correfpondence ; for there 
 is no ncceifary connection between the city of 
 Troy and a mountain oak, nor between her 
 
 lofty 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifakm, 283 
 
 lofty fpires and the wide-extending branches 
 Ol a tree. The one is not zvilbin the other, 
 as it's life and foul ; nor can the rclationfliip 
 fubfifting between them be confidered like that 
 of caufe and eifed:, efience and form, prior 
 and poflerior, foul and body, which ncverthe- 
 lefs, as before obferved, is the cafe with all 
 true correfpondcnccs. 
 
 The difference between a mere figure and a 
 correfpondence may again appear from the 
 following confidcration. A mere figure or 
 fimile is the refemblance which one natural 
 objccl: or circumftance is fuppofed to bear to 
 another natural objed or circumllancc ; w hercas 
 a correfpondence is the adlual relation fubfirting 
 between a natural objed and a fpintual fubject, 
 or a natural form and 2ifpiritual elfence ; that is, 
 between outer and inner, lozver and higher y nature 
 and fpirit ; and not between nature and nature, 
 ov fpirit Siudi fpirit. This diftinclion fliould be 
 -well attended to. The language of correfpon- 
 dences is the language of God himfclf, being 
 that in w hich he always fpeaks, both in his 
 Word, and in his works : but figure and mcr 
 taphor, together with the language of fable, 
 are the mere inventions of man, which took 
 
 O o 2 lJ^t:ir 
 
284 A Defence of the Neio Church, 
 
 their rife when the divine fcicnce of cor- 
 refpondences began to be loft in the world. 
 
 This being a fubject of confiderable impor- 
 tance, I fhall take the liberty of adding a few 
 further remarks, which, though not imme- 
 diately connedled with it, may yet ferve to 
 illuftrate the dodlrine of the New Church with 
 refped: to the language in which the literal 
 fenfe of the Word is written. 
 
 Numbers, as well as names, in the holy 
 Word, arc fignificative and correfpondent : 
 therefore it is faid, Apoc. xiii. i 8, *' Here is 
 " wifdom : let him that hath underftanding 
 *' count the number of the bead : for it is the 
 •* number of a man ; and his number is fix 
 " hundred three-fcore and fix." Many com- 
 mentators have puzzled both themfelves and 
 their readers in attempting to unfold the fig- 
 nification of the number G6G : but I believe 
 they are all agreed in applying it to the Romifh 
 church exclulively. Herein, however, they are 
 much miliaken; for the whole chapter, in the 
 fpiritual fcnfc, treats of the Reformed churches 
 only. Indeed I muft fay, the more I rcfledt 
 on the learned, the labourtd, and the in- 
 genious explanations given by the moil cele- 
 brated 
 
Signijied by the Neio ycrufalem. 285 
 
 brated writers on the fubjcvfb, who have con- 
 fined their ideas to natural, hiilorical, and ex- 
 ternal things, the more I am convinced, that 
 not one of them nil, however eminent or diftin- 
 guifhed his name, has had even a faint glimpfe 
 of it's real and genuine meaning. 1 fpcak 
 thi» without any derogation from the talents or 
 acquirements of any writer ; for I wifli to pay 
 a proper refpedl to every man of learning, who 
 has in any mcafure laboured for the improve- 
 ment and information of the world. But it 
 appears to me impoflible, that the mod acute 
 natural underfl"anding could ever, by virtue of 
 it's own powers, penetrate into the interior 
 receffes of the holy Word, which can only be 
 brought to light by means of a revelation from 
 the fame Spirit which diclated it. It further 
 appears, that the book of revelation, called 
 the Apocalypfe, was in divine providence fealed 
 from the eyes of all the world until the prefcnt 
 day ; and that it is a feries of prophecies par- 
 ticularly dcfigncd for the ufe of the New 
 Church, the true meaning of which cannot be 
 underftood without the fcience of corrcfpon- 
 dences ; which fcience is revived in the wri- 
 tings of Baron Swcdenborg, and has it's foun- 
 dation in the Word of God, as well as in the 
 works of creation. 
 
 I re- 
 
286 A Defence of the Neio Churchy 
 
 1 remember to have read, fomc years ago, 
 many curious explanations of the number 666, 
 all having reference to the titles of the pope, 
 in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin, or in fome 
 other way alluding to the church of Rome. 
 The words Lateinos^ Romiith, Vicar his General is 
 Dei in terris, Vicarius Filii Dei, with various 
 others, were by dint of numeral powers, and 
 fuch like calculations, all made to produce the 
 exacft complement 666. At that time I thought 
 fome attention was due to thofe ingenious 
 fpeculations ; but on further inquiry I fooa 
 found, that not only the names above men- 
 tioned would make up the required number, 
 but perhaps an hundred and fifty other names, 
 that could no more be fuppofed to have any 
 conned-ion with the contents of the Apocalypfe, 
 than the man in the moon. I then faw, that 
 all fuch explications could not be the effed: of 
 that wifdom fpoken of in the 13th chapter, and 
 to which we are invited ; but that there muft 
 be fome other hidden mxcaning, with which the 
 learned were unacquainted. It did not fatisfy 
 me, that Lateinos, Romiith^ Vicarius Filii Dei^ 
 or even Ludovicus^ made up the complement 
 666, when other words were to be found, that 
 did the fame, fuch as Jofeph Smithy TomkinSy 
 Benjamin Bennct^ and v/hat is fingular enough, 
 
 the 
 
Signified by the Nnc Jenifalcm. 273 
 
 the Rev. JoJ, Priejllcy ; for by the magical 
 power of numerals I can bring them all to 
 ling the fame fong, fix hundred and fixty fix. 
 It was indeed a cnricus circumflance ; but I 
 thought thai not fufiicient for one who is in 
 fearch of genuine truth ; neither did I then, 
 nor do I now think, that a mere rcLiis or conun- 
 drum is worthy a place in thofe oracles of 
 divine truth, whofc Author is no lefs than the 
 great Jehovah, the God of heaven and earth. 
 
 The Apocalypfe, like every orhcr book of 
 divine infpiration, is couched in natural terms, 
 to reprefent and point out fpiriuial things ; and 
 there is as great a diftindion between the type 
 and antitype y as between what is natuvid and 
 fpiritual. Now the antitype and type ought 
 never to be underflood as exiting in one and 
 the fame gradus^ but in two diilinct, difcrete 
 modes of being. Underftand me right: I 
 mean, that a prophecy couched in natural 
 terms, ought not be expected to have it's ful- 
 filment in a natural manner, but in a manner 
 difcretely diftinQ from it, that is, in a fpiritual 
 manner. Thus, when in fcripture it is faicf, 
 xkvdX fevcn or ten kings fliall arife ; that a /r^/ 
 had feven heads and ten horns, 6cc. ^'c. wc are 
 not to underfland, that in the acconipliHuncnt 
 2 of 
 
288 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 of this prophecy there fliall literally arife 
 /even or ten kings, or that there fhall be any 
 real beaji zvi/b /even heads and ten horns, for this 
 would be confounding the antitype with the 
 type in the fame gradus, or fame mode of ex^ 
 iftence ; but \\t are to underfland, that the 
 prophecy will be accomplifhed when zvbat is 
 /gnified by /even or ten kings, and when what is 
 /ignified by /even heads and ten horns, fhall take 
 place in the church ; and this is placing the 
 antitype in a degree or mode of exifence above the 
 type. All the prophecies in the Apocalypfe 
 are of this fort ; and therefore it appears to me 
 contrary to the true fenfe of fcripture, to fup- 
 pofe that a fulfilment of that prophecy in the 
 13th chapter can be difcovered in any man's 
 name that happens to make up the number 666; 
 for this would be taking both the type and 
 antitype in one and the fame gradus, as before 
 obferved, when nevcrthelefs I believe there is 
 not a fingle prophecy either in the Old or New 
 TeO-ament, but what it's accomplilhment ought 
 to be underftood as principally belonging to the 
 internal fenfe ; though 1 will admit, that many 
 of them have alio been literally fulfilled. 
 
 As the true meaning of the number GdG 
 may be feen at large in Baron Swedcnborg's 
 
 Apocalypfi 
 
Signijied by the Nczv Jerufalan. 289 
 
 Apocalypfe Revealed^ I fliall here only obferve, 
 that the whole chapter, in which it is con- 
 tained, gives a defcription of the faith of the 
 Protellant or Reformed churches, particularly 
 in refpe6t to it's feparation from charity or 
 good works, and that the number of the beaft 
 denotes the quality of that faith, as being a 
 complex of the moft enormous falfes. It is 
 called the number of a many becaufe number fig- 
 nifics quality, and man fignifies wifdom and 
 intelligence, but in the oppofite fcnfe, as in the 
 prefent cafe, felf-derived wifdom ; for it is faid 
 of thofe who feparate faith from charity. I 
 have already obferved, that a whole church, 
 or community of men, appears before the Lord 
 as one man : it is for this rcafon that the quality 
 of a church is, in the letter of fcripture, faid to 
 be the number of a man. See a further explanation 
 of this fubjed in the Magazine of Knozvledge, 
 ^c. vol. i, p. 210. 
 
 I fliall conclude my remarks on the holy 
 fcriptures and the fcience of correfpondcnces 
 with the following quotation from the work 
 entitled True Chrijiian Religion, n. 200 to 207. 
 ** It is aflerted in the church, that the Word is 
 holy, inafmuch as Jehovah the Lord fpakc it; 
 but becaufe it's holinefs doth not appear in it's 
 
 p p litcidl 
 
250 A Defence of the New Church, . 
 
 literal fenfc, therefore they who once begin to, 
 doubt about it*s holinefs on that account, in 
 the future courfe of their reading confirm their 
 doubts by many paflages they meet with, fug- 
 gefling thefe fcrupulous queRions/ Can this be 
 holy ? Can this be divine ? Now to prevent the 
 influence of fuch doubts on men's minds, leffc 
 they fhould become general, and in confequence 
 thereof the Word of God fhould be rejected as 
 a common trivial writing, and thereby the 
 Lord's conjunction with man fhould be cut off, 
 it hath pleaied the Lord, at this time, to 
 reveal it's fpiritual fenfe, for the purpofe of 
 difcovering tp mankind in what part of it it's 
 divine fandity lieth concealed. But to illuf- 
 |:rate this, let us apply to examples. In the 
 Word we find frequent mention made fome^ 
 times of Egypt, fometimes of Afhur, fome- 
 times of Edom, of Moab, of the children of 
 Ammon, of the Philiftines, of Tyre and Sidon, 
 and of Gog: they now, who do nor know 
 that by thofc names the things of heaven and 
 of the church are fignified, may eafily be led 
 into an erroneous notion, that the Word trcaietb 
 much of people and nations, and but little of 
 heaven and the church, confequcntly much 
 about earthly things, and but little about hea- 
 venly things ; whereas, were fuch perfons acr 
 
 quainted 
 
Signified hy the Nexv Jerufalcm. 291 
 
 quainted with what is fignified by thofe people 
 and nations, or by their names, this might be 
 the means to lead ihcm out ot crroi into truth. 
 In like manner, when it is obfcrved, that in the 
 Word frequent mention is made of gardens, 
 groves, woods, and alfo of the trees that grow 
 therein, as the olive, the vine, the cedar, the pop- 
 lar, and the oak; and alfo of lambs, flieep, goat?^ 
 calves, oxen; and likewifc of mountains, hills, 
 valleys, fountains, rivers, waters, and the like ; 
 he who knoweth nothing of the fpiritual fenfc 
 of the Word, mufl: of neccflity be led to fup- 
 pofe, that nothing further is meant by thefc 
 things than what is cxpreifed in the letter; for he 
 little thinketh, that by a garden, a grove, and a 
 •wood, are meant wifdom, intelligence, fcience; 
 that by the olive, the vine, the cedar, the poplar, 
 ■and the oak, are meant the good and truth of 
 the church, under the difl^'erent charadcrs of 
 celeftial, fpiritual, rational, natural, and fcnfual ; 
 that by a lamb, a flieep, a goat, a calf, and an 
 OK, are meant innocence, charity, and natural 
 affedlion ; that by mountains, hills, and valleys, 
 are meant the higher, the lower, and the lowed 
 things relating to the church ; alfo, that by 
 Eo-ypt is fignified what is fcientific, by Afliur 
 what is rational, by Edom what is natural, by 
 Moab ;he adulteration of good, by the chiU 
 
 Pp :j drcn 
 
2g2 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 dren of Ammon the adulteration of truth, by 
 the Philiftines faith without charity, by Tyre 
 and Sidon the knowledges of goodnefs and 
 truth, by Gog external worfhip without in- 
 ternal ; in general, by Jacob in the Word is 
 underftood the church-natural, by Ifrael the 
 church-fpiritual, and by Judah the church- 
 celeftial. When the mind is opened to this 
 knowledge, it may then be able to conceive 
 that the Word treateth folely of celeftial things, 
 and that the earthly things mentioned in it are 
 only the fubjeds wherein thofe celeftials are 
 contained. But let us take another inftance 
 from the Word, for the illuftration of this 
 truth. We read in Ifaiah, *' In that day fhall 
 " there be a highway out of Egypt to Aifyria, 
 " and the Aflyrian fhall come into Egypt, and 
 " the Egyptian into AlTyria, and the Egyptians 
 *' (hall ferve with the Aflyrians. In that day 
 ** Ihall Ifrael be the third with Egypt, and 
 " with AlTyria, even a blelTing in the mid ft 
 " of the land ; whom Jehovah of Hofls fhall 
 " blefs, faying, BleiTed be Egypt my people, 
 ** and Affyria the work of my hands, and Ifrael 
 " mine inheritance,'* chap. xix. 2j, 24, 25. 
 By thefe words, in their fpiritual fenfe, is figni- 
 fied, that at the time of the Lord's coming, the 
 fcientific, the rational, and the fpiritual fhould 
 
 make 
 
Signified by the New JerufaUm. 2€}o^ 
 
 make one, and that then the fcientific HioiiU 
 ferve the rational, and both the fpiritual ; for, 
 as was faid above, by Egypt is fignified the 
 Scientific, by Afliur or AfTyria the rational, and 
 by Ifrael the fpiritual ; by the repetition of the 
 words, /w that da}\ is meant the firft and fccond 
 coming of the Lord. 
 
 •* What is meant by correfpondcnce, hat!) 
 to this day remained unknown, notwithlbnding 
 it was a fubjeCt mod familiar to the men of the 
 moft ancient times, w ho efleemed it the fciencc 
 of fciences, and cultivated it fo univerfaily^ 
 that all their books and tracls were written, by 
 correfpondences. The book of Job, which 
 was a book of the ancient church, is full of 
 correfpondences. The hieroglyphics of the 
 Egyptians, and the fabulous ftories of antiquity, 
 were founded on the fame fcience ; all the an- 
 cient churches were churches reprefentative of 
 fpiritual things ; their ceremonies, and even, 
 their fratutes, which were rules for the inllitu- 
 tion of their worllnp, confided of n^.cre cor- 
 refpondences ; in like manner, every thing in 
 the Ifraelitiih church, their burnt-olferingiv 
 facrifices, meat-offerings, and drink-offerings, 
 with all the particulars belonging to each, were 
 correfpondences ; io alio was the tabernacle^ 
 
 With 
 
294 A Defence of the New Ckurch, 
 
 with all things contained in it; and likewife 
 their fefiivals, as the feaft of the unleavened 
 bread, the feafl: of tabernacles, the feafi: of the 
 firft-fruits; alfo, the priefthood of Aaron and 
 the Levites, and the garments of their holinefs* 
 Now, forafnnuch as divine things fix their ex- 
 iftence in outward nature in correfpondences, 
 therefore the Word was written by mere cor- 
 refpondences ; and for the fame rcafon, the 
 Lord, in confequence of fpeaking from the 
 Divinity, fpake by correfpondences ; for what- 
 ever proceedeth from the Divinity, when il 
 comes into outward nature, manifefbs itfelf in 
 fuch outward things as correfpond with what is 
 divine, which outward things become then the 
 repofitories of divine things, otherwife called 
 Celeftial and fpiritual, that lie contained within 
 them in a hidden and myfterious manner. 
 
 ** The fcience of correfpondences was not 
 only known, but alfo cultivated in many king- 
 doms iDf Afia, particularly in the land of 
 Canaan, Egypt, AfTyria, Chaldea, Syria, Arabia, 
 in Tyre, Sidon, and Nineveh, and from thence 
 k was conveyed into Greece, where it was 
 changed into fable, as may appear from the 
 "Works of the mort ancient writers in that 
 country. . . 
 
 "To 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 295 
 
 : '* To (licw that the fcience of correfpon- 
 jdences was long prcfervcd amongft the Aliatic 
 nations, but chiefly amongft thofe who were 
 (Called diviners ana wife men, and by fome 
 magi, I fnall adduce a remarkable inftance 
 from I Sam. chap. v. andvi. We are there 
 informed, that the ark, containing the two 
 rabies, whereon w ere written the ten command- 
 ments, was taken by the PhiJiHines, and placed 
 in the houfe of Dagon, in Afiidod, and that 
 Dagon fell to the ground before it, and after- 
 wards, that his head and both the palms of his 
 hands were feparated from his body, and lay 
 on the threfliold, and that the people of Aflidod 
 and Ekron, to the number of fevcral thoufands, 
 were fmitten with emerods, and that the land 
 was devoured with mice ; and that the Philif- 
 tines, on this occafion, called together their 
 prices and diviners, and that to put a flop to 
 the deftruclion which threatened them, they 
 came to this determination, viz. that they would 
 make five golden emerods, and five golden 
 mice, and a new cart, and would fet the ark on 
 this cart, and have it drawn by two milch-kinc, 
 which lowed in the way before the cart, and 
 thus would fend back the ark unto the children 
 of Ifracl, by whom the kine and the cart were 
 pffcred up in facrifice, and the God of Ifrael 
 
 was 
 
296 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 was appeafed. That all thcfe devices of the 
 Philiiline diviners were correfpondences, is 
 evident from their fignification, which is this ; 
 the Philiftines theinfclves fignified thofe who 
 are influenced by faith feparate from charity ; 
 Dagon reprefented their religious worfhip; the 
 emerods, wherewith they were fmitten, fig- 
 nified the natural loves, which, if feparated 
 from fpiritual love, are unclean ; and mice fig- 
 nified the devafiation of the church, by falfi- 
 fications of truth ; anew cart fignified natural 
 dodlrine of the church ; for chariot, in the 
 Word, fignificth doctrine derived from fpiritual 
 truths; the milch -kine fignified good natural 
 affedlions ; the golden emerods fignified the 
 natural loves purified and made good ; the 
 golden mice fignified the devafiation of the 
 church removed by means of goodnefs ; for 
 gold, in the Word, fignifieth goodnefs ; the 
 lowing of the kine in the way fignified the 
 difficult converfion of the concupifcences of 
 evil in the natural man into j,^ood affections : 
 the offering up of the kine and the cart as a 
 burnt-offering, fignified that thus the God of 
 Ifracl was rendered propitious. All thefe 
 things then, which the Philifiines did by the 
 advice of their diviners, were correfpondences ; 
 I from 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalent. 297 
 
 from which it appears, that that fcicnce wai 
 long prefervcd amongfl: the gentiles. 
 
 " Forafmuch as the reprefentative rites of the 
 church, which were coj-rcfpondcnces, in procefs 
 of time, began to be corrupted by idolatrous 
 and likewife magical applications of them ; 
 therefore, the fcience of correfponJences was, 
 by the Divine Providence of the Lord, fuc- 
 celTively darkened, and, arnongft the Ifracliiifli 
 and Jevvifh people, enrirely obliterated, hu 
 deed, the divine worihip of that people con- 
 fifted of mere correfpondences, and confcqucntly 
 was reprefentative of heavenly things, but ftill 
 they had no knowledge of a finglc thing repre- 
 fented ; for they were altogether natural men, 
 and therefore had neither inclination nor ability 
 to gain any underftanding of fpiritual and cc~ 
 leftial fubjects ; for the fame reafon they were 
 necellarily ignorant of correfpondences, thcfe 
 being reprefentations of thuigs fpiritual and 
 celeftial in things natural. 
 
 " The reafon why the idolatries of tlie gen- , 
 tiles of old took their rife from the fcience of 
 correfpondences, was, becaufe all things that 
 appear on the face of the earth have corrcf- 
 pondencc, confeq-jcntly, not only trees and 
 
 Q^ q vegetables. 
 
'2gH A Defence of the New Ckurch, 
 
 vegetables, but alfo beads, birds, and fiflics of 
 every kind, and all other animals. The an-^ 
 cients, who were verfed in the fcience of cor- 
 refpondences, made themfelves images, which 
 correfponded with things celeftial ; and were 
 greatly delighted therewith, by reafon of thci-r 
 fignification, and that they could difcern in 
 them what related to heaven and the church; 
 and therefore they placed thofe images both in 
 their temples, and alfo in their houfes, not with 
 any intention to worfhip them, but to ferve as a 
 means of recollecling the celeftial things figni- 
 fied by them* Hence, in Egypt and in other' 
 places they made images of calves, oxen, fer- 
 pents, and alfo of childi^en, old men, and vir- 
 gins; becaufe calves and oxen iigniiied the 
 afteQions and powers of the natural man ; fer- 
 pents, the prudence and likewife cunniag of 
 the fenfual man; children, innocence and 
 charity; old men, Vvifdom ; and virgins, the 
 afFedlions of truth, &c. Succeeding ages, when 
 the fcience of correfpondences was obliterated, 
 began to adore as holy, and at length to wor- 
 fliip as deities, the images and pictures fet up 
 by their forefathers, becaufe they found them 
 in and about their temples. For the fame 
 reafon, the ancients performed their worfhip 
 in gardens and in groves, according to the 
 
 diifercnt 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalcm. 299 
 
 diflerent kinds of trees growing therein ; and 
 alfo on mountains and hills ; for gardens and 
 groves fignilied wifdom and intelligence, and 
 every particular tree fomcthing that had re- 
 lation thereto, as the olive the good of lovc; 
 the vine, truth derived from that good ; the 
 cedar, good and truth rational; a nioun- 
 tain, the higheft heaven; a hill, the heaven 
 beneath. That the fciencc of correfpondcnces 
 remained amongft: many eaftern nations, even 
 till the coming of ihe Lord, may appear alfo 
 from the wife men of the eafl:, who vifitcd the 
 Lord at his nativity; wherefore a ftar \\ent 
 before them, and they brought with them 
 gifts, gold, frankincenfe, and myrrh, Matt. 
 ii. I, 2, 9, 10, II ; for the liar which went 
 before them fignified knowledge from heaven ; 
 gold fignified celcllial good ; frankincenfe, 
 fpiritual good ; and myrrh, natural good, 
 which are the three conftituents of all wor- 
 Ihip. But ftill the fciencc of correfpondcnces 
 was annihilated amongft the Ifraelitifli and 
 Jewifh people, although all parts of their wor- 
 Ihip, and all the llatutcs and judgments given 
 them by Mofes, and all things contained in the 
 "Word, were correfpondcnces; the reafon \s.h, 
 becaufe they were idolaters at heart, and con- 
 fequcmly of fuch a nature and geiaius, that rhcy 
 
 Q^q 2 \^cre 
 
300 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 were not willing to allow that any part of their 
 worfhip had a celefiial and fpiritual fignifica- 
 tion, for they believed that all the parts thereof 
 were holy of themfelvesj wherefore had the 
 celeftial and fpiritual ilgnifications been re- 
 vealed to them, they would not only have re- 
 jeQed, but alfo have prophaned them ; for this 
 reafon, heaven vvas fo fliut up againfl: them, 
 that they fcarce knew whether there was fuch 4 
 thing as eternal life ; and that fuch was the 
 cafe with them, appears evident from the cir- 
 Cumdance, that they did not acknowledge the 
 Lord, although the whole fcripture throughout 
 prophefied concerning him, and foretold his 
 coming; they rejedled him folely on that ac- 
 count, bpcaufe he inftruifled them about an 
 heavenly kingdom, and not about an earthly 
 one ; for they wanted a Meiliah, who fliould 
 exalt them above all nations in the world, and 
 pot a Mefilah, who Ihould provide only for 
 their eternal falvation. 
 
 *• The reafon why the fcience pf corref- 
 pondences, which is the true key to the fpi- 
 ritual fcnfe of the Word, was not difcovered to 
 later ages, was, becaufe the chriilians of the 
 primitive church were men of fuch great fim- 
 plicity, that it w^s to no purpofe to difcover 
 
 15 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufalcm. 301 
 
 it to them ; for had it been difcovcrcd, they 
 Mould have found no ufe in it, nor would thcv 
 have undcrrtood it. After thofc iirll: ages of 
 chriftianity, there arofe thick clouds of dark* 
 ncfs, which overfpread the whole chrillian 
 world, firft in confequcncc of many heretical 
 opinions propagated in the church, and foon 
 after in confequence of the decrees and deter- 
 minations of the Council qy Nicii, con- 
 cerning the exigence of three divine perfons 
 from eternity, and concerning the perfon of 
 Chrifl:, as the Son of Mary, and not as the Son 
 of Jehovah God ; hence fprung the prefcnt 
 faith of juilification, in which three Gods are 
 approached and worfliipped, according to their 
 refpective orders, and on which depend all and 
 every thing belonging to the prefent church, as 
 the members of the body depend on the head ; 
 and becaufe men applied every part of the 
 Word to confirm this erroneous faith, there- 
 fore the fpiritual fenfe could not be difcovcred ; 
 for had it been difcovcred, they would have 
 applied it alfo to a confirmation of the fame 
 faith, and thereby would have prophaned the 
 very holy Word, and thus would have (hut up 
 heaven entirely againft thcmfelvcs, and have 
 removed the Lord from the church. 
 
 The 
 
3G2 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 "* The reafon ^vhy the fcience of corref- 
 pondences, Avhich is the key to the fpiritual 
 fenfe of the Word, is revealed at thjs dayi is, 
 becaufc the divine truths of the church are now- 
 coming to light, and of thefe the fpiritual 
 fenfe of the Word confifteth'; and whilll thefe 
 are in man, the Htcral fenfe of the Word cannot 
 be perverted 5 for the literal [cn[c is capable of 
 being turned any way, but if it be turned to 
 favour the falfe, then it's internal fandlity is 
 deftroyed, and the external along with it, 
 whereas, if it be turned to favour the truth, 
 then the fandtity is preferved. That the fpi- 
 ritual fenfe of the Word fliould be opened now, 
 at this time, is lignified by John feeing heaven 
 open, and the white horfe; and alfo by his 
 feeing and hearing the angel, who flood in the 
 fun, calling all people together to a great fup- 
 per, Apoc. xix. 11 to 18. But that it would 
 not be acknowledged for fome time, is lignified 
 by the beads and the kings of the earth, who were 
 about to make war with him that fat on the 
 white horfe, Apoc. xix. 19; and alfo by the 
 dragon, which perfccuted the woman, that 
 brought forth the man-child, into the wilder- 
 nefs, and call: out of his mouth water as a flood 
 after her, that he might caufe her to be carried 
 away of the flood, Apoc. xii. 13 to 17." 
 
 V. Of 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalem, 30J 
 
 St< •£• «!• •!• «!s 
 
 •J» ^> ^» ^f» "JS 
 
 V. Cy /^^ Second Coming of ibe Lord. 
 
 It is written in Matt. xxiv. 29, 30, jr. 
 " Immediately after the tribulation of tbofc 
 *' days, the fun fliall be darkened, and the 
 ** moon fliall not give her hght, and the fiarj 
 *' fliall fall from heaven, and the powers of the 
 " heavens fliall be Ihakcn. And then fliall 
 "appear the fign of the Son of Man in 
 " heaven : aq^ then ihall all the tribes of 
 " the earth mourn, and they Ihall fee the figii 
 " of the Son of Man coming in the clouds of 
 *' heaven, with power and great glory. And 
 " he fhall fend his angels with a great found of 
 ** a trumpet, and they lliall gather together 
 " his ele6l from the four winds, from one end 
 **of heaven to the other." From this and 
 fimilar pafTages in the Word, underflood 
 merely according to the literal fcnfe, has 
 arifen the generally prevailing notion, that 
 the Lord will appear perfonally \\\ the cloudi 
 of heaven, at which time all who have ever 
 lived fince the creation of the world, are to be 
 raifed up out of their graves, and their fouls 
 again clothed with their bodies; and v^hcn 
 thus alfembled in one place, that they who have 
 
 live J 
 
304 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 lived well, will be judged to eternal life or 
 heaven, and they who have done evil, to 
 eternal death or hell. Into this opinion, I 
 obferve, that you. Sir, in common with the 
 reft of your neighbours, have fallen; not know- 
 ing, that by the clouds of heaven, in which 
 the Lord is to make his appearance, is meant 
 the literal fenfe of the Word, and by glory it's 
 fpiritual fenfe ; confequently, that the Lord, 
 when the church is at an end, will reveal to 
 mankind the fpiritual fenfe of the Word, and 
 thus manifeft divine truth fuch m it is in it's 
 purity, which is the true fign of the laft 
 judgment taking place. 
 
 It is one of the charges you bring againil 
 the members of the New Jerufalem, that they 
 do not believe on this fubjecfl in like manner 
 with yourfelf; and that they take the bare 
 alTertions of Baron Swedenborg in the room 
 of rational proof. The firft part of the charge 
 is trus enough ; but as to the latter, you are 
 miftaken ; for although we fet a very high 
 valife on his folemn declarations, yet ue do 
 not receive ihem merely as fud\ independent 
 of proper evidence, but as fatisfadory illiif- 
 trations of the true fcripture doBrine of the 
 
 Lord's 
 
Signified by the New Jerufaleni. 305 
 
 Lord's fccond advent, the laft judgment, and 
 the rcfurreclion. 
 
 With rcfpccl to the Lonl's fccond advent y the 
 doiftrine of the New Church is this ; that the 
 Lord cannot come in per/on into the material 
 world, becaufe lincc his afcenlion into heaven 
 he is in his glorified humanity, and in this 
 humanity, although it is omniprefent, he cannot 
 be fcen by any man unlefs his fpiritual eyes 
 be firll: opened, as was the cafe with all who 
 faw hmi after his refurredion ; for as a material 
 eye can fee nothing but matter, fo the Lord's 
 glorified body being fubfiantial, and not ma- 
 terial, can only be feen by a fpiritual eye. 
 Indeed it is a clear cafe to me, that, were 
 the Lord to make his p^T/oW appearance among 
 men in the unclouded fplendor of his Divine 
 Humanity, it would be attended with more 
 certain deftrudion to the whole race of man- 
 kind, than if this ball of earth, together with 
 all it's inhabitants, were caft into the fun. 
 But although the Lord cannot, confillently 
 with divine order, come perfonally into the 
 world, yet he can in his Word, which being 
 the divine truth proceeding from himfclf, is in 
 this refpecl the fame thing as himfclf. ** In 
 " the be^^innin^ w as the Word, and the Word 
 
306 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 " was with God, and God zvas the Word^'^ 
 John i. I. 
 
 To this you objecft, p. 39, " When the dif- 
 ** ciples were viewing Jefus afcending to heaven, 
 ^' the angels who flood by faid to them, Adts i. 
 " II, " Ye men of Galilee, why look ye up to 
 " heaven ? This fame Jcfus, who is taken up 
 " from you into heaven, Ihall fo come in like 
 " manner as ye have fcen him go into heaven.** 
 ^' What'* (you afk) *' can be more evident from 
 ** this, than that as the afcent of Jefus v^as 
 *' perfonal and vifible, his return will be the 
 ** fame, perfonal and viiible, not figurative or 
 " emblematical only, meaning not himfelf, but 
 ^* his dodrines ?'* In anfwer to this, I have to 
 obferve, that the whole pafTage from which 
 you have drawn the objedtion, is the record of 
 a tranfadion that occurred, }iot in the natural^ 
 but in the fpiritual zvorld ; for, as has been 
 already proved, the Lord never was, nor could 
 be, ^ttn after his refurredtion, by the material 
 eyes of any man. He was then in the lower 
 parrs of the fpiritual world ; confequently his 
 perfonal afcent mufi have been from thence mto. 
 heaven, and not from the material world, 
 which he had left forty days before, viz. at the 
 time of his refurredion. Befidcs, there are 
 
 cloudy 
 
Signified by the Nevo Jerufalcm, 307 
 
 clouds in the fpiritual world, equally as well 
 as in the natural world ; and the clouds of the 
 former are more properly called the clouds of 
 heaven, than the latter, which in facfl are no- 
 thing but the clouds of the carih. It is evident, 
 therefore, that what the angels faid of Jcfus 
 returning from heaven in like manner as he 
 went up into heaven, ought to be underftood 
 as alluding to his appearance in the fpiritual 
 world, at the time of his fccond coming, and 
 not to any perfonal appearance in the natural 
 world. To men on earth who are enlightened 
 fo as to difcern the fpiritual fenfe of the fcrip- 
 tures, the Lord appears as divine truth : but to 
 thofe inhabitants of the fpiritual world, who in 
 heart acknowledge him as the only God of 
 heaven and earth, he not only manifefts him- 
 felf in the character of divine truth, but alfo 
 occafionally prefents him.fclf in perfon, de- 
 fcending in the fame glorious manner, as the 
 men of Galilee faw him afccnd. And thus the 
 event, which the angels foretold, hath adually 
 taken place. 
 
 That the above pafTagc in the Ads of the 
 Apoftlcs cannot with propriety be undcrrtood 
 in any other fenfe than that already explained, 
 may further appear from this confideration, 
 
 R r 2 that 
 
3o8 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 that the Lord's afcenlion was vifible only to 
 his followers, whofe eyes were opened, and 
 not to the bulk of mankind. Now if he is to 
 conic again ifi like manner, as is exprefsly de- 
 clared, it follows, that his fecond advent will 
 be witnelfed and acknowledged, not by the 
 bulk of mankind in general, but (as before, 
 fonow again) by his followers only, whofe fpi- 
 ritual eyes or underflandings are opened to 
 difcern him in his Word. And all fuch, in 
 confequence of clearly comprehending tl>c 
 meaning of John, when he fays, that God was 
 the Word, will fee that the Lord's advent in 
 his Word, confifting of a revelation of it's 
 internal contents, is neither a mere figure nor 
 an emblem, but a divine reality. 
 
 It was before obferved, that by the clouds 
 of heaven, in which the Lord is faid to come, 
 is meant the Word in it's literal fcnfe. This 
 is proved from the follov»ing paiTages. *' God 
 " rode upon a cherub, and did fly; yea, he 
 ** did fly upon the wings of the wind. His 
 " pavilion round about him were dark waters, 
 " and thick clouds of the flvies. At the bright- 
 " ncfs that was before him, his thick clouds 
 "paired," Pfalm xviii. lo to 13. " Afcribe 
 f' ye flrength unto God ; his excellency is over 
 '■ " Ifrael, 
 
Signified by the Nezo Jerufalcm. -og 
 
 *' Ifrael, and his flrength is in the clouds ;' 
 Pfalm Ixviii. 34. " And Jehovah will create^ 
 *' upon every dwelling-phicc of mount Zion, 
 " and upon her alTernblies, a cloud and Imoke 
 " by day, and the fhining of a Haming fire by 
 ** night ; for upon all the glory lliali be a 
 "covering," Ifaiah iv. 5. ''Behold, Jehovah 
 '• rideth upon ^fwift cloud,** Ifaiah xix. i. " Ik 
 '^ bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds, and 
 " the cloud is not rent under them. He holdeth 
 " back the face of his throne, and fpreadeth 
 *' his cloud upon it," Job xxvi. 8, 9. In all 
 thefc paflliges clouds denote the literal fenfe 
 of the Word ; and riding upon a cloud figni- 
 fies indruClion in divine truth. The fame ua5 
 reprefented by the thick cloud in which Jehovah 
 dcfcended upon mount Sinai, when the law was 
 delivered to Mofes, that being the firjl-fruits 
 of the Word. From all which circumdances 
 it is evident, that the Lord's fecond coming in 
 the clouds of heaven, which is for the purpofc 
 of bringing into his church t\\Q: full barvcj} o^ 
 the Word, can have no other meaning than 
 his jTiore immediate prefcncc in the literal 
 fenfe of the Word, in confequence of the re- 
 velation which is now taking place o( it's 
 fpiritual fenfe. 
 
 I VI. Of 
 
310 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 wf^ wfi ^» ^1^ ^^ 
 
 VI. Of the Lajf Judgmeiii. 
 
 Baron Swedenborg afTerts, that the lad judg- 
 ment was accomplifhed in the fpiritual world, 
 in the year 1757. On this you take occafion 
 to raife three objedions, the iirft of which is, 
 p. 2^^y that "to all appearance no difference 
 •* whatever then took place in the power of 
 *' man to contend with vice or prejudice." 
 The fecond occurs in p. 39, where you charge 
 the members of the New Church with holding, 
 *' that no future judgment i& to be looked for.'* 
 And the third is, p. 42, that *^ according to 
 ** Mr. Swedenborg the lafl: judgment took place 
 •* in the fpiritual world only, and of courfe 
 " none could be judged befides thofe who had 
 ** been dead :*' whereas it is your opinion, that 
 ** thofe who fhall be found alive at the cominir 
 «* of Chrin-, and v/ho will not die at all, are to 
 ** be judged, as well as thofe who have been 
 " dead ;" confequently that the whole procefs 
 of the lafl judgment is to be as literal and formal 
 as any trial in V/ellminfter Hall. 
 
 As to the firft objection, that has been 
 already anfwered in the preceding part of this 
 
 Defence^ 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalcm. 31 1 
 
 Defence, p. 51 to 55, where it is fliewn, that a 
 niofl extraordinary change has manifeftly taken 
 place, (ince the year 1757, throughout every 
 nation in chriflendom, particularly in regard 
 to the liberty of thinking about religious and 
 civil concerns. The rcftoration of this fpiritual 
 liberty to mankind was announced by Baron 
 Swedenborg in his Treatife on the Laji Judgment 
 fo long ago as the year 1758 ; which was at a 
 time when the general operation of that liberty 
 could not be perceived in the natural world ; 
 for as yet the fpiritual judgment had not de- 
 fcended as an efficient caufe into natural effedls : 
 wherefore it required fome length of time to 
 naanifefl:, in the outward acflions of men, the 
 change which had paffed in their interiors, 
 that is, in the fpiritual world. But the event 
 has fince proved the truth of his afTertion ; and 
 1 doubt not but every year's experience will in 
 future tend more and more to confirm it. 
 
 Exclufive of thefe reafons for believing that 
 the judgment, fpoken of in the fcriptures, is 
 already accomplillied, there are others ofcon- 
 liderable weight, amounting to little lefs than 
 a kind of demonftrative proof. When mention 
 is made of the iall judgment in the Word of 
 God, it is generally rcprcfcnted as an event 
 
 which 
 
312 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 which is to be fucceeded by an extraordinary 
 degree of iUuniination, and knowledge of di- 
 vine things, vouchfafcd to the human mind, by 
 means of a new revelation. Thus the coming of 
 the Son of Man is compared to lightning Jhining 
 out of the eafty Matto xxiv. 27. After the judg- 
 ment of the great whore, John fays, " I faw 
 ** heaven opened^ and behold a -white horfe : and 
 " he that fat upon him was called The IVord of 
 " God^"* Apoc. xix. II, 13 ; evidently alluding 
 to the underftanding of the fpiritual fenfe of the 
 fcriptures, which was to take place after the 
 judgment. The fame is further defcribed in 
 chap. xxi. by the new heaven and new earth, 
 and the holy city Nev/ Jerufalem coming 
 down from God out of heaven ; which event, 
 as it is now taking place, is a proof that the 
 laft judgment, according to the fcriptures, has 
 been already performed, the one coming to 
 pafs as the certain confequence of the other. 
 
 The truth of our dodrine concerning the 
 adlual accomplilliment of the laft judgment, 
 is further coniirmed by the following con- 
 fideration. Our Lord fays, '* The time cometh, 
 «' when I fhall 7io more f peak unto you in proverbs ^ 
 ** but I fiall fhew you plainly of the Father,*' 
 John xvi, 25. The fpeaking no more in pro- 
 verbs. 
 
Signified hy the Nezo JeriifaUnu 3 1 3 
 
 verbs, can mean nothing elfe but revealing in 
 plain terms the fpiritual fenfc of his Word. 
 This is effecied in the writings of Emanuel 
 Svvedenborg; which is a corroborating proof, 
 that the prefent day is the time to which our 
 Lord alluded, as the sera of his fecond advent. 
 But above all, his promife, that in that day he 
 would Ihew us plainly of the Father, is ro me a 
 moft certain and indubitable proof, that the laft 
 judgment is actually accomplifhcd ; for prior to 
 this, men were no more difpofed to hear that 
 Jefus himfelf was the Father, than they were in 
 the days of his flcfli ; therefore he faid, " I 
 " have yet many things to fay unio you, but 
 ^^ ye cannot hear them nozv^' John xvi. 12. 
 Now no church, or fet of men, that have here- 
 tofore exifled fince the firft inflitution of chrif- 
 tianity, have ever yet pretended to any plainer 
 knozvledge of the Father, than was enjo}ed by 
 the apoftles, and immediate difciplcs of the 
 Lord ; and yet it was predided, that a day 
 would come, when fuch knowledge would be 
 communicated to the church. The prophet 
 Ifaiah indeed long ago declared, that the 
 Child which was to be born, the Son which was 
 to be given, (hould be called God^ the Father of 
 eternity, Ifaiah ix. 6. But who ever believed 
 his report } Where is the church, that ever 
 
 S s acknow- 
 
314 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 acknowledged Jefus Chrilt to be the Father of 
 eternity y as well as the Son that was born in time f 
 Where ^re the builders that ever made Him 
 the chief corner 'Jlont of their building ? diredling 
 all their worfhip to Him alone as the Head of the 
 church, and not to another being whom they 
 vainly imagined to be fuperior to him ? Where 
 are fuch churches, fuch chriftians to be found, 
 as will bring all their praife, all their glory, 
 and all their honour, and lay them down at his 
 feet, in humble and proftrate adoration, ac- 
 knowledging Hirn alone as the Father and Saviour 
 of mankind ? I know of none that have ever 
 had fuch a plain and dire5f knowledge of the 
 Father as dwelling in the perfon of Jefus 
 Chrift, except the members of the New Jeru- 
 falcm. This circumflance is therefore to me a 
 demonflrative proof, not only that the lal! 
 judgment is accomplifhed, and thereby an end 
 put to the former chriflian church, but alfo 
 that the New Church and kingdom of Chrifi 
 is begun, that he hath taken to himfelf his 
 great power, and that henceforth he fl^iall reign 
 for ever and ever- 
 
 Your fecond objedion, in which you charge 
 the members of the New Church with holding, 
 " that no future judgment is to be looked for," 
 
 i^ 
 
Signified by the New Jenifalcm. 3 1 5 
 
 is not a true rcprcfentation of our belief in that 
 rcfped : for although we really believe, that 
 the lafl: general judgment w as accompliilicd in 
 the year 1757, yet we alfo niaihtain, that every 
 man /';; particular will be judged immediately 
 after death, and that he will be rewarded ac- 
 cording to the deeds done in the body, whether 
 they have been good or evil. The lad judg- 
 ment we confider to be of various fignification, 
 general, particular, and fingular ; general, as 
 having refpedl to the end of a church ; particular, 
 in reference to the death of individuals ; and 
 fingular, with refpe6l to the future (late of man 
 as determined by every thought and aficvflion, 
 every word and work. 
 
 The common idea of ihe laft judgment being 
 univerfal, and decifive of the fate of all man- 
 kind without exception, the deccafed among 
 whom are fuppofed to be rcferved in fome 
 unknown place till that great day, is not only 
 hoilile to the true fenfe of fcripture, but alfo 
 repugnant to found reafon. By the fcriptures 
 we are informed, that two general judgments 
 have taken place on the inhabitants of this 
 earth, prior to that in the year 1757. The 
 firR was the laft judgment of the moll ancient 
 church, when all charity and fairh peri fhcd, 
 
 S s 2 an(i 
 
316 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 and which is defcribed in Genefis by the flood. 
 At that time, according to the language of the 
 Word, heaven and earth pafled away, that is, 
 the internals and externals of the church 
 perifhed, and a new heaven and a new earth 
 were created, that is, a new church, which 
 fucceeded the former, and may be called the 
 ancient church. The lafl judgment of this 
 fecond general church, which included many 
 particular churches, together with the repre- 
 fentative of a church eflablifhed among the 
 pofterity of Jacob, took place at the time of 
 the Lord's firfl coming into the world. The 
 prophet Ifaiah fpeaks of this judgment, to be 
 accompUflied by the Lord, in the following 
 terms : '* Who is this that cometh from Edom, 
 ** with dyed garments from Bozrah, travelling 
 " in the greatnefs of his flrength ? I that fpeak 
 '* in righteoufnefs, mighty to fave. I have 
 " trodden the wine-prefs alone : / will tread 
 " them in mine anger ^ and trample them in my, 
 '* fury ; and their blood fhall be fprinkled upori 
 ** my garments, and I v^'ill•ftain all my raiment. 
 f* For the day of vengeance is in my heart, and 
 " ihe year of my redeemed is come," Ifaiah 
 Ixiii. I, 3, 4. Hence it appears, that judg- 
 ment and redemption commence at the fame 
 time ; which is further evident from the fol- 
 lowing 
 
Signified by the Nezv Jcrufaltm, 3 1 j 
 
 lowing pafTages : " 7 ion fhall be redeemed zvi/h 
 "jiidgmef/t, and her converts with rightcoufnefs. 
 " And the delirudtion of the tranfgrcirors and 
 ** of the finners fhall be together," Ifaiah. i. 27, 
 28. '* 1 he Lord fliall purge the blood of Jc- 
 *^ rufalem from the midft thereof, by the ffiril 
 ** of jiidpjieiif, and by the fpirit of burning,'* 
 Ifaiah iv. 4. Not to mention many other 
 places to the fame cfFect in this and other 
 prophets. The Lord himfclf alfo, when he 
 was in the adt of fulfilling thofc prophecies, and 
 executing the judgment, fays, " Now is the 
 *^ judgment of this zvorld; iioiv f^:^all the prince of 
 ''this zi;orid be caft out^' John xii. 31. In 
 another place, " Verily verily I fay unto you, 
 ** the hour is coming, and nozv is, when the 
 ** dead fnall hear the voice of the Son of God ; 
 " and they that hear fliall live. For as the 
 " Father hath life in himfelf, fo hath he given 
 " to the Son to have life in himfelf; and bath 
 *' given him authority to execute judgment alfo^ 
 ** becaufe he is the Son of Man," John v. 25, 
 26, 27. Again, " Be of good cheer, / have 
 ** overcome the vcorld^ John xvi. i^-^. From 
 which pafTages it is evident, that a day of 
 judgment is not fpoken of in the fcripiures, 
 as an event the like of which has never yet in 
 any former period taken place, or as dccifivc 
 
 of 
 
3i8 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 of the fate of cwtry individual of the human 
 race; for we find, that the Lord, when on 
 earth, adlually accompli ihed a judgment, not 
 upon the whole race of mankind, but only 
 upon thofe who were deceafed, and confe- 
 quently in the fpiritual world. 
 
 Thefe confiderations fufficiently obviate your 
 third objedion, and prove, that the dodrine of 
 the New Church refpedling the lafi judgment 
 is perfectly confident with the Word of God; 
 while all thofe fyflems, which fuppofe the de- 
 flrudlion of the univerfe as the neceiTary confe- 
 quence of that event, can be confidered in no 
 other light, than as fo many idle dreams, and 
 dreadful chimeras, calculated to frighten man- 
 kind, and to infpire them with no one ufeful 
 or rational fentimcnt, but on the contrary with 
 difmal expecflation and ufelefs alarm. 
 
 The end of creation is the formation of an 
 angelic heaven out of the human race, which, 
 as an image of the Creator, may bear fomc 
 rcfpeift to his infinity and eternity. But thi? 
 refpect to infinity and eternity would ceafe, 
 were the habitable earth to be deflroyed at the 
 day of the laft judgment ; for then, by a period 
 being put to the procreations of mankind, the 
 
 extent 
 
Signified by the Nexo Jeriifalcin. 319 
 
 extent of heaven, together with the number 
 of it's inhabitants, would be limited : whereas, 
 it is highly rcafonable to fuppofe, that as the 
 human mind, which is an heaven in it's fmal- 
 ieft form, increafes in perfection according to 
 the plurality of it's knowledges, fo the angelic 
 heaven will likevvife advance in perfedion, 
 and thus more and more rcfemblc it's Creator, 
 according to the perpetually increafing number 
 of it's inhabitants. Hence the dodrines which 
 attribute to the Divine Being an end worthy of 
 himfelf in the creation of the v/orld, by making 
 provifion for the perpetual generations and eter- 
 nal fuccelTions of mankind, mufh be the moll 
 rational in themfclves, as well as mod conform- 
 able to divine revelation, when properly under- 
 ftood. That the habitable earth is not to be 
 deftroyed at the time of the lall judgment, is 
 plain from the Lord's words in Luke, ** 1 tell 
 " you, in that night there fhall be two men 
 *' in one bed ; the one (hall be taken, and lie 
 '' other /hall be left. 1\vo vvomeri fhall be grind- 
 " ing together; the one fliall be taken, and the 
 " other left. Two men fliall be in the field ; 
 *• the one iliall be taken, and the other left;' 
 chap. xvii. 34, 35, 36. Here the laft time of 
 the church is called night, becaufe there is no 
 genuine faith remaining, in confequcncc of 
 
 there 
 
320 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 there being no true chanty : but that the world 
 would not then be deftroyed, is plainly declared 
 by the circumftance of fome being lefc while 
 others are removed. The fame dodlrine may 
 be confirmed from the following palfages : 
 ** Jehovah built his fancluary like high palaces, 
 ** like the earth which he hath eftablifhed for 
 ** ever," Pfalm Ixxviii. 69. ** Thou hall efta- 
 *' blifhed the earth, and it ahidelh, Pfalm cxix. 
 90. " One generation pafTeth away, and another 
 *' generation cometh ; but the earth abldeth for 
 ** ever,'' Ecclef. i. 4. 
 
 In addition to the above, I will here tran- 
 fcribe the following paflage from the Treatife 
 on the Laji Judgment, n. 30, 32, ibewing why 
 men are judged in the fpiritual world, and not 
 in the natural. " No one is judged from the 
 natural man, confequently not whilft he is living 
 in the natural world, inafmuch as man is then 
 in a natural body : but all are judged in the 
 fpiritual man, confequently when they come 
 into the fpiritual world, for man is then in a 
 fpiritual body. It is the fpiritual part of man 
 that is judged, but not the natural ; for this 
 latter is in no rcfpedl faulty or criminal, inaf- 
 much as it does not live of itfelf, but is merely 
 a fervant or indrument, whereby the fpiritual 
 
 man 
 
5ignijied by the New Jernfalem. 321 
 
 man ads. Hence alfo it is, that judgment 
 palles on men, when they have put ofi* their 
 natural, and put on their fpiritual body. In 
 this body a man alfo appears according to his 
 true quality with rcfpcQ to love and faith ; for 
 every one in the fpiritual world is an image or 
 likenefs of his own love, not only with refpedl to 
 his face and body, but with refpec't to his fpecch 
 and aclions. Hence it is, that all are known 
 and diflinguifhed as to their real quality, and im- 
 mediately feparated, when it is the good plea- 
 fure of the Lord. From what has been faid 
 it alfo appears evident, that the judgment takes 
 place in the fpiritual world, and not in the 
 natural world or on the earths. 
 
 •* Every one after death is bound to, or in 
 fellowdiip with, a certain fociety, and this im- 
 mediately on his entering into the fpiritual 
 world. As foon as ever fpirits are gathered 
 together, and feparated, they are alfo judged, 
 and every one is inftantly fixed in his own 
 place, the good in heaven, and in fociety there 
 with their like, and the evil in hell, and in 
 fociety there with their like. Hence it is mani- 
 fell, that the laft judgment can only take place 
 in the fpiritual world, as well becaufe every one 
 
 T ; ihcrc 
 
322 A Defence of the Neio Church, 
 
 there is an image of his own life, as becaufe 
 all are affociated together who are in a fimilar 
 life, confequently every one is in fellowfl'iip with 
 his like. It is otherwife in the natural world, 
 where the good and the bad are intermixed ; 
 there no one knows the real quality of another, 
 nor are they feparated from each other accord- 
 ing to the affection of their lite. Befides, it is 
 impoflible for any man with his natural body to 
 be cither in heaven or in hell ; wherefore, in 
 order that man may enter into one or the other, 
 it is necefTary that he put off his natural body, 
 and afterwards be judged in his fpiritual body. 
 Hence it is, as obfervcd above, that the fpi- 
 ritual man is judged, and not the natural." 
 
 ^ »}» ^ r^ ^ 
 
 VJI. Of the ReJiiYreclion, 
 
 As the notion^ commonly entertained about 
 the refurre8ion of the dead, arc, like thofe on 
 the laft judgment and the fecond coming of the 
 Lord, draw n from the mere letter of fcripture, 
 without any knowledge of it's fpiritual fenfe, it 
 is not to be expeded, that they fhould approach 
 any nearer the truth than them. From the 
 idea you- entertain of heavenly happincfs, that 
 -'• • • it 
 
Signified Ay the Nexo Jemfalevi, 323 
 
 it cannot be perceived by the foul, except \vhile 
 united to a grofs material body, you take it for 
 granted, that all men, on their death, are re- 
 duced to a flate of torpor, inactivity, or extinc- 
 tion, in which condition they are to remain thll 
 the hft day, when you fuppofc the fpark of 
 life will be re-kindled, and again animate the 
 fame body which had been configncd to the 
 grave, notwithftanding it's having bcea de- 
 voured by worms, 6cc. In this opinion you 
 likewife feem to be confirmed by the circum- 
 flance of the refurreclion of Jcfus Chrill >*ith 
 his whole body, which, like the firft-fruits 
 under the law, you confidcr as a fample of the 
 eeneral harveft at the refurre^flion of all man- 
 kind, in like manner with their whole bodies. 
 Hence, p. 37, you remark as follows: ** Ac- 
 ** cording to the fcriptures, the refurrcdlion of 
 *' Chrifl: is a pattern of our own refurredion, 
 ** and therefore he is called the firjhfruiis from 
 *f the dead. What were the firft-fruits under 
 " the law, but a fample of the general harvcfl ? 
 ** Whatever, therefore, Chrilt now is, we ihall 
 ** be alfo, when with us, as with him, cor- 
 ** ruption fliall have put on incorruption, and 
 " this mortal lliall have put on immortality." 
 
 Tt 2 H 
 
324 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 If by the firft-fruits from the dead you un- 
 jderftand the firft body that was raifed from the 
 dead, (which evidently appears to be the fenfe 
 in which you take that expreflionj your pre- 
 mifes are falfe, and confequently the whole of 
 your reafoning founded thereon mufl: be incon- 
 clufive. According to the fcriptures, Jefus 
 was not the firft that was raifed from the dead ; 
 for he himfelf raifed Lazarus, John xi. 43^, 44; 
 likewife Jairus's daughter, Mark v. 41, 42 ; 
 ^nd the widow's fon, Luke vii. 14, 15. The 
 prophet Elifha alfo raifed the Shunamite's fon, 
 2 King$ iv. 34, 35. And even after his death, 
 when a dead man was let down into his fe- 
 pulchre, and touched the bones of Eliflia, he 
 revived, and fbood up on his feet^ 2 Kings xiii. 
 21. All thefe are indances of perfons rifing 
 from the dead, previous to the refurredlion of 
 our Lord ; which are fufficient to prove, that 
 the exprclTion of Chrift's being the firfl-fruits 
 from the deady is not to be underftood according 
 to the fenfe which you feem to put upon it, 
 bur rather as implying the fame thing that is 
 f]gnified by his being called i\\q firjl-begotten of 
 the deady Apoc. i. 5 ; the firfl-borny Pfalmlxxxix, 
 27; and \k\t rcfiirre^ion itfefy John xi. 25 ; that 
 is, the primary and fole fountain, from whom all 
 pther beings derive their life. 
 
 I may 
 
Signified by the New Jcnifalem. 325 
 
 I may here take occafion to obfcrve, as a 
 •flriking proof of the divinity of Jefus, that 
 his body, after the refurrcction, fo elfciuially 
 differed from thofe of Lazarus, Jairus's daugh- 
 ler, and the Shu nam ire's fon, who were alfo 
 raifed from the dead, that v;hilc thcfe latter 
 were again converfant with mankind, in 
 like manner as they had been before their de- 
 ceafe, that is, in grofs material bodies, which 
 were liable to a fccond natural death, the Hu- 
 manity of the Lord was only occafionally vifiblc 
 to his difciples, and no more fubjccl: to fuf- 
 fcrings or death. That the body of Lazarus 
 after his being raifed from the grave, was not 
 exempt from the ufual infirmities of human 
 nature, is plain from the circumflance of the 
 chief prierts confulting how they might put 
 him to death, John xii. 10. But of Jefus, 
 after his refurretlion, no fuch circumftance is 
 related, nor could fuch a defign by any pof- 
 fibiliry be put in execution. This, therefore, 
 furniflies an additional argument in favour of 
 his divinity, and proves that Chrift was more 
 than a man. 
 
 You fay, " Whatever Chrift now is, we fhall 
 " alfo be, when with us, as with him, cor- 
 " ruption (hall have put on incorruption," &:c. 
 
 By 
 
326 A Defence of the Nezo Church, 
 
 By thcfc words you fccnj to infimiate, that 
 Jefus was no more than a mere man, and 
 that, as fuch, he faw corruption in common 
 with the rcll of the dead. But had you ftudied 
 10 invent a declaration more contrary to the 
 true fenfc of the fcripturcs than this, I am 
 inclined to believe you would have found forrie 
 difficulty m the attempt. David, who repre- 
 fenred the Lord, fays, '' My ficfh Ihail refl: in 
 " hope : for thou wilt not leave my foul in hell, 
 ** nellher wilt thou Jiiffer thine Holy One to fee cor- 
 ''ruptiGUy* Pfalm xvi. 9, 10. That thefc 
 words were fpoken of Jefus, is plain from this 
 circumftance, that David in his own perfon 
 faw corruption, whereas Jefus faw no corrup- 
 tion, for before corruption could take place he 
 rofe from the dead. \\-ith this agrees the" 
 rcftimpny cf Peter in Ads ii. 25, 30, 31, where 
 he exprefsly fays that David in that pfalm fpake 
 of Chriil:. The fame is aiierted by Paul in 
 thefe ^^ords, " David, after he had fcrved his 
 ^''own generation by the will of God, fell on 
 " lleep, and was laid unto his fathers, 'diidfaw 
 *^ Lorrtiption : but he v. horn God raifed again, 
 ' ' fa-iv no 'orrufit ion, ' ' A d's x i i i . 36,37. Herein 
 tli£n is to be feen a flriking diibnction between 
 Jefus and other men ; fuch a diilindion as at 
 once raifes him abjvc the \Oiole of the human 
 
 race. 
 
Signified by the Ncxv Jerufakm, 327 
 
 race, and charadcrizcs him as their God, aiul 
 not as a mere man, their fcllow-crcaturc. 
 What he is, therefore, we can never be ; for he 
 is Lord and Maftcr, but u c are only fcrvants : 
 he is the Head of the church, but \vc arc 
 fcarcely members: he is Creator, Redeemer, 
 Saviour; but we are the created, redeemed, 
 faved : he is the King; we are the fubjects : 
 he is Alpha and Omega, the Firfl and rhe 
 Laft, the All in all; but \wc arc — nothing. 
 Such is the difparity between God and man, 
 Jefus Chrift and ourfclves. 
 
 You fcem, p. 40, to Iny great Hrcfs on the 
 account which Paul gives of the refurrecflion, in 
 I Thefll iv. 15 to 17, where he fays, " I'or this 
 " we fay unto you by the Word of the Lord, 
 *^ that we who are alive and remain unto the 
 *' coming of the Lord, fliall not prevent thcn^ 
 *' who are afleep. For the Lord himfelf Ihall 
 *' defcend from heaven w ith a fliout, w iih the 
 " voice of ihe archangel, and with the trump 
 ** of God ; and the dead in Chrilt lliall riic 
 " lirft. Then wc who arc alive and remain, 
 " Ihall be caught up together with them in the 
 "clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and (o 
 ** fhall we ever be with the Lord." Jmit all 
 this may very calily be explained, conlillcntly 
 J with 
 
328 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 with the doctrines of the New Church, by 
 coniidering it as fpoken according to the ap- 
 pearances of the hteral fenfe of the Word, 
 which defcribes fpiritual things by fuch images 
 and expreilions as are accommodated to the 
 apprehenfion of men in the natural world. 
 We have already feen, p. 305, that the Lord's 
 fecond coming in the clouds of heaven is not 
 to be underfiood as alluding to the atmo- 
 fpherical clouds over our heads, but to the 
 literal fenfe of the Word, and to the appear- 
 ance of clouds in the fpiritual world. In this 
 view, the above palTage perfectly coincides 
 with our fentiments ; for we maintain, that the 
 new heaven is formed before the new earth, 
 that is, the New Church takes place in the fpi- 
 ritual world before it does in the natural w orld ; 
 which agrees with this faying, that the dead in 
 Chfift Jhall rife jirft. And as the church on 
 earth will be conjoined with the church in 
 heaven, fo as together to form only one church, 
 like internal and external, therefore it is faid, 
 that we who are alive and remain, fhall be 
 caught up together iviih them in the clouds^ to meet 
 the Lord in the air ; that is, we fhall be enabled, 
 at the Lord's fecond coming, when the fpiritual 
 fenfe of his Word fliall be revealed, to penetrate 
 through the ihade and obfcurity of the letter, 
 
 and. 
 
Signified by the N'erc Jcriifcdem. 320 
 
 and, difcerning the glaiy of it's inner contents, be 
 elevated into the heat and light of heaven, by 
 virtue of which wc fliall worlliip the Lord alone 
 in fpirit and in truth, as angels do above. In aay 
 other (tn{^, what can be meant by being caught 
 up in the clouds, and meeting the Lord in the 
 air? Surely every rational and intelligent perfon 
 muft know, that heaven is no more in or above 
 the clouds, than it is under them; and that the 
 prefencc of the Lord is equally as well to be 
 found upon the earth, as in any heights of the 
 air or atmofphere ! 
 
 Another palTagc which you quote as ap- 
 parently favourable to your hypothefis, is that 
 in I Cor. xv. 51, 52, 53, wiierc the apoHle 
 Paul fays, ** Behold, I fnew you a myftery ; we 
 *' fhall not all flcep, but v.c Ihall all be changed, 
 ** in a moment, in the twinkling, of an eye, at 
 *' the lad trump; for the trumpet Ihall found, 
 ♦' and the dead fhall be raifed incorruptible, and 
 '* we fhall be changed. For this corruptible 
 ** murt put on incorruption, and this mortal 
 "mud put on immortality." In whatever ^ 
 fenfe thefe words of the apofllc arc to be in- 
 terpreted, they ought at leall to be taken in 
 ronneclion with the preceding verfes of the 
 fame chapter. The conflrudion which I ob- 
 
330 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 ferve you put upon them, is, that the fame ma- 
 terial body which is committed to the earth, 
 will rife again, and be made immortal. But 
 this is not the do(flrine of Paul ; for he dif- 
 tinguifhes between the natural corruptible body 
 which is fown, and the fpiritual incorruptible 
 body which is raifed. " Thou fool,'* fays he, 
 " that which thou fowefl, thou foweji not that 
 ^^ body that Jhall he ^* verfe 37. "There are ce^ 
 " leliial bodies^ and bodies terrejlrialy* verfe 40. 
 ** There is a natural body^ and there is 2^ fpiritual 
 " body^^^ verfe 44. ** Now this I fay, brethren, 
 " that flejh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of 
 " God ; neither doth corruption inherit incorrupt 
 ** tiony' verfe 50. Hence, I think, we may 
 fairly conclude, that Paul maintained the re- 
 furreclion of man's fpiritual body> and not of 
 his material, earthy, and corruptible body. 
 In agreement wath this, then, mufl the fuc- 
 ceeding verfes, which you have quoted, be un- 
 deril'ood. He begins, ** Behold, I fhew you a 
 " myftery\* plainly implying, that what he is 
 going to add, is not to be underftood literally, 
 but fpiritually ; for were it to be taken accord- 
 ing to the exprcfs tenor of the words, there 
 would be no myftery in the cafe, but a fimple 
 prophetic narration. A myilery is fomething hid- 
 den from public view, being under the cover of 
 
 appearances,. 
 
Signified by the New Jemfalcm. 33 1 
 
 appearances, which may either be milintcr- 
 prcted or properly undcrllood, according to the 
 different degrees of illumination which dillcrcnt 
 perfons may poillTs. Paul, in moll of his 
 cpiftles, writes according to the literal fenfc of 
 the Word ; which indeed could not have 
 been othervvife, inafmuch as the genuine fpi- 
 ritual fenfe was not at that time clearlv re- 
 vealed. Hence the appearance of calvinifm, 
 and the doftrine of jultification by faith alone, 
 fo vifible in various parts of his writings, is by 
 many confirmed as the genuine fentimcnt of 
 Paul ; when yet it is fufliciently clear from other 
 parts, that he in reality maintained no fuch 
 doeSirines. See i Cor. xiii. 13: ** Now abideth 
 ** faith, hope, and charity : but the great ejl of 
 '* thefe is charity." This alfo is the cxprefs doc- 
 trine of the New Church. But writing as he 
 did according to the appearances of truth in 
 the letter of fcripinre, it is no w onder that he 
 fliould have been mifunderllood by thofe w ho 
 penetrated no further. Let us now fee w hat is 
 the real import of h:s words, agreeable to the 
 true fenfe of fcripturc. To be changed in a 
 moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the lalf 
 trump, means nothing clfe but the certainty of 
 palFuig from a natural into a fpiritual Ihitc, at 
 the time of ihi: Lord's fecond coming ; and ihis 
 
 U u z change 
 
332 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 change may take place, according to it's mca- 
 fure, as well with thofe who arc now living, 
 as with thofe who are already dead. Not that 
 a material body fhall be ever converted into a 
 fpiritual body, for this is a diing impoffiblc, as 
 being contrary to divine order; but on the 
 death and removal of the former, together with 
 all the imperfedions of it's nature, man will 
 be endowed with a fpiritual fubilantial body, 
 in which he will live for ever, and no more 
 fee the corruption of death. 
 
 " Paul," you fay, p. 41, " compares the re- 
 ** furredion of the dead, i Cor. xv. 36, to the 
 *' revival of feed that has been put into the 
 ^* ground ; and w^e read. Rev. xx. 13, of the 
 *' fea giving up it's dead. But according to 
 ** you, nothing that is ever committed to the 
 <* ground, or to the fea, will appear again, or 
 ^^ any thing elfc in the place of it." With 
 refpecl to the revival of feed that has been put 
 into the ground, it fs well known, that it is 
 net the fame grofs earthy fuhfance of the feed 
 which grows up in the form of a new plant or 
 tree, but only the fpirit within it, which ac- 
 cumulates fn'flj matter from the juices of the 
 foil in which it is fovvn. Hence Paul, in the 
 very next verfe to that which you mention, fays, 
 "' ' ' " " And 
 
Signified by the Neio Jcrufalem. 333 
 
 '* And that which thou foweH:, thou Joweft not 
 " that bodywbicb/ball be^ but bare grain, it may 
 ^' chance of wheat, or of Ibme other grain." 
 This is a true emblem of man's refurreclion; 
 the material body, which is laid in the grave, 
 forms no part of that fpiritual and fubllantial 
 body, with w hich man rifes ; but the fpirit, 
 which is within the material body, quits it 
 after death, and then man lives as a man in all 
 refpedls as before, only in a more perfed: ftatc, 
 in confequence of being difencumbcred of the 
 grofs body of clay. You therefore do juflicc 
 to the members of the New Church, when 
 you report as their belief, that *' nothing that 
 " is ever committed to the ground, or to the 
 ?' fea, will appear again :" but you by no 
 means do juftice to their fcniiments, when you 
 reprefent them as holding, that " nothing elfe 
 ** is to appear in the place of it." 
 
 As to the pafllige in Apoc. xx. 13, where it 
 is faid, that ** the fea gave up the dead which 
 ** were in it," it has no rcfpecl whatever to the 
 fea in the natural world, or to the men whofc 
 dead bodies have been there conligned. This 
 indeed may appear even from the circumrtance, 
 that no notice is taken of the bodies which have 
 been committed to the earth, although the 
 
 number 
 
334 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 number of thcfc latter immcjifcly exceeds that 
 of ihe former, comprifiiig in fad the general 
 bulk of mankind. But it is dill more plain 
 from the words immediately following thofe 
 above quoted, viz. " And death and bell de- 
 " livered up the dead which were in them/* 
 And again, vcrfe 14, *^ Dealb and hell were 
 •* cad into the lake of fire,'* If we take thefe 
 lafi words in their mere literal fenfe, we iliall be 
 under the ncceility of fuppofing, that helljhall 
 he cajl inio belly which is a manifed: abfurdity. 
 And if hell deliver up the dead, in order to 
 prefcnt them before the judgment- feat, it will 
 follow, that fome men are configned to hell, 
 immediately on their death, not only before 
 fcntence of condemnation is palTed upon them, 
 but even before they are arraigned at the bar, 
 and tried ; which is utterly inconfiftent with 
 every principle of julfice, Vvhecher human or 
 divine. This do6trine, moreover, is particu- 
 larly unfavourable to the fchcme which vou 
 have adopted, rcfpecting the ilate of fouls after 
 ihe death of the body ; for you fuppofe, that 
 then the life of nrai becomes extinct, and that 
 he neither goes to heaven nor to hell, until 
 the arrival of a certain grand but awful day^ 
 vjfually called the end of the v/orld, aud day of 
 judgmciit, when (ouls and bodies are to be re- 
 united. 
 
Signified by the New Jerufakm, 335 
 
 united, and for the fiiR- time cither raifcd to 
 heaven, or thruft down into hell. 
 
 That man, however, riles again immediately 
 afcer death, is evident from many paifagcs in 
 the Word, particularly the following : " Jefus 
 " faid to the thief on the crofs. Verily 1 fay 
 •* unto thee, To-day flialt thou be with me in 
 " paradife," Luke xxiii. 43. The fame al(b 
 appears from what the Lord faid concerning 
 Dives and Lazarus, that Dives went to hcl!, 
 and thence converfed with Abraham ; and thai 
 Lazarus went to heaven ; and all this while 
 men were ftill living in the world, ccnfcquenrly 
 before what is generally underftood by the day 
 of judgment ; for when Dives intrcated Abra- 
 ham to fend Lazarus from the dead to warn 
 his brethren, Abraham anfw-ered, " If they 
 " hear not Mof:s and the prophets, neither v\ ill 
 ** they be perfuaded though one rofc from tbc 
 ^^ dead," Luke xvi. 31. It is further writfci). 
 ** I am the God of Abraham, and the God of 
 " Ifaac, and the God oi Jacob. Gci is not thf 
 <* God of the dead, hut of the Ihing;' Matt. xxii. 
 31. Hence it appear^;, that Abraham, Ifaac, 
 and Jacob, notwithlhnding the death o( their 
 bodies, are flill alive. 1 he nngel hkcwife fiid 
 unto John, who fell down lo worlhip him, *' I 
 
336 A Dtfente of the New Churchy 
 
 "am ihy fellozvfervaiity and of thy brethren the 
 *^ prophets,'* Apoc. xix. 10. chap. xxii. 9 : a 
 demonftrative proof this, not only that man 
 lives as a man after death, prior to the general 
 judgment, but alfo that angels are of the human 
 race, being no other than deceafed men. So 
 again, when Jefus was transfigured before Peter^ 
 James, and John, " there appeared unto them 
 *^ Mofes mid Elias talking with him,*' Matt. 
 xvii. 3. And in the Ads of the ApolUes, chap. 
 X. 30, " Cornelius faid, I prayed in my houfe, 
 *' and behold, a man flood before mc in brio;ht 
 " clothing;*' which fame man is called an angel 
 of God, verfe 3, 7, 23. 
 
 When a propofition is clearly proved, it is 
 unneceffary to urge further arguments on the 
 fame fubjecl. I Oiall therefore conclude my 
 remarks on the refurrecftion, by briefly fhewing 
 who are the perfons meant by the living, and 
 who by the dead, that are to be judged at the 
 lafl day ; for I obferve you all along take the 
 account of the judgment according to the firft 
 and lowed: fenfe of the words, when yet, to be 
 truly rational in our conceptions, we cught to^ 
 elevate our minds to their higheft fenfe, and 
 thus from the letter afcend to the fpirit. Alf 
 who die in a flate of regeneration, are in the 
 
 language 
 
Sigmjied by the New Jerufaltm, 307 
 
 language of fcrlpture called living vien; but all 
 who depart in an unregenerate (late, are termed 
 dead. Both defcriptions of men will be judged ; 
 the former, as having the fpirit of true life w ithin 
 them, to life eternal ; but the latter, as being defti- 
 tute of that life, to death eternal : life eternal is 
 the life of angels in heaven ; but death eternal 
 is the life of devils in hell. The Lord alone 
 knovveth th^ true ftate of every man ; there- 
 fore the Lord alone is the judge of every man; 
 and he will give to every one according to his 
 works, whether they have been good or bad. 
 This is what is meant by judging the living 
 and the dead, good and evil being the only 
 proper dillindion between life and death, as 
 invariably fct forth in the Word of God. 
 
 ^ ♦ * * H« 
 
 VI IL Of Marriages in Heaven. 
 
 It is no wonder, that men, who have been 
 accuftomcd to underiland the Word of God in 
 no other fcnfe than that of the letter, fliouki 
 raife objections againlt that part of the New 
 Jerufalem dodrincs, which allerts, that mar- 
 riages take place in heaven, as well as upon 
 rarch. The plaufibility of this ohjcdion ap- 
 
 X X pears 
 
338 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 pears the more ftriking from the reply made 
 by our Lord, Luke xx. 34, to certain of the 
 pharifees, who interrogated him about the 
 refurreclion ; which, as might have been ex- 
 peded, is urged by you. Sir, as a decifive ar- 
 gument againft the truth of our doctrine. But 
 upon clofer examination it will be found, that 
 not only in the prefent, but in a variety of 
 other inftances, the Lord fpake in a language 
 adapted to the ftate of his hearers, who were 
 fo immerfed in worldly and corporeal ideas, 
 as to have no other conceptions of the heavenly 
 ftate than fuch as were grofs, earthly, and fen- 
 fual. To have anfwered them in any other 
 manner than he did, would have been to en- 
 courage them in their delufion : wherefore it 
 was necefTary, firft of all, to withdraw them 
 from the groflhefs of their imaginations, in 
 order to prepare them for the reception of 
 genuine truth. Marriage with them was no 
 other than carnal conjunction, an union not of 
 minds, but of bodies. With this view of 
 marriage, they afked Jefus, which of the fevea 
 deceafed brethren, who fucceflively had lived 
 with the fame woman, fhould have her again 
 to wife in the refurredion ? To which he wifely 
 anfwered, " The fons of this age marry, and 
 " are given in marriage," (even according to 
 
 your 
 
Signified hy the New Jerufalem. 339 
 
 your conceptions of marriage) ; '* but ihcy ^vho 
 " fliall be accounted worthy to obtain that 
 '* world, and the refurrcdion of the dead, 
 ** neither nicury nor are given in marriage," 
 (in any fuch ieiife as you underHand marriages,) 
 Luke XX. 34, 35. Befides this interpretation 
 of the words, they have a ftill further meaning, 
 which may be explained as follows. Marriage, 
 in the fpiritual fenfe, fignifies conjunction with 
 the Lord ; and this conjunclion mull be ef- 
 feded upon earth before death, or it never will 
 in another life ; for as the tree falls, fo it lies. 
 On this account it is faid, that in heaven they 
 neither marry nor arc given in marriage; that 
 is, regeneration, which, is begun and entered 
 into during the life of the body, is not re-com- 
 menced in heaven, like a jirfl afl of marriage, 
 or fpiritual conjunclion with the Lord, but is 
 carried on and perfeded as the Jeciud or coujiV' 
 mation of a former covenant. 
 
 Many parts of the fcriptures arc to be un- 
 derftood in a fenfe diametrically oppofite to the 
 cxpreflion of the letter ; as where it is laid, 
 that God is Angry, that he puwJJxs, cap into bell, 
 and d^Jh'oys ; that he has arbtirarily chojai a part 
 of the human race for falvation, and rejected 
 the reft ; inftcad of which the true fcnlc is, 
 
 X X 2 ^^^^ 
 
340 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 that God is loving and merciful to ally hating 
 mne, punifhing nonCy calling none into hell, de-. 
 flroying none, reprobating none. All thefe ex- 
 preilions are mere appearances accommodated 
 to the infant apprehenfions of man, who is 
 apt to judge of the Lord by \vhat paffes in his 
 own bread. In like manner when it is faid, 
 there are no marriages in heaven, the real truth 
 is, that there are marriages there, not indeed 
 fuch grofs, carnal, and unchalle marriages as 
 take place on earth, but marriages of a celellial 
 kind, pure, chafte, holy, worthy of heaven, 
 and where, in a fuprcme fcnfe, the Lamb, the 
 Lord God himfelf, is the hufhand of his 
 church. 
 
 Again, it is faid, that in heaven they nei- 
 ther marry nor are given in marriage, juft as it 
 is faid, that no man is to be called father, 
 mailer, or rabbi: that a rich man can fcarcely 
 be faved, it being calier for a camel to pafs 
 through the eye of a needle, than for a man 
 who hath great riches to enter into the king- 
 dom of heaven; but that the poor, the lame, 
 and the blind, gain eafy admilTion : that we are 
 to make friends of the mammon of unright- 
 eoufnefs : that the right eye is to be plucked 
 out, and the right hand cut off, if they offend : 
 
 that 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalcm. 34 1 
 
 that we are not to rcfift evil, but to him that 
 fmiterh us on the right cheek, to turn the other 
 alfo : that if any man will fue us at the law, 
 and take away our coat, we are to let him have 
 our cloak alfo : that in order to become a true 
 difciple of Jefus, a man mull hate his father, 
 and mother, and w ife, and children, and bre- 
 thren, and fiflcrs, yea and his own life alfo: 
 that the Lord came into the vsorld, not to Icntl 
 peace among men, but a fuord; and to fet 
 at variance w ith each other the father and the 
 fon, the mother and the daughter, &c. ike. 
 In fhort, it is faid, that in heaven ihcy neither 
 marry, nor are given in marriage, in the fame 
 fenfe as numerous other palfagcs of fcripturc 
 fpcak of heavenly and divine things, the literal 
 exprcilions of which are not in themfelves naked 
 or genuine truths, but truths clothed with ap- 
 pearances, and thus accommodated to the ap- 
 prehenfion of the fimple, and of children. 
 
 That neverthelcfs there arc marriages in 
 heaven, as well as upon earth, confiiting of :he 
 fpiritual union between male and female minds, 
 is clearly dcducible not only from the original 
 defign of the creation of man, but alio from 
 the general knic of the fcripturcs, which in 
 many places reprcfcnt heaven as a Itatc of mar- 
 
 riage. 
 
342 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 riage* As there are two univcrfal principles 
 of life proceeding from the Creator, viz. good 
 and truth, (although in him they are only one,) 
 it is necefl'ary that there be two univerfal re- 
 ceptacles in the intelligent creation to perceive 
 and manifeft that life. Thefe two receptacles, 
 in the general view of the human race, are 
 male and female minds, feparate indeed from 
 each other while in their firft and lowefi: ftate 
 of being, but fo formed that in their afcent 
 towards their great original, they may be con- 
 tinually more and more united to each other: 
 which union, as to the fpirit, is fo perfedt and 
 complete, that two minds, heretofore didindt 
 from each other, at length conltitute only one 
 mind, or one angel. Their bodies, it is true, 
 ftill continue diftind from each other ; for the 
 union of mind can never be fully fet forth by 
 any union of hody^ although there is a perpetual 
 effort to accomplilh even this. Our Lord fays, 
 " Have ye not read, that he who made them 
 «« at the beginning, made them 7nale and female F 
 ** And faid. For this caufe fliall a man leave 
 "father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 
 "and they i-xain Jhall he cne flejb. Wherefore 
 " they are no more twain, but one flelh. What 
 " therefore God hath joined together, let not man 
 ^' put ajundcry Matt. xix. 4, 5, 6. Hence it 
 
 appears. 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalem. 343 
 
 appears, that marriage, which confiQs in the 
 union of male and female forms, both in the 
 fpiritual and in the natural world, is agreeable 
 to the original unchangeable intent of the 
 Creator, who being efTential good and truth in 
 moft perfedt union, defireth all the recipient 
 forms thereof to become images and likcnclies 
 of himfelf. 
 
 Were it neceflary, I might here take oc- 
 calion to enlarge upon the fubjecl, and fliew 
 how the two univerfal principles of life, above 
 mentioned, manifeft themfelves in almoll every 
 part of the creation, both animate and inani- 
 mate. In the a^iima/e, wc obferve love and 
 wifdom, good and truth, will and underQand- 
 ing, affedion and thought, works and words ; 
 alfo in the condrudion of the body, a cere- 
 bellum and cerebrum, heart and lungs, pulfc 
 and refpiration ; two eyes, two cars, t\\ o arms, 
 two legs, &c. &c. all of which, although dif- 
 tinguifhed into pairs, and thus expreflive of 
 man's twofold life, yet in point of ufe make 
 only one ad, one life, rcprefentative of that 
 heavenly ftate of fpiritual union between the 
 fexes, which is again rcprcfcntaiive of the 
 ^ivine marriage of good and truth in the Lord, 
 in whom fince his glorification they arc no 
 
 longer 
 
344 ^ Defence of Ike Mew Church, 
 
 longer two, but one. In the imnimate creation 
 
 we may alfo trace limilar reprefentations, as io 
 
 the heat and light proceeding from the fun, 
 
 which are both united in one ray; the two 
 
 polar virtues of magnetifm ; and the two powers 
 
 of eledtricity, called pofitive and negative^ 
 
 which are united in one fubflance, as in ai 
 
 kind of marriage between male and female. 
 
 The fame thing may be feen in the diflindion 
 
 of plants according to what is called the fcxual 
 
 f)n:em, which bears fo great a refemblance to 
 
 the mile and female fex in animals, that the 
 
 mofl: celebrated botaniRs have not fcrupled 
 
 to call them male and female plants. But in 
 
 this they are miliaken, as may be feen in the 
 
 note below.* However, there is a diflindion 
 
 in 
 
 * The Linnean fyflem fuppofes plants, &c. to be male 
 and fen^ale, becaufe of a certain difbin6tion between their 
 parts, called xhcjlamen and pijiil, the union of both which 
 is necelTary to render the feed prolific. But this diflinftion 
 in plants is no more a fufficient reafon for calling them 
 male and female parts of a plant, than a fimilar diflIn6lion, 
 \vhich may be obferved in ail male animals, is for fup- 
 pofing there are male and female parts in one and the 
 fame animal. The charafteriltic peculiar to male animals 
 is the formation of feed in themfelves, which is firfl con- 
 ceived in the ut.derftanding, then formed in the will, and 
 afterwards tranflated to the lower parts of the body, where 
 it is enveloped with a material covering, and thence con- 
 veyed 
 
Signified by the Kcio Jerufalcm, 3.^5 
 
 in the parts of plants, analogous to tlic diRirc^ 
 tion of will and^undcrflanding in man, which 
 under certain circumflances may be confidcrcd 
 like male and female. Thus both the animarc 
 and inanimate creation, each in it's jKculiar 
 
 way, 
 
 vcycd into the womb, and laO: of all brought forth into 
 open day. By tracing this analogy in the vegetable king- 
 dom, we may eafily lee what is mnle, and what female. 
 All plants are male, bccaufo they produce of themfclves 
 fieds-only^ and not new plants. Ihc difiinft parts of the 
 plant, which fomc millake for the male and fcrniile organs 
 of generation, are nothing but analogous refemblanccs of 
 the will and underftanding, wliich arc equally diflinft in 
 eveiy male animal, and like them neccfTdrily unite in the 
 formation of feed. But this animal feed cannot produce 
 new animals, until it is conveyed into the womb of a 
 female, where, after undergoing a flatc of corruption, 
 fimilar to that of death, it riles again in all the (Ircngth 
 and vigour of a new and living animal. In like manner 
 the feeds of plants, which are all male, cannot produce 
 new plants, until they are Town in the womb of the earth, 
 which is the common female, where they equally undergo 
 a fta'e of corruption fimilar to death, and alter that rife 
 up by vegetation into new plants. As therefore ihzjor' 
 Ttiatioii of feed is peculiar to t!ie male, and the fiourijhmcvt 
 and expanfion of it peculiar to the female, it follows, that 
 all the fubjefts of the vegetable kingdom are male, bccaufc 
 they are concerned only in preparing Iced for the produc- 
 tion of plants; and that the earth alone is the common 
 female, becaufe it nourifhes and expands the feed, and 
 thus aftually brings forth new plants. 
 
 Y y 
 
346 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 way, points out and reprefents the union of 
 good and truth, which is the fame thing as 
 celeftial marriage. 
 
 That the fcriptures reprefent heaven as a 
 ftate of marriage, is plain from thofe places 
 where the Lord is fpoken of as a bridegroom 
 or hufband, and the church as his bride or 
 wife; as from the following, *^ The marriage 
 *' of the Lamb is come, and his zvife hath made 
 " herfelf ready. BlelTed are they who are called 
 " unto the marriage -/upper of the Lamb," Apoc. 
 xix. 7, 9. " I John faw the holy city. New 
 Jerufalem, coming down from God out of 
 heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her 
 hufband. Come hither, I will fhew thee the 
 ** hridcy the Lamb's wife^' Apoc. xxi. 2, 9. 
 Again, *' The kingdom of heaven is like unto 
 ** a certain king, who made a marriage for his 
 " fon, and fent forth his fervants to call them 
 " that were bidden to the weddings' Matt. xxii. 
 2, 3. ** Then fhall the kingdom of heaven be 
 " likened unto ten virgins^ who took their 
 " lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroomy 
 '^ of whom five went in to the marriagey' Matt,- 
 XXV. I to I o. 
 
 If 
 
 f( 
 
 <c 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalenu 347 
 
 If heaven itfclf is compared to a marriage, 
 why iliould it fcem an improbable thing, that 
 marriages fliould take place there ? particularly 
 as man continues to live as a man after death, 
 the male being flill male, and the female flill 
 female ? It is indeed fuppofed by many of the 
 learned, that fouls are of no fex; but this is a 
 grofs miflake; for the diflindion of fcx origi- 
 nates in the foul, and it is that which caufes 
 the body to have either the male or female 
 form. The mafculine principle confiQs in this, 
 that love is inmoll, whofe clothing is wifdom; 
 whereas the feminine principle has the w ifdom 
 of the male for it's inmoil, and the love thence 
 derived (being a fecondary love) for it's cloth- 
 ing. Thus the female principle is derived 
 from the male, agreeable to what is faid in Gen. 
 ii. 23, that the woman was taken out of the 
 man. Now as in all love there is a tendency 
 to conjun6l:ion, and as the male and female 
 were fo created that they two may become as 
 it were one man, or one Hefh, there being a 
 conjundlive principle in every part of their con- 
 ftitution, it follows, that in every 11 age ofcx- 
 iftcnce this tendency to union muft be gratified, 
 and confequendy that there are marriages in 
 heaven, where the end of creation is full) ac- 
 compli flied. 
 
 Y y 2 But 
 
348 A Defence of the Neto Church, 
 
 But you objedl, p. 43, '' What is the end 
 ^' of marriage, but the propagation of the 
 ^^ fpecies ? and fmce you allow this to have no 
 " place in the fpiritual world, for what purpofc 
 ** is the difference of fexes, and what can you 
 ?* mean by conjugal delights in that ftate ?" 
 J have already fhev/n, that marriage is the 
 union of two principles, viz. good and truth, 
 which originally were one, as in the Creator, 
 but iince the creation became feparate. Imme- 
 diately on their re-union procreation takes place, 
 becaufe it is the neareft pofiible rcfemblance of 
 creation^ for God being elTential good and 
 truth in perfeti: union, is in confequence thereof 
 in the perpetual ad of creating, that is, of 
 preferving ; prefervation being no other than 
 inftant and perpetual creation. In heaven, 
 although the union of minds is more complete, 
 and the conjugal delights more bleiied, than 
 on earth, yet there is no propagation of the 
 fpecies, lor want of an ultimate material bafis 
 wherein their fpiritual principles may reft, and 
 as it vvere fee corruption prior to the formation 
 of an actual and diilindly organized offspring. 
 But inftead thereof, there is a propagation of 
 goods and truths, the effence of their fpecies, 
 which without doubt terminate in, and are 
 adjoined to, their proper receptive forms in 
 
 the 
 
Signified by ihc Ncrv Jervfalcm. 349 
 
 the natural world. iSefidcs, the conjugal enjoy- 
 ments of angels tend more and more to promote 
 and confirm the union of male and female 
 minds, and thereby to fulfil the divine law, 
 that they twain fliall be one flcfli. Matt. xix. 5, 
 6. Thistherefoie is the grand end of marriage. 
 
 It is faid in Apoc. xii. i, 2, 5, that *' there 
 " appeared a great wonder in heaven, a woman 
 *' clothed with the fun, and the moon under 
 " her feet : and Ih.c being with cbi'/d, cried, 
 *' travailing in birth, and pained to be deliv- 
 " ercd. And J/je brought forth a man-childy who 
 *' was to rule all nations with a rod of iron.*' 
 This being fpoken prophetically, and confc- 
 quently in the language of correfpbndcnce, by 
 the man-child which wa^ brought forth, wc 
 are not to underftand literally a man-child, but 
 that to which a man-child correfponds, viz. the 
 do^lrine of the church ; and by the woman the 
 New Church, which is the New Jcrufalcm. 
 She was {^-iw 10 bring forth a man-child in 
 heaven, becaufe the doctrines of the New 
 Church originate there, and defcend from 
 thence into the natural world, where the child 
 was aclually born when the Do^rinc of the Nezv 
 Jerufaleni, the Do^rine of the Lord, the Do^rine 
 of the Sacred Scripture, and the DoElritie cf Life, 
 
 vcrc 
 
350 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 were publiilied, thefe being particularly figni« 
 fied by the man-child. In the Word frequent 
 mention is made of generations and births, all 
 of which have reference to good and truth ; 
 for nothing elfe is generated and born of the 
 Lord as a hufband, and of the church as a 
 "vvife. The male offspring born in fpiritual 
 marriage, is truth and good in the under- 
 ftanding, and thence in thought ; and the 
 female offspring is truth and good in the will, 
 and thence in affcdion. 
 
 Human fouls dcfcend from the Lord through 
 all the heavens, but receive their interior 
 quality, as well as their exterior forms, from 
 their immediate progenitors : and fuch is the 
 intimate connexion fubfifiing between the 
 angelic heaven and men upon earth, that I 
 have no doubt but the marriages and conjugal 
 enjoyments of angels are among the interior 
 caufes of human prolification, which may be 
 jufrly confidered as a natural effect flowing 
 from the fpiritual world. But as this is a 
 fubjcd of intricate refearch, and not abfolutely 
 neceiiary to be enlarged upon in this Defince 
 of the New Churchy I Ihali content myfelf with 
 the obfervations ah-eady made, referring the 
 reader for further inforK^iaiion to Baron Sue- 
 I denbor?/s 
 
Signified by the New Jerufalcm. 
 
 351 
 
 deiiborg's trcatifc entitled, The Deligbls ofWif- 
 do?n refpecJiug Conjugal Love. 
 
 si* si* ^ «1> tJj, 
 
 T* *T* ^ "^ rt* 
 
 IX. That Love and IVi/dom are Subfiances^ and 
 not mere Properties. 
 
 I am aware. Sir, that hitherto it has been 
 a received opinion among metaphyficians, that 
 love and wifdom are not real Jiihfiances them- 
 felves, but mere -properties of lomething elfc, 
 which they call fubftance. Hence, 1 bch'evc, 
 has arifen all that confufion and perplexity of 
 idea fo obfervable in the moft celebrated 
 writers, when treating of the being and at- 
 tributes of God. While fome reprefent him as 
 an abftracfl being, deditute of all fubftancc or 
 form, which is the fame as a mere nothing, 
 others coniider him as nature in it's firfi: prin- 
 ciples, confequently as fomething^matcrial ex- 
 tending itfelf through, and filling the expanfe 
 of the univerfc. Such or limilar mud necef- 
 farily be the ideas of all thofe, who ground ^ 
 their reafonings upon the fallacious fuppolition, 
 that love and wifdom arc mere properties, and 
 not real fubdances. 
 
 \i 
 
352 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 If Baron S wed enborg has introduced into 
 the world an entire new iyitem of metaphyncs, 
 as well as of theology, he is certainly entitled 
 to a candid hearing; and no perfon ought to 
 decide either upon his philofophy or divinity, 
 until he has well examined what he has written 
 on thefe fubjedis-; for however true it may be, 
 as you obHfrve, p. 44, that " Mr. Swedenborg 
 *^ makes that to be fubftance, which all other 
 " writers call property/' it does not hence 
 follow, that his difiindions are lefs accurate, 
 or his reafonings lefs true and conclulive. On 
 the contrary, I believe, an impartial, unpreju- 
 diced mind may difcern more true philofophy, 
 and more folid argumentation in his metaphy- 
 lical as well as theological difquifitions, than is 
 to be met with in any writer that preceded, or 
 that has hitherto fucceeded him. 
 
 ** God,'' fays he, '^ inafmuch as he is an 
 **'eire," that is, an original, infinite, felf-fub- 
 fifting being, '* is alfo a fubftance; for an eiTc 
 without a fubfiance is a mere imaginary entity; 
 fubflance being a fubfifling entity. And what- 
 foever is a fubftance, is likewife a formj for 
 fubftance too without form is a mere imaginary- 
 entity. Wherefore both fubftance and form 
 may be predicated of God, but with this dif* 
 
 tlnction^ 
 
Signijied by the New Jerufalem. 353 
 
 tlnolion, that he is a fubftance and form fole- 
 exiflent, fclf-exiftent, and primary." Thcfc 
 are Baron Svvcdcnborg's own words in his work 
 entitled True Cbriftian Religion^ n. 20 ; from 
 which it appears, that you have not fairly re- 
 prefented his dodlrinc of the divine cxiftcncc, 
 in afTcrting (as you have done in p. 48, 49, 51, 
 54,) that he makes God to be nofuhflance at all, 
 but a mere property. What he calls a fubftance, 
 namely, love and wifdom, you indeed call a 
 property; but this ought to be no reafon for 
 commixing your diftinctions with his, and then 
 charging him with the abfurdity which appears 
 in the exprefTions, when all the while it is oc- 
 calioned by your own inaccuracy in Hating his 
 fentimcnts. 
 
 Baron Swcdcnborg aflcrts, that God is love 
 itfelf, wifdom irfelf, and life itfelf, on which 
 you take occafion to obferve as follows, p. 44: 
 " That God is a being poiTclIcd of love, and 
 «» wifdom, and life, is intelligible language; 
 •* but that he is love, and wifdom, and life, is 
 " not fo, except in a figurative fenfc/' A lun- 
 damental error fccms to be contained in 
 thefe words, becaufe they imply, that in God 
 is fomething which is not God, jufl as in man 
 there is foiiieihing which is not man. But if 
 
 Z z love. 
 
354 ^ Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 love, wifdom, and life, are not in God as a 
 
 felf-fubfifting, independent fubflancc, then he 
 mull: derive them from fome other being, in 
 whom they are fuch; which would be reducing 
 him to the predicament of a creature, by whom, 
 as a recipient, fuch things are indeed poirefTcd, 
 but in whom neverthelefs they do not eirentially 
 refide as his proper own. God, however, is 
 not a recipient either of love, wifdom, or life, 
 but the primary fource from whom they pro- 
 ceed : and therefore he is exprefsly called love, 
 it/elf i I John iv. 8, i6; wifdom iifelfy or truth 
 itfelfj Luke xi. 49. John xiv. 6 ; and life itfelf 
 John xi. 25. Now as every thing that is in 
 God, is God, he being infinitely and elTentially 
 cne^ it follows, that thefe three, love, wifdom, 
 and life, are not only in God as the effence of 
 • God, but alfo as his very fubftance and perfon. 
 
 That love and wifdom, with life which is 
 their union, are real fubilance, is further evi- 
 dent from the following confideration. What- 
 ever proceeds from any thing, muft be a fub- 
 ftance, and indeed of a nature fimilar to that 
 from which it proceeds. A mere property, 
 feparate from a fubflance, cannot proceed ; for 
 in no refped does fuch an nbitrad: property 
 differ from a non-entity ; and to f:iy that no- 
 things 
 
Signified by the New Jerufakvi. 35*5 
 
 thing, or what is equivalent to nothing, pro- 
 ceeds fiom foniething, and is alfo received b^ 
 fomcthing, what is this but language without 
 Icntimcnt, words without meaning ? Now love 
 and wifdom are acknowledged to proceed from 
 God. But they cannot proceed from him as 
 mere properties, for we have feen that on fuch 
 a fuppofition they would amount to mere no- 
 things. They mud therefore proceed from him 
 as a fubftance, which fubftance muft be a form, 
 and alfo of a nature fimilar to the fountain 
 from whence it proceeds. Hence I conclude, 
 I. That God is the only felf-fubfifting, primary 
 fubflancc and form, from whom all other fub- 
 Hancesand forms are originally and perpetually 
 derived. 2. That the divine love and wifdom 
 in God, and proceeding from God, are alfo a 
 real fubftance and form, giving life and being to 
 all created fubftances and forms both in the fpi- 
 ritual and the natural world. 
 
 Perhaps you may afk, ' If love and wifdom 
 < be 2i fubjiance, then what arc it's properlusV 
 To which I anfwcr. The three following arc 
 the effential properties of divine love, viz. r. 
 To love others out of it/elf, 2. To dcfirc to be 
 one ivi/b tbcm. And, 3. To delirc to make 
 others happy /;-^/// tlfclf. Thcfc arc the pro- 
 
 Z z 2 pcrtics. 
 
356 ^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 perties, which inhere io^ and are inicparable 
 from, the divine love of God. The property 
 of divine wifdom is, to forefee and promote the 
 accomplifliment of thofe ends by ihthejl poffible 
 means, Thefe being, the properties of divine love 
 and wifdom, it is plain, that divine love and 
 wifdom themfelvcs muft be a Jiibftance ; for all 
 property has relation to fubflance, which is a 
 fubjed:, and the divine love and divine wifdon\ 
 in form are the fubjedt of all divine properties. 
 
 You acknowledge, p. 45, that you are inca^ 
 pable of forming any ideas at all of the diftinc- 
 tion between the divine effe^ the divine effence^ 
 and the divine exigence \ and yet Baron Sweden- 
 borg, and his tranflator, whofe note you have 
 quoted, make it very clear and intelligible to 
 others. But it is rather lingular, that a perfon, 
 who profelTes his ignorance of the very terms 
 inade ufe of in the new fyftem of metaphyiics 
 publifned by our Swedifh author, fhould yet 
 take upon hira to decide againil it. Can it be 
 expected, that the public will look upon him as 
 a competent judge, who has openly avowed his 
 incapacity, by declaring in one place, that he 
 cannot form any ideas at all about the matter 5 
 and in another place, that he finds himfelf in- 
 cluded in the number of thofe who do not under- 
 
 Jlani 
 
Signified by the New Jemfalcm. 357 
 
 fland the writings of Baron Swcdenborg ? It 
 reminds me of a certain clerical gentleman, a 
 dodlor of divinity, who, aficr writing pretty 
 freely againft the dodrines of the New Church, 
 candidly confefTed to me, that he did not undcr- 
 fland what Baron Swedenborg meant by the 
 three terms celefaal, fpiritnal, and natural / 
 
 I fhall conclude this article with the follow- 
 ing quotation from Baron Swedcnborg's w ork, 
 entitled, Angelic Wijdoni concerning Divine Love 
 and Divine IVi/dom, n. 40 to 43, and 2S6,- 
 wherein he proves, that love and wifdom are both 
 a fubflance and a form, and that this can be no 
 other than the human form. 
 
 " The common idea of men concerning love 
 and wifdom is as of f»mething volatile and 
 floating in fubtil air or ether ; or as of an ex- 
 halation from fomething of fuch a nature; and 
 fcarcely any one thinks that they are really and 
 aQually a fubllance and a form. They who 
 fee that they are a fubflance and a form, never- 
 thelefs perceive love and wifdom out of their 
 fubjcds as ilTuing from it ; and what they per- 
 ceive out of their fubject as ilfuing from it, aU 
 fhough it be perceived as fomething volatile and 
 floating, they alfo call a fublUncc and form, 
 
 not 
 
358 A Defence of ike Neic Church, 
 
 not knowing that love and wifdorn are the 
 fubjedt itfelf, and that that which is perceived 
 without it as fomething volatile and floating, 
 is only an appearance of the flate of the fubjed: 
 within itfelf. The caufes why this hath not 
 heretofore been feen are feveral ; one is, that 
 appearances are the firfl: things from which the 
 human mind forms it's underftanding, and that 
 it cannot fhake them off but by an invefliga- 
 tion of the caufe, and if the caufe lies very 
 deep, it cannot inveftigate it, without keeping 
 the underftanding fome time in fpiritual light, 
 in which it cannot keep it long by reafon of the 
 natural light which continually draws it down. 
 Neverthelefs the truth is, that love and wifdom 
 are a real and adual fubflance and form, which 
 conflitutes the fubjed itfelf. 
 
 " But inafmuch as this is contrary to appear- 
 ance, it may feem not to merit belief, unlefs 
 it be demonftratcd ; and it cannot be demon- 
 llrated, except by fuch things as a man can 
 perceive by his bodily fenfes ; wherefore by 
 them it fhall be demonftrated. Man hath five 
 fenfes, which are called feeling, tafte, fmell, 
 hearing, and fight. The fubjedl of feeling is 
 the fkin with which a man is encompafled, the 
 fubflance and form itfelf of the fkin caufe it to 
 
 feel 
 
Signified by the Nexo Jcrufalcm. 359 
 
 feel what is applied ; the fcnfe of feehnr^ is not 
 in the things which are applied, but it is in 
 the fubftance and form of the fkin, which is the 
 fubjecl ; the fcnfe is only an affedion thereof 
 from things applied. It is the fame with the 
 tafte; this fcnfe is only an affedlion of the fub- 
 llance and form of the tongue ; the tongue is 
 the fubjed. It is the fame vv ith the fmcll ; that 
 odours affed the nofe, and are in the nofe, and 
 that there is an affedion thereof from odorife- 
 rous fubftances touching it, is well knov, n. It 
 is the fame with hearing; it appears as if the 
 hearing was in the place w here the found begins, 
 but the hearing is in the car, and is an atfeclion 
 of it's fubftance and form; that the hearing is 
 at a diftance from the car, is an appearance. It 
 is the fame w ith the fight ; it appears, when a 
 man fees objedls at a diftance, as if the fight was 
 there, but neverthelefs it is in the eye which is 
 the fubjecl, and is in like manner an affcclion 
 thereof: the diftance is only from the judgment 
 concluding concerning fpace from intermediate 
 ohjeds, or from the diminution and confequent 
 obfcuration of the object, w hofe image is pro- 
 duced within the eye according to the angle of 
 incidence. Hence it appears, that the fight docs 
 not go from the eye to the objtoi, bur that the 
 image of the objed enters the eye, and afRc:,. 
 
 it'.; 
 
360 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 it's fubftance and form : for it is the fame with 
 the fight as it is with the hearing, the hearing 
 does not go out of the ear to catch the found, 
 but the found enters thie car and affecls it. 
 Hence it may appear, that the affedion of a 
 fubftance and form, which conftitutes the fenfe, 
 is not a thing feparate from the fubjedl, but 
 only caufeth a change in it, the fubjedl remain- 
 ing the fubje6l then as before, and after. Hence 
 it follows, that the fight, hearing, fmell, taflc, 
 and feeling, are not any thing volatile flowing 
 from thofe organs, but that they are the organs 
 themfelves confidered in their fubftance and 
 form, and that whilft they are affeded the fenfe 
 is produced. 
 
 " It is the fame with love and wifdom, with 
 this only diff'erence, that the fubftanccs and 
 forms, which are love and wifdom, do not exift: 
 before the eyes as the organs of the external 
 fenfes ; but ftill no one can deny, that thofe 
 things of love and wifdom, which are called 
 thoughts, perceptions, and affections, are fub- 
 ftances and forms, and that they are not volatile 
 entities flowing from nothing, or abftradled from 
 that real and acflual fubftance and form, which 
 is the fubjedl : ' for there are in the brain innu- 
 merable fubftances and forms, in which every 
 
 interior 
 
Signtji^ i by the New Jnufalm. 36 1 
 
 interior fenfe, which hath iclation to the un- 
 dcrflanding and the will, refidcs. That all the 
 affecftions, perceptions, and thoughts there, are 
 not exhalations from them, but that tiicv arc 
 adlually and really the fubjeds, which do not 
 emit any thing from thcmfclvcs, but only un- 
 dergo changes according to the influences which 
 affecl them, may evidently appear from what 
 hath been fa id above concerning the fenfes. 
 
 " Hence it may be fcen that the divine love 
 and the divine wifdom in themfelves are a fub- 
 fiance and form, for they are ellencc and cxifl- 
 ence itfelf; and if they were not fuch an e^cncc 
 and exiftence as they are a fubfrancc and form, 
 they would only be an imaginary entity, which 
 in itfelf is not any thing." 
 
 Such is the reafoning of Baron Swedenborg in 
 favour of the exigence of love and wifdom, noc 
 as mere properties of fomcthing elfc, but as 
 being themfelves an adlual fubdancc and form. 
 That this form is truly and properly human, lie 
 proves in n. 286 of the fame work, in the fol- 
 lowing manner. " No intelligent pcrfon can 
 deny, thai in God there is love and wifdom, that 
 there is mercy and clemency, that there is good 
 and truth iticif, becaufc they arc from him; 
 
 ^ A an^ 
 
362 A Defeyice of the New Churchy 
 
 and as he cannot deny that thefe things arc in 
 God, neither can he deny that God is a Man; 
 for no one of them can exifl: abftracfledly from 
 man, for man is their fubjetH:, and to feparate 
 them from their fubjed, is to fay that they do 
 not exift. Think of wifdom, and place it with- 
 out man, and then let me afk. Is it any thing? 
 Can you conceive of it as of fome etherial prin- 
 ciple, or as of fome principle of fire ? You can- 
 not, unlefs poflibly as exiting in thofe princi- 
 ples, and if in them, it muft then be wifdom 
 in a form, fuch as man hath ; yea, it muft be 
 in every form of man's, not one muft be want- 
 ing in order that wifdom may be in it. In a 
 word, the form of v\ ifdom is man ; and foraf- 
 much as man is the form of wifdom, he is alfo 
 the form of love, mercy, clemency, good, and 
 truth, becaufe thefe adt as one with wifdom.** 
 
 *4^ >S» ^> ftl# ^C* 
 
 *^ •'J* ^g* v^ w^ 
 
 X. Of the Divine Influx. 
 
 It is a leading docflrine of the New Church, 
 that man is not life in himfclf, but merely a 
 recipient of life, which continually flows from 
 the fountain of all life, viz. God, who alone is 
 life in himfelf ; confequently that all love and 
 
 w^ifdom. 
 
Signified by the New Jeriifalem, 363 
 
 vvifdom, all good and truth, come from the fame 
 fource. Agreeably hereto \vc alfo maintain, in 
 the words oi Baion Swcdtnborg, that the fpiri- 
 tual world did exift, and docs fublift, proxi- 
 mately from it's own fpiritual fun, and the na- 
 tural world in like manner from it's own natu- 
 ral or niaterial fun. But to the firft of thcfc 
 pofit'ons, you objecft, p. 45, that it is unphilo- 
 fophical, becaufe all our primary ideas arc re- 
 ceived Irom external objects through the me- 
 dium oi tlie bodily fcnfcs ; and becaufe Dr. 
 Hartley has endeavoured to prove, that what 
 Mr. Locke calls ideas of rcHecition, are nothing 
 more than combinations of funple ideas, origi- 
 nally derived from impreflions made by fcnfible 
 objeds. That this mode of reafoning is molt 
 agreeable to appearancesy 1 readily grant ; but it 
 does not thence follow, that it is moll true or 
 genuine. The very circumftance of it's being an 
 appearance accommodated to the bodily JenJeSy is 
 with me fufficient 10 excite a fufpicion of it's 
 fallacy; for I have ever found, that the appear- 
 ances of nature, as firft apprehended by the 
 fenfes, arc for the moll part, if not altogether, 
 diameincdlly oppojile lo the truth of things. 
 
 There are two kinds of order, the oriC of 
 which is real, the other apparent; or in othcf 
 
 3 A 2 words, 
 
364 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 words, there is one order of the fpi ritual world, 
 which has refpedl to the eifence of things, and 
 another order of the natural world, which has 
 refpeCL to the appearance of things as ex i fling in 
 time and fpace. This may be elucidated by the 
 following comparifon. In the building of a 
 temple or houfe, the firfi thing in the natural 
 world, and confequently the firfl: thing in time, 
 is the foundation, and the lafl a place to wor- 
 fhip in, or to dwell in. But in the fpiritual 
 world, or what amounts to the fame thing, in 
 the tnhid of the archiie^l^ the order is entirely re- 
 verfed, for the firfl and uppermofl thing with 
 him, which is the end in view, is a place to 
 perform worfliip in, or to dwell in, and the laft 
 is the foundation. It is the fame with the dif-- 
 pofition of a garden, or the culture of land ; 
 the firft thing, in point of time and bodily la^ 
 hour, is to level the ground, and to prepare the 
 foil for the reception of trees and feeds to be 
 planted and fown. But the firfl thing, in re- 
 fpe6l to the mind, or end in view, is a plentiful, 
 harveft, and the enjoyment of the fruits to be 
 produced. Hence I infer, that as in the above- 
 mentioned indances the firll things in point of 
 time, are in reality the lafl in true order, being 
 produced by thofc which are firfl in end, al- 
 though lail as to time; fo all our primary 
 
 ideas 
 
Signified by the Nexo Jcrufalan, 365 
 
 ideas, occafioned by iinprcfllons from external 
 objcfls, are in like manner produced from fpi- 
 ritual caufes, which, though manifeflcd laft as 
 to appearance, are yet lirll as to realiry. Thus 
 the order of divine inHux, fo beautifully ex- 
 plained and illuftrated by Baron Swedcnborg, is 
 proved to be both rational and philofophical ; 
 while the contrary fyllein of fuppofing love, 
 wifdom, and life, to be derived from fcnfelefs 
 matter, can boall noihing but the merit oi JaU 
 luciGUs appearance. 
 
 In conformity with the above-mentioned 
 appearances, and becaufe man is fo formed, that 
 his intelledluai or perceptive faculty firfl opens 
 upon effeds, and thence, by a retrograde mo- 
 tion as it v.ere, afcends to caufes, the holy 
 fcriptures thcmfelves, being accommodated to 
 man's primary conceptions of truth, fpeak a 
 limilar language in their external fenfe; while 
 internally they contain a meaning widely dif- 
 ferent, and treat of things, not as they appear 
 in their outward forn^is, but as they arc in their 
 real effenccs. Thus in Gen. i. h, it appears 
 from the literal fenfe as if ihc fun was created 
 on the fourth day, after the earth; when yet 
 we know, or at leall ought to know, that the 
 fun, as being the fountain of natural heat and 
 
 light. 
 
^66 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 light, and thus as it were the father and fup- 
 porter of it's univerfe, mud have been the 
 primary work of creation in this natural world, 
 and in the hands of divine omnipotence the in- 
 flrument by which every material fubftance was 
 originally produced.' 
 
 It is an edabliflied rule in philofophy, that 
 Jubjifience is a continuation of exiftence ; and 
 that whatever is the prefent caufe of the one, 
 muft have been the original caufe of the other. 
 Whence it follows, that the earth, inafmuch as 
 it is dependent on the fun for fubfirtence, by 
 means of it*s heat andiight, muft have derived 
 it's exiflence alfo from the fame fountain. That 
 the earth is really dependent on the fun for fub- 
 liftence, is fufficiently plain from it's general 
 appearance in the time of winter, when not 
 only the whole of the vegetable kingdom fufFers 
 a vifible decay bordering on defl:ru6lion, but 
 many fubjedts likcwife of the animal kingdom 
 fmk into a flate of torpor and death-like lleep. 
 If fuch effedts are occafioned only by a fmall 
 'withdrawing of the fun's heat, what wouki not 
 be the cafe, were the communication to be 
 totally cut off! Could any thing fliort of utter 
 deilrudion, if not annihilation, be the certain 
 confequcnce? Yet, notwjthltanding thcfe con- 
 fide rat ions, 
 
Signified by the New Jcrufakm. 367 
 
 fiderations, you moft unaccountably aflcrt, p. 
 45, that ** the natural world, or the earth, docs 
 " not, in any proper fenfe, exifl or fublill from 
 *'the material fun;" but that "they are two 
 ^^independent bodies!'' that is to fay, bodies 
 which have no neceiTary connection with each 
 other. From what fyftem of philofophy you 
 derive thefe fentiments, I know not. They are 
 certainly foreign to that which is now generally 
 adopted ; and being equally foreign even to the 
 appearances of truth, I believe you will find 
 it difficult to fupport them by any natural ex- 
 periments. In moft, if not all your other 
 doctrines, you have fomcching plaufiblc to 
 appeal to, like the evidence of the fenfes ; but 
 in the prefent cafe I think it mufl be confcffed, 
 that even appearances are againjl you. 
 
 The doflrine of divine influx, as dcfccndiag 
 from God through heaven, firfl into the foul 
 of man, and then into his body, is by Baron 
 Swedenborg amply and fatisfadtorily explained. 
 Indeed one great end oi his writings is to fct 
 this point in it's true light, and thereby 10 con- 
 vince mankind, that, notwithllanding all appear- 
 ances to the contrary, yet there is only one 
 fource of love, wifdom, and life, for allui the 
 univerfe; but that they arc received dilfcrently 
 
 by 
 
368 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 by each, according to the difference of their 
 l-efpeQive forms. As there is no neccffity for 
 Enlarging on the fubjecl in this place, I Hull 
 'conclude it with the following remark. 
 
 It appears as if man derived all his ideas from 
 fexternal objeds, as from a cai{/e ; but the truth 
 IS he derives no idea whatever from them, as 
 jfrom a cau/e; which is plain from this con- 
 iideration, that every caufe is, in point of dig- 
 nity, fuperior to it's effedl; whereas external 
 objedls are inferior in dignity to the ideas 
 which are improperly called their effed. But 
 it is equally true, that without external objeds 
 tve can have no ideas at all ; whence it follows, 
 that although external objecTs are not properly 
 the <au/e of ideas, yet they are the neceffary 
 occafim of them, ferving as mediating objeds 
 not only to embody ideas, but alfo to fupply 
 the mind with an inert power, which is as ne- 
 celTary to the rational faculty in it's contem- 
 plation and fenfible perception of fpi ritual 
 truth, as mercury is to a looklng-glafs in the 
 refledion of the rays of natural light. For as 
 in the latter cafe, without an o'paque fubflance 
 behind the glajs^ to arreft and as it were embody 
 the light, no natural image can be produced ; fo 
 in the former cafe, without an iriert principle 
 
 under 
 
Signified by the New Jtrufalem. 369 
 
 tmder the w/W, viz. in the bodily fenfcs, in like 
 manner to arrefl and embody truth in it's 
 defcent from heaven, no fpiritual idea could be 
 formed or fenfibly perceived by man. To fup- 
 pofe, that wifdom, intelligence, or fcience, ac- 
 tually flow from dead material objeds, becaufc 
 our ideas appear to be excited thereby, is no 
 lefs abfurd than to imagine, that the bright 
 image ieen in a mirror is actually derived from 
 the dark opake fubilance of the mercury, be- 
 caufc the rays of light alfo appear to fpring 
 forth from it. The image really confifts of 
 natural light reflected from the mirror, accor- 
 ding to the form of the objcdt ; and fo alfo 
 ideas, thoughts, and perceptions, adlually con- 
 fifl: of fpiritual light, which is truth, m like 
 manner reflected from external objeds, accor- 
 ding to the form of the human mind. 
 
 * :J: * * * 
 
 XI. Of the Bijco'jeiy of the Georgium Sidus* 
 
 You object to the infpi ration of Baron Swe- 
 denborg, that, though he vilitcd not only the 
 moon, and the other planets of our fy Item, but 
 alfo various planets belonging to other funs, he 
 fays nothing of that which ha* lately been dif- 
 
 o B covered 
 
370 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 covered by Dr. Herfchcl. In anfwer to which, 
 I have to obferve, that although it is true he 
 takes no notice of a feventh primary planet in 
 our fvllem, in his Treatife on the Earlhs in the 
 JJniverfe^ and their Inhabitants, yet in another 
 book entitled, De Cidtu et Amove Dei^ n. ir, 
 ■where he treats of the origin of the different 
 planets, he exprefbly fpeaks of feven primary 
 ones in the following terms. " Seven * foetufes 
 were excluded from the fun atone birth, namely, 
 as many in number as there are huge bodies 
 revolving in the grand circle of the world; 
 every one of which being poifed in it's fphere, 
 
 in 
 
 * The author's own words are as follow : Septem erant 
 foetus uno nixu editi, quot fcilicet corpora in maximo 
 mundi circo errantia ; horum unumquodvis in fua fphaera 
 iibratum, fecundum ralionem molis cum ponderc, ocius 
 aut fegnius, a nafali centro receffit. Ila feparati fratres, 
 Guifque velocitate accept a patenti fpatio inlurgebat, &. 
 fimul ac in gyros, eiiam per gradus a gyris in peripheriaS; 
 per setherem explanatas, excurfum faciebat. Quidam 
 ctiam orbiculoSj plurcs vel pauciores, tanquam famulos 
 Sc fatcllites, intra gyralas circum fe fphasras recepfos, 
 fecum a parentis aula abduxerunt : noftra vero tellus non 
 nift quam unam, tanquatti vernam, quae Luna dicitur^ 
 ut ilia luminofam Solis effigiem in fe ut in fpeculo excep- 
 tam, no6lis cumprimis tempore, in telluris obje6t3s, fuas 
 her^j faciem, reflefteret: ita quocunqud abircnt, & ut- 
 cunque fe vcrterent, fab intuitu, & in praefentia fui pa- 
 rentis, nihilominus agebant. 
 
Sign ijicd by the New Jernfalan. o 7 1 
 
 m a ratio according to it's bulk and weight, 
 revolved quicker or flower, receding from it's 
 native center. The kindred globes thus fcpa- 
 rated, made excursions into the open fpace, 
 each wkii ihevtlocity proper to it's contents, 
 and at the fame tin)e by fpiral evolutions, ex- 
 tending by dcgrteo, made large excurfions into 
 the etnerial regions. Some diew with them 
 from their fortering parent (mailer globes, more 
 or lefs in number, which accompanied them as 
 humble attendants, being admitted to revolve 
 within their orbits. Our earth had only one as 
 an attendant handmaid, called the moon, which 
 receiving the luminous image of the fun on her 
 furface, like a mirror, might rcHeCl it on the 
 face of the earth, her miflrefs, more cfpccially 
 in the night time. Thus wherever they were 
 carried, and which way focvcr they were turned, 
 they were notwithflanding under the intuition 
 and diredion of their common parent." 
 
 . In what manner Baron Swedcnborg obtained 
 his information, I do not pretend to fav; but 
 from the above paflage (as I have clfe where * 
 obfervcd in a nocc on the fame,) it is plain, 
 that he was aj">pnzcd ot the actual cxillcncc oi 
 /even primary planets in our folar fylleni, 
 
 3 B 2 though 
 
 * Magazine of KnowLd^e^ &c, voL i. p. 4-' 6. 
 
372 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 though all the other philofophers of his day 
 were acquainted with no more than fix^ viz. 
 Mercury, Venus, the Earth, Mars, Jupiter, 
 and Saturn. The moon is not a primary planet, 
 but a fecondary one, and is by the author ex- 
 prefsly confidered as fuch; fo that it is im- 
 poffible he could have meant to include the 
 moon among the number of the ^Q.\tn ; for he 
 fays, that fame of ihe /even had fatellites revol- 
 ving round them in fmall orbits, and then in- 
 ftances the moon as a fecondary planet appoin- 
 ted to attend this earth. Baron Swedenborg'S 
 treatife on the origin of the earth was publiflied 
 in Latin in the year 1745; and it was not till 
 the year 1781 that Dr. Herfchel difcovcred the 
 feventh primary planet, called Gecrgium Sidus, 
 
 Whatever therefore may have been Baroq 
 Swedenborg'S reafons for not giving a par- 
 ticular account of the Georgium Sidus, or it's 
 inhabitants, in his treatife on the Earths in the 
 Univerfey it is plain, that the omlffion was not 
 becaufe he was unacquainted with a feventh 
 primary planet in our fyftem. But even fup- 
 pofing he had known nothing about it, fuch a 
 circumiiance would not at all affe(fl the credit 
 of his teftimony in other matters ; for I never 
 [iriderftood, that it is abfolutely cffential, to fornj 
 
 the 
 
Signified by the Nezu Jerufalem. 373 
 
 the charadler of an infpired man, that he be 
 acquainted with every thing that is to be known: 
 it is fufficicnt, I apprehend, if in all his afTcr- 
 tions about w hat he docs know, he deliver him- 
 felf in a rational, confirtent manner, and prove 
 his doctrines by the written Word of God. 
 
 ^ '!» H* 'I' 5fl 
 
 XII. Of lime and Space in the Spiritual IVorhL 
 
 Baron Svvedenborg truly obfcrvcs, that it is 
 one of the moft diflkult things in the world for 
 men, while living in the body, to withdraw 
 their thoughts from time and fpacc, and think 
 of fpiritual things with fpiritual ideas, that is, 
 with ideas that have no relation to time or 
 fpace, but to jlate. Nay, fo difficult does it 
 appear to you, Sir, that in p. 49, you cxprefsly 
 declare, that you can eaficr admit the non-cx- 
 iftence of God himfclf, than the non-exiflcncc 
 of fpace or duration. Your words are, " Though 
 ** we can^ in imagination, fuppofe the Divine 
 '* Being himfelf not to have exillcd, yet it is 
 " i7npq[Jihle for us to exclude the ideas of fpacc 
 " or duration." From this I infer, that you con- 
 ceive time and fpacc, w hich in thcmfclvcs arc 
 unfubllantial, inanimate, and dcflitutc of intel- 
 ligence. 
 
374 -^ Defence of the New Church, 
 
 ligence, to be more necelTary and independent 
 in their exiftence, than him whom we call 
 God J confequently, that they ought rather to 
 be confidered as the Firft Caufe of all things, 
 than any intelligent Being, whofe exigence may 
 in idea be difpenfed with. Shocking as this 
 may appear, I do not know that it is charging 
 your principles with too much ; for in one place 
 you give us to undcrftand, that God is in the 
 ihape of infinite fpace, and in another you airert, 
 that the moft eilential and necellary of all 
 beings is fpace and duration ; which is no lefs 
 than a virtual acknowledgment, that fpace itfelf, 
 or duration itfelf, is God : for that which is 
 moji ejjential and neceffary\ mufi: be primary^ and 
 that which is primary muR be the caufe of all 
 beings, and fuch a caufe is God. So true is 
 the obfervation of Baron Swedenborg, that 
 they who exclude from their minds all ideas of 
 the Divine Human Form of God, muft una- 
 voidably fall into naturalifm or athcifm. 
 
 You acknowledge, p. 6i, that God is the 
 maker and conflant preferver oi all things. Now 
 fpace and duration are either Jomelhing or 
 nothing. If they are Jomelhing^ then by your 
 own confeflion they muR: have been created^ 
 and are ftill preferied by God. But if they 
 
 arc 
 
Signified by the New jeriifaUm. 37^ 
 
 are nothing, I leave you to extricate yourfclf, 
 as well as you arc able, out of the dilemma 
 into which you have fallen, by aflcninrr that 
 the cxiflence of God is Icis ncccirary, than 
 the adual being of that which after all has no 
 real exigence 1 This latter is an abfurdity, 
 which 1 think you will not attempt to delVnd ; 
 and therefore you mufl: ftand to the firll propo- 
 fition, viz. that time and fpace were both intro- 
 duced by God into the v, orld at the creation ; 
 in which cafe you nuiQ alfo of nccelliiy ac- 
 knowledge, that God himfelf is alx)ve time and 
 fpace, and confequently that in his own proper 
 exigence he bears no rcLition to cither of them. 
 But the truth of this ihall be made more evident 
 ML 
 
 Becaufe God is omniprcfcnt, you think he 
 muft neceflarily bear fome relation to fpace, 
 by which you mean, that he muft be extended 
 through all fpace. But this idea of God is 
 both irrational and unphilofophical; for if he 
 be a fubjedt oi exteujion, he muft be a fubjcd of 
 divi/Jon alfo; in which cafe the idea of his 
 indivifible unity would perifli, and being hin:(df, 
 like any finite fubflance, made tip of parts^ he 
 could never be confidcrcd as a God of infinite 
 perfcdions. The abfurdities nccclfarily at- 
 tendant 
 
376 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 tendant upon the fuppoiition of God being 
 extended through all fpace, according to the 
 rules and laws of fpace, are fo many and great, 
 that I apprehend no intelligent perfon needs to 
 have them recounted. I will, however, juit 
 mention one as a fpecimen of the reft. Were 
 God to be infinitely extended, or in other 
 words, to fill what is called infinite fpace, 
 then on every divifion of the whole fphere into 
 two hemifpheres, by the horizon, it might be 
 faid, that the one half of God is in the one 
 hernifphere, and the other half in the other : 
 confequently he would not be completely and 
 wholly prefent in either of them diftindly. 
 Thus by fuppofing a prefence of divilible lo- 
 cality, the trueft and nobleft idea of the divine 
 omniprcfence is loft, which conftfts in being 
 fullyy wholly^ completely^ and indivifibly prefent 
 in all fpaces without fpacc, and in all times 
 without time. Any other kind of omniprefence 
 is unworthy of God, and deferves not to be 
 called divine. 
 
 But if the notion you entertain about the 
 omniprefence of the Divine Being, as having 
 relation to fpace ^ is found to be irrational, low, 
 andunjuft; no lefs monftrous and abfurd muft 
 muft be that idea, which fuppofes an omni- 
 I prefence 
 
Signifcd ly the New Jcru/iilcvi. 377 
 
 prefence bearing relation to time. By bringing 
 down the Infinite into fpace, and confining ins 
 being to the properties thereof, as if his pcrfon 
 and habitation were neccffarily fubjei-'t to the 
 laws of natural extenfion, like thofe of his finite 
 creatures on earth, it is cafy to fee what is the 
 form you give him in your own mind. But when 
 yoQ affert, that he mull have relation to time, as 
 bcino- prefent in all duration as well as in all 
 fpace, it is indeed hard to conceive what you 
 can make of fuch omniprefcnce. According 
 to the principles you lay down, viz. that the 
 exiftence of God mud have relation to time, it 
 ^vill follow, that as neither the pajl nor the 
 future has at the prefent moment any adtual 
 exiftence, fo neither has the omniprefcnce of 
 God any adual relation to them ; confequently 
 that God is not omniprefcnt in refpcd to all 
 times, but only in rcfpccl to that one time, 
 which is now prefent. You cannot furely fay. 
 that the pafl time has any prefent exigence ; Ihll 
 lefs can you fay, that the ////.7r<f has. It then 
 they have no exiftence at the prefent moment, 
 how can it be faid, that the omniprefcnce of 
 God, which \s fouietbntg, can have relation Co 
 that which is nothing ? According to your own 
 reaibning, it can only have relation to the fleet- 
 ing noiv; for there is no other point of du- 
 
 3 C ration, 
 
378 A jbefence of the New Church, 
 
 ration, on which you can lay your hand, and 
 fay, // exifis. Thus by limiting the Divine 
 Being to the revolutions of time, you in the 
 fame breath ^tny his eternity^ which is totally 
 independent of all times, it not being even 
 made up of them, and make his exigence in no 
 refpedl to differ from that of a temporary crea- 
 ture, with whom the paft and the future arc 
 never prefent, except by recolledlion or antici- 
 pation. 
 
 From what has been faid, it is plain to be feen,. 
 that no true idea of the divine omniprefence 
 can be formed, unlefs we banifh from the mind 
 both time and fpace. The whole immenlity of 
 fpace muft dwindle into a point, and all fuccef- 
 lions of tim.e into a fingle moment, before we can 
 rationally and fatisfadorily perceive the omni- 
 prefence of God in a human form, or in any 
 tolerable meafure comprehend the mode of his 
 eternal exiftence; for with him ail fpace is but a 
 point i and all eternity a prefent now. Nay, even 
 with m.an, w^ho is but a finite being, there is a 
 certain power inherent in his affedlions, capable 
 of fo contradiing fpace, and ihortening time, that 
 they fhall be to him as nothing. I can as readily 
 think of the moft dillant ftar, as of the neareft 
 objed: : it takes no more time to travel, in my 
 
 thought^ 
 
Signified by the Nezv jferuJaUm, 379 
 
 thoughts, to the one, than to the other. Hence 
 it appears, that whatever a pcrfon intcnfely 
 thinks of, is as it were prefcnt w ith him, whe- 
 ther it's diftance in the natural w orld be great or 
 fmall. So alfo in rcfpc(ft to time; in all pleafing 
 and joyous Hates of mind, th- time feems fhort; 
 but in contrary ftates long : evincing, that nei- 
 ther time nor fpace bears any ftridt relation to 
 will and underflanding, affccflion and thought, 
 in man; and if fo, ftill lefs can they be predica- 
 ted of God, whofe infinite perfections admit of 
 no admcafurcmcnt. 
 
 That neither angels nor fpiritshave any thing 
 to do with fpace, may eafily be gathered from 
 this circumftancc, that even the human mind, 
 which IS an embodied fpirit, is not a proper fub- 
 jcdl of it. When we fay, fuch a pcrfon has a 
 great foul, we do not mean that his foul occupies 
 a great fpace, for this kind of extenfion is only 
 applicable to body ; but we mean, that he is pol- 
 fclled of certain qualities, which are as far fupe- 
 rior toothers, in point of real dignity or excel- 
 lence, as fome material objcdls exceed others in 
 magnitude or bulk. The foul of a fat, luHy man. 
 although it may Hllabody uhich occupies much 
 more fpace than that of another \sho is Icfs, yet 
 is not on that account a u hir rhr <:rcarcr. Nci- 
 
380 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 ther in cafes of amputation of limbs, when the 
 body evidently fuffers in it's dimenfions, is the 
 foul on that account a whit the lefs, although the 
 fpace it occupies is confiderably diminifhed: 
 which is a plain proof, that extenfion in relation 
 to fpace is not predicable of the foul, but impletion 
 only. How abfurd would it be to fuppofe, that 
 with every alteration in the bulk of the body^ 
 occafioned by diforders or otherwife, a "limilar 
 change takes place in the dimenfions of the foul ! 
 And yet this muft be the cafe, if fpirits and an- 
 gels bear any fuch relation to fpace as bodies do: 
 and with equal propriety you may talk of mea- 
 furing the will and* underilanding by the car- 
 penter's rule or bucket. 
 
 But in p. 48, you objedl, that "according to 
 " Mr. Swedenborg angels are real beings, in the 
 ** form of men, and have all of them been men, 
 ^' who when they die throw oif the material bo- 
 " dy, and appear in what he calls their fubllan- 
 "'* tial or celeflial body. They mufl:, therefore, 
 *' as it fhould feem, occupy a portion of real 
 *'' fpace as they did before, and confequenrly 
 ^' cannot refide except in real place. But what 
 " fpace, or place, is there in the alfeftions, 
 *' which are only properties of the mind ? What 
 '' room is there for a good angel in the affecftioii 
 
 •* of 
 
Signified by the Nezo Jervfalan, 381 
 
 " of love, or for a bad one in that of anger?" 
 Rather fay, * What room is there for a bad 
 
 * angel in the atfedion of love, or for a good 
 
 * one in that of an^^cr ?* 
 
 We have already fecn, that affeclions are not 
 mere properties, but that they are real fpiritual 
 fubliances. Therefore all your objcdlions againlV 
 the exigence oi fpace in the aflcdtions, as in 
 mere properties of the mind, fall to the ground, 
 having no application to the do61rincs we main- 
 tain. Baron Swedcnborg aflerts, that angels 
 and fpirits dwell in the affedions of men, and 
 yet they are not without place. But this is to 
 be undcrftood in the follow ing manner. I'hey 
 are connected with fpace in no other way than 
 through the medium of man, who is adually in 
 it. They refide in man's affcdions, thtfe affec- 
 tions refide in his body, and this body is ac- 
 tually in fpace. Thus angels and fpirits may be 
 faid to refide in fpace, or place, not immediately 
 or direc/ly, but mediately or tjidireclly. And lice 
 vcrfay man himfelf, even while living in the 
 body, is in like manner indirectly relident either 
 in heaven or in hell ; and after death, aHiially 
 or immediately in the one or the other. Angels, 
 therefore, do not aclually occupy fpace in their 
 pwn proper perfons, although there is the fame 
 
 appcar^icc 
 
382 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 appearance of fpace with them in the fpiritual 
 World, as there is with men in the natural world; 
 but they occupy human aifecflions, which affec- 
 tions occupy human bodies, and thefe bodies 
 are in adlual fpace. Such is the connexion be- 
 tween the inhabitants of the fpiritual and thofc 
 of the natural world, neither of whom can fub- 
 lift independently of the oiher. 
 
 In anfvver to yeur qucftion, p. 48, whether 
 there muil not be fome beings as neceffary to 
 the affections of angels, as angels arc to thofe 
 of men, it is to be obfcrved, that angels differ 
 from each other, according to the heavens they 
 inhabit, as much as fpirits differ from men. 
 The angels of the third or highefl: heaven are 
 invifible to thofe of the fecond or middle hea- 
 ven; thefe again are invifible to the angels of 
 jthe firft or loweft heaven ; and thefe latter in 
 their turn are invifible to common fpirits, Avhofe 
 temporary relidence is in the middle world be- 
 tween heaven and hell. In each of thefe cafes 
 fhe fuperior dwells in the affecliions of the infe,. 
 ^ior, as fpirits d\^ ell in the affedions of mxn ; 
 and it is in this way, that the links of creation 
 ?ire joined together. But there cannot be con- 
 tinued gradations of created beings quite up to 
 the Creator himfclf, lince between the highefl 
 
Signified by the New Jimfalevi. 383 
 
 finite creature and the infinite Creator, there 
 always mu ft be an infinite dillance ; and thcic 
 gradations may as well terminate, where they 
 a^^ually do, viz. with the angels of the highefl 
 heaven, as any where elfe. Yet even in this cafe, 
 the divine principle is accommodated to angelic 
 affedions by various dcfcending gradations 
 within itfelf, prior to it's actual reception by 
 the higheft angels ; for the fphcre of divinity 
 above the third heaven is fo ardent and intenfc, 
 that no creature could fubfift a moment in it. 
 Whence it follows, that although there arc no 
 fuperior beings refidcnt in the alfeclions of the 
 highell angels, as they are in thofc of men, yet, 
 what is tantamount to the fame, there is an 
 accommodated influx of life within them, by 
 virtue of which the Divine Being himfelf rcfidcs 
 in them, as in his temple, and by their means 
 in the good affedions of mankind who are hi> 
 foctflool. And this is a fullicicnt anfwcr to 
 your next queftion, viz. ** What was there to 
 " refide in the atfedions of the lirft men, v.ho 
 " on their deaths only became the firfl angels?*" 
 
 ♦ * ♦ 
 
 «* The fpiritual world of Mr. Swedcnborg," 
 
 you fav, p. 54, " bears fomc refcmblancc to 
 
 *< the ideal world of Plato. Both, however^ 
 
 ♦• are equally the work of imagination ; and it 
 
384 A Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 " is remarkable, that, as in dreams, Mr. Swe- 
 '* denborg had no real new ideas communicated 
 " to him in the different worlds that he viHtcd, 
 *' but only fuch combinations of old ideas as 
 *' commonly occur in dreams. Wherever he 
 " went, he found beings in the form of men, 
 " and the fame animals that we have here, hills 
 " and vallies, feas and rivers, as with us.*' 
 
 Whatever may be your opinion of the wif- 
 dom of Plato, and others of the ancients, I 
 confider it far fuperior to that which palTes for 
 wifdom among many of our modern philofo- 
 phers, whofe conceptions of fpirit are either fo 
 grofs as to m.ake it one and the fame with mat- 
 ter, or fo attenuated as to refolve it into 
 mere vapour or nothing. As to your objec- 
 tion, that Mr. Swedenborg hadr no real new- 
 ideas communicated to him, becaufe he de- 
 fcribes the things of the fpiritual world by 
 limilar objecls in the natural, this will apply 
 equally as well to the fcriptures themfelves, as 
 to his writings. Whenever the prophets fpeak 
 of fpiritual things, or of the appearances in 
 another life, they always do it in fuch terms as 
 are proper to natural language, and under fuch 
 forms as we have been accuilomed to behold. 
 Nay, even when God himfelf delivers a new 
 
 revelation. 
 
Signified by the New Jtrufalem. 385 
 
 revelation, he does it by cxprefllons, which, if 
 analyfcd, are found to be no other than what 
 you call combinations of old ideas. If there- 
 fore the circumftance of Baron Swedcnborg's 
 defcribing the things of the fpiritual world by 
 natural forms, be a fufficient reafon for rcjcding 
 his teflimony, it is no lefs a reafon for rejecting 
 the fcriptures alfo, thefc being written exaQly 
 in the fame manner. And if your dodlrine of 
 influx be true, in fuppofing that all intelligence 
 and wifdom, or, to ufe your own words, all 
 ideas, are derived from imprelTions made by 
 fenfible objeds, and afterwards combined to- 
 gether, then revelation itfclf is but a particular 
 arrangement of matter, and he, whom we fup- 
 pofe to be the fountain of wifdom, and call 
 God, turns out to be no other than nature at 
 
 laft. 
 
 « « « 
 
 The next thing I have to remark upon, is 
 a palTage in p. 56, where you fiy, " There is 
 " certamly no fmall confufion in the ideas oi 
 •* Mr. Swedcnborg, when he makes the bfavens 
 ** in the fpiritual world fynonomous to angels^ 
 '* and the halls to devils; as if thefc raal beings 
 " and the place w hich they occupy were the 
 " fame thing." 
 
 'X D However 
 
386 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 However confufed this way of fpeaking may 
 appear to you, Sir, it is certainly very common 
 with the bed fpeakcrs, as well as the belt wri- 
 ters, on almoft every fubjed:. What, for ex- 
 ample, is more commion, than for a politician 
 to talk of wars, treaties, and commerce, with 
 Frame, Spain, Rujjia, America y &c. ? thus with 
 the places as fynonomous to the people that 
 inhabit them ^ And how frequently do we read 
 of the boufe of lords, the houfe of commons, 
 the houfe of Biunfwick, the hoiije of Bourbon, 
 &c. 6^c. when at the fame time nothing elfe 
 is meant but \}cit perjom ox family within or be- 
 longing to the houfe ? Nay, even you yourfclf. 
 Sir, in the Letters you have addrefled to the 
 members of the New Church, make ufe of the 
 *very fame kind of language, which you ridicule 
 and condemn in Baron Swedcnborg. I will 
 produce your own Words. Speaking of a young 
 lady's ingenious imitation of plants in paper, 
 and comparing to the lofs of them the deftruc- 
 tion of your library and laboratory, you exclaim, 
 in p. X. of your preface, ** How would the 
 " country in general have been filled with indig- 
 ** nation, had any envious female neighbour 
 " come by force, or ftealth, and thrown all 
 «' her fiowers into the fire, and thus dellroyed 
 ** all the fruits of her ingenuity, and patient 
 
 ♦* working 
 
Signified by the Nexo Jerujalcm, 387 
 
 ** working for years, in a linglc n^umcnt 1'* 
 Now here. Sir, you fpcak of a countryy which 
 is a placCy being filled with iudignalion, which 
 is an affection of the human mind; and xk\\x% pcrjons 
 and places arc made to be fynonomous, by 
 yourfclf, as well as by the Baron whom you 
 oppofc. 
 
 If we turn to the fcriptures, wc fliail find a 
 
 iimilar language ufcd in them. In Apoc. xxi. 
 
 22, the Lord God almighty and the Lamb 
 
 are called the temple of the New Jerufalein. 
 
 In I Sam. iv. 7, the ark of God and God bim^ 
 
 Jelf are fpoken of as fynonomous. In Jonah ii. 
 
 2, the whale s Mly is called the belly of bell; 
 
 thus the place hell and a jijh arc confidercd as 
 
 fynononr^us terms. In Ifaiah xwiii. 15, it is 
 
 faid, " We have made a covenant with dealb^ 
 
 " and with hell are we at agreement." And in 
 
 Apoc. XX. 14, denth and hell are faid to be caft 
 
 \x\x.o l\^^ lake of fire : in both of which paffjgcs, 
 
 flates and places are mentioned inlkad ot per-. 
 
 Jons, So again, in Ifaiah xxiii. I, 4. l^cjhips 
 
 of Tarfnilh are addrclfcd as nun, ar»d the /rj 
 
 itfelf IS pcrfonificd, and rcprefcntcd as faying 
 
 in human languagv-, " I travail no:, nor bring 
 
 <* forth chiLircn, neither Ao i nourilh up young 
 
 "' men, nor bring up virgi.is." Many other 
 
 .' 1) 2 pailhgc* 
 
388 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 pafiages might be produced from the Word, 
 wherein places and things evidently denote 
 perfons and dates. But as I exped: by this 
 time you mufl fee the impropriety of making 
 that an objeclion to Baron Swedenborg's lan« 
 guage, which equally militates againft the 
 Word of God, againft the beft fpeakers and 
 writers on every fubjecl, and even againft your- 
 felf too, Sir, I fhall leave you to refiecl on the 
 merits of the cafe, while I prepare to addrefs 
 you with a few concluding remarks. 
 
 «f^ %!• ^f ^f *^ 
 
 fl^ rl* *t* V ^ 
 
 XIII. Of Charity. 
 
 You charge Baron Svvedenborg, and thofc 
 who have embraced his writings, with want of 
 charity, becaufe he aflerts, and they believe, 
 that no one can be admitted into heaven, who 
 acknovv'ledges a trinity of Gods, or who denies 
 the divinity of Jefus Chrift. Had this been a 
 mere arbitrary afTertion, without having ifs 
 foundation in the Word of God, and in the 
 true nature and fitnefs of things, there might 
 have been fome juftnefs in your charge. But 
 Vi'hen it is confidercd, that one grand defign of 
 ^he fcriptures is, not only to teach the unity 
 
 Pf 
 
Signijicd by the New Jernfalcm, 389 
 
 of God, but to point cut "ji-ho and what be is, 
 in order that men nuiy worfliip him in a man, 
 ner the mo ft likely to be cllcclivc of conjunc- 
 tion with him ; and when the fame fcriprures 
 inform us, that ic is one of the elfcntial con- 
 ditions of falvation, to acknowledge and believe 
 the divinity of jefus Chrift, there is reafon to 
 fuppofe, that, notwithllanding the apparetit 
 uncharitablcnejs of fuch a condition, it muft in 
 reality be cthcrwife, becaufe dit^tated by him 
 who is the fountain of /ot'^and mercy. It there- 
 fore becomes a bufinefs of the nioll ferious 
 concern to be properly acquainted with this 
 intercrting fubjecl; feeing that on fuch ac- 
 knowledgmenL, both in dodrii'.e and in life, 
 depends no lefs than our eternal welfare, or 
 what amounts to the fame thing, our admifTion 
 into heaven. 
 
 It is not my intention to adduce all the 
 paflages of fcripture, that inculcate the nccef- 
 fity of believing in Jefus, as well as the Father, 
 in order to cnfure our future happinefs. Let 
 the following fufhcc. " He that belicveib on 
 *' the Son, hath everlafling life : and he that 
 *< helie'vetb not the Son, Ihall not fee life," John 
 iii. 36. Jefus faid, •* If yc belieze not, that I 
 " Am, ye (hall die in your fins," John viii. 24. 
 
 " Yc 
 
3 go A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 ^' Ye believe in God, believe alfo in me, I am 
 " the way, and the truth, and the lifel' John 
 xiv. I, 6. "This is hfc eternal, that they 
 " might know thee the only true God, and Jejus 
 '' Chriji whom thou had: fent," John xvii. 3. 
 Upon fuch paiHiges as thefe is founded Baron 
 Swedenborg's affertion, that none can be ad- 
 mitted into heaven, but they vv'ho have faith 
 in Jefus Chrifl: as the Son of God, or one with 
 the Father, and thus acknowledge the divinity 
 of his humanity. Arians and Socinians falling 
 fhort in this refpei^l, are therefore condemned, 
 not by the relimiony of Baron Swedenborg 
 alone, but by the holy fcriptures themfelves. 
 *^ He that reje^eth me, (faith the Lord,) and 
 ** receiveth not my zvords, hath one that judgeth 
 •" him : the zvord that I have fpoken, the fame 
 " Ihall judge him in the lafl day^*' John xii. 
 48. Again, " Whofoever fpeaketh againft 
 *' the Holy Spirit, it fliall not be forgiven him, 
 " neither in this world, nor in the world to 
 ** come," Matt. xii. 32. To fpeak againft the 
 Holy Spirit, is to fay that what proceeds from 
 Jefus is not holy in itfclf, to deny the divinity 
 of his humanity, and to alTert that he is a 
 7nere man, or a mere angel ; thus that ** he hath 
 ** an unclean fpirit,'' Mark iii. 30 ; for in his 
 fight, who alone is hoh\ Apoc. xv. 4, both 
 
 angejs 
 
Signified by the New Jcriifalcm. 391 
 
 angels and men are filthy and unclean. Job. xv. 
 15, 16. Pfalm xiv. 3. Therefore to afcribc 
 to Jefus any thing fliorc of perfonal and proper 
 divinity, as Arians and Socinians do, and to 
 be confirmed therein both in do^rine and in life^ 
 is coming within the defcription of thofe who 
 exclude ihemfelves from heaven, and who arc 
 therefore faid to be guilty of a fin unto death, 
 I John V. 16, or in other words, of blafphemy 
 againlt the Holy Spirit, which cannot be for- 
 given in this world, nor in the world to conic. 
 
 In addition to the evidence arifing from 
 fcripture, we may alfo gather from the true 
 nature and fitncfs of things, that no Arian or 
 Socinian, vchile he conlinnes to be fucb, can be 
 admitted into heaven. If it be allowed, that 
 heaven derives all it's elTcnce from the Lord's 
 humanity, which mufl: be the cafe if the in- 
 habitants arc members of his body, then ic 
 will follow, that no pcrfon can hasc a place 
 therein, but he who acknow ledges Chrill as his 
 head ; comparatively as no member of the 
 human body can continue to be fuch, without 
 receiving life from the head, and thus as U 
 were acknowledging the fo jrcc from which it 
 derives it's fupport. 
 
 No 
 
392 A Defence of the New Church, 
 
 No fubjedl can gain admiflion to the court 
 of an earthly prince, while he refufes to ac- 
 knowledge his right and title to the crown ; 
 fuch a perfon, by the very nature and fitnefs 
 of things, being felf-excluded. It is juft the 
 fame with refped: to admiflion into heaven, 
 which is the court of the King of kings : all 
 who enter the gates of that palace, mufi: bear 
 true allegiance to their lawful fovereign Jefus 
 Chrift; they mufl: be loyal fubjedls ; they mud 
 love him with their hearts; they mufl confefs 
 him with their tongues ; and none elfc can 
 tafte angelic happinefs, or even breathe ce- 
 leftial air. 
 
 That men of every religious perfuafion, by 
 whatever name they are called, whether Arians, 
 Socinians, Jews, Mahometans, or idolaters, 
 may neverthelefs be faved, as well as thofe 
 who profefs the trueft religion in the world, 
 provided they live a life of chanty according 
 to the befl: light they poilefs, and are not con- 
 firmed in the falfes of their religion, is a doc- 
 trine to which I believe every member of the 
 New Jcrufalcm molt chearfully fubfcribes. 
 And further, that they who know and pro- 
 fefs the mod genuine, heavenly, and divine 
 truths, if they live not in agreement with 
 
 them. 
 
Signified by the Nero Jerufalcm. 393 
 
 them, can have no place in heaven, whcVcall 
 is charity and mutual love ; for the Hate of 
 man after death depends not fo much on the 
 quahty of his thoughts, opinions, and do8rincs, 
 as upon the e]uality of his alfedions and 
 life. If thefe be good, no error of judgment 
 will eventually exclude him from heaven: he 
 may indeed be thereby retarded in his progrefs 
 thither; but when by repeated inflruclions in 
 the world of fpirits iiis undcrlhinding is cp.- 
 lightened with the pure beams of angelic wif- 
 dom, he will then be prepared to enter into 
 the full enjoynient of celellial happinefs, and 
 jom the company of thofe blelfed fpirits, who 
 unite in afcribing all blcfiing, and honour, and 
 glory, and power, unto him that fittcth upon 
 the throne, and unto the Lamb for^ ever and 
 ever. 
 
 Having now, S'r, in the bcH: manner my 
 leifure hours would permit, m.ade anfucr to 
 every objcdion, which you have brought for- 
 ward ao-ainrt tlie doclrincs of the New Jcru- 
 falem ; and having at the fame time proved, 
 as it's fundamental ariicle, the fuprcmc and 
 exclufive divinity of Jcfus Chriil, it only re- 
 mains to bo obfcrved, that the \vholc is rul>- 
 mitrcd to your ferious rcfleiflion and conlidcra- 
 
 j K lion. 
 
394 ^ Defence of the New Churchy 
 
 tion. If what has been advanced in the prefenfc 
 Defence of the New Churchy be neither confiftent 
 with fcripture nor reafon, it will and ought to 
 fall to the ground, as a work of imagination, 
 ^nd a delufion of the mind. But if, on the 
 other hand, it ihould appear to be fupported 
 by the authority of both, then you, Sir, in 
 common with every other fceker of truth for 
 the fake of truth, muft feel yourfelf interefted, 
 in no fmall degree, in the decifion of quef- 
 tions, which, from their very nature^ involve 
 confequences of the utmofl: importance. The 
 difference between believing aright and be- 
 lieving amifs, is fomething like the difference 
 between doing good and doing evil, though not 
 altogether fo ; for it is poflible, that he, whofe 
 opinions are falfe, may yet be fauklefs, and 
 confcquently in a falvable ftate ; whereas the 
 man, whofe life and condudl is evil, can exped: 
 nothing elfe but to incur the penalties of his 
 guilt. Truth, genuine, unadulterated truth, 
 is, I hope, with each of us the objecfl of pur- 
 fuit. But while we have in view the difcovery 
 of fo great a treafurc, let us not forget to pre- 
 pare our minds for the lading enjoyment of it, 
 by cultivating with all diligence that heavenly 
 principle of love and charity, which is not only 
 the end, but alfo the producing caufc of truth. 
 
 Thus^ 
 
Signified by the Ncxo Jernfalem. 395 
 
 Thus, whether \vc are now in the pofTefTion of 
 it, or not, we fliall moll: alTurcdly obtain it 
 hereafter, when in heaven wc arc admitted to 
 ihc tellowiliip of angels, and there commcngc 
 adual citizens of the New Jerufalem. 
 
 In this hope, and with my moil cordial 
 >vifhes for your eternal profperity, 
 
 I remain, 
 
 S I R, 
 
 Your obedient Servant, 
 
 ROBERT HINDMARSH. 
 
 J^cndQrit Jan. 1792. 
 
 P J N I S. 
 
J. 
 
 d. 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 LIST OF BOOKS Sold ly R. HINDMARSH. 
 
 1. A RCANA COELESTIA, vol. i, 3, 4, 5. i 
 
 2. XJL A BriefExpofitionof the Dodrineof the 
 
 New Church « « - o 
 
 3. True Chriftian Religion, or the Univerfal 
 
 Theology of the New Church - - o 
 
 4. A Treatife on the Nature of Influx, or of the 
 
 Communication between Soul and Body o 
 K, A Treatife concerning Heaven and Hell o 
 
 h. Of the New Jerufalem and it's Heavenly Doc- 
 trine * - - - 04^ 
 
 7. The Do6lrine of the New Jerufalem concern- 
 
 ing the Lord - - - - o 2 o 
 
 8. The Do6lrine of the New Jerufalem concern- 
 
 ing the Sacred Scripture - - -020 
 
 9. The Doctrine of Life for the New Jerufalem o I o 
 
 10. Of the Earths in the Univerfe, and their 
 Inhabitants - - - _ 026 
 
 XI. The Pfalms of David, with a Summary Ex- 
 
 pofition of the Internal Senfe - 03^ 
 
 12. Of the White Horfe mentioned in the Revela- 
 
 tion, Chap. XIX. with curious Remarks on 
 theSouls of Beafts, and the Lifeof Vegetables o I o 
 
 13. A Treatife concerning the Lad Judgment, 
 
 and the Deftru6lion of Babylon, in 1757 o 
 I4« Continuation of the Laft Judgment - o 
 
 15. Angelic Wifdom concerning Divine Love 
 
 and Divine Wifdom _ _ . o 
 
 16. Angelic Wifdom concerningDivine Providence o 
 
 17. TheLiturgy of the New Church, in fmall Oc- 
 
 tavo, or large Qi^iarto _ - _ o 
 
 18. The Apocalvpfe Revealed, 2 vols. - o 
 
 19. Hymns for the New Church - - o 
 ^o. Jehovah's Mercy, a Poem, recommendTng 
 
 the Writings of the Hon. E. Swedenborg, 
 
 by J. Proud - - 003 
 
 21 . Nine Queries concerning the Trinity, Sec. with 
 
 their Anfwers - - - 003 
 
 22. Wifdom's Di6lates - - - c i 6 
 
 23. The New Magazine of Knowledge, &c. in 20 
 
 Numbers at 6d. each, or complete in 2 vols. 010 o 
 
 24. An Eulogium delivered on the Death of the 
 
 Hon. E. Swedenborg - - - 009 
 
 25. A Short Account of the Hon. E. Swedenborg, 
 
 and his Theological Writings - -006 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 I 
 
 c 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 
 6 
 
 I 
 
 G> 
 
 13 
 3 
 
 
 
 6 
 
1 1012 01007 8378