We know, in a general sense, what “false” means. It’s the wrong
answer on a “true or false” test; it’s saying 2+2=5; it’s saying that the sky is green and the clouds are orange.
That simplicity, however, comes from applying the idea of “truth” to simple, concrete facts. It gets much trickier when we try to apply the idea to the things we love and feel.
Consider, for instance, the idea that “you’ve got to look out for yourself, because no one else is going to.” Is that true? It feels true in a way, and seems to apply to a lot of real-world situations. To some degree, no matter how high-minded we might be, we have to take care of ourselves if we’re going to be any good to anyone else. But if we take that idea and make it central to our lives, will it help us be loving people? Or will it encourage selfishness, which is pretty strong in most of us anyway? Clearly the answer is the latter.
Swedenborg would label that a “falsity,” because it is ultimately a description of how to be selfish. “Love your neighbor as you love yourself” would, by contrast, be labeled a “truth” because it is a description of how to be caring and kind. Basically, statements describing or springing from love of the Lord and love of the neighbor are “truth” and those springing from love of self or love of worldly things are “falsity.”
You might wonder why that is. The fact that “look out for yourself” is selfish doesn’t make it necessarily untrue; it’s a selfish world!
But in Swedenborg's view, the universe and reality itself are direct products of the Lord’s infinite love, and are thus ultimately expressions of love. And if love is the very stuff of reality, then the more loving something is, the more real it is -- and the less loving something is, the less real it is. So ideas that reflect and support love are “true” because they are describing something "real" -- something filled with love. Ideas that reject love are “false” because they are are describing that is not "real."
This sounds odd, because we have all dealt with evil and falsity in ourselves and in others, and they certainly feel real. In fact, they feel quite powerful, and we can feel empowered by them. Swedenborg says this is a misperception, however -- basically a temporary effect of our freedom to choose.
Essentially the case is this: The Lord created us to be something separate -- he needed something to love that was not himself. But love was his only building material; how could he build something that wasn't love?
We might use water as an analogy. Imagine that you want to build a house, but the only material available to you is water. Anything you try is just going to be a matter of pumping water from one place to another -- it's not going to create a house.
So what do you do? You freeze it. You take away heat until the molecules in that water slow down and lock into solid patterns. Then you can cut blocks and build with them. It's still water, but until it receives heat it will be locked into place with properties that are very different.
That's sort of how the Lord created us. We are created from love, but in a state of "cold" that lets us be different and separate. His desire is to melt us and let us flow out, but he lets us stay cold if we want to.
In that "ice" state, we might describe ourselves in many ways: we might brag about how hard our crystals are, how low our temperature is, how good we would be at breaking things if we fell on them. We might encourage any melting spots to wise up and get cold; we might even try to force them. And those statements might be "true" for that icy state. But they are not true at all for our intended existence as flowing water in a warm, loving world.
Those "icy" ideas, then, are falsities -- seemingly true for a cold world with little love, but contrary to the Lord's desire to warm us, melt us and turn us into life-giving water.
But there’s an argument: Couldn’t someone use the idea that “you’ve got to look out for yourself, because no one else is going to” to become strong and self-reliant, in a better position to help others, and use it to be a better person? Yes, they could – ideas that are essentially false can at times be used for good purposes. In a broad application, religious systems can have false ideas about the Lord, but still lead people to good lives and ultimately to heaven. On the flip side, ideas that are essentially true can be used for evil purposes (“love thy neighbor” could prompt giving aid to someone engaged in evil, for instance).
The key here is love. If you use the ideas you have to open up to the Lord's warmth, the ice will melt -- even if those ideas have their roots in "icy" thinking. And if you reject love, you can use "water" thinking to turn away from the Lord and turn the temperature down. That's kind of a gift; the Lord knows that we will be confused, and will struggle, and will help us find warmth if we want it even if we are still caught up in icy thinking. And as we find warmth, we'll be able to recognize that icy thinking for what it is.
Passages from Swedenborg
New Jerusalem and Heavenly Doctrine (Whitehead) n. 171
Of Falsity.
There are innumerable kinds of falsity, namely, as many as there are evils, and evils and falsities are according to their origins, which are many (n. 1188, 1212, 4729, 4822, 7574). There is falsityfrom evil, or the falsityof evil; and there is evil from the falsity, or the evil offalsity; and falsity again from thence (n. 1679, 2243). From onefalsity that is assumed as a principle, falsities flow in a long series (n. 1510, 1511, 4717, 4721). There is falsity from the lusts of the love of self and of the world; and there is falsity from the fallacies of the senses (n. 1295, 4729). There are falsities of religion; and there are falsities of ignorance (n. 4729, 8318, 9258). There is falsity which contains good, and falsity which does not contain good (n. 2863, 9304, 10109, 10302). There is what is falsified (n. 7318, 7319, 10648).
The quality of the falsity of evil (n. 6359, 7272, 9304, 10302). The quality of the evil of falsity (n. 2408, 4818, 7272, 8265, 8279). The falsities from evil appear like mists, and impure waters over the hells (n. 8138, 8146, 8210). Such waters signify falsities (n. 739, 790, 7307). They who are in hell speak falsities from evil (n. 1695, 7351, 7352, 7357, 7392, 7699). They who are in evil cannot do otherwise than think what is false when they think from themselves (n. 7437).
There are falsities of religion which agree with good, and falsities which disagree (n. 9258). Falsities of religion, if they do not disagree with good, do not produce evil but with those who are in evil of life (n. 8318). Falsities of religion are not imputed to those who are in good, but to those who are in evil (n. 8051, 8149). Every falsity may be confirmed, and then it appears like truth (n. 5033, 6865, 8521, 8780). Care should be taken lest falsities of religion be confirmed, since the persuasion of falsity principally arises from thence (n. 845, 8780). How hurtful the persuasion of falsity is (n. 794, 806, 5096, 7686). A persuasion of falsity is perpetually exciting such things as confirm falsities (n. 1510, 1511, 2477). They who are in the persuasion of falsity are interiorly bound (n. 5096). In the other life, they who are in a strong persuasion of falsity, when they approach others, close up their rational, and as it were suffocate it (n. 3895, 5128).
Truths which are not genuine, and also falsities, may be consociated with genuine truths; but falsities which contain good, and not falsities in which is evil (n. 3470, 3471, 4551, 4552, 7344, 8149, 9298). Falsities which contain good are received by the Lord as truths (n. 4736, 8149). The good which has its quality from falsity is accepted by the Lord, if there is ignorance, and therein is innocence and a good end (n. 7887).
Evil falsifies truth, because it draws aside and applies truth to evil (n. 8094, 8149). Truth is said to be falsified, when it is applied to evil by confirmations (n. 8602). Falsified truth is contrary to truth and good (n. 8602). For further particulars respecting the falsification of truth (see n. 7318, 7319, 10648).
Apocalypse Explained (Tansley) n. 734
And there was war in heaven.- That this signifies combat offalsityagainst truth, and of truth against falsity, is evident from the signification [of war as denoting spiritual war, that is,] of falsityagainst truth and of truth against falsity, of which we shall speak presently. The falsityhere meant is falsity from evil, while the truth is truth from good; for many kinds of falsities exist, but those only which are from evil fight against truths from good, since evil is opposed to good, and all truth is of good. All those are in the falsities of evil who in their life have given no thought to heaven and the Lord, but have thought only of themselves and the world. To think of heaven and the Lord in the life, is to think that one ought to act in such or such a manner, because the Word so teaches and commands; those who do this, since they live from the Word, live from the Lord and heaven. But to think only of oneself and the world, is to think that one ought to act in this or that manner because of the laws of the country, and for the sake of reputation, honours and gain. Such persons do not live for the Lord and heaven, but for themselves and the world; these are in evil as to life, and from evils in falsities; and those who are in falsities from this source fight against truths. But these do not fight against the Word, for they call it holy and Divine, but they fight against the genuine truths of the Word; they confirm their falsities by the Word, but by the sense of its letter only, which in some passages is of such a nature that it may be interpreted to confirm the most heretical principles, for the reason that the Word in that sense is adapted to the apprehension of children and the simple minded; these for the most part are sensual, and the sensual receive only those things that they see. And because the Word is such in the letter, therefore those who are in falsities from evil of life confirm their falsities by the Word, and thus falsify the Word. In fact those who separate faith from charity, so falsify the Word that wherever mention is made of acting or of deeds and works, they explain such passages - of which there are thousands - so as to make it appear that not the doing of deeds or works is meant, but only believing and faith; and so in other cases. These things have been said in order that the reader may know who are meant by those who are in falsities from evil, and who made war with Michael and his angels, as treated of in the following article.
Apocalypse Explained (Tansley) n. 526
And the third part of them was darkened.- That this signifies that all those things were changed into falsities of evil, and into the evils of falsity, is evident from the signification of darkness which denotes falsities, and hence of being darkened which denotes to be changed into falsities. The reason why it denotes to be changed into the falsities of evil and the evils of falsityis, that it is said the third part of the sun was darkened, the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; and the sun signifies the good of love, the moon, the good and truth of faith, and the stars, the cognitions of good and truth. Therefore the third part of the sun being darkened, signifies that the good of love was changed into evil, and the falsitythence, which is the falsity of evil. For good is changed into evil, and thencefalsity, but the truth of faith, signified by the moon, is changed intofalsity, and thence evil, which is the evil of falsity. The evil of falsityis the falsity of doctrine, from which proceeds evil of life, and thefalsity of evil is evil of life, from which proceeds falsity of doctrine.
[2] The reason why darkness signifies falsity, is, that light signifies truth, and falsity is the opposite of truth, as darkness is of light. Moreover, when a man does not possess the light of life, which is the Divine Truth, the shadow of death is then in him, which is falsity. For man, from his proprium, is in every evil, and the falsitytherefrom, and he can be removed from them only by means of the truths of the church; where therefore there are no truths, there the falsities of evil are. That truths are the only means by which man can be removed from evils, purified and reformed, may be seen in the Doctrine of the New Jerusalem (n. 24).
Divine Providence (Ager) n. 318
But how man's state is changed by confirmations and consequent persuasions shall now be told, and in the following order: (1) There is nothing that cannot be confirmed; and falsityis confirmed more readily than the truth. (2) When falsityhas been confirmed the truth is not seen; but from confirmed truth falsity is seen. (3) An ability to confirm whatever one pleases is not intelligence, but only ingenuity, which may exist even in the worst of men. (4) There is confirmation that is intellectual and not at the same time voluntary; but all voluntary confirmation is also intellectual. (5) The confirmation of evil that is voluntary and also intellectual causes man to believe that his own prudence is everything and the Divine providence nothing; but this is not true of intellectual confirmation alone. (6) Every thing confirmed by the will and also by the understanding remains to eternity; but not what has been confirmed by the understanding only.
[2] As regards the first: There is nothing that cannot be confirmed, and falsity is confirmed more readily than the truth. What is there that cannot be confirmed, when it is confirmed by atheists that God is not the Creator of the universe, but that nature is the creator of itself; that religion is merely a restraint, and for the simple and the common people; that man is like a beast, and dies like one; also when it is confirmed that adulteries are allowable, likewise clandestine thefts, frauds, and deceitful contrivances; that cunning is intelligence and shrewdness is wisdom? Does not every one confirm his own heresy? Are there not volumes filled with the confirmations of the two heresies that reign in the Christian world? Make up ten heresies, however abstruse, ask an ingenious man to confirm them, and he will confirm them all. If afterwards you look at them solely from the confirmations will you not see the falsities as truths? As all falsity is visible in the natural man from its appearances and fallacies, and truth is visible in the spiritual man only, it is clear that falsity can be confirmed more readily than truth.
[3] To make clear that everyfalsity and every evil can be so confirmed as to make the falsityappear like truth and the evil like good, let it be proved, for example, that light is darkness and darkness light. May it not be asked, What is light in itself? Is it anything more than a something that appears to the eye according to its state? What is light to the closed eye? Have not bats and birds of night such eyes that they see light as darkness and darkness as light? I have been told that some men see in this way; and that the infernals, although they are in darkness, still see each other. Does not man have light in his dreams in the middle of the night? Thus is not darkness light, and light darkness? But it may be answered: What of this? Light is light as truth is truth; and darkness is darkness as falsity is falsity.
[4] Take another example: It is to be proved that a raven is white. May it not be said that its blackness is only a shade that is not its real self? Its feathers are white within, so is its body; and these are the substances of which the bird is formed. As its blackness is a shade, so the raven grows white when it gets old-such have been seen. What is black in itself but white? Pulverize black glass, and you will see that the powder is white; therefore when you call the raven black you speak from the shadow and not from the reality. But the reply may be, What of this? In this way all birds might be called white. Although all this is contrary to sound reason it has been presented to show how confirmations can be found for falsity that is directly opposite to the truth, and for evil that is wholly opposite to the good.
[5] Secondly: When falsity has been confirmed the truth is not seen, but from confirmed truth falsity is seen. All falsity is in darkness, and all truth is in light; and in darkness nothing is seen, and what any thing is is known only by handling it; in light it is otherwise. For this reason, in the Word falsities are called darkness, and thus those that are in falsities are said to walk in darkness and in the shadow of death. On the other hand, truths are there called light, and therefore those who are in truths are said to walk in the light, and are called children of light.
[6] There are many things to show that when falsity has been confirmed truth is not seen, and that from confirmed truth falsity is seen. For example, who could see any spiritual truth if it were not taught in the Word? Would there not be merely thick darkness that could be dispelled only by means of the light in which the Word is, and only in him who is willing to be enlightened? What heretic can see his falsities unless he admits the genuine truths of the church? He does not see them before. I have spoken with those who have confirmed themselves in faith separate from charity; and when asked whether they saw how much is said in the Word about love and charity, about works and deeds, and keeping the commandments, and that he is called blessed and wise who does them, and foolish who does them not, they said, that while reading all this they saw it only as a matter of faith, and thus they passed it by with their eyes shut, as it were.
[7] Those that have confirmed themselves in falsities are like those who see cracks in a wall; and in the shades of evening they see them in their fancies as a horseman or a man, but this fanciful image is dispelled by the inflowing light of day. Who can have a sense of the spiritual uncleanness of adultery except one who is in the spiritual cleanness of chastity? Who can have a sense of the cruelty of revenge except one who is in good from love of the neighbor? Who that is an adulterer, or that is eager for revenge, does not sneer at those who call the delights of such things infernal, and on the other hand, call the delights of conjugial love and of love for the neighbor heavenly? And so on.
[8] Thirdly: An ability to confirm whatever one pleases is not intelligence, but only ingenuity, which may exist even in the worst of men. There are some who are very skilful in confirming, who have no knowledge of any truth and yet are able to confirm both truth and falsity; and some of them ask, What is truth? Is there any? Is not that true that I make true? And yet such are believed in the world to be intelligent; although they are but wall plasterers. Only those who perceive truth to be truth are intelligent, and they confirm truth by verities continually perceived. There is little discernible difference between these two classes, because there is little discernible difference between the light of confirmation and the light of the perception of truth; and those who are in the light of confirmation seem to be also in the light of the perception of truth; and yet the difference between them is like that between illusive light and genuine light; and illusive light is such that in the spiritual world it is turned into darkness when genuine light flows in Such illusive light prevails with many in hell, and when these are brought into genuine light they see nothing at all. From all this it is clear that the ability to confirm whatever one pleases is mere ingenuity, and may exist even in the worst of men.
[9] Fourthly: There is confirmation that is intellectual and not at the same time voluntary; but all voluntary confirmation is also intellectual. This may be illustrated by examples. Those who confirm the doctrine of faith separate from charity and yet live a life of charity, or in general those who confirm falsity of doctrine and yet do not live according to it, are those that are in intellectual confirmation and not at the same time in voluntary, while those that confirm falsity of doctrine and live according to it are those that are in both voluntary and intellectual confirmation. The reason of this is that the understanding does not flow into the will, but the will flows into the understanding. This also shows what falsity of evil is, and what falsity not of evil is. Falsity not of evil can be conjoined with good, but falsity of evil cannot, for the reason that falsity not of evil is falsity in the understanding and not in the will; while falsity of evil is falsity in the understanding from evil in the will;
[10] Fifthly: The confirmation of evil that is voluntary and also intellectual causes man to believe that his own prudence is everything and the Divine providence nothing; but this is not true of intellectual confirmation alone. There are many who by worldly appearances confirm in themselves, their own prudence and yet do not deny the Divine providence; with such there exists only intellectual confirmation; while with those who at the same time deny the Divine providence there exists also voluntary confirmation; but this, together with persuasion, exists chiefly with those who are worshipers of nature and also worshipers of self.
[11] Sixthly: Every thing confirmed by the will and also by the understanding remains to eternity, but not what has been confirmed by the understanding only. For that which pertains to the understanding alone is not within the man but is outside of him; it is merely in the thought; and nothing enters into man and is appropriated to him except what is accepted by the will, for it then comes to be of his life's love. That this remains to eternity will be considered in the following number.
Conjugial Love (Chadwick) n. 428
As regards the actual pairing of evil and falsity, it should be known that evil loves falsityand wants to be one with it, so that they become joined. Likewise good loves truth and wants to be one with it, so that they become joined. It is obvious that just as the spiritual source of marriage is the marriage of good and truth, so the spiritual source of adultery is the pairing of evil and falsity. That is why this pairing is meant in the spiritual sense of the Word by adultery, fornication and prostitution (see THE APOCALYPSE REVEALED 134). This principle ensures that anyone in a state of evil who marriesfalsity, and anyone in a state of falsitywho takes evil to share his bed, by forming such a compact strengthens his attitude in favour of adultery, and he commits it so far as he dares and can. He strengthens his attitude out of evil by means of falsity, and he commits it out offalsity by means of evil. The reverse is also true: anyone in a state of good who marries truth or anyone in a state of truth who takes good to share his bed, sets himself against adultery and in favour of marriage, and embraces a blessed married life.
Who (or What) is Swedenborg?
The ideas on this site are based on the works of Emanuel Swedenborg, an 18th-century Swedish scientist and theologian. Swedenborg claimed that his religious writings, the sole focus of the last three decades of his life, were done at the behest of the Lord himself, and constituted a revelation for a successor to the Christian Church.
In keeping with Swedenborg’s own statements, modern believers downplay his role as author, attributing the ideas to the Lord instead. For this reason they generally refer to Swedenborg’s theological works as “the Writings,” and some resist the label “Swedenborgian” as placing emphasis on the man rather than the message.
Since “the Writings” would be an unfamiliar term to new readers, we have elected to use the name “Swedenborg” as a label for those theological works, much as we might use “Isaiah” or “Matthew” to refer to books of the Bible. The intent, however, is not to attribute the ideas to Swedenborg, any more than we would attribute the divinity of the Bible to Isaiah the man or Matthew the man.
So when you read “according to Swedenborg” on this site, it’s really shorthand for “according to the theological works from the Lord through Swedenborg.” When you read “Swedenborg says,” it’s really shorthand for “the theological works of Swedenborg say.”