[2] The spiritual man says, just as the natural man does, that good should be done to the poor, widows, and orphans; but the spiritual man thinks that good should not be done to the poor, widows, or orphans who are evil, or who call themselves poor when in fact they are rich; for then they would mislead simply by the words they use. From this the spiritual man is led to deduce that the poor, widows, and orphans mentioned in the Word mean those who are spiritually so. But the natural man thinks that good should be done to the poor, widows, and orphans who are literally called such, and that none other than these are meant in the Word; nor is he interested in whether they are evil or good people. What the poor, widows, and orphans may be on a spiritual level he neither knows nor wishes to know. From this one may see that this outermost truth - that good should be done to the poor, widows, and orphans - appears to be the same with both the spiritual man and the natural man; but when it is explained no such similarity exists. But when the lack of any similarity comes out, the two are consequently parted from each other, and then outermost truth serves the natural man as evidence or proof that an approach has been made. Therefore it speaks falsely against the spiritual man who no longer has anything with which to protect himself. Accordingly this example too serves to show why and in what way 'a garment' means evidence or proof.

[3] Take another example. The spiritual man says, just as the natural man does, that good should be done to the neighbour. He also says that everyone is his neighbour, yet he thinks that one person is his neighbour in a different respect and degree from another, and that to do good to an evil person because he calls himself his neighbour is to do evil to the neighbour. The natural man joins the spiritual man in subscribing to that outermost truth - the truth that good should be done to the neighbour, and also the truth that everyone is the neighbour. But he supposes that the neighbour is anyone who is favourably disposed towards him; and he has no interest in whether that person is good or evil. This example too shows that the two appear to be joined together so far as outermost truth is concerned, but that there is no real joining together, also that as soon as that truth is explained they become parted from each other. Once they are parted outermost truth serves the natural man as evidence against the spiritual man that the latter has been making sport of it so to speak. The same can be seen in all the other examples [in 5008].