. . . , which is not something historical, because as knowing myself in relationship to God I am more than historical, I am eternal; or the illusory result.—JP V 5794 (Pap. VI B 35:15) n.d., 1845

From final copy; see 1.83:26:

Changed from: Pastor Helweg30

—Pap. VI B 98:25 n.d., 1845

From draft; see 1.19-26:

The subjective existing thinker who has the categories of the infinite in his soul has them always, and therefore his form is continually negative.[VI B 35:19 117] Suppose such a person devoted his whole life to writing one single book, suppose he published it, suppose he assumed one reader—he would then altogether negatively express his relation to one reader; whereas a positive assistant professor who scribbles a book in fourteen days positively and beatifyingly addresses himself to the whole human race. That negative thinker, on the other hand, could never achieve any kind of direct relationship to his reader. [VI B 35:19 118] He therefore would probably say: I can just as well recommend the reading of this book as advise against it, because there is no direct gain from reading it and no direct loss from not having read it.*

The subjective existing thinker is therefore just as negative as he is positive. Among the negative ones there are a few. . . . .

*Note. For the sake of caution, I must beg everyone not to be bothered about what he reads here. It is written for idle people; yes, the serious reader will easily perceive that it is a joke to tease Lessing.— JP V 5795 (Pap. VI B 35:19) n.d., 1845

From draft; see 1.92:33-93:17:

This is what Socrates develops in the Symposium. [VI B 35:24 118] In his dissertation, Magister Kierkegaard was alert enough to discern the Socratic but is considered not to have understood it, probably because, with the help of Hegelian philosophy, he has become super-clever and objective and positive or has not had the courage to acknowledge the negation. Finitely understood, of course, the continued and perpetually continued striving toward a goal without attaining it is to be rejected, but, infinitely understood, striving is life itself and is essentially the life of that which is composed of the infinite and the finite. An imaginary positive accomplishment is a chimera. It may well be that logic has it, although before this can be regarded as true it needs to be more precisely explained than has been done up to now; but the subject is an existing [existerende] subject, consequently is in contradiction, consequently is in the process of becoming, and if he is, consequently is in the process of striving. [VI B 35:24 119]—JP V 5796 (Pap. VI B 35:24) n.d., 1845

Deleted from final copy; see 1.93:31:

. . . . . leap.*

*Note. … Perhaps [same as 1.99:6-10] no relation to the leap, since a leap is precisely what is dialectically decisive. That is to say, being about to make the leap is still a nothing in relation to the leap, and to have been most earnestly very close to the leap, that is, to have executed this nothing with utmost earnestness is indeed just like a jest.

In margin: if one does not have sufficient earnestness to do as Münchhausen did.— JP III 2355 (Pap. VI B 98:26) n.d., 1845

From draft; see 1.94:27-95:28, 1.34-38 and fn.:

Rare thoughtfulness! If a historical point of departure can decide an eternal happiness, then it can also eo ipso decide an eternal unhappiness.