9965. 'That they may not bear iniquity and die' means the elimination of the whole of worship. This is clear from the meaning of 'bearing the iniquity', when the subject is the priestly office of Aaron and his sons, as a removal or shifting away of falsities and evils with those who are governed by good derived from the Lord, dealt with above in 9937. But when it speaks of them 'bearing iniquity and dying' the elimination of the whole of worship is meant, see 9928; for the representative worship died because nothing of it appeared any longer in heaven. The situation in all this may become clear from what has been stated and shown above in 9959-9961. They also died when they did not act in accordance with the statutes, ¹ as is evident from Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu, who were devoured by fire from heaven when they did not take the fire of the altar to burn incense but foreign ² fire, Leviticus 10:1-2ff. 'The fire of the altar' represented God's love, thus love from the Lord, whereas 'foreign fire' represented love from hell. The elimination of worship was meant by their burning incense with this fire and their consequent death. For the meaning of 'fire' as love, see 5215, 6832, 7324, 7575, 7852.

[2] Many places in the Word state that they would bear iniquity when they did not do things in accordance with the statutes, and by this was meant damnation because sins had not been removed. Not that they themselves were condemned on account of disobeying the statutes. Rather by doing so they eliminated representative worship and in so doing represented the damnation of those who remain in their sins. For none are condemned because they fail in their performance of outward religious observances, only because of evils in the heart, thus because of failing in such observances as a result of evil in the heart. This is what 'bearing iniquity' means in the following places: In Moses,

If a soul sins and acts against any of Jehovah's commandments regarding what ought not to be done, ³ though he does not know it, yet he will be guilty and will bear his iniquity. Leviticus 5:17-18.

Here the retention of evils and consequent damnation should not be understood literally by 'bearing iniquity', although that is the spiritual meaning; for it says 'though he does not know it', implying that what the person has done does not spring from evil in the heart.

[3] In the same author,

If any of the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offering is eaten at all on the third day, the one offering it will not be accepted. It is an abomination, and the soul that eats it will bear his iniquity, and will be cut off from his people. Leviticus 7:18; 19:7-8.

Here also 'bearing iniquity' means remaining in his sins and being as a result in a state of damnation. It does so not because the person ate some of his sacrifice on the third day, but because 'eating it on the third day' represented something abominable, namely an action leading to damnation. Thus 'bearing iniquity and being cut off from his people' represented the damnation of those who performed the abomination meant by that deed. Nevertheless there was no condemnation on account of his having eaten it, for interior evils that were represented are what condemn, not exterior actions in which those evils are not present.

[4] In the same author,

Every soul who eats a carcass ⁴ or that which has been torn, and does not wash his clothes and bathe his flesh shall bear his iniquity. Leviticus 17:15-16.

Since 'eating a carcass or that which has been torn' represented making evil or falsity one's own, the expression 'bearing iniquity' also has a representative meaning. In the same author,

If a man who is clean fails to keep the Passover, this soul shall be cut off from his people, because he did not bring the offering of Jehovah at its appointed time; he shall bear his sin. Numbers 9:13.

'The Passover' represented deliverance by the Lord from damnation, 7093 (end), 7867, 7995, 9286-9292; and 'the Passover supper' represented being joined to the Lord through the good of love, 7836, 7997, 8001. And since these things were represented it was decreed that anyone who did not keep the Passover should be cut off from his people and that he should bear his sin. The failure to keep it was not really so great a crime; rather it represented those who at heart refuse to accept the Lord and consequently deliverance from sins, and so who have no wish to be joined to Him through love. Thus it represented their damnation.

[5] In the same author,

The children of Israel shall not come near the tent of meeting, or else they will bear iniquity and die. ⁵ Levites shall perform the work of the tent of meeting, and these shall bear the iniquity. Numbers 18:22-23.

The reason why the people would bear iniquity and die if they were to go near the tent of meeting to do the work there was that they would thereby eliminate the representative worship assigned to the function of the priests. The function of the priests or the priestly office represented the Lord's entire work of salvation, 9809; and this is why it says that the Levites, who also were priests, should bear the people's iniquity, by which expiation or atonement was meant, that is, removal from evils and falsities with those who are governed by good derived from the Lord alone, 9937. 'Bearing iniquity' means real damnation when this expression is used in reference to those who perform evil deeds because their heart is evil, such as those mentioned in Leviticus 20:17, 19-20; 24:15-16; Ezekiel 18:20; 23:49; and elsewhere.

Poznámky pod čarou:

4738. 'So that he might therefore rescue him out of their hands, to return him to his father' means so that it might lay claim to it for the Church. This is clear from the meaning of 'rescuing out of their hands' as delivering, as above in 4732, and from the meaning of 'returning to his father' as laying claim to it for the Church; for Jacob, to whom 'father' refers here, represents the Jewish religion which sprang from the Ancient Church, as above in 4700, 4701. What was laid claim to for the Church was the Divine Truth concerning the Lord's Divine Human, for, as stated already, 'Joseph' means that truth specifically.

[2] To know more regarding this truth, it should be recognized that the Ancient Church acknowledged it, as also did the Primitive Christian Church. But there came a time when the papacy so extended its authority that it had control over every human soul; it exalted itself in the way the king of Babel is said to have done, in Isaiah,

You said in your heart. I will go up into the heavens, above the stars of God ¹ I will raise my throne, and I will sit on the mount of assembly, I will go up above the heights of the clouds, and I will make myself like the Most High. Isaiah 14:13-14.

Then - at that time - Divinity was taken away from the Lord's Human, that is, His Divine was made distinct and separate from His Human.

[3] The way in which this distinction was decreed in a certain council ² has also been revealed to me. I saw some people appear on the right in front of me, some distance away on a level with the sole of my foot. They were talking among themselves, but I did not hear what about. I was told that they were some of those who had come together in the council when the decree was made regarding the Lord's two Natures - His Divine one and His Human one. Shortly after that I was allowed to talk to them. They said that those who had the greatest influence in the council and who held higher positions and had higher authority than the rest met together. They did so in a room that was dark, where they decided that both Divinity and Humanity should be attributed to the Lord, the main reason for their decision being that otherwise the papacy could not have remained in being. For if they had acknowledged that the Lord was one with the Father, as He Himself says, no one could then have been acknowledged as His vicar on earth. Schisms were developing at that time, which would have toppled and destroyed the power of the papacy, had they not made that distinction. To strengthen it they also assembled proof texts from the Word and swayed the rest of the council.

[4] Those who spoke to me added that by doing this they were able to have control in heaven and on earth. They knew from the Word that all power in heaven and on earth had been given to the Lord, and this power could not have been granted to any vicar [of Christ] if the Human too were acknowledged to be Divine. For they knew that no one was allowed to make himself equal to God and that that power existed essentially in the Divine, not in the Human unless it was granted to it as it was also subsequently granted to Peter. They said that by doing what they did they were then able to keep the schismatics quiet who were most astute, and were also able to strengthen the power of the papacy. From this it is clear that they invented the distinction they made purely for the sake of having control, and that therefore they had no wish to know that the gift of power to the Lord's Human in heaven and on earth demonstrates that His Human too is Divine. It is also clear that 'Peter', to whom the Lord gave the keys of heaven, does not mean the man Peter but faith rooted in charity, which is received from the Lord alone and is therefore a power that belongs to the Lord alone - see Preface to Genesis 22.

Poznámky pod čarou: