19. (Verse 4) John. That this signifies the Lord as to doctrine, is evident from the representation of John, as being the good of love, of which above, n. 8. Because he represents the good of love, he also, in the highest sense, represents the Lord, since all the good of love is from the Lord, men, spirits and angels being only recipients; and those who are recipients, are said to signify that which is from the Lord. The case is similar with many other persons in the Word, as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Elijah, Elisha, John the Baptist, Peter, and the rest of the apostles, each of whom signifies some good or truth of heaven and of the church, but still all of them, in the highest sense, signify the Lord. As, for instance, David, in the internal sense signifies Divine truth in the spiritual kingdom, which is called the Lord's royalty; therefore, in the highest sense, he signifies the Lord as to that truth and as to His royalty; for this reason it is said of David in the Word, that he is to come and reign over the sons of Israel (Ezekiel 37:24, 25; Hosea 3:5). Similarly, Elijah and Elisha, who, because in the internal sense they signify the Word, therefore, in the highest sense, they signify the Lord from whom is the Word. (That Elijah and Elisha signify the Word, and thus the Lord as to the Word, may be seen, Arcana Coelestia 2762, 5247; the case is the same with John the Baptist, who is therefore called Elijah, n. 7643, 9372. That Peter signifies faith, and thence the Lord as to faith, because faith is from the Lord, may be seen above, n. 9.) It is therefore evident why John signifies the Lord. The reason he signifies the Lord as to doctrine is, because it is said, "John to the seven churches," and by the seven churches, in the internal sense, are meant all who are in truths from good, or in faith from charity; for these are they who constitute the church; and it is doctrine that teaches those things. For this reason the Lord, as He is the Word, is also the doctrine of the church, for all doctrine is from the Word. (That the Lord is the doctrine of the church, because all the truth which pertains to doctrine is from the Word, thus from the Lord, may be seen, Arcana Coelestia 2531, 2859, 3712.)

5094. 'The cupbearer and the baker' means regarding both kinds of sensory powers. This is clear from the meaning of 'the cupbearer' as the sensory powers subordinate to the understanding part of the mind, dealt with in 5077, and from the meaning of 'the baker' as the sensory powers subordinate to the will part, dealt with in 5078, which, as stated above in 5083, 5089, were cast aside by the interior natural. But it should be realized that the actual powers of the senses were not cast aside - that is to say, sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch, for the life of the body is dependent on these - but the insights or thoughts, as well as the affections and desires, that are dependent on them. Objects belonging to the world enter a person's external or natural memory by way of his senses on the one hand and by way of his rational thought on the other. These objects then divide themselves off from one another in that memory; those entering through rational thought place themselves in a more internal position, whereas those entering through the senses do so in a more external one, as a consequence of which the natural comes to have two parts - the interior part and the exterior - as has also been stated above.

[2] The interior natural is what 'Pharaoh king of Egypt' represents, while the exterior natural is what 'the cupbearer and the baker' represents. The nature of the difference between the two becomes clear from the different ways they look at things, that is, from their thoughts and their conclusions based on those thoughts. The person who uses the interior natural to think with and to form conclusions is rational, and is so insofar as he has absorbed what comes to him through rational thought; but the person who uses the exterior natural to think with and form conclusions is governed by his senses, and is so insofar as he has absorbed what comes to him from sensory evidence. Such a person is called one governed by his senses, whereas the other is called one who is rational-natural. When a person dies he has the entire natural with him; and its form remains the same as that which it took in the world. He is also rational-minded to the extent he has absorbed ideas from rational thought, but sensory-minded to the extent he has absorbed ideas from his senses. The difference between the two is that, to the extent it has absorbed ideas from rational thought and made them its own, the natural looks down on the senses belonging to the exterior natural and controls them by disparaging and casting aside illusions formed by the senses. But to the extent that it has absorbed ideas formed by the bodily senses and made them its own the natural looks down on rational thought by disparaging this and casting it aside.

[3] An example of the difference between the two may be seen in the ability of the rational-natural man to comprehend that no one's life is self-existent but that it comes to him through an influx of life from the Lord by way of heaven, and the inability of one governed by the senses to comprehend the same. For the latter says his senses tell him and he can plainly see that his life is self-existent and that it is pointless to contradict the evidence of the senses. Let another example be given. The rational-natural man comprehends the existence of a heaven and a hell; but one governed by his senses denies the existence of these because he has no conception of another world purer than the one he sees with his eyes. The rational-natural man comprehends the existence of spirits and angels who are not visible to him; but one governed by the senses cannot comprehend the same, for he imagines that what he cannot see or touch has no existence.

[4] Here is another example. The rational-natural man comprehends that it is the mark of an intelligent being to have ends in view, and with foresight to be directing means towards some final end. When he looks at the natural creation from the point of view of the order of everything, he sees the natural creation as a complex system of means and realizes that an intelligent Supreme Being has given them direction, though to what final end he cannot see unless he becomes spiritual. But a person governed by his senses does not comprehend how anything distinct and separate from the natural creation can exist or how some Being superior to the natural order can do so. He has no notion of what exercising intelligence, exercising wisdom, having ends in view, or giving direction to means may be unless all these activities are being spoken of as natural ones; and when they are spoken of as such, his idea of them is like that of one who is designing a machine. These few examples show what is meant by the interior natural and the exterior natural, and by the powers of the senses being cast aside - not sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch in the body, but the conclusions reached by these about interior matters.