2909.

In Kiriath-arba, the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan. That this signifies in the church, is evident from the signification of “Kiriath-arba,” as being the church as to truth; and from the signification of “Hebron in the land of Canaan,” as being the church as to good. In the Word, and especially in the prophetical parts, where truth is treated of, good is treated of also, because of the heavenly marriage in everything of the Word (see n. 683, 793, 801, 2173, 2516, 2712); therefore here, when Kiriath-arba is mentioned, it is also said, “the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan.” (That the “land of Canaan” denotes the Lord’s kingdom, may be seen above, n. 1413, 1437, 1607; also that the places in that land were variously representative, n. 1585, 1866.)

[2] In regard to Kiriath-arba which is Hebron, it was the region where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob dwelt. That Abraham dwelt there, appears from what was said in a preceding chapter: “Abraham came and dwelt in Mamre, which is in Hebron” (Genesis 13:18). That Isaac dwelt there, appears from what is said in a later chapter: “Jacob came unto Isaac his father, to Mamre, to Kiriath-arba, the same is Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac sojourned” (Genesis 35:27). That Jacob dwelt there is evident from Joseph being sent to his brethren by Jacob his father, from the valley of Hebron (Genesis 37:14). From the representation of the three, as spoken of above, it is plain that Kiriath-arba which is Hebron represented the church before Jerusalem did.

[3] That every church in process of time decreases, until it has nothing left of faith and charity, and then is destroyed, was also represented by Kiriath-arba which is Hebron, in its being possessed by the Anakim, by whom were signified dire persuasions of falsity (n. 581, 1673). That it was possessed by the Anakim, may be seen in several places (Numbers 13:21-22; Josh. 11:21 14:15; 15:13-14; Judges 1:10); and that it came to its end or consummation and was destroyed, was represented by all things therein being given by Joshua to the curse (Josh. 10:36-37; 11:21); and the Anakim being smitten by Judah and Caleb (Judges 1:10; Josh. 14:13-15; 15:13-14). And that there was again a new church, was represented by Hebron being assigned to Caleb for an inheritance, as to field and villages (Josh. 21:12); but the city itself was made a city of refuge (Josh. 20:7; 21:13); and a priestly city for the sons of Aaron (Josh. 21:10-11); in the inheritance of Judah (Josh. 15:54).

[4] Hence it is evident that Hebron represented the Lord’s spiritual church in the land of Canaan. And likewise on this account David was required by the command of Jehovah to go to Hebron, and was there anointed to be king over the house of Judah; and after he had reigned there seven years and six months, he went to Jerusalem and took possession of Zion (see 2 Samuel 2:1-11; 5:5; 1 Kings 2:11); and then for the first time the spiritual church of the Lord began to be represented by Jerusalem, and the celestial church by Zion.

2209. And I am become old. That this signifies after it should no longer be of such a nature, namely, not Divine but human, and that this latter should be put off, is evident from the signification of “becoming old,” as being to put off the human (spoken of above, n. 2198, 2203). As regards the rational in general, when it thinks about Divine things, especially from its own truth, it cannot possibly believe that there are such things; both because it does not apprehend them, and because there adhere to it the appearances born from the fallacies of the senses by which and from which it thinks; as is evident from the examples adduced above (n. 2196); to which the following may be added for the sake of illustration.

[2] If the rational be consulted, can it believe that the Word has an internal sense, and this so remote from the literal sense as has been shown? And thus that the Word is that which conjoins heaven with earth, that is, the Lord’s kingdom in the heavens with the Lord’s kingdom on earth? Can the rational believe that souls after death speak with each other most distinctly, without the speech of words, and yet so fully as to express more in a minute than a man does by his speech in an hour? And that the angels do the same, but in a speech still more perfect, and one that is not perceivable by spirits? Also, that on coming into the other life all souls know how to speak in this way, although they receive no instruction in so speaking? Can the rational believe that in one affection of man, nay, in one sigh, there are such numberless things as can never be described, and yet are perceived by angels? And that every affection of man, nay, every idea of his thought, is an image of him, being such as to contain within it in a wonderful manner all the things of his life? Not to mention thousands upon thousands of such things.

[3] The rational, which is wise from sensuous things, and is imbued with their fallacies, when thinking of such things, does not believe that they can be so, because it is unable to form to itself any idea except from such things as it perceives by some sense either external or internal; and what then must be the case when it thinks about Divine celestial and spiritual things, which are still higher? For there must always be some appearances from sensuous things, upon which the thought must lean, and when these appearances are withdrawn, the idea perishes, as has also been evident to me from novitiate spirits, who take the greatest delight in the appearances which they have brought with them from the world, saying that if these should be taken away from them, they did not know whether they could think. Such is the rational as regarded in itself.