737. 'Noah was a son of six hundred years' means his initial state of temptation. This is clear from the fact from here down to Eber in Chapter 11 nothing else is meant by numbers, years of age, or names than real things, as was the case also with the ages and names of all those mentioned in Chapter 5. Here 'six hundred years' means the initial state of temptation. This becomes clear from its prime factors which are ten and six multiplied again by ten. When the same factors are involved it makes no difference whether the number arrived at is large or small. As for ten, this has been shown already at 6:3 to mean remnants, while the meaning of six here as labour and conflict is clear from places throughout the Word. For the situation is this: What has gone before dealt with man's preparation for temptation, that is to say, he was supplied by the Lord with truths of the understanding and with goods of the will. These truths and goods are remnants, but they are not brought forth so as to be acknowledged until man is being regenerated. In the case of those who are being regenerated by means of temptations the remnants existing with any man are for the angels present with him. From these remnants they draw out those things with which they protect him against the evil spirits who activate falsities with him and in this way attack him. It is because remnants are meant by 'ten' and conflict by 'six' that six hundred years are spoken of, a number in which ten and six are the prime factors and which means a state of temptation.

[2] As regards conflict being the particular meaning of 'six', this is clear from Genesis 1, which describes the six days of man's regeneration prior to his becoming celestial. During those six days there was constant conflict, but on the seventh day came rest. Consequently there are six days of labour, and the seventh is the sabbath, a word which means rest. This also is why a Hebrew slave was to serve for six years and in the seventh was to go free, Exodus 21:2; Deuteronomy 15:12; Jeremiah 34:14, and why for six years they were to sow the land and gather in the produce, but in the seventh they were to leave it alone, Exodus 23:10-12. The same applied to a vineyard. It is also the reason why in the seventh year the land was to have a sabbath of rest, a sabbath to Jehovah, Leviticus 25:3-4. Because 'six' means labour and conflict it also means the dispersion of falsity, as in Ezekiel,

Behold, six men coming from the direction of the upper gate, which looks towards the north, every man with a weapon of dispersion in his hand. Ezekiel 9:2.

And in the same prophet, against Gog,

I will cause you to turn about, and I will split you into six, and cause you to come up from the uttermost parts of the north. Ezekiel 39:2.

Here 'six' and 'splitting into six' stand for dispersion, 'the north' for falsities, and 'Gog' for people who seize on doctrinal matters based on things of an external nature with which they destroy internal worship. From Job,

He will deliver you in six troubles, and in a seventh no evil will touch you. Job 5:19.

This stands for the conflict that constitutes temptations.

[3] 'Six' occurs in other parts of the Word where it does not mean labour, conflict, or the dispersion of falsity, but the holiness of faith. In these instances it is related to twelve, which means faith and all things of faith in their entirety, and to three which means that which is holy. Consequently there is also a genuine derivative meaning to the number six, as in Ezekiel 40:5, where the man's measuring rod with which he measured the holy city of Israel was six cubits long; and in other places. The reason for this derivative is that in the conflict of temptation the holiness of faith is present, and also that six days of labour and conflict look forward to the holy seventh day.

3463. 'That Isaac's servants came' means rational concepts. This is clear from the meaning of 'servants' as rational concepts, and also as facts, dealt with in 2567, and from the representation of 'Isaac' as the Lord's Divine Rational, dealt with in 1893, 2066, 2072, 2083, 2630, 3012, 3194, 3210. From what has gone before it is clear what aspect of the Lord is represented here by Isaac, namely the Word as regards its internal sense. For by 'Abimelech, Ahuzzath, and Phicol' are meant matters of doctrine concerning faith which are drawn from the literal sense of the Word, like those matters of doctrine possessed by people who are called 'Philistines' in the good sense. That is, they are people who have no other matters of doctrine than those concerning faith, and yet so far as life is concerned they do what is good, though it is the good of truth. And these matters of doctrine do have a certain link with the internal sense, and so with the Lord.

[2] For people who have no other matters of doctrine than those concerning faith and yet who live according to them are linked in some way to Him, though in a remote way. It is remote for the reason that they do not know from any affection what charity towards the neighbour is, let alone love to the Lord, but only from some concept that belongs to faith. Thus they do not possess any perception of good, only a type of persuasion that that is true and accordingly good which their matters of doctrine tell them to be so. And when they are confirmed in those matters of doctrine they are just as likely to be subject to falsity as to truth, for nothing else than good can confirm a person as to what the truth is.

[3] Truth does indeed teach what good is, but it does so without perception, whereas good teaches what truth is from perception. Anyone may recognize this difference, and also the nature of it, simply from the following general command concerning charity,

All things whatever you would wish people to do to you, do so to them. Matthew 7:12.

The person who acts from this commandment does indeed do what is good to others; but he does it because it is so commanded rather than from any affection in the heart. And as often as he does that good deed he begins from a selfish motive, and also in doing such good his thoughts are of merit. But when he does not act from the commandment but from charity, that is, from affection, his actions begin in the heart, and so in freedom. And as often as he performs that act he begins from the desire itself for what is good, and so that which is a delight to him; and because in this delight he finds reward he has no thought of merit.

[4] From this one may now see what the difference is between doing good from faith and doing it from charity, and that people who do it from faith are more remote from good itself, which is the Lord, than those who do it from charity. The former cannot be easily brought to the good that flows from charity so that they may perceive it because truths are not present in them to any great extent. For no one can be brought to that good unless untruths have been rooted out first, which cannot be effected as long as untruths are so deeply rooted that a person is persuaded that they are truths.