8080. 'And all the firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem, means that the truths of faith are not to be ascribed to the Lord, but forms of the good of faith. This is clear from the meaning of 'the firstborn' as faith, dealt with in 352, 2435, 6344, 7035, 8042; from the meaning of 'sons' as truths, dealt with in 489, 491, 533, 1147, 2623, 3373; and from the meaning of 'redeeming' as giving something else instead, as above in 8078, 8079. The fact that those truths of faith are not to be ascribed follows from the full message that is implied by these words, And all the firstborn of man among your sons you shall not make over, that is, you shall not sacrifice, but you shall redeem', 'not making over' being not ascribing, as above in 8074, 8078. From this it is evident that 'all the firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem' means that the truths of faith are not to be ascribed to the Lord, but something else instead. Proof that this something else is the good of faith is provided by the consideration that generally 'the firstborn' means the good of faith, as above in 8042, 8043. But since it speaks here about 'the firstborn of man among his sons', the truth of faith is meant; for there is the truth of faith and there is the good of faith.

[2] Further proof that the good of faith, which is charity, is this something else which is to be ascribed to the Lord instead of the truths of faith is provided by the fact that the firstborn of the children of Israel were not accepted but the Levites instead; and the reason for this was that 'Levi' represented the good of faith, or charity, 3875, 4497, 4502, 4503. With regard to the acceptance of the tribe of Levi instead of all the firstborn, see Numbers 3:12-13, 40-end; 8:16-18. Even more proof that the good of faith is the something else to be ascribed to the Lord is provided by the consideration that faith without charity is not faith, 654, 724, 1162, 1176, 2231, 2343, 2349, 2429, 2839, 2982, 3146, 3325, 3849, 3865, 4368, 5351, 7039, 7082-7084, 7342 (end), 7950, and also by the consideration that the good of faith in actual fact occupies first place, while the truth of faith merely appears to do so, 3539, 3548, 3556, 3563, 3570, 3576, 3603, 3701, 4925, 4926, 4928, 4930, 4977, 5351, 6256, 6269, 6272, 6273, so that charity is the firstborn, 3325, 3494, 4925, 4926, 4928, 4930.

[3] The reason why the truth of faith regarded in itself without the good of faith is not to be ascribed to the Lord, that is, not to be given to Him or acknowledged to come from Him, is that no truth of faith has any life within it until it becomes the good of faith; and the truth of faith becomes the good of faith through the willing and doing of it, 7835. When therefore it becomes the good of faith it is acknowledged by the Lord as being His, for the Lord imparts faith indirectly through the good of faith. Every truth of faith too that a member of the spiritual Church possesses becomes the good of faith when he is regenerated. Not till then does it become the Lord's.

[4] The law regarding the redemption of the firstborn of man was laid down to prevent them from sacrificing their sons, a practice that had come into use among gentiles with whom statutes of the Ancient Church - which was a representative Church - remained in force, but in a form that had been completely adulterated in the course of time. The consecration of the firstborn to God was one of those statutes of the Ancient Church; but by consecration they began to understand sacrifice. The descendants of Jacob leaned likewise towards the same practice, and therefore that law of redemption was marked out for them. And to prevent them from following that practice the Levites were adopted instead of the firstborn, as has been stated. The law was marked out in keeping with its corresponding meaning in the spiritual world, which is that the truths of faith are not holy, thus that these are not to be consecrated or ascribed to the Lord but forms of the good of faith. Later on that consecration to Him was taken to mean that they were to give or present the firstborn to Jehovah, and to offer a sacrifice for him, as the following stated in Luke shows,

When the days of their purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Jesus to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it has been written in the Law of the Lord, that every male opening the womb should be called holy to the Lord) and to offer a sacrifice. Luke 2:22-24.

5351. 'And Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh' means a new area of will within the natural, and the essential nature of it. This is clear from the representation of 'Manasseh' in the Word as spiritual good within the natural, and so a new area of will there, dealt with below. This name also implies the essential nature of that good or new area of will. The fact that the name implies the essential nature of this may be recognized from the names given to other people. An explanation of the essential nature accompanies each name, like that given for Manasseh in the following words, For God has made me forget all my labour and all my father's house. These words describe the essential nature of what is meant by 'Manasseh'. What is more, when the phrase 'he called the name' is used, the meaning is that the actual name too contains that essential nature, since 'name' and 'calling the name' mean the essential nature, 144, 145, 1754, 1896, 2009, 2724, 3006, 3421.

[2] The reason why the firstborn who was given the name Manasseh means spiritual good within the natural, or a new area of will there, is that good is in actual fact the firstborn in the Church. That is, with someone who is in the process of becoming a Church, truth is not the firstborn, though it appears to be so, see 352, 367, 2435, 3325, 3494, 4925, 4926, 4928, 4930. The same may also be recognized from the consideration that a person's will takes precedence over his understanding; for the desires in a person's will are the primary constituents of his life, while the ideas in his understanding are secondary to them; and he acts in accordance with the desires of his will. What goes forth from the will is called good in the case of those who through regeneration have received from the Lord a new will; but it is called evil in the case of those who have had no wish to receive such. What goes forth from the understanding however is called truth in the case of the regenerate but falsity in the case of the unregenerate. But because no knowledge of a person's will is possible except through his understanding - for the understanding is the outward form that the will possesses or the outward form taken by the will which enables it to be known - people therefore imagine that truth which goes forth from the understanding is the firstborn. But this is nothing else than the appearance, for the reason that has been stated.

[3] This explains the controversy that existed in former times over whether the truth which is the essence of faith was the firstborn of the Church or whether good which is the essence of charity was such. Those who based their conclusions on the appearance said that truth was the firstborn, whereas those who did not base theirs on the appearance acknowledged that good was. This also explains why at the present day people make faith the primary and absolutely essential constituent of the Church, but charity the secondary and non-essential element. But by supposing that faith alone is what saves a person they have sunk into far deeper error than the ancients. (In the Church faith is used to mean all the truth of doctrine, while charity is used to mean all the good of life.) They do, it is true, call charity and the works of charity the fruits of faith. Yet does anyone believe that those fruits make any contribution to salvation when the belief exists that someone can be saved by faith in the final hour of his life, no matter what kind of life he led before then? More than this, does anyone believe that those fruits contribute in any way to salvation when people use doctrine to set faith apart from works that are the product of charity, saying that faith alone saves without good works, or that works which are matters of life contribute nothing to salvation? Dear, dear! What kind of faith is that, and what kind of Church is it when people cherish faith that is dead and reject faith that is living? For faith without charity is like a body without a soul. But a body without a soul is removed from sight and put away because it stinks, as everyone knows; and in the next life faith without charity is just like this. All who possessed faith so-called which was devoid of charity are in hell; but all who had charity are in heaven. For everyone's life remains with him, whereas doctrine does so only insofar as it draws on that life.

[4] It is less easy to show from other places in the Word that 'Manasseh' means a new area of will within the natural - or what amounts to the same, spiritual good there - than it is to show that 'Ephraim' means a new area of understanding within the natural, or spiritual truth there. Even so, inferences can be drawn regarding the meaning of 'Manasseh' from what is said about 'Ephraim', because in the Word when two are mentioned together in the way these are, one means good, the other truth. Therefore Manasseh's meaning - spiritual good within the natural, which is the essence of the new will there - will be seen in what follows shortly where Ephraim is the subject.