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.

3670. 'And He will give you the blessing of Abraham' means the joining of the Divine itself to the good and truth of the natural. This is clear from the meaning of 'blessing' as a joining together, dealt with above in 3660, 3667, and from the representation of 'Abraham' as the Lord's Divine itself, which is called the Father, dealt with in 2011, 3251, 3439. And as these words are addressed to Jacob, who is to represent the Divine Good and Truth of the Lord's Divine Natural, it is a joining together of the Divine itself to the good and truth of the Natural - this joining together being meant in the internal sense by 'He will give you the blessing of Abraham'. In the sense of the letter it is possession of the land of Canaan that is meant by 'the blessing of Abraham', and also by the words that follow, 'to inherit the land of your sojournings, which God gave to Abraham'. This also is what these words are taken to mean by all who believe that the historical descriptions of the Word do not embody anything more heavenly and deeper than that. This is especially so with the Jewish nation, which also claims from that sense to hold a superior position to all other nations and peoples. Their forefathers understood those words in the same way, especially Jacob, who had that kind of disposition, as becomes clear from what has been stated just above in 3667. That is to say, he did not know Jehovah and was unwilling to acknowledge Him unless He conferred bodily and worldly benefits on him. The fact that neither Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob were meant, but that Jacob represented the Lord's Natural which He was to make Divine is abundantly evident from the explanations given. The same applies to the character of any person who represents, whether evil or good; for the evil are no less able to represent, and have represented, the Lord's Divine, see 665, 1097, 1361.

[2] The same may be seen from the representatives which also exist at the present day. For all kings, no matter who they are or what they are like, represent the Lord through the kingly office itself residing with them; and in like manner all priests, no matter who they are or what they are like, do so through their priestly office. The kingly office itself and the priestly office itself are sacred, no matter who serves in them. Consequently the Word taught by someone evil is no less sacred; nor is the Sacrament of Baptism, or the Holy Supper, or similar ministrations any less so. From this it may also be seen that no king can possibly claim as his own the sacredness that goes with his kingly office, nor any priest the sacredness that goes with his priestly office. Insofar as he does claim it or attribute it to himself he brands himself with the sign of a spiritual thief, or the mark of spiritual theft. And insofar as he commits what is evil, that is, acts contrary to what is right and fair, and contrary to what is good and true, a king throws off his representation of the sacred kingly office, and a priest his representation of the sacred priestly office, and then represents the reverse of this. This explains why so many laws were laid down in the Jewish representative Church concerning the sacredness which was to be attached in particular to priests when ministering. More on this matter will in the Lord's Divine mercy be stated later on.