2180. 'And took a young bull, tender and good' means a celestial-natural which the rational took to itself in order that it might join itself to perception from the Divine. This is clear from the meaning of 'a young bull' or 'a son of an ox' in the Word as natural good. And because the subject is the Lord's Rational, it is called 'tender' from the celestial-spiritual, which is truth grounded in good, and 'good' from the celestial itself, which is good itself. Within the genuine rational there is both the affection for truth and the affection for good, but that which is first and foremost there is the affection for truth, as shown already in 2072. This explains why 'tender' is mentioned before 'good'; but even so, as is quite usual in the Word, both are mentioned on account of the marriage of truth and good which is referred to above in 2173.

[2] That 'a young bull' or 'a son of an ox' means the celestial-natural, or what amounts to the same, natural good, becomes especially clear from the sacrifices, which were the principal representatives in the worship of the Hebrew Church and after this of the Jewish Church. Their sacrifices were made either from the herd or from the flock, thus from animals of various kinds that were clean, such as oxen, young bulls, he-goats, sheep, rams, she-goats, kids, and lambs, besides doves and fledgling pigeons. All of these creatures meant the internal features of worship, that is, celestial and spiritual things, 2165, 2177, those from the herd meaning celestial-natural, those from the flock celestial-rational. Because both of these - natural things and rational things - are more and more interior and are various, so many genera and so many species of these creatures were therefore employed in sacrifices. This fact becomes clear also from its being laid down as to which creatures were to be offered in burnt offerings and also which in every kind of sacrifice - the daily sacrifices; those offered on sabbaths and at festivals; those made as free-will, eucharistic, or votive offerings; and those offered in purifications, cleansings, and also in inaugurations. Which creatures were to be used, and how many, in each kind of sacrifice is mentioned explicitly. This would never have been done unless each one had had some specific meaning, as is quite evident from those places where the sacrifices are the subject, as in Chapter 29 of Exodus; Chapters 1, 3, 4, 9, 16, and 23 of Leviticus; and Chapters 7, 8, 15, and 29 of Numbers. But this is not the place to explain what each one meant. The situation is similar in the Prophets where those animals are mentioned, from which it may become clear that young bulls meant celestial-natural things.

[3] That none but heavenly things were meant becomes clear also from the cherubim seen by Ezekiel and from the living creatures before the throne which were seen by John. Regarding the cherubim the prophet says,

The likeness of their faces was the face of a man (homo); and they four had the face of a lion on the right side; and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; and they four had the face of an eagle. Ezekiel 1:10.

Regarding the four living creatures before the throne John says,

Around the throne were four living creatures - the first living creature was like a lion, the second living creature like a young bull, the third living creature had a face like a man (homo), the fourth living creature was like a flying eagle - saying, Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come. Revelation 4:7-8.

Anyone may see that holy things were represented by the cherubim and these living creatures, thus also by the oxen and young bulls in the sacrifices. The same applies in the prophecy of Moses concerning Joseph,

Let it come upon the head of Joseph and upon the crown of the head of the Nazirite among his brothers. The firstborn of his ox has honour, and his horns are the horns of a unicorn; with these he will thrust the peoples together, to the ends of the earth. Deuteronomy 33:16-17.

These words are not intelligible to anyone unless he knows what ox, unicorn, horns, and many other things mean in the internal sense.

[4] As for sacrifices in general they were indeed commanded to the Israelites through Moses. But the Most Ancient Church which existed before the Flood never knew anything at all about sacrifices, nor did it ever enter their minds to worship the Lord by the slaughtering of animals. The Ancient Church which existed after the Flood knew nothing about it either. Representatives did indeed exist there, but not sacrifices. These were first introduced in the subsequent Church called the Hebrew Church, and from there they spread to the gentile nations, and even to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and so to Jacob's descendants. The fact that the gentile nations had sacrificial worship has been shown in 1343, and the fact that Jacob's descendants also had such worship before they left Egypt, thus before sacrifices were commanded through Moses on Mount Sinai, becomes clear from Exodus 5:3; 10:25, 27; 18:12; 24:4-5.

[5] This is especially clear from their idolatrous worship in front of the golden calf, regarding which the following is said in Moses,

Aaron built an altar in front of the calf, and Aaron made a proclamation and said, Tomorrow there will be a feast to Jehovah. And they rose up early the next morning and presented burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. And the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Exodus 32:5-6.

This happened while Moses was on Mount Sinai, and so before the command came to them regarding the altar and the sacrifices. That command came to them for the reason that sacrificial worship among them had been turned, as it had among the gentiles, into idolatrous worship, from which they could not be drawn away because they looked upon it as-the chief holy thing. Once something has been implanted in people from their earliest years as being holy, the more so if received from their fathers, and thus is inrooted, the Lord in no way breaks it - provided it is not contrary to order itself - but bends it. This was the reason for its being laid down that the sacrificial system should be established, such as one reads in the books of Moses.

[6] The fact that sacrifices were by no means acceptable to Jehovah, and so were merely permitted and tolerated for the reason just stated, is quite evident in the Prophets. Concerning them the following is said in Jeremiah,

Thus said Jehovah Zebaoth, the God of Israel, Add your burnt offerings on to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh. I did not speak with your fathers and I did not command them on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt on the matters of burnt offering and sacrifice. But this matter I commanded them, saying, Obey My voice, and I will be your God. Jeremiah 7:21-23.

In David,

O Jehovah, sacrifice and offering You have not desired; burnt offering and sin-sacrifices You have not sought. I have delighted to do Your will, O my God. Psalms 40:6, 8.

In the same author,

You do not delight in sacrifice that I should give it; burnt offering You do not accept. The sacrifices of God are a contrite spirit. Psalms 51:16-17.

In the same author,

I will not take any young bull from your house, nor he-goats from your folds. Sacrifice to God confession. Psalms 50:9, 14; 107:21-22; 116:17; Deuteronomy 23:18.

In Hosea,

I desire mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings. Hosea 6:6.

Samuel said to Saul,

Has Jehovah great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices? Behold, to be submissive is better than sacrifice, to be obedient than the fat of rams. - 1 Samuel 15:22.

In Micah,

With what shall I come before Jehovah and bow myself to God on high? Shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will Jehovah be pleased with thousands of rams, with tens of thousands of rivers of oil? He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does Jehovah require of you but to carry out judgement, and to love mercy, and to humble yourself by walking with your God? Micah 6:6-8.

[7] From these quotations it is now evident that sacrifices were not commanded but permitted, and also that in sacrifices nothing else was regarded except that which was internal, and that it was that which was internal that was pleasing, not that which was external. For this reason also the Lord abolished them, as was also foretold through Daniel in the following words when he was speaking about the Lord's Coming,

In the middle of the week He will cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease. Daniel 9:27.

See what has been stated about sacrifices in Volume One, in 922, 923, 1128, 1823. As for 'the young bull' which Abraham made ready or prepared for the three men, the meaning is similar to that of the same animals when used in sacrifices. That it had a similar meaning becomes clear also from the fact that he told Sarah to take three measures of fine flour. Regarding the fine flour that went with the offering of a young bull the following is said in Moses - referring to when they were to come into the land,

When you make ready a young bull for a burnt offering or a sacrifice in the declaring of a vow, or for peace offerings to Jehovah, you shall bring with the young bull a minchah of three tenths of fine flour mixed with oil. Numbers 15:8-9.

Here similarly the number 'three' appears, though three 'tenths' here but three 'measures' in Abraham's instruction to Sarah. But only two tenths went with the offering of a ram, one tenth with that of a lamb, Numbers 15:4-6.

10609. 'Also no flock or herd shall feed before this mountain' means that neither were they capable of receiving instruction concerning the interior and exterior good of the Church, worship, and the Word. This is clear from the meaning of 'flock' as interior good, and from the meaning of herd' as exterior good, both of which are dealt with in 5913, 6048, 8937; from the meaning of 'feeding' as receiving instruction, dealt with in 5201, 6277; and from the meaning of 'mountain', which at this point is Mount Horeb, as the external aspect of the Church, worship, and the Word, dealt with in 10543. From these meanings it is evident that those words mean that neither was this nation capable of receiving instruction concerning the interior and exterior good of the Church, worship, and the Word, since they stood outside and in no way within that external aspect of them. The reason why they were incapable of receiving instruction concerning it was that they were ruled by self-love and love of the world, and people ruled by those loves are totally incapable of knowing what celestial and spiritual good is, and so of knowing what the Church's good is, since this good, being Divine, is spiritual and celestial. If this good were described to them they would not begin to comprehend it, because the internal part of the mind, where perception of that good takes place, is in their case closed.

[2] That such things are meant by 'no flock or herd shall feed before the mountain' may seem to be strange to those who confine their attention to the historical meaning of the Word and think no further than this, that something involving that nation is meant by these words. Nor is anything other than this known by those unacquainted with the internal sense of the Word, in which flock or herd are not meant by 'flock or herd' but the interior and exterior good residing with a person. For what does the Word, which is Divine, have to do with a flock and herd, that is, with animals? Human beings, their worship, love, and faith, thus such things as compose the Church with them, is what the Divine Word has to do with.

[3] The fact that such things, not flock or herd, are meant by 'flock or herd' is clear from places in the Word where they are mentioned, as in David,

You have given Him dominion over the works of Your hands; and You have put all things under His feet, flocks and all herds, and also the beasts of the fields. Psalms 8:6-7.

This refers to the Lord and to His power over all things in heaven and on earth, 'flocks' and 'herds' meaning forms of good, interior and exterior, that exist with people, and 'beasts' people's affections. If those creatures did not have these meanings what would be the point of describing the Lord's power, which is Divine, as power over flocks, herds, and beasts? For the meaning of 'beasts' as human affections, see in the places referred to in 9280.

[4] In Joel,

The day of Jehovah is near, and as destruction from Shaddai will it come. The beasts groan, the droves of the herd are perplexed, because they have no pasture, even the droves of the flock are made desolate. Joel 1:15, 18.

Here also 'the beasts' stands for human affections, 'the droves of the herd and of the flock' standing for forms of good, interior and exterior. For these verses refer to the Lord's Coming, this being what is meant by 'the day of Jehovah'. They also refer to the Church at that time, to its having been laid waste, that is, to its not possessing the good of love any longer, nor the good of faith, these being what 'beasts', 'herds', and 'flocks' mean. If they did not mean those things what would be the point of saying that the beasts would groan on that day, the droves of the herd would be perplexed, and the droves of the flock would be made desolate? What would all this have to do with the Church? Their having no pasture at that time means that no truth is present in which they may receive instruction.

[5] In Jeremiah,

From our youth shame is devouring the work of our fathers - their flocks and their herds, and their sons and their daughters. Jeremiah 3:24.

Here also 'flocks' and 'herds' mean the Church's forms of good, which are those of love and faith, interior and exterior ones.

[6] In Isaiah,

I will bring forth seed from Jacob, and from Judah the heir of My mountains. Then Sharon will be the dwelling-place of the flock, and the Valley of Achor the place for the herd to lie down ¹ , for My people who have sought Me. Isaiah 65:9-10.

'Jacob' and 'Judah' here are not used to mean the people of Jacob and Judah but the external and internal celestial Church, 'Jacob' the external and 'Judah' the internal. The internal good of that Church is meant by 'the dwelling-place of the flock' and the external good by 'the place for the herd to lie down', 'Sharon' being the internal part [of that Church], where this good resides, and 'the Valley of Achor' the external part. The fact that 'Sharon' means the internal part of the celestial Church is clear from the places where Sharon is mentioned, as in Isaiah 33:9; 35:2; and the fact that 'the Valley of Achor' means the external part of that Church is clear in Hosea 2:15.

[7] In Hosea,

Israel, Ephraim, and Judah will go with their flocks and with their herds to seek Jehovah, and they will not find [Him]. Hosea 5:5, 6.

Here also 'flocks' and 'herds' mean the interior and exterior things with those who should be understood by 'Israel, Ephraim, and Judah'. If they did not mean those things what would be the point of saying that these three would go with their flocks and herds to seek Jehovah?

Poznámky pod čarou: