9372. And He said unto Moses. That this signifies that which concerns the Word in general, is evident from the representation of Moses, as being the Word (of which below); and from the signification of “He said,” as involving those things which follow in this chapter, thus those which concern the Word (see n. 9370). (That Moses represents the Word, can be seen from what has been often shown before about Moses, as from the preface to Genesis 18; and n. 4859, 5922, 6723, 6752, 6771, 6827, 7010, 7014, 7089, 7382, 8601, 8760, 8787, 8805.) Here Moses represents the Word in general, because it is said of him in what follows, that he alone should come near unto Jehovah (verse 2); and also that, being called unto out of the midst of the cloud, he entered into it, and went up the mount (verses 16-18).

[2] In the Word there are many who represent the Lord in respect to truth Divine, or in respect to the Word; but chief among them are Moses, Elijah, Elisha, and John the Baptist. That Moses does so, can be seen in the explications just cited above; that so do Elijah and Elisha, can be seen in the preface to Genesis 18; and n. 2762, 5247; and that John the Baptist does so is evident from the fact that he was “Elias who was to come.” He who does not know that John the Baptist represented the Lord as to the Word, cannot know what all those things infold and signify which are said about him in the New Testament; and therefore in order that this secret may stand open, and that at the same time it may appear that Elias, and also Moses, who were seen when the Lord was transfigured, signified the Word, some things may here be quoted which are spoken about John the Baptist; as in Matthew:

After the messengers of John had departed, Jesus began to speak concerning John, saying, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? a reed shaken by the wind? But what went ye out to see? a man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they that wear soft things are in kings’ houses. But what went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, even more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, Behold I send Mine angel before Thy face, who shall prepare Thy way before Thee. Verily I say unto you, Among those who are born of women there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist; nevertheless he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he. All the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye are willing to believe, he is Elias who was to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear (Matthew 11:7-15; and also Luke 7:24-28).

No one can know how these things are to be understood, unless he knows that this John represented the Lord as to the Word, and unless he also knows from the internal sense what is signified by “the wilderness” in which he was, also what by “a reed shaken by the wind,” and likewise by “soft raiment in kings’ houses;” and further what is signified by his being “more than a prophet,” and by “none among those who are born of women being greater than he, and nevertheless he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he,” and lastly by his being “Elias.” For without a deeper sense, all these words are uttered merely from some comparison, and not from anything of weight.

[3] But it is very different when by John is understood the Lord as to the Word, or the Word representatively. Then by “the wilderness of Judea in which John was” is signified the state in which the Word was at the time when the Lord came into the world, namely, that it was “in the wilderness,” that is, it was in obscurity so great that the Lord was not at all acknowledged, neither was anything known about His heavenly kingdom; when yet all the prophets prophesied about Him, and about His kingdom, that it was to endure forever. (That “a wilderness” denotes such obscurity, see n. 2708, 4736, 7313.) For this reason the Word is compared to “a reed shaken by the wind” when it is explained at pleasure; for in the internal sense “a reed” denotes truth in the ultimate, such as is the Word in the letter.

[4] That the Word in the ultimate, or in the letter, is crude and obscure in the sight of men; but that in the internal sense it is soft and shining, is signified by their “not seeing a man clothed in soft raiment, for behold those who wear soft things are in kings’ houses.” That such things are signified by these words, is plain from the signification of “raiment,” or “garments,” as being truths (n. 2132, 2576, 4545, 4763, 5248, 6914, 6918, 9093); and for this reason the angels appear clothed in garments soft and shining according to the truths from good with them (n. 5248, 5319, 5954, 9212, 9216). The same is evident from the signification of “kings’ houses,” as being the abodes of the angels, and in the universal sense, the heavens; for “houses” are so called from good (n. 2233, 2234, 3128, 3652, 3720, 4622, 4982, 7836, 7891, 7996, 7997); and “kings,” from truth (n. 1672, 2015, 2069, 3009, 4575, 4581, 4966, 5044, 6148). Therefore by virtue of their reception of truth from the Lord, the angels are called “sons of the kingdom,” “sons of the king,” and also “kings.”

[5] That the Word is more than any doctrine in the world, and more than any truth in the world, is signified by “what went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet;” and by, “there hath not arisen among those who are born of women a greater than John the Baptist;” for in the internal sense “a prophet” denotes doctrine (n. 2534, 7269); and “those who are born,” or are the sons, “of women” denote truths (n. 489, 491, 533, 1147, 2623, 2803, 2813, 3704, 4257).

[6] That in the internal sense, or such as it is in heaven, the Word is in a degree above the Word in the external sense, or such as it is in the world, and such as John the Baptist taught, is signified by, “he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he;” for as perceived in heaven the Word is of wisdom so great that it transcends all human apprehension. That the prophecies about the Lord and His coming, and that the representatives of the Lord and of His kingdom, ceased when the Lord came into the world, is signified by, “all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.” That the Word was represented by John, as by Elijah, is signified by his being “Elias who is to come.”

[7] The same is signified by these words in Matthew:

The disciples asked Jesus, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? He answered and said, Elias must needs first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, that Elias hath come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they wished. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them. And they understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist (Matthew 17:10-13).

That “Elias hath come, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they wished” signifies that the Word has indeed taught them that the Lord is to come, but that still they did not wish to comprehend, interpreting it in favor of the rule of self, and thus extinguishing what is Divine in it. That they would do the same with the truth Divine itself, is signified by “even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them.” (That “the Son of man” denotes the Lord as to truth Divine, see n. 2803, 2813, 3704)

[8] From all this it is now evident what is meant by the prophecy about John in Malachi:

Behold I send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Jehovah cometh (Malachi 4:5).

Moreover, the Word in the ultimate, or such as it is in the external form in which it appears before man in the world, is described by the “clothing” and “food” of John the Baptist, in Matthew:

John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, had His clothing of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his food was locusts and wild honey (Matthew 3:1, 4).

In like manner it is described by Elijah in the second book of Kings:

He was a hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins (2 Kings 1:8).

By “clothing,” or a “garment,” when said of the Word, is signified truth Divine there in the ultimate form; by “camel’s hair” are signified memory-truths such as appear there before a man in the world; by the “leathern girdle” is signified the external bond connecting and keeping in order all the interior things; by “food” is signified spiritual nourishment from the knowledges of truth and of good out of the Word; by “locusts” are signified ultimate or most general truths; and by “wild honey” their pleasantness.

[9] That such things are signified by “clothing” and “food” has its origin in the representatives of the other life, where all appear clothed according to truths from good, and where food also is represented according to the desires of acquiring knowledge and growing wise. From this it is that “clothing,” or a “garment,” denotes truth (as may be seen from the citations above; and that “food” or “meat” denotes spiritual nourishment, n. 3114, 4459, 4792, 5147, 5293, 5340, 5342, 5576, 5579, 5915, 8562, 9003; that “a girdle” denotes a bond which gathers up and holds together interior things, n. 9341; that “leather” denotes what is external, n. 3540; and thus “a leathern girdle” denotes an external bond; that “hairs” denote ultimate or most general truths, n. 3301, 5569-5573; that “a camel” denotes memory-knowledge in general, n. 3048, 3071, 3143, 3145, 4156; that “a locust” denotes nourishing truth in the extremes, n. 7643; and that “honey” denotes the pleasantness thereof, n. 5620, 6857, 8056). It is called “wild honey,” or “honey of the field,” because by “a field” is signified the church (n. 2971, 3317, 3766, 7502, 7571, 9139, 9295). He who does not know that such things are signified, cannot possibly know why Elijah and John were so clothed. And yet that these things signified something peculiar to these prophets, can be thought by everyone who thinks well about the Word.

[10] Because John the Baptist represented the Lord as to the Word, therefore also when he spoke of the Lord, who was the Word itself, he said of himself that he was “not Elias, nor the prophet,” and that he was “not worthy to loose the latchet of the Lord’s shoe,” as in John:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory. The Jews from Jerusalem, priests and Levites, asked John who he was. And he confessed, and denied not, I am not the Christ. Therefore they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? But he said, I am not. Art thou the prophet? He answered, No. They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said Isaiah the prophet. They said therefore, Why then baptizest thou, if thou art not the Christ, nor Elias, nor the prophet? He answered, I baptize with water; in the midst of you standeth one whom ye know not; He it is who is to come after me, who was before me, the latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose. When he saw Jesus, he said, Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world! This is He of whom I said, After me cometh a man who was before me; for he was before me (John 1:1, 14, 19-30).

From these words it is plain that when John spoke about the Lord Himself, who was Truth Divine itself, or the Word, he said that he himself was not anything, because the shadow disappears when the light itself appears, that is, the representative disappears when the original itself makes its appearance. (That the representatives had in view holy things, and the Lord Himself, and not at all the person that represented, see n. 665, 1097, 1361, 3147, 3881, 4208, 4281, 4288, 4292, 4307, 4444, 4500, 6304, 7048, 7439, 8588, 8788, 8806.) One who does not know that representatives vanish like shadows at the presence of light, cannot know why John denied that he was Elias and the prophet.

[11] From all this it can now be seen what is signified by Moses and Elias, who were seen in glory, and who spoke with the Lord when transfigured, of His departure which He should accomplish at Jerusalem (Luke 9:29-31); namely, that they signified the Word (“Moses” the historic Word, and “Elias” the prophetic Word), which in the internal sense throughout treats of the Lord, of His coming into the world, and of His departure out of the world; and therefore it is said that “Moses and Elias were seen in glory,” for “glory” denotes the internal sense of the Word, and the “cloud” its external sense (see the preface to Genesis 18, and n. 5922, 8427).

619. But in thy mouth it shall be sweet as honey, signifies outwardly delightful. This is evident from the signification of "mouth," as being what is exterior; for this treats of the little book and eating it up, and "the little book" signifies the Word, and "eating it up" signifies perception and exploration; thence "the mouth," which first receives, means the external of the Word. It is evident also from the signification of "sweet as honey," as being the delight of natural good. The external of the Word was "sweet as honey," that is, thus delightful, because the external of the Word is such that it can be applied to any love whatever, or to any principle derived therefrom; and these can be confirmed by it. The external of the Word, which is the sense of its letter, is such because many things in it are written in accordance with the appearances presented to the natural man, and many appearances, when not interiorly understood, are fallacies, like the fallacies of the senses. Those, therefore, who love to live for the body and for the world, by means of these appearances draw over the external of the Word to confirm evils of life and falsities of faith.

[2] This was done especially by the sons of Jacob, who applied all things of the Word to themselves, and from the sense of the letter they held the belief, and also maintain it to this day, that they were chosen in preference to others, and therefore were a holy nation; that their Jerusalem, the temple there, the ark, the altar, the sacrifices, with innumerable other things, were holy of themselves; they did not know, and did not wish to know, that the holiness of all those things proceeded solely from this, that they represented things Divine proceeding from the Lord that are called celestial and spiritual, and are the holy things of heaven and the church, and that to think that these are holy of themselves, and not because of the Divine things they represent, would be to falsify and adulterate the Word by applying it to themselves and to their own loves. It was similar with their belief respecting the Messiah, that he would be king of the world, and would raise them above all other nations and peoples throughout the globe; not to mention other things which they gathered from the mere sense of the letter of the Word, which to them were sweet as honey in the mouth. This is why the things in the spiritual sense of the Word are undelightful, for in that sense are the truths themselves which are not according to appearances; as that the Jewish nation itself was not holy, but worse than every other nation, consequently that it was not chosen; that the city of Jerusalem merely signifies the Lord's church and doctrine respecting Him and the holy things of heaven and the church; and that the temple, the ark, the altar, and the sacrifices represented the Lord and the holy things that proceed from Him, and that for this and no other reason were they holy. These are truths that are stored up inwardly in the sense of the letter of the Word, that is, in its internal spiritual sense; and these truths they deny, because, as was said, they have falsified and adulterated the Word in the sense of the letter; and these things therefore are undelightful to them, like foods that are bitter in the belly.

[3] It is said that the little book was "in the mouth sweet as honey," because "honey" signifies the delight of natural good; that "honey" signifies that delight can be seen from the following passages. In Ezekiel:

It was said to the prophet, Open wide thy mouth and eat that I give thee. And I saw and behold, a hand was put forth unto me, and lo, the roll of a book was therein; and when he had spread it before me it was written in front and behind, and written thereon were dirges, moaning, and woe. Then he said unto me, Son of man, eat this roll, and go speak unto the house of Israel. Then he said unto me, Feed thy belly and fill thy bowels with this roll that I give thee; and when I ate it, it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness. And he said, Go to the house of Israel and speak my words unto them (Ezekiel 2:8-10; 3:1-4).

These things involve things altogether similar to those in Revelation. The command to the prophet Ezekiel "to eat the roll of the book" involves something similar as the command to John "to eat the little book," namely, to explore how the Divine truth which is in the Word is yet received, perceived, and appropriated by those who are of the church; for the prophet Ezekiel and John represent the doctrine of truth and the Word, therefore the exploration was made with them. It was made by eating a book, because "to eat" signifies to perceive and thus to appropriate, as has been shown above; and when this has been ascertained, namely, how the Word was still perceived, it is said to the prophet Ezekiel that "he should go to the house of Israel and speak to them the words of God;" also to the prophet John that "he must prophesy," that is, still teach the Word in the church; and this because the book was perceived to be "in his mouth sweet as honey," that is, because the Word in the sense of the letter is still delightful, but for the reason that this sense can be applied to any principles of falsity and to any loves of evil, and can thus serve them in confirming the delights of the natural life separated from the delights of the spiritual life; and when these are separated they become mere delights of the loves of the body and of the world whence are principles of falsity from fallacies.

[4] In Isaiah:

A virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call His name God-with-us. Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to reject the evil and to choose the good (Isaiah 7:14, 15).

That this was said of the Lord is proved in Matthew (Matthew 1:23). Anyone can see that "butter and honey" do not mean here butter and honey, but something Divine corresponding to them, for it is added, "that He may know to reject the evil and to choose the good," and that is not known by eating butter and honey; but "butter" signifies the delight of spiritual good, and "honey" the delight of natural good, consequently the two signify the Lord's Divine spiritual and Divine natural, and thus His Human, interior and exterior. That the Lord's Human is meant can be seen from its being said that "a virgin shall conceive and bear a son;" and that it is Divine from its being said, "and shall call His name God-with-us," "to call a name" signifying the quality of a thing, here what the Divine is, for He was to be called "God-with-us."

[5] "Butter and honey" also signify the delight of spiritual and natural good in these words in the same chapter:

Butter and honey shall everyone eat that remains in the land (verse 22).

"That remains" mean those that are inwardly and also outwardly good from the Lord, consequently who receive the good proceeding from the Lord in truths; the blessedness therefrom of the internal or spiritual man, and also of the external or natural man, is signified by "butter and honey."

[6] In Job:

He shall suck the poison of asps; the viper's tongue shall slay him. He shall not see the streams, the flowings of the brooks of honey and butter (Job 20:16, 17).

This is said of hypocrites who talk well and smoothly about God, about the neighbor, and about heaven and the church, and yet think altogether otherwise; and because they cunningly contrive by these means to captivate minds, although in heart they cherish what is infernal, it is said, "He shall suck the poison of asps, the viper's tongue shall slay him." That such have no delight in natural good or spiritual good is meant by "He shall not see the streams, the flowings of the brooks of honey and butter," "streams" meaning the things of intelligence, and "the flowings of the brooks of honey and butter," the things therefrom that are of affection and love, which are the very delights of heavenly life. Every delight of life that abides to eternity is a delight of spiritual good and truth, and from that a delight of natural good and truth; but hypocritical delight is a natural delight separate from spiritual delight, and this delight is turned in the other life into what is direfully infernal. Evidently "butter and honey" do not mean here butter and honey, for where, in the world, can there be found "flowings of brooks of honey and butter"?

[7] "Milk and honey" have a similar signification as "butter and honey;" and as "milk" signifies the delight of spiritual good, and "honey" the delight of natural good, and these delights are with those who are of the Lord's church, therefore the land of Canaan, which signifies the church, was called:

A land flowing with milk and honey (Exodus 3:8, 17; Leviticus 20:24; Numbers 13:27; 14:8; Deuteronomy 6:3; 11:9; 26:9, 15; 27:3; 31:20; Joshua 5:6; Jeremiah 11:5; 32:22; Ezekiel 20:6).

That in the Word "the land of Canaan" means the church has been shown above (n. 29, 304, 431); and the church is with those only who are in spiritual good and at the same time in natural good; in such the church is formed by the Lord; for the church is in man and not outside of him, consequently is not with those with whom these goods are not. These goods with their delights are signified by "milk and honey."

[8] There was also much honey in the land of Canaan at that time, because at that time the church of the Lord was there, as can be seen from the first book of Samuel, where it is said:

That they came into the forest, where there was honey upon the face of the ground, and there was a stream of honey, and Jonathan's eyes were opened by tasting the honey (1 Samuel 14:25-27, 29).

"Jonathan's eyes were opened by tasting the honey" because "honey" corresponds to natural good and its delight, and this good gives intelligence and enlightens, from which Jonathan knew that he had done evil; as we read in Isaiah, "He shall eat butter and honey, that he may know to reject the evil and to choose the good." For at that time correspondences exhibited their effects outwardly, since all things of the Israelitish Church consisted of correspondences, which represented and signified things celestial and spiritual.

[9] Again, "oil and honey" have a similar signification as "butter and honey" in the following passages. In Moses:

He made him to ride on the high places of the earth, and fed him with the produce of the fields; he made him to suck honey out of the cliff, and oil out of the flint of the rock (Deuteronomy 32:13).

This is in the song of Moses, which treats of the church in its beginning, and afterward in its progress, and finally in its end. Those that constituted the Ancient Church are described by these words, not those however who constituted the Israelitish Church, for these were evil from the beginning even to the end, as can be seen from their fathers in Egypt, and afterwards in the wilderness; but the Ancient Church, the men of which are meant by "their fathers," was that which the Lord "made to ride on the high places of the earth, and fed with the produce of the fields." That to these the good of natural love and the good of spiritual love with their delights were given by means of truths, from which they had their intelligence and according to which they lived, is signified by "he made him to suck honey out of the cliff, and oil out of the flint of the rock," "honey" signifying the delight of natural love, "oil," the delight of spiritual love, and "the cliff" and "the flint of the rock," truth from the Lord. (That "oil" signifies the good of love and charity, may be seen above, n. 375; and that "cliffs" and "rocks" signify truth from the Lord, n. 411, 443)

[10] In David:

I fed ¹ them with the fat of wheat, and with honey out of the rock I satisfied them (Psalms 81:16).

"The fat of wheat" signifies the delight of spiritual good, and "honey out of the rock," the delight of natural good through truths from the Lord (as above). It is to be known that natural good is not good unless there is also spiritual good; for all good flows in through the spiritual man or mind into the natural man or mind, and so far as the natural man or mind receives the good of the spiritual man or mind so far man receives good; that there may be good there must be both, or the two sides, consequently natural good separated from spiritual good is in itself evil, although by man it is still perceived as good. Since there must be both, it is said in the passages cited and yet to be cited, "butter and honey," "milk and honey;" "fat and honey," as also "oil and honey;" and "butter," "milk," "fat," and "oil" signify the good of spiritual love, and "honey" the good of natural love, together with their delights.

[11] In Ezekiel:

Thus wast thou decked with gold and silver, and thy garments were fine linen and silk and broidered work; thou didst eat fine flour, honey, and oil, whence thou didst become exceeding beautiful, and didst prosper even to a kingdom. But my bread which I gave thee, and the fine flour and oil and honey with which I fed thee, thou didst set before idols as an odor of rest (Ezekiel 16:13, 19).

This is said about Jerusalem, which signifies the church, first the Ancient Church, and afterwards the Israelitish Church. Of the Ancient Church it is said "she was decked with gold and silver," which signifies the love of good and truth that the men of that Church had; "the garments of fine linen, silk, and broidered work," signify the knowledges of celestial, spiritual, and natural truth, "fine linen" signifying truth from a celestial origin, "silk" truth from a spiritual origin, and "broidered work" truth from a natural origin, which is called knowledge [scientificum]. "She ate fine flour, honey and oil," signifies the perception of natural and spiritual truth and good, and their appropriation, "to eat" signifying to be appropriated, "fine flour" truth, "honey" natural good, and "oil" spiritual good, which were appropriated to them by a life according to the truths above mentioned. "She became exceeding beautiful and prospered even to a kingdom" signifies to become intelligent and wise so as to constitute a church, "beauty" signifying intelligence and wisdom, and a "kingdom" the church. But of the Israelitish Church, which was merely in externals without internals, whence the men of that church were idolatrous, it is said that "they set the fine flour, honey, and oil before the images of a male, or idols, as an odor of rest," that is, they perverted the truths and goods of the church into falsities and evils, and thus profaned them.

[12] In the same:

Judah and the land of Israel were thy merchants in the wheats of Minnith and Pannag, and honey and oil and balsam they gave for thy merchandise (Ezekiel 27:17).

This is said of Tyre, which signifies the church in respect to the knowledges of truth and good; so, too, "Tyre" signifies the knowledges of truth and good themselves belonging to the church; "oil and honey" have a similar signification as above. What is meant here in the spiritual sense by "Judah and the land of Israel," by "the wheats of Minnith and Pannag," and by "balsam," also by "the merchandise of Tyre," may be seen explained above n. 433.

[13] In Moses:

A land of brooks of water, of fountains and depths going forth from the valley and mountain; a land of wheat and barley, and of vine and fig-tree and pomegranate; and of olive oil and honey (Deuteronomy 8:7, 8).

This is said of the land of Canaan, which means the church which is in celestial, spiritual, and natural good, and in truths therefrom; but the contents of this verse are explained above (n. 374, 403), showing that "oil and honey" here signify the good of love in the internal or spiritual man and in the external or natural man.

[14] In David:

The judgments of Jehovah are truth, they are righteous altogether; more desirable than gold and than much fine gold; and sweeter than honey and the dropping of honeycombs (Psalms 19:9, 10).

In the same:

I have not departed from Thy judgment; for Thou hast instructed me. How sweet are Thy words to my palate, more than honey to my mouth (Psalms 119:102, 103).

"Judgments" signify the truths and goods of worship, therefore it is said "the judgments of Jehovah are truth, they are righteous altogether;" "righteous" signifies the good of life and worship therefrom; and as good is also signified by "gold" and "fine gold," it is said that "they are more desirable than gold and than much fine gold," "gold" meaning celestial good, "fine gold" spiritual good, and "desirable" means what belongs to affection and love. Since the goods by which a man is affected are delightful it is said that they are "sweeter than honey and the dropping of honeycombs," and that "the words of Jehovah are sweet to the palate, more than honey to the mouth," "sweet" signifying what is delightful, "honey" natural good, and "the dropping of honeycombs" natural truth. And because "honey" means natural good, and the "mouth" signifies what is external, it is said "more than honey to my mouth," as in Revelation, that "the little book was sweet as honey in the mouth."

[15] In Luke:

Jesus said to the disciples, who believed that they saw a spirit, See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; feel of Me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me having. Then He said to them, Have ye here anything to eat? And they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and of a honeycomb. And He took it and did eat it before them (Luke 24:39, 41-43).

From the series of these words regarded in the spiritual sense it is very evident that "honeycomb" and "honey" signify natural good, for the Lord disclosed to His disciples that He had glorified or made Divine His whole Human, even to its natural and sensual; this is signified by "hands and feet" and by "flesh and bones," which they saw and felt, "hands and feet" signifying the ultimate of man which is called the natural, "flesh" its good, and "bones" its truth; for all things that are in the human body correspond to spiritual things, the "flesh" corresponding to the good of the natural man, and the "bones" to its truths. (On this correspondence, see in the work on Heaven and Hell 87-102.) And this the Lord confirmed by eating before the disciples of the broiled fish and honeycomb; "the broiled fish" signifying the truth of good of the natural and sensual man, and "the honeycomb," the good of the truth of the same. The Lord, therefore, by letting them feel of Him, showed and confirmed that His whole Human, even to its ultimates, was glorified, that is, made Divine; and this He showed, too, by the eating, in that "He ate before them a piece of broiled fish and of a honeycomb."

[16] As "honey" signifies the good of the natural man, so also:

John the Baptist had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his food was locusts and wild honey (Matthew 3:4; Mark 1:6).

For John the Baptist represented something similar as Elijah; wherefore it is also said that "Elijah should come," by whom John is meant. Elijah represented the Lord in relation to the Word, or the Word from the Lord; John had a similar representation; and as the Word teaches that the Messiah or the Lord was about to come, John was sent before to preach respecting the Lord's coming, according to the predictions in the Word. And as John represented the Word, therefore he represented the ultimates of the Word, which are natural, by his raiment and also by his food, namely, by his raiment of camel's hair and the leathern girdle about his loins; "camel's hair" signifying the ultimates of the natural man, such as are the exterior things of the Word, and "the leathern girdle about the loins," the external bond and connection of these with the interior things of the Word, which are spiritual. "Locust and wild honey" have a like signification, "locust" signifying the truth of the natural man, and "wild honey" its good. It is the same whether you say the truth and good of the natural man or natural truth and good, such as the Word is in its ultimate sense, which is called the sense of the letter or the natural sense, for this was what John represented by his raiment and food.

[17] That:

No leaven and no honey were to be offered in the offerings made by fire to Jehovah (Leviticus 2:11);

because "leaven" signifies the falsity of the natural man, and "honey" the delight of good of the natural man, and in the contrary sense the delight of its evil; this is also like leaven when it is mixed with such things as signify things interiorly holy, for natural delight draws its own from the delights of the love of self and of the world; and as the Israelitish nation was in such delights more than other nations, therefore they were forbidden to use honey in their sacrifices. (On the signification of "honey," as meaning the delight of the good of the natural man, see Arcana Coelestia 5650, 6857, 8056, 10137, 10530)

[18] That:

When Samson had rent the young lion he found in its carcass a swarm of bees and honey, when he was about to take a wife from the Philistine nation (Judges 14:8);

signified the dissipation of faith separated from charity, which the Philistine nation represented; for this reason the Philistines were called "uncircumcised," and this term signified that they were without spiritual love and charity and only in natural love, which is the love of self and of the world. Because such a faith destroys the good of charity it was represented by a young lion that attacked Samson with intent to tear him in pieces, but as Samson was a Nazirite, and by his Naziriteship represented the Lord in respect to His ultimate natural, he rent the lion, and afterwards found in its carcass "a swarm of bees and honey," and this signifies that when such faith has been dissipated, the good of charity succeeds in its place. The other things related of Samson in the book of Judges have a like signification; for there is nothing written in the Word that does not represent and signify such things as belong to heaven and the church, and these can be known only by a knowledge of correspondences, and thus from the spiritual sense of the Word.

Poznámky pod čarou:

4444. As they heard it, and the men were grieved, and they were very angry. That this signifies that they were in evil against the truth of the Church among the Ancients, is evident from the signification of being “grieved and very angry,” as being to be in evil. That this was against the truth of the Church among the Ancients, follows, because it was against Shechem the son of Hamor, by whom is signified the truth among the ancients, as before said (n. 4430, 4431). That they were in evil is evident from what follows, in that they spoke with fraud (verse 13), and then, after Shechem and Hamor had complied with their demands, they slew them (verses 26-29). Thus by being “grieved and very angry” is here signified that they were in evil. It appears as if these words signify zeal because he lay with their sister, according to the words which presently follow: “Because he had wrought folly in Israel in lying with Jacob’s daughter, and so it ought not to be done;” and at the end of the chapter: “They said, Shall he make our sister as a harlot?” (verse 31); but it was not zeal, for zeal is impossible with anyone who is in evil, being possible only with him who is in good, because zeal has good within it (n. 4164).

[2] It is true that the religiosity which existed with their posterity had good within it, for each and all things of it represented the celestial and spiritual things of the Lord’s kingdom; but as regards those who were in that religiosity it had no good within it, for they were in mere externals without internals, as shown above. The case herein is the same as it is with the religiosity of that nation as now prevalent among them: they acknowledge Moses and the prophets, thus the Word, which in itself is holy, but as regards them it is not holy, for in everything therein they regard themselves, and thus make the Word worldly, nay, earthly, for that there is anything heavenly in it they do not know and neither do they care. They who are in such a state cannot be in good when in their religiosity, but in evil, for nothing heavenly flows in, because they extinguish it in themselves.

[3] Moreover, it was according to a law known in the Ancient Church that he who forced a virgin should give a dowry and take her for his wife, as thus stated in Moses:

If a man persuade a virgin who is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall endow her with a dowry to be his wife. If refusing her father refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay silver, as much as is the dowry of virgins (Exodus 27:15-16).

And elsewhere:

If a man find a damsel who is a virgin, who has not been betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be caught, the man who lay with her shall give the damsel’s father fifty pieces of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he forced her, and he may not put her away all his days (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

That this same law was known to the ancients is very evident from the words of Shechem to the damsel’s father and brothers: “Shechem said unto her father and unto her brethren, Let me find grace in your eyes, and what ye say unto me I will give. Multiply upon me exceedingly dowry and gift, and I will give according as ye shall say unto me, and give me the damsel for a woman” (verses 11-12). And as Shechem desired to fulfill this law, and Dinah’s brothers gave their consent provided that he would become as they were by circumcising every male, according to the words which follow: “Nevertheless in this will we consent unto you, if ye will be as we are, that every male with you be circumcised, we will both give our daughters to you, and will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you, and we will be one people” (verses 15-16), it is evident that Dinah’s brothers did not act from the law (thus not from good), but contrary to the law, and consequently from evil.

[4] It was indeed according to their law that they should not enter into marriages with the nations, as stated in Moses: “Lest thou take of their daughters for thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods” (Exodus 34:16); and again: “Thou shalt not contract kinship with the nations, thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, and his daughter thou shalt not take unto thy son, because he will turn aside thy son from following Me, that they may serve other gods” (Deuteronomy 7:3-4); but this law was given in regard to idolatrous nations, lest by marriages with them the sons of Israel should turn aside from truly representative worship to idolatrous worship; for when they became idolaters they could no longer represent the celestial and spiritual things of the Lord’s kingdom, but the opposites, which are infernal, for they then called forth from hell a certain devil whom they worshiped, and to whom they applied the Divine representatives, and therefore it is said, “Lest they go a whoring after their gods.” This law was given for the additional reason that by the “nations” were signified the evils and falsities with which the goods and truths represented by the sons of Israel were not to be commingled, consequently not diabolical and infernal things with heavenly and spiritual things (see n. 3024 at the end).

[5] But they were never forbidden to intermarry with the nations who accepted their worship, and who after being circumcised acknowledged Jehovah. These they called “sojourners sojourning with them,” who are thus spoken of in Moses:

If a sojourner shall sojourn with thee, and be willing to keep the passover to Jehovah, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it, and he shall be as an inhabitant of the land; there shall be one law for the inhabitant and for the sojourner that sojourneth in the midst of you (Exodus 12:48-49).

And again:

When a sojourner shall sojourn with you, he shall keep the passover unto Jehovah; according to the statute of the passover, and according to the statutes thereof, so shall he do; one statute shall there be for you, both for the sojourner and for the native of the land (Numbers 9:14).

The reason why they were called “sojourners sojourning in the midst of them” and “with them” was that “to sojourn” signified to be instructed; and therefore a “sojourner” signified those who suffered themselves to be instructed in the statutes and doctrinal things. (That “to sojourn” and a “sojourner” have this signification may be seen above, n. 1463, 2025, 3672) In the same:

If a sojourner shall sojourn with you who shall have made a fire-offering of an odor of rest unto Jehovah, as ye do, so he shall do: as to the assembly, there is one statute for you and for the sojourner that sojourneth, a statute of eternity for your generations; as ye are, so is the sojourner before Jehovah; one law and one judgment shall be for you and for the sojourner that sojourneth with you (Numbers 15:14-16).

As the native of you shall be the sojourner that sojourneth with you (Leviticus 19:34).

One judgment shall there be for you, such as is for the sojourner, such shall be for the native (Leviticus 24:22).

[6] That this statute was known not only to Jacob and his sons, but also to Shechem and Hamor, is evident from their words; for the statutes, judgments, and laws that were given to the Israelitish and Jewish nation were not new, but such as had previously existed in the Ancient Church and in the second Ancient Church which was called Hebrew from Eber, as has been shown. That consequently this law was known is evident from the words, “The sons of Jacob said to Hamor and Shechem, We cannot do this word, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, for this is a reproach to us; nevertheless in this will we consent to you, if ye will be as we, to circumcise for you every male, we will both give our daughters to you, and will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you and will be for one people” (verses); and the same is evident from the words of Hamor and Shechem, in that they not only consented, but also caused themselves and every male of their city to be circumcised (verses 18-24).

[7] Hence it is evident that Shechem became a sojourner such as is spoken of in the law, and thus could take the daughter of Jacob for a woman; so that to kill them was a wicked deed, as Jacob also testified before his death (Genesis 49:5-7). That not only Judah, but also Moses, and also the kings of the Jews and of the Israelites, and also many of the people, took wives from the nations, is evident from the historicals of the Word; and that these wives received their statutes, judgments, and laws, and were acknowledged as sojourners, is not to be doubted.