10559. And Moses said unto Jehovah. That this signifies indignation that the Divine was not with them, thus not the church itself, is evident from the signification of “saying,” as here being indignation, for “saying” involves the things which follow, because these are what he said, and the things which follow are things of indignation on this account, that the Divine would not be with them, thus that the church would not be with them, whereby they might be rendered pre-eminent to all that were upon the face of the earth, as is plain from verse sixteen which follows. The reason why the words of Moses to Jehovah were words of indignation on that account, was that Moses here bears relation to the head of the Israelitish nation (see above, n. 10556); wherefore he speaks for himself and for that nation, for he says, “I and the people” (verse 16). And because he here bears relation to that nation as its head, therefore by “Moses said unto Jehovah” is signified indignation; for a man who is such as was that nation, is indignant against God if he does not obtain his desires.

[2] This is done by all those who are in external things without what is internal, for if they reverence and adore God, and as it were love Him, it is not for His own sake, but for the sake of themselves, because they desire nothing else than eminence above others and wealth beyond others, this being the fire which excites their reverence and adoration, and as it were their love. But if they do not obtain what they desire, they forsake God. That that nation was of such a character is very evident from the historicals of the Word. The like is signified by the words of Jacob:

Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way wherein I walk, and will give me bread to eat, and a garment to put on, and I return in peace to my father’s house, then Jehovah shall be to me for God (Genesis 28:20-21).

These words mean that if he should receive these things, he would acknowledge Jehovah for his God; but if he should not receive them, he would not acknowledge Him. Such also was the nation descended from him. From this it is that that nation so often fell away, and worshiped other gods, until at last they were for this reason cast out from the land of Canaan, first the Israelitish nation, and afterward the Jewish. It is evident that the cause of the indignation above spoken of was that if Jehovah did not go with them they would not become preeminent to all in the whole world.

[3] That it was also a cause of indignation that the church itself was not with them, follows from the fact that to be brought by Jehovah into the land of Canaan denotes to become the church. The reason of this is that the church had been in the land of Canaan from the most ancient times, and that the Word could not have been written elsewhere, thus except with the nation which possessed that land; and where the Word is, there is the church. That the Word could not have been written anywhere else was because all the places that were in the whole of that land, and that were round about it, such as the mountains, the valleys, the rivers, the forests, and all the rest, had become representative of celestial and spiritual things; and it was necessary that the sense of the letter of the Word, in both the historical and the prophetical parts, should consist of such things, because the interior things of the Word, which are celestial and spiritual, must close in such things, and as it were stand on them like a house upon its foundation; for unless the Word in respect to the sense of the letter, which is its ultimate, stood upon such things, it would be like a house without a foundation. That this is so is evident from the Word, in that mention is so often made of the places of that land, all of which, having become representative, signify the things of heaven and of the church.

[4] From this it is that to be brought into the land of Canaan signifies the setting up of the church, and that the indignation of Moses involves this also, although he did not think of it. (That the church was in the land of Canaan from the most ancient times, and that consequently all the places therein became representative, see n. 3686, 4447, 454, 4516, 4517, 5136, 6306, 6516, 8317, 9320, 9325; and that from this “the land of Canaan” in the Word signifies the church, see the places cited in n. 9325)

6306. Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite. That this signifies by victory over evil, is evident from the representation of the Amorite, as being evil (see n. 1857); and from the signification of “taking out of the hand,” as being to acquire through victory. As regards the Amorites, be it known that by them is signified evil, and also by the Canaanites; and by the rest of the nations in that land which are mentioned in the Word are signified various kinds of evil and also of falsity. Such things were represented by the nations when the sons of Israel came into possession of the land of Canaan, for the reason that, while the sons of Israel represented heavenly things, those nations represented infernal things, and in this way the land of Canaan represented every state of the other life; and because the nations represented infernal things, they were given to the curse, and it was forbidden to enter into a covenant with those which remained.

[2] That the sons of Israel seized and inhabited the land of those who represented the hells was a representative that about the time of the Lord’s coming the infernals would have occupied a large part of heaven; and that by coming into the world and making the Human in Himself Divine the Lord would expel them and cast them down into the hells, and thus deliver heaven from them, and give it for an inheritance to those who would be of His spiritual kingdom.

[3] That by the Amorite nation was represented evil in general, is plain from the passages where it is mentioned, as in Ezekiel:

Jerusalem, thy tradings and thy generations were from the land of the Canaanite; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite (Ezekiel 16:3, 45);

as in the internal sense “father” signifies the good of the church, but in the opposite sense evil; and “mother” signifies the truth of the church, but in the opposite sense falsity, therefore it is said “thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite.”

[4] And in Amos:

I destroyed the Amorite before them, whose height was like the height of the cedars, and he was sturdy as the oak. I led you in the wilderness, to possess the land of the Amorite (Amos 2:9-10);

here also the “Amorite” denotes evil, for the evil of the love of self is described by the “height of the cedars and the sturdiness of the oak.” That the “Amorite” is evil in general, is because the whole land of Canaan was called “the land of the Amorite;” for it is said, “I led you in the wilderness, to possess the land of the Amorite.” Again in the second book of Kings:

Manasseh king of Judah hath done evil above all the evil that the Amorites did, who were before him (2 Kings 21:11).

[5] That “with my sword” signifies by means of truth combating, is evident from the signification of “sword,” as being truth combating (see n. 2799, 4499). And that “with my bow” signifies by means of doctrine, is evident from the signification of “bow,” as being doctrine (n. 2686, 2709).

[6] That the words “the portion which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow” were spoken by Israel on account of the internal sense, is very manifest, because Jacob did not take that portion from the Amorite with his sword nor with his bow, but bought it of the sons of Hamor, as is plain from the words in Genesis:

Jacob came to Shalem, a city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, when he came thither from Paddan-aram; and encamped before the city. And he bought the portion of the field, where he had spread his tent, from the hand of the sons of Hamor, Shechem’s father, for a hundred kesitah (Genesis 33:18-19).

That this field was the portion which he gave to Joseph, is evident from these words in Joshua:

The bones of Joseph, which the sons of Israel brought up out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem, in the portion of the field which Jacob bought of the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem, for a hundred kesitah; and they were for an inheritance to the sons of Joseph (Josh. 24:32).

From this it is plain that that portion was bought, and that it was what was given to Joseph.

[7] That the city of Shechem was not meant, which was near there, where Simeon and Leviticus slew every male, and which they took with the sword (Genesis 34), may be seen from the fact that Jacob abhorred that deed, and on that account cursed Simeon and Levi, and utterly put away from himself that deed, saying:

Let not my soul come into their secret; in their assembly let not my glory be united; for in their anger they slew a man, and in their good pleasure they unstrung an ox. Cursed be their anger, for it was vehement; and their wrath, for it was hard: I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel” (Genesis 49:5-7).

From all this it is now evident that these words, “one portion which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow,” were said by him when he was in the prophetic spirit, for the sake of the internal sense.