1799. 'Behold, a son of my house is my heir' means that in the Lord's kingdom there would be only that which is external. This is clear from the meaning in the internal sense of 'an heir' and of 'inheriting'. 'Becoming an heir' or inheriting means eternal life in the Lord's kingdom. All who are in the Lord's kingdom are heirs, for the source of the life in them is the Lord's life, which is the life of mutual love, and for that reason they are called 'sons'. The Lord's sons or heirs consist of all who have His life in them, for it is from Him that their life comes, and it is from Him that they have been born, that is, regenerated. Those born of another are that other's heirs; and so it is with all who are being regenerated by the Lord, for in that case they are receiving the life that is the Lord's.

[2] In the Lord's kingdom there are those who are external, those who are more interior, and those who are internal. Good spirits who dwell in the first heaven are external, angelic spirits who dwell in the second heaven are more interior, and angels who dwell in the third heaven are internal. Those who are external are not as close to or near the Lord as those who are more interior, and these in turn are not so close or near as those who are internal. Out of Divine love, or mercy, the Lord wills to have everyone near to Himself, so that they do not stand outside, that is, in the first heaven. His will is that they should dwell in the third heaven, and if possible not merely with Him but abiding in Him. Such is the nature of Divine or the Lord's love. But since at that time none but external things existed with the Church, He complained of this in the words that occur here - 'Behold, a son of my house is my heir' - by which is meant that in His kingdom there would thus be only that which is external. But comfort followed, and a promise of internal things, as described in the verses that follow next. What the external aspect of the Church is has been stated already in 1083, 1098, 1100, 1151, 1153.

[3] By itself doctrine does not constitute the external aspect of the Church, still less the internal, as stated above. Nor on the Lord's part is it its teachings that make one Church distinct and separate from another, but its life in accordance with those teachings, all of which, as long as they present what is true, regard charity as their basic principle. What else does doctrine do but teach men the kind of people they ought to be?

[4] In the Christian world it is their doctrines that cause Churches to be distinct and separate, and because of these they call themselves Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists or the Reformed, and Evangelicals, among other names. It is solely by reason of their doctrines that they are called by these names. This situation would never exist if they were to make love to the Lord and charity towards the neighbour the chief thing of faith. In this case their doctrinal differences would be no more than shades of opinion concerning the mysteries of faith which truly Christian people would leave to individual conscience, and in their hearts would say that a person is truly a Christian when he lives as a Christian, that is, as the Lord teaches. If this were so all the different Churches would become one, and all the disagreements which stem from doctrine alone would disappear. Indeed the hatred one man holds against another would be dispelled in an instant, and the Lord's kingdom on earth would come.

[5] The Ancient Church which existed immediately after the Flood, though scattered among many kingdoms, was of this nature. That is to say, people differed much from one another in matters of doctrine, but for all that, they made charity the chief thing. Also they regarded worship, not from the standpoint of doctrinal teachings which are matters of faith, but from that of charity which is a matter of life. This is what is meant by 'they all had one lip and their words were one', Genesis 11:1, regarding which see 1285.

1154. 'Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah' were just so many nations with whom such worship existed, and who mean just so many types of matters of doctrine which were forms of ritual, derived from the external worship existing with 'Gomer'. This is clear from the Prophets where the same nations are mentioned again. Those nations mean in every instance doctrinal teachings or forms of ritual. And as usual they are meant in both senses, at times in the genuine and at others in the contrary. Ashkenaz is mentioned in Jeremiah,

Set up a standard on the earth, sound the trumpet among the nations; consecrate the nations against her, cause the kingdoms of Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz to hear against her. Jeremiah 5:27.

This refers to the destruction of Babel where 'Ashkenaz' stands for its idolatrous worship, that is, for external worship separated from internal, which destroyed Babylon. In particular it stands for doctrines that are false. Thus Ashkenaz is used in the contrary sense. Togarmah is mentioned in Ezekiel,

Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they were your traders in the souls of men, and they gave vessels of bronze for your merchandise. Those of Bethtogarmah gave horses and horsemen, and mules for your resources. Ezekiel 27:13-14.

This refers to Tyre which represented people who possessed cognitions of celestial and spiritual things. As previously, 'Javan, Tubal, and Meshech' are various representative rites, that is, ones that correspond; and so also is 'Bethtogarmah'. The external rites of the former have regard to celestial things, but those of the latter, or Bethtogarmah, to spiritual things, as is clear from the meaning of the wares with which they traded. In this case Bethtogarmah is used in the genuine sense. In the same prophet,

Gomer and all on his Ranks; Bethtogarmah, the uttermost parts of the north, together with ale on his flanks. Ezekiel 38:6.

Here they stand for perverted matters of doctrine, which are also 'the uttermost parts of the north'. In this case Gomer and Bethtogarmah are used in the contrary sense.