4211. And called his brethren to eat bread. That this signifies the appropriation of good from the Lord’s Divine natural, is evident from the signification of “brethren,” as being those who were now conjoined by a covenant, that is, by friendship; and in the internal sense those who are in good and truth (that these are called “brethren” may be seen above, n. 367, 2360, 3303, 3459, 3803, 3815, 4121, 4191); from the signification of “eating,” as being appropriation (see n. 3168, 3513, 3832; and that banquets and feasts with the ancients signified appropriation and conjunction by love and charity, see above, n. 3596); and from the signification of “bread,” as being the good of love (n. 276, 680, 1798, 3478, 3735), and in the supreme sense the the Lord, (n. 2165, 2177, 3478, 3813). As in the supreme sense “bread” signifies the Lord, it therefore signifies everything holy which is from Him, that is, everything good and true; and because there is nothing else good, which is good, except that which is of love and charity, “bread” signifies love and charity. Nor did the sacrifices of old signify anything else, for which reason they were called by the one word “bread” (n. 2165). They also ate together of the flesh of the sacrifices, in order that the heavenly feast might be represented, that is, conjunction by the good of love and charity. This is what is now signified by the Holy Supper; for this succeeded in the place of sacrifices, and of the feasts from the sanctified things; and the Holy Supper is an external of the church that contains within itself an internal, and by means of this internal it conjoins the man who is in love and charity with heaven, and through heaven with the Lord. For in the Holy Supper also, “eating” signifies appropriation, the “bread” celestial love, and the “wine” spiritual love; and this so entirely that when a man is in a holy state while eating it, nothing else is perceived in heaven.

[2] The reason why the expression “the appropriation of good from the Lord’s Divine natural” is made use of, is that the subject treated of is the good of the Gentiles, and it is this good which is now represented by Laban (n. 4189). Man’s conjunction with the Lord is not a conjunction with His Supreme Divine Itself, but with His Divine Human; for man can have no idea whatever of the Lord’s Supreme Divine, which so transcends his idea as altogether to perish and become nothing; but he can have an idea of His Divine Human. For everyone is conjoined by thought and affection with one concerning whom he has some idea, but not with one concerning whom he has no idea. If when anyone is thinking about the Lord’s Human, he has holiness in his idea, he is thinking also of that holy which coming from the Lord fills heaven, so that he is also thinking of heaven; for in its complex heaven bears relation to a man, and it does this from the the Lord, (n. 684, 1276, 2996, 2998, 3624-3649); and this accounts for the fact that no conjunction is possible with the Lord’s Supreme Divine, but only with His Divine Human, and through His Divine Human with His Supreme Divine. Hence it is said in John that no one hath seen God at any time, except the Only begotten Son (1:18); and that no one can come to the Father except through Him; and hence also He is called the Mediator. That such is the case may be very well known from the fact that all within the church who say they believe in a Supreme Being, and make no account of the Lord, are precisely those who believe nothing at all, not even that there is a heaven, or that there is a hell, and who worship nature. Moreover, if such persons are willing to be instructed by experience, they will see that the evil, even the worst of them, say the same thing.

[3] But as regards the Lord’s Human, men think in various ways, one in one way and another in another, and one in a more holy way than another. They who are within the church are able to think that His Human is Divine, and also that as He says He is one with the Father, and that the Father is in Him, and He in the Father. But they who are without the church cannot do this, both because they know nothing about the Lord and because they have no idea of the Divine except from the images which they see with their eyes, and the idols which they can touch with their hands. And yet the Lord conjoins Himself with these by means of the good of their charity and obedience that is within their gross idea of Him. For this reason it is here said that such have an “appropriation of good from the Lord’s Divine natural;” for the conjunction of the Lord with man is according to the state of his thought and the derivative affection. They who are in the most holy idea concerning the Lord, and at the same time in the knowledges and affections of good and truth-as those can be who are within the church-are conjoined with the Lord in respect to His Divine rational; whereas they who are not in such holiness, nor in such interior idea and affection, and yet are in the good of charity, are conjoined with the Lord in respect to His Divine natural. They who have a holiness of a still grosser kind are conjoined with the Lord in respect to His Divine sensuous; and this conjunction is what is represented by the brazen serpent, in that those who looked at it recovered from the bite of the serpents (Numbers 21:9). In this conjunction are those among the Gentiles who worship idols, and yet live in charity in accordance with their religion. From all this it is now evident what is meant by the appropriation of good from the Lord’s Divine natural, which is signified by Jacob’s calling his brethren to eat bread.

1798. Abram said, Lo to me Thou hast not given seed. That this signifies that there was no internal of the church, is evident from the signification of “seed,” which is love and faith, spoken of above (n. 255, 256, 1025), and from the signification of an heir, as explained in what follows. That love and the faith derived from it are the internal of the church, has already been several times said and shown. No other faith is meant as being the internal of the church than that which is of love or charity, that is, which is from love or charity.

[2] Faith, in a general sense, is all the doctrinal teaching of the church. But doctrine [doctrinale] separated from love or charity, by no means makes the internal of the church, for doctrine is only knowledge which is of the memory, and this exists also with the worst men, and even with infernals. But the doctrine that is from charity, or that is of charity, does make the internal of the church, for this is of the life. The life itself is the internal of all worship; and so is all doctrine that flows from the life of charity; and it is this doctrine that is of faith which is here meant. That it is this faith which is the internal of the church, may be seen from this consideration alone, that he who has the life of charity is acquainted with all things of faith. If you will, just examine all doctrinal things, and see what and of what quality they are; do they not all pertain to charity, and consequently to the faith that is from charity?

[3] Take only the Precepts of the Decalogue. The first of these is to worship the Lord God. He who has the life of love or of charity worships the Lord God, because this is his life. Another precept is to keep the Sabbath. He who is in the life of love, or in charity, keeps the Sabbath holy, for nothing is more sweet to him than to worship the Lord, and to glorify Him every day. The precept, “Thou shalt not kill,” is altogether of charity. He who loves his neighbor as himself, shudders at doing anything that injures him, still more at killing him. So too the precept, “Thou shalt not steal;” for he who has the life of charity would rather give of his own to his neighbor, than take anything away from him. And so with the precept, “Thou shalt not commit adultery;” he who is in the life of charity the rather guards his neighbor’s wife, lest anyone should offer her such injury, and regards adultery as a crime against conscience, and such as destroys conjugial love and its duties. To covet the things that are the neighbor’s is also contrary to those who are in the life of charity; for it is of charity to desire good to others from one’s self and one’s own; such therefore by no means covet the things which are another’s.

[4] These are the precepts of the Decalogue which are more external doctrinal things of faith; and these are not only known in the memory by him who is in charity and its life, but are in his heart; and he has them inscribed upon himself, because they are in his charity, and thus in his very life; besides other things of a dogmatic nature which he in like manner knows from charity alone; for he lives according to a conscience of what is right. The right and the truth which he cannot thus understand and explore, he believes simply or from simplicity of heart to be so because the Lord has said so; and he who so believes does not do wrong, even though what he thus accepts is not true in itself, but apparent truth.

[5] As for example, if anyone believes that the Lord is angry, punishes, tempts, and the like. Or if he holds that the bread and wine in the Holy Supper are significative, or that the flesh and blood are present in some way in which they explain it-it is of no consequence whether they say the one thing or the other, although there are few who think about this matter, or even if they do think about it, provided this is done from a simple heart, because they have been so instructed, and nevertheless live in charity: these, when they hear that the bread and wine in the internal sense signify the Lord’s love toward the whole human race, and the things which are of this love, and man’s reciprocal love to the Lord and the neighbor, they forthwith believe, and rejoice that it is so. Not so they who are in doctrinal things and not in charity; these contend about everything, and condemn all whoever they may be that do not say (they call it “believe”) as they do. From all this everyone can see that love to the Lord and charity toward the neighbor are the internal of the church.