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.

2360. That Lot calls them “brethren” because it is from good that he exhorts them, is evident from the signification of a “brother.” In the Word “brother” signifies the same as “neighbor,” for the reason that everyone ought to love his neighbor as himself; thus brethren were so called from love; or what is the same, from good. This manner of naming and addressing the neighbor comes from the fact that in heaven the Lord is the Father of all and loves all as His children; and thus that love is spiritual conjunction. From this the universal heaven resembles as it were one family derived from love and charity (n. 685, 917).

[2] Therefore as all the sons of Israel represented the Lord’s heavenly kingdom, that is, the kingdom of love and charity; among each other they were called “brethren,” and also “companions;” but the latter, that is, “companions,” not from the good of love, but from the truth of faith; as in Isaiah:

They help every man his companion, and he saith to his brother, Be of good courage (Isaiah 41:6).

In Jeremiah:

Thus shall ye say every man to his companion, and every man to his brother, What hath Jehovah answered? and what hath Jehovah spoken? (Jeremiah 23:35).

In David:

For my brethren and companions’ sakes I will say, Peace be within thee (Psalms 122:8).

In Moses:

He shall not press upon his companion or his brother, because the release of Jehovah hath been proclaimed (Deuteronomy 15:2-3).

In Isaiah:

I will confound Egypt with Egypt, and they shall fight every man against his brother, and every man against his companion (Isaiah 19:2).

In Jeremiah:

Beware every man of his companion, and trust ye not in any brother; for every brother will utterly supplant, and every companion will slander (Jeremiah 9:4).

[3] That all who were of that church were called by the one name “brethren,” see in Isaiah:

They shall bring all your brethren out of all the nations for an offering unto Jehovah, upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon dromedaries, to the mountain of My holiness, Jerusalem (Isaiah 66:20).

They who know nothing beyond the sense of the letter, as was the case with the Jews, believe that no others are signified than the posterity of Jacob; thus that they will be brought back to Jerusalem upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, by those whom they call the Gentiles. But by the “brethren” are meant all who are in good; and by the “horses,” “chariots,” and “litters,” the things which are of truth and good; and by “Jerusalem” the Lord’s kingdom.

[4] In Moses:

When there shall be among thee a needy one of one of thy brethren, in one of thy gates, thou shalt not harden thy heart, and shalt not shut thy hand from thy needy brother (Deuteronomy 15:7, 11).

Again:

From among thy brethren thou shalt set a King over thee; thou mayest not put over thee a foreigner, who is not thy brother, and his heart shall not be lifted up above his brethren (Deuteronomy 17:15, 20).

Again:

A prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me, Jehovah thy God will raise up unto thee; him shall ye obey (Deuteronomy 18:15, 18).

[5] From all this it is evident that the Jews and Israelites all called one another brethren; but those united by covenant they called companions. Yet as they understood nothing beyond the historical and worldly things of the Word, they believed that they called one another brethren because they were all sons of one father, or of Abraham; yet they were not called “brethren” in the Word from this circumstance, but from the good which they represented. “Abraham” also, in the internal sense, denotes nothing else than love itself, that is, the the Lord, (n. 1893, 1965, 1989, 2011), whose sons, consequently those who are “brethren,” are those who are in good, in fact all those who are called the neighbor; as the Lord teaches in Matthew:

One is your Master, Christ; all ye are brethren (Matthew 23:8).

[6] Again:

Whosoever is angry with his brother without cause shall be in danger of the judgment; whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council. If thou offer a gift upon the altar, and there remember that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother (Matthew 5:22-24).

Again:

Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye? How wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye (Matthew 7:2-4)?

Again:

If thy brother sin against thee, go and show him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother (Matthew 18:15).

Again:

Peter coming to Him said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? (Matthew 18:21).

Again:

So also will My heavenly Father do unto you, if ye from the heart forgive not everyone his brother their trespasses (Matthew 18:35).

[7] It is clear from these teachings that all in the universe who are the neighbor are called “brethren,” and this because everyone ought to love his neighbor as himself, thus they are so called from love or good. And as the Lord is good itself, and regards all from good, and is Himself the Neighbor in the highest sense, He also calls them “brethren,” as in John:

Jesus said to Mary, Go to My brethren (John 20:17).

And in Matthew:

The King answering shall say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me (Matthew 25:40).

Thus it is evident that “brother” is a term of love.