3670. And He will give thee the blessing of Abraham. That this signifies the conjunction of the Divine Itself with the good and truth of the natural, is evident from the signification of a “blessing,” as being conjunction (n. 3660, 3667); and from the representation of Abraham, as being the Lord’s Divine Itself which is called the “Father” (concerning which see n. 2011, 3251, 3439). And inasmuch as these words are spoken to Jacob, by whom there would be represented the Lord’s Divine natural as to the Divine good and truth therein, therefore the conjunction of the Divine Itself with the good and truth of the natural is what is signified, in the internal sense, by “He will give thee the blessing of Abraham.” In the sense of the letter, it is the possession of the land of Canaan that is meant by the “blessing of Abraham,” and also by the words which follow: “to cause thee to inherit the land of thy sojournings, which God gave unto Abraham;” and according to this sense do all apprehend the words who believe that the historicals of the Word do not contain within them things more heavenly and secret: and especially so do the Jewish nation, who on the strength of these words claim for themselves privileges above every other nation and people. Their fathers understood the words in the same manner, and especially were they so understood by Jacob, whose quality is evident from what was said just above (n. 3667), in that he would not have known Jehovah, nor have been willing to acknowledge Him, unless He had given him corporeal and worldly blessings. But that neither Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob was meant, and that by Jacob is represented the Lord as to the natural which He would make Divine, is abundantly manifest from the explications given above. That it is immaterial what is the quality of the man who represents, as to whether he is evil or good, and that evil men equally with good men can represent and have represented the Lord’s Divine, may be seen above (n. 665, 1097, 1361).

[2] The same may be seen from the representatives which exist even to this day; for all kings, whoever they may be, and of whatever quality, by the royalty itself that appertains to them represent the Lord; in like manner all priests, whoever and of whatever quality they may be, by the priestly office itself. The royal and the priestly office itself is holy, whatever be the quality of him who ministers therein; and this is the reason why the Word taught by an evil man is equally holy, and also the sacrament of baptism and the Holy Supper, and other such things. And from this it is also evident that no king can possibly claim for himself anything of the sanctity that belongs to his royalty; nor any priest anything of the sanctity that belongs to his priesthood. Insofar as either claims anything thereof to himself, or attributes it to himself, so far he brands himself with the character of a spiritual thief, or with the mark of spiritual theft; and also insofar as he does evil, that is, acts contrary to what is just and equitable, and contrary to what is good and true, so far a king puts off the representative of holy royalty, and a priest the representative of holy priesthood, and represents the opposite. For this reason in the representative Jewish Church there were so many laws enjoined concerning the holiness in which priests especially should be during their ministration-on which subject, of the Lord’s Divine mercy, more will be said in what follows.

3667. And God Shaddai will bless thee. That this signifies the temptations of that truth and good through which there is conjunction, is evident from the signification of “God Shaddai,” as being temptations (concerning which signification in what follows); and from the signification of being “blessed,” as being conjunction (see n. 3504, 3514, 3530, 3565, 3584). Inasmuch as by Jacob is now represented the good of truth, as before shown (n. 3659), therefore that good and truth are here meant by “thee.” The reason why “God Shaddai” signifies temptations, is that in ancient times they distinguished the Supreme God (that is, the Lord) by various names, and this in accordance with His attributes, and in accordance with the goods which are from Him, and also in accordance with the truths, the multiplicity of which is a fact that is known to everyone. They who were of the Ancient Church by all these appellations understood only one God, namely, the Lord, whom they called Jehovah; but after the church had declined from good and truth, and at the same time from this wisdom, they began to worship as many gods as there were appellations of the one God; insomuch that every nation, and at last every family, acknowledged one of them for its own god; hence came the many gods of which mention is often made in the Word.

[2] The same thing took place in the family of Terah the father of Abraham, and also in the house of Abraham himself, who worshiped other gods (as may be seen above, n. 1356, 2559), and especially the God Shaddai (n. 1992). That the worship of this God remained in that house, is evident also from these words in Moses:

I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in God Shaddai, but by My name Jehovah I was not known to them (Exodus 6:3).

This is the reason why it was said to Abraham: “I am God Shaddai; walk before Me, and be perfect” (Genesis 17:1); and why it is here said by Isaac to Jacob, “God Shaddai will bless thee.” That this is the case is also clearly evident from what follows in this chapter, in that after the Lord had said to Jacob in a dream, “I am Jehovah the God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac” (verse 13), still Jacob afterwards said, “If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way wherein I walk, and will give me bread to eat and raiment to put on, and I return in peace to my father’s house, then Jehovah shall be to me for God” (verses 20-21); from which it is evident that neither did the house of Jacob acknowledge Jehovah; but that Jacob would acknowledge Him as his God if He would be his benefactor-just as is the case at this day in Christian Gentilism.

[3] But as specifically regards God Shaddai, the Lord had been so called in the Ancient Church with respect to temptations and to blessings and benefits after temptations, as was shown in Second Part (n. 1992). This is the reason why by “God Shaddai” in the internal sense are signified temptations. That by temptations is effected a conjunction of good and truth, see what has already been stated and shown concerning temptations (n. 2819).