4874. And she said, Thy signet. That this signifies a token of consent, is evident from the signification of a “signet,” as being a token of consent. That a “signet” is a token of consent, is because in ancient times decrees were confirmed by a signet, and therefore by a signet is properly signified confirmation itself and testification that it is so. Tamar’s asking for his signet, kerchief, and staff, as a pledge that a kid of the goats would be sent, which afterwards she did not accept, involves a mystery which without the internal sense cannot possibly be known. The mystery is this: as a kid of the goats signified the genuine conjugial, consequently what is internal-for everything genuine is at the same time internal-and as there was not this on the part of Judah, Tamar therefore did not accept a kid of the goats, as appears from what follows; but instead of it took an external with which the internal of the church, signified by “Tamar,” might be conjoined. The external of the church is signified by the signet, kerchief, and staff; by the “signet” consent itself, by the “kerchief” external truth, and by the “staff” the power of this truth; moreover, these things are pledges of the conjunction of the external or natural man.

[2] The conjunction of internal truth with the external or with the religiosity of the Jewish nation, is represented by the conjunction of Tamar with Judah as a daughter-in-law with her father-in-law under the pretext of the duty of a husband’s brother; and the conjunction of the religiosity of the Jewish nation with the internal of the church is represented by the conjunction of Judah with Tamar as with a harlot. Moreover, the conjunctions are precisely of this nature; but their quality cannot be so well explained to the apprehension. To angels and good spirits, however, their quality is very manifest, for it is presented to them in the light of heaven, in which the arcana of the Word lie open as in clear day-quite otherwise than as in the light of the world, which exists with man. In brief: the representatives instituted with the posterity of Jacob were not precisely like those in the Ancient Church; but were for the most part like those in the church instituted by Heber, which was called the Hebrew Church. In this church were many new kinds of worship, such as burnt-offerings, sacrifices, and other things, which were unknown in the Ancient Church; but the internal of the church was not conjoined with these representatives in the same way as with those of the Ancient Church. But the way in which the internal of the church was conjoined with the representatives among the Jewish nation, and the converse, is described in the internal sense by the conjunction of Tamar with Judah as a daughter-in-law with her father-in-law under the pretext of the duty of a husband’s brother; and by the conjunction of Judah with Tamar as with a harlot. In regard to the Hebrew Church see above (n. 1238, 1241, 1327, 1343, 3031, 4516, 4517); and in regard to the sacrifices in this church not existing in the Ancient (see n. 923, 1128, 1343, 2180, 2818).

2818. To slay his son. That this signifies until whatever was from the merely human was dead, is evident from the internal sense of these words; for they signify the Lord’s most grievous and inmost temptations, the last of which was that of the cross, in which it is evident that what was merely human also died. This could not be represented by Abraham’s son or Isaac, because to sacrifice sons was an abomination; but it was represented so far as it could be, namely, even to the attempt, but not to the act. Hence it is evident that by these words, “Abraham took the knife to slay his son,” is signified until all that was merely human was dead.

[2] That it was known from the most ancient time that the Lord was to come into the world, and was to suffer death, is evident from the fact that the custom prevailed among the Gentiles of sacrificing their sons, believing that they were thus purified, and propitiated to God; in which abominable custom they could not have placed their most important religious observance, unless they had learned from the ancients that the Son of God was to come, who would, as they believed, be made a sacrifice. To this abomination even the sons of Israel were inclined, and Abraham also; for no one is tempted except by that to which he is inclined. That the sons of Jacob were so inclined is evident in the Prophets; but lest they should rush into that abomination, it was permitted to institute burnt-offerings and sacrifices (see n. 922, 1128, 1241, 1343, 2180).