4925. 'That behold, his brother came out' means the truth of good. This is clear from the meaning of 'brother' as that which is kindred, by virtue of good, dealt with in 3815, 4267, and so the truth of good. The truth of good is that truth which is rooted in good, or that faith which is rooted in charity. Dealt with here in the internal sense is the birthright in the case of those who are being born again or regenerated by the Lord, and therefore the birthright within the Church. It has been a matter of argument since most ancient times as to which is the firstborn, whether this is the good of charity or whether it is the truth of faith. Unseen while a person is being born again and becoming a Church, good conceals itself within the interior man and reveals itself solely within some affection which does not pass into the conscious feelings of the external or natural man until he has been born again. But truth reveals itself, for this does enter his conscious feelings and lodges in the memory belonging to the external or natural man. This explains why many have fallen into the error that truth is the firstborn, and at length even thinking that truth is the vital element of the Church, so vital that truth which is called faith can save a person without the good of charity.

[2] From this one error very many others have been derived which have infected not only what is taught but also life, such as the error that no matter what kind of life a person leads he can be saved provided he has faith. A further derivative error is that very wicked people are accepted into heaven provided that in the final hour before they die they declare their belief in those things which are matters of faith; and another such error is that, irrespective of the kind of life one has led, one is accepted into heaven solely by grace. Because people hold to this teaching they fail at length to know what charity is or to have any concern about what it is, till in the end they do not believe in the existence of it, or consequently in the existence of heaven and hell. The reason for this is that faith without charity, or truth without good, teaches a person nothing; and the more it departs from good, the more foolish it makes him. For good is what the Lord flows into and through which He flows, imparting intelligence and wisdom and consequently a superior ability to see, and also perception whether something is really true or not.

[3] From these considerations one may now see the position with regard to the birthright, namely that in actual fact it belongs to good but appears to belong to truth. This is what the birth of Tamar's two sons is used to describe in the internal sense. 'The twice-dyed thread' which the midwife bound on the hand that came out means good, as shown in 4922; 'coming out first' means priority of place, 4923; 'withdrawing the hand' means that good concealed its own power, as stated immediately above [in 4924]; 'his brother came out' means truth; 'you have made a breach upon yourself means this truth's apparent separation from good; 'afterwards his brother came out' means that good is in actual fact first; and 'on whose hand was the twice-dyed thread' means the acknowledgement that good is first. For it is not until after a person has been born again that good is acknowledged to be first, at which point that person's actions spring from good, and his view of truth and what this is like springs from the same.

[4] These are the matters contained within the internal sense, in which teaching is given regarding the good and truth with a person who is being born anew, namely that good in actual fact occupies first place but truth appears to do so, and that good is not seen to occupy the first place while a person is being regenerated but is plainly seen to do so once he has been regenerated. But there is no need to explain these matters any further since they have been explained already - see 3324, 3325, 3494, 3539, 3548, 3556, 3563, 3570, 3576, 3603, 3701, 4243, 4244, 4247, 4337; and the fact that controversy has taken place since ancient times over whether the birthright belonged to good or to truth, that is, to charity or to faith, 2435.

[5] Because in the highest sense the Lord is the firstborn, and therefore love to Him and charity towards the neighbour are the firstborn, the law was for that reason laid down in the representative Church that firstborn things were Jehovah's: in Moses,

Sanctify to Me all the firstborn, that which opens the womb among the children of Israel; with man and with beast let them be Mine. Exodus 13:2.

You shall make over to Jehovah all that opens the worm', and every firstling of a beast; however many males you have they shall be Jehovah's. Exodus 13:12.

All that opens the womb is Mine; therefore among all your cattle, you shall give the male. that among oxen and small cattle which opens [the womb]. Exodus 34:19.

All that opens the womb among all flesh which they bring to Jehovah, from men and from beasts, shall be yours. Nevertheless you shall surely redeem all the firstborn of men. Numbers 18:15.

Behold, I Myself have taken the Levites from the midst of the children of Israel, instead of every firstborn, that which opens the womb, from the children of Israel, so that the Levites may be Mine. Numbers 3:12.

[6] Because the firstborn is the one that opens the womb, the expression 'that which opens the womb' is therefore added, when the firstborn is mentioned in these places, so as to mean good. It is evident that this expression means good from the specific details contained in the internal sense, especially from those which are recorded regarding the sons of Tamar: Zerah is said to have opened the womb with his hand, and 'Zerah' represents good, as is also clear from the twice-dyed thread placed on his hand, dealt with in 4922. In addition to this 'the womb', to which the expression 'opened' is applied, means the place where good and truth, consequently the Church, lie, see 4918, while 'opening the womb' means supplying the power which enables truth to be born.

[7] Because the Lord is the only firstborn - He being Good itself, and His Good being the source of all truth - Jacob, who was not the firstborn, was therefore allowed to purchase the birthright from Esau his brother so that he might represent Him. Also, because this was not sufficient, he was called Israel, so that by this name he might represent the good of truth; for 'Israel' in the representative sense means good which comes through truth, 3654, 4286, 4598.

2417. 'Do not look back behind you' means that he was not to look to matters of doctrine. This is clear from the meaning of 'looking back behind him' when the city was behind him and the mountain in front of him; for 'a city' means doctrinal teaching, 402, 2268, 2451, while 'a mountain' means love and charity, 795, 1430. That this is the meaning will be evident in the explanation at verse 26, where it is said that his wife looked back behind him and she became a pillar of salt. Anyone may recognize that these words - 'looking back behind him' - have some Divine arcanum within them and that this lies too far down to be visible. For looking back behind him seems to involve nothing reprehensible at all, and yet it is of such great importance that it is said that he was to escape for his life, that is, he was to be concerned about his life to eternity by not looking back behind him. What is meant by looking to matters of doctrine however will be seen in what follows.

[2] Here let it be merely stated what doctrinal teaching is. Such teaching is twofold: one kind has to do with love and charity, the other with faith. Each of the Lord's Churches at the outset, while still very young and virginal, neither possesses nor desires any other doctrinal teaching than that which has to do with charity, for this has to do with life. In course of time however a Church turns away from this kind of teaching until it starts to despise it and at length to reject it, at which point it acknowledges no other kind of teaching than that called the doctrine of faith. And when it separates faith from charity such doctrinal teaching colludes with a life of evil.

[3] This was so with the Primitive or gentile Church after the Lord's Coming. At the outset it possessed no other doctrinal teaching than that which had to do with love and charity, for such is what the Lord Himself taught, see 2371 (end). But after His time, as love and charity started to grow cold, doctrinal teaching regarding faith gradually crept in, and with it disagreements and heresies which increased as men leant more and more towards that kind of teaching.

[4] Something similar had happened to the Ancient Church which came after the Flood and which was spread throughout so many kingdoms, 2385. This Church at the outset knew no other teaching than that which had to do with charity, for that teaching looked towards and permeated life; and so they were concerned about their eternal welfare. After a time however some people started to foster doctrinal teaching about faith which they at length separated from charity. Members of this Church called such people 'Ham' however because they led a life of evil, see 1062, 1063, 1076.

[5] The Most Ancient Church which existed before the Flood and which was pre-eminently called Man enjoyed the perception itself of love to the Lord and charity towards the neighbour, and so had teaching about love and charity inscribed within them. But there also existed at that time those who fostered faith, and when these at length separated it from charity they were called Cain, for Cain means such faith, and Abel whom he killed means charity; see the explanation to Genesis 4.

[6] From this it becomes clear that doctrinal teaching is twofold, one kind having to do with charity, the other with faith, although in themselves the two are one, for teaching to do with charity includes everything to do with faith. But when doctrinal teaching comes to be drawn solely from things to do with faith, such teaching is said to be twofold because faith is separated from charity. Their separation at the present day becomes clear from the consideration that what charity is, and what the neighbour, is utterly unknown. People whose teaching is solely about faith know of charity towards the neighbour as nothing other than giving what is their own to others and taking pity on everyone, for they call everyone their neighbour indiscriminately, when in fact charity consists in all the good residing with the individual - in his affection, and in his ardent zeal, and consequently in his life - while the neighbour consists in all the good residing with people which affects the individual. Consequently the neighbour consists in people with whom good resides - and quite distinctly and separately from one person to the next.

[7] For example, charity and mercy are present with him who exercises righteousness and judgement by punishing the evil and rewarding the good. Charity resides within the punishment of the evil, for he who imposes the punishment is moved by a strong desire to correct the one who is punished and at the same time to protect others from the evil he may do to them. For when he imposes it he is concerned about and desires the good of him who does evil or is an enemy, as well as being concerned about and desiring the good of others and of the state, which concern and desire spring from charity towards the neighbour. The same holds true with every other kind of good of life, for such good cannot possibly exist if it does not spring from charity towards the neighbour, since this is what charity looks to and embodies within itself.

[8] There being so much obscurity, as has been stated, as to what charity is and what the neighbour, it is plain that after doctrinal teaching to do with faith has seized the chief position, teaching to do with charity is then one of those things that have been lost. Yet it was the latter teaching alone that was fostered in the Ancient Church. They went so far as to categorize all kinds of good that flow from charity towards the neighbour, that is, to categorize all in whom good was present. In doing so they made many distinctions to which they gave names, calling them the poor, the wretched, the oppressed, the sick, the naked, the hungry, the thirsty, the prisoners or those in prison, the. sojourners, the orphans, and the widows. Some they also called the lame, the blind, the deaf, the dumb, and the maimed, and many other names besides these. It was in accordance with this kind of teaching that the Lord spoke in the Old Testament Word, and it explains why such expressions occur so frequently there; and it was in accordance with the same that the Lord Himself spoke, as in Matthew 25:35-36, 38-40, 42-45; Luke 14:13, 21; and many times elsewhere. This is why those names have quite a different meaning in the internal sense. So that doctrinal teaching regarding charity may be restored therefore, some discussion will in the Lord's Divine mercy appear further on as to who such people are, and what charity is, and what the neighbour, generally and specifically.