9372. And He said unto Moses. That this signifies that which concerns the Word in general, is evident from the representation of Moses, as being the Word (of which below); and from the signification of “He said,” as involving those things which follow in this chapter, thus those which concern the Word (see n. 9370). (That Moses represents the Word, can be seen from what has been often shown before about Moses, as from the preface to Genesis 18; and n. 4859, 5922, 6723, 6752, 6771, 6827, 7010, 7014, 7089, 7382, 8601, 8760, 8787, 8805.) Here Moses represents the Word in general, because it is said of him in what follows, that he alone should come near unto Jehovah (verse 2); and also that, being called unto out of the midst of the cloud, he entered into it, and went up the mount (verses 16-18).

[2] In the Word there are many who represent the Lord in respect to truth Divine, or in respect to the Word; but chief among them are Moses, Elijah, Elisha, and John the Baptist. That Moses does so, can be seen in the explications just cited above; that so do Elijah and Elisha, can be seen in the preface to Genesis 18; and n. 2762, 5247; and that John the Baptist does so is evident from the fact that he was “Elias who was to come.” He who does not know that John the Baptist represented the Lord as to the Word, cannot know what all those things infold and signify which are said about him in the New Testament; and therefore in order that this secret may stand open, and that at the same time it may appear that Elias, and also Moses, who were seen when the Lord was transfigured, signified the Word, some things may here be quoted which are spoken about John the Baptist; as in Matthew:

After the messengers of John had departed, Jesus began to speak concerning John, saying, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? a reed shaken by the wind? But what went ye out to see? a man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they that wear soft things are in kings’ houses. But what went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, even more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, Behold I send Mine angel before Thy face, who shall prepare Thy way before Thee. Verily I say unto you, Among those who are born of women there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist; nevertheless he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he. All the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye are willing to believe, he is Elias who was to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear (Matthew 11:7-15; and also Luke 7:24-28).

No one can know how these things are to be understood, unless he knows that this John represented the Lord as to the Word, and unless he also knows from the internal sense what is signified by “the wilderness” in which he was, also what by “a reed shaken by the wind,” and likewise by “soft raiment in kings’ houses;” and further what is signified by his being “more than a prophet,” and by “none among those who are born of women being greater than he, and nevertheless he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he,” and lastly by his being “Elias.” For without a deeper sense, all these words are uttered merely from some comparison, and not from anything of weight.

[3] But it is very different when by John is understood the Lord as to the Word, or the Word representatively. Then by “the wilderness of Judea in which John was” is signified the state in which the Word was at the time when the Lord came into the world, namely, that it was “in the wilderness,” that is, it was in obscurity so great that the Lord was not at all acknowledged, neither was anything known about His heavenly kingdom; when yet all the prophets prophesied about Him, and about His kingdom, that it was to endure forever. (That “a wilderness” denotes such obscurity, see n. 2708, 4736, 7313.) For this reason the Word is compared to “a reed shaken by the wind” when it is explained at pleasure; for in the internal sense “a reed” denotes truth in the ultimate, such as is the Word in the letter.

[4] That the Word in the ultimate, or in the letter, is crude and obscure in the sight of men; but that in the internal sense it is soft and shining, is signified by their “not seeing a man clothed in soft raiment, for behold those who wear soft things are in kings’ houses.” That such things are signified by these words, is plain from the signification of “raiment,” or “garments,” as being truths (n. 2132, 2576, 4545, 4763, 5248, 6914, 6918, 9093); and for this reason the angels appear clothed in garments soft and shining according to the truths from good with them (n. 5248, 5319, 5954, 9212, 9216). The same is evident from the signification of “kings’ houses,” as being the abodes of the angels, and in the universal sense, the heavens; for “houses” are so called from good (n. 2233, 2234, 3128, 3652, 3720, 4622, 4982, 7836, 7891, 7996, 7997); and “kings,” from truth (n. 1672, 2015, 2069, 3009, 4575, 4581, 4966, 5044, 6148). Therefore by virtue of their reception of truth from the Lord, the angels are called “sons of the kingdom,” “sons of the king,” and also “kings.”

[5] That the Word is more than any doctrine in the world, and more than any truth in the world, is signified by “what went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet;” and by, “there hath not arisen among those who are born of women a greater than John the Baptist;” for in the internal sense “a prophet” denotes doctrine (n. 2534, 7269); and “those who are born,” or are the sons, “of women” denote truths (n. 489, 491, 533, 1147, 2623, 2803, 2813, 3704, 4257).

[6] That in the internal sense, or such as it is in heaven, the Word is in a degree above the Word in the external sense, or such as it is in the world, and such as John the Baptist taught, is signified by, “he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he;” for as perceived in heaven the Word is of wisdom so great that it transcends all human apprehension. That the prophecies about the Lord and His coming, and that the representatives of the Lord and of His kingdom, ceased when the Lord came into the world, is signified by, “all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.” That the Word was represented by John, as by Elijah, is signified by his being “Elias who is to come.”

[7] The same is signified by these words in Matthew:

The disciples asked Jesus, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? He answered and said, Elias must needs first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, that Elias hath come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they wished. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them. And they understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist (Matthew 17:10-13).

That “Elias hath come, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they wished” signifies that the Word has indeed taught them that the Lord is to come, but that still they did not wish to comprehend, interpreting it in favor of the rule of self, and thus extinguishing what is Divine in it. That they would do the same with the truth Divine itself, is signified by “even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them.” (That “the Son of man” denotes the Lord as to truth Divine, see n. 2803, 2813, 3704)

[8] From all this it is now evident what is meant by the prophecy about John in Malachi:

Behold I send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Jehovah cometh (Malachi 4:5).

Moreover, the Word in the ultimate, or such as it is in the external form in which it appears before man in the world, is described by the “clothing” and “food” of John the Baptist, in Matthew:

John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, had His clothing of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his food was locusts and wild honey (Matthew 3:1, 4).

In like manner it is described by Elijah in the second book of Kings:

He was a hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins (2 Kings 1:8).

By “clothing,” or a “garment,” when said of the Word, is signified truth Divine there in the ultimate form; by “camel’s hair” are signified memory-truths such as appear there before a man in the world; by the “leathern girdle” is signified the external bond connecting and keeping in order all the interior things; by “food” is signified spiritual nourishment from the knowledges of truth and of good out of the Word; by “locusts” are signified ultimate or most general truths; and by “wild honey” their pleasantness.

[9] That such things are signified by “clothing” and “food” has its origin in the representatives of the other life, where all appear clothed according to truths from good, and where food also is represented according to the desires of acquiring knowledge and growing wise. From this it is that “clothing,” or a “garment,” denotes truth (as may be seen from the citations above; and that “food” or “meat” denotes spiritual nourishment, n. 3114, 4459, 4792, 5147, 5293, 5340, 5342, 5576, 5579, 5915, 8562, 9003; that “a girdle” denotes a bond which gathers up and holds together interior things, n. 9341; that “leather” denotes what is external, n. 3540; and thus “a leathern girdle” denotes an external bond; that “hairs” denote ultimate or most general truths, n. 3301, 5569-5573; that “a camel” denotes memory-knowledge in general, n. 3048, 3071, 3143, 3145, 4156; that “a locust” denotes nourishing truth in the extremes, n. 7643; and that “honey” denotes the pleasantness thereof, n. 5620, 6857, 8056). It is called “wild honey,” or “honey of the field,” because by “a field” is signified the church (n. 2971, 3317, 3766, 7502, 7571, 9139, 9295). He who does not know that such things are signified, cannot possibly know why Elijah and John were so clothed. And yet that these things signified something peculiar to these prophets, can be thought by everyone who thinks well about the Word.

[10] Because John the Baptist represented the Lord as to the Word, therefore also when he spoke of the Lord, who was the Word itself, he said of himself that he was “not Elias, nor the prophet,” and that he was “not worthy to loose the latchet of the Lord’s shoe,” as in John:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory. The Jews from Jerusalem, priests and Levites, asked John who he was. And he confessed, and denied not, I am not the Christ. Therefore they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? But he said, I am not. Art thou the prophet? He answered, No. They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said Isaiah the prophet. They said therefore, Why then baptizest thou, if thou art not the Christ, nor Elias, nor the prophet? He answered, I baptize with water; in the midst of you standeth one whom ye know not; He it is who is to come after me, who was before me, the latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose. When he saw Jesus, he said, Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world! This is He of whom I said, After me cometh a man who was before me; for he was before me (John 1:1, 14, 19-30).

From these words it is plain that when John spoke about the Lord Himself, who was Truth Divine itself, or the Word, he said that he himself was not anything, because the shadow disappears when the light itself appears, that is, the representative disappears when the original itself makes its appearance. (That the representatives had in view holy things, and the Lord Himself, and not at all the person that represented, see n. 665, 1097, 1361, 3147, 3881, 4208, 4281, 4288, 4292, 4307, 4444, 4500, 6304, 7048, 7439, 8588, 8788, 8806.) One who does not know that representatives vanish like shadows at the presence of light, cannot know why John denied that he was Elias and the prophet.

[11] From all this it can now be seen what is signified by Moses and Elias, who were seen in glory, and who spoke with the Lord when transfigured, of His departure which He should accomplish at Jerusalem (Luke 9:29-31); namely, that they signified the Word (“Moses” the historic Word, and “Elias” the prophetic Word), which in the internal sense throughout treats of the Lord, of His coming into the world, and of His departure out of the world; and therefore it is said that “Moses and Elias were seen in glory,” for “glory” denotes the internal sense of the Word, and the “cloud” its external sense (see the preface to Genesis 18, and n. 5922, 8427).

6857. Flowing with milk and honey. That this signifies the pleasantness and delight thence, is evident from the signification of “milk,” as being the celestial spiritual, or the truth of good (see n. 2184); and as it denotes the truth of good, it denotes also the pleasantness thereof, for these are conjoined; and from the signification of “honey,” as being delight (n. 5620). From what was shown above (n. 6854) it can be seen what is meant by “making to come up out of that land to a land good and broad, flowing with milk and honey,” namely, that they who had been detained in the lower earth in pits there until the Lord’s coming, should then be raised to heaven where are the good of charity and the truth of faith and the derivative pleasantness and delight. These things are specifically signified by these words; but in general are signified all of the spiritual church who are in temptation and are liberated from it.

9210. Thou shalt not be to him as a usurer. That this signifies that this must be done from charity, is evident from the signification of “a usurer,” as being one who does what is good for the sake of self-advantage; for a usurer intrusts money to another for the sake of usury, and assists another for the sake of recompense. And because genuine charity does not regard profit or recompense as the end, but the good of the neighbor, therefore by “thou shalt not be as a usurer” is signified that it must be done from charity. He who does not know what Christian charity is, may believe that it consists not only in giving to the needy and the poor, but also in doing good to a fellow citizen, to our country, and to the church, for any cause whatever, or for any end whatever. But be it known that it is the end that determines the quality of all a man’s deeds. If his end or intention is to do good for the sake of reputation, or to acquire honors or profit, then the good which he does is not good, because it is done for the sake of himself, and thus also from himself. But if his end is to do good for the sake of a fellow citizen, his country, or the church, thus for the sake of the neighbor, then the good which the man does is good, for it is done for the sake of good itself, which, in general, is the neighbor itself (n. 5025, 6706, 6711, 6712, 8123); thus also it is done for the sake of the Lord, for such good is not from man, but from the Lord, and that which is from the Lord is the Lord’s. It is this good which is meant by the Lord in Matthew:

As much as ye did to one of the least of these My brethren, ye did to Me (Matthew 25:40).

[2] As it is with good, so also it is with truth. Those who do truth for the sake of truth, do it also for the sake of the Lord, because they do it from the Lord. To do truth for the sake of truth, is to do good; for truth becomes good when it passes from the understanding into the will, and from the will goes forth into act. To do good in this manner is Christian charity. Sometimes those who do good from Christian charity have regard to reputation from it, for the sake of honor, or for the sake of profit; yet they do so very differently from those who regard these things as the end; for they regard what is good and just as the essential and only thing, thus as being in the highest place; and thereafter they regard profit and honor, and reputation for the sake of these, as being relatively not essential, thus in the lowest place. When persons of such a character have in view what is just and good, they are like those who fight in battle for their country, and who then have no regard for their life, nor for their rank and possessions in the world, which are then relatively of no account. But those who have regard to themselves and the world in the first place, are of such a character that they do not even see what is just and good, because they have in view themselves and their own profit.

[3] From all this it is evident what it is to do good for the sake of self or the world, and what it is to do good for the sake of the Lord or the neighbor, and what is the difference between them. The difference is as great as that between two opposites, thus as great as between heaven and hell. Moreover, those who do good for the sake of the neighbor or the Lord are in heaven; but those who do good for the sake of self and the world are in hell. For those who do good for the sake of the neighbor and the Lord, love the Lord above all things and the neighbor as themselves, in accordance with the chief of all the commandments (Mark 12:28-31). But those who do all things for the sake of themselves and the world, love themselves above all things, thus more than God, and not only do they despise the neighbor, but even hold him in hatred if he does not make one with themselves, and be theirs. This is meant by what the Lord teaches in Matthew:

No man can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon (Matthew 6:24).

There are those who serve both; but these are they who are called “lukewarm, neither cold nor hot,” who are “spewed out” (Revelation 3:15-16). From all this it is now plain what was represented by usurers who took usury, namely, those who do good for the sake of profit.

[4] From this it is clear why it is said that one “should not be as a usurer, and should not put usury upon a brother;” as also in other passages in Moses:

Thou shalt not put on thy brother usury of silver, usury of food, usury of anything on which it is put. Upon a foreigner thou mayest put usury; but upon thy brother thou shalt not put usury; that Jehovah thy God may bless thee in all that thou puttest thine hand unto, in the land whither thou goest to possess it (Deuteronomy 23:19-20; Leviticus 25:36-38);

“to put on a brother the usury of silver” denotes to lend truths, or to instruct, for the sake of profit; “to put the usury of food on him” denotes to lend the goods of truth for the sake of profit; for “silver” denotes truth (n. 1551, 2954, 5658, 6914, 6917); and “food,” the good of truth (n. 5147, 5293, 5340, 5342, 5410, 5426, 5487, 5576, 5582, 5588, 5655, 5915, 8562). That “Jehovah will bless those who do not so, in all that they put their hand unto in the land” is because they are in the affection of good and truth, thus in the happiness the angels have in heaven, for a man has heaven in this affection, that is, in the good of this love (n. 6478, 9174). The reason why it was allowable to put usury on foreigners, was that by “foreigners” are signified those who do not acknowledge and receive anything of good and truth (n. 7996). Thus they who do good only for the sake of profit are to serve man, because they are relatively servants (n. 1097).

In David:

He that walketh perfect, and that doeth righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart; He that giveth not his silver to usury, and taketh not a gift against the innocent. He that doeth this shall never be moved (Psalms 15:2, 5);

“to give one’s silver into usury” denotes to teach merely for the sake of profit, thus to do good for the sake of the recompense. In like manner in Ezekiel:

A righteous man who doeth judgment and righteousness, giveth not into usury, and taketh not interest (Ezekiel 18:5, 8).

He that withholdeth his hand from the needy, that taketh not usury or interest, that doeth My judgments, that walketh in My statutes, living he shall live (Ezekiel 18:17).

In thee have they taken a gift to shed blood; thou hast taken usury and interest, and thou hast taken gain of thy companions by violence (Ezekiel 22:12).

This is said of the “city of bloods,” by which is signified the falsity that destroys truth and good (n. 9127); “taking usury and interest” denotes doing good for the sake of profit and recompense, thus not from charity. (That genuine charity is devoid of all claim to merit, see n. 2371, 2373, 2400, 4007, 4174, 4943, 6388-6390, 6392, 6478)