1385. Er zijn geesten, die tot de streek van de huid, vooral van de schubachtige huid behoren, die over alles willen redeneren en geenszins gewaarworden, wat goed en waar is, en die het zelfs hoe meer zij redeneren, des te minder gewaarworden, doordat zij in het redeneren de wijsheid stellen, en ook zo als wijs gezien te worden. Hun werd gezegd, dat de wijsheid van de engelen bestaat in het innerlijk gewaarworden of iets goed en waar is, zonder geredeneer; maar zij begrijpen niet, dat zo’n innerlijke gewaarwording kan bestaan Het zijn diegenen, die in het leven van het lichaam het goede en het ware verward hebben door wetenschappelijke en filosofische dingen, en zich vandaar voor geleerder hielden dan anderen en die van te voren niet enig beginsel van het ware uit het Woord hadden opgenomen; en zij hebben daarom minder gezonde rede.

2144. 'In the oak-groves of Mamre' means the character of the perception. This is clear from the representation and meaning of 'oak-groves', and also from the representation and meaning of 'Mamre'. What oak-groves in general represented and meant has been shown in Volume One, in 1442, 1443, and what the oak-grove of Mamre specifically represented and meant, in 1616, namely perceptions, though of a human kind such as spring from factual knowledge and from the initial rational concepts derived from that knowledge.

[2] What perception is, is totally unknown at the present day, for nobody today possesses the kind of perception that the ancient and especially the most ancient people possessed. The latter knew from perception whether a thing was good and consequently whether it was true. There was an influx from the Lord by way of heaven into the rational part of their minds, and from that influx when they thought about anything holy, they perceived instantly whether a thing was so or was not so. Later on such perception with mankind perished and people began to entertain heavenly ideas no more but only worldly and bodily ones; and when this happened the place of such perception was taken by conscience (which also is a kind of perception), for acting contrary to conscience and according to conscience is nothing else than discerning from conscience whether a thing is so or not so, or whether it ought to be done.

[3] But perception that goes with conscience does not originate in inflowing good but in truth which from earliest childhood has been implanted in the rational part of the mind in accordance with the holiness of people's worship, and after that has been confirmed; for that truth alone is believed by them to be good. Consequently conscience is a kind of perception, but it has its origin in truth such as this; and when charity and innocence are introduced into it by the Lord, the good that goes with that conscience is then brought into being. These few considerations show what perception is. Yet between perception and conscience there is a wide difference. See what has been stated about perception in Volume One, in 104, 125, 371, 483, 495, 503, 521, 536, 597, 607, 784, 865, 895, 1121, 1616; about the perception spirits and angels have, in 202, 203, 1008, 1383, 1384, 1390-1392, 1394, 1397, 1504; and about the learned not knowing what perception is, in 1387.

[4] As regards the Lord when He lived in the world, all of His thought sprang from Divine perception since He alone was a Divine and Celestial Man. For He has been the only one in whom Jehovah Himself was present and from whom His perception came, also dealt with in Volume One, in 1616, 1791. His perceptions became more and more interior the closer He came to union with Jehovah. The nature of His perception at this time becomes clear from what has been stated in Volume One, in 1616, about the oak-groves of Mamre; and then the nature of it when He perceived the things contained in this chapter is described in what follows below.

483. The names which follow - Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, and Noah - mean just so many Churches, the first and chief one of which was called Man. The chief characteristic of these Churches was perception, and therefore the differences between the Churches of that period were primarily differences in perception. On the subject of perception, let it be mentioned here that nothing else reigns in the whole of heaven but the perception of good and truth. Its nature defies description, and includes differences so countless that no one community's perception is exactly like that found in another. Perceptions there fall into genera and species. Those genera are countless, and so too are the species within every genus. These in the Lord's Divine mercy will be dealt with later on. Since there are countless genera, and countless species within every genus, and even more countless sub-species to each species, it becomes clear how very little indeed the world of today knows about celestial and spiritual matters. It does not even know what perception is, and if told, it does not believe that it even exists. The same applies to other matters too.

[2] The Most Ancient Church represented the Lord's celestial kingdom, even as to each variation of perception in its genus and species. But because nobody nowadays knows what perception is, not even the most general aspect of it, facts of a wholly strange and meaningless nature would therefore be imparted if the genera and species of the perceptions of those Churches were stated. They were divided into houses, families, and nations, and used to contract marriages within their own houses and families, in order that genera and species of perception might be established and be derived from parents altogether as reproductions of innate dispositions. This also is why members of the Most Ancient Church dwell together in heaven.