The Bible

 

Genesis 32:21

Study

       

21 Så drog Gaven i Forvejen, medens han selv blev i Lejren om Natten.


The Project Gutenberg Association at Carnegie Mellon University

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #4292

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

4292. In the internal historical sense 'he said, Your name will no longer be called Jacob, but Israel' means that they could not as [the descendants of] Jacob play the representative part, except by virtue of the new nature that was imparted to them. This becomes clear from the meaning of 'Jacob' in the Word as his descendants, dealt with above in 4281, and from the meaning of 'name' as the essential nature, dealt with immediately above in 4291. The new nature itself is meant by 'Israel' in the internal sense, for 'Israel' is the celestial-spiritual man and consequently the internal man, 4286. And since 'Israel' means the celestial-spiritual man, and so the internal man, 'Israel' also means the internal spiritual Church. For whether you use the expression spiritual man or spiritual Church, it amounts to the same thing because any spiritual person in particular is the Church, even as many are in general. If the individual person in particular were not the Church, no Church in general could exist. The expression Church is used in everyday language to describe a congregation in general; but each member of the congregation must be a Church if that greater Church is to exist. Every general whole incorporates parts that are like that whole.

[2] The implications of this particular matter - the inability of [the descendants on Jacob to play the representative part, except by virtue of the new nature imparted to them, meant by 'Israel' - are as follows: It was specifically Jacob's descendants who were to represent the Church but not specifically Isaac's since Isaac's descended not only through Jacob but also through Esau. Still less was it specifically Abraham's, for Abraham's descended not only through Jacob but also through Esau, and likewise through Ishmael, as well as through his sons by his second wife Keturah, who were Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, Shuah, and the sons of these, see Genesis 25:1-4. Now because Jacob's descendants insisted that they should be representative, as shown just above in 4290, they could not represent as Jacob, or as Isaac, or as Abraham. The reason why they could not do so as Jacob was that 'Jacob' represented the external aspect of the Church, but not the internal. And they could not do so as Isaac at the same time or as Abraham at the same time for the reason advanced immediately above.

[3] So that they could represent the Church therefore, a new name had inevitably to be given to Jacob, and through that name a new nature, which new nature was to be a sign of the internal spiritual man, or what amounts to the same, of the internal spiritual Church. That new nature is meant by 'Israel'. Every Church of the Lord is internal and external, as has been shown several times already, the internal Church being that which is represented, the external that which represents. The internal Church is also either spiritual or else celestial, the internal spiritual Church being represented by 'Israel', but the internal celestial Church at a later time by 'Judah'. Therefore a division also took place, and the Israelites became a kingdom on their own and the Jews another on their own. But these matters will in the Lord's Divine mercy be discussed later on. From this it is evident that 'Jacob', that is, Jacob's descendants, could not represent the Church as Jacob, for that would have been to represent solely the external aspect of the Church. They had to do so as Israel as well because 'Israel' is the internal aspect.

[4] It has been shown in various places already that it is the internal which is represented and the external which represents, as may also be seen in the human being. A person's speech represents his thought, and a person's action represents his will. Speech and action are the external aspects of the person, thought and will the internal. In addition the various looks seen on a person's face represent both, that is to say, both his thought and his will. It is well known to everyone that the looks on a person's face are representative, for the looks on the faces of people who are sincere enable their interior states to be seen. In short, every part of the body represents some facet of a person's inclination (animus) and mind (mens).

[5] It is similar with the external aspects of the Church, for these are like the body, while its internal aspects are like the soul. There were, for example, the altars and the sacrifices on them, which, as is well known, were external things. There was likewise the bread of the presence, also the lampstand with its lamps, as well as the fire that was kept burning all the time. Anyone can recognize that these external things represented internal ones, as likewise did everything else of a ritual nature. The fact that these external things could not represent anything external, only what was internal, becomes clear from the considerations introduced already. So 'Jacob' could not represent as Jacob, because 'Jacob' means the external aspect of the Church, but he could do so as Israel because 'Israel' means its internal aspect. This is what is meant by a new nature being imparted to enable the descendants of Jacob to play the representative part.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #4288

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

4288. These same verses which have been explained so far also have regard to the Jewish and Israelitish nation which is called 'Jacob' in the Word, as stated and shown above in 4279. In the sense which is being called the internal historical the words 'Let me go, for the dawn is coming up' mean that the genuine representative role would depart from the descendants of Jacob before they entered into the representatives connected with the land of Canaan. The nature of that nation has been shown above, namely that among them no internal worship existed, only external worship; that is to say, they had become cut off from the heavenly marriage, and therefore no Church could be established among that nation, only that which was a representative of the Church, see 4281.

[2] But one must know what a representative Church is and what a representative of the Church is. A representative Church exists when internal worship is present within external, but a representative of the Church when no internal worship exists even though external does so. In both cases they observe very similar external practices, that is to say, they follow similar ordinances, laws, and commands. But in the representative Church external things correspond to internal so that they make one, whereas in a representative of the Church that correspondence does not exist because external things are either devoid of internal or else at variance with them. In the representative Church celestial and spiritual love is supreme, but in a representative of the Church bodily and worldly love is supreme. Celestial and spiritual love constitutes the internal itself, but when no celestial or spiritual love exists, only bodily and worldly, that which is external devoid of what is internal exists. The Ancient Church which existed after the Flood was a representative Church, but that which was established among the descendants of Jacob was merely a representative of the Church. But to make the difference between the two quite plain, let it be illustrated by examples.

[3] In the representative Church Divine worship took place on mountains because 'mountains' meant celestial love, and in the highest sense the Lord, 795, 1430, 2722, 4210; and when they held worship on mountains they were in their own holy place because they were at the same time abiding in celestial love. In the representative Church Divine worship also took place in groves because 'groves' meant spiritual love, and in the highest sense the Lord in regard to that love, 2722; and when they held worship in groves they were in their own holy place because they were at the same time abiding in spiritual love. When they held Divine worship in the representative Church they used to turn their faces towards the rising of the sun because 'the rising sun' too meant celestial love, 101, 1529, 1530, 2441, 2495, 3636, 3643. And when they looked up at the moon they were again filled with holy reverence because 'the moon' meant spiritual love, 1529-1531, 2495, 4060. And the same applied when they looked up at the starry sky because this meant the angelic heaven or the Lord's kingdom. In the representative Church they had tents or tabernacles in which they held Divine worship, and this was holy worship because 'tents' or 'tabernacles' means the holiness of love and of worship, 414, 1102, 2145, 2152, 3312. And countless other examples could be mentioned.

[4] In the representative of the Church Divine worship did indeed take place at first on mountains and also in groves. The practice also existed then of turning to face the rising of the sun, as well as that of beholding the moon and the stars. There was likewise worship in tents or tabernacles. But because their external worship was devoid of internal - that is, they were governed by bodily and worldly love and not by celestial and spiritual, and so worshipped the actual mountains or groves, and also the sun, moon, and stars, as well as their tents or tabernacles - those practices, which had been holy in the Ancient Church, were now made idolatrous by those belonging to a representative of the Church. They were therefore restricted to the same place and practices for them all, that is to say, to the mountain on which Jerusalem and at length Zion stood, where from the temple they beheld the rising of the sun, and also to one tent for them all, called the tent of meeting, and ultimately to the ark in the temple. They were restricted to these things to the end that a representative of the Church might come into being when they practiced what was outwardly holy. Otherwise they would have rendered holy things unholy.

[5] From these examples one may see what the difference is between a representative Church and a representative of the Church. In general, one may see that members of the representative Church communicated with the three heavens, and that they did so in things of an interior kind, for which external ones could serve as the foundation on which they rested. But those who belonged to a representative of the Church did not communicate with heaven in things of an interior kind. Yet the external things to which those people were limited were nevertheless able to serve as the foundation for interior ones. The Lord's Providence in a miraculous manner enabled this to be so, for the reason that some kind of communication might be established between heaven and mankind through what was a semblance of the Church. For without any communication of heaven with mankind by means of some kind of Church the human race would perish. But what the communication is like when it takes place through external things devoid of any correspondence with internal ones cannot be stated briefly. In the Lord's Divine mercy a statement is to be made about this later on.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.