From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #9372

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

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).

  
/ 10837  
  

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

The Bible

 

2 Kings 1:8

Study

       

8 And they answered him, He was an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins. And he said, It is Elijah the Tishbite.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #1992

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

1992. I am God Shaddai. That in the sense of the letter this signifies the name of Abram’s God, by which name the Lord was first represented before them, is evident from the things contained in the Word concerning Abram, and concerning the house of his father, in that they adored other gods.

In Syria, whence Abram came, there still existed remains of the Ancient Church, and many families there retained its worship-as is evident from Eber who was of that country, from whom came the Hebrew nation-and they in like manner retained the name “Jehovah,” as is evident from what has been shown in Part First (n. 1343), and also from the case of Balaam, who was from Syria and offered sacrifices and called Jehovah his God. That Balaam was from Syria may be seen in Numbers 23:7; that he offered sacrifices, Numbers 22:39-40; 23:1-3, 14, 29; that he called Jehovah his God, Numbers 22:8, 13, 18, 31; 23:8, 12, 16.

[2] But this was not the case with the house of Terah, the father of Abram and Nahor, for this was one of the families of the nations there that had not only lost the name “Jehovah” but had also served other gods, and instead of Jehovah had worshiped Shaddai, whom they called their god. That they had lost the name “Jehovah,” is evident from the things adduced in Part First (n. 1343). And that they served other gods is openly stated in Joshua:

Joshua said unto all the people, Thus hath said Jehovah, the God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt of old time beyond the River, Terah the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, and they served other gods; now fear Jehovah, and serve Him in entirety and in truth; and put away the gods that your fathers served beyond the River, and in Egypt, and serve ye Jehovah. And if it be evil in your eyes to serve Jehovah, choose ye this day whom ye will serve, whether the gods that your fathers served that were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites (Josh. 24:2, 14-15).

That Nahor also, the brother of Abram, and the nation descended from him, served other gods, is evident from Laban the Syrian, who was in the city of Nahor and worshiped images or teraphim, which Rachel carried away (Genesis 24:10; 31:19, 26, 32, 34). See also what is said on this subject in Part First (n. 1356). That instead of Jehovah they worshiped Shaddai, whom they called their god, is distinctly stated in Moses:

I (Jehovah) appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, as God Shaddai; and by My name Jehovah was I not known to them (Exodus 6:3).

[3] From all this we may see that in his early manhood, Abram, like other Gentiles, was an idolater, and that up to this time, while living in the land of Canaan, he had not rejected from his mind the god Shaddai-by which is meant in the sense of the letter the name of Abram’s god-and that by this name the Lord was first represented before them (that is, before Abram, Isaac, and Jacob), as is evident from the passage just quoted.

[4] The reason why the Lord was willing to be first represented before them by the name “Shaddai” is that the Lord by no means desires to destroy suddenly (still less in a single moment) the worship that has been inseminated in anyone from his infancy; for this would be to tear up the root, and thereby destroy the holy state of adoration and of worship that has been deeply implanted, and which the Lord never breaks, but bends. The holy state of worship, that has been rooted in from infancy is of such a nature that it cannot endure violence, but only a gentle and kindly bending. The case is the same with those Gentiles who in their bodily life had worshiped idols, and yet had lived in mutual charity. As the holy state of their worship has been inrooted from their infancy, in the other life it is not taken away in a moment, but successively; for in those who have lived in mutual charity, the goods and truths of faith can be easily implanted, and they receive them afterwards with joy; for charity is the very soil. And such also was the case with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in that the Lord suffered them to retain the name “God Shaddai,” insomuch that He said He was God Shaddai; and this from the meaning of the name.

[5] Some translators render Shaddai “the Almighty;” others, “the Thunderer;” but it properly signifies “the Tempter” or “Tester,” and “the Benefactor,” after the temptations” or “trials,” as is evident from the book of Job, which mentions “Shaddai” so frequently because Job was in trials or temptations; as may be seen from the following passages:

Behold, happy is the man whom God chastiseth; and reject not thou the chastening of Shaddai (Job 5:17). The arrows of Shaddai are with me, the terrors of God do set themselves in array against me (Job 6:4). He shall forsake the fear of Shaddai (Job 6:14). I will speak to Shaddai, and I desire to contend with God (Job 13:3). He hath stretched out his hand against God, and strengtheneth himself against Shaddai (Job 15:25) His eyes shall see his destruction, and he shall drink of the fury of Shaddai (Job 21:20). Shaddai, thou shalt not find Him out; He is great in power, and in judgment, and in the greatness of righteousness. He will not afflict (Job 37:23).

Also in Joel:

Alas for the day! for the day of Jehovah is near, and as devastation from Shaddai shall it come (Joel 1:15).

The same may also be seen from the word shaddai itself, which signifies vastation, and thus temptation, for temptation is a kind of vastation. But as this name took its rise from nations in Syria, He is not called “Elohim Shaddai,” but “El Shaddai;” and in Job simply “Shaddai,” and “El” or “God” is named separately.

[6] As after temptations there is consolation, those people also attributed the good resulting from them to the same Shaddai (as in Job 22:17, 23, 25-26); as well as the understanding of truth, which also results from temptations (Job 32:8; 33:4). And as Shaddai was thus esteemed as the god of truth-for vastation, temptation, chastening, and rebuking, are not of good, but of truth-and because the Lord was represented by him before Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the name was retained even in the Prophets; but in them by “Shaddai” is meant truth. As in Ezekiel:

I heard the voice of the wings of the cherubim, like the voice of many waters, like the voice of Shaddai, when they went; the voice of tumult, like the voice of a camp (Ezekiel 1:24).

And again:

The court was filled with the brightness of the glory of Jehovah; and the voice of the wings of the cherubim was heard even to the outer court, as the voice of God Shaddai when He speaketh (Ezekiel 10:4-5

where “Jehovah” denotes good, and “Shaddai” truth. In the internal sense of the Word “wings” in like manner signify things that belong to truth.

[7] Moreover Isaac and Jacob also make mention of the God Shaddai in a similar sense, that is, as of one who tempts, and delivers from temptation, and afterwards confers benefits. When Jacob was fleeing because of Esau, Isaac said to him,

God Shaddai bless thee, and make thee fruitful and multiply thee (Genesis 28:3).

And when the sons of Jacob were about to go into Egypt to buy corn, and when they feared Joseph so greatly, Jacob said to them,

God Shaddai give you mercies before the man, that he may release unto you your other brother, and Benjamin (Genesis 43:14).

Jacob, then called Israel, blessing Joseph, who had been in the evils of temptations, or trials, more than his brethren, and had been delivered from them, said,

By the God of thy father, and He shall help thee, and with Shaddai, and he shall bless thee (Genesis 49:25).

All this shows why the Lord was at first willing to be represented by the god Shaddai whom Abram worshiped, and why He said “I am God Shaddai;” as in like manner He afterwards said to Jacob, “I am God Shaddai; be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 35:11); and a further reason was that in what goes before, temptations were treated of in the internal sense.

[8] The worship of Shaddai among those people originated from the fact that, as was the case with a certain nation that of the Lord’s Divine mercy will be spoken of in what follows, so with those who were of the Ancient Church, there were often heard spirits who reproved them and who also afterwards comforted them. The spirits who reproved them were perceived at the left side, beneath the arm. Angels were present at such times, at the head, who governed the spirits and moderated the reproof. And as there was nothing that was said to them by the spirits which they did not regard as Divine, they named the reproving spirit “Shaddai;” and because he afterwards administered consolation, they called him “the god Shaddai.” The men at that time, as also the Jews, because they did not understand the internal sense of the Word, were in the religious belief that all evil and thus all temptation, like all good and thus all consolation, come from God; but that it is not so, may be seen in Part First (n. 245, 592, 696, 1093, 1874, 1875).

  
/ 10837  
  

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