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).

1138. Verse 11. And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her, signifies the mourning and grief of those who acquire the things pertaining to that religious persuasion in order to gain honor and wealth. This is evident from the signification of "merchants," as being those who acquire the knowledges of the truth and good of the church, and in the contrary sense those who acquire the knowledges of evil and falsity, so here those who acquire the things pertaining to that religious persuasion for the sake of gain, that is, both honors and wealth. (That this is the signification of "merchants" may be seen n. 840, 1104.) Also from the signification of "weeping and mourning," as being to grieve and lament. There are four kinds of men of that religious persuasion that are here described, namely, those called "kings of the earth," those called "merchants of the earth," those called "merchants of merchandise," and those called "masters of ships with sailors." "The kings of the earth" are treated of in verses 9, 10, "the merchants of the earth" in verses 11-14, "the merchants of merchandise" verses 15-16, and "the masters of ships and sailors" verses 17-19.

(Continuation respecting the Athanasian Faith and respecting the Lord)

[2] From all this it is evident that the Lord can lead man to heaven only by means of these laws, although he has Divine love from which He wills, and Divine wisdom from which He knows all things, and Divine power, which is omnipotence, from which He can do what He wills. For these laws that are called laws of providence are laws of order respecting reformation and regeneration, thus respecting the salvation of man, and against these the Lord cannot act, since to act against them would be to act against His own wisdom and against His own love, thus against Himself. In respect to the first law, which is, That from sense and perception man cannot know otherwise than that life is in him; and yet he should acknowledge that the goods and truths which belong to love and faith which he thinks, wills, speaks, and acts, are not from him but are from the Lord. This law presupposes the second, namely, That man has freedom, and that this freedom also appears to be his, and yet he should acknowledge that it is not his, but is the Lord's in him.

[3] This law follows from the former because freedom makes one with life, for without freedom man cannot feel and perceive that life is as if it were in him; it is from freedom that he feels this and perceives this, for it is from freedom that everything that the life effects appears to man to be his own [proprium et suum], for freedom is the power to think, will, speak, and do from oneself, here as if from oneself. And it especially belongs to the will, for a man says, I have power to do what I will, and I will that which I have power to do; in other words, I am in freedom. Again, who cannot think from freedom that one thing is good and another evil, or that one thing is true and another false? Therefore freedom was given to man together with his life, nor is it ever taken away from him; for so far as it is taken away or lessened so far man feels and perceives that he does not live, but that another lives in him, and so far the delight of all things of his life is taken away or lessened, for he becomes a slave.

[4] That from sense and perception man knows no otherwise than that life is in him, thus that it is as if it were his own, has need of no other proof than experience itself. Who has any other feeling or perception than that he thinks from himself when he thinks, that he wills from himself when he wills, that he speaks and acts from himself when he speaks and acts? But it is from a law of the Divine providence that man should know no otherwise, since without such a feeling and such a perception he cannot receive anything to himself, appropriate anything to himself, or bring forth anything from himself; thus he would be neither a recipient of life from the Lord nor an agent of life from the Lord, but would be like an automaton, or like an upright image, without understanding or will, with the hands hanging down, awaiting influx that could not be given. For if life were not received and not appropriated as if by man, it would not be retained, but would flow through, and in consequence man from being alive would become like one dead, and from being a rational soul would become not rational, thus either a brute or a stock; for he would have no delight of life, that is, the delight that everyone has from receiving as if from himself, from appropriating and from bringing forth as if from himself, since delight and life act as one, and when you take away all the delight of life you grow cold and die.

[5] If it were not according to a law of the Divine providence that man should feel and perceive as if life and everything pertaining to it were in him, and should be left to acknowledge simply that good and truth are not from him but are from the Lord, nothing could be imputed to man, neither good nor truth, and thus neither love nor faith; and if nothing could be imputed, the Lord would not have commanded in the Word that man must do good and shun evil, and if he did good heaven would be his inheritance, and if he did evil hell would be his portion; nor even would there be any heaven or hell, for without that perception man would not be a man, thus would not be a dwelling place of the Lord. For the Lord wills to be loved by man as if by him; thus it is that the Lord dwells with man in what is His own, and this he has given him in order that He may be loved reciprocally; for the Divine love consists in this, that it wishes what is its own to be man's, and this could not be unless man felt and perceived what is from the Lord to be as if it were his own.

[6] If it were not according to the Divine law that man cannot from sense and perception know otherwise than that life is in him, no end for the sake of which man could act would be possible; this is possible to man because the end from which he acts seems to be in him. The end from which he acts is his love, which is his life, and the end for the sake of which he acts is the delight of his love or life, and the effect in which the end presents itself is use. The end for the sake of which he acts, which is the delight of his life's love, is felt and perceived in man, because the end from which he acts enables him to feel and perceive it; and that end is, as has been said, the love which is life. But to the man who acknowledges that all things of his life are from the Lord, the Lord gives the delight and blessedness of His love, so far as the man acknowledges this and performs uses. Thus when man by acknowledgment and by faith from love, as if from himself, ascribes to the Lord all things of his life, the Lord in turn ascribes to man the good of His life, which carries with it every happiness and every blessedness, and also enables him to feel and perceive interiorly and exquisitely this good to be in himself as if it were his own, and the more exquisitely in proportion as man from the heart wills that which he acknowledges by faith. The perception is then reciprocal, for the perception that He is in man and man is in Him is grateful to the Lord, and the perception that he is in the Lord and the Lord in him is gratifying to man. Such is the union of the Lord with man and of man with the Lord by means of love.