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.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #3653

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

3653. From all this it is now evident that in these verses there is fully described the state of devastation of the church in respect to the goods of love and the truths of faith, and that at the same time there is given an exhortation to those who are in these goods and truths in regard to what they ought then to do. There are three kinds of men within the church; namely, those who are in love to the Lord; those who are in charity toward the neighbor; and those who are in the affection of truth. Those who belong to the first class, who are in love to the Lord, are specifically signified in the words, “let them that are in Judea flee into the mountains.” Those in the second class, who are in charity toward their neighbor, are specifically signified in the words, “let him that is upon the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house.” Those in the third class, who are in the affection of truth, are specifically signified in the words, “and let him that is in the field not return back to take his garment.” (See what has been said and explained above in regard to these words, n. 2454; and what is meant by “returning back,” and “looking behind him.”)

  
/ 10837  
  

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

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Arcana Coelestia #3310

Study this Passage

  
/ 10837  
  

3310. That “a man of the field” signifies the good of life from doctrinal things, is evident from the signification of “field.” In the Word frequent mention is made of “earth” or “land,” of “ground,” and of “field;” and by “earth” or “land,” when used in a good sense, is signified the Lord’s kingdom in the heavens and on earth, thus the church, which is His kingdom on earth. The like is signified by “ground,” but in a more restricted sense (n. 566, 662, 1066-1068, 1262, 1413, 1733, 1850, 2117, 2118, 2928). The same is signified also by “field,” but in a sense still more restricted (n. 368, 2971); and as the church is not the church from doctrinal things except insofar as these have respect to the good of life as their end; or what is the same, unless these doctrinal things are conjoined with the good of life, therefore by “field” is principally signified the good of life; and in order that this may be of the church, there must be doctrinal things from the Word which have been implanted in this good. Without doctrinal things there is indeed good of life, but not as yet the good of the church, thus not as yet good truly spiritual, except only in the capacity of becoming so; as is the case with the good of life among the Gentiles who have not the Word, and therefore are ignorant of the Lord.

[2] That a “field” is the good of life in which are to be implanted the things which are of faith, that is, spiritual truths which are of the church, is very evident from the Lord’s parable in Matthew:

The sower went forth to sow, and as he sowed, some fell upon the hard way, and the birds came and devoured them; and others fell upon stony places where they had not much earth, and straightway they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth; and when the sun was risen, they were scorched, and because they had no root, they withered away; and others fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them; but others fell upon the good ground and yielded fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold: he that hath an ear to hear, let him hear (Matthew 13:3-9; Mark 4:3-9; Luke 8:5-8).

Here four kinds of earth or ground in a field-that is, in the church-are treated of. That the “seed” is the Word of the Lord, thus truth, which is said to be of faith, and that the “good ground” is the good which is of charity, is evident, for it is the good in man that receives the Word; the “hard way” is falsity; a “stony place” is truth that has no root in good; “thorns” are evils.

[3] As regards the good of life from doctrinal things, which is signified by “a man of the field,” the case is this: They who are being regenerated, at first do what is good from doctrinal things, for of themselves they do not know what is good, but learn it from the doctrinal things of love and charity; from these they know who the Lord is; who is the neighbor; what love is, and what charity; thus what good is. When they are in this state they are in the affection of truth, and are called “men [viri] of the field;” but afterwards when they have been regenerated, they do not do what is good from doctrinal things, but from love and charity, for they are then in the good itself which they have learned through doctrinal things, and then are called “men [homines] of the field.” The case herein is as with one who by nature inclines to adulteries, thefts, and murders, but who learns from the commandments of the Decalogue that such things are of hell, and so abstains from them. In this state he is affected by the commandments because he is afraid of hell, and from these and likewise from many things in the Word he learns how he ought to direct his life; and in this case when he does what is good, he does it from the commandments. But when he is in good, he begins to be averse to the adulteries, thefts, and murders to which before he had been inclined; and when he is in this state, he no longer does what is good from the commandments, but from good, which then is in him. In the former state he learns good from truth; in the latter state he teaches truth from good.

[4] The same is the case also with spiritual truths, which are called doctrinal things, and are still more interior commandments; for doctrinal things are the interior truths that belong to the natural man. The first truths are of sense, the next are of memory-knowledge, the interior ones are of doctrine. These doctrinal truths are founded upon truths of memory-knowledge, for man can form and retain no idea, notion, or conception of them except from memory-knowledges. But truths of memory-knowledge are founded upon truths of the senses, for without sensuous things no memory-knowledges can be comprehended by man. These truths, namely, those of memory-knowledge and of sense, are what are signified by “a man skillful in hunting;” but doctrinal truths are those which are signified by a “man of the field.” In this way do these truths follow in succession with man; and therefore until he is of adult age, and through truths of sense and of memory-knowledge is in doctrinal truths, no man is able to be regenerated, for he cannot be confirmed in the truths of doctrine, except by means of ideas derived from the things of memory-knowledge and of sense. For nothing is possible in man’s thought, even as to the deepest arcanum of faith, that is not attended with a natural and sensuous idea, although the man is for the most part ignorant of the nature of it; but in the other life, if he desires it, it is presented to view before his understanding, and even, if he so wishes, before his sight; for however incredible it may appear, in the other life such things can be presented to the sight.

  
/ 10837  
  

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