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).

4444. As they heard it, and the men were grieved, and they were very angry. That this signifies that they were in evil against the truth of the Church among the Ancients, is evident from the signification of being “grieved and very angry,” as being to be in evil. That this was against the truth of the Church among the Ancients, follows, because it was against Shechem the son of Hamor, by whom is signified the truth among the ancients, as before said (n. 4430, 4431). That they were in evil is evident from what follows, in that they spoke with fraud (verse 13), and then, after Shechem and Hamor had complied with their demands, they slew them (verses 26-29). Thus by being “grieved and very angry” is here signified that they were in evil. It appears as if these words signify zeal because he lay with their sister, according to the words which presently follow: “Because he had wrought folly in Israel in lying with Jacob’s daughter, and so it ought not to be done;” and at the end of the chapter: “They said, Shall he make our sister as a harlot?” (verse 31); but it was not zeal, for zeal is impossible with anyone who is in evil, being possible only with him who is in good, because zeal has good within it (n. 4164).

[2] It is true that the religiosity which existed with their posterity had good within it, for each and all things of it represented the celestial and spiritual things of the Lord’s kingdom; but as regards those who were in that religiosity it had no good within it, for they were in mere externals without internals, as shown above. The case herein is the same as it is with the religiosity of that nation as now prevalent among them: they acknowledge Moses and the prophets, thus the Word, which in itself is holy, but as regards them it is not holy, for in everything therein they regard themselves, and thus make the Word worldly, nay, earthly, for that there is anything heavenly in it they do not know and neither do they care. They who are in such a state cannot be in good when in their religiosity, but in evil, for nothing heavenly flows in, because they extinguish it in themselves.

[3] Moreover, it was according to a law known in the Ancient Church that he who forced a virgin should give a dowry and take her for his wife, as thus stated in Moses:

If a man persuade a virgin who is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall endow her with a dowry to be his wife. If refusing her father refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay silver, as much as is the dowry of virgins (Exodus 27:15-16).

And elsewhere:

If a man find a damsel who is a virgin, who has not been betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be caught, the man who lay with her shall give the damsel’s father fifty pieces of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he forced her, and he may not put her away all his days (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

That this same law was known to the ancients is very evident from the words of Shechem to the damsel’s father and brothers: “Shechem said unto her father and unto her brethren, Let me find grace in your eyes, and what ye say unto me I will give. Multiply upon me exceedingly dowry and gift, and I will give according as ye shall say unto me, and give me the damsel for a woman” (verses 11-12). And as Shechem desired to fulfill this law, and Dinah’s brothers gave their consent provided that be would become as they were by circumcising every male, according to the words which follow: “Nevertheless in this will we consent unto you, if ye will be as we are, that every male with you be circumcised, we will both give our daughters to you, and will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you, and we will be one people” (verses 15-16), it is evident that Dinah’s brothers did not act from the law (thus not from good), but contrary to the law, and consequently from evil.

[4] It was indeed according to their law that they should not enter into marriages with the nations, as stated in Moses: “Lest thou take of their daughters for thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods” (Exodus 34:16); and again: “Thou shalt not contract kinship with the nations, thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, and his daughter thou shalt not take unto thy son, because he will turn aside thy son from following Me, that they may serve other gods” (Deuteronomy 7:3-4); but this law was given in regard to idolatrous nations, lest by marriages with them the sons of Israel should turn aside from truly representative worship to idolatrous worship; for when they became idolaters they could no longer represent the celestial and spiritual things of the Lord’s kingdom, but the opposites, which are infernal, for they then called forth from hell a certain devil whom they worshiped, and to whom they applied the Divine representatives, and therefore it is said, “Lest they go a whoring after their gods.” This law was given for the additional reason that by the “nations” were signified the evils and falsities with which the goods and truths represented by the sons of Israel were not to be commingled, consequently not diabolical and infernal things with heavenly and spiritual things (see n. 3024 at the end).

[5] But they were never forbidden to intermarry with the nations who accepted their worship, and who after being circumcised acknowledged Jehovah. These they called “sojourners sojourning with them,” who are thus spoken of in Moses:

If a sojourner shall sojourn with thee, and be willing to keep the passover to Jehovah, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it, and he shall be as an inhabitant of the land; there shall be one law for the inhabitant and for the sojourner that sojourneth in the midst of you (Exodus 12:48-49).

And again:

When a sojourner shall sojourn with you, he shall keep the passover unto Jehovah; according to the statute of the passover, and according to the statutes thereof, so shall he do; one statute shall there be for you, both for the sojourner and for the native of the land (Numbers 9:14).

The reason why they were called “sojourners sojourning in the midst of them” and “with them” was that “to sojourn” signified to be instructed; and therefore a “sojourner” signified those who suffered themselves to be instructed in the statutes and doctrinal things. (That “to sojourn” and a “sojourner” have this signification may be seen above, n. 1463, 2025, 3672) In the same:

If a sojourner shall sojourn with you who shall have made a fire-offering of an odor of rest unto Jehovah, as ye do, so he shall do: as to the assembly, there is one statute for you and for the sojourner that sojourneth, a statute of eternity for your generations; as ye are, so is the sojourner before Jehovah; one law and one judgment shall be for you and for the sojourner that sojourneth with you (Numbers 15:14-16).

As the native of you shall be the sojourner that sojourneth with you (Leviticus 19:34).

One judgment shall there be for you, such as is for the sojourner, such shall be for the native (Leviticus 24:22).

[6] That this statute was known not only to Jacob and his sons, but also to Shechem and Hamor, is evident from their words; for the statutes, judgments, and laws that were given to the Israelitish and Jewish nation were not new, but such as had previously existed in the Ancient Church and in the second Ancient Church which was called Hebrew from Eber, as has been shown. That consequently this law was known is evident from the words, “The sons of Jacob said to Hamor and Shechem, We cannot do this word, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, for this is a reproach to us; nevertheless in this will we consent to you, if ye will be as we, to circumcise for you every male, we will both give our daughters to you, and will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you and will be for one people” (verses); and the same is evident from the words of Hamor and Shechem, in that they not only consented, but also caused themselves and every male of their city to be circumcised (verses 18-24).

[7] Hence it is evident that Shechem became a sojourner such as is spoken of in the law, and thus could take the daughter of Jacob for a woman; so that to kill them was a wicked deed, as Jacob also testified before his death (Genesis 49:5-7). That not only Judah, but also Moses, and also the kings of the Jews and of the Israelites, and also many of the people, took wives from the nations, is evident from the historicals of the Word; and that these wives received their statutes, judgments, and laws, and were acknowledged as sojourners, is not to be doubted.

364. (Verse 4) And there went out another horse that was red. That this signifies the understanding of the Word destroyed as to good, is clear from the signification of a horse as denoting the Intellectual (concerning which see above, n. 355); in the present case, because the states of those who belong to the church where the Word is, are treated of. By a horse is signified the Intellectual of the men of the church as to the Word. And from the signification of red or reddish, as denoting the quality of a thing as to good, therefore, in the present case, the quality of the understanding of the Word as to good. That reddish here signifies this destroyed as to good, is evident from what immediately follows in this verse, for it is said, it was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, that they should kill one another, and there was given unto him a great sword, by which is signified, that there was thence the extinction of all truth. Because the horses seen by John, were distinguished by colours (for the first appeared white, the second red, the third black, and the fourth pale), and colours signify the qualities of things, therefore something shall first be said here concerning colours. In the heavens there appear colours of every kind, and they derive their origin from the light there, which light, as it immensely excels in brightness and splendour the light of the world, so also do the colours there; and because the light there is from the Sun of heaven, which is the Lord, and is the proceeding Divine, and hence that light is spiritual, therefore also all colours signify things spiritual. And since the proceeding Divine is the Divine good united to the Divine truth, and the Divine good in heaven is manifested by a flaming light, and the Divine truth by a white light, therefore, there are two fundamental colours there, namely, red and white; the red colour derives its origin from the flaming light which proceeds from the Divine good, and the white from the white light which proceeds from the Divine truth; therefore in proportion as colours are derived from red they signify good, and so far as they are derived from white, they signify truth.

(But these things will be more evident from what is said from experience concerning colours in the Arcana Coelestia, namely, that the most beautiful colours appear in the heavens (n. 1053, 1624); that colours in the heavens are from the light there, and that they are the modifications and variations thereof (n. 1042, 1043, 1053, 1624, 3993, 4530, 4922, 4742); that thus they are appearances of truth and good, and signify such things as pertain to intelligence and wisdom (n. 4530, 4922, 1677, 9466); that therefore the precious stones, which were of various colours, in the breast-plate of the ephod, or in the urim and thummim, signified all things of truth from good in heaven and in the church, and that hence the breast-plate in general signified the Divine truth shining forth from the Divine good (n. 9823, 9865, 9868, 9905); and that hence responses were given by variegations and resplendences of light, and at the same time by silent perception, or by a living voice out of heaven (n. 3862); that colours signify good in proportion as they are derived from red, and truth in proportion as they are from white (n. 9467). Concerning the light of heaven, whence and what it is, see the work concerning Heaven and Hell 126-140, 275.)

[2] Moreover it should be known, that red not only signifies the quality of a thing as to good, but also the quality of a thing as to evil; for that colour exists from the flaming light which is the light from the Sun of heaven, as said above, and it also exists from the flaming [quality] in hell, which is from the fire there, this fire being like a coal fire. Hence the red in heaven is altogether different from the red in hell; the red in heaven is shining and living, whereas the red in hell is hideously obscure and dead; the red of heaven also imparts life, but the red of hell death; the reason is, that the fire from which red is produced is in its origin love, celestial fire, being from celestial love, and infernal fire from infernal love; hence it is that fire in the Word signifies love in both senses (as may be seen, n. 4906, 5071, 5215, 6314, 6832, 7575, 10747; and in the work concerning, Heaven and Hell 134, 566-575); therefore the red existing therefrom signifies the quality of the love in both senses. This red also, or the red colour of this horse, in the original Greek, is expressed [by a word derived] from fire. From these considerations, and at the same time from the description of this horse in this verse, it is evident why it is that a red horse signifies the understanding of the Word destroyed as to good. That a horse signifies something of this sort, is quite evident from the fact, that the horses were seen when the seals were opened, and it is said that they went out, for horses could not go forth out of the book, but that those things were to be manifested that are signified by horses. That a horse signifies the Intellectual, and colour its quality, has been made well known to me from experience; for spirits who were meditating from the understanding upon some subject have appeared to me at different times riding upon horses, and when I asked them whether they were riding, they said they were not, but that they stood meditating upon the subject; hence it was evident, that riding upon a horse was an appearance representative of the operation of their understanding.

[3] There is also a place, which is called the assembly of the intelligent and wise, whither many resort for meditation, and when any one enters it, there appear to him horses of various colours, and variously caparisoned, and also chariots, and some riding, and others sitting in the chariots; when asked whether they ride upon horses, and are carried in chariots, they say that they are not, but that they go along meditating; hence also it was evident what is signified by horses, and by chariots. (But upon this subject more may be seen in the small work concerning the White Horse.) From these considerations, it is now evident, why it is that horses were seen by John when the seals of the book were opened, and also what they signify. The reason why those horses were seen, is, because all the spiritual things of the Word are set forth in the sense of its letter by such things as correspond or represent, and thence signify them, and this in order that the Divine may be there in ultimates, and, consequently, in fulness, as has been frequently said above.

[4] That reddish or red signifies the quality of a thing as to good is also evident from the following passages in the Word: In Moses:

Who washes his clothing in wine, and his garment in the blood of grapes. His eyes are redder than wine, and his teeth whiter than milk (Genesis 49:11, 12).

These words are in the prophecy of the father Israel concerning Judah, and by Judah is there meant the Lord as to the good of love, and in a relative sense the Lord's celestial kingdom. What is signified by each particular there, in the spiritual sense, may be seen in the Arcana Coelestia, where they are explained. The Divine wisdom which is from the Divine good, is signified by his eyes being redder than wine; and the Divine intelligence, which is from the Divine truth, by his teeth being whiter than milk.

[5] In Lamentations:

"The Nazarites were whiter than snow, they were whiter than milk, their bones were more ruddy than pearls" (4:7).

By the Nazarites the Lord was represented as to the Divine Human (see above, n. 66, 196, at the end), wherefore also, in a relative sense, the good of celestial love was signified by them, because this good proceeds immediately from the Lord's Divine Human; its representative in the church is thus described. The truth of that good is signified by their being whiter than snow, and whiter than milk; and the good of truth, by their bones being more ruddy than pearls. For bones signify truths in their ultimate, thus truths in their whole extent, for in ultimates all things are together, and in fulness.

[6] That they are from good, and also are goods, is signified by their being ruddy. In Zechariah:

"I beheld four chariots going out from between mountains of brass. In the first chariot were red horses; in the second chariot black horses; in the third chariot white horses; and in the fourth chariot grisled horses, strong" (6:1-3).

That by the red horses is here also signified the quality of the understanding as to good in the beginning, by the black horses the quality of the understanding as to truth in the beginning, by the white horses the quality of the understanding as to truth afterwards, by the grisled horses the quality of the understanding as to truth and good afterwards, and by strong the quality thereof thence as to the power of resisting falsities and evils, may be seen above (n. 355), where the signification of the horse is treated of. In the same prophet almost the same is meant by the "red horse, upon which a man rode, standing among the myrtle trees" (1:8). Because by red or ruddy is signified the quality of a thing as to good, therefore, red rams' skins were used for the covering over the tabernacle (Exodus 25:5; 26:14; 35:7). And, therefore, also the water of separation, by which they were cleansed, was made from the ashes of a red heifer (Numbers 19:1-10). By the red heifer is signified the good of the natural man, and by the water of separation, made from those ashes, is signified the truth of the natural man; and this was commanded because all cleansing is effected by truths; the particulars also respecting the slaying of it, and respecting the preparation of the water of cleansing from it, involve spiritual things.

[7] Because red signifies the quality of a thing as to good, therefore, also names and things, which are named from the same expression in the original tongue, signify the good in which they originate. Red, in the original tongue, is called Adam, whence the name Adam, and also the name Edom, and hence also man is called Adam, the ground Adama, and the ruby Odam; thus, those names and those things are from red. By Adam is signified the Most Ancient Church, which was the church that was in the good of love; the same is signified by man, and also by ground in the spiritual sense, where celestial good is treated of. That Edom was named from red may be seen in Genesis 25:30; and hence the truth of the good of the natural man is signified by him. That the ruby is also named from red, may be seen in Exodus 28:17; 39:10; Ezekiel 28:13; hence it is that by the ruby is signified the truth of celestial good. (That Adam signifies the Most Ancient Church, which was the celestial church, or the church that was in the good of love to the Lord, may be seen, (n. 478, 479; that man signifies the church as to good, n. 4287, 7424, 7523; that ground also signifies the same, n. 566, 10570; that Edom, because he was named from red, signifies the truth of the good of the natural man, n. 3300, 3322; and that the ruby signifies the truth of celestial good, n. 9865.) Because red signifies the quality of a thing as to good, therefore, in the opposite sense, it signifies the quality of a thing as to evil, which is the opposite of good, consequently, good destroyed. In this sense red is mentioned in the following passages: In Isaiah:

"If your sins are as scarlet, they shall become white as snow; if they are red as crimson, they shall be as wool" (1:18).

And in Nahum:

"The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in purple; in a fire of torches are his chariots, the chariots raged in the streets; they ran to and fro in the broad ways, the appearance of them as of torches" (2:3, 4).

In that sense also the dragon is called red (Apoc. 12:3); which will be explained in what follows.