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).

4736. Cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness. That this signifies that they should conceal it meanwhile among their falsities, that is, that they should regard it as false, but still retain it because it was of importance to the church, is evident from the signification of a “pit,” as being falsities (see n. 4728); and from the signification of a “wilderness,” as being where there is no truth. For the word “wilderness” has a wide signification, it means where the land is uninhabited, and thus not cultivated; and when predicated of the church, it denotes where there is no good, and consequently no truth (n. 2708, 3900). Thus by a “pit in the wilderness” are here meant falsities in which there is no truth, because no good. It is said in which there is no truth because no good; for when anyone believes that faith saves without works, truth may indeed exist, but still it is not truth in him, because it does not look to good, nor is it from good. This truth is not alive, because it has in it a principle of falsity, consequently with anyone who has such truth, the truth is but falsity from the principle which rules in it. The principle is like the soul, from which the rest have their life. On the other hand there are falsities which are accepted as truths, when there is good in them, especially if it is the good of innocence, as with the Gentiles and also with many within the church.

3387. 'For he was afraid to say, My wife, [thinking,] The men of the place may perhaps kill me on account of Rebekah' means that it was impossible for Divine Truths themselves to be disclosed, and so for Divine Good to be received. This is clear from the meaning of 'being afraid to say' as an inability to disclose; from the meaning of 'wife', who is Rebekah here, as the Lord's Divine Rational in respect to Divine Truth, dealt with in 3012, 3013, 3077; from the meaning of 'killing me' as good not being received, for 'Isaac', to whom 'me' refers here, represents the Divine Good of the Lord's Rational, 3012, 3194, 3210 - good being said 'to be killed' or to perish when it is not received, for it ceases to exist with that person; and from the meaning of 'the men of the place' as people who possess matters of doctrine concerning faith, dealt with just above in 3385. From these meanings it is now evident what the internal sense of these words is, namely: If Divine truths themselves were disclosed they would not be received by those who possess matters of doctrine concerning faith because those truths go beyond the whole range of their rational grasp of things, and so go beyond the whole of their faith, and as a consequence of this no good at all could flow in from the Lord. For good from the Lord, or Divine good, cannot flow in except into truths, for truths are the vessels for good, as shown many times.

[2] Truths or appearances of truth are given to a person to enable Divine Good to develop the understanding part of his mind, and so the person himself, for truths exist to the end that good may flow in. Indeed without vessels or receptacles good has nowhere to go, for it can find no condition answering to itself. Where no truths exist therefore, that is, where they have not been received, neither does any rational or human good exist; and as a consequence the person does not possess any spiritual life. Therefore, so that a person may nevertheless possess truths, and from these receive spiritual life, appearances of truth are given, to everyone according to his ability to grasp them; and these appearances are acknowledged as truths because they have the capacity to hold Divine things within them.

[3] So that it may be known what appearances are and that they are what serve a person as Divine truths, let the following be used by way of illustration: If man were told that in heaven angels have no concept of place, and so no concept of distance, but that instead they have concepts of state, he could not possibly grasp it, for he would suppose from this that nothing distinct and separate existed but that everything was fused together, that is to say, all the angels were together in a single place. Yet everything there is so distinct and separate that nothing could ever be more so. Places, distances, and intervals of space which exist in the natural order exist in heaven as states, see 3356. From this it is evident that all the things that are stated in the Word about places and intervals of space between objects, also ideas that are formed from these and expressed through them, are appearances of truth; and unless everything were stated by means of those appearances it would in no way be received and would as a consequence be scarcely anything; for the concept of space and time is present in almost every single detail of a person's thought as long as he is in the world, that is, living within space and time.

[4] The fact that the Word speaks according to appearances involving space is clear from almost every single part of it, as in Matthew,

Jesus said, How is it that David says, The Lord [said] to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool? Matthew 22:43-44.

Here the expression 'sitting at the right hand' is derived from the concept of place and so according to the appearance - when in fact it is a state of the Lord's Divine power which is described by that expression. In the same gospel,

Jesus said, Hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven. Matthew 26:64.

Here similarly 'sitting at the right hand' and also 'coming on clouds' are expressions derived from men's concept of place, whereas the concept angels have is one of the state of the Lord's power. In Mark,

The sons of Zebedee said to Jesus, Grant us to sit in Your glory, one on Your right hand and the other on Your left. Jesus replied, To sit at My right hand and at My left is not Mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared. Mark 10:37, 40.

From this it is evident what kind of concept the disciples had of the Lord's kingdom, that is to say, one that involved sitting on the right hand and on the left. Such being the concept they had of it the Lord also replied to them in a way they could understand and so by an appearance that could be seen by them.

[5] In David,

Like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, he rejoices as a mighty man to run the course. From the end of the heavens is His going forth, and His circuit to the ends of them. Psalms 19:5-6.

This refers to the Lord, the state of whose Divine power is described by means of such things as belong to space. In Isaiah,

How you have fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the dawn! You said in your heart, I will go up into the heavens, above the stars of God ¹ I will raise my throne. I will go up above the heights of the clouds. Isaiah 14:12-14.

'Falling from heaven', 'going up the heavens', 'raising a throne above the stars of God', 'going up above the heights of the clouds' are all expressions derived from the concept and appearance of space or a place, and are used to describe self-love profaning holy things. Since celestial and spiritual things are presented to man by means of and according to visual objects like these, heaven too is therefore described as being on high when in fact it is not on high but in that which is internal, 450, 1380, 2148.

Footnotes: