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).

8788. And sanctify them today and tomorrow. That this signifies the veiling over of the interiors that they may appear in the holy of faith now and afterward, is evident from the signification of “sanctifying,” as being to dispose that they appear to be in holiness in respect to what is external; and as this is effected by means of a veiling over of the interiors, therefore this is also understood by “sanctifying;” that “today and tomorrow” denote now and afterward is evident. How the case herein is may be briefly explained. The church instituted with the Jews was not a church in respect to them, but was only the representative of a church; for in order that there may be a church, there must be with the man of the church faith in the Lord, and also love to Him, and likewise love toward the neighbor. These make the church. But these were not with the people which was called “Jacob,” for it did not acknowledge the Lord, and thus was not willing to hear about faith in Him, still less about love toward Him, nor even toward the neighbor; for it was in the love of self and the love of the world, which loves are utterly opposed to love to the Lord and love toward the neighbor. This disposition is inrooted in that people from their first parents. For this reason it is, that with that people no church could be set up, but only a representation of the things which are of the church.

[2] The church is represented when the man makes worship consist in external things, but in such as correspond to heavenly things. Then internal things are represented by the external ones, and the internal things are open in heaven, with which there is thus conjunction. In order therefore that the Israelitish people might be representative, although their interiors were devoid of the faith and love of heaven, and were even full of the love of self and of the world, these interiors were veiled over, and thus their external things could be communicated to spirits, and through them to the angels, without their internal things; whereas if their internal things had not been veiled over, these would have lain open, and then the representation would have perished, because unclean things would have burst forth and caused contamination. The Israelitish people above all others could be thus veiled over, because it, more than others, adored external things, and made holiness, and even what is Divine, consist in them. From this it can be seen what is meant by “sanctifying,” namely, the veiling over of the interiors so that they may appear to be in the holiness of faith; yet not to themselves, but to the angels with them. (See what has been already shown concerning this people and concerning the institution of the church with it, n. 4208, 4281, 4288, 4289, 4293, 4307, 4314, 4316, 4317, 4429, 4433, 4444, 4459, 4500, 4844, 4847, 4865, 4899, 4911, 4912, 7048, 7051, 8588.) That sanctifications with them were nothing else than appearances of holiness in external things, and yet without anything holy appertaining to them, can be seen from the rites by means of which they were sanctified, namely, the sacrifices, the washings, the sprinklings of blood, the anointings, which do not touch internal things in the slightest degree.

3387. Because he feared to say, She is my woman; lest the men of the place should kill me for Rebekah. That this signifies that He could not open Divine truths themselves, because thus Divine good would not be received, is evident from the signification of “fearing to say,” as being not to be able to open; from the signification of “woman,” who here is Rebekah, as being the Lord’s Divine rational as to Divine truth (n. 3012, 3013, 3077); from the signification of “slaying me,” as being that good is not received, for by Isaac, who here is “me,” is represented the Divine good of the Lord’s rational (n. 3012, 3194, 3210), for good is said to be slain, or to perish, when it is not received, because with him who does not receive it, it is nullified; and from the signification of the “men of the place,” as being those who are in the doctrinal things of faith (n. 3385). From all this it now appears what is the internal sense of these words, namely, that if Divine truths themselves were to be opened, they would not be received by those who are in the doctrinal things of faith, because they surpass all their rational apprehension, thus all their belief, and consequently nothing of good from the Lord could flow in. For good from the Lord, or Divine good, can inflow solely into truths, because truths are the vessels of good, as often shown.

[2] Truths or appearances of truth are given man to the intent that Divine good may be able to form his understanding, and thus the man himself. For truths exist to the end that good may flow in; for without vessels or receptacles good finds no place, because it finds no state corresponding to itself; and therefore where there are no truths, or where they are not received, there is no rational or human good, consequently the man has no spiritual life. In order therefore that man may nevertheless have truths, and thereby have spiritual life, appearances of truth are given to everyone according to his apprehension; which appearances are acknowledged as truths, because they are such that Divine things can be in them.

[3] In order that it may be known what appearances are, and that they are such things as serve man instead of truths Divine, let us take examples for illustration. If it should be said that in heaven there is no idea of place, thus none of distance, but that instead of these there are ideas of state, this could not possibly be apprehended by man, for this would cause him to believe that there nothing is distinct, but that everything is confused, that is, all in one, or together; when yet all things there are so distinct that nothing can be more so. (That the places, distances, and spaces, which exist in nature, are in heaven states, may be seen above, n. 3356.) Hence it is manifest that whatever is said in the Word concerning places and spaces, and from them and by means of them, is an appearance of truth; and unless it were said by means of such appearances, it would not be received at all, consequently would be scarcely anything; for so long as he is in the world, that is, in space and time, the idea of space and of time is within almost everything of man’s thought, both in general and in particular.

[4] That the language of the Word is according to appearances of space appears from almost everything in it; as in Matthew:

Jesus asked them saying, How then doth David say, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand till I make Thine enemies Thy foot stool (Matthew 22:43-44)

where to “sit on the right hand” comes from the idea of place, thus according to appearance, when nevertheless what is here described is the state of the Lord’s Divine power. Again:

Jesus said, Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming upon the clouds of heaven (Matthew 26:64);

here in like manner “sitting on the right hand,” and also “coming upon the clouds,” are derived from the idea of place with men; but with angels the idea is of the Lord’s power.

In Mark:

The sons of Zebedee said to Jesus, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on Thy right hand, and the other on Thy left hand, in Thy glory. Jesus answered, To sit on My right hand, and on My left, is not Mine to give, except to those for whom it hath been prepared (Mark. 10:37, 40).

From this it is manifest what sort of an idea the disciples had concerning the Lord’s kingdom, namely, that it was to sit on His right hand and on His left; and because they had such an idea, the Lord also answered them according to their apprehension, thus according to what appeared to them.

[5] In David:

He is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run his course. His going forth is from the end of the heavens and His circuit unto the ends of it (Psalms 19:5-6);

speaking of the Lord, whose state of Divine power is here described by such things as are of space.

In Isaiah:

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the dawning! Thou saidst in thine heart, I will ascend into the heavens, I will exalt my throne above the stars of heaven; ¹ I will ascend above the heights of the cloud (Isaiah 14:12-14); where “falling from heaven,” “ascending into the heavens,” “exalting the throne above the stars of heaven,” “ascending above the heights of the cloud,” all of which are expressions descriptive of the love of self profaning holy things, are all derived from the idea and appearance of space or place. Inasmuch as celestial and spiritual things are presented before man by means of such things as appear to men, and in accordance with such things, therefore heaven is also described as being on high, when yet it is not on high, but is in what is internal (n. 450, 1380, 2148).

Footnotes: