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).

725. "A son, a male" signifies the doctrine of truth for the church which is called "the New Jerusalem," because "son" signifies truth (as has been shown just above), and "a son, a male" signifies the truth of doctrine from the Word, consequently the doctrine of genuine truth which is for the church. It means the doctrine for the church which is called the New Jerusalem, because "the woman that brought forth a son, a male" means that church (as has also been shown above). The doctrine of truth which is for the church is also signified by "male" in the following passages. In Moses:

God created man into His image, into the image of God created He him. Male and female created He them (Genesis 1:27).

Male and female created He them, and blessed them, and called their name Man, in the day when they were created (Genesis 5:2).

What is involved in the things that are related in the first chapters of Genesis respecting the creation of heaven and earth, paradise, and eating from the tree of knowledge, no one can know except from the spiritual sense, for these historical things are made-up historicals, and yet they are holy, because every least particular is inwardly or in its bosom spiritual.

[2] It describes the establishment of the Most Ancient Church, which surpassed all the churches on this earth; its establishment is meant by the creation of heaven and earth, its intelligence and wisdom by the garden in Eden, and its decline and fall by eating from the tree of knowledge. From this it is clear that "Man," who is called "Adam and Eve," means that church, for it is said "male and female created He them, and called their name Man;" and as that church is meant by the two, it follows that "the male" means its truth, and "the female" its good, so too, "male" means doctrine, and "female," the life, since the doctrine of truth is also the doctrine of love and charity, thus the doctrine of life; and the life of good is also the life of love and charity, thus the life of doctrine, that is, life according to doctrine. These two are meant by "male [and female]," and these taken together and conjoined in marriage are called "Man" [Homo], and also constitute the church, which is meant by "Man," as has been said above. So, again, Adam is from a word that means ground, and ground from its reception of seeds signifies the church in respect to the truths of doctrine, for in the Word seeds signify truths; while Eve is from a word that means life, as it is said:

Because she was to be the mother of all living (Genesis 3:20).

These two, doctrine and life, when taken together and joined as it were in marriage, are called "Man," and also constitute the church, because man is man from the understanding of truth and from the will of good, consequently from the doctrine of life, since this is of the understanding, and from the life of doctrine, because this is of the will. It is similar with the church, for the church is in man, and is the man himself.

[3] That these two, which are signified by "male and female," are not to be two but one, the Lord teaches in the Gospels:

Jesus said, Have ye not read that He who made them from the beginning of creation made them male and female, and they twain shall be one flesh? Therefore they are no more twain, but one flesh (Matthew 19:4-6; Mark 10:6, 8).

This, like every particular of the Word, must be understood not only naturally, but also spiritually, and unless it is also understood spiritually no one can know what is signified by "male and female [or husband and wife] shall be no more twain but one flesh" (as it is also said in Genesis 2:24). Here, as above, "male and female" signify in the spiritual sense truth and good, consequently the doctrine of truth, which is the doctrine of life, and the life of truth, which is the life of doctrine; these must be not two but one, since truth does not become truth with man without the good of life, nor does good become good with anyone without the truth of doctrine, for good becomes spiritual good only by means of truths, and spiritual good is good, but natural good without it is not good. When these are one, then truth is of good and good is of truth, and this one is meant by "one flesh." It is similar with doctrine and life; these also constitute one man of the church when the doctrine of life and the life of doctrine are conjoined with him, for doctrine teaches how one must live and do, and life lives the doctrine and does it. From this it can also be seen that "a son, a male" signifies the doctrine of love and charity, consequently the doctrine of life.

[4] Since the truth of doctrine or the doctrine of truth is signified by the "male," the law was given:

That every male opening the womb should be holy to Jehovah (Exodus 13:12, 15; Deuteronomy 15:19; Luke 2:23).

For from the marriage of truth and good, which, as has been said above, is meant in the spiritual sense by the marriage of man and woman, truths and goods are born, consequently these are signified in that sense by "sons and daughters," truths by "sons," and goods by "daughters;" and as every man is reformed and regenerated by means of truths, for without truths man does not know what is good, or what is the nature of good, thus does not know the way to heaven, so truth, which is what is first born from the marriage of truth and good, was sanctified to Jehovah. This truth first born is also the doctrine of truth, for that which is first is the all in what follows, thus is in all truth, and all truth is doctrine. But it must be carefully noted that "the firstborn" signifies the truth that is of the good of charity, consequently it signifies the good of charity in its form and in its quality, and therefore truth. For truth is the form of good and the quality of good. This is signified by "the firstborn," because from the good of love, which is signified by the womb and the infant in it, nothing else can be born but the good of charity; and this good does not become good until it has been formed and qualified, that is, until it is in the form in which it has its quality, and its form is called truth, and yet it is good in form.

[5] From what has now been said it can be seen why it was commanded:

That every male should appear three times in the year before the face of the Lord Jehovah (Exodus 23:17; 34:23; Deuteronomy 16:16);

namely, at the three feasts, which signified everything of regeneration, from its first to its last; and as everything of regeneration is effected by the truths of doctrine that are made by the Lord to be of the life, so all males, by whom truths were signified, were to present themselves before the Lord that they might be made clean by Him and afterwards be led by Him. Moreover, "three times in the year" signifies continually, and "the face of Jehovah" the Divine love, by which man is led. And this was done because "Jerusalem" signified the church in respect to doctrine, and thence also the doctrine of the church.

[6] Because "burnt-offerings and sacrifices" signified celestial and spiritual things, "burnt-offerings" celestial things, and "sacrifices" spiritual things, the law was given:

That burnt-offerings should be of males without blemish, either from the flock or from the herd; but sacrifices might be either of males or females (Leviticus 1:2, 3; 3:1, 6).

The reasons were that celestial things are such as are of the love to the Lord, thus of the marriage of good and truth, but spiritual things are such as are of charity towards the neighbor, thus not of marriage but of the blood relationship of truth with good; and truths and goods in blood relationship are like sisters and brothers, but in marriage truths and goods are like husband and wife. This is why the burnt-offerings were "of males without blemish," which signify genuine truths from the Word, or from doctrine out of the Word, which have been conjoined to the good of love to the Lord, which good was signified by "the altar and its fire." The sacrifices were "either of males or females," because "males" signified truths, and "females" goods, conjoined not by marriage but by blood relationship; and as both of these, like brothers and sisters, are of one parent, worship was equally well pleasing from truths and from goods, that is, from males and from females.

[7] As all spiritual nourishment is from truths that are from good, the law was also given:

That the male among the priests might eat the holy things (Leviticus 6:18, 29; 7:6).

This was the law because "males" signify the truths of doctrine, which are doctrinals, as above, and "priests" the goods of love, which are the goods of life, and "their eating of the holy things" that belonged to Aaron and his sons signified spiritual nourishment.

[8] In Moses:

When thou draw near unto a city to fight against it, thou shalt invite it to peace; if it does not accept, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword, but the women, the little ones, the beasts, and the prey thou shalt take (Deuteronomy 20:10-14).

Every male in a city that did not accept peace should be smitten with the edge of the sword, but not the women, little ones, and beasts, because "city" signifies doctrine, and "a city of the nations in the land of Canaan" the doctrine of falsity, likewise the males of that city; and "not to accept peace" signifies not to agree with the truths and goods of the church, which were signified by "the sons of Israel;" "the edge of the sword," with which the males should be smitten, signifies truth destroying falsity. And because falsities alone fight against truths and goods and destroy them, but not evils without falsities, "the women, little ones, and beasts," which, with the nations, signified evils, were not smitten, since evils can be subdued, amended, and reformed by means of truths.

[9] In Jeremiah:

Cursed be the man who brought glad tidings to his father, saying, A son, a male is born to thee, in gladdening he hath made him glad; let that man be as the cities that Jehovah overthrew (Jeremiah 20:15, 16).

This is said of those who are in the devastated church, in which nothing but falsities rule and are accepted; therefore "cursed be the man who brought glad tidings to his father, saying, A male is born to thee," signifies one who acknowledges falsity and proclaims it as truth, thus the doctrine of falsity in place of the doctrine of truth; "in gladdening he hath made him glad" signifies the accepting from affection of falsity; "let that man be as the cities that Jehovah overthrew" signifies that it shall be with the doctrines that are from mere falsities, which the Lord exterminated from the church, and as with the cities of the Canaanitish nation that He destroyed; the comparison is with cities because "cities" signify doctrines.

[10] In Ezekiel:

Thou didst take the vessels of thine adorning, of My gold and of My silver which I had given to thee, and madest for thee images of a male with which thou didst commit whoredom (Ezekiel 16:17).

This is said of "the abominations of Jerusalem," which signify the falsifications and adulterations of the Word, which are made by applications to the cupidities of corporeal and earthly loves; "vessels of adorning from the gold and silver of the Lord" signify the knowledges of good and truth, which are the goods and truths of the sense of the letter of the Word; these are called "vessels" because they contain in them spiritual truths and goods, and are called "vessels of adorning" because they are the appearances and thus forms of things interior; the things that are of "gold" signify those that are from good, and those of "silver" those that are from truth; "thou madest for thee images of a male, with which thou didst commit whoredom," signifies falsities appearing as truths of doctrine, but which are falsified; "the images of a male" meaning the appearances of truth, which nevertheless are falsities, and "to commit whoredom" meaning to falsify.

[11] In Malachi:

Cursed be the defrauder in whose flock is a male and he voweth and sacrificeth to the Lord a corrupted thing (Malachi 1:14).

"A male in the flock" signifies the genuine truth of doctrine from the Word; "a corrupted thing" signifies what is falsified; and "to vow and sacrifice" signifies to worship, thus from things falsified when truth is known; that this worship being fraudulent is infernal is signified by "cursed be the defrauder." From what has now been shown from the Word respecting the signification of "male" and of "sons," it can be seen that "the son, a male that was brought forth by the woman arrayed with the sun, and upon whose head was a crown of twelve stars," signifies the doctrine of truth, thus the doctrine of love and charity for the church which is called the New Jerusalem (which is treated of in the twenty-first chapter of this book).

4581. And he poured out a drink-offering thereon. That this signifies the Divine good of truth, is evident from the signification of a “drink-offering,” as being the Divine good of truth, of which below; but first I will state what the good of truth is. The good of truth is that which has elsewhere been called the good of faith, and is love toward the neighbor, or charity. There are two universal kinds of good, one of which is called the good of faith, and the other the good of love. The good of faith is what is signified by a “drink-offering,” and the good of love by “oil.” They who are brought by the Lord to good by an internal way are in the good of love, but they who are brought by an external way are in the good of faith. The men of the celestial church, and likewise the angels of the inmost or third heaven, are in the good of love; but the men of the spiritual church, and likewise the angels of the middle or second heaven, are in the good of faith. For this reason the former good is called celestial good, but the latter spiritual good. The difference is the same as that between willing well from good will, and willing well from good understanding. The latter therefore, namely, spiritual good, or the good of faith, or the good of truth, is what is signified by a “drink-offering;” but the former, namely, celestial good, or the good of love, is what is understood in the internal sense by “oil.”

[2] That such things were signified by the “oil” and the “drink-offering” cannot indeed be seen except from the internal sense, and yet it must be apparent to everyone that holy things were represented, for otherwise what else would be the pouring out of a drink-offering and of oil upon a pillar of stone than a ridiculous and idolatrous performance? And so in the making of a king, unless holy things were signified and involved in the putting of a crown on his head, anointing him with oil from a horn upon his forehead and upon his wrists, putting a scepter into his hand besides a sword and keys, investing him with a crimson robe and then seating him upon a throne of silver; and afterwards in his riding on a horse in royal trappings and being served at table by those of highest rank, not to mention other formalities, unless all these ceremonies represented holy things, and were venerable through their correspondence with the things of heaven and thence of the church, they would be like babies’ plays on a larger scale, or like plays on the stage.

[3] Nevertheless all these rituals derived their origin from the most ancient times, when rituals were holy from their representing holy things, and from correspondence with the holy things in heaven and thence in the church. Moreover, at the present day they are regarded as venerable, not because it is known what they represent, or to what they correspond, but by an interpretation as of emblems that are in use. But if it were known what each of these things represents, and to what holy thing it corresponds—the crown, the oil, the horn, the scepter, the sword, the keys, riding upon a white horse, and eating while nobles are serving-men would think of them with much more reverence. But this they do not know, and wonderful to say, do not desire to know, to such a degree have the representatives and significatives which are in such things and everywhere in the Word been at the present day destroyed in the minds of men.

[4] That a “drink-offering” signifies the good of truth, or spiritual good, may be seen from the sacrifices in which it was employed. Sacrifices were made from the herd or from the flock, and were representative of the internal worship of the the Lord, (n. 922, 923, 1823, 2180, 2805, 2807, 2830, 3519). To these were added the meat-offering and the drink-offering. The meat-offering, which consisted of fine flour mingled with oil, signified celestial good, or what is the same, the good of love, “oil” signifying love to the Lord, and “fine flour” charity toward the neighbor. But the drink-offering, which consisted of wine, signified spiritual good, or what is the same, the good of faith. Both together therefore (namely, the meat-offering and the drink-offering) signified the same things as the bread and wine in the Holy Supper.

[5] That these were added to the burnt-offerings and sacrifices is evident in Moses:

Thou shalt offer two lambs of the first year day by day continually; the one lamb thou shalt offer in the morning, and the other lamb shalt thou offer between the evenings; and a tenth of fine flour mingled with beaten oil, a fourth of a hin, and drink offering of the fourth of a hin of wine for the first lamb; and so also for the second lamb (Exodus 29:38-41).

In the day when ye wave the sheaf of the firstfruits of the harvest, ye shall offer a lamb without blemish of the first year, for a burnt-offering unto Jehovah, the meat-offering whereof shall be two tenths of fine flour mingled with oil, and the drink offering whereof shall be of wine, the fourth of a hin (Leviticus 23:12-13, 18).

On the day when the days of his Naziriteship are fulfilled, he shall offer his gift unto Jehovah (sacrifices), and a basket of unleavened things of fine flour, cakes mingled with oil, with unleavened wafers anointed with oil, with their meat-offering and their drink-offerings (Numbers 6:13-15, 17).

Upon the burnt-offering they shall offer a meat-offering of a tenth of fine flour mingled with the fourth of a hin of oil; and wine for the drink offering, the fourth of a hin, in one manner for the burnt-offering of a ram, and in another manner for that of an ox (Numbers 15:3-5, 11).

With the burnt-offering of the daily sacrifice thou shalt offer a drink-offering, the fourth of a hin for a lamb; in the holy place shalt thou pour out a drink-offering of wine unto Jehovah (Numbers 28:6-7).

Moreover concerning the meat-offerings and drink-offerings in the sacrifices of various kinds, see Numbers 28:7-31 29:1-40.

[6] That the meat-offering and the drink-offering had this signification may be seen from the fact that love and faith effect everything of worship; and it may be seen above that the bread (which here is of fine flour mingled with oil) and the wine in the Holy Supper signify love and faith, thus everything of worship (n. 1798, 2165, 2177, 2187, 2343, 2359, 3464, 3735, 3813, 4211, 4217).

[7] But when the people fell away from the genuine representative of the worship of the Lord, and turned away to other gods and poured out drink-offerings to them, then by the drink-offerings were signified things which are opposite to charity and faith, namely, the evils and falsities of the love of the world, as in Isaiah:

Ye did become heated with gods under every green tree, thou hast also poured out to them a drink-offering, thou hast offered a meat-offering (Isaiah 57:5-6);

“to become heated with gods” denotes the concupiscences of falsity (that “gods” denote falsities, n. 4402, 4544); “under every green tree” denotes from the belief of all falsities (n. 2722, 4552); “to pour out to them a drink-offering and offer a meat-offering” denotes the worship of them. Again:

Ye that forsake Jehovah, that forget the mountain of My holiness, that prepare a table for Gad, and fill a drink-offering to Meni (Isaiah 65:11).

In Jeremiah:

The sons gather wood, and the fathers kindle a fire, and the women knead dough, to make cakes to the queen of the heavens, and to pour out a drink-offering to other gods (Jeremiah 7:18).

[8] Again:

Doing we will do every word that is gone forth out of our mouth, to burn incense to the queen of the heavens, and to pour out drink-offerings to her as we and our fathers have done, and our princes in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 44:17-19);

“the queen of the heavens” denotes all falsities, for in the genuine sense the “armies of the heavens” are truths, but in the opposite sense falsities, and in like manner the “king and queen;” thus the “queen” denotes all of them, and “to pour drink-offerings to her” is to worship.

[9] Again:

The Chaldeans shall burn the city, and the houses upon whose roofs they have offered incense to Baal, and have poured out drink-offerings to other gods (Jeremiah 32:29);

“the Chaldeans” denote those who are in worship in which there is falsity; “to burn the city” denotes to destroy and vastate those who are in doctrinal things of what is false; “to offer incense to Baal upon the roofs of the houses” denotes the worship of what is evil; “to pour out drink-offerings to other gods” denotes the worship of what is false.

[10] In Hosea:

They shall not dwell in Jehovah’s land, and Ephraim shall return into Egypt, and they shall eat what is unclean in Assyria; they shall not pour out wine to Jehovah (Hos. 9:3-4);

“not to dwell in Jehovah’s land” denotes not to be in the good of love; “Ephraim shall return into Egypt” denotes that the intellectual of the church will become mere knowledge and sensuous; “they shall eat what is unclean in Assyria” denotes impure and profane things from reasoning; “they shall not pour out wine to Jehovah” denotes no worship from truth.

[11] In Moses:

It shall be said, Where are their gods, the rock in which they trusted, that did eat the fat of the sacrifices, and drank the wine of their drink-offering? Let them arise and help them (Deuteronomy 33:37-38 [NCBSW: 32:37-38]);

“gods,” as above, denote falsities; “that did eat the fat of the sacrifices” denotes that they destroyed the good of worship; “that drank the wine of their drink-offering” denotes that they destroyed the truth of worship. Drink-offerings are also predicated of blood, in David:

They shall multiply their griefs, they have hastened to another, lest I pour out their drink-offerings of blood, and lest I take up their names upon my lips (Psalms 16:4);

and by these words are signified the profanations of truth; for in this sense “blood” denotes violence offered to charity (n. 374, 1005), and profanation (n. 1003).