Explaining the Inner Meaning of John 21

Verses 21:1, 2. That after his resurrection, the Lord manifested himself in common or general principles to those who were principled in good and truth.

Verse 21:3. And this at a time, when they were teaching the knowledges of truth and good for the reformation of mankind, but whereas they taught from themselves, and not from the Lord, therefore their teaching was fruitless.

Verses 21:4, 5, 6. On which account they are gifted with interior light, yet faint, from the Lord, instructing them that they ought to do all things from the good of love and charity, and that thus natural men might be converted to the truth.

Verses 21:7, 8. Which instruction is perceived to be from the Lord by those who are principled in the good of life, and also by those who are in the good of faith, therefore these latter are more and more confirmed in truth, though as yet it was in common or general principles, whilst the former, by the truth of doctrine, seek to lead natural men to the good of life.

Verses 21:9, 10, 11. Therefore they are made sensible of the divine presence in the truth of good, and in the good of love, and obeying the divine command, they acknowledge the fruitfulness and multiplication of good and truth, in all their fullness in the church, and in their coherence, to be of the Lord.

Verses 21:12, 13, 14. Yet it is granted them of the divine mercy to appropriate to themselves that fruitfulness and multiplication, by incorporating into their own minds and lives both good and truth from the Lord, whereby all doubt is removed concerning the divine presence, and they are fully convinced of the glorification of the Lord's Humanity.

Verses 21:15, 16, 17. On which occasion exploration is made concerning the conjunction of truth and good in the church, and divine admonition given, that it is the office of truth, or of those who are principled in truth, to instruct all who are in innocence, likewise all who are in the good of charity, and lastly, all who are in the good of faith.

Verses 21:18, 19. Divine warning is also given at the same time concerning the separation of truth, or faith, from good, or charity, teaching that the faith of the church in its rise is in the good of innocence, but when it is in its setting, it would no longer be in that good, nor in the good of charity, but would be led by evils and falsities.

Verses 21:20, 21, 22, 23. But still the good of charity would remain with those who are of the Lord, even to the end of the church, and when there is a new church, and not with those who are in truth separate from good.

Verses 21:24, 25. For they, who are principled in the good of charity, bear faithful witness to the truth, being convinced of the truth by its light in their own minds, yet they cannot unfold the whole of the divine operation, because the church is not in a state to receive it.

4823. 'And she conceived again and bore a son' means evil. This is clear from the meaning of 'a son' as truth and also good, dealt with in 264, and so in the contrary sense as falsity and also evil, though evil that arises out of falsity. Essentially this kind of evil is falsity, because it has its origin in this. For anyone who does what is evil arising out of false teaching does what is false; but because this falsity is realized in action it is called evil. The meaning which the firstborn carries of falsity and consequent evil is evident from the statement made here regarding this [second] son, to the effect that in action he did what was evil. The actual words are 'he spilled his seed on the ground, so that he should not provide seed for his brother; and what he had done was evil in the eyes of Jehovah; and He caused him to die also', verses 9-10. The fact that this evil arose out of falsity is also evident at that point. What is more, in the ancient Churches the secondborn meant the truth of faith realized in action; therefore the second son here means falsity realized in action, which is evil. It may also be recognized that evil is meant by this son from the fact that the firstborn was named Er by his father or Judah, but this son, Onan, by his mother, the daughter of Shua, as may be seen in the original language. For 'man' in the Word means falsity and his wife (mulier) evil, see 915, 2517, 4510; and so also does 'the daughter of Shua' mean evil, 4818, 4819. Therefore because he was given his name by his father, 'Er' means falsity; and because Onan was given his name by his mother, evil is meant by him. Thus the first was so to speak the father's son, the second so to speak the mother's son.

[2] In the Word the expression 'man and wife' (vir et uxor) is used many times, as also is 'husband and wife' (maritus et uxor). When 'man and wife' is used, 'man' means truth and 'wife' good; or in the contrary sense 'men' means falsity and 'wife' evil. But when 'husband and wife' is used, 'husband' means good and 'wife' truth; or in the contrary sense 'husband' means evil and 'wife' falsity. The reason underlying this arcanum is this In the celestial Church good resided with the husband and the truth of that good with the wife; but in the spiritual Church truth resided with the man and the good of that truth with the wife: Such is and was the actual relationship between the two, for in human beings interior things have undergone this reversal. This is the reason why in the Word, when celestial good and celestial truth from this are the subject, they are called 'husband and wife', but when spiritual good and spiritual truth from this are dealt with, these are called 'man and wife', or rather 'man and woman' (vir et mulier). From this, as well as from the actual expressions used, one can come to know which kind of good and which kind of truth are being dealt with in the internal sense of the Word.

[3] Here also is the reason why it has been stated already in various places that marriages represent the joining of good to truth, and of truth to good. Furthermore conjugial love has its origin in these two joined together. Among celestial people conjugial love has its origin in good joined to truth, but among spiritual people in truth joined to good. Marriages also correspond in actual fact to these joinings together. From all this one may see what is implied by the father giving the first son his name, but the mother giving the second and also the third sons theirs, as is clear from the original language. The father named the first son because the first son meant falsity, while the mother named the second son because the second son meant evil.