3686. 'And Esau saw that the daughters of Canaan were evil in the eyes of Isaac his father' means the Lord's foresight and provision that the affections for that truth - the affections to which natural good had been joined until then - would not be suitable for such conjunction. This is clear from the meaning of 'seeing' here as foresight and provision, dealt with in 2837, 2839; from the representation of 'Esau' as the Lord as regards the Divine Good of the Natural, dealt with already; from the meaning of 'the daughters of Canaan', in this case the daughters of Heth, as affections for truth from a non-genuine source, dealt with in 3470, 3620-3622; and from the meaning of '[evil] in the eyes of Isaac his father' as not being suitable for such conjunction, that is to say, through the good of the natural, represented by 'Esau', with the good of the rational, represented by 'Isaac'. From this it is evident that all these words mean the Lord's foresight and provision that the affections for that truth, being from a non-genuine source, would not be suitable for conjunction. The truth of all this may be seen from the explanation given at 26:34-35, where the subject is the daughters of Heth whom Esau had taken as wives, and at 27:46, where the subject is the plea to Jacob not to marry one of the daughters of Canaan. The reason why 'the daughters of Canaan' here means affections for truth from a non-genuine source, whereas above 'the daughters of Canaan' meant affections for falsity and evil, 3662, 3683, is that the Hittites in the land of Canaan belonged to the Church as it existed among gentiles. They were not so much under the influence of falsity and evil as other nations there, such as the Canaanites, Amorites, and Perizzites. This also was why the Hittites represented the Lord's spiritual Church among the gentiles, 2913, 2986.

[2] The Most Ancient Church which was celestial and existed before the Flood was situated in the land of Canaan, see 567. The Ancient Church which existed after the Flood was also situated there, as well as in many other countries, 1238, 2385. This was how it came about that all the gentile nations there, and also all the territories there, and all the rivers there, served as representatives. For the most ancient people, who were celestial, perceived through all the objects they beheld the kind of things that belong to the Lord's kingdom, 920, 1409, 2896, 2897, 2995, and so beheld the same through the territories and the rivers there.

[3] After their times those representatives survived in the Ancient Church, including the representatives related to the places there. Furthermore the Word that existed in the Ancient Church, dealt with in 2897-2899, contained place-names which were for the same reason representative; and the Word existing after their times, which is called Moses and the Prophets, also contains them. This was why Abraham was commanded to go there, and the promise was made to him that his descendants would possess that land. That promise was not made because they were any better than all the other nations, for they were the worst of them all, 1167, 3373. But it was made so that through them the representative Church might be established, in which no attention was paid to representative persons and places themselves but to the actual things which these represented, 3670, and thus also so that the names existing in the Most Ancient and the Ancient Churches might be preserved.

3670. 'And He will give you the blessing of Abraham' means the joining of the Divine itself to the good and truth of the natural. This is clear from the meaning of 'blessing' as a joining together, dealt with above in 3660, 3667, and from the representation of 'Abraham' as the Lord's Divine itself, which is called the Father, dealt with in 2011, 3251, 3439. And as these words are addressed to Jacob, who is to represent the Divine Good and Truth of the Lord's Divine Natural, it is a joining together of the Divine itself to the good and truth of the Natural - this joining together being meant in the internal sense by 'He will give you the blessing of Abraham'. In the sense of the letter it is possession of the land of Canaan that is meant by 'the blessing of Abraham', and also by the words that follow, 'to inherit the land of your sojournings, which God gave to Abraham'. This also is what these words are taken to mean by all who believe that the historical descriptions of the Word do not embody anything more heavenly and deeper than that. This is especially so with the Jewish nation, which also claims from that sense to hold a superior position to all other nations and peoples. Their forefathers understood those words in the same way, especially Jacob, who had that kind of disposition, as becomes clear from what has been stated just above in 3667. That is to say, he did not know Jehovah and was unwilling to acknowledge Him unless He conferred bodily and worldly benefits on him. The fact that neither Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob were meant, but that Jacob represented the Lord's Natural which He was to make Divine is abundantly evident from the explanations given. The same applies to the character of any person who represents, whether evil or good; for the evil are no less able to represent, and have represented, the Lord's Divine, see 665, 1097, 1361.

[2] The same may be seen from the representatives which also exist at the present day. For all kings, no matter who they are or what they are like, represent the Lord through the kingly office itself residing with them; and in like manner all priests, no matter who they are or what they are like, do so through their priestly office. The kingly office itself and the priestly office itself are sacred, no matter who serves in them. Consequently the Word taught by someone evil is no less sacred; nor is the Sacrament of Baptism, or the Holy Supper, or similar ministrations any less so. From this it may also be seen that no king can possibly claim as his own the sacredness that goes with his kingly office, nor any priest the sacredness that goes with his priestly office. Insofar as he does claim it or attribute it to himself he brands himself with the sign of a spiritual thief, or the mark of spiritual theft. And insofar as he commits what is evil, that is, acts contrary to what is right and fair, and contrary to what is good and true, a king throws off his representation of the sacred kingly office, and a priest his representation of the sacred priestly office, and then represents the reverse of this. This explains why so many laws were laid down in the Jewish representative Church concerning the sacredness which was to be attached in particular to priests when ministering. More on this matter will in the Lord's Divine mercy be stated later on.