4292.就内在历史意义而言，“那人说，你的名不要再叫雅各，要叫以色列”表他们若不凭着赋予他们的新性质，就无法作为雅各（的后代）来代表。这从“雅各”和“名”的含义可以看出来：在圣言中，“雅各”是指雅各的后代（参看4281节）；“名”是指性质，如刚才所述（4291节）。新的性质本身在内义上由“以色列”来表示，因为“以色列”是指属天-属灵之人，因而是指内在人（4286节）。“以色列”是指属天-属灵之人，因而是指内在人，故也指内在属灵教会。无论你说属灵之人，还是说属灵教会，意思都一样，因为属灵之人就是一个具体的教会，而众多人则是总体的教会。如果个体人不是具体的教会，就不会有任何总体的教会。在日常用语中，教会用来描述总体上的会众；为了更大的教会能够存在，会众的每个成员必是一个教会。每一个总的整体都包含类似于该整体的各个部分。
至于这个问题本身，即他们若不凭着赋予他们的新性质（这新性质由“以色列”来表示），就无法作为雅各的后代来代表，情况是这样：教会专门由雅各的后代来代表，而不是专门由以撒的后代来代表；因为以撒的后代不仅出自雅各，还出自以扫。教会更不是专门由亚伯拉罕的后代来代表，因为亚伯拉罕的后代不仅出自雅各，还出自以扫，同样出自以实玛利，还有亚伯拉罕与第二任妻子基土拉所生的儿子，即心兰、约珊、米但、米甸、伊施巴、书亚，以及这些人的儿子（参看创世记25:1-4）。由于雅各的后代坚持作代表，如刚才所示（4290节），所以他们无法作为雅各，或以撒，或亚伯拉罕来代表。他们之所以无法作为雅各来代表，是因为雅各代表教会的外在，而非内在。他们之所以无法同时作为以撒，也无法同时作为亚伯拉罕来代表，原因如上所述。
因此，为了让他们能代表教会，必须赋予雅各一个新名字，并通过这个名字赋予一个新性质；这新性质要表示内在属灵人，或也可说，内在属灵教会。这新性质就由“以色列”来表示。主的每一个教会都既是内在的，也是外在的，如前面频繁所示。内在教会就是被代表的，外在教会就是那去代表的。此外，内在教会要么是属灵的，要么是属天的。内在属灵教会由“以色列”来代表，内在属天教会由后来的“犹大”来代表。因此，分裂也就发生了，以色列人独自为一国，犹太人也独自为一国；蒙主的神性怜悯，这些问题容后再述。由此明显可知，雅各，也就是雅各的后代，无法作为雅各来代表一个教会，因为这将是唯独去代表教会的外在；他们必须也作为以色列来代表，因为“以色列”是内在。
前面各处已说明，内在是那被代表的，外在是那去代表的，这一点从人自己也可以看出来。人的言语代表他的思维，他的行为代表他的意愿。言语和行为是人的外在，思维和意愿是人的内在。另外，人的脸本身因其各种表情而既代表他的思维，也代表他的意愿。众所周知，脸因其表情而代表；因为对于诚实人来说，他们的内在状态从脸上的表情就能看出来。简而言之，身体的各个部分皆代表人的意向和心智的某个方面。
教会的外在也一样，因为外在就像身体，内在就像灵魂。例如祭坛和上面的祭物，众所周知，这些都是外在事物；陈设饼、灯台及其灯盏，以及一直燃烧的火也是外在事物。人人都知道，这些外在事物代表内在事物，仪式中的其它事物也一样。这些外在事物不可能代表任何外在事物，而只能代表内在事物，这一点从前面的引证明显可知。因此，“雅各”不可能代表雅各，因为“雅各”是指教会的外在；但雅各能作为以色列来代表，因为“以色列”是指教会的内在。这就是为了叫雅各的后代能扮演代表的角色所赋予的新性质的意思。
Potts(1905-1910) 4292
4292. In the internal historical sense by "he said, Thy name shall no more be called Jacob, but Israel," is signified that they could not represent as Jacob, but as from a new quality given them. This may be seen from the meaning of "Jacob" in the Word, as being his posterity (see n. 4281); and from the signification of a "name," as being quality (see just above, n. 4291). The new quality itself is "Israel" in the internal sense; for "Israel" is the celestial spiritual, thus the internal man (n. 4286). And because "Israel" is the celestial spiritual and thus the internal man, "Israel" is also the internal spiritual church; for whether you speak of the spiritual man or the spiritual church, it is the same thing; because the spiritual man is a church in particular, and a number are a church in general. If a man were not a church in particular, there would not be any church in general. A congregation in general is what in common speech is called a church, but in order that there may be any church, everyone in this congregation must be such as is the church in general, because every general involves parts similar to itself. [2] As regards the matter itself (that they could not represent as Jacob, but as from a new quality given them, which is "Israel") the case is this. It was specifically Jacob's posterity who represented the church, but not Isaac's specifically; for Isaac's posterity were not from Jacob only, but also from Esau. Still less was it Abraham's posterity specifically; for Abraham's posterity were not from Jacob only, but also from Esau, and likewise from Ishmael, as also from his sons by his second wife Keturah - thus from Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah, and their sons (see Gen. 25:1-4). Now as Jacob's posterity insisted on being representative (as shown just above n. 4290), they could not represent as Jacob, nor as Isaac, nor as Abraham. That they could not as Jacob was because Jacob represented the external of the church, but not its internal; and they could not as Isaac at the same time, nor as Abraham at the same time, for the reason just adduced. [3] There was therefore no other way by which they could represent the church than by a new name being given to Jacob, and thereby a new quality; which new quality should signify the internal spiritual man, or what is the same, the internal spiritual church. This new quality is "Israel." Every church of the Lord is internal and external, as has been repeatedly shown. The internal church is what is represented, and the external is what represents. Moreover the internal church is either spiritual or celestial. The internal spiritual church was represented by Israel, and the internal celestial church was afterwards represented by Judah. Therefore also a division was made, and the Israelites were a kingdom by themselves, and the Jews were a kingdom by themselves; but on this subject of the Lord's Divine mercy hereafter. Hence it is evident that Jacob (that is, the posterity of Jacob) could not represent a church as Jacob, for this would be to represent only the external of a church; but must also do so as Israel, because "Israel" is the internal. [4] That the internal is what is represented, and the external what represents, has been shown before, and may likewise be seen from man himself. Man's speech represents his thought, and his action represents his will. Speech and action are man's externals, and thought and will are his internals. Furthermore, man's face itself, by its varying looks, represents both his thought and his will. That the face by its looks represents, is known to everyone; for with the sincere their interior states may be seen from the looks of the face. In a word, all things of the body represent what is of the animus and of the mind. [5] The case is similar with the externals of the church, for these are like a body, and the internals are like a soul - as the altars and the sacrifices upon them, which as is known were external things; in like manner the showbreads; also the lampstand with its lights; and likewise the perpetual fire: that these represented internal things may be known to everyone; and it is the same with the rest of the rites. That these external things could not represent external but internal things, is evident from what has been adduced. Thus Jacob could not represent as Jacob, because "Jacob" is the external of the church; but Jacob could represent as Israel, because "Israel" is its internal. This is what is meant by the new quality given in order that the posterity of Jacob might represent.
Elliott(1983-1999) 4292
4292. In the internal historical sense 'he said, Your name will no longer be called Jacob, but Israel' means that they could not as [the descendants of] Jacob play the representative part, except by virtue of the new nature that was imparted to them. This becomes clear from the meaning of 'Jacob' in the Word as his descendants, dealt with above in 4281, and from the meaning of 'name' as the essential nature, dealt with immediately above in 4291. The new nature itself is meant by 'Israel' in the internal sense, for 'Israel' is the celestial-spiritual man and consequently the internal man, 4286. And since 'Israel' means the celestial-spiritual man, and so the internal man, 'Israel' also means the internal spiritual Church. For whether you use the expression spiritual man or spiritual Church, it amounts to the same thing because any spiritual person in particular is the Church, even as many are in general. If the individual person in particular were not the Church, no Church in general could exist. The expression Church is used in everyday language to describe a congregation in general; but each member of the congregation must be a Church if that greater Church is to exist. Every general whole incorporates parts that are like that whole.
[2] The implications of this particular matter - the inability of [the descendants on Jacob to play the representative part, except by virtue of the new nature imparted to them, meant by 'Israel' - are as follows: It was specifically Jacob's descendants who were to represent the Church but not specifically Isaac's since Isaac's descended not only through Jacob but also through Esau. Still less was it specifically Abraham's, for Abraham's descended not only through Jacob but also through Esau, and likewise through Ishmael, as well as through his sons by his second wife Keturah, who were Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, Shuah, and the sons of these, see Gen 25:1-4. Now because Jacob's descendants insisted that they should be representative, as shown just above in 4290, they could not represent as Jacob, or as Isaac, or as Abraham. The reason why they could not do so as Jacob was that 'Jacob' represented the external aspect of the Church, but not the internal. And they could not do so as Isaac at the same time or as Abraham at the same time for the reason advanced immediately above.
[3] So that they could represent the Church therefore, a new name had inevitably to be given to Jacob, and through that name a new nature, which new nature was to be a sign of the internal spiritual man, or what amounts to the same, of the internal spiritual Church. That new nature is meant by 'Israel'. Every Church of the Lord is internal and external, as has been shown several times already, the internal Church being that which is represented, the external that which represents. The internal Church is also either spiritual or else celestial, the internal spiritual Church being represented by 'Israel', but the internal celestial Church at a later time by 'Judah'. Therefore a division also took place, and the Israelites became a kingdom on their own and the Jews another on their own. But these matters will in the Lord's Divine mercy be discussed later on. From this it is evident that 'Jacob', that is, Jacob's descendants, could not represent the Church as Jacob, for that would have been to represent solely the external aspect of the Church. They had to do so as Israel as well because 'Israel' is the internal aspect.
[4] It has been shown in various places already that it is the internal which is represented and the external which represents, as may also be seen in the human being. A person's speech represents his thought, and a person's action represents his will. Speech and action are the external aspects of the person, thought and will the internal. In addition the various looks seen on a person's face represent both, that is to say, both his thought and his will. It is well known to everyone that the looks on a person's face are representative, for the looks on the faces of people who are sincere enable their interior states to be seen. In short, every part of the body represents some facet of a person's inclination (animus) and mind (mens).
[5] It is similar with the external aspects of the Church, for these are like the body, while its internal aspects are like the soul. There were, for example, the altars and the sacrifices on them, which, as is well known, were external things. There was likewise the bread of the presence, also the lampstand with its lamps, as well as the fire that was kept burning all the time. Anyone can recognize that these external things represented internal ones, as likewise did everything else of a ritual nature. The fact that these external things could not represent anything external, only what was internal, becomes clear from the considerations introduced already. So 'Jacob' could not represent as Jacob, because 'Jacob' means the external aspect of the Church, but he could do so as Israel because 'Israel' means its internal aspect. This is what is meant by a new nature being imparted to enable the descendants of Jacob to play the representative part.
Latin(1748-1756) 4292
4292. Quod in sensu interno historico per `dixit, Non Jacob dicetur amplius nomen tuum quin Israel' significetur quod non repraesentare possent ut Jacob, sed ut ex novo dato quali, constare potest ex significatione `Jacobi' in Verbo quod sint posteri ejus, de qua supra n. 4281; et ex significatione `nominis' quod sit quale, de qua mox supra n. 4291, ipsum novum quale est `Israel' in sensu interno; Israel enim est caelestis spiritualis homo, proinde internus, n. 4286; et quia Israel est caelestis {1} spiritualis homo, ita internus, etiam Israel est interna spiritualis Ecclesia;nam sive dicas hominem spiritualem, sive Ecclesiam spiritualem, idem est, homo enim spiritualis (t)in particulari est Ecclesia, ac plures sunt in communi; si {2} homo in particulari non foret Ecclesia, non foret aliqua Ecclesia in communi; est congregatio in communi {3}, quae in vulgari sermone vocatur Ecclesia, sed unusquisque in congregatione illa erit talis ut sit aliqua Ecclesia; omne commune involvit partes sui similes. [2] Quod {4} ipsam rem attinet, nempe quod non repraesentare possent ut Jacob, sed ut ex novo dato quali, quod est `Israel,' illa ita se habet:
erant Jacobi posteri in specie, qui repraesentarent Ecclesiam, non autem Jishaki in specie, nam Jishaki posteri non solum erant ex Jacobo, sed etiam ex Esavo, minus adhuc [erant] Abrahami posteri in specie, nam Abrahami posteri non solum erant ex Jacobo, sed etiam et ex Esavo, et quoque ab Jishmaele, ut et ex filiis ejus ab altera uxore Ketura, ut ex {5} Zimrane, Jokshane, Medane, Midiane, Jishbako, Shuaho, aque horum filiis, videatur Gen. xxv 1-4: nunc quia Jacobi posteri institerant quod illi repraesentativi essent, ut mox supra n. 4290 ostensum est, non potuerunt repraesentare ut Jacob, nec ut Jishak, nec ut Abraham; quod non ut Jacob, erat quia `Jacob' repraesentabat externum Ecclesiae, non autem internum; et quod non ut Jishak simul nec ut Abraham simul, erat ob causam nunc supra allatam; [3] ideo ut repraesentare possent Ecclesiam, non potuit aliter quam ut novum nomen Jacobo inderetur, et per id novum quale, quod, nempe novum quale, significaret internum spiritualem hominem, seu quod idem, internam spiritualem Ecclesiam; id novum quale est `Israel'; omnis Ecclesia Domini est interna et externa, ut aliquoties prius ostensum est; interna est quae repraesentatur, et externa quae repraesentat; est etiam interna Ecclesia vel spiritualis vel caelestis, interna Ecclesia spiritualis repraesentabatur per `Israelem,' at interna Ecclesia caelestis repraesentabatur dein per `Jehudam,' ideo etiam divisio facta est, ac Israelitae per se erant regnum et Judaei per se, sed de his, ex Divina Domini Misericordia, in sequentibus dicetur. Inde patet quod Jacob, hoc est, Jacobi posteri non potuerint repraesentare Ecclesiam ut Jacob, nam hoc foret solum (o)repraesentare externum Ecclesiae, sed quoque ut Israel, quia `Israel' est internum. [4] Quod internum sit quod repraesentatur, et externum quod repraesentat, prius passim ostensum est, et quoque constare potest ex ipso homine; locutio hominis repraesentat ejus cogitationem, et actio hominis repraesentat ejus voluntatem, locutio et actio sunt externa, at cogitatio et voluntas sunt interna hominis; porro, ipsa facies hominis per varios suos vultus repraesentat utramque, nempe tam cogitationem ejus quam voluntatem; quod facies per vultus repraesentet, unicuique notum est, nam ex vultibus faciei apud sincero videri possunt status eorum interiores; verbo, omnia quae sunt corporis, repraesentant illa quae sunt animi et quae sunt mentis: [5] (m)similiter se habet cum externis Ecclesiae; haec enim instar corporis sunt, at interna instar animae, sicut altaria et sacrificia super illis, quae quod externa fuerint, notum est, similiter panes propositionis, tum candelabrum cum lucernis, ut et ignis perpetuus; quod illa repraesentaverint internum etiam cuivis notum esse potest; pariter reliqui ritus; quod externa hae non repraesentare `possent externa sed interna, ex illis quae allata sunt, constare potest; ita quod' non Jacob ut Jacob, quia `Jacob' es externum Ecclesiae, sed Jacob ut Israel, quia `Israel' est ejus internum(n). Haec sunt quae intelliguntur per novum datum quale quod (t)posteri Jacobi repraesentarent. @1 I has spiritualis caelestis, but see n. 4286$ @2 i enim$ @3 plurium$ @4 Sed quod$ @5 scilicet a$ @6 possint$