8647. 'And Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, took Zipporah, the wife of Moses' means the good from God which had been joined to God's truth. This is clear from the representation of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses' as Divine Good, the source of the good joined to truth, in this instance God's truth, which 'Moses' represents, dealt with above in 8643, 8644; from the representation of 'Zipporah, the wife of Moses' as the good from God. Marriages represent goodness and truth joined together. In the celestial Church the husband represents good and the wife the truth coming from it; but in the spiritual Church the man represents truth and the wife good. Here 'the wife of Moses' represents good because the spiritual kingdom is dealt with, see 2517, 4510, 4823, 7022.

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.