709. The name Jehovah is used because now the subject is charity. From verse 9 to the end of the previous chapter Jehovah is not used but God, the reason being that there the subject is the preparation of Noah, or the member of the Church called Noah, as regards things of his understanding, which are matters of faith. Here however it is the preparation of him as regards the things of his will, which are matters of love. When the subject is the things of the understanding, that is, the truths of faith, the name God is used, but when it is those of the will, that is, goods stemming from love, Jehovah is used. For it is not things of the understanding, that is, of faith, that constitute the Church but those of the will which are matters of love. Jehovah is present within love and charity, but not within faith except faith that inheres in love or charity. This also is why in the Word faith is compared to the night, but love to the daytime, as in Genesis 1 where the great lights are mentioned; the greater light, which is the sun and means love, has dominion over the day, while the lesser light, which is the moon and means faith, has dominion over the night, Genesis 1:14, 16. Similarly in the Prophets, Jeremiah 31:35; 33:20; Psalms 136:8-9; also Revelation 8:12.

4149. 'Anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live in the presence of our brothers' means that that truth was not 'Laban's', and that what was 'Laban's' truth could not reside in his - 'Jacob's' - good. This is clear from the meaning of 'gods' which in this case are the teraphim, as truths, dealt with in 4111, not however the truths belonging to the good meant by 'Laban' but to the affection which 'Rachel' represents. It is because those truths are meant by 'gods' here that the reference to Rachel's having stolen them is added. And more concerning them appears further on which would not have been recorded if that deed of hers had not entailed arcana which are evident solely in the internal sense. And because the truths under discussion here were not truths belonging to the good meant by 'Laban' but those belonging to the affection for truth which 'Rachel' represents, the words 'Anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live in the presence of our brothers' therefore mean that that truth was not 'Laban's', and that what was 'Laban's' truth could not reside in his - 'Jacob's' - good.

[2] The implication of this arcanum is that all spiritual good has its own truths, for wherever that good exists truths are present also. Regarded in itself good is a single whole, but it is made various by means of truths. Indeed truths may be compared to the fibres which compose some organ of the body. It is the form which these fibres take that determines the nature of the organ and therefore of its function. And this - that is to say, its function - is dependent on the life which flows in through the soul, a life that comes from good which originates in the Lord. So although good is a single whole it nevertheless varies with each individual; it is so varying that it is never exactly the same with one person as with another. This also is why one person's truth cannot possibly abide in another person's good. For all the truths residing with someone in whom good is present intercommunicate and produce some form or other. For this reason one person's truth cannot be transferred to another, for when it is transferred it passes into the form that is peculiar to the recipient and takes on a different appearance. But this arcanum demands exploration which is too deep to enable it to be revealed in just a few words. This explains why the mind of one person is never exactly like another's, but that the differences in people's affections and ways of thinking are as numerous as the people themselves. It also explains why the whole of heaven consists of angelic forms which are endlessly varying. Arranged by the Lord into the form heaven takes, those forms act as a single whole. For no single whole is ever composed of parts that are identical but of those that are various existing in a single form and which make one in keeping with that form. This now shows what is meant by the statement that what was 'Laban's' truth could not reside in his own - 'Jacob's' - good.