4208. 'And Jacob swore by the Dread of his father Isaac' means confirmation from the Divine Human, which in that state is called 'the Dread'. This is clear from the meaning of 'swearing' as confirmation, dealt with in 2842, 3375; and from the meaning of 'the Dread of Isaac' as the Lord's Divine Human, dealt with in 4180. The fact that when people swore oaths they did so by the Lord's Divine Human, see 2842.

[2] The reason for the use here of the expressions 'the God of Abraham, the God of Nahor, the God of their father (who was Terah)' and 'the Dread of Isaac, Jacob's father' is that Terah's sons acknowledged just so many gods, for they were idolaters, 1353, 1356, 1992, 3667. It was also a peculiar feature of that house that each family worshipped its own individual god. This is why at this point the expressions 'the God of Abraham', 'the God of Nahor', 'the God of their father', and 'the Dread of Isaac' are used. Abraham's family however was commanded to acknowledge Jehovah as its God. All the same, they did not acknowledge Him to be anything more than just another god by whom they could distinguish themselves from the gentiles, and so only His name was different. This also accounts for their defection on so many occasions to other gods, as is made clear in the historical sections of the Word. The reason why they defected was that they were interested solely in things of an external nature. What things of an internal nature were they did not know at all and did not wish to know.

[3] So far as those people's participation in them was concerned, the religious practices of their Church were wholly idolatrous because they had been separated from the things of an internal nature; for every religious practice of the Church when separated from what is internal is idolatrous. Yet it was still possible for those people to represent the genuine condition of the Church since representations have nothing to do with the person who represents, only with the thing represented, 665, 1097 (end), 1361, 3147. But in order that a representative Church might come into being, and in this way some kind of communication between the Lord and man through heaven might exist, it was particularly necessary for them to be kept in their acknowledgement of Jehovah, if not in their hearts yet with their lips. For among them representatives were not an expression of internal entities but of external ones. And this was the kind of communication they had, different from that in the genuine Church in which communication was effected through things of an internal nature. For this reason also their Divine worship made no difference to their souls, that is, it did not yield them blessings in the next life, only prosperity in the world.

[4] In order that they might be kept in external things so many miracles were therefore performed among them which would never have taken place if things of an internal nature had had a place among them. For the same reason they were also compelled on many occasions to worship Jehovah through the imposition of punishments, captivities, and threats, though no one is compelled by the Lord to engage in internal worship, for this is implanted only in a state of freedom, 1937, 1947, 2874-2881, 3145, 3146, 3158, 4031. The chief external practice required of them was that they should confess the name Jehovah, for Jehovah was the Lord who was represented in all the practices of that Church. On the point that Jehovah was the Lord, see 1343, 1736, 2921, 3035.

3158. 'Tell me; and if not, tell me' means a state in which they are free to deliberate. This is evident from the sense of the words themselves. From all that has gone before it is clear that while the sense of the letter in this chapter is dealing with the betrothal and marriage of Rebekah to Isaac, the internal sense is dealing with the introduction and joining together of truth and good, for the introduction and joining together of truth and good is spiritual betrothal and spiritual marriage. In both instances a free state to deliberate is necessary. The necessity for it in betrothal and marriage is well known, but the necessity for it in the introduction and joining together of truth and good is not so well known because it is not visible to the natural man and belongs among the things that go on quite apart from any reflecting on them. Yet this activity continues moment by moment in one who is being reformed and regenerated, that is to say, he experiences a free state when truth is being joined to good.

[2] Everyone may know, if he merely stops to think, that nothing ever exists as a person's own unless it forms part of his will. That which belongs solely to the understanding does not become a person's own until it belongs also to his will, for what belongs to the will constitutes the essential being (esse) of a person's life, whereas what belongs to the understanding constitutes the manifestation (existere) of that essential being. Consent flowing from the understanding alone is not consent, but all consent springs from the will. Unless therefore the truth of faith which belongs to the understanding is received by the good of love which belongs to the will it is in no sense truth that has been acknowledged, and so is not faith. In order that it may be received by good that belongs to the will it is necessary that a free state should exist. Everything that belongs in the will looks to be free. The state itself of the will is freedom, for what I will, I choose and desire since that is what I love and acknowledge as that which is good. From this it becomes clear that the truth of faith in no sense becomes a person's own until it has been accepted by the will, that is, introduced and joined to the good there, which cannot happen except in a free state.