4823.“她又怀孕生了一个儿子”表邪恶。这从“儿子”的含义清楚可知，“儿子”是指真理，以及良善（264节），因而在反面意义上是指虚假，以及邪恶，不过是由虚假所产生的邪恶。这种邪恶本质上是虚假，因为它来源于这虚假。事实上，凡出于虚假教义行邪恶的人也会行虚假；不过，这虚假已在行为中实现，故被称为邪恶。头生的表示虚假，由此表示邪恶；这一点从此处关于次子的陈述明显看出来，即：“俄南便遗种在地，免得给他哥哥留种”；“俄南所作的在耶和华眼中看为恶，耶和华也就叫他死了”（38:9，10）。在此也明显可知，这邪恶由虚假产生。此外，在古代教会，次子表示行为中的信之真理；因此，次子在此表示行为中的虚假，也就是邪恶。这个儿子就表示邪恶，这一点从以下事实也可以看出来：长子珥这个名字是他父亲，或犹大起的；而次子俄南这个名字是他母亲，就是书亚的女儿起的，这可见于原文。因为在圣言中，“（男）人”表示虚假，“女人”表示其邪恶（参看915，2517，4510节）。“书亚的女儿”表示邪恶（参看4818，4819节）。因此，珥这个名因是他父亲起的，故表示虚假；俄南这个名因是他母亲起的，故表示邪恶。因为这样前者可以说是父亲的儿子，而后者可以说是母亲的儿子。
在圣言中，经上常提及“（男）人和妻子”，以及“丈夫和妻子”。当提及“（男）人和妻子”时，“（男）人”表示真理，“妻子”表示良善；在反面意义，“（男）人”表示虚假，“妻子”表示邪恶。但当提及“丈夫和妻子”时，“丈夫”表示良善，“妻子”表示真理；在反面意义上，“丈夫”表示邪恶，“妻子”表示虚假。这个奥秘背后的原因是这样：在属天教会，丈夫处于良善，妻子处于该良善的真理；而在属灵教会，男人处于真理，妻子处于该真理的良善。这二者之间的实际关系过去是这样，现在仍是这样，因为人的内层已经经历了这种颠倒。这就是为何在圣言中，当属天良善和由此而来的属天真理是论述的主题时，它们被称为“丈夫和妻子”；而当属灵良善和由此而来的属灵真理是论述的主题时，它们被称为“（男）人和妻子”，确切地说，被称为“男人和女人”的原因。由此，以及由这些话本身可知，就圣言的内义而言，所论述的是哪种良善和哪种真理。
这也是为何各个地方早已阐述了婚姻代表良善与真理，并真理与良善的结合的原因。此外，婚姻之爱也来源于良善与真理的这种联结。在属天人当中，婚姻之爱来源于与真理联结的良善；而在属灵人当中，则来源于与良善联结的真理。婚姻还实实在在对应于这些联结。由此可见，父亲给长子起名，母亲给次子，以及三子起名蕴含什么；这一点从原文清楚看出来，即：父亲给长子起名，是因为长子表示虚假，母亲给次子起名，是因为次子表示邪恶。
Potts(1905-1910) 4823
4823. And she conceived again, and bare a son. That this signifies evil, is evident from the signification of a "son," as being truth, and also good (n. 264); thus in the opposite sense falsity and also evil, but the evil which is from falsity. This evil in its essence is falsity, because it is from it; for one who from a false doctrine does what is evil, does also what is false; but because it is done in act, it is called evil. That by the firstborn son is signified falsity, and by this one evil, is evident from its being related of this son that he did evil in act, namely, that "he destroyed the seed to the earth, that he might not give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did was evil in the eyes of Jehovah; and He caused him also to die" (verses 9 and 10). Here also it is evident that this evil was from falsity. Moreover, in the ancient churches by the second son was signified the truth of faith in act; and therefore by this son falsity in act, that is, evil. That evil is what is signified by him, may be seen also from the fact that Er the firstborn was named by his father, or Judah; while this son, or Onan, was named by his mother, the daughter of Shua, as may be seen in the original tongue. For in the Word by a "man" is signified falsity, and by a "woman" the evil thereof (see n. 915, 2517, 4510). That by the daughter of Shua is signified evil, may be seen above (n. 4818, 4819). Wherefore Er, because he was named by his father, signifies falsity, and Onan, because he was named by his mother, signifies evil; for the former was thus as it were the father's son, but the latter as it were the mother's. [2] In the Word "man and wife," and also "husband and wife," are often mentioned; and when "man and wife" are mentioned, by "man" is signified truth, and by "wife" good, and in the opposite sense by "man" is signified falsity, and by "wife" evil; but when "husband and wife" are mentioned, good is signified by "husband," and truth by "wife," and in the opposite sense evil is signified by "husband," and falsity by "wife." The reason of this mystery is this: in the celestial church the husband was in good, and the wife in the truth of this good; but in the spiritual church the man is in truth, and the wife in the good of this truth; such were they in fact then, and such are they now, for the interiors of man have undergone this change. Hence where celestial good and celestial truth from it are treated of in the Word, it is said "husband and wife;" but where spiritual good and spiritual truth from it are treated of, it is said "man and wife," or rather "man and woman." From this, as also from the expressions themselves, it is known what good and what truth are treated of in the Word, in its internal sense. [3] This too is the reason of its having been occasionally stated that marriages represent the conjunction of good and truth, and of truth and good. Moreover, conjugial love has its origin from this conjunction of good with truth; and conjugial love with the spiritual from the conjunction of truth with good. Marriages also actually correspond to these conjunctions. From all this it is evident what is involved in the father's naming the first son, and the mother's naming the second, and also the third-as appears from the original tongue-namely, that the father named the first son, because by him was signified falsity, and that the mother named the second, because by him was signified evil.
Elliott(1983-1999) 4823
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.
Latin(1748-1756) 4823
4823. `Et concepit adhuc et peperit filium': quod significet malum, constat ex significatione `filii' quod sit verum et quoque bonum, de qua n. 264, ita in opposito sensu falsum et quoque malum, sed malum quod ex falso; hoc malum in sua essentia est falsum quia inde est; qui enim facit malum ex falso doctrinali, is facit falsum, sed quia actu sit {1}, vocatur malum. Quod per primogenitum significetur falsum et per hunc malum, patet {2} inde quia de hoc filio memoratur quod actu fecerit malum, nempe, `quod perdiderit semen ad terram ut non daret semen fratri suo; et fuit {3} malum in oculis Jehovae quod fecit {4}, et mori fecit etiam eum, vers. 9, 10; quod hoc malum fuerit ex falso, etiam ibi patet;{5} praeterea (o)in Ecclesiis antiquis per secundo genitum significabatur verum fidei actu, per hunc itaque falsum actu, hoc est malum; quod sit malum quod per hunc significatur {6}, etiam constare potest ex eo quod primogenitus Er nominatus sit ex patre seu Jehudah, at {7} hic seu Onan (c)ex matre {8} filia Shuae, ut {9} videri potest in lingua originali; per `virum' enim in Verbo significatur falsum et per `mulierem' ejus malum, videatur n. 915, 2517, 4510; quod per `filiam Shuae' malum, n. 4818, 4819;
quapropter quia Er vocatus est (o)nomine a patre, significatur per illum falsum, et qui Onan ex matre, significatur (o)per eum malum, ille enim ita erat sicut patris filius, hic autem sicut matris'. [2] In Verbo pluries dicitur `vir et uxor', tum `maritus et uxor', et cum dicitur vir et uxor, significatur verum per `virum' et bonum per `uxorem', ac in opposito sensu falsum per `virum' et malum per `uxorem'; at cum dicitur maritus et uxor, significatur bonum per `maritum' et verum per `uxorem', ac in opposito sensu malum per `maritum' et falsum per `uxorem'; causa hujus arcani haec est: in caelesti Ecclesia fuit maritus in bono et uxor in vero illius boni;
at in spirituali Ecclesia est vir in vero et uxor in bono illius veri, et quoque actualiter ita sunt et fuerunt, interiora enim apud hominem hanc versuram habuerunt inde est `quod' ubi in Verbo agitur de caelesti bono et inde caelesti vero, ibi dicatur `maritus et uxor', at ubi de spirituali bono et inde spirituali vero, ibi dicatur `vir et uxor', seu potius `vir et mulier' exinde ut quoque ex ipsis vocibus cognoscitur de quo bono et de quo vero in Verbo in sensu ejus interno agitur; haec etiam (t)est causa quod passim prius dictum sit quod conjugia repraesentent conjunctionem boni et veri, ac veri et boni; amor etiam conjugialis ex conjunctione illa suam originem ducit; amor conjugialis apud caelestes ex conjunctione boni cum vero, et {10} amor conjugialis apud spirituales ex conjunctione veri cum bono; conjugia etiam illis conjunctionibus actualiter correspondent. (m)Ex his patet quid involvit quod pater vocaverit nomine primum {2}, ac mater alterum, et quoque tertium ut constat ex lingua originali, quod nempe pater primum {11} nomine vocaverit, quia per illum significabatur falsum, et quod mater secundum quia per illum significabatur malum.(n) @1 fit$ @2 i quoque$ @3 sicut I$ @4 fuit I$ @5 i et$ @6 i filium significatur malum$ @7 et$ @8 i seu$ @9 See footnote p. 497.$ @10 at$ @11 primogenitum$