3118. The man bent himself, and bowed himself down to Jehovah. That this signifies gladness and joy, is evident from the signification of “bending himself,” and of “bowing himself down,” as denoting to be glad and to rejoice. Bending and bowing down are gestures of humiliation, that is, they are humiliation in act, whether in a state of grief or in a state of joy-in a state of grief when that which is wished for does not come to pass, but in a state of joy when it does come to pass; as in this case, that Rebekah, according to the vow of his heart, gave him to drink out of her pitcher, and made his camels drink also. (That “bowing down” is a gesture of joy also, may be seen above, n. 2927, 2950.) The term “gladness” is used, and also “joy,” for the reason that in the Word “gladness” is predicated of truth, and “joy” of good. Moreover gladness is of the countenance, but joy of the heart; or what is the same, gladness is of spiritual affection or of truth, but joy is of celestial affection or of good; thus gladness is in a degree less than joy, as bending is likewise less than bowing down; which is also evident from the fact that the man of the spiritual church merely bends himself before the Lord, and invokes grace; whereas the man of the celestial church bows himself down before the Lord and implores mercy (see n. 598, 981, 2423). Both terms are used by reason of the marriage of truth and good in every single thing of the Word (n. 683, 793, 801, 2516, 2712).

2516. Behold, thou wilt die because of the woman. That this signifies that the doctrine of faith would become null and void if the rational were consulted as to its contents, is evident from the signification of “Abimelech,” who is here addressed, as being the doctrine of faith; from the signification of “dying,” as being to become null and void; and from the signification of a “sister,” who is here called “the woman,” as being the rational (see n. 2508). Hence now by “Abimelech dying because of the woman” is signified that the doctrine of faith would become null and void if the rational were consulted.

[2] The reason why there is no doctrine of faith from the rational, is that the rational is in appearances of good and truth, which appearances are not in themselves truths (as before shown, n. 2053, 2196, 2203, 2209). Moreover the rational has under it fallacies which are from external sensuous things confirmed by memory-knowledges, which induce obscurity in these appearances of truth. The rational for the most part is merely human, as also is evident from its birth; and this is why nothing doctrinal of faith can begin from it, and still less be constructed from it; but must be from the Lord’s Divine Itself and Divine Human. This is its origin, and indeed so entirely that the Lord is doctrine itself; on which account also in the Word He is called the Word, the Truth, the Light, the Way, the Door; and (what is an arcanum) all doctrine is from the Divine good and the Divine truth, and has in itself the heavenly marriage. Doctrine that has not this in it is not the genuine doctrine of faith. Hence it is that in all the particulars of the Word (the source of doctrine) there is an image of a marriage (see n. 683, 793, 801).

[3] In the literal or external sense of the Word the doctrine of faith does indeed appear as if it possessed much from the rational, and even from the natural; but this is because the Word is for man, and has been in this manner accommodated to him; but still in itself it is spiritual from a celestial origin, that is, from Divine truth conjoined with Divine good. That doctrine would become null and void if as to its contents the rational were consulted, will be illustrated by examples in what follows.