5840. [A conversation] with the Babylonians about the Athanasian creed
I have spoken with them about the Athanasian Creed, and it was shown that they have this doctrine from it: That the Lord as to the Divine is one with the Father, because it is written that they are equally eternal, infinite, omnipotent, and much more; and that the Divine of the Lord is in His Human, because it is said that just as soul and body make one human being, so the Divine and the Human of the Lord make one Christ; and that the two cannot be commixed, but the Divine took the Human to Itself; and that from this it is clear that the Divine of the Lord is in His Human, just as the soul in the body, undivided; and that thus the power of His Human He had from His own Divine that was in Him; and that they had no need to have said that He had power from the Father, since it was from Him Himself, because His Divine was like the Divine that is called the Father. And it was also said that the soul of the Lord was in actual fact from the Divine that is the Father, because He was conceived by Him, thus that the Divine of the Father actually was in Him; and thus that if they wanted to separate the Human from the Divine, it would be just like separating the soul from the body. When they heard this they were unable to reply, trying to find different ways of interpreting it, but could not. They said that they would stay with the doctrines from the Consistory in Rome. But it was asked whether they would have changed any of those things in the Athanasian Creed, and the reply was made that they would change nothing at all. This showed that they had claimed the Lord's Divine power to themselves.
5840. [CONVERSATION] WITH THE BABYLONIANS ABOUT THE CREED OF ATHANASIUS.
I spoke with these, several times, about the Creed of Athanasius, and showed them that they have from it this doctrine, namely, that the Lord as to the Divine is one with the Father, since we read that He, in like manner, is Eternal, Infinite, Omnipotent, and many other things; also, that the Lord's Divine is in His Human, since it is stated, that, like as the soul and body make one man, so the Lord's Divine and Human make one Christ; likewise, that these two are not commingled, but that the Divine took the Human to itself. [I remarked], also, that it is manifest from this that the Lord's Divine is in His Human like the soul in the body, consequently, not separate, and that He thus had power of His Human from His Divine, which was in Him; and that, consequently, they need not have said that He had power from the Father, since it was from His very Self, inasmuch as His Divine was like the Divine which is called the Father. 1And it was said, too, that the Lord's soul actually was from the Divine which was the Father, since He was conceived from Him; so that the Father's Divine was actually in Him, and, so, if they wanted to separate the Human from the Divine, it would be like separating soul from body. When they heard this, they could answer nothing, seeking various things in order that they might explain; but they were not able. They said that they abide in those decrees which issue from the Consistory at Rome; but it was inquired whether they have there changed any of those things which are in the Creed of Athanasius; and they replied that they have altered nothing at all. - Hence was shown that they have arrogated to themselves the Divine power of the Lord.
Footnotes:
1. That is, of course, that this is the case according to the Athanasian Creed, out of which Swedenborg is here refuting the errors of these Papists. The statement of the Creed on the point is; "Equal to the Father as touching His God-head." -TR.
5840. Cum Babylonicis de symbolo Athanasii
Loquutus aliquoties cum illis de Symbolo Athanasii, et ostensum quod inde illis ea doctrina sit, quod Dominus quoad Divinum unus sit cum Patre, quia legitur quod similiter aeterni, infiniti, omnipotentes, et plura, et quod Divinum Domini sit in Humano Ipsius, quia dicitur quod sicut anima et corpus facit unum hominem, ita Divinum et Humanum Domini unum Christum, tum quod bina illa non commixta sint, sed quod Divinum receperit ad se Humanum, et quod inde pateat, quod Divinum Domini sit in Humano Ipsius, sicut anima in corpore, inseparata, et quod sic potestatem Humani sui habuerit ex suo Divino quod in Ipso, et quod sic non opus habuerint dixisse, quod potestatem habuerit ex Patre, cum a Seipso, quia Divinum Ipsius simile esset Divino quod vocatur Pater, et dictum quoque quod anima Domini actualiter fuerit a Divino quod Pater quia ab Ipso conceptus, sic quod Divinum Patris actualiter fuerit in Ipso; et sic si vellent separare Humanum a Divino foret sicut separare animam a corpore, cum haec audiverunt nihil potuerunt respondere, quaerentes varia ut explicarent, sed non potuerunt, - dicebant quod maneant in illis quae ex Consistorio Romae, sed quaesitum num ibi mutaverint aliquid ex illis quae in symbolo Athanasii, et responsum, quod prorsus nihil, - inde ostensum quod Divinam Domini potestatem sibi arrogaverint.