Dialogue III.-The Impassible.
Orthodoxus and Eranistes.
Orth. -In our former discussions we have proved that God the Word is immutable, and became incarnate not by being changed into flesh, but by taking perfect human nature. The divine Scripture, and the teachers of the churches and luminaries of the world have clearly taught us that, after the union, He remained as He was, unmixed, impassible, unchanged, uncircumscribed; and that He preserved unimpaired the nature which He had taken. For the future then the subject before us is that of His passion, and it will be a very profitable one, for thence have been brought to us the waters of salvation.
Eran. -I am also of opinion that this discourse will be beneficial. I shall not however consent to our former method, but I propose myself to ask questions.
Orth. -And I will answer, without making any objection to the change of method. He who has truth on his side, not only when he questions but also when he is questioned, is supported by the might of the truth. Ask then what you will.
Eran. -Who, according to your view, suffered the passion?
Orth. -Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Eran. -Then a than gave us our salvation.
Orth. -No; for have we confessed that our Lord Jesus Christ was only man?
Eran. -Now define what you believe Christ to be.
Orth. -Incarnate Son of the living God.
Eran. -And is the Son of God God?
Orth. -God, having the same substance as the God Who begat Him.
Eran. -Then God underwent the passion.
Orth. -If He was nailed to the cross without a body, apply the passion to the Godhead; but if he was made man by taking flesh, why then do you exempt the passible from the passion and subject the impassible to it?
Eran. -But the reason why He took flesh was that the impassible might undergo the passion by means of the passible.
Orth. -You say impassible and apply passion to Him.
Eran. -I said that He took flesh to suffer.
Orth. -If He had had a nature capable or the Passion He would have suffered without flesh; so the flesh becomes superfluous.
Eran. -The divine nature is immortal, and the nature of the flesh mortal, so the immortal was united with the mortal, that through it He might taste of death.
Orth. -That which is by nature immortal does not undergo death, even when conjoined with the mortal; this is easy to see.
Eran. -Prove it; and remove the difficulty.
Orth. -Do you assert that the humansoul was immortal, or mortal?
Eran. -Immortal.
Orth. -And is the body mortal or immortal?