each attribute is a hypostasis, and the hypostases become three—yet this illustration does not accord with what you maintain. For in the example of Zayd we are dealing with one essence that possesses three attributes—medicine, arithmetic, and writing. There are not three essences here, although each attribute carries a ruling that the others do not.

No rational person would say that an attribute is equal to the subject in essence, or that the essence together with one attribute equals, in essence, the essence together with another attribute. The essence is one, and what is equal is not identical with that to which it is equal. Moreover, the essence together with the attribute is what you call “the Father”; if this is the One who united with the Messiah, then the One united with him is the Father.

You have also declared concerning this same One:

“He is true God of true God, of the essence of His Father, equal to the Father in essence; He descended, was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and of Mary the Virgin, became man, was crucified, and suffered.”

This necessarily implies that the true God, equal to the Father in essence, was crucified and suffered; thus the divinity itself would be crucified and suffering. Some of your sects acknowledge this, while others reject it, yet the logical consequence of your creed is the former.

Furthermore, since He was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and of Mary, if—as you claim—the Holy Spirit is the life of God, then Christ would be both the Word of God and His life. His divinity would therefore comprise two of the three hypostases, whereas according to you He is only the hypostasis of the Word.