If, however, they contend that only some—rather than all—of the divine reality is united with him, they have admitted division and partition. They are therefore caught between two options: either their doctrine collapses, or they acknowledge division and partition along with its inherent falsehood.

Moreover, they declare:

“True God from true God, of the substance of His Father, begotten not created, consubstantial with the Father, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten before all ages.”

We ask them: This begotten Son, equal to the Father in essence and “true God from true God”—is he an attribute that inheres in something else, or an independent entity that subsists in its own right?

If the former, an attribute is neither God nor Creator; no one says of an attribute that it is “born of God” or that it is “equal to God in essence.” Never has any prophet, nor any follower of the prophets, called a divine attribute God’s son or child, nor has anyone claimed that a divine attribute was generated from Him. No rational person asserts that an eternal attribute is generated from the eternal Essence.

Yet they maintain that the Messiah is a god who created the heavens and the earth by virtue of the union of his humanity (nasūt) with this Son begotten before all ages, consubstantial with the Father.

All of that, however, is the description of a self-subsistent entity, like substances that exist in themselves, not the description of attributes that depend upon another. And once that is conceded, division and partition become inevitable.