into hypostases, each possessing life, wisdom, and the other attributes just as He does. Nor is there any hypostasis that possesses an attribute without, on the logic of your own argument, allowing the possibility that its attribute is like that hypostasis. If, then, these hypostases are deities and every attribute is a deity, and all of them proceed from His very essence, it necessarily follows that every attribute of each of the three hypostases must itself be a deity like them, for it too stems from His essence. The matter would thus broaden endlessly, with neither limit nor terminus.

He said: If you affirm three hypostases in heaven, all sharing one eternal essence, are you not compelled to concede three gods? After all, hypostases are personal entities that can be pointed to and defined; if not, what proof do you have? Yet in some of your disputations you insist that the three return to one, neither divisible nor separated, and you liken their union and the radiance that issues from them to the sun. At the same time we see that you have built the very law of your faith on the claim that the Messiah is both God and man united, that he ascends to heaven and sits at the right hand of his Father. But the one who sits at the right hand of another—does this not make him distinct