The creed says that the Son is begotten of the Father, not of the one essence.
Do you consider this following statement as heresy?
The Son is: Son of the nature of His Father
I asked Apotheoun (Todd) this question, but I'm still waiting on his reply. I hope he's ok, I haven't seen him post here in a while.
Just so you know, this is exactly what we confess about the Son in the Creed of the Chaldean liturgy, though in English
, it has been translated equivalently as "of the same substance as his Father", but the literal translation of the Modern-Aramaic of the Chaldean Creed
which is pronounced in Chaldean-Modern-Aramaic as "bir di-kyana d-babeh", is the following:
ܒܸܪ ܕܸܟܝܵܢܵܐ ܕܒܵܒܹܗ
bir - Son
di-kyana - of the nature (or essence)
d-babeh - of His Father
The essence here referring to the general essence (or kyana in Eastern Aramaic).
What do you think?