Salpy, you may well be right. I don't know enough about them to know whether or not this is close to their belief, I had in fact not heard of this creed until this thread, when I went looking online and found this. I learned, because of Rafa's posts, to always be careful of anything Nestorian.
Anastasia, assuming this creed is in fact the creed you were talking about (and if it is not, I would be greatly indebted if you would link me to the one you were talking about or if you would type it into a post), let's go through line by line.
"We believe in one God, the Father, who upholds everything, the Creator of all things that are seen and unseen."
Vs. "We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible." This is very close. I don't know exactly whether or not "who upholds everything" being included and "Almighty" being disincluded matters, but I lean towards not so much. The rest of it is basically the same, especially since I have regularly seen "Creator" used instead of "Maker" with the Orthodox Creed just being more precise by including "of heaven and earth" wheras the Nestorians disinclude it, but I don't think it matters since by say "of all things visible and invisible" with the translation of the Nestorian Creed just being slightly different in word choice than my translation (not the one I made, seeing as I don't speak ancient greek, but rather the one I use outside of Church) of the Orthdoox Creed.
"[We believe] in one Lord God, and in Jesus [Christ], the only son of God, [the firstborn] of all beings, who… in the beginning was not created but begotten by the Father;"
Vs. "and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-Begotten, begotten of the Father before all worlds" These may well mean fundamentally the same things, but the way words are used often subtly suggest different meanings because of nuances in the words. As such, I would say that the Nestorian Creed here is sketchy at best.
" [true God] of true God… by whose hand the [aeons] were fashioned and everything was created,"
Vs. "Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father; by Whom all things were made" I would note it leavs out "of one eseence with the Father" which is a pretty big difference, and could lead to a variety of heretical views. But aside from that, it is fairly similar - but again I would point you to the fact that words have nuances.
"he who for the sake of men and for our salvation descended from the heavens and clothed himself in a body by the Holy Spirit, and became man and entered the womb;"
Vs. Who for us men and for our salvationcame down from heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man; " How the Nestorian Creed is constructed, it says that the Holy Spirit formed a body and placed it in the womb of the Virgin, it also suggests that God merely took on flesh, as opposed to truly and in every sense of the word BECAME man, it suggests he did not have his whole humanity.
"who was born of Mary, the virgin, and [who] suffered agony and [was] raised on the cross [in] the days of Pontius Pilate; and [was buried] and ascended and sits on the right hand of the Father and is ready to come (again) to judge the dead and the living."
Vs. "And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; Whose Kingdom shall have no end." Aside from leaving out the phrase "Whose Kingdom shall have no end", which is a pretty significant phrase, I don't really have anything objectionable in this one, even for the most part the word structure.
"And [we believe] in the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit, who went forth from the Father, the Holy Spirit who gives life."
Vs. "And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, Who spoke by the prophets." I think the lack of detail in the Nestorian Creed on the Holy Spirit, may well show a lack of respect for the Spirit as a truly equal part of the Godhood, of course this would in part depend on the date of the creed.
