// I think even you would have to concede that the word direct from God in your ears trumps anything his son might have had to say//
um no - they are co-equal innit?
this is a bit like N telling us what muslims believe.
Now the Creed ( one of them there are a few(*) has "proceedeth from the Father and the son" ( filioque )
and the orthodox chuches got their knickers ( OK cassocks) in a knot over this and were excused 'filioque'
here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque
But that didnt stop the muslim conquest c 650. Cairo was betrayed by Someone who was such a traitor that his name was expunged ( al-muqarqas) and who is now thought to be the Patriarch. The Pate thought he could get a better deal from the Muslim hordes than he could from Byzantium central whilst the Copts and Emperor were disputing this. No really
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Muqawqis
(*) Nicene actually
No - No someone ASKED - is it not better to come from the father rather than the son, doubtless thinking what a clever point and not realising there had been 500 y dispute over this - - around 1500 y ago
and all I can say is: thank God ( sozza andie!) he didnt ask about
homoousion and the difference to homoiousion
( yeah the difference is an iota or jot)