}}</ref> Rozdíl tohoto postoje spočíval v tom, že ztělesnění Krista má jednu přirozenost, ale tato přirozenost má stále jak božský, tak lidský charakter a uchovává všechny tyto vlastnosti v obou. Ač miafyzité odmítli eutychianismus, na obě tyto skupiny jejich názoroví oponenti nahlíželi jako na monofyzity.
}}</ref>
The Miaphysites rejected this definition as verging on [[Nestorianism]] and instead adhered to a wording of [[Cyril of Alexandria]], the chief opponent of Nestorianism, who had spoken of the "one (''mia'') nature of the Word of God incarnate" ({{polytonic|μία φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένη}} ''mia physis tou theou logou sesarkōmenē'')<ref> John McGuckin (2004), ''Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy'', ISBN 0-88141-259-7 p140 et al </ref> The distinction of this stance was that the incarnate Christ has one nature, but that nature is still of both a divine character and a human character, and retains all the characteristics of both. Though the Miaphysites condemned [[Eutychianism]], the two groups were both viewed as [[monophysites]] by their opponents.
