Editing Arianism (section)

==Beliefs==
Little of Arius's own work survives except in quotations selected for polemical purposes by his opponents, and there is no certainty about what theological and philosophical traditions formed his thought.{{sfn|Bauckham|1989|p=75}} The influence from [[Absolute (philosophy)|the One]] of [[Neoplatonism]] was widespread throughout the Eastern Roman Empire, and this influenced Arius.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Arius {{!}} Biography, Beliefs, & Facts  |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Arius |access-date=2023-04-12 |website=www.britannica.com |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Hesiod |date=2022-06-24 |title=Arius and Neoplatonism |url=https://minervawisdom.com/2022/06/24/arius-and-neoplatonism/ |access-date=2023-04-12 |website=Discourses on Minerva |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=The Early Unitarians: Arius and His Followers |url=https://people.wku.edu/jan.garrett/arius.htm |access-date=2023-04-12 |website=people.wku.edu}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Spencer |first=Ian |title=Plato: proto-trinitarian, or the Father of Arianism? – Trinities |date=5 April 2007 |url=https://trinities.org/blog/plato-proto-trinitarian-or-the-father-of-arianism/ |access-date=2023-04-12 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ribolov |first=Svet |date=2013-01-01 |title=A New Look at Arius' Philosophical Background |url=https://www.academia.edu/20120195 |journal=Church Studies |volume=10|pages=203–212}}</ref>

Arius's basic premise is that only God is independent of existing. Since the Son is dependent, he must, therefore, be called a creature.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Arianism {{!}} Definition, History, & Controversy {{!}} Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Arianism |access-date=2023-04-09 |website=www.britannica.com |language=en}}</ref> Arians put forward a question for their belief: "Has God birthed Jesus willingly or unwillingly?" This question was used to argue that Jesus is dependent for his existence since Jesus exists only because God wants him to be.<ref name=newmanreader/>

Arianism taught that the ''[[Logos (Christianity)|Logos]]'' was a divine being created by God the Father before the world's creation, serving as the medium for creation, and that the Son of God is subordinate to the Father.{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1867|p=45|loc=Volume 7}} The concept of the ''Logos'' refers to an inner attribute of God associated with wisdom. Jesus is identified as the ''Logos'' due to a supposed resemblance to this inner aspect of God's nature.<ref name=newmanreader/>

A verse from [[Proverbs]] was used, according to Arianism, the creation of the Son by God, "The Lord created me at the beginning of his work."<ref>{{bibleverse|Proverbs|8:22–25|HE}}</ref><ref name="FiorenzaGalvin1991">{{Cite book|last1=Schüssler Fiorenza|first1=Francis|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=btI0eD3aNvoC&pg=PA164|title=Systematic theology: Roman Catholic perspectives|last2=Galvin|first2=John P.|publisher=Fortress Press|year=1991|isbn=978-0-8006-2460-6|pages=164–|access-date=14 April 2010}}</ref> Therefore, they posited, the Son was rather the very first and the most perfect of God's creatures, and he was called "God" only by the Father's permission and power.{{sfn|Kelly|1978|loc=Chapter 9}}<ref>{{Cite book|last=Davis|first=Leo Donald|url=https://archive.org/details/firstsevenec_davi_1990_000_6702418/page/52|title=The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787)|publisher=Liturgical Press|year=1983|isbn=978-0-8146-5616-7|location=Collegeville|pages=[https://archive.org/details/firstsevenec_davi_1990_000_6702418/page/52 52–54]}}</ref> The term "Son" is ambiguous, as Arians use [[Adoptionism|adoptionist]] theology to support the belief that Jesus was created ''ex nihilo'' by the Father.<ref name=newmanreader/>

Arians do not believe in the traditional doctrine of the [[Trinity]].<ref name="www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk">{{Cite web |url=http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/Extras/Newton_Arian.html |title=Newton's Arian beliefs |publisher=School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews |location=Scotland}}</ref>{{sfn|Phan|2011|p=72}} The letter of the Arian bishop [[Auxentius of Durostorum]]<ref name="faculty.georgetown.edu">{{Cite web |url=http://faculty.georgetown.edu/jod/texts/auxentius.trans.html |title=Auxentius on Wulfila: Translation by Jim Marchand}}</ref> regarding the Arian missionary [[Ulfilas]] ({{circa|311}}–383) gives an overview of Arian beliefs. Ulfilas, ordained by Arian bishop [[Eusebius of Nicomedia]], became a missionary to the [[Goths]] and believed that God the Father, the "unbegotten" Almighty, is the only true God.<ref name="bibleverse|John|17:3">{{bibleverse|John|17:3}}</ref> According to Auxentius, Ulfilas believed the Son of God, Jesus, the "only-begotten god",<ref>{{bibleverse|John|1:18}}</ref> was begotten before time began.<ref>{{bibleverse|Proverbs|8:22–29}}, {{bibleverse|Revelation|3:14}}, {{bibleverse|Colossians|1:15}}</ref> The [[Holy Spirit in Christianity|Holy Spirit]], he wrote, is the illuminating and sanctifying power of God. Using 1 Corinthians 8:5–6 as a [[proof text]]:

{{blockquote|Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as in fact there are many gods and many lords/masters—yet for us there is one God (Gk. ''theos'' – θεός), the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord/Master (''[[kyrios]]'' – κύριος), Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.|source={{bibleverse| 1 Corinthians| 8:5–6|NRSV}} }}

The creed of Ulfilas, which concludes the letter mentioned above,<ref name="faculty.georgetown.edu" /> distinguishes God the Father ("unbegotten"), who is the only true God, from the Son of God ("only-begotten") and the Holy Spirit, the illuminating and sanctifying power, which is neither God the Father nor the God the Son:

{{blockquote|I, Ulfila, bishop and confessor, have always so believed, and in this, the one true faith, I make the journey to my Lord; I believe in only one God the Father, the unbegotten and invisible, and in his only-begotten Son, our Lord/Master and God, the designer and maker of all creation, having none other like him. Therefore, there is one God of all, who is also God of our God; and in one Holy Spirit, the illuminating and sanctifying power, as Christ said after his resurrection to his apostles: "And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be clothed with power from on high"<ref>{{bibleverse|Luke|24:49}}</ref> and again "But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Ghost is come upon you";<ref>{{bibleverse|Acts|1:8}}</ref> Neither God nor Lord, but the faithful minister of Christ; not equal, but subject and obedient in all things to the Son. And I believe the Son to be subject and obedient in all things to God the Father.|source={{harvnb|Heather|Matthews|1991|p=143}}}}

A letter from Arius to the Arian [[Eusebius of Nicomedia]] (died 341) states the [[Arian creeds|core beliefs of the Arians]]:

{{blockquote|Some of them say that the Son is an eructation, others that he is a production, others that he is also unbegotten. These are impieties to which we cannot listen, even though the heretics threaten us with a thousand deaths. But we say and believe and have taught, and do teach, that the Son is not unbegotten, nor in any way part of the unbegotten; and that he does not derive his subsistence from any matter; but that by his own will and counsel he has subsisted before time and before ages as perfect as God, only begotten and unchangeable, and that before he was begotten, or created, or purposed, or established, he was not. For he was not unbegotten. We are persecuted because we say that the Son has a beginning but that God is without beginning.|Theodoret: Arius's Letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia|translated in Peters' ''Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe'', p. 41}}

Principally, the dispute between [[Trinitarianism]] and Arianism was about two questions:
* has the Son always existed eternally with the Father, or was the Son begotten at a certain time in the past?
* is the Son equal to the Father or subordinate to the Father?

For [[Constantine the Great|Constantine]], these were minor theological points that stood in the way of uniting the Empire, but for the theologians, it was of huge importance; for them, it was a matter of salvation.<ref name="Christianitytoday">{{Cite web |url=https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/people/theologians/athanasius.html |title=Athanasius, Five-time exile for fighting 'orthodoxy' |date=8 August 2008 |access-date=10 August 2018}}</ref>

For the theologians of the 19th century, it was already obvious that, in fact, Arius and Alexander/Athanasius did not have much to quarrel about; the difference between their views was very small, and the end of the fight was by no means clear during their quarrel, both Arius and Athanasius suffering a great deal for their own views. Arius was the father of [[Homoiousian]]ism, and Alexander was the father of [[Homoousian]]ism, which Athanasius championed. For those theologians, it was clear that Arius, Alexander, and Athanasius were far from a true doctrine of the Trinity, which developed later, historically speaking.{{sfn|Forrest|1856|p=6}}

Guido M. Berndt and [[Roland Steinacher]] state clearly that the beliefs of Arius were acceptable ("not especially unusual") to a huge number of orthodox clergy; this is the reason why such a major conflict was able to develop inside the Church since Arius's theology received widespread sympathy (or at least was not considered to be overly controversial) and could not be dismissed outright as individual heresy.{{sfn|Berndt|Steinacher|2014|p=}}