Sedative> Don't ask me. I'm atheist
So you see? Atheism doesn't have all the answers after all!
As for the topic:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arian_controversy
The Arian controversy
describes several controversies related to Arianism which divided the Christian church from before the Council of Nicaea in 325 to after the Council of Constantinople in 381. The most important of these controversies concerned the relationship between God the Father and God the Son.
’ insistence on three co-equal divine Persons, however, subjected them to accusations of tritheism. The extreme opposite, Sabellianism
, also widespread at that time, conflated the three Persons into one and saw no distinctions among them whatsoever. The theologians, therefore, had to articulate the unity of the divine essence as well as the distinctness of Persons in the Godhead.
As time went on and in response to continual controversy, the Cappadocians’ theological writings increased in nuance and also in clarity. What emerged from them was the orthodox Christian belief that God is a unity of Three distinct yet inseparable and equal Persons. The Cappadocian theologians worked out this theology by establishing the distinctness of the divine Persons, the communitarian relationships of the Three, and the unity of their divine essence.
taught that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, i.e. both uncreated. The Sabellian form had been condemned as heresy in the 3rd century. The Athanasian form would be declared orthodox at the Council of Constantinople in 383, and has become the basis of most of modern trinitarianism.
According to the historian Socrates of Constantinople, Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium taught "that Christ was a mere man."
Their opponents associated the teachings of Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium with those of Sabellius and Paul of Samosata, which had been widely rejected before the controversy.
taught that the Son is similar to the Father, either "in all things" or "according to the scriptures," without speaking of substance. Several members of the other schools, such as Hosius of Cordoba and Aëtius, also accepted certain Homoian formulae.
taught that the Son is of a different substance from the Father, i.e. created. Arius had taught this early in the controversy, and Aëtius would teach the later Anomoean form.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_of_JesusNestorianism
teaches that Jesus was two persons, rather than one, rejecting the unity of Jesus' natures, whereas Monophysitism
teaches that Jesus had one nature, rather than two. Neither of these views differ concerning the other points. Docetism
, conversely, teaches that Jesus' humanity was merely an illusion, and instead he is understood as purely divine. This view does not teach the incarnation or the mortal death of Jesus by crucifixion, and understands the resurrection in significantly different terms.Non-trinitarianism
does not define God in terms of three divine persons. Some of these groups teach that Jesus is not, or at least was not always, God. Others see Jesus as God, but not distinct from the Father or Spirit, often describing those as merely changes in appearance, or modes of existence. Mormons
consider Jesus to be a separate being, united as one with the Father and Spirit only in purpose.
Some Liberal Christians
generally consider Jesus to have been an ordinary man only. They generally believe that miraculous and prophetic events in Jesus' life were not historical. They sometimes find a metaphorical meaning in what they consider fictitious accounts of his life. Jesus' relationship with God is described in widely diverse views within this group.
, descendants of Reformation era Socinians, view Jesus as never more than human.
See original articles for more information, footnotes and links.