Paperback: 216 pages ; Dimensions (in inches): 0.49 x 8.60 x 5.52
Publisher: Oxford University Press; (May 2001)
The paperback edition is also available in Canada and the United Kingdom
Book Description - obtained from Amazon.com
Arians in the third century AD maintained that Jesus was less divine than God. Regarded as the archetypal Christian heresy, Arianism was condemned in the Nicene Creed and apparently squashed by the early church. Less well known is the fact that fifteen centuries later, Arianism was alive and well, championed by Isaac Newton and other scientists of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment. This book asks how and why Arianism endured. -- This text refers to the Hardcover edition. The hardcover edition is also avialable in Canada and the United Kingdom
Comments from a Reader - Obtained from Amazon.com
This book is laudable in its coverage of the "original" 4th century Arianism, as well as its revival among British intellectuals in the 18th century, the most well-known being Isaac Newton. Readers interested in a thorough summary of the same substance/similar substance debate, as well as the subtle differences between an "Arian" and a "Socinian" will not be disappointed.
The work bears a strong signature of Oxfordian "ivory tower" isolation, pronouncing Arianism dead and gone, when the impetus for publication of the book probably came from the immense interest in a resurgent Arian viewpoint. Arianism simply refuses to go away.
The actual doctrine of the Trinity is a thorn in the side of modern Christianity because it is A)rather hard to grasp for those who spend their lives outside a seminary, B)not obviously supported by the New Testament narrative, C)smacks of Platonic philosophy and the "trinities" of pagan gods,and D)seems to have popped up during the Nicene period and is thus associated with many of the "errors of Constantine" and his interference in the early Christian church.
With the "bloody bishops" gone, and the political pressure of adhering to a Trinitarian creed no longer as intense as it once was, a belief gap between clergy and laity may be widening. A number of "ordinary" Christians, quizzed on their beliefs vs. various articles defining and Arian dogma might say, of course Jesus Christ is a "secondary" divine being, created by the Father for the purpose of salvation, and of course the Holy Spirit is only the active force of the Father in the world and has no personality in and of itself.
One might ask at this late date if an Arian or Trinitarian confession really matters to the continuance of the Christian community. It will be exciting to see if the "gatekeepers" one day simply scrap the Trinity concept due to lack of interest and Biblical support.
Remember, just as our ancestors fought over the "one iota" of difference between the words "homoousia" and "homioousia", without the Trinity, a Trinitarian becomes an Arian!
Our Comments
The word "Arianism" is a label that has been misused to represent the early Christian view that Jesus was the firstborn creature, who lived with the only true God before the world of mankind was made. (Colossians 1:15; John 17:1,3,5) Except what has been provided to us by trinitarian writings, all of the works of Arius were destroyed by the trinitarian sect, so we know very little about what Arius taught. Without knowledge of what Arius taught in all areas, how can one accept the label "Arian"? While many Christians are in general agreement with the views of Arius as given to us by the trinitarian writings, it would be not be right to think that they agreed with him on all other points that he might have believed, of which we have no information. Thus, to refer to Christians who believe in the early Christian view expressed as "Arians" is a misnomer. If a label is needed (and our society seems to love to have everything with "label", we prefer the term "Hebraic" view to describe the divinity of Jesus, since the early view is based on the usage of the words EL and ELOHIM in the Old Testament (the Hebrew-Aramaic Scriptures).
