Semi-Arianism was a 4th-century Christian theological position that emerged during the intense debates over the nature of Christ following the First Council of Nicaea (325 AD). It represented a deliberate middle-ground attempt to modify the stricter teachings of Arianism while still firmly rejecting the full Nicene doctrine of the Trinity.
Core of Arianism (for context)
Arius (c. 250–336 AD) taught that God the Father alone is uncreated and eternal. The Son (Jesus/Christ) was the first and highest created being—begotten by the Father at some point in time (“there was [a time] when he was not”), not co-eternal, of a different substance (heteroousios), and subordinate/inferior to the Father. The Holy Spirit was even lower in the hierarchy.
What Semi-Arianism changed
Semi-Arians (also called Homoiousians) rejected the most extreme Arian claims. They affirmed that:
Armstrong’s teaching on God (the “God Family” or binitarianism)
Armstrong rejected the Trinity as a pagan, unbiblical doctrine invented centuries after the apostles. Instead:
This is classically described as binitarianism (two Persons in the Godhead), though Armstrong extended it into a dynamic, expanding “God Family.”
How Armstrongism Relates
Armstrongism is not strict Arianism, because it explicitly denies that Christ was created and affirms His full divinity and pre-existence. However, it is a clear modern expression of Semi-Arian Christology packaged within a robust binitarian framework. It mirrors the ancient Semi-Arian emphasis on “similar (but not identical) divine substance,” the eternal begetting of the Son, subordination of the Son to the Father, and an impersonal Holy Spirit. Armstrong’s unique addition—the expanding “God Family” in which humans become literal God beings—goes beyond the 4th-century views but rests on the same foundational rejection of Nicene consubstantiality.
Conclusion
In the final analysis, Semi-Arianism, Arianism, and binitarianism—all non-Trinitarian systems—embody the same fatal refusal: they categorically reject the biblical and historic truth that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons sharing the identical divine substance. Armstrongism represents the most aggressive and successful 20th-century resurrection of this ancient error. It is no daring “restoration” of suppressed apostolic truth, but a slick, radio-era repackaging of the very Semi-Arian compromise that the early church thoroughly examined, exposed, and thunderously condemned as heresy at Nicaea and Constantinople.
For those shaped by Armstrongism, this historical connection is devastatingly clear and scripturally damning: the vaunted “God Family” doctrine—with its two separate divine Beings, impersonal Spirit, subordinationist hierarchy, and audacious promise that humans can literally become God beings—is not fresh revelation from God. It is a sophisticated echo of the 4th-century theological poison that subtly yet fatally undermines the full, unqualified deity of the Son and distorts the very nature of the Godhead revealed in Scripture.
The Bible thunders against every form of subordinationism and creaturely reduction of the Son. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made (John 1:3). “For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9). The Father Himself addresses the Son with the words of deity: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever” (Hebrews 1:8, quoting Psalm 45:6). Jesus boldly declared, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), prompting the Jews to seek His death “because you, being a man, make yourself God” (John 10:33) and because He was “making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). Isaiah’s prophecy calls the coming Messiah “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Isaiah 9:6), while Thomas, upon seeing the risen Christ, worshipped Him as “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Paul exults that Christ is “God over all, blessed forever” (Romans 9:5) and “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13).
The Holy Spirit fares no better under such systems. Far from an impersonal force or power, He is fully personal and fully divine. Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit—and Peter declares they lied to God (Acts 5:3-4). We are baptized into the one name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19), and the apostolic benediction places all three on equal footing: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14). To demote the Spirit to an “it” is to contradict the clear witness of Scripture.
The Nicene Creed was not a pagan intrusion or Catholic corruption; it was the church’s necessary, Spirit-led bulwark defending the gospel’s core proclamation of Jesus Christ as “true God from true God,” begotten not made, of one substance with the Father. Armstrongism’s Godhead teaching, no matter how boldly or attractively proclaimed across the airwaves, does not elevate human potential—it diminishes the glory of Christ, grieves the Holy Spirit, robs God of His triune majesty, and leads souls back into the same soul-destroying errors that once threatened to unravel the heart of the Christian faith. Those who cling to it stand not in restored apostolic truth, but squarely in the long, dark shadow of a heresy the undivided early church rightly judged incompatible with Scripture and eternally dangerous to the soul.
The choice remains as stark and urgent today as it was in the fourth century: embrace the full biblical revelation of the triune God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons—or settle for the seductive half-measures of Semi-Arianism dressed in modern clothing. Only the former safeguards the deity of our Savior, the glory of the gospel, and the hope of redemption.
Silent Pilgrim
Arius (c. 250–336 AD) taught that God the Father alone is uncreated and eternal. The Son (Jesus/Christ) was the first and highest created being—begotten by the Father at some point in time (“there was [a time] when he was not”), not co-eternal, of a different substance (heteroousios), and subordinate/inferior to the Father. The Holy Spirit was even lower in the hierarchy.
What Semi-Arianism changed
Semi-Arians (also called Homoiousians) rejected the most extreme Arian claims. They affirmed that:
- The Son was not a creature made out of nothing.
- The Son was begotten (eternally generated) by the Father and existed before the world.
- The Son was fully divine in a real sense and “of similar substance” (homoiousios) with the Father—very close, but not identical in essence (homoousios, “same substance” or “consubstantial”).
- The Son was still subordinate to the Father in rank or authority.
Armstrong’s teaching on God (the “God Family” or binitarianism)
Armstrong rejected the Trinity as a pagan, unbiblical doctrine invented centuries after the apostles. Instead:
- God is a family or kingdom of divine spirit beings, currently consisting of two co-eternal Persons: God the Father (supreme) and the pre-existent Word/Logos (who became Jesus Christ).
- Both the Father and the Son are fully divine, uncreated, and composed of the same kind of divine “spirit essence” or “God-kind” substance.
- They are two distinct beings/persons, not one essence in three Persons. The Father is greater in authority; the Son is subordinate yet shares the divine family nature.
- The Holy Spirit is not a third Person or co-equal member of the Godhead. It is the impersonal power, mind, essence, or active force of God.
- Humans who repent, accept Christ, and endure in obedience can ultimately be born again as literal spirit children of God—added to the divine family and becoming “God beings” themselves (though the Father remains supreme).
This is classically described as binitarianism (two Persons in the Godhead), though Armstrong extended it into a dynamic, expanding “God Family.”
How Armstrongism Relates
Armstrongism is not strict Arianism, because it explicitly denies that Christ was created and affirms His full divinity and pre-existence. However, it is a clear modern expression of Semi-Arian Christology packaged within a robust binitarian framework. It mirrors the ancient Semi-Arian emphasis on “similar (but not identical) divine substance,” the eternal begetting of the Son, subordination of the Son to the Father, and an impersonal Holy Spirit. Armstrong’s unique addition—the expanding “God Family” in which humans become literal God beings—goes beyond the 4th-century views but rests on the same foundational rejection of Nicene consubstantiality.
Conclusion
In the final analysis, Semi-Arianism, Arianism, and binitarianism—all non-Trinitarian systems—embody the same fatal refusal: they categorically reject the biblical and historic truth that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons sharing the identical divine substance. Armstrongism represents the most aggressive and successful 20th-century resurrection of this ancient error. It is no daring “restoration” of suppressed apostolic truth, but a slick, radio-era repackaging of the very Semi-Arian compromise that the early church thoroughly examined, exposed, and thunderously condemned as heresy at Nicaea and Constantinople.
For those shaped by Armstrongism, this historical connection is devastatingly clear and scripturally damning: the vaunted “God Family” doctrine—with its two separate divine Beings, impersonal Spirit, subordinationist hierarchy, and audacious promise that humans can literally become God beings—is not fresh revelation from God. It is a sophisticated echo of the 4th-century theological poison that subtly yet fatally undermines the full, unqualified deity of the Son and distorts the very nature of the Godhead revealed in Scripture.
The Bible thunders against every form of subordinationism and creaturely reduction of the Son. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made (John 1:3). “For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9). The Father Himself addresses the Son with the words of deity: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever” (Hebrews 1:8, quoting Psalm 45:6). Jesus boldly declared, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), prompting the Jews to seek His death “because you, being a man, make yourself God” (John 10:33) and because He was “making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). Isaiah’s prophecy calls the coming Messiah “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Isaiah 9:6), while Thomas, upon seeing the risen Christ, worshipped Him as “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Paul exults that Christ is “God over all, blessed forever” (Romans 9:5) and “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13).
The Holy Spirit fares no better under such systems. Far from an impersonal force or power, He is fully personal and fully divine. Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit—and Peter declares they lied to God (Acts 5:3-4). We are baptized into the one name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19), and the apostolic benediction places all three on equal footing: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14). To demote the Spirit to an “it” is to contradict the clear witness of Scripture.
The Nicene Creed was not a pagan intrusion or Catholic corruption; it was the church’s necessary, Spirit-led bulwark defending the gospel’s core proclamation of Jesus Christ as “true God from true God,” begotten not made, of one substance with the Father. Armstrongism’s Godhead teaching, no matter how boldly or attractively proclaimed across the airwaves, does not elevate human potential—it diminishes the glory of Christ, grieves the Holy Spirit, robs God of His triune majesty, and leads souls back into the same soul-destroying errors that once threatened to unravel the heart of the Christian faith. Those who cling to it stand not in restored apostolic truth, but squarely in the long, dark shadow of a heresy the undivided early church rightly judged incompatible with Scripture and eternally dangerous to the soul.
The choice remains as stark and urgent today as it was in the fourth century: embrace the full biblical revelation of the triune God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons—or settle for the seductive half-measures of Semi-Arianism dressed in modern clothing. Only the former safeguards the deity of our Savior, the glory of the gospel, and the hope of redemption.
Silent Pilgrim
7 comments:
The Messiah was not created. John 1:1-3 clearly shows this as does Colossians 1:15-17. He and the Father created all things that were created.
The submission that the Messiah was made is false unless someone who was not with Him in his earthly life and who did not write a book of the Bible is correct and one who was with Him in life and who wrote several books in the Bible is the one who should be ignored.
Keep bashing the herbster and his minions, but stop lying to people. Regarding a third being of some godhead, c'mon no2hwa, try to be honest. Teaching that there is an uncle holy spirit is just as bad. The Spirit is the power of the Creator (Father and Messiah). How does one know this is not some third being and that the teaching is not from scripture? Read on....
I John 5 says that those who love God keep His commandments. These commandments are not a burden. Verses 4-5 say that those who are born of God overcome the world by faith because they believe that Yeshua the Messiah is the son of God. Because of faith, He was able to abide by the Torah that He gave to Moshe for Israel without sin as believers are expected to do. Remember, He is the Yod Hay Vav Hay (LORD) of the Tanach. Paul says so - 1 Corinthians 10:1-4. The Messiah is the perfect example that John is telling his readers to follow. Verses 6-8 say that Yeshua the Messiah came by water and blood as testified by the Holy Spirit. These three things testify in agreement to prove who He is.
Some scriptures have been added to that chapter to support the belief of the catholic church like the KJV does. Research Erasmus for more information.
Also, see footnote 77 https://talmidimyeshua.org/youwillliveinthem.htm#f77 where the catholic church changes things (is lying) because it thinks it has the authority to do so which is does not - Matthew 5:16-20.
While your at it, see an example of that organization (not) proving that it supposedly has the right to change laws (Daniel 7:25) and one which it explains to the protestants that it did which they the protestants follow - footnote 86 https://talmidimyeshua.org/youwillliveinthem.htm#f86
Reposting. Not sure if firt one wen through.
The Messiah was not created. John 1:1-3 clearly shows this as does Colossians 1:15-17. He and the Father created all things that were created.
The submission that the Messiah was made is false unless someone who was not with Him in his earthly life and who did not write a book of the Bible is correct and one who was with Him in life and who wrote several books in the Bible is the one who should be ignored.
Keep bashing the herbster and his minions, but stop lying to people. Regarding a third being of some godhead, c'mon no2hwa, try to be honest. Teaching that there is an uncle holy spirit is just as bad. The Spirit is the power of the Creator (Father and Messiah). How does one know this is not some third being and that the teaching is not from scripture? Read on....
I John 5 says that those who love God keep His commandments. These commandments are not a burden. Verses 4-5 say that those who are born of God overcome the world by faith because they believe that Yeshua the Messiah is the son of God. Because of faith, He was able to abide by the Torah that He gave to Moshe for Israel without sin as believers are expected to do. Remember, He is the Yod Hay Vav Hay (LORD) of the Tanach. Paul says so - 1 Corinthians 10:1-4. The Messiah is the perfect example that John is telling his readers to follow. Verses 6-8 say that Yeshua the Messiah came by water and blood as testified by the Holy Spirit. These three things testify in agreement to prove who He is.
Some scriptures have been added to that chapter to support the belief of the catholic church like the KJV does. Research Erasmus for more information.
Also, see footnote 77 https://talmidimyeshua.org/youwillliveinthem.htm#f77 where the catholic church changes things (is lying) because it thinks it has the authority to do so which is does not - Matthew 5:16-20.
While your at it, see an example of that organization (not) proving that it supposedly has the right to change laws (Daniel 7:25) and one which it explains to the protestants that it did which they the protestants follow - footnote 86 https://talmidimyeshua.org/youwillliveinthem.htm#f86
Thanks. SP! Another great article. I have always found Armstrongism's stance on the Godhead suit disturbing but could never quit figure it out The fact that so many in Armstrongism believe Jesus is a created creature is shocking. It is also interesting watching people have a fit over the trinity as if it is a closed system.
I knew it wouldn't take long for the Messianic's to jump in with their two cents, which is about as irrelevant as HWA's version. Stop lying to the people!
7:15 and 7:11, way to bring the proof (NOT).
No need for proving something. Just bash and love the catholic pappa just like they loved herbster the apostle.
Or, try to find where the catholics came up with the trinity from the scriptures and show it. Feewings don't count.
Armstrongism represents the most aggressive and successful 20th-century resurrection of this ancient error.
Recall also that the Jehovah Witnesses are a major deviation too and perhaps more successful as they have been going a lot longer than Armstrongism and have a lot more degotees.
''I John 5 says that those who love God keep His commandments'' - your message being to preach the Torah
Perhaps you might find the time to consider more just what are these commandments in the book of 1 John, and think whether your hardline reflects these teachings. .
Students have concluded it is not a reference to the ten as such like you state or as Armstrong stated. 1 John as you read through it is not talking about the Ten Commandments or Torah. It defines God’s commandments as believing in Jesus and loving one another. These are the teachings of Christ, not the Sinai Law. The law of Christ.
And if one decides to reject these lessons in 1 John and hunkers down to keep the ten - next consider if one is brave how is it one is actually ''keeping'' law at the astronomically high level as spoken of by Jesus.
Post a Comment