RJM said:
Arius argued the Son was begotten before time began. If you insist you cannot grasp that Spirit is not dependent on time, perhaps you are wasting time trying to discuss religion, spirit, metaphysics -- whatever you want to call it -- in purely material terms?
Well, let's see..
There are 2 possible scenarios.
1. Arius believed that a spiritual Father created a spiritual Son (before the ages)
2. Arius believed that a spiritual Father created a mortal Son (not before the ages)
The division in philosophies that was between Arius and Alexander caused serious warfare between Christians.
Whoever was victorious, it wouldn't be outside the realms of possibility that one side would want to defame the other.
Let us examine option 1..
Arius would not know anything about time dilation, as it wasn't until 1905 that it was discovered .. is that right?
Arius was saying there was a time (a once) when the Son was not.
Surely for Arius, that would mean what it says? i.e. only the Father existed in the beginning
Hence, it really
does mean that Arius did
NOT believe in an eternal Son.
I don't think there is any need to go on any further..