Arianism has been defined in the recent United News, July-August 2017, article "How The Shack's Message Misses The Truth" as follows (false concept that God existed before Jesus and that Jesus was a special creation of God).
Here are some facts that make me wonder about this definition.
My Webster's dictionary explains that Arian believed that Jesus was not divine. This is not the concept that I get from the definition in the article. This brings up a red flag.
Now note some scriptural passages.
John 8:58 (NKJV)
Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
So the I Am who was God existed before Jesus who was the Son of Man. This seems to contradict the statement noted above.
1 John 4:3 (NKJV)
and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God.
1 John 2:23 (NKJV)
Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
Differences between made or created or formed or begotten are often just semantics. Mary was not divine so Jesus must have been at least 50% newly created, pardon my math.
I Am became Jesus in the flesh but I Am was spirit and Jesus was flesh. They are, in that respect, not the same being. One was immortal the other mortal. The immortal became mortal. To reiterate, Jesus (I Am) came in the flesh, that is to say, was made mortal.
John 1:18 (NASB)
No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
John 1:18 (NKJV)
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
Jesus was the only begotten Son of God. This unquestionably shows that Jesus was indeed divinely extra special. This also seems to contradict your statement.
It seems to me that Arianism is being misrepresented and a false statement is being propagated in the process.
2017 Jacques Gauvin