A significant difference is the "Archangel Michael transformed into human Jesus, then after dying transformed back to Archangel Michael again" teaching. That detail is not in the historic Arian doctrine (AFAIK). Otherwise they follow Arius closely:
- Belief that the Godhead is unshared--that the Father alone is the one (capital-G) God
- Belief that the Father alone has always existed and is unchanging (immutable)
- Belief that Jesus has only a lesser degree of divinity, inferior to the Father (little-g "god", per NWT/Johannes Greber rendering of John 1:1)
- Belief that Jesus is not of the same substance as the Father
- Belief that Jesus is a created being, rather than self-existent
From this summary of a Brittanica article:
Christ was viewed as the most perfect creature in the material world, whose moral integrity led him to be "adopted" by God as a son but who nevertheless remained a secondary deity, or Logos substantially unlike the eternal, uncreated Father and subordinate to his will. Because the Godhead is unique, it cannot be shared or communicated so that the Son cannot be God. Because the Godhead is immutable, the Son, who is mutable (being represented in the Gospels as subject to growth and change) cannot be God. The Son must, therefore, be deemed a creature who has been called into existence out of nothing and has had a beginning. Moreover, the Son can have no direct knowledge of the Father since the Son is finite and of a different order of existence.
