Actually, Firefly, that is true, more or less.
Back around 300 AD, there was a priest named Arius in Alexandria, Egypt who taught that Jesus was born man, and through his actions and relationship with God became divine. This is a significant point, because it means that Jesus was created by the father. It also implies that any of us could be transformed into a divine entity if we were to play our cards right. Now at this point in history, there was not an official church doctrine on the issue, so it was debated heatedly in the streets. The chief opponent was Bishop Alexander of Alexandria. He held that Jesus has always existed, co-eternally with God. There are implications here as well. This would mean that Jesus was born divine, so not only does that not allow for you or I to attain this status, it also implies that he had a will or capacity for a relationship with God that is beyond the common man. Because of this, the standard that Jesus' life set was understandably beyond us mere mortals. The masses became quite charged over this issue, coming to riots and even assasinations of key church figures. Eventually Constantine himself had to get involved, and he used his influence to convene the Council at Nicea in 325. Constantine himself was present, and he did have some political reasons to press the council for a quick resolution (the burning and sacking of cities, including Alexandria was one of them). The council eventually adopted the Nicean creed by vote, and the creed declares that "We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty... We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ. Begotten of the father. Begotten, not made. Of one being with the Father. God from God, light from light, true God from true God."
Incidentally, this wording in the Nicean creed says that Jesus was of one being of the Father. This is a translation. The original said that Jesus was of the same substance as the father. This word for substance, ousia, was a real sticking point. It became the wedge that drove the Greek orthodox church to part ways with the Catholic church (at that point the only church around. This is also the source of the line "We believe in one Catholic and Apostolic Church." This is said even in Protestant churches, since the original meaning of the word catholic is universal, and so the phrase indicates that the people believe that the churches will someday be reunited into one.) They (the Greek faction) felt that the point of the trinity was that it couldn't be understood. Sort of like a Zen koan, it was a way of preventing the mind from using its rational faculties to interpret God's nature. The Greek faction felt that the Nicean creed was too much of a "formula" for God's nature. The creed that they say omits this summary of God's nature.
This issue is mentioned in Karen Armstrong's book, "A History of God" which I would highly recommend to anyone. I also read a book that is entirely devoted to this particular conflict called "The Battle for Jesus." I'd recommend that as well, but I lent it out and never got it back, so I don't know the author's name. It is interesting to note that one of the key doctrines of modern Christianity was decided by vote, but don't forget that the Bible was assembled by a council, and the Popes are elected. So this is a long standing tradition in the Church. There have been seven of these ecuminical councils over the ages, Nicea being the first. Check this link out for the quick and dirty version of the Arian (named for Arius) controversy and the Nicean Council.
http://www.gospelcom.net/chi/GLIMPSE...glmps088.shtml
-uber (edited for terrible spelling and grammar)