LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

ARIANISM HERESY



A RESEARCH PAPER SUBMITTED TO
THE FACULTY OF THE SEMINARY
IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTERS OF RELIGIOUS EDUCATION


BY
NATHAN J.KERR


LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA
MARCH 2013

2

Introduction
One of the most famous controversies of the early church still affects to a lesser extent
the church today. The topic of the paper is the topic of a debate that spurred some of the most
widely used creeds to this day-most notably The Nicene Creed. The story of Arius is not only a
defining moment of church history and dogma, but is a fascinating tale of church unity,
competing Bishops, and the first mixings of the Church and Government under Emperor
Constantine. This paper will briefly outline the history, arguments for and against, and the
Orthodox conclusion to show that Arianism was and still is a heresy threatening the Trinitarian
truth of Christs church.
Since the times of the early church, persecution of the Christians or Jewish followers of
Christ were persecuted on different levels with the persecution intensifying in local areas as more
Gentiles were coming to this newfound sect of Judaism than were Jews and the pantheistic rulers
of the Roman empire felt they could no longer just look the other way. The Christians were
persecuted initially by the Jews by being expelled from the synagogues
1
and later by the Roman
emperors (sporadically) for failing to worship the emperor. Although the Jews since before
Christ were unofficially not required to worship the emperor as the emperors turned a blind eye,
with the explosion of Christianity (brought on by the Pax Romana) emperors felt threatened by
this new source of mono-theism in a vast empire of many religions
2
.
This changed when in the early fourth century with Constantine the Great- the ruler of the
western half of the Roman Empire entering into agreement with Licinius who was the ruler of
the eastern half of the empire. In 313, the widely known Edict of Milan gave the freedom of

1
Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity: Volume 1 (New York: Harper Collins, 2010), 35
2
B.R. Hernagen, An Introduction to the History of Psychology (Belmont, CA: Wadsorth, 2009), 77
3

religion to all- including the Christians
3
. Later in 320 however, Licinius reneged on the edict and
as a Pagan monotheist, he began persecuting the Christians in the east. In 324, Constantine
defeated Licinius and adopted Jesus as his God instead of the sun god
4
. This unified the Roman
Empire and Christians were no longer persecuted and gained influence within the government
for the first time. This interference or mix within the government would prove to be both good
and bad. Good in that Christians were secure in their faith from hostility, but bad in that
excommunication could later result in the threat of state sanction persecution and meddling in
theological disputes by secular rulers
5
.
With the threat of death off of the Christians mind, theological disputes that began
sporadically early on (i.e. Jew and Gentile dispute of Pauls time and the Gnostics) now came to
the forefront as the church leaders now had time to debate them. The debate this paper focuses
on is that of Arianism which gains its name from a Presbyter in Egypt named Arius.
There were scattered accounts about the early life of Arius. Epiphanius of Salamis (c.
315403 ce)
6
writes (albeit a critic of Arius) that Arius was born in Libya
7
and of the many
sources, it is assumed that he was born in between 250 and 280. He was a student of Lucian of
Antioch who was martyred in 312
8
. In about 311, Arius was ordained a presbyter in Alexandria
by Achilles who was martyred the same year but his public career did not seem to come into
focus until 313 under Achilles successor Alexandria gave Arius permission to expound the

3
Everett Ferguson, Church History: Volume One (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 183
4
Ibid.
5
E. G. Hinson, The Early Church: Origins to the Dawn of the Middle Ages (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 208
6
Alan D. Fitzgerald, Augustine Through the Ages (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1999), 297
7
Rowan Williams, Arius: Heresy and Tradition (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 2002), 29
8
Ferguson, Church History: Volume One, 193
4

Scriptures in the church
9
. Epiphanius described Arius as tall with a demeanor that easily
brought him followers. One of a calm and gentle voice always wearing a sleeveless tunic
10

11
.
The beginnings of Arianism really traces its roots back to a stoic type philosophy that
all man (regardless of the fall of Adam and Eve) were born sinless
12
. Arius was a more
developed theologian that adopted adoptionism which is the doctrine that Jesus was made
divine rather than always was. The key phrase for Arians was, There was a time when he did
not exist and also There was a time when the Son was not which says that Jesus was born
human and earned his divinity
13
. The opposite position was quoted as Always Father, always
Son.
14

The main controversy begins in 319, Alexander, the Bishop of Alexandria and his
presbyters were having a discussion of Christology and the doctrine of the Trinity. The
original point of contention was the title of Father for God. To Arius, he believed that those
who sided with Bishop Alexander (and his presbyter and later Bishop of Alexandria, Athanasius)
were Modalists
15
To Arius, because Jesus suffered, he could not be originally be divine both
for the reason of suffering, but also mutability
16
. Athanasius believed that only Jesus human
nature suffered. Arius believed that if God was divisible through consubstantiation, it would
give the Father a body and when all presumed the Father to not have human form
17
. However,

9
Ibid., 31
10
Ibid.
11
According to Rowan Williams, the sleeveless tunic is what many philosophers and gurus of the day wore and
would lead people to believe he had the knowledge to salvation.
12
Jim Papandrea, Reading the Early church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea (New York: Paulist Press, 2012)
Kindle edition location 3578
13
Ibid., location 3608
14
Christopher Hall, Learning Theology With the Church Fathers (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2002), 36
15
Modalism is the view that God took on different modes but was one person or entity such as the Oneness
Pentecostals or Jesus Only Pentecostals of today. The extreme opposite would be tri-theism.
16
Papandrea, Reading the Early church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea, location 3608
17
Hall, Learning Theology With the Church Fathers, 36
5

the Orthodox position was that if Father and Son were that succinct, then that would create dual
Gods.
However, Arius could not deny John 1:1 which says In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (KJV) so Arius conceded that Christ was pre-
existent, just not eternally pre-existent
18
. For this, Arius has his own scripture to seemingly
back him up. Colossians 1:15 states, He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all
creation. (NKJV)
19
To Arius, through Gods foreknowledge of all things, the Father foreknew
that the Logos was going to be needed and therefore just prior to creation, God created this
wisdom (Logos) to later fill the perfectly obedient (also foreknown from the Father) Jesus
20
.
Other areas of the controversy was over the divine order of Christ in relationship to the
Father, Holy Spirit, and Jesus himself. To Arius, Jesus (being the shell of the Logos) was placed
into divinity due to perfect obedience and should not be called the Son of God until after his
baptism
21
. Athanasius used an illustration of the sun and the light that comes from the sun to
illustrate to Arius Logos in relationship to the Father. As the sun is inseparable from its produced
rays, the Father is to the Son
22
.
The one area of agreement (and probably the only area) was that while on earth, Jesus
was subordinate to the will of the Father. But even the interpretation was different. Arius and his
followers taught a Christology of ascent meaning that a perfect man named Jesus became
divine through pleasing God with perfect obedience
23
. Arius had scriptures to seemingly back
him up. All throughout the Gospel accounts, Jesus spoke of the Fathers will and not his. After

18
Papandrea, Reading the Early church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea, location 3608
19
Also in Ephesians 5:5, Paul seems to make a differentiation of the Kingdom of Christ and God.
20
Papandrea, Reading the Early church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea, location 3608
21
Ibid.
22
Hall, Learning Theology With the Church Fathers, 39
23
Papandrea, Reading the Early church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea, location 3639
6

Jesus left earth, Paul wrote in the first letter to the Corinthians that the head of Christ was god
(1 Cor 11:3). Bishop Alexander and later Bishop Athanasius taught a Christology of descent.
That is, God emptied himself and became man as is taught in Philippians 2:7 and upon his
resurrection was exalted to the right hand of Christ (v.9).
So to sum up the controversy, Arius believed the Word/ Logos that was begotten in
John 3:16 equaled created and not pre-existent and that Jesus was adopted to divinity and the
Orthodox belief was that begotten equaled generated, but not created- yet always was and that
while we are adopted, the Son always was by substance and essence. The Orthodox viewed the
hierarchy of Christ as equal to the Father but through willful submission he gave authority to
become man while on earth. Arius feels that Athanasius et al is speaking nonsense and the
Orthodox feel Arius relating too much of the human to the Spiritual which is limiting God by
applying human categories (limits of time and speech) to God
24
. Arius was simply following
(correctly or incorrectly) what was set in motion by the earliest church fathers (known as being
ignorant atheists for believing in one God by the Romans.) The earliest church fathers would try
and use Platonic philosophy in conjunction with the scriptures to explain our God and so when
the Bible speaks of God (in the OT) walking or speaking it was to be taken allegorical as the
God of the early philosophers was the Supreme Being that we know of as God and was taught to
the intellectual philosophers as being immutable
25
. This is how the doctrine of the Logos
came about Justin, Clement, Origen etc.
26


24
Hall, Learning Theology With the Church Fathers, 40
25
Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity: Volume 1, 182-183
26
Ibid.
7

Because Arius refused to go along with his bishops teachings, Bishop Alexander
convened a synod
27
in Alexandria
28
and had Arius exiled for refusing to sign on to the creed
agreed upon concerning Arianism. Arius wrote to other bishops that were more sympathetic to
his reasoning of the Logos and won the favor of Eusebius- bishop of Nicomedia
29
among others.
Bishop Alexander wrote all of the local bishops through an encyclical and asked that when one
bishop makes a decision, that it be binding on all areas under different bishops control. This was
for the sake of church discipline. Otherwise, what Arius was doing could be done by anyone by
simply appealing to a different bishop
30
. After this, it seems that Athanasius would take over the
fight against Arianism.
As mentioned in the previous paragraph, Eusebius of Nicomedia and other fellow
students when he was in Antioch
31
also known as fellow Lucianists who was their teacher sided
with Arius and started writing letters. This started leading to unrest including pro-Arian
demonstrations in Alexandria in an empire that was just recently united when Constantine
defeated the ruler in the east- Licinias. In response, Constantine sent his Bishop Hosius of
Cordoba to try and mediate
32
. After failing to win common ground agreement, Constantine
convened the first ever great assembly or council in Nicaea in 325.
Since Arius was not a bishop, he was not allowed to sit on the council. He did have his
followers to include both Eusebius of Nicomedia and to a lesser extent Eusebius of Caesarea
33
.

27
The difference between a synod and council (as will later be discussed with the first real council at Nicaea is the
size (number of bishops) and how widespread the representation of geographical area and sects the culmination of
the bishops represented.
28
Ferguson, Church History: Volume One, 193
29
Ibid.
30
David Gwynn, Athanasius of Alexandria: Bishop, Theologian, Ascetic, Father (New York: Oxford University
Press, 2012)
31
Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity: Volume 1, 185
32
Ibid., 186
33
Ferguson, Church History: Volume One, 194
8

There were, according to Everett Ferguson
34
five schools of thought. 1.) Those totally
convinced by Arius such as Eusebius of Nicomedia. 2.) The more moderate especially on the
issue of subordination as was the case of the other Eusebius (of Caesarea) which formulated
from the earlier Origen. 3.) The more theologically uneducated bishops who were more
concerned with unity. 4.) Those who found Arius teaching offensive such as Alexander and
Hosius and 5.) the Monarchians who had a more Modalist view and they included Eustathius of
Antioch and Marcellus of Ancyra
35
. The debate also keyed in on four main words
36
.
Homoousians- Son is of the same substance as the Father
Homoiousians- Son is of similar substance to the Father
Homoeans- the Son is of likeness to the Father
Anomoeans- the Son is unlike the Father

The first of the four is the word adopted by the Council of Nicaea and was supported by
Athanasius (east), Hilary of Poitiers (west), and with some reservation the bishop of Rome which
made it official catholic dogma
37
.
The resulting final creed that was agreed upon by vote was that formulated after the creed
of Caesarea
38

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and
invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father
[the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of
Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the
Father; By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth];
Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was
made man; He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven;

34
Ibid.
35
It is important to note that the future revered Athanasius and main opponent besides Alexander of Arianism was a
deacon at the time and thus could only advise his teacher and bishop- Alexander.
36
Ferguson, Church History: Volume One, 201
37
Ibid.
38
Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity: Volume 1, 189
9

From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
And in the Holy Ghost.
3940


This did not put to rest the controversy and in fact, later, Constantine himself died a
probable Arian and received his deathbed baptism by none other than Eusebius of Nicomedia!
41

Over the following years, as is evident by the later baptism mentioned above, Constantine felt he
was too harsh on the deposed bishop followers of Arianism and recalled them. Athanasius
succeeded Alexander in 328 and spent 16 of his 40 years in five separate exiles
42
ordered by 1.)
the Council of Tyre, 2.) by the succeeding emperor Constantius- son of the late Constantine, 3.)
again by Constantius in 356, 4.) by Julian the Apostate and pagan cousin successor to the throne
of Constantius and finally 5.) in 365by Valens
43
.
After many twists and turns, the controversy ended when the emperor Theodosius
convened a council in 381 for which the believers of the word homoousios won out and a new
more fuller creed called the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed forever became the official
Orthodox creed in use today
44
. This council also anathematized other heresies such as the
Sabellians and the Pneumatomachians
45
.
The final Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed reads as follows:
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible
and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the
Father before all ages, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, Begotten, not made; of one essence
with the Father, by whom all things were made:
Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy
Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man;

39
The following was added as an anathema [But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was
not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son
of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable'they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.]
40
This creed would once again be added to in another council at Constantinople in 381
41
Ibid., 190
42
Ferguson, Church History: Volume One, 204
43
Ibid.
44
Ibid., 208-209
45
Ibid., 209
10

And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried;
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures;
And ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father;
And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have
no end.
And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father,
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the
Prophets;
And we believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins. We look for the Resurrection of the dead,
And the Life of the age to come. Amen
46
.
So now the question becomes, which is the correct doctrine? As an orthodox leaning
Christian, and after reading the evidence of both views, I can definitely see how Arius was
confused and came to such a position. The scriptures used in his defense read at face value seem
to be on his side and are varied and numerous. Proverbs 8:22 speaks of Wisdom being Gods
first creation. Another is Hebrews 5:8 where is states he was a (lower case) son who learned
(mutable) from his obedience and then became the salvation. This is on top of many other
scriptures
47
. In fact, some would argue that there are as many or more (face value) scriptures for
Arianism than not.
The scriptural support against Arianism is vast as well. Some of these include Genesis
1:26 where it refers to the Creator as saying our
48
image and John 1:1-4, and Hebrews 13:8
where it speaks of Christs immutability and more. However, at the risk of sounding Catholic,
this is why there are so many sects of Protestantism. There used to be a clear authority that was
final in its determination of on-the-face contradictions of scripture. This is where this student
feels the Catholic church (both eastern and western rites) have correctly used tradition in

46
Ibid., 195
47
John 8:42, 12:27, 14:28, 17:3, 1 Corinthians 11:3, 15:28, Colossians 1:15 to name a few
48
Although Arius conceded that the Logos was created as the firstborn.
11

addition to Sola Scriptura to define and mediate seemingly scriptural inconsistencies especially
in matters as tough as those faced at these councils.
To this day, we still have modern day Arian Catholics
49
that believe the councils got it
wrong or bent to political pressures out of unifying the empire rather than subjectively looking at
the scriptures. An even more heretical group which numbers in the millions is the Jehovah
Witnesses. Some would claim Mormonism as an Arian cult or at least Semi-Arian. The danger
is that as of 2011, two of the fastest three denominations are the Jehovah Witnesses and the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints with combined memberships of 7.22 million
adherents
50
. As Christians who hold the key doctrinal truths, we must come together once again
as councils and speak with one voice where heresies are concerned.



49
See www.arian-catholic.org
50
National Council of Churches, 2011 Yearbook of Canadian and American Churches (New York: 2011)
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/110210yearbook2011.html (accessed March 1, 2013)
12

Bibliography


Ferguson, Everett. Church History: Volume One : From Christ to Pre-Reformation : The Rise
and Growth of the Church in its Cultural, Intellectual, and Political Context.. Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005.

Fitzgerald, Allan. Augustine Through the Ages. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999.

Gonzalez, Justo. The Story of Christianity: Volume 1. 2nd ed. New York: Harper One, 2010.

Gwynn, David M.. Athanasius of Alexandria: Bishop, Theologian, Ascetic, Father. New york:
Oxford University Press, 2012.

Hall, Christopher . Learning Theology with the Church Fathers. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2002.

Hergenhahn, B. R.. An Introduction to the History of Psychology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth,
2009.

Hinson, E. Glenn. The Early Church: Origins to the Dawn of the Middle Ages. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1996.

"National Council of Churches USA." Inside the National Council of Churches.
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/110210yearbook2011.html (accessed March 1, 2013).

Papandrea, James . Reading the Early Church Fathers: from the Didache to Nicaea. New York:
Paulist Press, 2012.

Williams, Rowan. Arius: Heresy and Tradition. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002.