Arianism

Arianism is a system of Christian belief that rejects the traditional doctrine of the Trinity and asserts that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is a created being who is therefore distinct from and subordinate to God the Father. Taking its name from Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria in Roman Egypt, the movement became one of the most significant theological controversies of the fourth century. While considered heretical by most mainstream Christian traditions today, related non-Trinitarian ideas remain present in some modern denominations, though many prefer to avoid the term Arian because of its long-standing negative associations.
Arian teachings arose from earlier strands of Christian thought that held differing views on the nature of Christ. The doctrine maintains that the Son was begotten by the Father before time, and thus did not share the Father’s eternity. Although the Son is viewed as divine, he is not considered equal in essence to the Father. In its most radical form, called anomoeanism, Arian theology described a complete dissimilarity between Father and Son.

Historical Background and Context

The dispute surrounding Arianism emerged in the late third century and dominated church debate throughout the fourth century. The controversy extended beyond clerical circles, permeating congregations, monastic communities and the imperial court. Several emperors, including Constantius II and Valens, adopted Arian or semi-Arian positions, while various Germanic groups such as the Goths and Vandals embraced Arian Christianity during and after the decline of the Western Roman Empire.
Arius himself had been a student at the school of Antioch, absorbing ideas associated with thinkers such as Paul of Samosata. His teaching centred on the belief that God the Father alone was self-existent and unbegotten, while the Son came into being by the Father’s will. This view stood in direct opposition to the developing Homoousian doctrine articulated by Athanasius of Alexandria, which insisted that the Father and the Son were equal in substance.
The conflict became so prominent that the emperor Constantine convened the First Council of Nicaea in 325. The council affirmed that the Son was ‘of one essence’ with the Father and denounced Arianism as heresy. Nevertheless, Arian and semi-Arian positions persisted for decades, supported by political shifts and differing regional traditions.

Early Theological Influences

Certain earlier Christian writers expressed ideas that later became associated with Arianism. Theologians such as Justin Martyr and Tertullian spoke of the Son as being generated in time, leading some scholars to describe them as pre-Arian in tendency. Origen was also accused of Arian leanings due to phrases like ‘second God’ and his subordinationist interpretations. However, Origen’s theology differed significantly from Arius’s, and later orthodoxy integrated aspects of his thought into the Nicene tradition.
The broader intellectual environment of the Eastern Roman Empire at the time included strong currents of Neoplatonism, which emphasised hierarchical orders of being. This philosophical background influenced the formation of Arian arguments about divine dependence and the uniqueness of the Father.

Doctrinal Beliefs

Central to Arian belief is the conviction that only the Father is unbegotten and absolutely self-existent. The Son, though divine, derives his existence from the Father and therefore cannot share the Father’s eternal nature. According to Arian logic, if the Father begat the Son, then there must have been a stage, however remote, when the Son did not yet exist.
Arian theology linked the figure of Christ with the Logos, an expression of divine wisdom active in creation. The Son was described as the foremost of all creatures, a perfect workmanship of God, possessing divine qualities only through the Father’s will. Scriptural passages, particularly from the Book of Proverbs, were interpreted as evidence that the Son was created at the beginning of God’s work.
Arians also rejected the traditional doctrine of the Trinity, arguing that three distinct divine figures could not share one identical essence. Instead, they emphasised a hierarchy within the Godhead, with the Father as supreme, the Son as subordinate, and the Holy Spirit as the illuminating power of God rather than a co-equal divine person.

Variations and Related Movements

Arianism existed alongside other non-Trinitarian systems in late antiquity. These included:

• Homoiousianism, which held that the Son was of similar but not identical substance to the Father.
• Anomoeanism, advocating a complete dissimilarity of essence between Father and Son.
• Semi-Arianism, maintaining that the Son was neither entirely uncreated nor created like other beings.

These groups often differed in emphasis and terminology but shared the rejection of Nicene Homoousian teaching.
In the fourth century, Arian ideas spread widely among the Germanic peoples through the missionary work of Ulfilas, who taught a creed asserting the sole divinity of the unbegotten Father, the subordinate nature of the Son, and the role of the Holy Spirit as a divine power rather than a personal being. This form of Arian Christianity persisted among several Germanic kingdoms well into the early Middle Ages.

Scriptural and Philosophical Reasoning

Arians framed their arguments around both scripture and philosophical reasoning. A recurring question concerned whether the Son’s existence was voluntary or necessary for the Father. If voluntary, the Son must be subordinate; if necessary, the Father would be diminished in his uniqueness. The Arian position emphasised divine freedom, asserting that the Father chose to create the Son.
Their interpretation of Christ as the Logos rested on the assumption that Christ represented a manifestation of divine wisdom rather than the fullness of God’s being. This view supported the doctrine that Christ served as the intermediary in creation, functioning according to the Father’s will rather than from inherent divine authority.

Modern Echoes and Legacy

Though rejected by mainstream Christianity as heretical, versions of Arian or near-Arian doctrines can be found within several modern non-Trinitarian groups. Some communities within the Churches of Christ historically expressed Arian-like views, as did early leaders such as Barton W. Stone. Certain Messianic and Hebrew Roots groups hold similar positions, though many within these movements adhere to Nicene doctrines. Others, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and modern Socinian-influenced traditions, maintain related non-Trinitarian beliefs while distancing themselves from the term Arian.
The theological debate surrounding Arianism had a lasting influence on Christian doctrine. The intense disputes of the fourth century pressed theologians to articulate more clearly the nature of Christ and the Trinity. The Nicene and Constantinopolitan creeds emerged as foundational expressions of Trinitarian orthodoxy, partly in response to Arian arguments. Even so, the subtle distinctions between early positions—such as those held by Arius, Alexander and Athanasius—demonstrate that early Christian theology evolved through complex and often contentious processes.