Why was Arius so popular?

Petros2015 · Oct 6, 2020

The was a (now lost) Thalia of Arius, kind of like a WatchTower tract too. Athanasius mentions it and quotes from it in some of his writings where he is pointing out the difference.

So maybe they got more Tracts of Thalia than they did Gospels of John
The Thalia was constructed in verses for easier memorization of the points as well

Fourth Century Christianity » Arius – Thalia

Gregory Thompson · Oct 6, 2020

mindlight said:
While accepting that Arius was wrong about Jesus I wonder why he was so popular. It took a lot for Athanasius and others to overthrow his doctrine. Despite the clear declaration of Nicea in 325 it took centuries to extricate him from the mainstream. Even today we have fast growing cults like Jehovah Witnesses who share a version of his teaching. You could even argue that Islam was a form of Arianism. So why was it so hard for people to understand Jesus is fully God, has no beginning and is consubstantial with the Father?

If you do not experience trinity (i.e. are not born again by the Holy Spirit) the notion of trinity also meaning one God is an absurd notion. Even for those who are born again, it takes a while to take notice of this nuance to our shared existence in Him.

Halbhh · Oct 6, 2020

mindlight said:
While accepting that Arius was wrong about Jesus I wonder why he was so popular. It took a lot for Athanasius and others to overthrow his doctrine. Despite the clear declaration of Nicea in 325 it took centuries to extricate him from the mainstream. Even today we have fast growing cults like Jehovah Witnesses who share a version of his teaching. You could even argue that Islam was a form of Arianism. So why was it so hard for people to understand Jesus is fully God, has no beginning and is consubstantial with the Father?

Here's the most fundamental mistake Arius made -- the error that caused the other errors -- to think he could specify and define all about God. A mistake we could make today, if we forget this reality:

Isaiah 55:9 "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so My ways are higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.

So, while we can find various mistakes Arius made, such as thinking Time is the master over God, instead of God the master over Time, or even the (yet another mistake) basic error of not taking well known key scripture seriously -- that spirit exists before mortal incarnation into a body:
Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

But that primary, key essential beginning mistake Arius made -- to think He could encompass God in his thoughts and understanding, and specify God -- that's a mistake anyone of us could make today, if we don't take God seriously when He says His thoughts/ways are above our understanding.

So, one could make that mistake even arguing against Arius: to think he didn't understand God but we do.

No, we only know what God has revealed to us, and not more. Put another way, God isn't less than us, that we could know all about Him, but higher than us instead.

Pathfinder627 · Oct 6, 2020

mindlight said:
While accepting that Arius was wrong about Jesus I wonder why he was so popular. It took a lot for Athanasius and others to overthrow his doctrine. Despite the clear declaration of Nicea in 325 it took centuries to extricate him from the mainstream. Even today we have fast growing cults like Jehovah Witnesses who share a version of his teaching. You could even argue that Islam was a form of Arianism. So why was it so hard for people to understand Jesus is fully God, has no beginning and is consubstantial with the Father?

Others have made good points about the appeal of simpler theology, but I think the main culprit is Constantine himself. And his successors. Arianism wouldn't have thrived as long as it did without their support. Yes, Constantine himself warmed up to Arius personally. It's a miracle that Nicaea managed what it did without his interference. But some of his successors were even more in this camp and intentionally planted Arian bishops.

Petros2015 · Oct 6, 2020

Halbhh said:
So, while we can find various mistakes Arius made, such as thinking Time is the master over God, instead of God the master over Time

Bingo!

zoidar · Oct 6, 2020

mindlight said:
While accepting that Arius was wrong about Jesus I wonder why he was so popular. It took a lot for Athanasius and others to overthrow his doctrine. Despite the clear declaration of Nicea in 325 it took centuries to extricate him from the mainstream. Even today we have fast growing cults like Jehovah Witnesses who share a version of his teaching. You could even argue that Islam was a form of Arianism. So why was it so hard for people to understand Jesus is fully God, has no beginning and is consubstantial with the Father?

Jesus never plainly states he is God. I believe that is the reason.

Pathfinder627 · Oct 6, 2020

zoidar said:
Jesus never plainly states he is God. I believe that is the reason.

"I and the Father are one."

"Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Not to mention scripture in general saying such. "For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

"and the Word was with God and the Word was God."

Even the Pharisees understood the implications - not to mention his claim to even forgive sins. And they killed him for it. "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

Bond-servant of Christ · Oct 6, 2020

Inkfingers said:
Begotten implies a time of begetting which implies non-eternal

if you mean by "μονογενής", then you are wrong. This is a compound word, which is from "μόνος and γένος", where the meaning literally is, "one of a kind, unique". There is no "begetting" involved this is Greek adjective. If "begetting" was meant, then the correct Greek word would have been used, with is, "μονογέννητος", but it is not.

Bond-servant of Christ · Oct 6, 2020

Inkfingers said:
First-born implies a birthing which implies non-eternal

also wrong, the term, "πρωτότοκος", is used for "priority, pre-eminence", and again nothing to do with any "begetting", or "creating", as the Jehovah's Witnesses and others wrongly teach. In Psalm 89:27, David is called, "Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth.", where David is "elyôwn", that is "exaulted" higher that all the other kings. Likewise in Jeremiah 31:9, it says, "They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble: for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.", which is for "preeminence". This very thing can be seen of Jesus Christ in Colossians 1:18, "And he is the Head of the body, the church: who is the Beginning (ἀρχή, first place or power, sovereignty; so Liddell & Scott Greek Lexicon) the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence (πρωτεύω, the "Highest place")"

mindlight · Oct 6, 2020

zoidar said:
Jesus never plainly states he is God. I believe that is the reason.

The ones who wanted to know Him heard Him say I am the Way the Truth and the life.....

Bond-servant of Christ · Oct 6, 2020

zoidar said:
Jesus never plainly states he is God. I believe that is the reason.

Jesus most certainly directly claimed for Himself to be Yahweh, which is Almighty God. See my earlier post on this, Jesus Christ Asserts Himself As YAHWEH

hedrick · Oct 6, 2020

I think there are two answers to the OP's question.

1. During this time period, theological disputes were tightly involved with church politics. Arius was part of a different community than Athanasius, and was apparently well regarded. Members of his community would support him.

2. It took several more centuries to define a way that Christ could be fully God and fully man. Arius was not rejecting the doctrine we know, but an early version of it. Arius' theology made sense of most of the important Biblical texts on Christology. The alternative may not have been obviously better during that time period.

I think Arius misread the intention of the key NT texts. The Logos was used by Jews as a way to talk about God's presence with his people. John surely didn't intend it to be a separate not-quite-divine entity. That comes from reading John too literally, and in a context very different from the one in which John wrote. But Arius is not the only one to fall into the trap.

Bond-servant of Christ · Oct 6, 2020

hedrick said:
I think there are two answers to the OP's question.

1. During this time period, theological disputes were tightly involved with church politics. Arius was part of a different community than Athanasius, and was apparently well regarded. Members of his community would support him.

2. It took several more centuries to define a way that Christ could be fully God and fully man. Arius was not rejecting the doctrine we know, but an early version of it. Arius' theology made sense of most of the important Biblical texts on Christology. The alternative may not have been obviously better during that time period.

I think Arius misread the intention of the key NT texts. The Logos was used by Jews as a way to talk about God's presence with his people. John surely didn't intend it to be a separate not-quite-divine entity. That comes from reading John too literally, and in a context very different from the one in which John wrote. But Arius is not the only one to fall into the trap.

Arius was an ARCH-HERETIC, who blasphemed by saying, there was a time when Jesus did not exist, and that He was the first-created by the Father! 100% against what the Bible very clearly teaches, that Jesus Christ IS Yahweh=Almighty God.

buzuxi02 · Oct 6, 2020

mindlight said:
. It took a lot for Athanasius and others to overthrow his doctrine. Despite the clear declaration of Nicea in 325 it took centuries to extricate him from the mainstream.

The original teachings of Arius actually died out pretty quickly after Nicea. He and his followers even agreed to a compromise teaching prior to his death. A new minority group replaced them called the Anomoeans. They were condemned again at semi-Arian councils as simply being heretical party.
The groups that remained are collectively refered to as semi-arians. Most preferred to use an alternative word than homoousios. There were like 2-3 parties all looking to ammend the statement in the Creed that used the homoousios. One of these groups even held a council in Antioch in 341 which upheld the Nicene calculation for the paschalion, and it's canons have been recieved into the church and are recognized as Orthodox.
The reason (semi) arianism died out (besides the fact they could not forge an alliance and agree on an alternate term with majority group more accurately called semi-nicean than arian) was due to the influence of the Cappadocian Father's. They refined and clarified how the terminology of hypostasis, and ousia should be regarded and touched upon the idea of physis.

ViaCrucis · Oct 6, 2020

dzheremi said:
This aspect of Christian history is not one of my strong points, but weren't the Goths first evangelized by Arian bishops, such as the infamous Wulfila(s) who translated the Bible into the Gothic language?

I think this is probably the case, the Goths' exposure to Christianity was Arian Christianity via Arian missionaries like Wulfila. Also, it was likely an example of top-down conversion, where the king/chief/head honcho converts and the lower ranks follow suit, and in turn the populace. If the leaders of the Visigoths converted to Arianism through missionary efforts of those like Wulfila, then the general conversion of the populace would follow suit.

-CryptoLutheran

InnerPhyre · Oct 6, 2020

The doctrine of the trinity is irrational, illogical, and beyond comprehension. Human beings can only understand a concept based on their experiences and comparisons with other concepts. The Trinity is unlike any created thing and therefore we cannot say “the trinity can be explained like this” and compare it to anything else in a way that satisfies human reason. It’s much more enticing to simplify it and come up with an easy to digest explanation than to accept that something is totally beyond human understanding. I suspect that is the reason Arius was so popular.

prodromos · Oct 6, 2020

Another reason Arius was popular was he was apparently a pretty decent song writer. Many of the Church hymns that came out of that period were written in response to the songs written by Arius.

klutedavid · Oct 6, 2020

mindlight said:
While accepting that Arius was wrong about Jesus I wonder why he was so popular. It took a lot for Athanasius and others to overthrow his doctrine. Despite the clear declaration of Nicea in 325 it took centuries to extricate him from the mainstream. Even today we have fast growing cults like Jehovah Witnesses who share a version of his teaching. You could even argue that Islam was a form of Arianism. So why was it so hard for people to understand Jesus is fully God, has no beginning and is consubstantial with the Father?

I think it was because Jesus humbled Himself, so well, that He fooled everyone. The apostle John proclaimed the deity of the Christ in no uncertain terms.

John 5:18
For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.

John 14:7
If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.

Then John gives us a visible description of Jesus.

Revelation 1:14
His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and His eyes were like a flame of fire. His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been made to glow in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters.

Which is identical to the description of YHWH in Ezekiel 10.

Daniel 10:6
His body also was like beryl, his face had the appearance of lightning, his eyes were like flaming torches, his arms and feet like the gleam of polished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a tumult.

fhansen · Oct 6, 2020

mindlight said:
While accepting that Arius was wrong about Jesus I wonder why he was so popular. It took a lot for Athanasius and others to overthrow his doctrine. Despite the clear declaration of Nicea in 325 it took centuries to extricate him from the mainstream. Even today we have fast growing cults like Jehovah Witnesses who share a version of his teaching. You could even argue that Islam was a form of Arianism. So why was it so hard for people to understand Jesus is fully God, has no beginning and is consubstantial with the Father?

1) Scripture isn’t perfectly and explicitly clear on this matter.
2) It’s simply not easy to believe a man can be God. Not by a long shot.

zoidar · Oct 6, 2020

Pathfinder627 said:
"I and the Father are one."

"Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Not to mention scripture in general saying such. "For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

"and the Word was with God and the Word was God."

Even the Pharisees understood the implications - not to mention his claim to even forgive sins. And they killed him for it. "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

mindlight said:
The ones who wanted to know Him heard Him say I am the Way the Truth and the life.....

Bond-servant of Christ said:
Jesus most certainly directly claimed for Himself to be Yahweh, which is Almighty God. See my earlier post on this, Jesus Christ Asserts Himself As YAHWEH

It's not that I don't agree with what Jesus said. Of course he is God! just saying you can see what Jesus said in a different way, especially since Jesus often used symbolism. I think that's one reason why Arius got popular.

Why was Arius so popular?

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Everything You say is Life to me

Active Member

Well-Known Member

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

See in the dark

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Oldbie

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency