Both Athanasius noted that Arius taught two Wisdoms. Athanasius wrote that in Arius’ theology,

“There are … two Wisdoms, one God's own who has existed eternally with God, the other the Son who was brought into existence. … There is another Word in God besides the Son” (RH, 13).

Alexander similarly wrote that Arius stated,

“Nor is he the Father's true Logos nor the Logos by nature, nor his true Wisdom” (RH, 16).

“He came into existence himself through the proper Logos of God and the Wisdom which was in God, in which God also made everything and him (the Son) with it” (RH, 16).

In Lorentz's summary of Arius’ theology, he said:

“There are two Logoi and two Wisdoms (Sophiae), and several powers of God. … Arius distinguished between an original Reason (Logos) or Wisdom immanent from eternity in the Godhead and the Son who was not immanent in the Godhead but created, and who could only be given these titles loosely or inexactly.” (20)

Why is it significant that Arius taught “two Logoi and two Wisdoms”? Was this a deviation of some kind?

(All references are to RPC Hanson's book, The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God - The Arian Controversy 318-381

  • 1
    I think some definition is necessary. One might say that Arius taught such because he had not properly read the Greek scriptures. This is massively apparent from your second quotation. Can you give some guidance as to what you mean by 'Why' ? Is this a philosophical why ? A medical enquiry ? A practical examination ? If Arius did not fully explain himself (and he wrote precious little that remains to us) it is going to be difficult (without opinionated supposition) to arrive at an academic conclusion.
    – Nigel J
    Jan 18 at 13:58
  • 2
    Since one Divine nature is shared, in union, in Spirit, I see it as wholly reasonable to perceive that there is one divine wisdom and one divine word. Nothing the Father knows or is aware of is contradictory to anything that the Son knows or is aware of. And the same is true of communicated word.
    – Nigel J
    Jan 19 at 12:19
  • 1
    No it is not. Father and Son are distinct individuals, yet one in nature. (And therefore of one mind and one wisdom and one word.) I think you need to refer to the documents of the Council of Nicaea.
    – Nigel J
    Jan 19 at 12:49
  • 1
    @NigelJ Sounds like you say it is not modalism because you say it is not. Nicaea says nothing of one nature, one mind, one wisdom, or one word.
    – Andries
    Jan 19 at 13:20
  • 1
    Well it is said 'we have the mind of Christ'. So if Christ and 'we' have one mind, I cannot see why the Father and the Son do not have one mind. And Christ is called, 'the wisdom of God'. So one wisdom shared by Christ and God. In one Holy Spirit there is unity. And such a unity it is ! (That is, if one be full of that Holy Spirit.)
    – Nigel J
    Jan 19 at 13:31


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .