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