By 320 CE, regions like Egypt, Syria, and Asia Minor were engulfed in theological fervor, grappling with the exact nature of the relationship between Jesus Christ— often referred to as “the Son” or Logos—and God the Father. A charismatic presbyter from Alexandria named Arius proposed a radical idea, claiming that Jesus, though divine, was not on an equal footing with God the Father in terms of eternal divinity. He described Jesus as “strong God” and “full God,” but contended that this divinity was a reward rather than intrinsic to Jesus’s nature. This essentially posited Jesus as subordinate, challenging long-held beliefs about his nature and role within the divine hierarchy.

In stark contrast, Athanasius and his supporters staunchly defended the idea that Jesus was inherently divine—that he was, and always had been, God. They argued that only someone of God’s own nature could offer salvation to humanity. The schism grew so intense that Emperor Constantine intervened, convening a synod at Nicaea. Here, bishops with varied beliefs congregated. However, it was Athanasius’s viewpoint that triumphed, cementing the belief that Jesus was “of one substance (homoousion) with the Father” (172). However, this proclamation did not mark the end of the Arian controversy: For years, political and theological skirmishes continued, showcasing the complexities in early Christian

Don't Miss Out!

Access Study Guide Now