Sorry, we got sent this several times over the past few days to post but wanted to validate it first. Fortunately, the internet doesn’t forget anything. Here is the original finding:
And some of the accompanying analysis:
And here is an Internet Archive Wayback Machine showing the original text:
Additional feedback that was emailed in:
The following are sources which I believe support what is mentioned above in the yellow text concerning the Arian heresy:
The Council of Nicaea, which condemned Arius as a heretic and issued a creed to safeguard “orthodox” Christian belief, was convened to settle the controversy. The creed adopted at Nicaea states that the Son is homoousion tō Patri (“of one substance with the Father”), thus declaring him to be all that the Father is: he is completely divine. In fact, however, this was only the beginning of a long-protracted dispute.
While the plain Arian creed was defended by few, those political prelates who sided with Eusebius carried on a double warfare against the term “consubstantial”, and its champion, Athanasius. This greatest of the Eastern Fathers had succeeded Alexander in the Egyptian patriarchate (326).