It’s from Justin’s first Apology.
Arianism was notable for its appeal to the Bible, as Maurice Wiles documents in Archetypal Heresy: Arianism Through the Centuries (1996) on pages 10 to 17, in detail. He goes on to comment:
In the past it [Arius’ description as ‘an acute reasoner’] has often been interpreted to imply that Arius was a skilled practitioner of Aristotelian logic. But the evidence does little to support such a view. It is in part perhaps the product of a general theory (going back to Hippolytus) that behind every heresy there lies the distorting influence of a specific philosophical school. Page 24
On each side of the controversy there were those with whom virtuosity of reasoning skill may see to have got out of hand. Page 25
There are no good grounds for distinguishing ‘Arianism’ as exclusively characterised by ‘presumptuous reasoning’. Page 26
Affirmation of the radically secondary status of the Son’s divinity, demonstrated not by philosophical argument but by the exegesis of scriptural texts, was the hallmark of Western Arianism throughout. Page 36
the primary distinguishing characteristic [of Arians according to the author of Opus Imperfectum] that marks out this community as the true church is faithfulness to Scripture. Page 39
Since it [Arianism among the Goths] was a faith that emphasised not merely the basic role of the Bible in the definition of Christian faith but its essential sufficiency for the task, it would not be surprising if it was to specifically biblical issues that any intellectual energies of among Gothic Christians should have been primarily directed. And this is what the scanty evidence suggests. Page 49
It is probably best described as non-Nicene rather than anti-Nicene, biblical and traditional in character. Thompson’s description of German Arianism as ‘characterised by a ponderous and earthbound reliance on the text of the Bible’ may be unnecessarily pejorative in tone, but not too far from the mark in substance. Page 50