Here is a statement of the theorem. I am attempting to prove the part starting from "Conversely...".
The distinct equivalence classes of an equivalence relation on A provide us with a decomposition of A as a union of mutually disjoint subsets. Conversely, given a decomposition of A as a union of mutually disjoint, nonempty subsets, we can define an equivalence relation on A for which these subsets are the distinct equivalence classes.
I found a similar thread discussing the problem, but it did not exactly answer the question I had: Proof of theorem about equivalence classes
So far, I have proved that the binary relation, $\sim$ defined by $x \sim y$ if and only if $x, y \in A_{\alpha}$, is an equivalence relation where $A_{\alpha}$ is an element of my paritions. Whenever I tried to prove that the set of equivalence classes are the $A_{\alpha}$'s, I got a bit stuck.
My thoughts so far are to fix an element, $i$, in my indexing set and choose an $x \in A_i$. Then $x \sim x$, so $x \in [x]$. Conversely, if $x \in [x]$, then I must prove that $x \in A_i$. All I know so far is that $x \in A_j$ for some $j$ in my indexing set. I don't really know how to prove that $A_j = A_i$.
I am not sure if fixing a set $A_i$ before defining the equivalence relation leads to success. I would suggest defining it right away for $A$ as a whole.
Let $A = \bigcup_{i=1}^n A_i$ be a disjoint union with $A_i \neq \emptyset$ for all $i$. Define $f: A \rightarrow \{1, \dots n\}$ with $f(a) = i \Leftrightarrow a \in A_i$*. Now define the equivalence relation $\sim$ as:
$$ x \sim y \Leftrightarrow f(x) = f(y) $$
This is indeed an equivalence relation which can be easily shown.
Now show that $A/\sim = \{A_1, \dots A_n\}$
*) This might look suspicious at first because it does not guarantee well-definedness of $f$, but given the disjoint union $f$ indeed maps one element from $A$ to exactly one element from $\{1, \dots, n\}$.
Actually, the theorem is stronger since it also works with an infinite number of partitions. You could think about whether or how this proof can be fixed.