Replies

RobbyS: "One has to look at the Synod, or Council of Nicaea as a court.
They took up Arius’ case and ruled against him.
Their judicial opinion took the form of the Credal statement.
You do not recognize their authority, of course, and want the Bible to decide the matter.
But of course that makes you the Court."

They were Emperor Constantine's Court, and I would recognize their authority to the same degree that I recognize Constantine as my emperor: not so much.

Nor am I the "Court" here, since my opinion is that both sides make reasonable arguments, all of which are only remotely related to what the Bible actually says, and are therefore irrelevant to the Bible's message.
So I make no judgment because no judgment is required in this case.

RobbyS: "The matter was not decided in favor of Nicaea until 380 and enforced by Theodosius, the first “Catholic” emperor."

All of which demonstrates that these issues were far more political than anything concerned with Jesus, his followers and New Testament authors.
So they should be of no concern to us.

RobbyS: "As to Unitarianism, my point is that it is an elitist religion.
Which is why the German kings who took over in the West were unable to impose it on the people.
Likewise the liberal protestantism of Washington, Adams etc.
Protestant evangelical became the relgious of the people by 1860."

So let's see if I understand you correctly: the homoousian creed of Roman Emperor Constantine are not "elitist", but any Unitarian ideas of our Founding Fathers were "elitist"?

So why do you call yourself a conservative?
Do you confuse American conservatives with European statists who go by the label "conservative"?

These were Christian bishops and they functioned as earlier synods did except they had wider -- ecumenical authority because a legate of the Western Patriarch--the bishop of Rome-- attended. You keep saying that the whole thing was Constantine’s diktat. But their judgment went against his views. He kept trying to rehabilitate Arius ,This came close to happening and his successor Constantius was an Arian. As to both sides, Arius had his hearing and a majority of the court decided against him on a theological issue, one involving the interpretation of the Bible.

Constantine’s role was as a politician as a peacemaker trying to get two quarreling religious factions together. A thousand years later, Charles V tried through a serious of meetings to get the Lutherans and the Papists together in Speyer and other places. Unable to get them to agree, it all ended in a civil war. Constantine had just ended such a war and hoped by sponsoring the Christians that he could bring peace to the empire.