Many, perhaps most, bishops of the time were not what came to be called orthodox. While they undoubtedly held many things in common, they also had a wide variety of beliefs. The idea of one church unified in belief from the time of the apostles, and beset by heretics, is simply untenable. Where there is no established orthodoxy, there can be no heresy.
At Niceae these orthodox things were defined.
But it is only in retrospect that these orthodox teachings are projected backwards as being those preserved and handed down from the apostles. Had Arianism or Donatism carried the day, they would now be "orthodoxy". That is the difference in our perspectives. You see it as the Spirit preserving Truth. I see the outcome as an accident of history, something that could have gone either way.
Yes, in theory.
That is the difference in our perspectives. You see it as the Spirit preserving Truth. I see the outcome as an accident of history, something that could have gone either way.
Yep. But like Einstein, I don't believe God plays dice with the universe.
(Besides, look at how quickly many of these heresies degnerate into nonsense. It is not for nothing that our Maryphobes end up messing up the ideas of Jesus' humanity, for example.)
SD