On another thread, our new friend Shidoran posted the following:
[quote=Shidoran]Quick starter note, I am neither Catholic, nor Prodestant.
The council of nicea seemed to me to be a bunch of church leaders trying to keep together the doctrines of a church falling into apostasy. I think Constantine basically got everyone together, told them to agree on the doctrines so everyone could get on with it. (ie so he could have a politically dominating church again, without confusions.)
It seems that most of the doctrines were majority voted, and doctrinal choices were politically motivated. In my mind this discredits most of the doctrines that came from this council, which unfortunately seems to encompass some of the basic catholic beliefs.
Moving along, as the Church of Constantine crumbled, the Catholic church broke away and remained.
Question for catholics: If the prodestants are “apostate” because they broke away from you, are you “apostate” because you broke away from an apostisizing original church and based your belief of a bunch of politically motivated doctrinal choices? I’m not trying to start a heated bible bashing discussion, it is merely a question of a curious truth-seeker.
…to which NotWorthy responded:
This is the part where you cut the generalities and say, “Some of those politically motivated choices were…”.
Then, maybe, we can answer your question.
Was it, “God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God”? “Homo-ousios”, so to speak?
Was it “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic”? Oh right, that was Chalcedon.
P.S. For a hint, you might want to look into Arianism. That is what was threatening to tear the Church apart, and would continue to endanger her for the next 100 or so years.
Since it was off topic, I decided to devote a new thread to Shidoran.