God and Satan both used Emperor Constantine

The Council declared that the Son was true God, co-eternal with the Father and begotten from His same substance, arguing that such a doctrine best codified the Scriptural presentation of the Son as well as traditional Christian belief about him handed down from the Apostles. This belief was expressed by the bishops in the Creed of Nicaea.

International Consultation on English Texts translation as printed in:
The Lutheran Book of Worship
The Book of Common Prayer (Episcopal)

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.

For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Absolutely wonderful, uplifting post.

Only two men at the council agreed that Christ was as St Alexandria said and yet they agreed to the Nicene Creed as you have listed it. Doesn't make sense, does it?

We can be so thankful that God used Constantine for good, but I do wish the church would look this gift horse in the mouth much better than it has.

Thank you, Blik I forgot to mention I got the first part of my post from wiki

Arianism (the idea that Jesus did not exist prior to His incarnation) was pretty thoroughly put down.

I wanted to clarify that because I was not sure which way you were presenting it

I was thinking about creeds earlier today, and how helpful it can
be for some to have certain beliefs codified and clarified like that.

Songs can help too

It still amazes me how easy it is to dissect gospel with mans own interpretation and make a hot mess of it all.
Honestly people around the world must be so confused of what is the truth in Christianity

Only the Higher Critics and Modernists had such a view of God. Bible-believing Christians do not have such nonsensical ideas. So when you use the term "church" you mean Christendom (and should use that term). The Church is the Body of Christ.

Getting back to Constantine, we may never know the truth. There is no question that during is reign the church of Rome brought in many pagan ideas into Christendom. But even the Early Church Fathers did not teach that there was an OT God vs an NT God.

"The Patristic attitude towards the Old Testament was reflected in the history of Christian worship. The Jewish roots of Christian Liturgy are obvious. But the whole system of Christian public worship was linked closely to the practice of the Synagogue as well."

https://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/aspects_church_history_florovsky.htm#_Toc101740040

I know God can use anyone or anything if He so desires; however, I think you have been reading currupted history information.

Constantine very deliberately set out to combine Judaism, Christianity, and Paganism for the sake of power and control. He was only thinking of himself and not God. What he "created" was an "unholy alliance" - an "unholy trinity" [even] - a "universal church" - for the purpose of absorbing all "factions" into it as a conglomeration of religion.

This "universal church" ultimately became the Holy Roman Empire and is still in existance today.

However, the "true church" that Christ started existed before and outside of that church - even until this day.

The Holy Roman Empire tried to "stamp it out of existance" (The Dark Ages), but couldn't do it. (God prevailed.)

What everyone needs to understand from history is that all of the HRE/RC "councils", "creeds", etc. - that were intended to "decide" what Christianity should be like - are entirely meaningless and completely useless - as "guiding directives" to Christians today (and always) - except for those who are a willing part of the Catholic Church - who willingly accept them as part of their religion.

Except for the historical significance to explain why certain things came about as they did, none of it is actually pertinent to "real Christianity" - because, Catholicism has never been a part of "real Christianity"; albeit, it is generally assumable that there are some saved people in its membership.

I "just cringe" when I see CC members talk about these things as if they were a valid part of church history (as in, the "true church").

The Bible is my guide.

I regard all of those things discussed above (in this post) as "tainted"...

The Bible is my guide.

I regard all of those things discussed above (in this post) as "tainted" because they came from the 'false-church'.

Often as I read many of these posts I keep thinking of Frank Sinatra singing "All or nothing at all". With God, that is true. But man always has things very mixed up with what is of God having some of our flesh in it.

The truth of Constantine is not a matter of all or nothing at all, the truth of this man is a mixture of God's ways and demon's ways. We should sort the two ways out, for God asks us to judge sin, not man. So I disagree with your statement "we shall never know the truth of Constantine". The truth of this man is a mixture of how God used him and how demons used him.

Paul lived before we had Constantine, the Nicene Council, Luther, St Augustine--or any of what influences our thinking today. I've been studying Paul's letter to the Corinthians that he wrote to a congregation who had no idea at all that the feasts were an odious duty and not a pleasurable joy, and what a difference it makes in the message Paul is giving the church.