>Response: No, I am saying that the belief in the trinity did
>not start here as some imply, there were church Fathers
>before this council who believed in the deity of Christ.

as there were ones who did not. but the outcome was decided and authorised by the roman and pagan emperors.

>Which Eusebius? There were two of them.

of nicodemia


>>and I wonder about whether Constantine 'could care less.'
>>Constantine considered himslef as a god-incarnate, and was a
>>worshipper of the 'unconquered' Sun. and it was CONSTANTINE
>>who initially sided with Athanasius. he later changed his
>>mind, and recalled Arius from exile. But he was later
>>reversed by the next emperor Constantius who again recalled
>>athanius.
>
>Response: What I meant is that Constantine did not care
>which side won, as long as he got unity.

didnt care? the emperor covened and oversaw the councils. he threw his support and authorty behind athanasius, then Arius, and then again Athanasius. and GAVE them legitimacy. of coruse a pagan mind and beleiver is going to be more recptive to ideas that fit their worldview. even asides from that, no one doubts that legitmay was authorised by the approval of the emperor. Christians like to say well Constantine became Christian and thus did what was in the best interest of Christianity, but he didnt become Chrisian until he was on his deathbed.

until before then Constantine was a follower of the the 'unconquered sun' (invitus Sol) the romanised version of mithra. Mithra oddly enough had his birthday on december 25th (no infulence huh?), and was the "Son" of the Sun-god and the 'saviour' of the world.

A Mithraic verse: "Be of good cheer, sacred band of Initiates, your God has risen from the dead. His pains and sufferings shall be your salvation." sounds familiar?

both the Vatican hill and tarsus (where paul was from) were central sites for mithraic rituals.