How do you discern which ideas from the early Church fathers to retain, and which ones to ignore? It sounds like from Constantine onwards you would say it's invalid. Constantine converted to Christianity in 312 AD, the Nicene creed was in 325 AD, and (just looked it up) it seems that the books of the bible that were canon were decided on in 397 AD. Would you keep all these, but remove icons? If the Church had become so rotten after Constantine's conversion and the Roman empire becoming Christian, why would one take the Nicene creed's ideas as being legitimate (Jesus being God the Son and his relationship to God the Father)? Would you say Arianism might be correct? Weren't Roman emperors viewed as being son of god? Or the books of the bible - how are you deciding which books are canon? There were disputes about which books are or aren't canon, and the 397 Council of Carthage played a crucial part. Seems that you're arbitrarily accepting some things, and disregarding other things from the early Christians.
How do you discern which ideas from the early Church fathers to retain, and which ones to ignore? It sounds like from Constantine onwards you would say it's invalid. Constantine converted to Christianity in 312 AD, the Nicene creed was in 325 AD, and (just looked it up) it seems that the books of the bible that were canon were decided on in 397 AD. Would you keep all these, but remove icons?
If the Church had become so rotten after Constantine's conversion and the Roman empire becoming Christian, why would one take the Nicene creed's ideas as being legitimate (Jesus being God the Son and his relationship to God the Father)? Would you say Arianism might be correct? Weren't Roman emperors viewed as being son of god? Or the books of the bible - how are you deciding which books are canon? There were disputes about which books are or aren't canon, and the 397 Council of Carthage played a crucial part.
Seems that you're arbitrarily accepting some things, and disregarding other things from the early Christians.