Several readers, when considering the Trinity, Mormonism, and orthodoxy, are wondering about the authority of Nicaea.

Master Doyle:

The two arguments I’ve heard most often to explain why Mormons
aren’t Christian are 1) they believe in extra-Biblical scriptures,
namely the Book of Mormon, and 2) they don’t believe in the Nicean
creed. Isn’t this ironic, believers in one extra-Biblical document shun
those who believe in a different extra-Biblical document.

HiveRadical:

I never understood how the Creedal view on the trinity could be
ultimately defended. For example what happened to the homoousian
trinity when, as Christ says (and regardless the fact that he’s
verbatim quoting OT scripture doesn’t mean he means the words any less,
or that the words are not applicable to his condition) “My God My God
why hast thou forsaken me?”

Had the Father forsaken the Son? How can something of the same
substance forsake itself? Why did Christ say “Touch me not, for I have
not ascended to my Father”?

There was a clear and complete separation if we take Christ at his
words. And if we’re not taking him at His words then I think there are
bigger issues than mere ontology that we have to address. If you think
there was some mystery meaning in why Christ said those things then
you’ve got some clever explaining to do.

Anywho. That’s one of the biggest befuddlements I have about trying
to figure out why everyone is ready to trust an extra-biblical council
on the final word on the nature of God when it’s in such stark contrast
to actual events and statements in the Bible given by Christ himself.

Be careful, kids — this is what got me rejected by Wheaton!