For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off: That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought.
​(Isa 29:20-21)

From www.equip.org:

The Council of Nicea was mostly Eastern. According to tradition, 318 bishops were in attendance, though most historians believe this number is a bit high. The vast majority came from the East, with less than a dozen representing the rest of the Empire.

The council was divided into three groups. Arius was in attendance, at the command of the Emperor, along with a few supporters. Most notable of these were two Egyptian bishops, Theonas and Secundus, as well as Eusebius of Nicomedia. This group represented the viewpoint that Christ was of a different substance Greek: heteroousios) than the Father, that is, that He is a creature.

The "orthodox" group was led primarily by Hosius of Cordova and Alexander of Alexandria (accompanied by his brilliant young deacon, and later champion of the Nicene position, Athanasius6). They represented the view that Christ was of the same substance (Greek: homo-ousios7) as the Father, that is, that He has eternally shared in the one essence that is God and in full deity.

The middle group, led by Eusebius of Caesarea (and hence often called the "Eusebian" party), distrusted the term homoousios, primarily because it had been used in the previous century by the modalistic8 heretic Sabellius and others who wished to teach the error that the Father and the Son were one person. This middle group agreed with the orthodox party that Jesus was fully God, but they were concerned that the term homoousios could be misunderstood to support the false idea that the Father and Son are one person. The middle group therefore presented the idea that the Son was of a similar substance (Greek: homoiousios) as the Father. By this means they hoped to avoid both the error of Arius as well as the perceived danger of Sabellianism found in the term homoousios.

Arian/Arius - of a different substance — heteroousios

Orthodox/Alexander, Hosius, Athanasius - of the same substance — homoousios

Eusebian/Eusebius of Caesarea - of a similar substance — homoiousios

THE Council of Nicea was perhaps the epitome of an attempt by the carnal finite mind of man to explain in metaphysical terms the relationship between God and his Son.

As shown above, this was done by attempting to define this relationship using words and language which are nowhere found in scripture.

From the close of this council, the prevailing or 'orthodox' view within christendom would be that the Son was homoousios - or of the same substance - as the Father. Thus everyone who would not bow the knee to this carnal product of man's reasoning was made 'an offender for a word' - a word that God did not see fit to use when he inspired the writing of the scriptures.

Untold thousands were mercilessly slaughtered or exiled; and for what? For a WORD - a word which was nothing more than the product of carnal reasoning.

This sad legacy continues to this day. Those who will not confess that God is a 'trinity' (a word found nowhere in the scriptures) are made offenders or heretics because they will not acknowlege this WORD. It is not enough to confess the identity of Jesus using the pure language of scripture. No, what men need to know is 'do you beleive in the trinity?' or 'do you believe that God is three persons?' or 'do you believe in God the Son?'. 

Since NONE of these can be acknowledged using only the language of scripture the just who refuse to bow to this carnal 'wisdom' of 'orthodoxy' are therefore 'turned aside for a thing of naught'.

Michael Servetus, a sixteenth century Spanish theologian and physician, was cruelly burned at the stake because he refused to acknowledge that God is a 'trinity'. While being consumed by the flames he cried out to his Lord,  'Jesus, Son of the eternal God, have mercy upon me!' Upon hearing this, the man who had delivered him to this fate, John Calvin, exclaimed: 'If only he had said 'eternal Son of God' he might have been saved'. Thus Servetus was made 'an offender for a word', and this just man who God had set as a 'reprover in the gate' was turned aside 'for a thing of naught'.

Sadly the world is filled with this type of 'christianity' which pillages the pages of scripture in order to build exclusive esoteric doctrines so that one may invent impressive sounding terminology and lay claim to the truth at the exclusion of all others.  The so-called heresy hunter want to know:

Are you pre-trib? Post trib? Mid-Trib? Pre-Wrath?

Are you Pre-Millennial? Post-Millennial? A-Millennial?

Are in Infralapsarianist or Supralapsarianist?

Are you Calvinist or Armenian?

One thing on which they all agree... You dare not deny the trinity. 

Where does this madness end?