Upon first reading the article I had questions about the actions of the Christians recorded. Were Christians so judgmental to each other’s varying views? Did Constantine really do those things? Did he not know so much better as a follower of Christ? Why does this writer seem to know so many issues in Church history, and I am not familiar with any of them?
When reading the article a second time and having learned a bit about what the writer is referencing, most of those questions are easily answered. Yes, there was a lot of disagreement between beliefs of Jesus and the trinity etc, yes there were unfortunate actions taken in how people under the umbrella of Christianity treated each other. I am not entirely clear on some of the detailed accusations of Constantine’s murder of son and brother in law, but with understanding now how shallow his understanding of Christianity was, it could be plausible to still be acting in such a way after claimed conversion. And yes, the author does know quite a bit of what was going on around these times, but his sources are very strategic to prove his point.