Trinitarianism in the

Church Fathers

Debate exists as to whether the earliest

Church Fathers in Christian history
believed in the doctrine of the Trinity – the
Christian doctrine that God the Father, God
the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy
Spirit are three distinct persons sharing
one homoousion (essence).
Theophilus of Antioch is the earliest Church father documented to have used the word "Trinity" to refer to God.

Some of the evidence used to support an

early belief in the Trinity are triadic
statements (referring to the Father, Son
and Holy Spirit) from the New Testament
and the Church Fathers. The view that the
Son was "of the substance of the Father,
God of God [...] very God of very God" was
formally ratified at the First Council of
Nicaea in 325 AD. The Holy Spirit was
included at the First Council of
Constantinople (381 AD), where the
relationship between the Father, Son and
Holy Spirit as one substance (ousia) and
three co-equal persons (hypostaseis) was
formally ratified.[1]

Introduction
Some Trinitarians say the doctrine of the
Trinity was revealed during the time that
the New Testament was written;[a] others
state that it was revealed in the Patristic
period (c. 100–451/787 AD).[3]
Nontrinitarians, on the other hand,
generally state that the traditional doctrine
of the Trinity did not exist until centuries
after the end of the New Testament
period.[4] Some Trinitarians agree with this,
seeing a development over time towards a
true understanding of the Trinity.[5]
Trinitarians sometimes refer to Christian
belief about God before the traditional
statements on the Trinity as
unsophisticated, 'naive',[6] or 'incipient
Trinitarianism',[7] and that early Christians
were 'proto-Trinitarian, partially
Trinitarian'.[8] Unitarians and some
Trinitarians state that this means that
those early Christians were not actually
Trinitarians.[9]
Expressions which link together the name
of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
occurred very early in the History of the
Christian Church. These are sometimes
taken as expressions about the Trinity.
Other times, they are referred to more
generally as 'triadic'.[10] It is stated by
some that "these passages cannot
immediately be taken as evidence of the
belief in the co-substantial unity of God;
names may be conjoined for any number
of reasons (e.g. unity in greeting, unity of
purpose, etc.) so even the use of a
threefold formula cannot be
conclusive".[11]
Two examples appear in the New
Testament: 2 Corinthians 13:13[12] and
Matthew 28:19.[13] The context of 2
Corinthians 13:14 (verse 13 in the Vulgate
and the NRSV), which is the close of a
letter, suggests the church's conjunction of
the Father, Son and Holy Spirit may have
originated as a doxological formula; while
the context of Matthew 28:19, the Great
Commission, shows that the verbal
conjunction of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit was used early on as a baptismal
formula. Unitarians hold that "the Father,
Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned
together [in the New Testament] in the
same context, but not in any way that
suggests they are all distinct persons who
together comprise the totality of God";[14] a
"literary triad does not equate to an
ontological triunity".[15]

This triadic pattern is even more marked in

the glimpses available of the early
Church's liturgy and day-to-day
catechetical practice.[1] Even so, some
have said that the "indications from the
apostolic and sub-apostolic writers are
that [their] triadic formulas [...] do not carry
the same significance as post-Nicene
triadic formulas".[16] The oldest extant
work in which the word "Trinity" itself
(Greek Trias, triados) is used is Theophilus
of Antioch's 2nd-century To Autolycus.[17]
There it is used to refer to God, his word
and his wisdom.[b] The view that the Son
was "of the essence of the Father, God of
God [...] very God of very God" was
formally ratified at the First Council of
Nicaea in 325 AD. The Holy Spirit was
included at the First Council of
Constantinople (381 AD), where the
relationship between the Father, Son and
Holy Spirit as one substance (ousia) and
three co-equal persons (hypostaseis) was
formally ratified.[1]

First century
The Didache uses the Gospel of Matthew
only and no other known Gospel, and thus
it must have been written before the four-
Gospel canon had become widespread in
the churches, i.e. before the second half of
the 2nd century when Tatian produced the
Diatessaron.[19] Given its literary
dependence on the Gospel of Matthew, it
is not surprising that the Didache follows
the Gospel of Matthew in designating a
triadic formula as the baptismal
formula:[20]

After the foregoing instructions,

baptize in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of
 the Holy Spirit, in living
[running] water [...]. If you have
neither, pour water three times
on the head, in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Spirit.

— Didache 7:1[21]

Scholars such as Clayton N. Jefford have

noted that Jesus is not "ever specifically
given a designation of divinity within the
text. He is simply called "servant, child"
(παῖς) in the prayers and referenced as
"the Lord" (ὁ κύριος) elsewhere."[22][23]
Jefford argues that this may have been for
reasons of cultural sensitivity. Specifically
towards Jews, as their beliefs on deity
(found in the Torah at Deuteronomy 6:4)[24]
stand in opposition to belief in a triune
God. This allows for a reading of Didache
that harmonises fully with the Jewish
perspective on God. This allows the reader
to come away unoffended, and thus the
text can be correctly read without
invocation of a triune God.

Some scholars, however, disagree with

Jefford's conclusion on cultural sensitivity.
They argue that such caution was
impossible to exercise as they believe the
trinity doctrine had not yet been
developed. For example, the Encyclopedia
Britannica says of the trinity "The doctrine
developed gradually over several
centuries".[25] This position would mean it
was impossible for Jefford's conclusion
on cultural sensitivity to be correct, since
these scholars say "It was not until later in
the 4th century that the distinctness of the
three and their unity were brought together
in a single orthodox doctrine of one
essence and three persons."[25] However,
other scholars disagree with this
conclusion and argued that proto-
trinitarian formula and teaching can be
found there.[26]
Second century

Early second century: Ignatius of

Antioch

Ignatius, second bishop of Antioch, who

was martyred in Rome around 110 AD,[27]
wrote a series of letters to churches in
Asia Minor on his way to be executed in
Rome. The conjunction of Father, Son and
Holy Spirit appears in his letter to the
Magnesian church:

Study, therefore, to be
established in the doctrines of
the Lord and the apostles, that
so all things, whatsoever ye do,
may prosper both in the flesh
and spirit; in faith and love; in
the Son, and in the Father, and
in the Spirit; in the beginning
and in the end; with your most
admirable bishop, and the well-
compacted spiritual crown of
your presbytery, and the
deacons who are according to
God. Be ye subject to the bishop,
and to one another, as Jesus
Christ to the Father, according
to the flesh, and the apostles to
 Christ, and to the Father, and to
the Spirit; that so there may be a
union both fleshly and spiritual.

— Epistle to the Magnesians,

Chapter 13 [SR][28]

Unitarians argue that Ignatius is not

indicating that the Father, the Son and the
Spirit "are one substance anymore than he
is saying flesh and spirit are one
substance".[16]

c. 155: Polycarp of Smyrna

Polycarp was martyred in Smyrna (where
he was also Bishop) in the year 155. It is
said by Irenaeus of Lyons that he was a
pupil of the Apostle John. In his final
prayer before his martyrdom, he "praises,
glorifies, and blesses" the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit:

For this cause, yea and for all

things, I praise Thee, I bless
Thee, I glorify Thee, through the
eternal and heavenly High-
priest, Jesus Christ, Thy beloved
Son, through whom with Him
and the Holy Spirit be glory both
 now [and ever] and for the ages
to come. Amen.

— Martyrdom of Polycarp
14:3[29]

169–181: Theophilus of Antioch

Theophilus of Antioch's Ad Autolycum is

the oldest extant work that uses the actual
word "Trinity" to refer to God, his Word and
his Wisdom. The context is a discussion of
the first three days of creation in Genesis
1–3:
 ...the three days before the
luminaries were created are
types of the Trinity, God, his
Word, and his Wisdom.

— To Autolycus 2:15[30]

It is maintained by some that "Theophilus

does not use τρίας to mean 'three-in-one',
but rather simply uses it to indicate that
there were three things before man, God
and His Word and His Wisdom";[17] that he,
like other second and third century
authors, was referring to "a "trinity", triad or
threesome, but not a triune or tripersonal
God".[31]
In contrast to Trinitarian theology,
Theophilus of Antioch did not view the Son
as an eternally self existing person.
Theophilus wrote that God "begat Him,
emitting Him along with His own wisdom
before all things."[32] Instead of speaking
of the Word as the Creator, Theophilus
speaks of the "Word as a helper in the
things that were created by Him",[32] thus
he assigns the role of Creator to God
alone, while assigning the lesser position
of "helper" to the "begat" Son. Many
scholars believe this viewpoint is
inconsistent with Theophilus believing in a
trinity. For example, Dr. Norman Geisler
comments: "There are no exceptions;
Christ is the Creator of all things including
angels and everything visible or invisible.
Since Christ could not be both the Creator
of everything and at the same time a
creature Himself, it is necessary to
conclude that He is Himself the uncreated
Creator of all creation".[33][34] It is
noteworthy that Theophilus specified that
only 1 of the 3 mentioned is God.[35] Even
in his most famous quote "Trinity, of God,
and His Word, and His wisdom",
Theophilus only identifies one of the three
as God. The other two are described as
being parts or aspects of this God ("His"
Word and "His" Wisdom). Neither does
Theophilus describe the Word and
Wisdom as persons. He simply says "God,
then, having His own Word internal within
His own bowels, begat Him, emitting Him
along with His own wisdom before all
things."[32] The viewpoint held by
Theophilus of both the Word (whom he
later identified as the Son)[36] and God's
Wisdom, as both being emitted at some
point in time, would seem to conflict with
the Trinitarian viewpoint of God being
eternal, uncreated, equal and self
existing.[37]

Third century: Theology in

response to Patripassianism
and Sabellianism
In the early 3rd century Tertullian and
Hippolytus of Rome wrote Against Praxeas
and Against Noetus, respectively, which are
sometimes considered the first extant
expository treatments of Trinitarian
theology.[38] Both authors use the word
Trinity (Latin: Trinitas; Greek: Trias), but the
term was yet to have its Trinitarian
meaning.[31][39] They wrote these works to
combat Patripassianism, the view that the
Father suffered on the cross along with
the Son. In the 3rd century there were also
Trinitarian theologies expressed in
writings against Monarchianism,
Sabellianism and Modalism.

216: Tertullian

Tertullian's treatise against a Patripassian

heretic named Praxeas, who claimed that
the Father had suffered with the Son on
the cross, is arguably the oldest extant
treatise with a detailed explicit Trinitarian
theology.[38] In his Against Praxeas
Tertullian wrote:

And at the same time the

mystery of the oikonomia is
safeguarded, for the unity is
distributed in a Trinity. Placed in
order, the three are the Father,
Son, and Spirit. They are three,
however, not in condition, but in
degree; not in being, but in form;
not in power, but in kind; of one
being, however, and one
condition and one power,
because he is one God of whom
degrees and forms and kinds are
taken into account in the name
of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit.

— Against Praxeas 2[40]

Others, however, argue that Tertullian was
unitarian,[41] claiming that Tertullian's use
of the word "trinity" differs from later
Trinitarian use: "For Tertullian, the one God
is not the Trinity; rather, the one God is a
member of the trinity";[42] "...Tertullian's
trinity [was] not a triune God, but rather a
triad or group of three, with God as the
founding member".[3]

c. 220: Hippolytus of Rome

In the early 3rd century, Hippolytus of

Rome wrote a treatise Against Noetus, in
response to a Christian from Smyrna
named Noetus who had been promoting
Patripassian views, which Hippolytus
deemed heretical. Noetus and other
Patripassians, such as Praxeas, claimed
that the Father as well as the Son had
suffered on the cross.[43] Like Tertullian,
Hippolytus explicitly used the word Trinity
in his treatise against Patripassian views:

The Father's Word, therefore,

knowing the economy and the
will of the Father, to wit, that
the Father seeks to be
worshipped in none other way
than this, gave this charge to the
disciples after he rose from the
dead: "Go ye and teach all
nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
(Matt 28:19) And by this he
showed that whosoever omitted
any one of these, failed in
glorifying God perfectly. For it is
through the Trinity that the
Father is glorified. For the
Father willed, the Son did and
the Spirit manifested.

— Against Noetus[44][45]
Some, referring to other parts of Against
Noetus along with Hippolytus' The
Refutation of All Heresies, view Hippolytus
as nontrinitarian, saying that "in his
theology, the divine (but less divine than
God) Logos came to exist from God a
finite time ago, so that God could create
the cosmos by means of him. On two
counts, then, this makes him not a
trinitarian – that the "persons" are neither
co-equal nor equally divine".[46]

c. 225: Origen

Origen's On First Principles (De Principiis or

Peri Archon) is the oldest extant Christian
theological treatise. Origen's theology of
the godhead is developed in this treatise,
which reveals that by this time the use of
the word Trinity to refer to Father, Son and
Holy Spirit is standard in orthodox
churches. However, it is argued that the
word still did not have its later, Trinitarian
meaning.[31]

For it is the Trinity alone which

exceeds every sense in which not
only temporal but even eternal
may be understood. It is all
other things, indeed, which are
outside the Trinity, which are to
be measured by time and ages...
It seems right to inquire into the
reason why he who is 'born
again through God' to salvation
has need of both Father and Son
and Holy Spirit and will not
obtain salvation apart from the
entire Trinity, and why it is
impossible to become partaker
of the Father or the Son without
the Holy Spirit. In discussing
these points it will undoubtedly
be necessary to describe the
activity which is peculiar to the
 Holy Spirit and that which is
peculiar to the Father and Son.

— [47]

However, it is also argued in

contradistinction that the word Trinity is
utilized with a very similar meaning to its
fourth century use.[48]

This is most clearly pointed out

by the Apostle Paul, when
demonstrating that the power of
the Trinity is one and the same,
in the words, "There are
diversities of gifts, but the same
Spirit; there are diversities of
administrations, but the same
Lord; and there are diversities
of operations, but it is the same
God who worketh all in all. But
the manifestation of the Spirit is
given to every man to profit:
withal." From which it most
clearly follows that there is no
difference in the Trinity, but that
which is called the gift of the
Spirit is made known through
the Son, and operated by God
the Father.[49]
Some see Origen as holding what many
scholars refer to as a "subordinist"
Christology: in Origen, "the Son and Spirit
are always in some sense derivative of,
less than, and subordinate to their source,
the one God, that is, the Father":[3]

The God and Father, who holds

the universe together, is
superior to every being that
exists, for he imparts to each
one from his own existence that
which each one is; the Son,
being less than the Father, is
superior to rational creatures
 alone (for he is second to the
Father); the Holy Spirit is still
less, and dwells within the
saints alone. So that in this way
the power of the Father is
greater than that of the Son and
of the Holy Spirit, and that of
the Son is more than that of the
Holy Spirit...

— Origen, First, 33-4 [I.3]

From this, it is argued that Origen was in

fact unitarian.[3] Others, however, see
Origen as teaching the ineffable begetting
of the Son and procession of the Spirit as
the unity of power and operation. In this
view the Son and Spirit have no less power
than the Father, by virtue of literally being
his power.[48] Both the Nicene[50] and
Athanasian[51] Creeds affirm the Son is
begotten of, and the Spirit proceeding from,
the Father, co-equally and co-eternally.

c. 256: Novatian

Novatian, presbyter of Rome, wrote the

oldest extant Christian treatise that is
specifically dedicated to and entitled On
the Trinity.[52] It was written in response to
a number of views deemed heretical by
Novatian, and particularly against
Sabellius, who had maintained that the
Trinity was divided into three prosopa, or
"characters by which God is revealed to
man, the Trinity being one of revelation,
not essence".[53]

For Scripture as much

announces Christ as also God,
as it announces God himself as
man. It has as much described
Jesus Christ to be man, as
moreover it has also described
Christ the Lord to be God.
Because it does not set forth him
to be the Son of God only, but
also the son of man; nor does it
only say, the son of man, but it
has also been accustomed to
speak of him as the Son of God.
So that being of both, he is both,
lest if he should be one only, he
could not be the other. For as
nature itself has prescribed that
he must be believed to be a man
who is of man, so the same
nature prescribes also that he
must be believed to be God who
is of God…. Let them, therefore,
 who read that Jesus Christ the
son of man is man, read also
that this same Jesus is called
also God and the Son of God.

— Treatise on the Trinity,

11[54]

Some, referring to chapter 31 of On the

Trinity, maintain that when Novatian
referred to Christ as 'God' he was still
excluding him from being 'the one true
God'.[3]

262: Pope Dionysius

According to Athanasius of Alexandria, in
the mid-3rd century Pope Dionysius wrote
a letter to Dionysius of Alexandria
criticizing Sabellius's views on the
relations between the Son and the Father,
as well as some who attempted to refute
Sabellius's views. He quotes parts of
Dionysius' letter in On the decrees of the
Council of Nicaea .[55] In this letter it is
clear that Dionysius used the word Trinity
(Greek Trias) to explicate the relations
between Father, Son and Holy Spirit:

Next, I may reasonably turn to

those who divide and cut to
pieces and destroy that most
sacred doctrine of the Church of
God, the Divine Monarchy,
making it as it were three
powers and partive subsistences
and godheads. I am told that
some among you who are
catechists and teachers of the
Divine Word, take the lead in
this tenet, who are diametrically
opposed, so to speak, to
Sabellius' opininons; for he
blasphemously says that the Son
is the Father, and Father the
Son, but they in some sort
preach three Gods, as dividing
the sacred Unity into three
subsistences foreign to each
other and utterly separate. For
it must be that with the God of
the Universe, the Divine Word is
united, and the Holy Ghost must
repose and habitate in God; thus
in one as in a summit, I mean
the God of the Universe, must
the Divine Trinity be gathered
up and brought together [...]
Neither, then, may we divide
into three godheads the
wonderful and divine Unity [...]
Rather, we must believe in God,
the Father Almighty; and in
Christ Jesus, his Son; and in the
Holy Spirit; and that the Word is
united to the God of the
universe. 'For,' he says, 'The
Father and I are one,' and 'I am
in the Father, and the Father in
me'. For thus both the Divine
Trinity and the holy preaching
of the Monarchy will be
preserved.

— 'De decretis Nic. syn.26[56]

265: Gregory the Wonderworker

Gregory was Bishop of Neocaesarea in

Asia Minor,[57] and wrote a Declaration of
Faith which treats the Trinity as standard
theological vocabulary:[58]

There is one God [...] There is a

perfect Trinity, in glory and
eternity and sovereignty, neither
divided nor estranged.
Wherefore there is nothing
either created or in servitude in
the Trinity; nor anything super-
induced, as if at some former
 period it was non-existent, and
at some later period it was
introduced. And thus neither
was the Son ever wanting to the
Father, nor the Spirit to the Son;
but without variation and
without change, the same
Trinity abides ever.

— Declaration of Faith.[59]

Notes
a. There is no scholarly consensus on when
the New Testament was written, though
most estimates fall within the 1st and 2nd
 centuries AD; the New Oxford Annotated
Bible states that "Scholars generally agree
that the Gospels were written forty to sixty
years after the death of Jesus. They thus
do not present eyewitness or contemporary
accounts of Jesus's life and teaching."[2]

b. "...the three days before the luminaries

were created are types of the Trinity, God,
his Word, and his Wisdom".[18]

References
1. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines A &
C Black 1965 (1965) p.88
2. Cousland, J.R.C. (2010). Coogan, Michael
David; Brettler, Marc Zvi; Newsom, Carol
Ann; Perkins, Pheme (eds.). The New
Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised
Standard Version. Oxford University Press.
p. 1744. ISBN 978-0-19-528955-8.

3. D. Tuggy, 'History of Trinitarian Doctrines (h

ttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/trinit
y-history.html) ' (2013) in Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy

4. Jeff Rath, An Appeal to Trinitarian

Christians: Historical Background of the
Trinity, online (http://www.christadelphia.or
g/trinityhistory.htm) (accessed
24/12/2013)

5. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 5th

edn (London: A&C Black, 1977), p. 87-88,90
 6. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 5th
edn (London: A&C Black, 1977), p. 90

7. M. Turner and G. McFarlane, 'Trinity' in I. H.

Marshall (ed.), et al., New Bible Dictionary
(3rd edn), electronic edition

8. Dale Tuggy, The Lost Early History of

Unitarian Christian Theology (https://www.y
outube.com/watch?v=0Hnlw4iMhE8) ,
paper delivered at CoGGC Theological
Conference, Atlanta [May, 2013], 4:43-56

9. Charles Morgridge, The true believer's

defence against charges preferred by
Trinitarians (1837), p. 162 (https://books.go
ogle.com/books?id=Ug6AEX88xuEC&dq=%
22not%20trinitarians%22&pg=PA162)

10. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 5th

edn (London: A&C Black, 1977), p. 88-89
11. Thomas Gaston (2007), Proto-Trinity: The
Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity
in the First and Second Christian Centuries
(http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/151/) .
MPhil(b). Thesis. University of Birmingham,
UK. p. 69

12. 2 Corinthians 13:13 (https://bible.oremus.or

g/?passage=2%20Corinthians%2013:13&ve
rsion=nrsv)

13. Matthew 28:19 (https://bible.oremus.org/?p

assage=Matthew%2028:19&version=nrsv)
14. David Burke, 'The Great Trinity Debate:
Week 5: Father, Son and Holy Spirit'
available online here (http://www.btdf.org/f
orums/topic/15127-week-v-father-son-holy-
spirit/) and here (http://www.reclaimingthe
mind.org/blog/2010/05/the-great-trinity-de
bate-part-5-dave-burke-on-father-son-holy-
spirit/) (accessed 24/12/2013)

15. David Burke, 'The Great Trinity Debate:

Week 5: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Rebuttal' online (http://www.btdf.org/forum
s/topic/15127-week-v-father-son-holy-spiri
t/?p=412010) (accessed 24/12/2013)
16. Thomas Gaston (2007), Proto-Trinity: The
Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity
in the First and Second Christian Centuries
(http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/151/) .
MPhil(b). Thesis. University of Birmingham,
UK. p. 72

17. Thomas Gaston (2007), Proto-Trinity: The

Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity
in the First and Second Christian Centuries
(http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/151/) .
MPhil(b). Thesis. University of Birmingham,
UK. p. 74

18. To Autolycus 2 (http://www.earlychristianwr

itings.com/text/theophilus-book2.html) :15

19. Date according to Metzger, Bruce. The

Canon of the New Testament. 1997
20. Thomas Gaston (2007), Proto-Trinity: The
Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity
in the First and Second Christian Centuries
(http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/151/) .
MPhil(b). Thesis. University of Birmingham,
UK. p. 70

21. Didache (http://www.earlychristianwritings.

com/text/didache-roberts.html)

22. Nessim, Daniel. "Didache and Trinity: Proto-

Trinitarianism in an Early Christian
Community" (https://www.academia.edu/3
0354503) .

23. "Didache: The Teaching of the Twelve

Apostles | Clayton N. Jefford | download" (h
ttps://b-ok.cc/book/3708055/65a198?dsou
rce=recommend) .
24. Deuteronomy 6:4 (https://mechon-mamre.o
rg/p/pt/pt0506.htm#4)

25. "Trinity | Definition, Theology, & History |

Britannica" (https://www.britannica.com/to
pic/Trinity-Christianity) .

26. Nessim, Daniel (2016). "Didache and Trinity:

Proto-Trinitarianism in an Early Christian
Community" (https://www.academia.edu/3
0354503) . academia.edu. Retrieved
November 1, 2022.

27. Eusebius of Caesarea, Church History iii.36

28. St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Magnesians
(Shorter Recension) (http://www.earlychrist
ianwritings.com/text/ignatius-magnesians-
roberts.html) , Roberts-Donaldson
translation.
29. Martyrdom of Polycarp (http://www.earlych
ristianwritings.com/text/martyrdompolycar
p-lightfoot.html) , Lightfoot trans.

30. To Autolycus (http://www.earlychristianwriti

ngs.com/text/theophilus-book2.html)
31. D. Tuggy, 'History of Trinitarian Doctrines (h
ttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/trinit
y-history.html) ' (2013) in Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "The terms we
translate as "Trinity" (Latin: trinitas, Greek:
trias) seem to have come into use only in
the last two decades of the second century;
but such usage doesn't reflect trinitarian
belief. These late second and third century
authors use such terms not to refer to the
one God, but rather to refer to the plurality
of the one God, together with his Son (on
Word) and his Spirit. They profess a "trinity",
triad or threesome, but not a triune or
tripersonal God".
32. "Logos Virtual Library: Theophilus of
Antioch: To Autolycus, II, 10" (https://www.l
ogoslibrary.org/theophilus/autolycus/210.
html) .

33. Christian Apologetics, 1988, p. 338

34. "Was Jesus a Created Being?" (https://ww
w.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets/jesus-
christ-the-real-story/was-jesus-a-created-b
eing) . 26 January 2011.

35. "Logos Virtual Library: Theophilus of

Antioch: To Autolycus, II, 15" (https://www.l
ogoslibrary.org/theophilus/autolycus/215.
html) .

36. "Logos Virtual Library: Theophilus of

Antioch: To Autolycus, II, 22" (https://www.l
ogoslibrary.org/theophilus/autolycus/222.
html) .
37. "What is the Doctrine of the Trinity?" (http
s://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-is-th
e-doctrine-of-the-trinity) . 23 January 2006.

38. Kerry D. McRoberts, 'The Holy Trinity' in

Stanley M. Horton (ed.), Systematic
Theology (Revised edn), (Springfield, MO:
Logion, 2012), p. 157
39. D. Tuggy (referring specifically to Tertullian)
says, "The word 'Trinity' has come to mean
the tri-personal God, consisting of the
eternal, equally divine Father, Son and Holy
Spirit. It is now used as a singular referring
term for the one God, assumed to be tri-
personal. But, both now and then [i.e., in the
2nd century], the word 'trinity' can simply
refer to "these three", Father, son and Holy
Spirit – that is, it can be used as a plural
referring term, and that usage of it does not
imply the items mentioned are parts of a
whole, or that they are in anyway equal, or
that they even belong to the same kind or
category. It refers simply to a triad, a triple,
a group of three [...] Tertullian uses the
word in this latter way. For him, the trinity is
 a triad, a group, a plurality, consisting of
those three selves. This plurality is not God"
(Dale Tuggy, 'Tertullian the unitarian (http
s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4pLkJ_J
siY) ' [4:03-4:13], paper delivered on
September 20, 2013 at the conference
Analytical Theology: Faith, Knowledge and
the Trinity (http://trinities.org/blog/archive
s/5049) [Prague, Czech Republic]).

40. Against Praxeas (http://www.earlychristian

writings.com/text/tertullian17.html)
41. "...he believes the son to have been caused
to exist by God a finite time ago. He tells us
that God was not always a father, for there
was a time when the son did not exist"
[Against Hermogenes, ch. 3]' (Dale Tuggy,
'Tertullian the unitarian (https://www.youtu
be.com/watch?v=A4pLkJ_JsiY) ' [10:54-
11:04], paper delivered on September 20,
2013 at the conference Analytical
Theology: Faith, Knowledge and the Trinity
(http://trinities.org/blog/archives/5049)
[Prague, Czech Republic]).

42. Dale Tuggy, The Lost Early History of

Unitarian Christian Theology (https://www.y
outube.com/watch?v=0Hnlw4iMhE8) ,
paper delivered at CoGGC Theological
Conference, Atlanta (May, 2013), 18:44-55
43. Against Noetus Ch. 1
44. Bio for Hippolytus of Rome (http://www.jhu.
edu/gcf/lessons/BioHippolytus.pdf) -
Jason Labonte noted: "Hippolytus himself
may not have believed in the Trinity in the
same way as we currently do, but it is hard
to determine exactly what he believed. In
any case, he believed that Jesus was a
separate person from God the Father and
yet still divine."

45. Against Noetus Ch. 14.

46. Dale Tuggy, 'trinitarian or unitarian? 10 –
Hippolytus on the identity of the one God (h
ttp://trinities.org/blog/archives/4556) '
(29/03/2012) on trinities.org (accessed
24/12/2013). Also see posts from
27/03/2013 (http://trinities.org/blog/archiv
es/4543) and 03/04/2013 (http://trinities.o
rg/blog/archives/4562) .

47. De Principiis, book 1, chapter 3 (http://www.

ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.vi.v.ii.iii.html) ;
The Trinity according to Origen (http://dlibra
ry.acu.edu.au/research/theology/gus_natha
n.htm) Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20080728021201/http://dlibrary.acu.e
du.au/research/theology/Gus_nathan.htm)
2008-07-28 at the Wayback Machine
48. Ramelli, Llaria (2011). "Origen's Anti-
Subordinationism and Its Heritage in the
Nicene and Cappadocian Line". Vigiliae
Christianae. Brill. 65 (1): 21–49.
doi:10.1163/157007210X508103 (https://d
oi.org/10.1163%2F157007210X508103) .
JSTOR 41062535 (https://www.jstor.org/st
able/41062535) .

49. Admantius, Origen. "De Principiis, Book 1"

(http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tex
t/origen122.html) . EarlyChristianWritings.
Retrieved 31 May 2017.

50. Nicene, Creed. "Nicene Creed" (http://www.r

eformed.org/documents/nicene.html) .
Reformed.org. Retrieved 31 May 2017.
51. Athanasian, Creed. "Athanasian Creed" (htt
p://www.reformed.org/documents/index.ht
ml?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/d
ocuments/athanasian.html) .
Reformed.org. Retrieved 31 May 2017.

52. Jerome, On Illustrious Men Ch. 70

53. J.E. Oulton, Eusebius: Ecclesiastical History
Vol 2; (Cambridge, 1980 reprint; p. 143, n.
1).

54. Fathers/Volume V/Novatian/A Treatise of

Novatian Concerning the Trinity/Part
11|Treatise on the Trinity, part 11 (http://ww
w.Ante-Nicene)

55. Johannes Quasten, Patrology, Vol. 2,

Utrecht, 1964, p. 239-241.

56. Athanasius De decretis Nic. syn. 26.

 57. Jerome, On Illustrious Men Ch. 65
58. Basil of Caesarea discusses the occasion
for Gregory writing this Declaration of Faith
in Letter 205

59. Declaration of Faith (http://www.ccel.org/c

cel/schaff/anf06.iii.iii.i.i.html)

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Trinitarianism_in_the_Church_Fathers&oldid=1
145148655"

This page was last edited on 17 March 2023, at

14:46 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless
otherwise noted.