Ante-Nicene Church Father Heresies Regarding Trinity

The doctrine of the Trinity in Christian theology describes the understanding of God as one essence in three distinct persons: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ), and God the Holy Spirit. These three persons are co-equal, co-eternal, and consubstantial, meaning they share the same divine essence while remaining distinct from one another. The Trinity expresses how Christians believe God’s nature is both unified and relational, with each person embodying God’s full divinity while participating in unique roles within the divine relationship.

The doctrine of the Trinity took centuries to be clearly formulated as early Christians sought to understand and articulate the nature of God in light of scripture and their experiences of God’s work in history. In the first few centuries after Jesus’ life, death, and supposed resurrection, there were various interpretations of God’s nature, particularly in relation to Jesus’ divinity and the role of the Holy Spirit. Debates about these topics intensified, leading to significant disagreements among theologians and church leaders. Key controversies arose, such as Arianism, which argued that Jesus was created by God and, therefore, not equal to the Father. To address these and other divergent views, ecumenical councils were convened, notably the First Council of Nicaea in 325 and the First Council of Constantinople in 381, where leaders sought to clarify and unify the doctrine of the Trinity. Through these councils, the Church eventually affirmed that God exists as three distinct persons, each fully divine and eternally united. This process of clarification took hundreds of years and shaped Christian theology by establishing foundational creeds that defined the Triune nature of God for subsequent generations.

When looking back at the writings of early church fathers before the fourth century, it becomes evident that many of their theological reflections do not align precisely with the later, more refined doctrine of the Trinity. In the pre-Nicene period, church fathers like Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Origen expressed views about the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, often suggesting a hierarchy or subordination within the Godhead. For example, Origen spoke of the Son as being “generated” by the Father, which implies a dependency or difference in essence. Similarly, Tertullian’s descriptions often emphasized the distinctiveness of the persons in ways that undermined their equality.

These early fathers grappled with articulating the divinity of Christ and the Spirit, but their language often fell short of the full equality and unity later affirmed by the doctrine of the Trinity. Thus, while they laid the groundwork, their ideas conflicted with the orthodox Trinitarian doctrine that solidified after the fourth-century councils. This retrospective assessment reveals a developmental process in Christian theology, where earlier insights were later refined, corrected, and incorporated into the unified Trinitarian framework that would become a hallmark of Christian orthodoxy.

Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 69–155 AD)

Polycarp was a bishop of Smyrna and a key figure among the Apostolic Fathers, supposedly a disciple of the Apostle John. He played a significant role in connecting the early Church to the apostolic tradition. His famous Letter to the Philippians emphasizes moral living, resisting heresy, and faithfulness to Christ. Polycarp is most well-known for his martyrdom, where he refused to renounce his faith and was burned at the stake, a story recorded in The Martyrdom of Polycarp. His life and teachings greatly influenced early Christian thought, especially in developing early Christian orthodoxy and martyrdom’s spiritual significance.

Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians primarily focuses on Christ and the Father, with little mention of the distinct role of the Holy Spirit, leaving his views on the Trinity underdeveloped by later standards. As an Apostolic Father, Polycarp’s writings do not contain a developed Trinitarian theology. His emphasis on Christ as divine is clear, but his understanding of the Holy Spirit is less clear, which could be seen as lacking from a later Trinitarian perspective. Based on his lack of emphasis and formulation of the Holy Spirit in relation to Christ and God shows that he did not consider them coequal.

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35–107 CE)

St. Ignatius of Antioch was a Bishop and an Apostolic Father. He wrote several letters emphasizing the importance of church unity, the authority of bishops, and the Eucharist. He is famous for his desire for martyrdom, viewing it as a means to unite with Christ.

Ignatius often refers to the Father as the supreme source of authority, with Christ as the one sent by and subordinate to the Father. In his Letter to the Ephesians (Chapter 7), Ignatius calls Jesus “our God,” affirming his belief in Christ’s divinity. Yet, he consistently frames Christ as sent from the Father and does not articulate a co-equal relationship between the two. His emphasis on Jesus as one who submits to the Father’s will implies a hierarchy, contrasting with later Trinitarian doctrine, which upholds the Son’s equality with the Father.

Ignatius emphasizes the distinct roles of the Father, Son, and Spirit but does not discuss a shared, unified divine essence. In his Letter to the Magnesians (Chapter 13), he speaks of “the will of the Father, and of Jesus Christ, our God.” His language here reflects an early Christian understanding in which the Father’s will is primary, and Jesus, as “our God,” operates under the Father’s authority. Ignatius’s writings lack the concept of a shared substance or essence that later Trinitarian doctrine would highlight.

Ignatius refers to the Holy Spirit in functional terms, often as the source of inspiration for believers and church leaders, rather than as a co-equal person in the Godhead. In his Letter to the Philadelphians (Chapter 7), Ignatius speaks of “the Spirit” leading the church to unity and truth, but he doesn’t outline a clear, personal divinity for the Spirit that would later be emphasized in the Nicene Creed. His understanding of the Spirit, while affirming its sanctifying role, lacks the concept of consubstantiality or personhood that the fourth-century doctrine would clarify.

Ignatius’s writings reflect an early stage in Christian thought, where Christ’s divinity and the Spirit’s role are affirmed, but not yet in the co-equal, consubstantial terms of later Trinitarian doctrine. His views, while influential in affirming core Christian beliefs, show an emphasis on hierarchical relationships within the Godhead and lack the doctrinal precision of the later, more formalized Trinity.

Justin Martyr (c. 100–165 CE)

An early Christian apologist and philosopher, Justin Martyr, defended Christianity against pagan accusations and tried to show its compatibility with Greco-Roman philosophy. His works, such as First Apology and Dialogue with Trypho, are important sources for understanding early Christian theology.

Justin Martyr’s understanding of begotten is that of being made. This is articulated in Chapter 5 of his Dialogue with Trypho.

Old Man: Do you say that the world is also unbegotten?
Justin: Some say so. I do not, however, agree with them.
Old Man: You are right; for what reason has one for supposing that a body so solid, possessing resistance, composite, changeable, decaying, and renewed every day, has not arisen from some cause? But if the world is begotten, souls also are necessarily begotten; and perhaps at one time they were not in existence, for they were made on account of men and other living creatures, if you will say that they have been begotten wholly apart, and not along with their respective bodies.
Justin: This seems to be correct.
Old Man: They are not, then, immortal?
Justin: No; since the world has appeared to us to be begotten.

Additionally, he describes the Trinity as a subordinationsit relationship between the three entities. Justin writes, in First Apology Chapter 13:

We reasonably worship Him, having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third (First Apology 13).

Justin’s ranking of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit implies a hierarchy rather than equality among the persons of the Trinity. This “second place” and “third place” understanding suggests that the Son and Holy Spirit are inferior or subordinate to the Father, a position rejected by later Trinitarian theology.

Justin describes the generation of the Logos: “

For they who affirm that the Son is the Father, are proved neither to have understood the Father, nor to have known that the Father of all has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God” (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 63).

He also writes that the Logos “was begotten before all creatures” (First Apology, Chapter 21).

Justin’s language suggests that the Son was begotten in time, which conflicts with the later doctrine that the Son is co-eternal with the Father, having no beginning in time. His views were later corrected by the Nicene Creed, which affirmed that the Son is eternally begotten, meaning He always existed with the Father, without being created.

Justin’s references to the Son can imply that the Logos (Son) is divine but in a lesser or secondary sense compared to the Father. This is another form of subordinationism, where the Son is not considered fully equal in divinity to the Father.

Justin writes that the Logos is a “second God” (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 56), which he also calls an Angel.

Justin: I shall attempt to persuade you, since you have understood the Scriptures, [of the truth] of what I say, that there is, and that there is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things— above whom there is no other God — wishes to announce to them.

In another passage (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 60), Justin again references Christ as an Angel.

The Word of God, who appeared to Moses, under the appearance of fire from a bush, and who likewise descended with the angels to behold the tower which the sons of men were building, is called both Angel and Apostle (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 60).

He states, “The Word, who is the first-born of God, is God, and that He was manifested to mankind” (First Apology 63). In this context, Justin emphasizes the divinity of the Logos but still speaks of the Father as the “true God” in a more supreme sense.

By calling the Logos a “second God,” Justin’s language implies that the Son is a distinct and perhaps lesser divinity than the Father, which conflicts with the later orthodox belief in the equality and consubstantiality of the Father and the Son, as affirmed by the Nicene Creed.

Justin also explains that people can become gods. In Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 124: Justin states,

“If we are worthy of it, we shall also be called sons of God, and we shall become gods, in that we shall be found to be in His divine image.”

In summary, Justin’s concepts differ significantly from later orthodox beliefs. Justin viewed the Son as “begotten” in the sense of being made, implying a temporal beginning, and described the relationship between the Father, Son, and Spirit as hierarchical, with the Father supreme and the Son and Spirit in “second” and “third” places, respectively. He even referred to the Logos (the Son) as a “second God” and an “Angel,” suggesting a form of subordinationism inconsistent with later Trinitarian doctrine. Additionally, Justin described the potential for believers to “become gods” through union with God’s divine nature. His ideas, though influential, are contrary to the Nicene Creed, which affirmed the coequal, co-eternal, and consubstantial nature of the Trinity.

Theophilus of Antioch (c. 120–185 CE)

Theophilus of Antioch (circa 120–190 AD) is one of the earliest Christian writers to use the term “Trinity” (τριάς), but his understanding of God, the Word (Logos/Son), and Wisdom (Sophia) differs from the later, formalized Trinitarian doctrine. His writings suggest a hierarchical relationship and lack of eternal co-equality, concepts that contrast with the Trinitarian unity developed in the fourth century.

In Ad Autolycum, Theophilus of Antioch provides the earliest known use of the term “Trinity” in a Christian context, describing it as a reference to God, His Word, and His Wisdom. This is specifically illustrated in his discussion of the creation narrative in Genesis:

“…the three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity, God, his Word, and his Wisdom.” (To Autolycus, Book 2, Chapter15)

Theophilus uses the term “Trinity” (τριάς) to signify three distinct entities—God, His Word, and His Wisdom—existing prior to humanity, rather than to describe a “three-in-one” or triune God as later Trinitarian doctrine would understand. This points to a concept of a “triad” or “threesome” rather than implying a tripersonal unity.

Contrary to Trinitarian views, Theophilus does not present the Son (the Word) as an eternally self-existing person. In his To Autolycus, Book 2, Chapter 10, he describes the Son as brought forth by God, writing that God “begat Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things.” This suggests that, rather than ascribing a co-creator role to the Word, Theophilus views the Word as a “helper” in creation, with the primary role of Creator belonging solely to God. If Christ is the Creator of all things, including angels, He must be uncreated; therefore, a created Christ would conflict with a Trinitarian understanding of the eternal and uncreated nature of God.

Moreover, Theophilus identifies only one of the three—the Father—as God, while describing the Word and Wisdom as aspects or expressions of God, rather than as independent persons. The implication that both the Word (later identified as the Son) and Wisdom were brought forth by God suggests a perspective incompatible with the Trinitarian view of an eternal, uncreated, and self-existent God.

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202 CE)

Irenaeus was the Bishop of Lyons and a disciple of Polycarp (who himself was a disciple of John the Apostle) and is known for his work Against Heresies, where he refuted Gnostic teachings and emphasized the unity of Scripture and Tradition. He is one of the earliest theologians to speak of the four canonical Gospels.

Like many early theologians, Irenaeus sometimes presents the Son and the Spirit as subordinate to the Father. Although he affirms the divinity of the Son and the Spirit, he occasionally emphasizes the Father’s primacy in a way that could be interpreted as subordinationism (the idea that the Son and Spirit are inferior in nature or rank to the Father).

In Against Heresies (Book 4, Chapter 20, Section 1), Irenaeus writes, “There is one God, the Father, who is above all, and through all, and in all.” While he affirms the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as working together in creation and salvation, he consistently speaks of the Father as “above all,” with the Son and Spirit acting through or in creation.

Irenaeus frequently speaks of the Father as the “one true God,” emphasizing His supreme role over all creation, including the Son and Spirit. In Against Heresies (Book 2, Chapter 28), he states, “The Father is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all.” While he affirms the divinity of the Son and Spirit, his language often underscores a hierarchy, with the Father as the ultimate source, rather than the co-equal and consubstantial unity later defined in Trinitarian doctrine.

Irenaeus uses the metaphor of the Son and the Spirit as the “two hands” of God, through whom the Father created and redeems the world (Against Heresies, Book 4, Chapter 20). Irenaeus writes,

“The Father is the invisible of the Son, but the Son is the visible of the Father; and the Spirit is the manifestation of the Son…By the hands of the Father, that is, by the Son and Holy Spirit, man was made after the image of God.“

This imagery suggests that the Son and Spirit function as agents of the Father rather than sharing a fully equal, independent divinity. By viewing them as extensions of the Father, Irenaeus emphasizes their distinct roles but doesn’t fully integrate them as co-equal persons in the unified essence of God.

This analogy suggests that the Son and Holy Spirit are parts of the Father and subordinate to Him in their essence or function as tools or agents of the Father, rather than co-equal persons within the Godhead. The later Trinitarian understanding affirmed that all three persons of the Trinity are equal in power, glory, and substance, which the “two hands” analogy goes against.

As stated in Against Heresies Book 3, 4, 4, we see that Irenaeus viewed God, the Father of Jesus, as the only true God, above all.

4. Wherefore I do also call upon thee, LORD God of Abraham, and God of Isaac, and God of Jacob and Israel, who art the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who, through the abundance of Thy mercy, hast had a favour towards us, that we should know Thee, who hast made heaven and earth, who rulest over all, who art the only and the true God, above whom there is none other God; grant, by our Lord Jesus Christ, the governing power of the Holy Spirit; give to every reader of this book to know Thee, that Thou art God alone, to be strengthened in Thee, and to avoid every heretical, and godless, and impious doctrine.

Irenaeus reafirms this in Book 3, 9, 1

This, therefore, having been clearly demonstrated here (and it shall yet be so still more clearly), that neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Lord Christ in His own person, did acknowledge any other Lord or God, but the God and Lord supreme: the prophets and the apostles confessing the Father and the Son; but naming no other as God, and confessing no other as Lord: and the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all;

Irenaeus describes the Son as “subordinate” or “subject” to the Father, implying a difference in status or authority. For instance, in Against Heresies (Book 3, Chapter 6), he writes that the Son “was sent by the Father” and “made manifest to men,” which highlights the Father’s initiating role and suggests a functional hierarchy. This language contrasts with the later Trinitarian doctrine, where the Son is considered co-equal with the Father, eternally begotten rather than created or lesser in authority.

Irenaeus, like many early Church Fathers, did not provide as developed a theology of the Holy Spirit as later Trinitarian formulations would require. His treatment of the Holy Spirit tends to be functional (how the Spirit acts) rather than focusing on the Spirit’s personhood and co-equality with the Father and the Son.

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215 CE)

A theologian and teacher at the Catechetical School of Alexandria, Clement sought to harmonize Christian faith with Greek philosophy. While deeply influential in early Christian thought, his writings contain elements that later Trinitarian doctrine would interpret as divergent. His writings reflect a philosophical approach to understanding God, with an emphasis on hierarchical relationships and the unique roles of the Father, Son, and Spirit.

Clement, like many early Christian theologians, emphasized the Father’s supremacy over the Son in a way that later Trinitarian orthodoxy would reject. He often portrayed the Son as subordinate to the Father in terms of rank or function, which aligns with what would later be labeled as subordinationism.

Clement often emphasized God’s oneness in a way that downplayed the distinct persons of the Trinity. He sometimes portrays the Son as subordinate to the Father. Clement states, “The Son is the power of God, the most ancient Word of the Father before the production of all things, and His wisdom” (Stromata Book 7 Chapter 2), which implies that the Son is not equal to the Father, a view later condemned as heretical.

Clement often presents the Logos (the Word) as an intermediary between the transcendent Father and the world, drawing heavily on Middle Platonic philosophy. This can imply that the Logos is not fully equal to the Father but is a distinct, lesser entity used by the Father to interact with creation. He views the Logos as the rational principle that pervades and orders the universe, a bridge between God and humanity. In Stromata (Book 5, Chapter 1), he describes the Logos as a distinct entity emanating from the Father. This philosophical framing can imply a level of separation that contrasts with the later Trinitarian affirmation of a shared, inseparable essence.

Clement’s references to the Holy Spirit often lack the clarity and emphasis given to the Spirit’s consubstantiality with the Father and Son in later doctrine. For instance, in Stromata (Book 5, Chapter 6), he mentions the Spirit primarily as an agent of sanctification and enlightenment rather than as a distinct, co-equal person within the Godhead. His treatment of the Spirit leans toward a functional role rather than a personal, fully divine member of the Trinity, as formalized in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.

Origen of Alexandria (c. 184–253 CE)

A prolific scholar and theologian, Origen contributed significantly to Biblical exegesis and Christian thought. His Hexapla was a monumental textual comparison of different versions of the Hebrew Bible. Though some of his views were later considered controversial, he influenced early Christian theology and hermeneutics.

Origen explicitly taught that the Son was subordinate to the Father, both in role and in essence, and his idea of the eternal generation of the Son was later viewed as problematic. Origen states, “The Father… is greater than the Son, for he is unbegotten; the Son is less than the Father because he is begotten” (On First Principles 1.3.5). This subordinationism was rejected by the Nicene Creed, which affirmed the consubstantiality (homoousios) of the Son with the Father.

“The God and Father, who holds the universe together, is superior to every being that exists, for he imparts to each one 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, and in turn the power of the Holy Spirit exceeds that of every other being.” (On First Principles 1.3.5)

Additionally, Origen’s theological system was posthumously condemned for various reasons, particularly at the Second Council of Constantinople (553 AD), which anathematized some of his teachings.

• Pre-existence of Souls: Origen believed in the pre-existence of souls, a concept that was later rejected by the Church.
• Subordinationism: Origen taught that the Son and the Holy Spirit were subordinate to the Father, which was contrary to the doctrine of consubstantiality (homoousios) developed at the Council of Nicaea.
• Apokatastasis: Origen proposed the idea of the eventual restoration of all beings, including Satan, to their original state of holiness (apokatastasis), which was deemed heretical.

Tertullian (c. 155–240 CE)

An early Christian apologist from Carthage, Tertullian is considered the father of Latin Christianity. He coined the term Trinity and contributed to developing the doctrine of the Incarnation and the use of Latin in Christian theology. His works such as Apologeticus defended Christians against Roman persecution.

Tertullian is often seen as the first to use the term “Trinity” (Latin: Trinitas), but he also expressed a form of subordinationism, where the Son and the Spirit were distinct and subordinate to the Father. He wrote,

“The Father is the whole substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as he himself acknowledges: “My Father is greater than I.”…He who begets is one, and he who is begotten is another: He too, who sends is one, and he who is sent is another.” (Against Praxeas 9).

Tertullian’s idea of the Son as a “portion” of the Father was rejected by later orthodox Trinitarian theology, which affirms that the Son is fully God, co-equal with the Father. This shows that Tertullian did not believe that the Son or Holy Spirit possessed full divinity. Additionally Tertullian writes that he believed that God took a piece of His eternal matter and later formed it into the son.

Then, as soon as God had willed to put forth into this own matter and form…he first brought forth the word itself…that everything might be made through the very word by which all had been planned and arranged, or rather already made, so far as God’s thought was concerned. (Against Praxeas 6, 6).

Later in life, Tertullian joined the Montanist movement, which was later declared heretical. The Montanist movement was founded by the self-proclaimed prophet Montanus. His teachings emphasized ecstatic prophecy, a rigorous moral code, and the belief in new divine revelations that surpassed those of Christ and the apostles. Montanism was condemned by the Church as heretical. While he was not directly condemned in any church councils, Montanism was widely condemned by Church leaders during the 2nd and 3rd centuries.

Final Thoughts

The doctrine of the Trinity, as recognized today, was not fully understood or properly articulated by the earliest church fathers. Figures like Theophilus of Antioch, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Ignatius of Antioch affirmed their understanding of the divinity of Christ and acknowledged the Spirit, yet they fell short of expressing the roles, relationships, or nature of these figures as it was later understood by the Trinity doctrine. As seen above, they posed views that would later be deemed heretical by the Church.

The writings of early church fathers predominantly emphasize God as the “unbegotten” and the Son as the “begotten,” with minimal discussion of the Holy Spirit. Their descriptions often suggest a hierarchy, with God the Father as supreme and the Word (or Son) and the Spirit as subordinate or emanating from Him. This approach indicates that early Christianity had not yet developed the concept of the Trinity as one God in three co-equal, co-eternal persons. The varied terminology and structure in these early texts suggest that Trinitarian doctrine was not yet a coherent or fully established belief but one that would gradually take shape over time.

The journey toward a unified Trinitarian doctrine required centuries of theological exploration, debate, and formal resolution. The ecumenical councils, particularly Nicaea in 325 AD and Constantinople in 381 AD, were critical in clarifying the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These councils addressed conflicting views, such as Arianism, which denied the full divinity of the Son. Yet, many controversies, such as Adoptionism, Modalism, Valentinianism, Marcionism, and Nestorianism, were left hanging and addressed in additional future councils. This evolution of doctrine highlights that the Trinity was not an obvious or fully realized belief from Christianity’s inception but rather a theology that gradually emerged over centuries.