Many people mistakenly believe that the concept of the Trinity was a fully developed and universally accepted doctrine among the earliest Christians. In reality, this was far from the case. After Jesus’ death, the early Christian community was deeply divided over fundamental questions about his identity. Was Jesus divine, or was he merely a prophet? If he was divine, in what sense? Had he always been divine, or was his divinity conferred upon him? If so, when did this occur? These debates consumed the minds of theologians, bishops, and ordinary believers alike. An often-cited anecdote attributed to Gregory of Nyssa, a prominent Christian theologian and bishop in the 380s, humorously illustrates the diversity of opinions among early Christians:
“Every part of the city is filled with such talk; the alleys, the crossroads, the squares, the avenues. It comes from those who sell clothes, moneychangers, grocers. If you ask a moneychanger what the exchange rate is, he will reply with a dissertation on the Begotten and Unbegotten. If you enquire about the quality and the price of bread, the baker will reply: ‘The Father is greatest and the Son subject to him.’ When you ask at the baths whether the water is ready, the manager will declare that ‘the Son came forth from nothing.'”
Among these competing views was a striking and, to some, compelling idea known as Adoptionism. Adoptionism was a theological perspective that arose in the early centuries of Christianity. This doctrine asserts that Jesus, though born as an ordinary human, was “adopted” as the Son of God at a specific moment in his life—typically understood to be his baptism, resurrection, or ascension.
Adoptionism stood out because it sought to reconcile Jesus’ humanity with his exalted status as the “Son of God” in a way that was both simple and grounded in Scripture. Proponents of this view argued that Jesus was not inherently divine by nature but was instead “adopted” as God’s son at a pivotal moment in his life—whether at his baptism, resurrection, or ascension. This theological stance drew on key New Testament passages and resonated with certain Jewish understandings of divine election, wherein God chose individuals to fulfill unique roles within His plan.
Paul of Samosata (c. 200-275 CE)
One of the most well-known figures who is associated with the concept of Adoptionism was Paul of Samosata. He became the bishop of Antioch in 260 but was deposed from his title in 268 CE after the Synod of Antioch, where his views were condemned as heretical. Paul of Samosata denied the preexistence of Christ as a divine being and instead emphasized Jesus’ humanity. For Paul, Jesus was a man uniquely endowed with the Word (Logos) of God, achieving divinity not by nature but through his unparalleled moral virtue and God’s indwelling presence. This view positioned him against emerging orthodox conceptions of Christ as eternally divine. Paul’s theology, with its focus on Jesus’ human development and adoption by God, sought to preserve monotheism but raised significant concerns among other Christians who wanted to make Jesus co-eternal with God.
Biblical Basis for Adoptionist Theology
Adoptionists grounded their theology in particular passages of the New Testament, emphasizing texts that suggest a progressive revelation of Jesus’ divine status rather than an intrinsic and eternal divinity. These passages can be grouped into several key moments in the life of Jesus:
The Baptism of Jesus
Adoptionists often pointed to the accounts of Jesus’ baptism as the decisive moment of his divine adoption:
Matthew 3:16-17: “And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.'”
Mark 1:10-11: “And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.'”
Luke 3:21-22: “Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.'”
Adoptionists argued that these passages depict a pivotal event in which Jesus is publicly acknowledged and endowed with divine authority, consistent with the concept of adoption.
It is worth noting that the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke appears immediately after the account of his baptism (Luke 3:23-28). This placement has long been regarded as unusual, prompting some scholars to suggest that it serves a deliberate theological purpose. By situating the genealogy at this juncture rather than during the birth story of Jesus, Luke may be emphasizing the connection between Jesus’ baptism—where he is declared the “beloved Son” of God—and his lineage as a “son” within his broader role. This juxtaposition could underscore that Luke believed that Jesus’ divine sonship, proclaimed at his baptism, marks the start of his adopted sonship.
The Resurrection
Adoptionists also highlighted the resurrection as the moment when Jesus’ divine status was definitively established:
Romans 1:3-4: “…concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Here, Paul seems to suggest a transformation or exaltation in Jesus’ status, from his human lineage as a descendant of David to his divine sonship as declared by the resurrection.
The Ascension
Passages describing Jesus’ ascension also carried weight for Adoptionists:
Acts 2:36: “Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
Philippians 2:9-11: “Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
Adoptionists interpreted these verses as affirming a progression in Jesus’ status, culminating in his elevation to divine authority.
4. Other Supporting Passages
Adoptionists often cited passages that emphasize Jesus’ obedience and fidelity as prerequisites for his divine status:
Hebrews 5:8-9: “Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him.”
Acts 10:38: “…how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.”
“Son of God” in Roman Antiquity
In Roman culture, the concept of a ruler or king being referred to as the “son of God” was neither foreign nor unique to Christianity. It was deeply embedded in the imperial ideology of the time, where divine sonship served as both a political and theological assertion of legitimacy. The Roman emperors, beginning with Augustus, frequently claimed a special relationship with the gods, often presenting themselves as divinely appointed figures who embodied the will of heaven on earth. This claim was not merely symbolic; it carried profound implications for the emperor’s authority and the unity of the empire.
One of the clearest examples of this idea is found in the title “Divi Filius”, meaning “Son of the Divine,” which was adopted by Augustus, the first Roman emperor. This title referred to Augustus as the son of the deified Julius Caesar, who had been declared a god (divus) by the Roman Senate following his assassination. By styling himself as the “Son of the Divine,” Augustus not only cemented his connection to Caesar but also implied his own quasi-divine status. This title and its implications were propagated through coinage, inscriptions, and imperial propaganda, reinforcing the emperor’s role as a mediator between the gods and humanity.
This concept of divine sonship extended beyond Augustus and was embraced by subsequent emperors, who sought to legitimize their rule through similar claims. Public rituals, temples, and festivals often celebrated the emperor as a divine or semi-divine figure, emphasizing his unique role in maintaining cosmic and civic order. The idea of a “son of God” as a title of power and divine favor thus resonated deeply within the Roman world, forming a key part of the cultural and religious milieu in which early Christianity emerged.
For early Christians, this cultural backdrop added layers of meaning to their proclamation of Jesus as the “Son of God,” who they also believed to be the Jewish Messiah, King of the Jews. While the title carried profound theological significance within the Christian tradition, it also corresponded with Roman imperial ideology. This overlap in language and symbolism would have been unmistakable, situating the Christian message within the broader Roman world while simultaneously subverting its claims to ultimate authority.
Were Paul and Luke Adoptionists?
There is strong evidence that both Paul and Luke, a follower of Paul, had an Adoptionist theology based on a careful reading of their texts. This theology often emphasized the progressive nature of Jesus’ divine status rather than an eternal preexistence.
Both Paul and Luke exhibit a theological framework that can be best described as subordinationist, meaning they portray Jesus as subordinate to God the Father rather than as co-equal and co-eternal with Him. This stands in contrast to the later doctrine of the Trinity, which asserts the full equality of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In their writings, Paul and Luke frequently emphasize the derived authority, dependence, and obedient role of Jesus, suggesting that they did not view him as ontologically equal to God.
Paul provides several passages that clearly indicate subordinationism:
1 Corinthians 15:27-28: Paul writes, “For God has put all things in subjection under his feet. But when it says, ‘all things are put in subjection,’ it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.” This passage explicitly states that Jesus, even in his exalted role, remains subordinate to God, who is the ultimate authority.
Philippians 2:9-11: After describing Jesus’ obedience unto death, Paul states, “Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name.” Here, Jesus’ exaltation is a result of God’s initiative, not an intrinsic or eternal status.
Romans 8:34: Paul states that Jesus “is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us,” portraying Jesus as a mediator between humanity and God, not as an equal participant in divinity.
Similarly, Luke’s writings also reflect subordinationist theology:
Luke 22:42: In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus prays, “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me; nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.” This prayer demonstrates Jesus’ submission to the will of the Father.
Acts 2:36: Peter declares, “Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” This statement indicates that Jesus’ lordship is granted to him by God, not inherent or eternal.
Such passages suggest that both Paul and Luke did not view Jesus as co-equal with God but rather as a figure who derives his authority and status from God. This subordinationist view runs counter to the later Trinitarian doctrine, which emerged to assert the co-equality and co-eternity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; however, it corresponds with adoptionist theology.
Paul’s Adoptionism: Divine Sonship at the Resurrection
Paul’s writings strongly suggest that he viewed Jesus’ divine sonship as being conferred at the resurrection. In Paul’s theology, the resurrection is not merely a confirmation of Jesus’ role as Messiah but the moment at which Jesus is exalted to a unique status as the “Son of God”:
Romans 1:3-4: Paul writes that Jesus “was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead.” The key phrase “declared to be the Son of God” points to a transformation or recognition of divine sonship tied to the resurrection event.
Acts 13:30-33 (attributed to Paul by Luke): “But God raised him from the dead, and for many days he was seen by those who had traveled with him from Galilee to Jerusalem. They are now his witnesses to our people. We bring you the good news that what God promised to the fathers, this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also it is written in the second Psalm, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you.’” Here, Paul directly connects Jesus’ resurrection with his “begetting” as God’s Son, a notion that strongly aligns with Adoptionist theology.
Paul’s view of the resurrection also diverges from the Gospel accounts, which emphasize Jesus’ physical, bodily resurrection. In 1 Corinthians 15:42-44, Paul describes the resurrection body as a “spiritual body,” contrasting it with the earthly body: “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body.” This suggests that Paul viewed the resurrection as a transformative event in which Jesus transcended his earthly, physical nature and became something entirely new—an exalted, spiritual being uniquely empowered by God.
Luke’s Adoptionism: Divine Sonship at the Baptism
In contrast to Paul, Luke’s writings suggest that Jesus’ divine sonship begins at his baptism. The baptismal scene in Luke’s Gospel is a key moment of divine proclamation and theophany, which Adoptionist interpreters have often highlighted:
Luke 3:21-22: “Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.'” The divine voice here is a declaration of Jesus’ sonship, and the descent of the Holy Spirit marks his anointing for his mission. This event, framed as a public acknowledgment of Jesus as God’s Son, closely aligns with the Adoptionist view of divine sonship being conferred at a specific point in Jesus’ life.
Luke 3:23: Immediately after the baptism, Luke transitions into Jesus’ genealogy, concluding with Adam, “the son of God.” The proximity of the baptismal event and the genealogy seems to suggest that Luke is situating Jesus’ sonship within the broader context of God’s salvific plan, while emphasizing the moment of his anointing as a transformative event.
Unlike Paul, Luke does not explicitly tie Jesus’ divine sonship to the resurrection but instead portrays his baptism as the defining moment of divine recognition and empowerment. This distinction underscores Luke’s unique theological emphasis, which appears to align more closely with an Adoptionist framework.
While later Christian orthodoxy emphasized the eternal divinity of Christ, the writings of Paul and Luke contain themes and formulations that reflect an earlier, more dynamic understanding of Jesus’ relationship with God—a perspective that aligns closely with Adoptionism. Their works reveal a framework in which Jesus’ divine sonship unfolds progressively, shaped by his mission, obedience, and exaltation, which diverges significantly from later Trinitarian orthodoxy.
Their subordinationist portrayal of Jesus as subordinate to God the Father undermines the idea of co-equality central to the Trinity doctrine. Paul’s emphasis on the resurrection as the moment of Jesus’ divine adoption and his description of the resurrection as a transformation into a spiritual, non-physical state further support an Adoptionist interpretation of his Christology. Meanwhile, Luke’s Gospel places Jesus’ adoption as God’s Son at his baptism, presenting it as a moment of divine anointing and empowerment. Together, these perspectives reveal an early Christian diversity in understanding Jesus’ divine status—one that complicates the later Trinitarian synthesis.
Final Thoughts
The early centuries of Christianity were a time of theological exploration, debate, and conflict as the nascent faith sought to define its understanding of Jesus’ identity and relationship to God. Far from being settled or monolithic, the doctrines we now associate with mainstream Christianity—such as the Trinity—emerged only after intense disputes among competing factions. The writings of Paul and Luke reveal a diverse and dynamic theological landscape in which subordinationist and Adoptionist tendencies held significant sway. Paul’s emphasis on Jesus’ exaltation at the resurrection and Luke’s portrayal of divine sonship beginning at Jesus’ baptism underscore an evolving understanding of Jesus’ role and nature.
Adoptionism, as a theological perspective, emphasized Jesus’ humanity while highlighting the relational and covenantal nature of his divine sonship. Rooted in a model of divine election, it resonated deeply with Jewish concepts of kingship and prophecy. Additionally, the title “Son of God” fit naturally within the Roman cultural framework, where rulers and emperors frequently claimed they were adopted under this divine favor or status through similar titles. It makes sense that just as Roman emperors linked their rule to divine sanction and portrayed themselves as mediators between the gods and humanity, Christians would want to do the same for their Messiah.
Adopting such language was both culturally intelligible and theologically significant for early Christians, as it redefined the concept of divine sonship through Jesus’ humility and obedience rather than imperial power or conquest. Though ultimately sidelined by the rise of Trinitarian orthodoxy, Adoptionist thought sought to honor both the humanity of Jesus and the divinely conferred status that marked his unique relationship with God. The evidence from the Synoptic Gospels, Acts, and Pauline epistles suggests an Adoptionist framework that better integrates Jewish monotheism with early Christian theology while subtly subverting Roman imperial ideology, offering a more historically grounded interpretation of Jesus’ identity among some of the early Christians.