I believe the latter.
1. The teaching of the Early Christian Fathers is summed up in these six propositions :
I. There is but one God, the Father.
II. There are in the Godhead three (not mere names or modes) truly distinct persons, the Father, the Son or Word of God and the Holy Ghost. These persons are not only hypostases but individual beings.
III. These three Persons are generically consubstantial, i.e. the three Persons are ????????? (homoousios), not ?????????? (monoousios).
IV. There is but one beginning/cause (????????, monarchia), one font/fountain or principle of divinity (???? ????????), God the Father, who alone is a???????, God of and from Himself. Thus, the Son and Holy Spirit derive their divinity, personhood and being from Him; the Son by generation, and the Holy Spirit by procession.
V. Because the Son and the Holy Spirit derive both their divinity and personhood from God the Father, this derivation is not limited only to the person of the Father, or the divinity of the Father, but rather, from both the personhood and divinity of the Father.
VI. The Son is subordinate to the Father and this subordination does not pertain to the economy of salvation only but also to the order of being before all worlds.
Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, C 62, 100, Apol I. 13, Apol I. 16, Apol II. 13); Theophilus of Antioch (To Autolycus, Book II, C 10); St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies, Book I, C 22, C 19 (Old version), Book III, C 15, C 16 (Old version), Book III, C 19. 2); Tertullian (Against Praxeas, C XIII); Origen (Commentary on the Gospel of John (Book II).6, (Book VI).23, Contra Cels. Book VIII C 14, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils, Leo Donald Davis, pg. 49); Novatian (On the Trinity, C 13, 31); Alexander of Alexandria (Epistles on Arianism and the Deposition of Arius 1.12, To Alexander, Bishop of the City of Constantinople); Athanasius, Discourse Against the Arians 1.58, 2.16, 4.1, 4.9-10, De Decretis); Eusebius (Eusebius of Caesarea to Euphration of Balanea); Eusebius the Historian (Ecclesiastical History Book I, ii, Leob Classical Library, Eusebius Vol. I Page 18); Cyril of Alexander (NPNF - 2nd series, Vol. 14, The Seven Ecumenical Councils, pg. 202); Gregory Nazianzen, (Fourth Theological Oration, 30); Basil the Great, (Letter 38, 125, 236-In some older works Letter 391); Bishop Bull in his A Defence of the Nicene Creed catalogs many passages from the Pre-Nicene and Nicene Fathers affirming the subordination of the Son to the Father’s Monarchy beginning on page 627.
2. The Council of Constantinople 381 A.D. and later creeds, changed the meaning of the original Nicene Creed 325 A.D. into a sense contradictory to its original intention by removing the phrase “of the essence of the Father” and Nicea’s anathemas. In the Nicene Creed we read, ‘????????? ?? ?????”, in English “consubstantial with the Father”. Yet this was translated, “unius substantiae cum Patre” in the Latin by Hosius, or whoever first translated the Greek into Latin. Thus homoousios became monoousios. A generic sense was replaced by a numeric sense. In other words, Nicea 325 A.D. affirmed multiple beings that had the same type of nature but only one of those beings was the One God and that was the Father because he is the only source and cause of all. Constantinople 381 A.D. and later creeds affirmed one being. This is a radical change in meaning and has created absolute chaos ever since. David Waltz says,
Fact 1 - Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 deletes portions of the Nicene Creed of 325, even though we read from the “Definition of the faith” of the council of Chalcedon in 451 that:
…we have renewed the unerring creed of the fathers. We have proclaimed to all the creed of the 318 [i.e. Nicene Creed of 325]; and we have made our own those fathers who accepted this agreed statement of religion—the 150 who later met in great Constantinople and themselves set their seal to the same creed. (Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume 1, Norman P. Tanner, S.J. editor, 1990, p. 83.)
Fact 2 – The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 is not “the creed of the 318” [i.e. Nicene Creed of 325].
Fact 3 – “No copy of the council’s doctrinal decisions, entitled ????? ??? ????????????? ???????? (record of the tome and anathemas), has survived.” (Ibid., p. 21.)
Fact 4 – “The Second Council of Constantinople, A. D. 381, was not originally a general council”. (Joseph Pohle, The Trinity, English trans. Arthur Preuss, 1912, p. 129.)
3. The idea that God is an essence that manifests itself in or by three persons is an innovation that took hold after Nicea 325 with the influence of PLotinus through Origen and then primarily in a man known today as Pseudo Dionysius who dominated the thought of the Roman Schoalstics. I have all of this cataloged in great detail here:http://eternalpropositions.wordpress.com/drakes-triadology-stuff/