Origen believed all people would be saved through Christ.
Tertullian was convinced people should be baptized on their deathbed to ensure their salvation was secured.
Irenaeus believed Old Testament Gentiles were justified by living according to Greek philosophy.
(I will let you figure out what is wrong with those 3 positions.)
I know Origen had some different ideas.
When I did a search it seems his idea was that all people might eventually attain salvation, but only after being purged of their sins through "divine fire".
Origen's concept of universal salvation was based on his belief in the ultimate restoration of all things through Christ.
Which in itself is something that I would like to see as the idea of anyone spending eternity in hell just tears at my soul.
Tertullian said people should be baptized was he wrong?
So believers should not be baptized is that what you are saying? Or do you think baptism is wrong, not sure what your problem is with what he said. Baptism is a public confession of ones faith so even doing it on their deathbed is still just that.
Was Irenaeus wrong?
Irenaeus argued that Old Testament Gentiles could be justified through faith and lived by God's grace, even before the coming of Christ. He emphasized that those who lived justly and piously in the Old Testament, and who believed in the coming of Christ, were also justified. Irenaeus's view aligns with the idea that justification is not limited to the New Testament era, but extends to all who have faith in God and live according to His will
Irenaeus believed that Old Testament Gentiles, like Abraham, were justified by faith in God's promises. He points to Abraham's faith being credited to him as righteousness (Romans 4:3) as an example of this
Strange that you condemn this ECF's but you hold to the pagan philosophy that Augustine brought into the church.