Personally I find Hippolytus's refutation of Noetus not inadequate bearing in mind Hippolytus's own misunderstanding of Rom 9:5 and his captivation to the philosophical Trinitarianism of his day. At least Hippolytus cites all the right bible verses to refute Noetus, but doesn't realize that Rom 9:5 could itself have been used to refute Noetus if read a different way. For per Hippolytus, Rom 9:5 makes the Christ of flesh the "Almighty" which cannot be, and needs no refutation as non-contextual. Christ was made Almighty only upon his resurrection.
That it never occurred to Hippolytus to read Rom 9:5 in a different way seems strange to us, but it is testament to the power of political propaganda exercised by, such as Cyril of Alexandria. If you crossed Cyril and his mob, you could get yourself murdered, literally, like Hypatia. Nestorius was exiled for life by Cyril, even though Nestorius subscribed to all the correct formulae, such as "God the Word." Cyril was, I believe, the harbinger of the 2 Thess 2:4 power prophesied (I am open to being persuaded otherwise). The orthodox had to agree to the Word being begotten of God in those days, which is why there is such specious uniformity and mutual parroting, which is alien to us.
The Hippolytus text is easy to misread in the critical section 2. In bold below is what Noetus says (i.e. not Hippolytus's words):
2.....Do you see, [Noetus] says, how the Scriptures proclaim one God? And as this is clearly exhibited, and these passages are testimonies to it, I am under necessity, [Noetus] says, since one is acknowledged, to make this One the subject of suffering. For Christ was God, and suffered on account of us, being Himself the Father, that [the Father] might be able also to save us. And we cannot express ourselves otherwise, [Noetus] says; for the apostle also acknowledges one God, when he says, “Whose are the fathers, (and) of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.” [Romans 9:5].
.
.
.
6. Let us look next at the apostle’s word: “Whose are the fathers, of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.” [Romans 9:5]. This word declares the mystery of the truth rightly and clearly. He who is over all is God; for thus He speaks boldly, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father.” He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is yet God for ever. For to this effect John also has said, “Which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” [Revelation 1:8]. And well has he named Christ the Almighty. For in this he has said only what Christ testifies of Himself. For Christ gave this testimony, and said, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father;” and Christ rules all things, and has been appointed Almighty by the Father. And in like manner Paul also, in setting forth the truth that all things are delivered unto Him, said, “Christ the first-fruits; afterwards they that are Christ’s at His coming. Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and power. For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For all things are put under Him. But when He saith, All things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted which did put all things under Him. Then shall He also Himself be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” [1 Corinthians 15:20-28]. If, therefore, all things are put under Him with the exception of Him who put them under Him, He is Lord of all, and the Father is Lord of Him, that in all there might be manifested one God, to whom all things are made subject together with Christ, to whom the Father hath made all things subject, with the exception of Himself. And this, indeed, is said by Christ Himself, as when in the Gospel He confessed Him to be His Father and His God. For He speaks thus: “I go to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.” [John 20:17]. If then, Noetus ventures to say that He is the Father Himself, to what father will he say Christ goes away according to the word of the Gospel? But if he will have us abandon the Gospel and give credence to his senselessness, he expends his labor in vain; for “we ought to obey God rather than men.”
7. If, again, he allege His own word when He said, “I and the Father are one,” [John 10:30], let him attend to the fact, and understand that He did not say, “I and the Father am one, but are one.” For the word are is not said of one person, but it refers to two persons, and one power. He has Himself made this clear, when He spake to His Father concerning the disciples, “The glory which Thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; that the world may know that Thou hast sent me.” [John 17:22-23]. What have the Noetians to say to these things? Are all one body in respect of substance, or is it that we become one in the power and disposition of unity of mind? In the same manner the Son, who was sent and was not known of those who are in the world, confessed that He was in the Father in power and disposition. For the Son is the one mind of the Father. We who have the Father’s mind believe so (in Him); but they who have it not have denied the Son. And if, again, they choose to allege the fact that Philip inquired about the Father, saying, “Show us the Father, and it sufficeth us,” to whom the Lord made answer in these terms: “Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father. Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?” [John 14:8-10] and if they choose to maintain that their dogma is ratified by this passage, as if He owned Himself to be the Father, let them know that it is decidedly against them, and that they are confuted by this very word. For though Christ had spoken of Himself, and showed Himself among all as the Son, they had not yet recognized Him to be such, neither had they been able to apprehend or contemplate His real power. And Philip, not having been able to receive this, as far as it was possible to see it, requested to behold the Father. To whom then the Lord said, “Philip, have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” By which He means, If thou hast seen me, thou mayest know the Father through me. For through the image, which is like the original, the Father is made readily known. But if thou hast not known the image, which is the Son, how dost thou seek to see the Father? And that this is the case is made clear by the rest of the chapter, which signifies that the Son who “has been set forth was sent from the Father, and goeth to the Father.”