Son's Subordination Analysis
THE NATURE OF THE SON’S SUBORDINATION
The debates within evangelicalism over the subordination of the Son do not seem to have subsided with the passing of time or increase in knowledge of the Scriptures and in spite of the larger volume of scholarship, be it biblical, theological or historical, conducted by and available to the two sides, gradationists and equivalentionist, or complementarians and egalitarians.
Summary - Equivalentists
In summary, equivalentists agree with gradationists that there has been functional subordination of the Son to the Father, and of the Holy Spirit to both the Son and the Father, but they differ from gradationists by asserting that this functional subordination was only temporary. For them it was only to accomplish …show more content…
It accepts that the Godhead exists in three ontologically equal yet distinct beings in the persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Their essence as members of the Godhead is verily the same, there is no iota of difference or distinction between any of them to the other insofar as their ontological being is concerned. They have always been God, they have always been members of the Triune God and there is perfect and complete unity and community within themselves. Their relationship with each other is also unique to and from the other. “The Father is the Fount of divinity, the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Spirit is eternally proceeding from the Father. These relationships, while marking the distinctiveness of identity of each Person, do not in any way limit or lessen the complete and equal divinity of each …show more content…
These relationships include subordination because the identities of the Son (Begotten) and the Spirit (Proceeding) are logically derived from the identity of the Father, making them subordinate, but these identities do not necessitate limitations on function.”
It is to be noted that the teaching of the trinity has to be constructed from throughout Scripture as it is not given in ready-made, clear format. Consequently the outcome will be coloured with the bias and hermeneutical presuppositions of the scholar. Erickson demonstrates this when he states about functional subordination: “While some texts, such as the 1 Corinthians 15 passage, favor the gradational view, it is our judgment that overall, the equivalence view does a better job of explaining more of the biblical evidence and with less distortion of the facts.” What is interesting about this is that Erickson offers no Bible verse to support his equivalentism position. What we find him doing is that he relies on what other scholars have written on the meaning of “begotten,” and “Father” and “Son.” We also find his interpretations of such verses as 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 and Hebrews 5:7-10 peculiar, including his justification of the meaning of kephalē in 1 Corinthians 11:3 and Ephesians 5:23. While what Erickson has done would be expected with
The debates within evangelicalism over the subordination of the Son do not seem to have subsided with the passing of time or increase in knowledge of the Scriptures and in spite of the larger volume of scholarship, be it biblical, theological or historical, conducted by and available to the two sides, gradationists and equivalentionist, or complementarians and egalitarians.
Summary - Equivalentists
In summary, equivalentists agree with gradationists that there has been functional subordination of the Son to the Father, and of the Holy Spirit to both the Son and the Father, but they differ from gradationists by asserting that this functional subordination was only temporary. For them it was only to accomplish …show more content…
It accepts that the Godhead exists in three ontologically equal yet distinct beings in the persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Their essence as members of the Godhead is verily the same, there is no iota of difference or distinction between any of them to the other insofar as their ontological being is concerned. They have always been God, they have always been members of the Triune God and there is perfect and complete unity and community within themselves. Their relationship with each other is also unique to and from the other. “The Father is the Fount of divinity, the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Spirit is eternally proceeding from the Father. These relationships, while marking the distinctiveness of identity of each Person, do not in any way limit or lessen the complete and equal divinity of each …show more content…
These relationships include subordination because the identities of the Son (Begotten) and the Spirit (Proceeding) are logically derived from the identity of the Father, making them subordinate, but these identities do not necessitate limitations on function.”
It is to be noted that the teaching of the trinity has to be constructed from throughout Scripture as it is not given in ready-made, clear format. Consequently the outcome will be coloured with the bias and hermeneutical presuppositions of the scholar. Erickson demonstrates this when he states about functional subordination: “While some texts, such as the 1 Corinthians 15 passage, favor the gradational view, it is our judgment that overall, the equivalence view does a better job of explaining more of the biblical evidence and with less distortion of the facts.” What is interesting about this is that Erickson offers no Bible verse to support his equivalentism position. What we find him doing is that he relies on what other scholars have written on the meaning of “begotten,” and “Father” and “Son.” We also find his interpretations of such verses as 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 and Hebrews 5:7-10 peculiar, including his justification of the meaning of kephalē in 1 Corinthians 11:3 and Ephesians 5:23. While what Erickson has done would be expected with