Wyatt Graham

Faith | Books | Culture

Eternal Functional Subordination

Does 1 Corinthians 15:28 Teach the Son’s Eternal Subordination? Answer: No, It Teaches Our Spiritual Transformation in Christ

by Leave a Comment

Note to readers: I consider this article to be a work in process. It represents my fresh and therefore incomplete view of 1 Corinthians 15. I offer them in this light and in this light only. 

 

Does 1 Corinthians 15:28 teach that the Son eternally submits to the Father: “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”?

Some argue the case. Bruce Ware claims, “There is no question that this passage indicates the eternal future submission of the Son to the Father, in keeping with his submission to the Father both in the incarnation and in eternity past” (2005: 84 – anipots.com). Wayne Grudem cites 1 Corinthians 15:28 to affirm the Son’s “subordinate” role (ST 249).

With the respect due these theologians, I disagree with their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15. By tracing the Adam-Christ relationship in 1 Corinthians 15, the citation of Psalm 8 in 15:27, and the meaning of the final phrase “that God may all in all,” we discern another and better conclusion of the text’s meaning. 1 Corinthians 15:28 indicates that the Son redeems physical humanity and subjects all physical things to God, so that God may be all in all Spiritual creatures through his abiding Spirit.

[Read more…] about Does 1 Corinthians 15:28 Teach the Son’s Eternal Subordination? Answer: No, It Teaches Our Spiritual Transformation in Christ

Can Christians Believe in the Eternal Submission of the Son? (a Review of Trinity Without Hierarchy Edited by Michael Bird and Scott Harrower)

by 1 Comment

For centuries, Christians have confessed that God exists as a tri-unity distinguished by the personal names of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each name of a person in God expressed some implied relationship: so the Father begets the Son and the Son is begotten.

These relational properties (often called relations of origin) maintained the unity of the simple God, while distinguishing persons in God according to their biblical names: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

But recently, some evangelicals have attempted to reconceive of the Trinity by introducing notions of authority and submission into the inner-life of God. The basic idea goes like this: Jesus obeyed the Father during his earthly life. And this obedience implies an eternal relationship in which the Son of God always obeyed the Father. So authority and submission explain how persons in God relate to one another.

[Read more…] about Can Christians Believe in the Eternal Submission of the Son? (a Review of Trinity Without Hierarchy Edited by Michael Bird and Scott Harrower)

The Complementarian Trinity Debate: A Chronological Summary (Pt II)

by 6 Comments

The last two weeks have witnessed the break out of a civil war between complementarian Trinitarians. One side affirms the eternal functional subordination of the Son (EFS), while the other side affirms only the economic subordination of the son (classical or non-EFS). Put more simply, one side argues that the Son has eternally submitted to the Father, while the other side asserts that the Son only submits to the Father in history.

I chronicle the beginning of the civil war here, providing context for the rest of this article in which I detail the on-going debate during June 11th to June 21st. During this period, the war intensifies. On June 13th Lewis Ayres and Michel Barnes, reputable patristic scholars, weigh-in on the Trinitarian debate, assaulting the position of Ware and Grudem (EFS). The patristic hammer weakens the EFS side, but they counterattack on the 14th and 20th. [Read more…] about The Complementarian Trinity Debate: A Chronological Summary (Pt II)

The Complementarian Trinity Debate: A Chronological Summary (Pt I)

by 1 Comment

Over the last two weeks, Christian blogs have been ablaze with debates about the Trinity. These debates have centered on how the Son relates to the Father. One side argues that how the Son submits to the Father in history is the same way God the Father relates to the God the Son in eternity. The other side argues that the way the Son submits to the Father in history is not the way God the Son relates to the Father in eternity.

The first position goes by at least three names: eternal function subordination (EFS), eternal relational subordination (ERS), or eternal relational authority-submission (ERAS). More specifically, it argues that the way the Son differs from the Father is by submitting, while the Father to the Son is by exerting authority. This relationship is how these two members of Trinity differ in eternity.

For EFS proponents, the submission of the Son does not indicate any inferiority between the two essentially. Actually, submission is an honorable role that does not require an ontological difference between the Father and Son. Further, this analogy between the Father and Son makes sense of human relations, relations between husband (authority) and wife (submission). 1 Corinthians 11:3 provides justification for this position: “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” [Read more…] about The Complementarian Trinity Debate: A Chronological Summary (Pt I)