So I'm working on some thoughts from John 5:16-30, especially around verse 19, the Son can do nothing by himself, only what he sees the Father doing.
This passage should be favourite for those who want to emphasise the functional subordination of the Son. After all, Jesus seems to determined to emphasise that the Father has given him life, judgement, honour...
But what does the functional subordination of the Son reveal about the Father.
If verse 19 is correct not just of Jesus actions in the economy, then doesn't it mean that the Son cannot submit unless he sees the Father also, in some way, submitting?
Isn't the whole point that there is a correlation between the action and will of the Father and the Son (and a positive correlation!)
And doesn't the Father in fact do this? By handing all judgement to the Son, by granting for the Son to have life in himself, by, in a sense giving up his identity to the will of the Son, since the Son gives life to whomever he pleased to give it.
Because of the gender debate, those who push functional subordination seem to want to posit a negative correlation between the action of the Son and the action of the Father (i.e. Jesus' submission shows us that the Father commands, rather than showing us that he Father also, in his own way, submits)Is this in any way related to the kind of crucifixion division of labour in popular evangelical piety, ie the Son is loving and forgiving and the Father is wrathful?
Wasn't it Arius who had the problem of asserting a negative correlation between the Son and the Father?any way related to the kind of crucifixion division of labour in popular evangelical piety, ie the Son is loving and forgiving and the Father is wrathful?
So I want to propose that asserting a functional subordination of the Son only avoids a Arius-ish mistake when it notes a positive correlation between the action of the Son in submitting and the action of the Father in giving him all things.
Not very useful for a gender debate though
Reintegrate interview: Dual citizens
3 days ago
3 comments:
Not very useful for a gender debate though
...unless you want to say something about mutual submission...
well, yeah, maybe.. but even then.. the difference between dvine persons and us is pretty vast
It boils down to the difference between Delegation (Mission) and Vindication (Reward) in the Covenant pattern.
The Son images the Father, and becomes His "plenipotentiary," that is, with the Father's full authority. As the Father sent the Son, so now the Son sends the Spirit to gather the Bride, whom the Son then presents to the Father as chaste and ready for marriage. Father, Son... Bride.
Post a Comment