Dave

HI again Mark…long time no chat! If i can reiterate what has been said by Cheryl and say we love you…you know…in a blokey type of…you know…way…ahem…(arkwardly shuffling my feet)…

You said, “If Jesus still has his humanity now and according to egalitarians, that is the ONLY thing that makes him subordinate, how is he not then eternally in that position?”

I guess this is a good point, and perhaps I am a bit confused but wanted to suggest the following.

Could we ALL stop using the word “subordinate” if indeed “submit” is what is meant? I do not believe that Jesus is subordinate to the Father, even during his earthly ministry. To be so would mean he would have changed in essence (c.f. Phil 2:6). But nowhere does scripture say Jesus was subordinate to the Father or the Godhead, to the best of my knowledge. It says he has been raised up…but he had submitted – placed himself below (as well as dying and being raised to life).

Finally, as I have mentioned before, I really am not interested in church history to the extent that some might be. The issue at hand now is if the Son can be subordinate in function but not in essence. The issue in my mind is not whether or not we can prove if the debate 2000 years ago was about this or not…but rather whether or not it is the truth.

It is the comps who claim it to be possible, so it should not be hard for them to prove! At the same time, what Cheryl said needs an answer – “If the Son would have less power and less authority to use His will and power, then He is no longer omnipotent.”