Article that Explains Mutual Submission in the Trinity

[mkgal1]

This may be a lot more than most would like to read, but the gist is this:

You have the Father, who loves the Son, and you have the Son, who willingly gives of himself to the Father and to us. But it’s not just that one-way street. The author of Hebrews even says, the Son now intercedes for us. Jesus pleads our case to the Father, and does the Father say, “My way or the highway?” No, the Father hears our prayers, and he answers them.

Submission within the Trinity is one where it’s not about a hierarchy, as if to say that the Father is more God than the Son, or Jesus has more authority than Holy Spirit. Rather, submission within the Trinity is one of unified purpose, and really, for them, unified nature.

So as we think about marriage, as we think about marriage reflecting who God is, as we think about us as individuals in a marriage reflecting who God is, submission is not one of authoritative rule, it is rather one, of unified purpose.~Graham Explains Submission within the Trinity

Thoughts on this?

 

[Dave-W]

Thoughts on this?

Eh - I think attempts to understand and explain the Trinity will all fall flat. Sometimes they actually border on the ancient heresies.

 

[mkgal1]

Eh - I think attempts to understand and explain the Trinity will all fall flat. Sometimes they actually border on the ancient heresies.

Explaining the "God is 3 persons in One God" is pretty impossible to explain---true, but did you read the article?

It's point is mostly explaining the inter relational dynamic within the Godhead--and how it's mutually submissive (as opposed to the modern fundamentalist belief of a hierarchy).

 

[Dave-W]

but did you read the article?
It's point is mostly explaining the inter relational dynamic within the Godhead-

No I did not. And to me, since the external working of three-in-one cannot be explained; what makes anyone think that trying to describe the inner workings would be any better?

I chalk all such musings up as mere speculation.

 

[mkgal1]

I chalk all such musings up as mere speculation.

You're right---but that's why it's called "faith" and not "certainty".

 

[Dave-W]

You're right---but that's why it's called "faith" and not "certainty".

That does not fit the biblical model for faith: Faith comes by HEARING and hearing by the WORD [rhema = spoken word] of God.

If God is not speaking it, then it is NOT biblical faith.

 

[mkgal1]

If God is not speaking it, then it is NOT biblical faith.

What's your criteria for knowing what God "speaks"?

 

[Dave-W]

What's your criteria for knowing what God "speaks"?

That still small voice (1 kings 19.12) in the inner man.

 

[mkgal1]

That still small voice (1 kings 19.12) in the inner man.

Okay....then I don't know how what I posted "doesn't fit the Biblical model for faith" because the still small voice in my soul says marriage is about mutual submission.

 

[Dave-W]

Okay....then I don't know how what I posted "doesn't fit the Biblical model for faith" because the still small voice in my soul says marriage is about mutual submission.

Is it telling you there there is a model of mutual submission in effect in the Godhead?

That was what I was talking about.

 

[mkgal1]

Is it telling you there there is a model of mutual submission in effect in the Godhead?

That was what I was talking about.

Yes.

 

[David B.]

I've always had trouble understanding the Trinity which is why I decided to join this forum in the first place. Some websites that advocate it do not have comment sections and reply in a discriminatory manner.

Thoughts on the article: Not what I thought it was going to be. Thought it was going to be about the Trinity and making sense of it, however the article seemed more focused on the topic of marriage than explaining the Trinity.

On the selected quote: It seems like another quote that does not prove the existence of the Trinity. One can be unified in purpose and still be different people with different positions. United in a goal, but still at different statuses with different responsibilities. Husbands and wives are essentially supposed to be "One" flesh or unified in purpose. However each member has a different role and different status. There is only ONE head of the family and that is the man. The wife is to serve as a complement of her husband working together to help the two obtain their goal without overstepping her husbands headship.

 

[Paidiske]

Folks, may I please point out that this thread is in the Egalitarian forum. I realise that it's a new area and you may not have realised, but please do check the SOP for this forum before posting further.

 

[David B.]

Folks, may I please point out that this thread is in the Egalitarian forum. I realise that it's a new area and you may not have realised, but please do check the SOP for this forum before posting further.

What exactly does this post mean? Does it mean that I am only allowed to post in areas with people of my same denomination (or non denominational)? Am I not allowed to converse with people of various denominations on this website? I am a new member.

 

[Paidiske]

Hi David, and welcome to CF!

When you look at the Forums page (Forums ) you will see that we have a huge variety of areas for different purposes. Some of those forums are open to everyone, and disagreement is free; others of those areas are more protected, for different denominations or groups to be able to have discussions focussed on their point of view without constant outside disagreement.

The way to tell which kind of forum each is, is to look for the Statement of Purpose, which is a thread at the top of each forum, outlining the way that forum works. For example, you may find the Statement of Purpose for this forum here: Statement of Purpose - Egalitarian Christians Statement of Purpose

As you can see, the Egalitarian forum has been created for those of us who believe in equality and mutuality between the sexes to share and encourage one another without having to constantly defend our point of view in debate with people who disagree. There are other areas where such debate can (and does!) happen.

Again, welcome, and I hope you find CF enriching and enjoyable; I know it takes a while to find your way around! You may be interested to check out the Non-Denominational Forum, which you can find here: Non-denominational

 

[David B.]

Hi David, and welcome to CF!

When you look at the Forums page (Forums ) you will see that we have a huge variety of areas for different purposes. Some of those forums are open to everyone, and disagreement is free; others of those areas are more protected, for different denominations or groups to be able to have discussions focussed on their point of view without constant outside disagreement.

The way to tell which kind of forum each is, is to look for the Statement of Purpose, which is a thread at the top of each forum, outlining the way that forum works. For example, you may find the Statement of Purpose for this forum here: Statement of Purpose - Egalitarian Christians Statement of Purpose

As you can see, the Egalitarian forum has been created for those of us who believe in equality and mutuality between the sexes to share and encourage one another without having to constantly defend our point of view in debate with people who disagree. There are other areas where such debate can (and does!) happen.

Again, welcome, and I hope you find CF enriching and enjoyable; I know it takes a while to find your way around! You may be interested to check out the Non-Denominational Forum, which you can find here: Non-denominational

Ok I understand. I will be more on the look out.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

A small clean up was done. Folks, please read the Statement of Purpose for this forum.

 

[mkgal1]

One can be unified in purpose and still be different people with different positions. United in a goal, but still at different statuses with different responsibilities. Husbands and wives are essentially supposed to be "One" flesh or unified in purpose. However each member has a different role and different status.

In the Athanasian Creed there's the verbiage: "Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence." What you're saying seems a lot like that....but it also seems fairly close to another view--the view that "equality = sameness" (which isn't what egalitarians believe).

In the Body of Christ I don't believe anyone is of "different statuses"--that's the beauty of the Gospel that "in Christ we are all one" (Gal 3:28) and social restrictions are stripped away. However.....we ALL have our unique contribution to the Body (diversity and distinction from each other---but acting with one purpose).

 

[FireDragon76]

Jesus intercedes in respect to his human nature. In the divine nature there is no disharmony of will. I don't see how this fits with the theology of "mutual submission", since it is not submission in the usual sense.

I also think the ancient understanding, at least for the Cappadocians is that there is a hierarchy within the Trinity: the Father is the source of all being. In fact denying this reality, the arche or headship of the Father, is quite offensive to Eastern Christian theology.

Honestly, I don't like the idea of using the Trinity to support either egalitarian or "complementarian" views of gender. I would rather talk about gender in terms of the image of God.

 

[Paidiske]

The Athanasian Creed would deny hierarchy within the Trinity. The east might disagree, but that's kind of a big deal in the west...