TheologyThoughts

This was a response on one of the lists:

1Co 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 1Co 15:24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 1Co 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 1Co 15:26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 1Co 15:27 For "God has put all things in subjection under his feet." But when it says, "all things are put in subjection," it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 1Co 15:28 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. [ESV]

Those who use this as a proof text against the Trinity ignore certain facts from the text itself:

1) Notice vs. 23 -- Christ is mentioned. Now, I hope you are not under the impression that Christ is a name -- it's not. Rather, it is a title, "anointed one," which emphasizes Jesus' role as the Messiah, which he fulfilled as a human being as well as God.

2) Secondly, vs. 28 -- he is referred to as "the Son," another designation which emphasizes not who he is, ontologically speaking, but his role, what he does...

3) Third, something which further supports the idea that what Paul has in view here is role distinctions, notice how he describes God -- "God the Father." The syntax used here is significant. Instead of something like τῷ θεῷ [τῷ] πατρί, TWi QEWi [TWi] PATRI, he instead says τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί, TWi QEWi *KAI* PATRI, "to God, even the Father," or "to God, that is, the Father," if we translate a bit more literally. The syntax highlights God the Father's role by the inclusion of KAI, in contrast to the role of the Christ as the Son.

So the text isn't about the nature of God as the Father or the Son, but about the distinctive roles they play in the eschatological completion of redemption. As I stated earlier, Christian theologians have long recognized the economic (role) subordination of the Son in the application of redemption. You therefore cannot use this text as proof against the deity of Christ and his equality with the Father.