Today, Jamie and Dr Tyler Wittman take up part 2 on the Trinity. Looking at questions like, How do we make sense out of the equality of the divine persons, while one (the son) is in submission to another (the father)?
Jamie: Hey everybody, welcome back to the podcast The Towel & The Basin. My name's Jamie Dew, president here at NOBTS Leavell College. And this is, I guess, part two of our podcast with Dr. Tyler Wittman, here at NOBTS. On the doctrine of the Trinity. I appreciate you being back with me once again-
Tyler: Thanks, man.
Jamie: ... and taking the time. I know you got a lot to do. Tell me about your writing projects real quick.
Tyler: I like-
Jamie: You just-
Tyler: ... I like doing this, though.
Jamie: Yeah.
Tyler: Yeah. I am working on finishing a book right now with a friend of mine, Dr. Bobby Jameson, who is associate pastor at Capitol Hill Baptist Church.
Jamie: Okay.
Tyler: ...In Washington, DC. And he and I have been working on this book for a couple years now. We don't really know what it's going to be called. Biblical Reasoning is going to be somewhere in the title, we think, but it's going to be on basically how scripture structures are thinking about the Trinity and the person of Christ. And how the way that scripture structures are thinking, actually is part of the triune God's formation of us in the image of Christ.
Jamie: Right. Okay.
Tyler: So yeah, it's basically about what is the object of theology? Well, it's the triune God. Well, how does that affect our reading of Scripture?
Jamie: Right. Is the book done?
Tyler: The first draft is. So we got to spend the next few months polishing it, making sure it sounds like it was written by one person, rather than two people. And those kind of things.
Jamie: That's hard to do.
Tyler: We hope to submit it by June. Yeah, you've done this.
Jamie: No, but I had really good fortune with the book on, it's one with Baker, I guess. It was the intro book with Paul Gould. Our writing style's very similar. So it's just dumb luck on that.
Tyler: See, Bobby's a better writer than I am.
Jamie: I doubt that.
Tyler: But anyway, we've had a blast. I learned a lot, and then I have to turn my attention next to a shorter book on creation and providence. And so that'll take up my time. And then I'll also start to work, maybe slowly on my next academic project, something to do with God's perfection.
Jamie: Okay. So providence and creations, not an academic book. That sounds awfully-
Tyler: Well, it's supposed to be a 40,000-word book. That's aimed at a general audience. I'm not going to be writing to fellow scholars or something like that. Yeah. That's what I mean.
Jamie: Right. Gotcha. And who's that with?
Tyler: Crossway.
Jamie: Crossway, all right. Good. All right. So super-helpful last podcast, just giving us a broad overview of the doctrine of the Trinity. Now, what we want to do is try to get into some of these contemporary debates. You said in the last podcast, what I said, and then you tweaked it a little bit. That if you really haven't been paying attention to these discussions in the last five to 10 years, you're behind at least on the discussion. And one of the big topics that's been raging over the last couple years has been this question of Christ's subordination to the Father. And then there are lots of questions that come along with that about how does that work? How do we hang on to equality? And some things like that, how long has that been going on?
And those are real loose, general ways of getting at the questions, but we'll try to flesh those questions out, make sense of those here. And then you got us through that. So let me start here. There are these indicators in Scripture, where Jesus is clearly in submission to the Father. And so, for example, he says things like, "I can do nothing apart from my father." Or a very vivid one in the garden of Gethsemane, when he seems to want very badly not to have to endure what he's about to endure on the cross and cries out, "If it's possible, let this cut past from me." And then, this great moment where he says, "Nevertheless, not my will, but Thy will be done." So he seems to be in submission to the Father. That raises all kinds of questions. And maybe later we'll come back and do something on the will.
Maybe, but for now, let's not do that. We'll just talk about subordination itself. There are these indications that Jesus, the Son is submitted to the Father. And yet there's also the reality, as we talked about in the last podcast that the Father, the Son, the Spirit are all equal with each other. So it seems at least prima facie that you've got a question there to work through. How do we make sense out of, on the one hand, the equality of the divine persons? All of them are equal. And yet one of them, at least, if not several, Holy Spirit to follow, is in submission to the other. It seems as though those may cut different ways. They're equal, yet one's in submission. Let's just start there. How do you make sense out of that?
Tyler: Well, the older theologians would make a distinction between what they call theology and economy, right? Which basically is the distinction. People hear economy and they think of invisible hands and their bank accounts. And it's a derivative meaning of the term, but economy is really in scripture, just an ordered arrangement or something. I can describe a household. Right? And how its various parts function.
Jamie: Well put.
Tyler: So when we talk about theology and economy, we're talking about discourse about God. That's what theology is. About His nature, His being, His life. And then economy is just His ordered plan and arrangement of the whole of space-time existence, everything. Right? So everything that's not God. So all of our history. So when theology is to make this distinction between theology and economy, they're making a distinction between, well, things we say about God, and then things you say that God does in time for us and for our salvation. Creating, providing, saving.
Glorifying, these kind of things. Right? Well, there has to be a fit between those two to some extent, but they're not the same. So we have to distinguish somehow between theology and economy, because the Creator is not a creature. He is the creator. Right? And if the world had not been, even though we can't really think about what that would be, if there were no creation or no creatures, there would still be God. Right? And He'd be the same, but He creates. And so the way He comports himself in the economy, okay. In time, in our history, it fits with who He eternally is, but it does not determine who He is, does not define who He is. Okay. God does not somehow change when He creates. He doesn't become the triune God. He doesn't change.
So one of the things that this basic creator/creature distinction does for us is that it helps attune us to the fact that when we come across statements, and if we had a long time, of course, we'd go into how Father, Son, and Spirit are all equally creator. They're all equally God. Scripture does spell that out for us pretty clearly. Though we've only mentioned the passages where the Son seems to be subordinate to the Father or something. So what's going on there? Well, if we keep all the scripture in mind, then that helps us to focus in on those statements and say, "Okay, clearly the Son is subordinate to the Father. The question is how? In what respect?" Well, if you keep in view, all of what scripture's saying at this point, you're able to see this as something that pertains to the economy.
Well, what's going on in the economy at this particular moment? Well, you remember back to Israel and how they failed in the wilderness. And they were disobedient to God. And they wandered in the wilderness, right. And before they could inherit the promised land and so forth. Israel, of course, began with one man. It culminates in one man. Right. It's fulfilled in one man, Jesus. And Jesus arrives in part to enact the faithful obedience that the nation of Israel did not render. In fact, that the first Adam did not render. Right? Jesus referred to as the second Adam.
Jamie: Sounds like the whole theme of the Book of Hebrews.
Tyler: Yes. Yeah, yeah. Yeah.
Jamie: I mean, there's a lot there.
Tyler: So, and scripture and Hebrews itself, the author of Hebrews says there's a fit. Right? Between who God is and the needs that we find ourselves in.
And the nature of Jesus Christ's work. Fittingness is a pretty big theme in Hebrews too. So what does that mean? It means there's a fit. Well, the Son is not eternally, I think, subordinate to the Father. He's subordinate in the economy because He is fully a man, and a man needed to be obedient to the Father. Okay. In order to fulfill the vocation that God had originally given to Adam, and so forth and so on.
So the whole of the son's obedience, if we keep the creative/creature distinction view, this distinction between theology and economy, then what we end up doing with those particular passages. Okay, just at first glance is, we end up saying, "Okay, we're not explaining them away, but we're explaining well, okay. Subordinate how, though? As a man." Okay. So that's our starting place. We have to say as a man, because He is not subordinate as God. That would not, I think, make any sense of everything scripture says about the Father-Son relationship, but particularly just doesn't make sense of what He's actually here to do. He's here to be the spotless lamb, the one who is perfectly obedient in our stead.
Jamie: Right. So then when these theologians have all used these distinctions between theology and economy. Theology, they're referencing what God is in and of Himself and then economy, how he's functioning in the world. And essentially, therefore saying that look, what God is in and of himself and how God chooses to function in this world and relate to us are two different things. As long as there's no contradiction in that, then we're square.
Tyler: They are two different things. And yet there is a tight fit between them.
Jamie: Right. So they're not contradictory, then.
Tyler: Yeah. And I mean, so there are some people who would say, "Yeah, God could behave himself in any way in the economy. And as long as it doesn't fundamentally contradict who He is in Himself, He'd be free." And of course, there's some sense in which that's probably true, but, but really most theologians have preferred just to say, "Well, look, there is a fit between the Son submitting to the Father as a man, and the Son's eternal relationship to the Father. Because however we theologians construe the Son's eternal relation to the Father in terms of his eternal generation from the Father," which we can get into later. But really what that's essentially saying is that the Son exists from the Father.
Okay? He always exists from the Father eternally, without any subordination or anything, equally. He exists from the Father. Well, in time, Jesus Christ, with our fully human nature as a man, He exists from the Father as well. So the Son's from-ness, as it were, in relation to the Father is exemplified in Jesus' obedience. But it's exemplified as obedience in the economy, because He's a man. Whereas eternally, I mean, what's he obeying the Father? In eternity. I mean, God isn't up there being like, "Hey, give me the remote" or something.
Jamie: Jesus wasn't the eternal channel changer on the TV. Like I was when I was a kid.
Tyler: Yeah. Turn the dial, the old television.
Jamie: Yeah. That's right. So then that raises the next question. You've hit on this a couple times, so let's just get specific about it. There's part of this debate, best I can tell is one watching from the outside over the last couple years, being very distracted with lots of other tasks. Part of this debate has been whether or not this subordination has been going on for all of eternity, or whether it's something that's, if you will, inaugurated in the created structures and order of everything. So in other words, it comes along with God creating the world. This is what we call an economic subordination. Right? So really, and best I can tell, this question comes down to, how long has this subordination been going on? Is that right? Those are our two views, eternal versus economic? Is that right?
Tyler: Kind of.
Jamie: Okay. Yeah. All right. So-
Tyler: I mean, a good theologian is always just, "Kind of, not really," just always complicates things hopelessly. No, I mean, yes. And basically that those are the options. If you wanted to get more technical, you could say, "Well, it has to do with basically the distinction between God, just as God." Okay. I think God, insofar as He has decreed, okay, to enact His plan for His glory. Right? In the whole economy, to create us and to be with us in Christ and to redeem us. Okay? So essentially, most theologians will root the beginnings of the Son's submission to the Father in the decree. Like the Father, Son, and Spirit all decree that the economy will have this particular shape to it. Right? And this particular plan. And then in the fullness of time that the Son, right, will assume human flesh.
And therefore, as a man, will render the obedience to the Father that is due him. All right? That we owe him. Okay. It's not the obedience the Son qua son owes him. It's the obedience that we as humans and made in his image owe him. And he renders on our behalf. So there's a fit there and so forth, but when does it take place? Well, it takes place in time.
Jamie: In the decree, right.
Tyler: It takes place in time. Has its root, as it were, in the decree. Right? In God's eternal plan.
Jamie: Okay. Rooted in the decree, instantiated in time.
Tyler: That's right. Executed in time. Yeah.
Jamie: All right. And so, and even then, so what that means is there's a sense in which, I guess that subordination could very well predate creation. Its actuality, but you're going to see it instantiated. Now it comes to be in a way that you can touch it, see it, articulate it in the created order.
Tyler: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, maybe another way in looking at it is just to say that the subordination is contingent. That's not necessary, absolutely necessary.
Jamie: So you would lean more on the economic side, then. So real quick, from your seat, why do you see that as a preferable perspective, as opposed to an eternal one? Are there complications that come about with an eternal perspective? Is there just a better fit with Scripture, you think?
Tyler: Yeah. All of that. That's right.
Jamie: And on that note, we're out of-
Tyler: Yes. The short answer is yes. Well, I mean first and foremost, I think that to say, to go from the Son's wrestling in Gethsemane, right. Or to say that the Father's greater than I, and to look at all these individual statements in Scripture and to read them in a very flat kind of way as immediately suggesting an eternal relation of obedience and submission, whatever. I just think that's actually a really sloppy exegesis. I think if you just patiently look at what those texts are actually saying, they're not ever saying that. So Scripture doesn't ever really talk about the eternal Father-Son relation as a relationship of obedience and submission. It actually says very little about that eternal relationship. So this is part of where the kind of constraints of the mysteriousness of a Trinity really have to impose themselves on us, to realize that we really can't say a whole ton about that Father-Son relationship. Because Scripture doesn't go there.
Jamie: In other words, the only lens we really have to look at this through is what we see in the temporal order.
Tyler: That's right. The Scripture does have some glances in that direction, but its focus is on the economy.
Jamie: Primary focus, right? Yeah, that's right.
Tyler: But we, of course, learn about theology, about God's being, His life, right. His inner nature and so forth, in terms of His economic actions and so forth. Well, first of all, it just doesn't make for good exegesis. The subordination is in positions. They didn't in the early church. That's why you had Athenasius and Augustine and Basil and Gregorys and all the rest. Cyril, out exegeting, right. The unorthodox parties for the most part, they were out politicing them as well, but they were fundamentally out exegeting them. But they're also doing better theology, I think. So to the other horn of your question, it does end up with some pretty disastrous implications, I think, for your Trinitarian theology. You end up, basically, I think, in a position where you can only affirm the full equal divinity of the three persons accidentally. Right? You can affirm that-
Jamie: Now let me-
Tyler: Yeah. Okay.
Jamie: You can finish that thought. I'm going to circle back, because probably a listener might not understand what you mean by accidentally.
Tyler: Yeah. Because you could say, "Well, yeah, Father, Son, and Spirit are equally God, right. And all that. I believe in Nicaea." But then you would also, if you wanted to be one of these subordinationist types you could say, "But the Son eternally submits to the Father and so forth." Well, your options there are either to just to be in a place where you're accidentally affirming both those truths, because they don't actually go together, or you're modifying the affirmation about the Father and Son's equality in some way to make room for that second statement. That the tradition has typically not wanted to do. Okay? So-
Jamie: Make sense. So if you're listening and you don't understand what it means by accident, this is really a philosophical distinction between the kinds of attributes that things have. I have brown hair, for example. I really do have it, but I don't have to have it. It's not something necessary to my nature, right. And so what you're saying is, if you go eternal, then affirming, what was it you said? The divinity of each person, you're only doing so accidentally, is that correct?
Tyler: Oh, I don't mean accident in the kind of Aristotelian category you're talking about. Yeah, yeah. That's a-
Jamie: So maybe the philosophers are sitting there going, "What do you mean by that?"
Tyler: Yeah. Yeah. They're thinking, "Accidents? What is he..." No, no. I just mean it's an accident. It's accidental. That someone is basically-
Jamie: Fell into it backwards, almost.
Tyler: Yeah. They're saying the Father-Son spirit are equal. And with the other hand, what they're saying, doesn't really comport with that. And so the affirmation, both of those truths is not a necessary. There's no necessary link between them. It's just an accidental link between them. Because they haven't quite fleshed out one side of that.
Jamie: Yeah. Got it.
Tyler: Maybe that doesn't make sense.
Jamie: No, man. Hey, this is super-helpful because again, like I said, I mean, this is the challenge. If you have not been staying up on the literature in the last five years, a guy like me who was moderately familiar with these historic questions, all of a sudden, man, I remember about five years ago watching, seeing all my friends were starting to debate this stuff. I'm like, "Oh, that's interesting." And I look up a couple years later, and there's 35 books that I haven't read that have all been published in the last five years. And I'm going, "Oh, holy moly. I'm not going to be able to read all those, so..."
Tyler: Well, and if I had one encouragement to pastors and laypersons, it would be, if you've got time, okay. To read the five latest books on the trinity here, whatever. Right. Or to sit down with a classic, like Augustine's book on the Trinity, or Gregory of Nazianzus's theological orations, or just some old book on the Trinity. Okay?
Jamie: Go there first.
Tyler: Go there first. Yeah. So that's why I was saying earlier, I think on our first podcast, just you can be out date on the discussions. But you can be up to date on the truths that this doctrine seeks to affirm. And that's going to be the more important thing. Because if you have a solid grasp on the things that Augustine is talking about, Gregory's talking about. Athanasius is talking about. Cyril, right. Then you're going to be able to work your way through these modern debates like a hot knife through butter.
Jamie: Good. The other thing they can do is listen to this podcast.
Tyler: That's right. They can always listen to your podcast. That's right.
Jamie: That's right. Hey man, I appreciate it once again.
Tyler: Thank you.
Jamie: And appreciate you folks for listening once again. Looking forward to the next ones we get into, as we continue through all these recent discussions.
Hey everybody, this is Jamie and Joe again. If you like this podcast, would you leave us a rating and review wherever you listen to podcasts? That helps other people find it. And if you have any questions, we'd love to hear about them. Just go to JamieDew.com/questions and send them in that way. And we'll take a look at the most frequently asked questions and give them a shot.