Comments on: Interview with Mary Kassian – Part I

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 01:31:18 +0000

This has been THE (not an) orthodox view since detailed formulations of the Trinity have been around. Matt Slick has a good explanation of the doctrine here.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 01:15:23 +0000

has argued against the orthodox belief that Jesus the Son of God is equal yet subordinate to the Father. Equal but subordinate? since when is this an orthodox view?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:18:47 +0000

Apologies, I missed a verse that he cites, and this one is more to the point of the Father submitting…
“Jesus willingly submitted himself to the One he called “Abba.” Thereby he reveals that the son is subordinate to the Father within the eternal Trinity. At the same time the Father is dependent on the Son for his diety.In sending his Son into the world, the Father entrsuted his own reign–indeed his own diety–to the Son (for example, Lk 10:22). Likewise the Father is dependent on the Son for his title as the Father… Hence the subordination of the Son to the Father must be balanced by the subordination of the Father to the Son.” (153-154) He also points to Wolfhart Pannenberg as “an important contemporary proponent of this idea” in a footnote.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:12:35 +0000

Yes…
“Rather than fighting to establish lines of authority and submission, we are to live in mutual submission to one another (Eph 5:1). This requires that we take on an attitude of humble self-sacrifice and service (see, for example, Phil 2:1-10).” (153)
“Consequently, we cannot set up the example of Christ's subordination to the Father alone–and hence a linear model of God–as definitive for the male-female relationship. Rather, the subordination of the Son to the Father must always be balanced with the dependency of the Father on the Son. The application of such a balanced model of the Trinity leads to an emphasis on mutual dependence and the interdependency of male and female, just as Paul concludes in 1 Corinthians 11:11-12.” (154)
Those are the only passages he cites in relation to this in this book. I think there's a fundamental problem with Grenz's view which he states earlier- “We note that Christ's relaitonship to the Father was the temporary submission of one divine person to another in the economy of salvation.” (152) It's too bad he offers no Biblical support for this doctrine.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:40:22 +0000

He was actually talking about a verse in Revelation that referred to the Father and the Son (not just people in the church); but for the life of me, I can't remember which one.
Do you have Grenz's book and know the basis for his position? I'd be interested in hearing which passages he refers to to come to this conclusion.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:39:10 +0000

Disregard all of the “

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:40:45 +0000

Thanks for this interview, Roger. This is an issue I struggled with a lot through tears and prayers and finally to understanding and even joy in the beauty of God's design and my special place in His design as a woman. This is extremely counter-cultural, and over the years I've had to retrain my thinking, but I strongly believe Kassian is correct.
Kassian said, ” Gilbert Bileziekien, another CBE supporter, has argued against the orthodox belief that Jesus the Son of God is equal yet subordinate to the Father.”
One think I've seen is that people–in their desire to be good to women, and (wrongly) thinking that the traditional view is not good to women–have accepted things like this. A man I highly respect who is an egalitarian said in our discussion about gender roles in ministry that the Bible says the Father will submit to the Son in the end. I didn't think the Scripture he pointed to said this at all, and I don't think this idea is biblical. Of course, I could be wrong about this, but I think this shows how sensitive and charged this issue is when an orthodox person who knows and respects the Bible can have a blind spot like this (i.e., the idea that the Father submits to the Son).

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:46:58 +0000

Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:09:21 +0000

This is as much as she says about CBE. CBMW offers a more in-depth critique here: http://www.cbmw.org/resources/articles/cberesponse.php, which is chapter 26 of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. (Mrs. Kassian is a member of CBMW)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 06:49:11 +0000

I'm curious to read more. Granted it's late and I'm tired. It's an interesting interview. I've browsed the CBE site a bit and I have to admit that I'm rather in line with them. But I'm curious to hear more about why Mrs. Kassian believes they are mistaken.