John wrote:
>The Son is such because He is always
>the Servant of the Father.
This is one idea that is at the heart of the historic objections to the
eternal sonship doctrine. If the person Yeshua was always the servant, then
how can we say that he was equal to the father in eternity past? There are
many passages that suggest that the person Yeshua set aside a part of the
glory he had and BECAME a servant by being born of the woman Mary.
I speak of a relational concept when I think "son." A son can become a servant on any or several occasions. The fact that He claimed to be the Son was understood by those of His day as making Himself equal to God.
Philippians 2:5-7
(5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
(6) Who, BEING IN THE FORM OF GOD, thought it not robbery to be equal with
God:
(7) But made himself of no reputation, and TOOK UPON HIM THE FORM OF A
SERVANT, and was made in the likeness of men:
In the passage above, if he TOOK UPON HIM the form of a servant by being
born in the flesh, then the implication is that he was not a servant prior
to that. If the term "son" implies subservience, then perhaps it is
applicable in regards to the function he took on by being born of the flesh.
Sonship includes subservience. In the Phil passages, Paul is telling us that it was Jesus Christ presenting this example of humble service. I believe that "Jesus Christ" is a term that always includes this notion " Sonship." I doubt seriously that the biblical writers ever wrote those words, Jesus Christ, without felling the excitement of that first confession, Thou are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
John 17:4-5
(4) I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou
gavest me to do.
(5) And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self WITH THE GLORY
WHICH I HAD WITH THEE BEFORE THE WORLD WAS.
John 14:28
(28) Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you.
If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for
my Father is greater than I.
Is this phrase, "my Father is greater than I" applicable only at this point
in time when he was of the flesh (created a little lower than the angels),
or is it applicable for eternity past too? The eternal sonship doctrine
would imply that it is applicable in eternity past, whereas Judy's doctrine
on this would suggest it may not have been applicable in eternity past, but
only when he became a son by being born of the woman.
If being a son does no damage to the notion of equality, why would any other function impair that belief, when speaking of the Christ?
Hebrews 2:6-11
(6) But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art
mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
(7) Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with
glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
(8) Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he
put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.
BUT NOW WE SEE NOT YET ALL THINGS PUT UNDER HIM.
(9) But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the
suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of
God should taste death for every man.
(10) For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things,
IN BRINGING MANY SONS UNTO GLORY, to make the captain of their salvation
perfect through sufferings.
(11) For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified ARE ALL OF
ONE: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,
