Last week, I noted Scott Swain’s chapter about the Son’s willing submission to the Father within the covenant of redemption. I’ve been doing some further reading on this, and it turns out that intratrinitarian relations with respect to the pactum have been a perennial discussion among reformed divines. For example, Jonathan Edwards has a fascinating essay in his “Miscellanies” about “The Economy of the Trinity and Covenant of Redemption.” The entire thing is about 6,300 words, but it is worth the effort to read it if you have the time. Edwards argues that the Father is the “head of the Trinity.” He never cites 1 Corinthians 11:3 explicitly, but I…

Mary Kassian has a fascinating Q&A with a leading egalitarian on the subject of abuse. The context of Kassian’s conversation is a review that Kassian wrote last May on the book “Black and White Bible, Black and Blue Wife.” I recommend reading the review first, then the Q&A.

A draft of the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society has been released. As many of you know, the theme of this year’s conference is “The Trinity,” which is such a smiling providence given the heat of current controversy. I won’t summarize the whole program here, but I will say that it looks really good. Among the highlights, there will be a parallel session featuring Bruce Ware, Wayne Grudem, Millard Erickson, and Kevin Giles: Millard J. Erickson, “Language, Logic, and Trinity: An Analysis of Recent Subordination Arguments” Bruce A Ware, “The Nature of the Priority of the Father within the Trinity: Biblical Basis and Importance” Wayne Grudem, “Why a…

The video below is not new, but it is relevant. Among the profitable things in it, these men remind us how the ninth commandment must inform theological polemics. “You shall not bear false witness” means that you must represent your opponent’s view accurately. It also means that you must not confuse your opponent’s view with an alleged entailment of his view. You can warn about a potential entailment of his view, but you cannot legitimately accuse your opponent of holding the alleged entailment if he explicitly rejects it.

Russell Moore recently said that Fred Sanders is a gift to the church. I couldn’t agree more. Sanders wrote a review last year of a collection of essays on the Trinity edited by Bruce Ware and John Starke. He closes his review with a brilliant summary of the obedience of the eternal Son. He writes: What’s eternal, and essential to the divine being, is Sonship, which means eternal generation and the filial generatedness that it entails. Is the obedience of the Son’s will to the Father’s commanding authority also eternal? That seems to me to be a fairly small question, and also one that needs an answer so nuanced it’s…

Over the weekend, a friend sent me a copy of the 2013 article “The Obedience of the Eternal Son” by Scott Swain and Michael Allen. I want to commend this essay to anyone who has been following the recent debate about intratrinitarian relations. I also want to warn you that this is not light reading, and I may lose all but the specialists in what follows. Having said that, this article is worth your time to ponder and understand for the current discussion. I’m not going to summarize the whole article, but I will give you its thesis and highlight a handful of other passages. Here’s the thesis:

At my church this morning, Pastor Jim Hamilton preached an excellent message from Psalms 56-57. If you have a chance to listen, I commend it to you. You can download it here or listen below. I also recommend a version of Psalm 57 that a band called The Critics put to music. I actually love this song. It’s called “Do Not Destroy,” which is a line from the superscription of the Psalm: “To the choirmaster: according to Do Not Destroy. A Miktam of David, when he fled from Saul, in the cave.” You can listen to the song above or download it here.