Perrydox.com is devoted to the pursuit of truth, whether plain or paradoxical, whether simple or sublime, or simply absurd yet absolute.
Ontological and Functional Descriptions of God within the Trinity
Ontological and Functional Descriptions of God within the Trinity, or The Worth (Ontology) and Working (Functionality) of “God”
In building our house of arguments, we are looking for inspired reasons for inspired conclusions which become inspired commands. Admittedly, when looking we sometimes find God explaining; other times He doesn’t. This brings us to 1 Corinthians 11. We are not yet ready to do an exegetical study of 11:2-16; we’re still laying down the foundations. Plus, a deep exegetical study will involve word definitions, cultural information, argument formation, comparative cases, and much more; all that will distract from the current information. What we want to do first is lay the groundwork by looking at Paul’s first reason (through inspiration) in chapter 11. This will begin building the foundation for his position.
While sometimes Paul puts his foundational reasons in the middle of his argument (11:7), or at the end (1 Timothy 2:13-4); this time the one we are examining first is found at the beginning:
1 Corinthians 11:3 [HCSB] But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of the woman, and God is the head of Christ.
For now, we’re accepting as axiomatic the definition of “head/kephale” as authority. That is a common conclusion among complementarians. Egalitarians have suggested “source” and “preeminent.” Such will need to be studied to see if our argument needs to be refined or revoked. To understand our own arguments better, it helps to be able to explain contrary positions as they are understood their proponents.
Accepted: God is the head of Christ. God is the authority over Christ. What does that imply? What does that not imply? To find the answers, we must examine the relationship between Christ and God, the dynamics between them, and even descriptions used to differentiate them and associate them.
Before doing that, let’s build our vocabulary. Words are important, and definitions even more so. Without both we cannot communicate nor hope to understand as needed.
- Ontological Equality – Ontological refers to essence, being. One focus here is eternal equality. Equality refers to sameness in value. The working phrase (which is easier to say and remember than ontological) is SAME WORTH.
- Functional Equality – Functional (sometimes referred to as Economical) Equality refers to how something operates. Functions focus on temporal responsibilities. Equality here again means sameness. The working phrase here is SAME WORK.
- Functional Inequality – The difference here is the function involves hierarchal roles. The emphasis is on different, but not inferior. Again, the working phrase is DIFFERENT WORK
Those definitions and descriptions are helpful to proceed. If unclear clear on their meanings an example will help; one complementarians and egalitarians both accept.
- Ontological Equality – Are both parents and children equal as persons, essence and WORTH? Yes. Does being equal eliminate the roles of parent and child? No.
- Functional Equality – In the relationship of being a parent to the child, are both father and mother equally “parents”? Do both having authority over the children? Are the children equally children and under the authority of their parents? The answers to all are yes.
- Functional Inequality – Remember, unequal does not mean inferior. It means different. Do fathers and mothers have the same roles even if they have the same authority? Can men get pregnant? Fathers and mothers do not have the same functional WORK.
1. Do God and Christ Have the Same Worth?
SAME WORTH – John 1:1; 5:1816-23; 8:58; 12:37-43; 17:5
2. Do God and Christ Have the Same Work?
SAME WORK – John 8:16; 17:18; 17:21
3. Do God and Christ Have the Different Work?
DIFFERENT WORK – John 5:19,30; 6:38; 14:28,31; 15:10
Equal Yet Unequal Together
Philippians 2:5-11
Questions:
- How were the Father and Son “equal?”
- How were the Father and Son “unequal”?
- If the Son is in subjection to His Father, what does that mean?
- If the Son is in subjection to His Father, what does that not mean?
Understanding the relationship of the Father and Son leads us to the narratives of both creation and the home as foundational arguments for the roles of men and women in the home and church. In other sections we will discover how.
Comments