1) John 14:28 - The president is greater than me. But the president and I are both humans. Our position does not make us of a different substance.John 14:28 – "The Father is greater than I."
1 Corinthians 15:27-28 – "For 'He has put everything under his feet.' Now when it says that 'everything has been put under him,' it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ."
John 5:19 – "The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing."
John 10:29 – "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all."
Philippians 2:6-8 – "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage... he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!"
John 17:1-5 – "Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you... I brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do."
Matthew 26:39 – "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."
Luke 22:42 – "Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done."
It's a topic that Trinitarians often avoid discussing because the concept of God being both Master and Servant presents an apparent contradiction. It's difficult to reconcile these two roles without creating a logical inconsistency.
One of many with the Trinity.
Asking them to explain, prove, and provide evidence for Hypostasis is, at best, quite entertaining.
2) 1 Corinthians 15:27-28 - Did Jesus put himself under his own feet? Let's not make this silly.
3) John 5:19 - Obedience does not imply anything more. Hopeful you were obedient to your parents.
4) John 10:29 - The father is greater in status not in God power.
5) Philippians 2:6-8 - I have a thread on this. The problem for you is that the verse makes no sense unless Jesus is God and did not use that equality to his own advantage. Otherwise the verse itself is a lie because Jesus is not equal with God.
6) John 17:1-5 - can any non-God being glorify God? Truly?
7) Matthew 26:39 - obedience or subservience does not imply a different substance.
8) Luke 22:42 - obedience or subservience does not imply a different substance.
1 Corinthians 15:27-28 longer answer from Grok because I had questions. Basically why would the Bible need to say something so obvious at all.
explain 1 Corinthians 15:27-28 why bother to say it is clear that does not include God himself since that seems obvious
Debate topic: Debate these 'troubling verses' for the Trinity.In 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, Paul writes:
"For he ‘has put everything under his feet.’ Now when it says that ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." (NIV)
Paul is addressing the ultimate authority and submission in the cosmic order, specifically Christ’s reign and relationship to God the Father. The phrase "it is clear that this does not include God himself" might seem unnecessary at first glance because, to many readers, it’s obvious that God wouldn’t be subject to anyone, including Christ. So why does Paul bother to clarify this?
One reason is to avoid any potential misunderstanding. Paul is quoting Psalm 8:6 ("You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet"), which originally described humanity’s dominion over creation but is now applied to Christ’s exalted status. When he says "everything" is put under Christ, he’s emphasizing the totality of Christ’s authority over all creation—every power, force, and being. However, in a Greco-Roman or Jewish context, where debates about hierarchies of gods, powers, or authorities were common, someone might misinterpret "everything" too literally and wonder if even God the Father is included. By explicitly stating that God himself is excluded, Paul ensures his readers don’t stumble into a theological error, like suggesting that the Father is somehow subordinate to the Son.
Another angle is theological precision. Paul is building a careful argument about the relationship between the Father and the Son, especially in the context of Christ’s temporary reign before handing all things back to God (v. 28). This passage reflects the early Christian understanding of the Trinity and Christ’s role as the mediator. The clarification reinforces that Christ’s authority, while absolute over creation, is still derived from and subject to the Father’s ultimate sovereignty. It’s a way of guarding against any confusion about the unity and distinction within the Godhead.
So, while it might seem obvious to us now, Paul’s audience— steeped in diverse philosophical and religious ideas—might have needed the reassurance. He’s dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s to keep the focus on God’s supreme authority and the Son’s willing submission, paving the way for the climactic point: "so that God may be all in all."
."
