28. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
When the work of redemption has been accomplished, the dead raised, the judgment held, the enemies of Christ all sub- dued, then, and not till then, will the Son also himself be sub- ject to him who put all things under him. This passage is evidently parallel with that in v. 24. The subjection of the Son to the Father here means precisely what is there meant by his dehvering up the kingdom to God even the Fa- ther. The thing done, and the person who does it, are the same. The subjection here spoken of is not predicated of the eternal Logos, the second person of the Trinity, any more than the kingdom spoken of in v. 24 is the dominion which be- longs essentially to Christ as God. As there the word Christ designates the Theanthropos, so does the word Son here desig- nate, not the Logos as such, but the Logos as incarnate. And as the delivery of the kingdom or royal authority over the universe committed to Christ after his resurrection, is consist- ent at once with his continued dominion as God over all crea- tures, and with his continued headship over his people ; so is the subjection here spoken of consistent with his eternal equality with the Father. It is not the subjection of the Son as Son, but of the Son as Theanthropos of which the apostle here speaks. The doctrine of the true and proper divinity of our Lord is so clearly revealed in Scripture, and is so in- wrought into the faith of his people, that such passages as these, though adduced with so much confidence by the im- pugners of that doctrine, give believers no more trouble than the ascription of the limitations of our nature to God. When the Bible says that God repents, we know that it is consistent with his immutability ; and when it says the Son is subject or inferior to the Father, we know that it is consistent with their equality, as certainly as we know that saying that man is immor- tal is consistent with saying he is mortal. We know that both of the last-mentioned propositions are true ; because mortality is predicated of man in one aspect, and immortality in another aspect. In one sense he is mortal, in another sense he is im- mortal. In like manner we know that the verbally inconsist- ent propositions, the Son is subject to the Father, and, the Son is equal with the Father, are both true. In one sense he is