The Father is greater than I (Jn 14:28).
i) This is a popular anti-Trinitarian prooftext. According
to unitarians, this means the Father is God, and Jesus is not.
According to Nicene subordinationists, this means that even
though Jesus is still God, Jesus is eternally and ontologically subordinate to
Father.
A basic problem with this approach is that it isolates the
statement from its surrounding context. “...for the Father is greater than I” isn’t
even a complete sentence. And it’s just a small part of a very extended discourse. In order to
gauge the force of this statement, we need to compare it with other statements
in this discourse.
ii) Jn 14:28 comes on the heels of Jesus saying:
Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? (v10a).
The mutual indwelling of the Father and the Son involves a
symmetrical relationship. While it’s understandable how the greater could
include the lesser, it’s less understandable how the lesser could include the
greater. To play on the spatial metaphor, you can put something smaller in
something bigger, but not vice versa.
If, on the other hand, the Father and the Son are coequals,
then it’s more understandable how each could contain the other.
Of course, it’s possible for the preposition (“in”) to carry
different connotations, depending on who or what is referred to. But here
identical language is used for both parties, in mirror symmetry.
iii) There’s an obvious parallel between 14:12 and 14:28:
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father (v12).You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I (v28).
Both involve comparative greatness, and in both, the
comparative greatness is indexed to the Son returning to the Father.
Given the proximity and similarity of these verses, where
v28 rounds out v12, forming a kind of inclusio, we’d expect there to be an
analogy between the greatness of the Father and the greatness of the works. But
it doesn’t make much sense to say the works are ontologically greater. What
would that even mean?
Commentators puzzle over the precise identity of the
“greater works” since Jesus doesn’t specify what they are. However, they seem
to have reference to answered prayers, where v12 leads into v13.
Jesus may have in mind something like this:
35 Do you not say, ‘There are yet four months, then comes the harvest’? Look, I tell you, lift up your eyes, and see that the fields are white for harvest. 36 Already the one who reaps is receiving wages and gathering fruit for eternal life, so that sower and reaper may rejoice together. 37 For here the saying holds true, ‘One sows and another reaps.’ 38 I sent you to reap that for which you did not labor. Others have labored, and you have entered into their labor (Jn 4:35-38).
There’s only so much Jesus could do at a particular time and
place. Ministering in Palestine for three years.
Collectively speaking, generations of Christians can do
“greater works.” The expansion of the Gospel has a global impact. That’s a
major force in shaping the course of world history.
iv) It’s also striking that Jesus says:
13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it (Jn 14:13-14).
On a unitarian or Nicene subordinationist reading of 14:28,
that’s not what we’d expect him to say. Rather, we’d expect him to say:
Whatever you ask in the Father’s name, he will do it, for
the Father is greater than all.
But Jesus instead invites the disciples to address their
prayers to him. And he tells them that he will answer their prayers.
v) Likewise, in 16:7, Jesus says:
Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
But if the sender is greater than the sent, does that mean
the Son is greater than the Spirit? To my knowledge, that’s not how Nicene
subordinationists argue.
vi) Now, a unitarian or Nicene subordinationist might object
that elsewhere in the Fourth Gospel, the Father sends the Spirit. Prayer is
addressed to the Father. The Father answers prayer.
That’s true. I’m not suggesting that these are exclusive to
Jesus. But that very alternation is problematic for unitarianism and Nicene
subordination.
How do we harmonize statements which indicate the Son’s
equality with the Father with statements which indicate the Son’s inequality
with the Father? I don’t think that’s difficult.
For instance, someone with greater ability can perform a job
requiring less ability, but someone with less ability can’t perform a job requiring
greater ability. It’s easy to see how equals can assume unequal roles. How a
superior can accept a self-demotion.
Indeed, this is the case throughout Bible history. Because
we can’t come up to God’s level, God comes down to our level. This is also the
case in the Fourth Gospel. The earthly ministry of Christ is clearly a comedown
from his natural status. That’s how it’s portrayed. A greater temporarily
assuming a lesser standing.
vii) I think 14:28 involves the same principle as 17:4-5:
4 I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. 5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
The Father is “greater” in the sense that the heavenly realm
is greater than the earthly realm. By returning to heaven, Jesus is leaving
behind the limitations of his earthly ministry. He can do more from heaven, for
that mode of existence isn’t subject to our spacetime limitations. Of course,
his earthly ministry lays the groundwork for his heavenly ministry. The
ascended Son can empower the disciples to do greater works because heaven
affords a greater field of action.
In 14:28, I think the “Father” functions as a metonymy or
synecdoche for God’s exclusive domain, in contrast to the world. A greater
place.
That identification accounts for the emphasis on changing
places (heaven>earth, earth>heaven), with the attendant abilities.
This is similar to how the Gospels alternate between
“kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” where “heaven” is a synonym for
“God,” and vice versa.
A brilliant refutation of everything Drake and Tuggy stand for. With your permission, I'd like to repost this on my blog (FWIW I look forward to the scowls from Drake and his followers confirming I'm a closet Vantillian after all, when in fact I have no tolerance for Unitarians and other deniers of the Son. I have my disagreements with Vantillians, but this isn't one of them).
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome to repost it at your blog.
DeleteThanks Steve,
ReplyDeleteAs I've mentioned before- the Greek word greater/μείζων (Joh 14:28 BGT) is always talking about quantity not quality. And a greater quantity does not dispute quality (your wife is not lesser because she is shorter).
But what really amazes me about that verse, is that Jesus is saying that HE is in the Father!
Can you imagine walking up to your dad and saying that your genes are in him? That your ontology is a vital part of his ontology?
Sure you might say that this is only talking about your spirit being in His spirit- but even that is making a massive claim. Can your spirit of sin be in Him as well?
This is an incredible claim that far too little ink has been spilled over. Thanks for adding some ink, Steve