Do you remember the controversy and brouhaha that erupted when J. I. Packer published similar views in his bestselling Knowing God?
Me neither.
Thus we have the following set of relationships: 1. The Son is subject to the Father, for the Son is sent by the Father in his (the Father’s) name. 2. The Spirit is subject to the Father, for the Spirit is sent by the Father in the Son’s name. 3. The Spirit is subject to the Son as well as to the Father, for the Spirit is sent by the Son as well as by the Father. (Compare 20: 22: “He breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’”)
Dare I open a can of worms… but this whole brouhaha is absolutely confusing to me, as what these theologians are putting forward is nothing new. If it was and is an obvious and clear heresy, where were the demands for Packer’s recantation over these last decades. His views being published in one of the most influential and most popular books among evangelicals, he wasn’t exactly hiding his heresy, it has been in display for decades.
In short, I am just dumbfounded as to why no one is calling on J. I. Packer to recant, or accusing him of having put forward unquestionable heresy. His classic “Knowing God” has been around for 45 years, sold well over a million copies, translated into a dozen languages, CT calls it one of the top 50 books that have shaped evangelicals…
But so far as I know, over the last 45 years, no one ever demanded Packer’s recantation or accused him of spreading such gross heresy.
I genuinely am dumbfounded by this. Why not?