210 FEMINIST VIEWS BASED ON UNTRUTHFUL CLAIMS
We may describe this difference in relationship in other terms, as
later theologians did (such as speaking of the eternal subordination of
the Son with respect to role or relationship, not with respect to sub-
stance), and still say we are holding to the historic Trinitarian doctrine
of the church. But we may not deny that there is any eternal difference
in relationship between the Father and the Son, as Bilezikian and others
do, and still claim to hold to the historic Trinitarian doctrine of the
church.
Bilezikian gives no explanation of how he understands “begotten of
the Father before all worlds” or “eternal generation” or “eternal beget-
ting.” It is remarkable that Bilezikian, in denying any eternal difference
in relationship between the Father and the Son, gives no explanation for
why he thinks he has not placed himself outside the bounds of the great
Trinitarian confessions through history. And it is simply irresponsible
scholarship to accuse all those who hold to the historic doctrine of the
eternal subordination of the Son to the Father (in role, not in being) of
“tampering with the doctrine of the Trinity” and coming close to
Arianism and engaging in “hermeneutical bungee jumping.”^6 It is
Bilezikian, not complementarians, who is tampering with the doctrine
of the Trinity. Bilezikian is certainly free to deny any eternal differences
in the Father-Son relationship if he wishes, but he may not truthfully say
that a denial of these eternal differences has been the historic doctrine
of the church.
Bilezikian quotes no church historians, no creeds, no other recog-
nized theologians when he affirms that his view is the historic doctrine
of the church. But it is not difficult to find many theologians and histo-
rians of doctrine who differ with Bilezikian’s unsubstantiated
affirmation.
For example, concerning this inter-Trinitarian relationship between
the Father and the Son, Charles Hodge (1797–1878), the great Princeton
theologian whose Systematic Theology has now been in print for 140
years, wrote about the Nicene Creed:
(^6) For these accusations see Gilbert Bilezikian, “Hermeneutical Bungee-Jumping: Subordination
in the Godhead,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40/1 (March 1997): 57-68.
The same article is found in Bilezikian, Community 101, 187-202.