debate on ESS is available. At some point, I will look into all this again, now that it has been brought up again by David, one of my blogging friends.
With little time at present to dedicate to this, although I hope to pick it up in my studies at some point or perhaps explore it as part of a Masters dissertation (sorely tempted to write some practical theology too though), I leave you with a number of links about The Eternal Subordination of the Son position, which is quite a huge area for investigation for complementarian and egalitarian Christians. This idea (ESS) became something hotter on the agenda since the tying of this status of Jesus to gender subordination without ontological inferiority became a way of justifying women's submission to their husbands in the home and the church. Some read this as concurring with scripture, others with culture.
David Ould, my friend in Sydney references the debate again and his exploration of a proof-text which he supposes might support ESS. As with proof-texting, which is not a fail-safe way, by any means, of determining the mind of God (difficult to discern in this world without human error), there are as many texts that can be raised to support ESS as to deny it.
You might want to read these resources, if this kind of stuff matters to you. Essentially we are looking at the minutiae here, doctrine and the ways it can be interpreted. I became interested in this doctrine because of its use by CBMW etc and some of the ways it was being used to justify all sorts of behaviour suffered by women in patriarchal expressions of Christianity, particularly in the US.
However, here we are.
David Ould can be accessed here.
Trinity Journal 30 NS 2 (2009) includes:
"Michael Bird and Robert Shillaker: The Son is Not Eternally Subordinated in Authority to the Father"
Michael Bird and Robert Shillaker
"The Son Really, Really is the Son: A Response to Kevin Giles"
I have a copy of this but encourage you to get in touch with Michael Bird for a copy.
Paula Fether is good for introductory reading
This makes for essential reading
There was a debate at TEDS on the very issue, which Christianity Today introduces here
It comprised of the following:
Defending the non-subordination view: Tom McCall, Professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology at TEDS. Keith Yandel, Professor of Philosophy University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Representing the Complementarian position which affirms that a structure of authority and submission will exist for eternity in the Godhead. Wayne Grudem and Bruce Ware. These two are well-known across the evangelical world on the gender issue.
The live video streaming for this is my first link at the top.
Here is a very scholarly interpretation of the debate, followed up again here and here
You can see I have been trying to get my head around this one for a while