I'm guessing your stating what I have heard before. In regard to the economic sense of Trinity, Christ is now and always has been subject to the Father, but in the ontological sense(is that right) he has never been, nor will be subject to the Father
Is that right?
It's no big deal, as we are not discussing the debate I'm interested in directly, just wondered
As a man He would eternally be subject to the One He calls His Father. This is a result of His humility that resulted in our redemption. This is consistent with the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union which states that within the one person of Christ are two natures: human and divine.
Nothing you have talked about or scriptures you have provided prove your belief silas. So what do you want to debate?