However, that Creed states that there is no inequality between the Three Persons: in John it became increasingly clear to me that the divine Son is unequal to the Father.

To say that "the Son of God" meant "Jesus as man," was a preposterous evasion: for there is no higher title for the Second Person of the Trinity than this very one--Son of God.

Now, in the 5th chapter, when the Jews accused Jesus "of making himself equal to God," by calling himself Son of God Jesus even hastens to protest against the inference as a misrepresentation -- beginning with: "The Son can do nothing of himself:" and proceeds elaborately to ascribe all his greatness to the Father's will.

In fact, the Son is emphatically "he who is sent," and the Father is "he who sent him:" and all would feel the deep impropriety of trying to exchange these phrases.

The Son who is sent,--sent, not _after_ he was humbled to become man, but _in order to_ be so humbled,--was NOT EQUAL TO, but LESS THAN, the Father who sent him.