[Evangelical]

There is only one authority, of the Father, as there is only one God. If we speak of multiple authorities, i.e. each person of the Trinity having an authority of their own, this is tri-theism.

The Bible says the authority the Son has is given to Him by the Father. If one person gives another person authority, then obviously the person from whom the authority was given is the higher authority and there is a kind of authority-submission structure.

“All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.” Matthew 28:18. Jesus did not say "I have all authority". He said "I have been given all authority". Indicating there is one in higher authority to Him, who is the Father.

There is equality in the authority between the Father and the Son only in the sense of the Son and the Father sharing the same authority. However we should keep in mind from whom the authority comes (the Father) and to whom the authority was given (the Son).

The problem for those that do not accept there is authority "structure" in the Trinity is that there are bible verses saying there is and these are self-explanatory:

Matt 8:9 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me.

Some bible versions have put this plainly , eg the NLT:

1 Cor 15:28 Then, when all things are under his authority, the Son will put himself under God's authority, so that God, who gave his Son authority over all things, will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere.

So we can understand that the equal authority the Father gave the Son is temporal, it is not eternal. 1 Cor 15:28 indicates the circumstance by which the Son will give up the authority the Father gave Him for a time. There is no bible verse which reverses the situation in 1 Cor 15:28 in a future time. There is no bible verse that says the Son revokes his place of submission under God's authority. Therefore this submission is understood to be eternal.

This authority structure can be understand not as each person of the Trinity having their own authority, but of each person of the Trinity sharing the one authority of the Father. The Father is the source of the authority, and he gives it to the Son. So there is a kind of authority-subjection between the Father and the Son but the Son only has the authority the Father has given him for the purpose of achieving the Father's will.

The problem is some theologians take the Nicene creed too seriously, they use it in a rigid way for which it was never intended. As Lee said, it is incomplete, or, it does not go into such detail, nor is it intended to. They tend to interpret the bible from the Creed, rather than the other way around.

So we are faced with a choice. The Nicene creed speaks of equality between the Persons of the Trinity "in all respects". The bible says otherwise.

The practice of Catholicism and Orthodoxy of holding onto traditions and myths rather than the Scripture, also applies to this issue where the Creeds are elevated to a position above the bible in order to reject what the bible actually says. It is only because of an attempt by Constantine to unite Christianity under one doctrine ie the Nicene Creed, that this matter is even an issue. Without the Creeds, the bible does not say that the Father, Son and Spirit are "equal in all respects". It is impossible to conclude that doctrine from the Scripture alone. If it were, they would have had no need to create the Nicene Creed in 325 AD, and could have pointed to a few bible passages that would resolve the dispute. We should keep in mind that the chief purpose of the Nicene creed was to combat the idea that the Son was a created being.

I note that one citation in the article appeals to church tradition , not Scripture, as a reason for why EFS is wrong, and this is my point:

This way of understanding the immanent Trinity does run counter to the pro Nicene
tradition, as well as the medieval, Reformation, and post-Reformation Reformed traditions that grew
from it. According to traditional Trinitarian theology, the will is predicated of the one undivided essence
[substance, or nature] so that there is only one divine will in the immanent Trinity.”

It is claimed that there is only one divine will in the Trinity yet we find the Son in Luke 22:42 saying "yet not my will..", indicating that the Son has a will independent of the Father, and John 10:18 where Jesus speaks of giving his life voluntarily.

These verses clearly show Christ having an independent will from the Father, and at this moment I believe Christ was still as much a part of the "immanent Trinity" while on the Earth as he was a billion years before.