Two posts for you weekend reading.
In “Let Us”
Is “let us” in Genesis 1:26 a reference to the Trinity even though the author and the first readers probably didn’t understand it this way? Tom Schreiner says yes and explains why (Justin Taylor).
In “I Am” (and More)
A primer on eternal Sonship with four scriptural proofs (Kevin DeYoung).
Without the eternality of the Son, we do not have a Christ who can fully save because we do not have a Christ who shares in all the attributes of deity. Without eternal Sonship, we cannot affirm that the Father has always been the Father. And if the Father has not always been in communion with the Son, then love cannot be eternal, for the Father would have had to create another being in order to give and receive love. Likewise, it is only with eternal Sonship that the economic Trinity (that which we see about God in the unfolding of redemptive history) corresponds to any real ultimate truth about God. The God who is must be the God who always was.
When I get time, I’ll add a link to this piece on the theological term page for eternal Sonship. (I see that I need to tweek the definition, too.)