A commonly cited text to support the subordination of the Son to the Father is that of John 14:28:
You heard me say to you, "I am going away, and I am coming to you." If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I." (NRSV)
The term translated as "greater" is μειζων, the masculine nominative singular comparative of μεγας (large/great); it is used elsewhere to show how one person is greater than another:
Are thou greater (μειζων) than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? (4:12)
Art thou greater (μειζων) than our father Abraham, which is dead? And the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? (8:53)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater (μειζων) than his lord; neither hs that is sent greater (μειζων) than he that sent him. (13:16)
Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater (μειζων) than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. (15:20)
In an attempt to "get around" the Christological implications of Christ saying that the Father is greater than Him, Trinitarian apologists argue that Jesus was only speaking of his incarnation, where he hid his divine attributes and glory, per the common Trinitarian interpretation of Phil 2:7 and that he was speaking of His humanity in contrast with the divinity of the Father.
There are a number of problems with this (lame) response; notice that Trinitarian apologists who use this "argument" ultimately shoot themselves in the foot, if they were consistent--if, in their view, Jesus was speaking of his human will/nature, and thus inferior to God, then they cannot use any of his other “claims” for divinity while he was on earth. Either he was, as a person, equal to God or he wasn’t.
There are a number of problems with this (lame) response; notice that Trinitarian apologists who use this "argument" ultimately shoot themselves in the foot, if they were consistent--if, in their view, Jesus was speaking of his human will/nature, and thus inferior to God, then they cannot use any of his other “claims” for divinity while he was on earth. Either he was, as a person, equal to God or he wasn’t.
Furthermore, another response that is sometimes forwarded is that Jesus' words mean that the Father is only "greater" in a functional sense in that the Father "sends" the Son, but is not "better" than Jesus. However, this is an example of “special pleading,” a very common logical fallacy within much of Trinitarian apologetics, as they are introducing a factor unrelated to the matter, and argue for that; to have someone greater than another person introduces inequality.
As with many biblical texts, we see that Latter-day Saint Christology is supported by biblical exegesis and that Trinitarian theology is found fighting against the plain, exegetically sound meaning of the pertinent texts and even the rules of basic logic (as it always is).