I'm not sure the degree of subordination you are referring to, but though Christ is subjected as a Son to His Father (Cf. Matthew 28:18), He is not inferior by nature and being (John 5:18). Noetus and apparently the Patripassions abused the text of Romans 9:5 to assert that Christ was the Father. Hippolytus (Against Noetus, 6), though he understood the passage to speak of Christ as "God," demonstrated the error of Noetus from other passages that Christ is not the Father. Basil in his commentary on the gospel of John (17.3) writes: "Did the Apostle, when he styled the Saviour 'God over all,' describe Him as greater than the Father? The idea is absurd . . . When the apostle said of the Son, we look for 'that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ,' did he think of Him as greater than the Father?" So apparently in these two places (the second being Titus 2:13), they saw the claim to Deity as being quite strong, so that they protected it from unwarranted abuse with such statements.Gregory Hartzler-Miller wrote: ↑December 15th, 2021, 10:52 am In Rom 9:5, could Paul be calling the Anointed one "God" in this subordinationist sense?
Also, I'm wondering if Christ is being pictured as "God"/King over "all" flesh i.e. both formerly Jewish flesh and formerly Gentile flesh (Cf. Eph. 2:11-16).
In the Greek, πάντων is neuter so in certain cases is translated "all things." This seems to encompass a broader view of Creation (see Matthew 28:18, Colossians 1:15-20; Hebrews 1:3) that would also encompass the narrower scope of Him being King over the Jews and Gentiles alike. This message of the gospel is a common theme in Paul's writings (Romans 3:29-31, 9:22-33; Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11).
I hope this is helpful.