Owen’s Death of Death…

God’s Sovereignty

"God sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice, and man from the beginning has fulfilled that decree by making his choice between good and evil. When he chooses to do evil, he does not thereby countervail the sovereign will of God but fulfills it, inasmuch as the eternal decree decided not which choice the man should make but that he should be free to make it. If in His absolute freedom God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay His hand or say, 'What doest thou?' Man’s will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so." A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God

James Arminius

"Besides, even true and living faith in Christ precedes regeneration strictly taken, and consisting of the mortification or death of the old man, and the vivification of the new man...For Christ becomes ours by faith, and we are engrafted into Christ, are made members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones, and, being thus planted with him, we coalesce or are united together, that we may draw from him the vivifying power of the Holy Spirit, by which power the old man is mortified and we rise again into a new life." [Works Vol.2 pg. 233, Wesleyan Heritage Collection].

Owen’s Death of Death…

Posted on November 9, 2007 by kangaroodort

Dan is doing a nice series on Owen’s arguments in The Death of Death in the Death of Christ over at Arminian Chronicles.

Filed under: atonement, John Owen, penal satisfaction |

5 Responses

Sean Babu, on November 9, 2007 at 4:04 pm said:

Thanks for sharing the link. I need to work through Owen soon. It’s hard, though, to get through Packer’s introduction. Apparently no one ever taught him the whole flies-honey/vinegar thing.
Classical Arminianism, on November 9, 2007 at 4:18 pm said:

If I were a Calvinist, I would be an Owenite. And a Warfieldian.

BTW, I love the roos!

Billy
J.C. Thibodaux, on November 9, 2007 at 4:20 pm said:

Apparently no one ever taught him the whole flies-honey/vinegar thing.

The same could be said of Owen. As long as Calvinists hold he and people like him up as great theologians, Calvinism (for them) can never be just some minor variation of doctrine as exists between pre/post/mid trib rapture, because men tend to act like the ones they hold to be their fathers. For men like that, it’s their way or no way.
Godismyjudge, on November 10, 2007 at 2:11 am said:

Thanks Ben. I hope you continue your series on falling from grace.

Dan
Sean Babu, on November 10, 2007 at 4:42 am said:

J.C.: The same could be said of Owen. As long as Calvinists hold he and people like him up as great theologians, Calvinism (for them) can never be just some minor variation of doctrine as exists between pre/post/mid trib rapture, because men tend to act like the ones they hold to be their fathers. For men like that, it’s their way or no way.

Right. This particular point of Calvinism is one where humility is especially called for. Limited atonement is patently contradicted by multiple passages in the NT; Calvin’s exact view isn’t totally clear; many fine “4 point” Calvinist scholars don’t buy into it. In fact it is a belief exclusive to Calvinism; even the otherwise very similar Lutherans don’t hold it. The burden of proof is definitely theirs.

Their best strategy would be to patiently and irenically argue why their view should be considered, but they don’t. I can forgive Owen because of his times, but Packer comes out swinging, “What? You don’t believe this? How dare you so distort the Gospel!” That doesn’t exactly encourage those not already convinced to be open to their arguments.

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Oct				Dec »
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30

Arminian Perspectives

Fighting For The Angels

Recent Posts

Hits Since 3/25/08

John Wesley

Recent Comments

God’s Sovereignty

Categories

James Arminius