# Ezekiel and John Owen



## Matthew1344 (Nov 11, 2014)

Does anyone know how John Owen interpreted chapter 18 and 31 of Ezekiel?


----------



## MW (Nov 11, 2014)

John Owen, Works, 10:387-388:

First, then, let us consider to whom and of whom these words are spoken. Is it to and of all men, or only to the house of Israel? Doubtless these last; they are only intended, they only are spoken to: “Hear now, O house of Israel,” verse 25. Now, will it follow that because God saith he delights not in the death of the house of Israel, to whom he revealed his mind, and required their repentance and conversion, that therefore he saith so of all, even those to whom he never revealed his will by such ways as to them, nor called to repentance, Ps. cxlvii. 19, 20? So that the very ground-work of the whole conclusion is removed by this first observation.

Secondly, “God willeth not the death of a sinner,” is either, “God purposeth and determineth he shall not die,” or, “God commandeth that he shall do those things wherein he may live.” If the first, why are they not all saved? why do sinners die? for there is an immutability in the counsel of God, Heb. vi. 17 ; “His counsel shall stand, and he will do all his pleasure,” Isa xlvi. 10. If the latter way, by commanding, then the sense is, that the Lord commandeth that those whom he calleth should do their duty, that they may not die (although he knows that this they cannot do without his assistance); now, what this makes to general redemption, I know not.

Thirdly, To add no more, this whole place, with the scope, aim, and intention of the prophet in it, is miserably mistaken by our adversaries, and wrested to that whereof there is not the least thought in the text. The words are a part of the answer which the Lord gives to the repining Jews, concerning their proverb, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.” Now, about what did they use this proverb? Why, “concerning the land of Israel,” verse 2, the land of their habitation, which was laid waste by the sword (as they affirmed) for the sins of their fathers, themselves being innocent. So that it is about God’s temporal judgments in overturning their land and nation that this dispute is; wherein the Lord justifieth himself by declaring the equity of these judgments by reason of their sins, even those sins for which the land devoured them and spewed them out; telling them that his justice is, that for such things they should surely die, their blood should be upon them, verse 13, — they shall be slain with the sword, and cut off by those judgments which they had deserved: not that the shedding of their blood and casting out of their carcases was a thing in itself so pleasurable or desirable to him as that he did it only for his own will, for let them leave their abominations, and try whether their lives were not prolonged in peace. This being the plain, genuine scope and meaning of this place, at the first view presenting itself to every unprejudiced man, I have often admired how so many strange conclusions for a general purpose of showing mercy to all, universal vocation and redemption, have been wrested from it; as also, how it came to be produced to give colour to that heap of blasphemy which our author calleth his fifth proof.


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 13, 2014)

Thank you Rev Winner

I will read this and come up with notes. I can't now, but I will asap.


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 13, 2014)

1) is his point that he doesn't want his children to die? Is it the same point that 2 Peter is making, "not willing that any should perrish"?


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 13, 2014)

2) God gets what he wants and does what he wants to so Ezekiel is not saying that "God does not want the purpose the wicked to die" because that happens. What Ezekiel is saying is "I command wicked man to live a way that leads to life".


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 13, 2014)

3) wasn't talking about salvation but earthly judgments?


----------



## earl40 (Nov 13, 2014)

Oh how I wish all would read this in all The Lord's church (including reformed churches) and oh how I really really wished after they read this they would believe Owen's take on this.


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 13, 2014)

Did I understand it right?


----------



## MW (Nov 13, 2014)

As soon as I hear "want" language my response is "no" because I think we should not make the All-sufficient One speak in respect of want.

God does not condemn men to die irrespective of sin. Men considered merely as creatures are not objects of divine justice. God does not take pleasure in the death of innocent creatures, contrary to the insinuation of the Israelites. Men as sinners are objects of justice. They are justly condemned for their sin, and God clearly takes pleasure in the administration of justice and vindication of His sovereignty and honour, as Scripture everywhere testifies.

God grants sinners opportunity to repent. He commands them to do it. He offers salvation to the truly penitent. To that degree He shows a willingness to save men, i.e., if they will repent. It is not an unconditional willingness. He is willing if they are. As it stands, they will not be willing unless He grants them repentance. God's unconditional willingness to save men is only seen in His will to give repentance to the elect.

This unconditional willingness, or absolute purpose, is what is spoken of in 2 Peter 3. God is not willing that any of the elect should perish, and therefore none of the elect shall perish. The day of vengeance and the end of the world is deferred in the divine program so as to give sufficient room for the elect to come to repentance.


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 13, 2014)

Yeah that is how I interpret 2 Peter too. 

I'm just trying to understand this, I am sorry, I am just having a tough time understanding. 

How would you, in the most layman terms possible, explain this passage


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 13, 2014)

Thanks Dr winzer


----------



## MW (Nov 13, 2014)

Matt, I am not a doctor.

The passage as a whole is speaking of wicked men turning from their wickedness. The oath of God does not relate to the death of wicked men in general, but to those who turn from sin to righteousness. This is clear from the conditional statements in the surrounding context. It is also clarified by the second half of the statement, which speaks positively of God taking pleasure in those who turn from their evil way and live.


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 14, 2014)

Ok thanks! And sorry, thought you were Dr


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 14, 2014)

2 questions:
1) with this stance of Ezekiel, do you believe that God does not love the reprobate at all?

2) What were you talking about early when you said that you disagdisagree with "God wanting"? Do you have any good threads I could read on the topic?


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 14, 2014)

> To that degree He shows a willingness to save men, i.e., if they will repent. It is not an unconditional willingness. He is willing if they are. As it stands, they will not be willing unless He grants them repentance. God's unconditional willingness to save men is only seen in His will to give repentance to the elect.



So conditional salvation to reprobate
unconditional salvation to elect
?


----------



## JimmyH (Nov 14, 2014)

Matthew1344 said:


> 2) What were you talking about early when you said that you disagree with "God wanting"? Do you have any good threads I could read on the topic?


 Matt, I had the very same question and Reverend Winzer explains in this thread ; http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/god-wants-clarification-reverend-winzer-please-85140/


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 14, 2014)

Thank you


----------



## MW (Nov 14, 2014)

Matthew1344 said:


> 1) with this stance of Ezekiel, do you believe that God does not love the reprobate at all?



God loves His creatures as the work of His own hands and man in particular as made in His image. The high value God places on His own image explains why God is angry with sinners every day, They are daily vandalising and violating the image He loves.



Matthew1344 said:


> What were you talking about early when you said that you disagdisagree with "God wanting"? Do you have any good threads I could read on the topic?



Jimmy has helpfully linked to the thread I would have linked to.


----------



## MW (Nov 14, 2014)

Matthew1344 said:


> So conditional salvation to reprobate
> unconditional salvation to elect?



Salvation itself is unconditional. In the purpose of God there is no conditional salvation. The offer of salvation requires men to believe and repent but this faith and repentance are themselves a part of the salvation which God gives to His elect and have been purchased by Christ. The rest are passed over as far as the purpose of salvation is concerned.


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 15, 2014)

Thank you all for your help! 

Rev Winzer can you show me texts that support he loves all as his creatures as creation because image bearers. I know there is not a txt that says it word for word, but if you could help me and speak into this thought more I would love it. I have seen this before on PB but at the time I wasn't swayed. But I do always enjoy your opinions, advice, and wisdom. So if you have the time I'd love to hear more. Or if you could give a link


----------



## MW (Nov 16, 2014)

Matthew1344 said:


> Rev Winzer can you show me texts that support he loves all as his creatures as creation because image bearers.



Please consider Psalms 136 and 145. If God did not love men as His image they would not be the objects of His acts of goodness or displays of justice.


----------



## Matthew1344 (Nov 17, 2014)

Angels are a display of his justice, right? And they are not made in his image.

I see that the txt in 145 says he has mercy on all that he has made. How do you see that it is because we are in his image?


----------



## MW (Nov 17, 2014)

Matthew1344 said:


> Angels are a display of his justice, right? And they are not made in his image.
> 
> I see that the txt in 145 says he has mercy on all that he has made. How do you see that it is because we are in his image?



Angelic analogies are difficult. Insofar as they are not functioning as visible representatives on earth it is true that angels are not "made in his image." But to be the object of justice they must be intelligent moral agents, and to that extent bare the image of their Creator.

Ps. 145 makes specific application to man as bearing a moral relation to the Creator.


----------

