The Death of Death in the Death of Christ - John Owen

Status
Not open for further replies.

FenderPriest

Puritan Board Junior
[IMGL]http://www.monergismbooks.com/images/P/DoD.jpg[/IMGL]I imagine there are several people who've read this book on here. I know a few (too few though) that have read it. The intention of the book is pretty blatant and obvious, and is arguing for a position that I already hold, but I have to say, this book has been deeply affecting me. I love the doctrines of grace, and I love the Gospel - this book has been stirring my heart in deep ways to grow in my affection and love for the Savior. What a profoundly gracious, kind, and infinitely wise King we have! Honestly, I'm not sure how universal redemptionist can celebrate that Jesus gets jipped in the end (in their system).

Anyhow, do you guys have any thoughts or reflections on this book? Also, has anybody read any rebuttals to this book? I can across this one, but wasn't particularly interested in reading it: Did Christ Die Only for the Elect? A Treatise on the Extent of Christ's Atonement by Norman F. Douty
 

DavidCPorter

Puritan Board Freshman
I did mention this in my application for membership of the Puritan Board but I will repeat it here. I came to understand the Reformed Faith by reading this book. I was in a Christian bookshop in Belfast (I think it was 1969) and a Free Presbyterian Minister, Rev Michael Patrick, suggested I should read it. It was the edition with an introduction by J I Packer. I found it to be a revelation of truth. I have gone on to read most of John Owen's works.
 

Presbyterian Deacon

Puritan Board Graduate
I love this book. He destroys all the objections and leaves you wondering how any thinking person can still be Arminian?

Owen's digression (book 3 chapter 8) "Of the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ..." is an excellent read!
 

JohnOwen007

Puritan Board Sophomore
Anyhow, do you guys have any thoughts or reflections on this book? Also, has anybody read any rebuttals to this book?

The best rebuttal I've found is a Masters thesis by Neil Chambers (done through RTS Jackson). Can't remember the exact title.

Personally, I have a love hate relationship with this book. Love, in that there are some parts of his argument that are sublime. Hate, in that Owen In my humble opinion imposes a prior grid over certain passages that question his position (for example, that "world: in John 3:16 = "elect" is horrible exegesis, especially considering the use of "world" in the next verse!).

We also see Owen's voluntarism (God could've saved people without the cross if he wished--yuk!) evident here. It was a few years later he'd changed his opinion on this as we see in A Dissertation on Divine Justice. DoD was written when he was a young man.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
We also see Owen's voluntarism (God could've saved people without the cross if he wished--yuk!) evident here. It was a few years later he'd changed his opinion on this as we see in A Dissertation on Divine Justice. DoD was written when he was a young man.

I agree that Owen adopts a voluntarist approach to the goodness of God, that is, God was not necessitated to bestow saving benefits upon all; but where in this work does he teach God could have saved people without the cross?
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
[IMGL]http://www.monergismbooks.com/images/P/DoD.jpg[/IMGL]I imagine there are several people who've read this book on here. I know a few (too few though) that have read it. The intention of the book is pretty blatant and obvious, and is arguing for a position that I already hold, but I have to say, this book has been deeply affecting me. I love the doctrines of grace, and I love the Gospel - this book has been stirring my heart in deep ways to grow in my affection and love for the Savior. What a profoundly gracious, kind, and infinitely wise King we have! Honestly, I'm not sure how universal redemptionist can celebrate that Jesus gets jipped in the end (in their system).

Anyhow, do you guys have any thoughts or reflections on this book? Also, has anybody read any rebuttals to this book? I can across this one, but wasn't particularly interested in reading it: Did Christ Die Only for the Elect? A Treatise on the Extent of Christ's Atonement by Norman F. Douty

Is this a new cover for the Banner of Truth Trust edition, or is someone else putting it out now?
 

DMcFadden

Puritanboard Commissioner
Few books are as powerful as this one. And, Packer's intro isn't too bad either. What a gift to the church!!!
 

FenderPriest

Puritan Board Junior
Is this a new cover for the Banner of Truth Trust edition, or is someone else putting it out now?

It's the new cover - the old one, with this church on the front, had a little too much going on (however, it's the edition I have of it). I'm reading from Volume X of his works, but this was the best picture I could find to accompany the post.
 

JohnOwen007

Puritan Board Sophomore
I agree that Owen adopts a voluntarist approach to the goodness of God, that is, God was not necessitated to bestow saving benefits upon all; but where in this work does he teach God could have saved people without the cross?

Dear Matthew, it's found here:

First, The foundation of this whole assertion seems to me to be false and
erroneous, — namely, that God could not have mercy on mankind unless
satisfaction were made by his Son. It is true, indeed, supposing the decree,
purpose, and constitution of God that so it should be, that so he would
manifest his glory, by the way of vindicative justice, it was impossible
that it should otherwise be; [...] but to assert
positively, that absolutely and antecedently to his constitution he could
not have done it, is to me an unwritten tradition, the Scripture affirming no
such thing, neither can it be gathered from thence in any good consequence. Works 10:205.

Here Owen sees the necessity of the cross as derived from God's decree (his will) and not from his being as such. I recoil at this.

Owen would abandon this Scotistism for a more intellectualist position (and side with Amyraut amongst others!) a few years later.

Hope you're surviving the floods up your way dear brother. Blessings.
 

Reformed Covenanter

Cancelled Commissioner
Its a shame that they have put crosses on the new edition. Nonetheless, it is a great book. John Owen is someone I plan to read a lot.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
Here Owen sees the necessity of the cross as derived from God's decree (his will) and not from his being as such. I recoil at this.

Owen would abandon this Scotistism for a more intellectualist position (and side with Amyraut amongst others!) a few years later.

Hope you're surviving the floods up your way dear brother. Blessings.

Thanks, Marty. The floods aren't a problem in Rocky, but I do feel for the people of Emerald.

It's ironic that Owen (and most modern Calvinists) use the necessitarian position because they believe it confirms the definiteness and hence the limitedness of the atonement.
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
Its a shame that they have put crosses on the new edition. Nonetheless, it is a great book. John Owen is someone I plan to read a lot.

What's the problem with using crosses on the cover? It's the basic symbol of Christianity.

Should Christianity employ such a "basic symbol"?

Why not? It's not a violation of the Second Commandment. And, it's something that even most unbelievers are familiar with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top