The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (John Owen)

347 Pages·2009·4 MB·English

by  John Owen

The Death of Death in the Death of Christ
by
John Owen
Christian Classics Ethereal Library
About The Death of Death in the Death of Christ by John Owen
Title: The Death of Death in the Death of Christ
URL: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/owen/deathofdeath.html
Author(s): Owen, John (1616-1683)
Publisher: Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Description: The Death of Death in the Death of Christ is John Owen’s definitive
work on the extent of the atonement. It is a polemical work, designed
to show among other things that the doctrine of universal redemption
is unscriptural and destructive of the gospel. It was called forth by the
progress in England of Arminianism and the half-way house of
Amyraldianism adopted by Baxter, Davenant and Usher.
Publication History: First edition 1648. The Works of John Owen, edited by William H
Goold, first published by Johnstone and Hunter 1850–1853. Reprinted
by photolithography and published by the Banner of Truth Trust,
Edinburgh 1967.
Print Basis: The Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh, 1967.
Rights: Copyright Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Status: Proof-read and ThML markup added.
Editorial Comments: Base text for electronic edition extracted from The AGES Digital
Library John Owen Collection © AGES Software.
Contributor(s): Timothy Lanfear (Markup)
CCEL Subjects: All; Theology; Classic;
LC Call no: BT775.09
LC Subjects: Doctrinal theology
Salvation
The Death of Death in the Death of Christ John Owen
Table of Contents
About This Book. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. ii
The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 1
Title page.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 1
Prefatory note.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 2
Analysis.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 4
To the Right Honourable Robert, Earl of Warwick.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 9
Two attestations touching the ensuing treatise.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 9
Attestation by Stanley Gower.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 9
Attestation by Richard Byfield.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 10
To the reader.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 11
Title.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 21
Book I.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 21
Chapter I. In general of the end of the death of Christ, as it is in the
Scripture proposed.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 21
Chapter II. Of the nature of an end in general, and some distinctions
about it.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 24
Chapter III. Of the agent or chief author of the work of our redemption,
and of the first thing distinctly ascribed to the person of the Father.. . . . p. 26
Chapter IV. Of those things which in the work of redemption are peculiarly
ascribed to the person of the Son.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 35
Chapter V. The peculiar actions of the Holy Spirit in this business.. . . . p. 38
Chapter VI. The means used by the fore-recounted agents in this
work.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 39
Chapter VII. Containing reasons to prove the oblation and intercession
of Christ to be one entire means respecting the accomplishment of the
same proposed end, and to have the same personal object.. . . . . . . p. 41
Chapter VIII. Objections against the former proposal answered.. . . . . p. 45
Book II.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 56
Chapter I. Some previous considerations to a more particular inquiry after
the proper end and effect of the death of Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 56
Chapter II. Containing a removal of some mistakes and false assignations
of the end of the death of Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 59
Chapter III. More particularly of the immediate end of the death of Christ,
with the several ways whereby it is designed.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 63
iii
The Death of Death in the Death of Christ John Owen
Chapter IV. Of the distinction of impetration and application — The use
and abuse thereof; with the opinion of the adversaries upon the whole
matter in controversy unfolded; and the question on both sides
stated.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 74
Chapter V. Of application and impetration.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 83
Book III.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 86
Chapter I. Arguments against the universality of redemption — The two
first; from the nature of the new covenant, and the dispensation
thereof.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 86
Chapter II. Containing three other arguments.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 89
Chapter III. Containing, two other arguments from the person Christ
sustained in this business.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 94
Chapter IV. Of sanctification, and of the cause of faith, and the
procurement thereof by the death of Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 97
Chapter V. Being a continuance of arguments from the nature and
description of the thing in hand; and first, of redemption.. . . . . . . . . . p. 104
Chapter VI. Of the nature of reconciliation, and the argument taken from
thence.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 106
Chapter VII. Of the nature of the satisfaction of Christ, with arguments
from thence.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 109
Chapter VIII. A digression, containing the substance of an occasional
conference concerning the satisfaction of Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 116
Chapter IX. Being a second part of the former digression — Arguments
to prove the satisfaction of Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 121
Chapter X. Of the merit of Christ, with arguments from thence.. . . . . . p. 127
Chapter XI. The last general argument.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 130
Book IV.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 134
Chapter I. Things previously to be considered, to the solution of
objections.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 134
Chapter II. An entrance to the answer unto particular arguments.. . . . . p. 152
Chapter III. An unfolding of the remaining texts of scripture produced for
the confirmation of the first general argument for universal
redemption.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 163
Chapter IV. Answer to the second general argument for the universality
of redemption.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 174
Chapter V. The last argument from scripture answered.. . . . . . . . . . p. 187
Chapter VI. An answer to the twentieth chapter of the book entitled, “The
Universality of God’s Free Grace,” etc., being a collection of all the
arguments used by the author throughout the whole book to prove the
universality of redemption.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 195
iv
The Death of Death in the Death of Christ John Owen
Chapter VII. The removal of other remaining objections.. . . . . . . . . . p. 223
Appendices.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 237
Some few testimonies of the ancients.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 237
An appendix upon occasion of a late book published by Mr Joshua
Sprigge, containing erroneous doctrine.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 241
Indexes.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 246
Index of Scripture References.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 246
Index of Citations.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 268
Index of Names.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 274
Greek Words and Phrases.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 281
Hebrew Words and Phrases.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 300
Latin Words and Phrases.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 302
Index of Pages of the Print Edition.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 320
Indexes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 322
Index of Scripture References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 322
Index of Citations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 327
Index of Names. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 329
Greek Words and Phrases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 331
Hebrew Words and Phrases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 335
Latin Words and Phrases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 336
Index of Pages of the Print Edition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 341
v
The Death of Death in the Death of Christ John Owen
vi
The Death of Death John Owen
SALUS ELECTORUM, SANGUIS JESU;
139
OR,
THE DEATH OF DEATH IN THE DEATH OF CHRIST:
A TREATISE OF THE REDEMPTION AND RECONCILIATION THAT
IS IN THE BLOOD OF CHRIST;
WITH
THE MERIT THEREOF, AND THE SATISFACTION WROUGHT THEREBY:
WHEREIN
THE PROPER END OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST IS ASSERTED; THE IMMEDIATE
EFFECTS AND FRUITS THEREOF ASSIGNED, WITH THEIR EXTENT IN RESPECT
OF ITS OBJECT;
AND THE
WHOLE CONTROVERSY ABOUT UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION FULLY DISCUSSED.
IN FOUR PARTS.
1. DECLARING THE ETERNAL COUNSEL AND DISTINCT ACTUAL CONCURRENCE
OF THE HOLY TRINITY UNTO THE WORK OF REDEMPTION IN THE BLOOD OF CHRIST;
WITH THE COVENANTED INTENDMENT AND ACCOMPLISHED END OF GOD THEREIN.
2. REMOVING FALSE AND SUPPOSED ENDS OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, WITH THE
DISTINCTIONS INVENTED TO SOLVE THE MANIFOLD CONTRADICTIONS OF THE
PRETENDED UNIVERSAL ATONEMENT; RIGHTLY STATING THE CONTROVERSY.
3. CONTAINING ARGUMENTS AGAINST UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION FROM THE
WORD OF GOD; WITH AN ASSERTION OF THE SATISFACTION AND MERIT OF CHRIST.
4. ANSWERING ALL CONSIDERABLE OBJECTIONS AS YET BROUGHT TO LIGHT,
EITHER BY THE ARMINIANS OR OTHERS (THEIR LATE FOLLOWERS AS TO THIS
POINT), IN THE BEHALF OF UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION; WITH A LARGE UNFOLDING
OF ALL THE TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE BY ANY PRODUCED AND WRESTED TO THAT
PURPOSE.
The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom
for many. — Matt. xx. 28.
In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches
of his grace. — Eph. i. 7.
Imprimatur, John Cranford.
The Death of Death John Owen
Jan. 22, 1647.
Prefatory note.
140
In the testimonies from the ancient fathers, which Owen appends to the following treatise, he
quotes Augustine and Prosper as authorities in support of his own view of a definite and effectual
atonement. Though these fathers, in opposition to the Pelagians and semi-Pelagians of their day,
held this view, the point did not emerge into commanding prominence in the controversy with
which their names are chiefly and honourably associated. It was by no means a subject of special
controversy, or the key of their position in the field on which their polemical laurels were won. It
was otherwise in the dispute which prevailed between Hincmar and Gottschalc, exactly four centuries
later. The discussion on the extent of the atonement then assumed a distinct and positive shape.
The decisions of the different councils which sat in judgment upon their conflicting principles will
be found in the appendix to this treatise. The same controversy was renewed in Holland between
the Gomarists and the Arminians, when the Synod of Dort, in one of its articles, condemned the
Remonstrant doctrine of a universal atonement. Cameron, the accomplished professor of divinity
at Saumur, originated the last important discussion on this point before Owen wrote his treatise on
it. The views of Cameron were adopted and urged with great ability by two of his scholars, Amyraut
and Testard; and in the year 1634 a controversy arose, which agitated the French Church for many
years. Amyraut had the support of Daillé and Blondell. He was ably opposed by Rivet, Spanheim,
and Des Marets.
In the last two instances in which discussion on the extent of the atonement revived in the
Reformed Churches, there was an essential distinction, very commonly overlooked, between the
special points upon which the controversies respectively turned. The object of the article on the
death of Christ, emitted by the Synod of Dort, was to counteract the tenet that Christ by the atonement
only acquired for the Father a plenary right and freedom to institute a new procedure with all men,
by which, on condition of their own obedience, they might be saved. The divines of Saumur would
not have accepted this tenet as a correct representation of their sentiments. Admitting that, by the
purpose of God, and through the death of Christ, the elect are infallibly secured in the enjoyment
of salvation, they contended for an antecedent decree, by which God is free to give salvation to all
men through Christ, on the condition that they believe on him. Hence their system was termed
hypothetic universalism. The vital difference between it and the strict Arminian theory lies in the
absolute security asserted in the former for the spiritual recovery of the elect. They agree, however,
in attributing some kind of universality to the atonement, and in maintaining that, on a certain
condition, within the reach of fulfilment by all men, — obedience generally, according to the
Arminians, and faith, according to the divines of Saumur, — all men have access to the benefits
of Christ’s death. To impart consistency to the theory of Amyraut, faith must, in some sense, be
2
The Death of Death John Owen
competent to all men; and he held, accordingly, the doctrine of universal grace: in which respect
his theory differs essentially from the doctrine of universal atonement, as embraced by eminent
Calvinistic divines, who held the necessity of the special operation of grace in order to the exercise
of faith. The readers of Owen will understand, from this cursory explanation, why he dwells with
peculiar keenness and reiteration of statement upon a refutation of the conditional system, or the
system of universal grace, according to the name it bore in subsequent discussions. It was plausible;
it had many learned men for its advocates; it had obtained currency in the foreign churches; and it
seems to have been embraced by More, or Moore, to whose work on “The Universality of God’s
Free Grace,” our author replies at great length.
Thomas Moore is described by Edwards, in his “Gangræna,” part ii. p. 86, as “a great sectary,
that did much hurt in Lincolnshire, Norfolk, and Cambridgeshire; who was famous also in Boston,
Lynn, and even in Holland, and was followed from place to place by many.” His work, in a quarto
volume, was published in 1643; and in the same year a reply to it appeared from the pen of Thomas
Whitefield, “Minister of the Gospel at Great Yarmouth.” Mr Orme remarks, “He takes care to
inform us on the title-page that ‘Thomas Moore was late a weaver at Wills, near Wisbitch.’ ” And
141
he adds, in regard to Moore’s production, “Without approving of the argument of the work, I have
no hesitation in saying that it is creditable to the talents of the weaver, and not discreditable to his
piety.” The weaver, it should be added, was the author of some other works: “Discovery of Seducers
that Creep into Houses,” “On Baptism,” “A Discourse about the Precious Blood and Sacrifice of
Christ,” etc.
In 1650, Mr Horne, minister at Lynn in Norfolk, a man, according to Palmer (Nonconf. Mem.,
iii. pp. 6, 7), “of exemplary and primitive piety,” and author of several works, published a reply to
Owen’s work, under the title, “The Open Door for Man’s Approach to God; or, a vindication of
the record of God concerning the extent of the death of Christ, in answer to a treatise on that subject
by Mr John Owen.” Horne had considerable reputation for skill in the oriental languages, and “some
of his remarks and interpretations of Scripture,” in the judgment of Mr Orme, “were not unworthy
of Owen’s attention.” Owen, however, in his epistle prefixed to his “Vindiciæ Evangelicæ,” expresses
his opinion that the work of Horne did not deserve a reply.
Two years after the following work had been published, its author had to defend some of the
views he had maintained in it against a more formidable and celebrated adversary. Richard Baxter,
in an appendix to his “Aphorisms on Justification,” took exception to some of the views of Owen
on redemption. Owen answered him in a treatise which may be regarded as an appendix to his
“Death of Death.” In the discussions between them, so much of scholastic subtilty appears on both
sides that little interest is likely to be felt in that department of the general question on which they
were at variance.
It may be necessary to state precisely what opinion Owen really held on the subject of the extent
of the atonement. All opinions on this point may, in general terms, be reduced to four. There are a
few who hold that Christ died so as ultimately to secure the salvation of all men. There are others
who maintain the view condemned by the Synod of Dort, that by the death of Christ God is enabled
3
The Death of Death John Owen
to save all or any, on condition of their obedience. There is a third party, who, while they believe
that Christ died so as infallibly to secure the salvation of the elect, hold that inasmuch as Christ, in
his obedience and sufferings, did what all men were under obligation to do, and suffered what all
men deserved to suffer, his atonement has a general as well as a special aspect and reference, in
virtue of which the offer of the gospel may be freely tendered to them. Lastly, there are those, and
Owen amongst the number, who advocate a limited or definite atonement, such an atonement as
implies a necessary connection between the death of Christ and the salvation of those for whom
he died, while the actual bearing of the atonement on the lost is left among the things unrevealed,
save only that their guilt and punishment are enhanced by the rejection of that mercy offered in the
gospel. Hagenbach, in his “History of Doctrines,” vol. ii. p. 255, strangely asserts, that “as regards
the extent of the atonement, all denominations, with the exception of the Calvinists, hold that
salvation was offered to all.” It would be difficult to specify any Calvinists worthy of the name
who hold that salvation should not be offered to all; and it seems needful to state that Owen at least,
a very Calvinist of Calvinists, held no such view. On the contrary, among Calvinists that adhere to
the doctrine of a definite atonement, it has been matter of debate, not whether the gospel should be
universally offered, but on what basis, — the simple command and warrant of the Word, or the
intrinsic and infinite sufficiency of the atonement, — the universal offer of the gospel proceeds.
Perhaps this point was never formally before the mind of our author, but he intimates that the “innate
sufficiency of the death of Christ is the foundation of its promiscuous proposal to the elect and
reprobate.”
Among the editions of this valuable work, that printed in Edinburgh, 1755, under the
superintendence of the Rev. Adam Gib, deserves honourable mention. It is printed with some care;
considerable attention is paid to the numeration; and a valuable analysis of the whole work is
prefixed to it. We have not felt at liberty to adopt the numeration in all respects, as rather more of
freedom is used with the original than is consistent with the principles on which this edition of
Owen’s works has been issued. We acknowledge our obligations to it in the preparation of the
subjoined analysis, which is mostly taken from it.
Analysis.
142
BOOK I. declares the eternal counsel and distinct actual concurrence of the holy Trinity unto
the work of redemption in the blood of Christ; with the covenanted intendment and accomplished
end of God therein.
Chapter I. treats in general of the end of the death of Christ, as it is in the Scripture proposed:—
I. What his Father and himself intended in it. II. What was effectually fulfilled and accomplished
by it:— 1. Reconciliation; 2. Justification; 3. Sanctification; 4. Adoption; 5. Glorification. III. A
general view of the opposite doctrine.
Chapter II. Of the nature of an end in general, and some distinctions about it:— I. The general
distinction of end and means. II. Their mutual relation:— 1. In a moral sense; 2. In a natural sense.
III. A twofold end noticed, viz.:— 1. Of the work; 2. Of the worker. IV. The end of every free agent
4