Death of Death (Treasures of John Owen for Today's Readers)

Rating:
Summary: Christ¿s Purposeful Death
Review: John Owen's work, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, is the classic text defending the purposeful and actual procurement of salvation for sinners in the death of Christ. While characteristically portrayed as a polemical work on the Calvinistic understanding of limited atonement this work is actually much more. In brief, it is a defense for the perfect work of Christ, which actually obtained salvation on the cross. It argues that the purpose of the triune God is to glorify himself and to save sinners.

Owen's thesis asserts that in the death of Christ salvation of sinners was actually accomplished. Christ came to the earth to seek and to save those who were lost. Through his oblation, being the entire humiliation of his life and death, he has secured perfectly the redemption of those for whom he died. Therefore the salvation of sinners was completely secured through the death of Christ. This stands in direct contrast to the Arminian and Amyraldian understanding of a universal redemption, which makes salvation only possible or hypothetical.

Owen divides his work into four books. The first book sets forth his thesis that the work of Christ on the cross was made for the full and complete salvation of those whom God intended to save. The work of salvation is a work of the triune God. God the Father stands as the author of salvation and the sender of Christ. He is the one who from before creation elects and chooses some to be saved. Christ is the sent one that became incarnate and offered himself up for death, was resurrected and intercedes in heaven for those whom he died. The Spirit was the helper to Christ in his earthly ministry and is the applier of salvation.

In the second book Owen argues that the supreme purpose of Christ's death was to bring glory to the Godhead. The subordinate purpose of his death was to bring salvation to sinners chosen by God. Scripture shows that in Christ's death God intended to save sinners and that the effect of his death actually secured their salvation and that those for whom Christ died are therefore chosen elect. Consequently, the impetration or securing work of salvation cannot be separated from the application of salvation. Christ's death (impetration) was intended for the elect only although being of infinite worth. His death brought about their salvation and the Spirit then applies that salvation to their account. Therefore Christ's death through the Spirit's application is a perfect and complete act of salvation.

In the third book Owen sets forth sixteen arguments against the doctrine of a general ransom. His arguments are primarily set against Arminians and Amyraldians who hold to a general or universal atonement, which claims that God makes salvation possible or hypothetical for the whole world. He debunks the view that the cross work of Christ only made salvation possible and sets forth positively the view that on the cross Christ made salvation effectual and actual. Owen also helpfully shows the logic of such a view of the atonement stemming from the biblical doctrine of election. If God chooses sinners from before the creation of the world then it is only those chosen sinners to whom Christ has died for and to whom the Spirit applies salvation.

In the last book Owen examines the various exegetical arguments set forth for a universal atonement. Owen exegetes at length several texts which speak of a general intent of the death of Christ, those which suggest that Christ's death was ineffective and lastly those which seem to declare a general offer of salvation. He also provides careful exegesis of Biblical texts, which use the words "world" and "all" along with texts, which seem to speak of those perishing for whom Christ died. Owen ends the work by taking Thomas More's work to task and then refutes various theological arguments proffered by universal redemptionists.

The most important point of this work is what is often missed in the present debate over unlimited vs. limited atonement. Owen's thesis is that Christ's death on the cross actually saved. The current debate focuses much on whether his death was for the elect or for the world, but I believe that the question is answered when it is framed in the matter of determining whether Christ's death actually saved or only made salvation possible. As Scripture shows, and Owen proves, the primary (sole?) emphasis is on the actual accomplishment of salvation. Those for whom Christ died are saved; they are regenerated, justified, sanctified, etc. Christ's work is perfect and that which he sought to accomplish has been fulfilled.

Owen's The Death of Death in the Death of Christ is in many ways the authoritative work on the effectual death of Christ. Through careful theological arguments and sound exegesis Owen establishes his thesis that the death of Christ actually saved sinners as opposed to the Arminian and Amyraldian schemes which only allow for a potential or hypothetical salvation. This work of Christ was primarily for the glory of God and secondarily for the salvation of sinners. Owen's work helps regain a better understanding of the Biblical Gospel, which truly exalts God and saves sinners. While nonetheless a polemical work, The Death of Death is written for the safekeeping of the gospel that God may truly be glorified and that the sinners may be confronted with the truth of the gospel and be saved. The preservation of the true gospel in Owen's work is therefore to be most appreciated.

Rating:
Summary: THE Book on Particular Redemption!
Review: The day that this book is refuted is the day that the TULIP shrivels up and dies--the day that God's free grace in salvation is shown to be a farce.

But Owen's thesis, that Christ did, in fact, save His people from their sins (Matt. 1:21), is nothing less than pure, undiluted Gospel-truth, and shall remain so as long as God Himself is Truth.

There is no work written by any Calvinist throughout the ages that can begin to compare with Owen's treatment of the death of Christ, and His procurement of eternal redemption thereby. And there is no work written by any Arminian throughout the ages that can begin to answer Owen's book. To do this, it would be necessary to show that the Scriptures present Christ's death as obtaining a mere possibility of redemption, instead of having actually obtained eternal redemption (Heb. 9:12), an absolute impossibility.

Owen's argumentation and exegesis are simply outstanding. Before reading this book, I had actually never read an exegesis of John 3:16. He spends ten pages of a detailed, Puritan examination of that passage alone. He also examines virtually every text cited by the Arminians in this controversy, coming to the same inescapable conclusion every time: "No Universalism Here."

J.I. Packer's "Introductory Essay" is not to be missed, either: It's already considered by many to be a classic, a "masterpiece in miniature."

But the "Essay" is undoubtedly the easiest reading in this volume. Owen was a 17th century Puritan, and can be difficult reading. It's definitely not a book to give your non-theologically-minded Arminian friends to convince them of Particular Redemption. But for an in-depth study of the doctrine, this book cannot be missed.

Rating:
Summary: A great puritan discusses the atonement of Christ.
Review: The Death of Death in the Death of Christ is a polemical work designed to show among other things that the doctrine of universal redemption (or universal atonement) is unscriptural and destructive of the gospel. The introduction by J. I. Packer is worth the price of the book.

Owen is not light reading and this work is no exception. It will require no small effort on the part of the reader. It must be read slowly and carefully, and then re-read again. However, as Packer says, "Nobody has the right to dismiss the doctrine of limited atonement as a monstrodity of Calvinistic logic until he has refuted Owen's proof that it is part of the uniform biblical presentation of redemption, clearly taught in plain text after plain text." And nobody has done that yet.

I rate it 5 stars for content. But if readability is the measure, then you best move on to something else.

Rating:
Summary: Sorry, friends ... this book has still not been refuted!
Review: This is Puritan John Owen's classic work on the doctrine of the atonement, which seeks to answer the question: for whom did Christ die? Owen was, and is still considered to be one of - if not THE - best English theologian who ever lived. This book demonstrates why he deserves such a distinction. It is one of the finest outworkings of the theological shift brought about by the Protestant Reformation, which is summarized by the latin phrase, soli Deo gloria. Thus, for Owen, the atonement was not just to make possible salvation for sinners. Rather, it was the securement of salvation for God's people, and it was accomplished and applied all for the glory of God alone (soli Deo gloria).

Despite the claims of others, this book as in all reality remained unrefuted since it was written. Many have tried, and many have been declared triumphant. However, those books pale in comparrison to Owen's work. Why? Because they all fail to do address him on the level of the biblical text. In other words, they have no exegesis! It is amazing that many will argue that Calvinists argue the system to defend their beliefs. However, virtually all of those who seek to refute Owen do not engage in strong exegesis, but argue in broad terms, from the vantage point of their own systems. Talk about calling the kettle black! Perhaps the worst of these so-called responses are Dave Hunts's book, "What Love is This?" and Norman Geisler's, "Chosen But Free." Both are filled with historical inaccuracies, misquotations, and worst of all very little exegesis. Regardless of our positions in this "in-house" debate, we must above all be biblical in our arguments, and, unfortunately, that seems to be missing from those arguing on the other side.

Lest, I appear to make unfair assertions that are unsupported, check out James White's "The Potter's Freedom" for a truly devastating critque of "Chosen But Free."

Rating:
Summary: The best work on limited atonement....
Review: While this is the best and most exhaustive work on limited atonement I've ever read, it simply isn't very convincing at all. Owen sends forth several texts that speak of Christ redeeming the church or his people in particular and then bases how everyone who should view the atonement on these passages, making the so called "universal passages" subservient to the "particular passages." The fallacy of this is obvious. First, although any good Arminian will concede the plain meaning of the particular passages, he/she would skillfully point out that not a single text in the Bible states that Christ died for ONLY his people. Moreover, any skilled exegete would point out that Paul also said that Christ loved him and gave himself up for him, but not ONLY Paul.

Owen's worst performance has to be in his explanation of 2 Peter 2:1. Instead of submitting to the plain meaning of the text, Owen tries to shift the burden of proof by trying to say that "Sovereign Lord" cannot refer to Christ (although the greek word despoten is used to refer to Christ and earthly masters just as the word kurios is) and "bought" cannot refer to redemption (although 1 Cor 7:23 & 6:20, Rev 5:9 specifically refer to redemption in the New Testament). Moreover, if bought does not refer to Christ's redemption, why would these people be lost in the first place? While his attempt to make "all men" into "some men" are weak at best, his performance on 2 Peter 2:1 is inexcusable and should serve as a warning to anyone (Calvinist or Arminian) who would impose his or her presuppositions onto the text.

If you want to learn more about the doctrine of limited atonement, this is the book for you. It's written in an exhaustive (and unfortunately, very dull) manner. However, don't let this book be the last work you read on the atonement, John Goodwin's "Redemption Redeemed" is a good Arminian explaination of this most important doctrine.