Life and Death natural and Spiritual Compared

Life and Death, Natural and Spiritual, Compared | Monergism
A very important topic that Christians should be concerned with, in terms of evangelism;
Life and Death, Natural and Spiritual, Compared

BY JOHN OWEN
Of death in sin — All unregenerate men are spiritually dead — Spiritual death is twofold: legal; metaphorical — Natural Life, what it is, and what it consists in — Natural Death, with its necessary consequents — The supernatural life of Adam in innocence, in its principle, acts, and power — Differences between that life and our spiritual life in Christ — Spiritual Death is a privation of the life we had in Adam; a negation of the life of Christ — It is privation of a principle of all life to God — Spiritual impotence in this — Differences between natural and spiritual death — The use of precepts, promises, and threatenings — No man perishes merely for lack of power — No vital acts in a state of death — The way of the communication of spiritual life — The nature of the best works of unregenerate persons— There is no disposition to spiritual life under the power of spiritual death.

Another description that the Scripture gives of unregenerate men as to their state and condition, is that they are spiritually dead; and hence, in like manner, it follows that there is a necessity for an internal, powerful, effectual work of the Holy Ghost on the souls of men, to deliver them out of this state and condition by regeneration. And this principally respects their wills and affections, just as the darkness and blindness described before, respects their minds and understandings. There is a spiritual life by which men live to God; being strangers to and alienated from this spiritual life, men are spiritually dead. The Scripture declares this concerning all unregenerate persons, partly in direct words, and partly in other assertions of the same importance. The testimonies of the first sort are many and express:
Eph 2.1, "You were dead in trespasses and sins;" Eph 2.5, "When we were dead in sins;" Col 2.13, "And you being dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of your flesh;" 2Cor 5.14, "If one died for all, then were all dead;" Rom 5.15, "Through the offense of one, many are dead;" Rom 5.12, "Death passed upon all men, for all have sinned." And the same thing is asserted in the second way, where the recovery and restoration of men by the grace of Christ is called their "quickening," or the bestowing of a new life upon them: for this supposes that they were dead, or destitute of that life which is communicated to them in this revivification; for only that which was dead before, can be said to be quickened. See Eph 2.5; John 5.21, 6.63.591

This death that unregenerate persons are under, is twofold:

1. Legal death, with reference to the sentence of the law. The sanction of the law was that, upon sinning, a man should die: "In the day that you eat of this you shall die the death," Gen 2.17. And upon this sentence Adam and all his posterity became dead in law, morally dead, or liable to death penally, and adjudged to it. This death is intended in some of the places mentioned before, such as Rom 5.12, and also 2Cor 5.14: For as Christ died, so all were dead. He died penally under the sentence of the law, and all were liable to death, or dead on that account. But this is not the death which I intend. Nor are we delivered from it by regeneration; rather, we are delivered by justification, Rom 5.1.592

2. Spiritual death, so called metaphorically, from the analogy and proportion that it bears to natural death. It is of great importance to know the true nature of this spiritual death, and because of it, how unregenerate men are utterly disabled from doing anything that is spiritually good, until they are quickened by the almighty power and irresistible efficacy of the Holy Ghost. Therefore, to declare this rightly, we must consider the nature of natural life and death, to which the spiritual estate of unregenerate men is an allusion.

Life in general, or the life of a living creature, is "The act of a quickening principle on a subject to be quickened, by virtue of their union." 593 And three things are to be considered in it:

1. The principle of life itself; in man this is the rational, "living soul," Heb. nephesh chayyah: Gen 2.7, "God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." Having formed the body of man from the dust of the earth, he designed for him a principle of life superior to that of brute creatures. Theirs is but the expression and spirit of their temperature and composition, even though particularly educed by the formative virtue and power of the Holy Ghost, as declared before. He creates for man, therefore, a separate, distinct, animating soul, and he infuses it into the matter prepared for its reception. As the Spirit did in the beginning in the creation of the species or kind of the human race in its first individuals, so he continues to do in the ordinary course of the works of his providence for continuing the human race. For having ordained the preparation of the body by generation, he immediately infuses into it the "living soul," the "breath of life," Heb. neshamah chayyah.

2. There is the "actus primus," 594 or the quickening act of this principle, on the principle quickened, in and by virtue of the union. Hereby the whole man becomes a "living soul;" Gr. psuchikos anthropos — a person quickened by a vital principle, and enabled for all naturally vital actions.

3. There are the acts of this life itself; and they are of two sorts:

(1.) Those which flow from life as life.

(2.) Those which proceed from life as such a life, from the principle of a rational soul.

The first sort are natural and necessary, such as all the actings and energies of the senses, and of the locomotive faculty, and also what belongs to receiving and making use of nutriment. These are acts of life, from which the psalmist proves that idols are dead things: from the lack of such acts. They are so far from having a divine life, as to have no life at all, Psa 115.4-7.595 These are acts of life as life; they are inseparable from it; and their end is to preserve the union of the whole between the quickening and quickened principles.

The second sort are acts of life that proceed from the special nature of this quickening principle. Such are all the elicit596 and imperate597 acts of our understandings and wills; all actions that are voluntary, rational, and uniquely human. These proceed from that special kind of life which is given by the special quickening principle of a rational soul.

pt2;
Hence it is evident what natural death consists in; and three things may be considered in it:

1. The separation of the soul from the body. By this separation, the act of infusing the living soul ceases as to all its ends; for as a principle of life to the whole, it operates only by virtue of its union with the subject that is quickened by it.

2. A cessation of all vital actings in the quickened subject; for that union from which they proceeded is dissolved.

3. As a consequence of these, the body is impotent and inept as to all its vital operations. Not only do all operations of life actually cease, but the body is no longer able to effect them. There does indeed remain in it "potentia obedientialis,"598 a "passive power" to receive life again, if that life is communicated to it by an external efficient cause. Thus the body of Lazarus, though dead, had the receptive power of a living soul; but it did not have an active power to dispose itself to life again, nor to vital actions.

From these things we may gather, by a just analogy, what spiritual life and death consist of. And to that end, some things must be observed beforehand; such as —

1. Adam in the state of innocency, besides having his natural life by which he was a living soul, likewise had a supernatural life with respect to its end, by which he lived to God. This is called the "life of God," Eph 4.18. This is the life which men who are now in the state of nature, are alienated from — it is the life which God requires, and which has God for its object and end. And this life was in Adam supernaturally.

For although this life was concreated in and with the rational soul, as a perfection due to it in the state in which it was, and with respect to the end for which it was made, yet it did not naturally flow from the principles of the rational soul. Nor were its principles, faculties, or abilities inseparable from those of the soul itself, being only incidental perfections of them, inlaid in them by special grace. This life was necessary for him with respect to the state in which he was, and the end for which he was made. He was made to live to the living God, and that was in a particular manner: — he was to live to God's glory in this world by discharging the rational and moral obedience required of him; and he was to live afterward in God's glory and in the eternal enjoyment of Him, as his highest good and highest reward. He was enabled for this end by that life of God, which we are alienated from in the state of nature.

2. In this life, as in life in general, three things are to be considered: (1.) Its principle; (2.) Its operation; (3.) Its virtue; or its habit, act, and power.

(1.) There was a quickening principle belonging to it. For every life is an act of a quickening principle.599 In Adam, this was the image of God, or a habitual conformity to God, his mind and will, in which the holiness and righteousness of God himself was represented, Gen 1.26-27.600 He was created in this image, or it was concreated with him, as a perfection due to his nature in the condition in which he was made. This gave him a habitual disposition toward all duties of that obedience which was required of him; it was the rectitude of all the faculties of his soul with respect to his supernatural end, Ecc 7.29.601

(2.) There were continual actions belonging to it from this principle, or by virtue of it and suited to it. All the acts of Adam's life should have been subordinate to his great moral end. In all that he did, he should have lived to God, according to the law of that covenant in which he walked before Him. And living to God was Adam's acting in in all things suitably to the light in his mind, to the righteousness and holiness in his will and affections, and to that uprightness, or integrity, or order, that was in his soul.

(3.) Along with this, he had the power or ability to continue the principle of life in suitable acts of such a life, with respect to the whole obedience required of him. That is, Adam had sufficient ability to perform any duty, or all duties, that the covenant required.

The supernatural life of Adam in his innocence consisted in these three things; and this is what the life to which we are restored by Christ corresponds. It corresponds to it, I say, and it supplies its absence with respect to the end of living to God according to the new covenant that we are taken into. For the life of Adam would not be sufficient for us to live to God according to the terms of the new covenant; nor is the life of grace we now enjoy suited to the covenant in which Adam stood before God.

This is why there are some differences between these two lives,602 the principal difference of which may be reduced to two heads:

pt3

1. The principle of this life was wholly and entirely in man himself. It was the effect of another cause, which was outside himself — namely, the good-will and power of God; but it was left to grow on no other root than what was in man himself. It was wholly implanted in his nature, and its springs lie in this. It should have had actual excitations by the influence of power from God; for no principle of operation can subsist in independence from God, nor can it apply itself to operate without His concurrence. But in the life to which we are renewed by Jesus Christ, the fountain and principle of it is not in ourselves, but in Christ, as one common head to all those who are made partakers of him. He is "our life;" and our life (as to its spring and fountain) is hidden with him in God, Col 3.3-4; for he quickens us by his Spirit, Rom 8.11. And our spiritual life, as it exists in us, consists in the vital actings of this Spirit of his in us — for "without him we can do nothing," John 15.5. By virtue of this, we "walk in newness of life," Rom 6.4. We live by this, therefore; yet not so much we live, as "Christ lives in us," Gal 2.20.

2. There is a difference between these lives with respect to the object of their vital acts. For the life which we now lead by the faith of the Son of God has various objects of its actings, which the other life did not have. For all the actings of our faith and love (that is, all our obedience) respects the revelation that God makes of himself and his will to us. Because of this, there are now new revelations of God in Christ; and consequently there are new duties of obedience required of us; as will be apparent afterward.

And there are other such differences between them. The life we had in Adam at the beginning, and that life we are renewed to in Christ Jesus, are so much of the same nature and kind (as our apostle manifests in various places, Eph 4.23-24; Col 3.10),603 that they serve the same end and purpose.

There being, therefore, this twofold spiritual life, or ability of living to God — that which we had in Adam and that which we have in Christ — we must inquire with reference to which of these it is that unregenerate men are said to be spiritually dead, or dead in trespasses and sins. Now, in the first place, this respects the life we had in Adam; for that life was deprived in the sanction of the law, "You shall die the death." This spiritual death is comprised in the privation of that spiritual life, or life to God, which unregenerate men never had — neither de facto nor de jure 604— in any state or condition. This is why, with respect to this life, they are dead only negatively — they do not have it. But with respect to the life they had in Adam [prior to the fall], they are dead privatively — they have lost that power of living to God which they once had.

pt4.

From what has been discussed, we may discover the nature of this spiritual death, under the power of which all unregenerate persons abide: for there are three things in it:

1. A privation of a principle of spiritual life enabling us to live to God;

2. A negation of all spiritual, vital acts — that is, of all acts and duties of holy obedience that are acceptable to God, and tend toward enjoying him;

3. A total defect and lack of power for any such acts whatsoever.

All of these are in that death which is a privation of life, which this spiritual death is.

First, There is a privation of a principle of spiritual life in it, namely, of that which we had before the entrance of sin, or a power of living to God according to the covenant of works; and there is a negation of that which we have by Christ, or a power of living to God according to the tenor of the covenant of grace. Therefore, those who are thus dead, have no principle or first power of living to God, or performing any duty which would be accepted by him, or enjoying him according to either covenant. It is with the spiritually dead as to all the acts and ends of spiritual life, as it is with the body as to all the acts and ends of natural life when the soul has departed from it. Why else are they said to be "dead"?

It is objected that, "There is a wide difference between natural and spiritual death. In natural death, the soul itself is utterly removed and taken from the body; but in spiritual death it continues. A man is still, notwithstanding this spiritual death, endowed with an understanding, will, and affections; and men are enabled by these to perform their duty to God, and yield the obedience required of them."

Ans. 1. In spiritual life, the soul is to the principle of that life, as the body is to the soul in natural life. For in natural life, the soul is the quickening principle, and the body is the principle quickened. When the soul departs, it leaves the body with all its own natural properties; but the body is utterly deprived of those properties which it had by virtue of its union with the soul. So too in spiritual life, the soul is not (in and by its essential properties) the quickening principle of that life, but it is the principle that is quickened. And when the quickening principle of spiritual life departs, it leaves the soul with all its natural properties entire as to their essence, even though they are morally corrupted; but it is deprived of all the power and abilities which it had by virtue of its union with a quickening principle of spiritual life. To deny such a quickening principle of spiritual life — superadded to us by the grace of Christ, distinct and separate from the natural faculties of the soul — is to renounce the whole gospel on this matter. It is the same as denying that Adam was created in the image of God, that he lost that image, and that we are renewed to the image of God by Jesus Christ. Hence,

Ans. 2. Whatever the soul acts in spiritual things by its understanding, will, and affections, as it is deprived of or not quickened by this principle of spiritual life, it does it naturally, not spiritually, as will instantly be made apparent.

There is, therefore, in the first place, a disability or impotence as to all spiritual things that are to be performed in a spiritual manner, in all persons who are not born again by the Spirit. This is because they are spiritually dead. Whatever they can do, or whatever men may call what they do, they can perform no spiritually vital act, no act of life by which we live to God, or that is absolutely accepted by Him, unless they are endowed with a quickening principle of grace. Hence it is said, "The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be," Rom 8.7. So then, "those who are in the flesh cannot please God," verse 8. Men may quibble as they please about this carnal mind, and contend that it is only the sensitive part of the soul,605 or the affections as corrupted by prejudices and depraved habits of vice. Two things are plain in the text:

First, That this carnal mind is in all mankind, whoever they are — those who are not partakers of the Spirit of God and his quickening power;

Secondly, That where this carnal mind is, there is a disability to do anything that would please God.

This is the sum of what we contend for, and which men may deny with as little a disparagement of their modesty, as to reject the authority of the apostle. So our Savior, for instance, tells us that "no man can come to him unless the Father draws him," John 6.44. Thus it is affirmed about all men where their nature is figuratively compared to evil trees, that they cannot bring forth good fruit unless their nature is changed, Mat 7.18, 12.33.606 This disability to good is also compared by the prophet to those effects which are naturally impossible to accomplish, Jer 13.23.607 We do not contend about expressions. This is what the Scripture abundantly instructs us in.

With respect to our spiritual life to God, according to his will and our future enjoyment of him, there is no power in men by nature and of themselves, by which they are able to perceive, know, will, or do anything in such a way or manner that it should be accepted by God. And so, upon the mere proposal from the word of God that they have a duty of spiritual obedience — and despite receiving its exhortations to perform it, accompanied with all the motives that are fit and suited to prevail with them to perform it — there must yet be an efficacious infusion into them, or a creation in them, of a new gracious principle or habit enabling them to this duty. And this is accordingly wrought by the Holy Ghost in all those who believe, as we will afterward declare.

Now we have a good base of information to properly discuss this topic.
Pick out a paragraph at a time to go over and discuss it.

From these things we may gather, by a just analogy, what spiritual life and death consist of. And to that end, some things must be observed beforehand; such as —

1. Adam in the state of innocency, besides having his natural life by which he was a living soul,

likewise had a supernatural life with respect to its end, by which he lived to God.

This is called the "life of God," Eph 4.18. This is the life which men who are now in the state of nature, are alienated from — it is the life which God requires, and which has God for its object and end. And this life was in Adam supernaturally.

For although this life was concreated in and with the rational soul,

as a perfection due to it in the state in which it was, and with respect to the end for which it was made,

yet it did not naturally flow from the principles of the rational soul.
Nor were its principles, faculties, or abilities inseparable from those of the soul itself, being only incidental perfections of them, inlaid in them by special grace. This life was necessary for him with respect to the state in which he was, and the end for which he was made.

He was made to live to the living God, and that was in a particular manner: — he was to live to God's glory in this world by discharging the rational and moral obedience required of him;

and he was to live afterward in God's glory and in the eternal enjoyment of Him, as his highest good and highest reward.



2. In this life, as in life in general, three things are to be considered: (1.) Its principle; (2.) Its operation; (3.) Its virtue; or its habit, act, and power.

(1.) There was a quickening principle belonging to it. For every life is an act of a quickening principle.599 In Adam, this was the image of God, or a habitual conformity to God, his mind and will, in which the holiness and righteousness of God himself was represented, Gen 1.26-27.600 He was created in this image, or it was concreated with him, as a perfection due to his nature in the condition in which he was made. This gave him a habitual disposition toward all duties of that obedience which was required of him; it was the rectitude of all the faculties of his soul with respect to his supernatural end, Ecc 7.29.601

(2.) There were continual actions belonging to it from this principle, or by virtue of it and suited to it. All the acts of Adam's life should have been subordinate to his great moral end. In all that he did, he should have lived to God, according to the law of that covenant in which he walked before Him. And living to God was Adam's acting in in all things suitably to the light in his mind, to the righteousness and holiness in his will and affections, and to that uprightness, or integrity, or order, that was in his soul.

(3.) Along with this, he had the power or ability to continue the principle of life in suitable acts of such a life, with respect to the whole obedience required of him. That is, Adam had sufficient ability to perform any duty, or all duties, that the covenant required.

The supernatural life of Adam in his innocence consisted in these three things; and this is what the life to which we are restored by Christ corresponds. It corresponds to it, I say, and it supplies its absence with respect to the end of living to God according to the new covenant that we are taken into. For the life of Adam would not be sufficient for us to live to God according to the terms of the new covenant; nor is the life of grace we now enjoy suited to the covenant in which Adam stood before God.

This is why there are some differences between these two lives,602 the principal difference of which may be reduced to two heads:[/QUOTE]

Here we see in detail, that Adam with original righteousness had spiritual life, in that he could commune with God.
As spiritual death occured in the day you eat, dying thou shalt surely die took place, first spiritual, then physical

Iconoclast said:

BY JOHN OWEN

Click to expand...

@DaveXR650 is a John Owen fanatic. I'm surprised he hasn't jumped at the chance to reminisce with a BONAFIDE Calvinist over Owen's works....

kyredneck said:

@DaveXR650 is a John Owen fanatic. I'm surprised he hasn't jumped at the chance to reminisce with a BONAFIDE Calvinist over Owen's works....

Click to expand...

That's the nicest thing you've ever said to me. In fact I am currently reading Owen where he is going into the relationship of the work of the Holy Spirit and the human side of us using our natural reason. The section above covers some of the same subject but from a different work than I am currently reading.

Careful reading of Owen shows why we get into a lot of heated debate on here about the order and cause of our coming to Christ. In my opinion you, and a lot of modern Calvinists on here tend to focus on the decrees and the predestination of our salvation. This isn't wrong, but it allows for confusion to remain after reading a lot of scripture references that are not conclusive or aren't really trying to address that. What I like about Owen, is that he focuses a lot on the impairment and inability of us in our natural state to comprehend spiritual things and to fully respond to God with true, saving faith. And Owen takes the time to show just how far we can go and what we can accomplish with our natural human reason and then he explains exactly where we will always fall short without the direct action of the Holy Spirit on us.

It took me years to be able to sit down and actually read Owen and get something out of it. But, for those willing to take the time it's well worth it. If you have never read Owen or other Puritans, you will not be able to just sit down with Owen. I think he is harder than Edwards to read. But thanks for the compliment and the heads up.

kyredneck said:

@DaveXR650 is a John Owen fanatic. I'm surprised he hasn't jumped at the chance to reminisce with a BONAFIDE Calvinist over Owen's works....

Click to expand...

To my eye he is very unsettled in his views. We all work thru things at different paces.
He jumps around quite a bit. Owen is not an easy read, but if time is available, he offers solid food for thought.
This linked article is very solid if a person works through it. It is out of fashion to have to pause and think through anything these days.

DaveXR650 said:

That's the nicest thing you've ever said to me. In fact I am currently reading Owen where he is going into the relationship of the work of the Holy Spirit and the human side of us using our natural reason. The section above covers some of the same subject but from a different work than I am currently reading.

Careful reading of Owen shows why we get into a lot of heated debate on here about the order and cause of our coming to Christ. In my opinion you, and a lot of modern Calvinists on here tend to focus on the decrees and the predestination of our salvation. This isn't wrong, but it allows for confusion to remain after reading a lot of scripture references that are not conclusive or aren't really trying to address that. What I like about Owen, is that he focuses a lot on the impairment and inability of us in our natural state to comprehend spiritual things and to fully respond to God with true, saving faith. And Owen takes the time to show just how far we can go and what we can accomplish with our natural human reason and then he explains exactly where we will always fall short without the direct action of the Holy Spirit on us.

It took me years to be able to sit down and actually read Owen and get something out of it. But, for those willing to take the time it's well worth it. If you have never read Owen or other Puritans, you will not be able to just sit down with Owen. I think he is harder than Edwards to read. But thanks for the compliment and the heads up.

Click to expand...

Are you reading an article, or from part of his works?

Iconoclast said:

Are you reading an article, or from part of his works?

Click to expand...

Right now I am reading from the Kindle version of The Life and Works of John Owen. I am in Book 3 Chapter 3 Corruption or depravation of the mind by sin. Years ago, I got a book that I think was called "A God Entranced Vision of All Things". It was about Edwards and Piper was one of the authors. Piper gave some advice that I have remembered since then and it has been helpful. Don't read about these guys. Read them for yourself and it will be worth it. He was right.

DaveXR650 said:

Right now I am reading from the Kindle version of The Life and Works of John Owen. I am in Book 3 Chapter 3 Corruption or depravation of the mind by sin. Years ago, I got a book that I think was called "A God Entranced Vision of All Things". It was about Edwards and Piper was one of the authors. Piper gave some advice that I have remembered since then and it has been helpful. Don't read about these guys. Read them for yourself and it will be worth it. He was right.

Click to expand...

The sub headings on "understanding" and" heart" are well worth the time to work through. I have to take it and break it down into an outline form to clarify and understand what he suggests are contained and derived from those verses.
I use such writings as a stepping stone to suggest other verses that come along side those offered..

Iconoclast said:

To my eye he is very unsettled in his views. We all work thru things at different paces.
He jumps around quite a bit. Owen is not an easy read, but if time is available, he offers solid food for thought.
This linked article is very solid if a person works through it. It is out of fashion to have to pause and think through anything these days.

Click to expand...

That is quite true but so does Owen. You, and many of the Calvinists on here would be upset if someone came on and insisted that Christ can do nothing for you if you do not believe. Yet here is Owen. " And many expect he will do so, because they believe he can if he will. But indeed Christ has no such power, no such ability; he cannot save unbelieving, impenitent sinners; for this cannot be done without denying himself, acting contrary to his word, and destroying his own glory. Let none please themselves with such vain imaginations. Christ is able to save all them, and only them, who come to God by him. Whilst you live in sin and unbelief, Christ himself cannot save you." Meditations and Discourses concerning the Glory of Christ. Chapter 1.

Now of course taken in context with the sum total of all Owens system of belief you slowly can begin to understand what he is doing here. But the censorious attitude which some have, without a real understanding of how these guys thought, is very harmful and doesn't make what we call Calvinism look good at all. It's not all your fault. Look at the length of your post above. Most are not willing or even able to comprehend it. But I get accused of being "unstable" on here often because I don't go along with the simple reductionism so common on this board. I'm glad you are really going into Owen. But many of his explanations of things are impossible to convey on a debate forum. And Ky is right, I am a huge fan of Owen, but not a disciple.

DaveXR650 said:

But indeed Christ has no such power, no such ability; he cannot save unbelieving, impenitent sinners; for this cannot be done without denying himself, acting contrary to his word, and destroying his own glory. Let none please themselves with such vain imaginations. Christ is able to save all them, and only them, who come to God by him. Whilst you live in sin and unbelief, Christ himself cannot save you." Meditations and Discourses concerning the Glory of Christ. Chapter 1.

Click to expand...

There's something very wrong with dictating what God, or Christ, can or cannot do dependent on our belief or willingness. If that's what Owen teaches, and you being his hardcore fanatic, it's no wonder you waffle the way you do.

Remember Paul? On the road to Damascus? Do you think there haven't been myriads of Christians who have been struck down with their own 'Damascus Road experience'?

DaveXR650 said:

That is quite true but so does Owen. You, and many of the Calvinists on here would be upset if someone came on and insisted that Christ can do nothing for you if you do not believe. Yet here is Owen. " And many expect he will do so, because they believe he can if he will. But indeed Christ has no such power, no such ability; he cannot save unbelieving, impenitent sinners; for this cannot be done without denying himself, acting contrary to his word, and destroying his own glory. Let none please themselves with such vain imaginations. Christ is able to save all them, and only them, who come to God by him. Whilst you live in sin and unbelief, Christ himself cannot save you." Meditations and Discourses concerning the Glory of Christ. Chapter 1.

Now of course taken in context with the sum total of all Owens system of belief you slowly can begin to understand what he is doing here. But the censorious attitude which some have, without a real understanding of how these guys thought, is very harmful and doesn't make what we call Calvinism look good at all. It's not all your fault. Look at the length of your post above. Most are not willing or even able to comprehend it. But I get accused of being "unstable" on here often because I don't go along with the simple reductionism so common on this board. I'm glad you are really going into Owen. But many of his explanations of things are impossible to convey on a debate forum. And Ky is right, I am a huge fan of Owen, but not a disciple.

Click to expand...

I also like Owen, but I wonder sometimes about his popularity (I suspect some like to quote Owen because to us Owen sounds more complex than his works are in reality). The difficulty in Owen is less his subject matter and more that his words are written in a 17th century language and style.

I also appreciate how focused Owen can be. He is straight forward and very solid in his views (one may disagree with Owen, but one knows exactly where Owen stood on any topic he discussed). Today many writers seem to discuss things vaguely, but Owen had a knack for spelling out precisely what he means. . . And repeating it in case one wonders )

My favorite is Mortification of Sin. The topic is simple, and his contribution is more pastoral than theological (discipline yourself against sin). But it is a pleasure to read.

Communion with God is, IMHO, a more theological work. Much of his focus is echoed in Piper. Death of Death is also an outstanding read.

kyredneck said:

There's something very wrong with dictating what God, or Christ, can or cannot do dependent on our belief or willingness. If that's what Owen teaches, and you being his hardcore fanatic, it's no wonder you waffle the way you do.

Remember Paul? On the road to Damascus? Do you think there haven't been myriads of Christians who have been struck down with their own 'Damascus Road experience'?

Click to expand...

See, you ARE upset with that, as I predicted. And your response shows exactly what I mean. You, and most of the Primitive Baptist and Calvinist posters on this site have reduced this rich theology into a set of dogmas and then determine an almost juvenile set of rules for fellowship and you go around jumping into threads with one liners, supporting each other, and piling on as if you are the guardians of Christian doctrine - and all you really do is show that you are incapable of really discussing an issue.

I remember Paul. And Owen discusses Paul in the very section I'm reading right now. It is fascinating to read how Owen, in great detail, as always, discusses what Paul, and others can think of and learn and respond to God with their own natural wills, and where they always come short and at what point the Holy Spirit has to work. You bring up Paul's experience, without really including what he said himself of his own experience, and without taking into consideration the other experiences of other folks who the Bible says go part way on their own or even go quite a way on their own with supernatural light and then end up not going on to true salvation. I'm sorry this won't work as one sentence answers where you can come on here, get your buddies to give you a like after making some smart aleck comment and somehow feel secure that you have it all together.

Why don't you start just listening to others when they post and then discuss the issues. So as not to leave you too puzzled, Owen was a high-Calvinist (that's a 5 pointer, with a heavy belief in complete determinism). He was the author of what still is the definitive work on the extent of the atonement. But there was always a point with him, and the other Puritans, where a person would actually and personally believe the gospel. And, he had no problem calling that a "condition" for salvation. He did not mean "condition" as some of the non-Calvinists on here mean it though.

JonC said:

I also like Owen, but I wonder sometimes about his popularity (I suspect some like to quote Owen because to us Owen sounds more complex than his works are in reality). The difficulty in Owen is less his subject matter and more that his words are written in a 17th century language and style.

I also appreciate how focused Owen can be. He is straight forward and very solid in his views (one may disagree with Owen, but one knows exactly where Owen stood on any topic he discussed). Today many writers seem to discuss things vaguely, but Owen had a knack for spelling out precisely what he means. . . And repeating it in case one wonders )

My favorite is Mortification of Sin. The topic is simple, and his contribution is more pastoral than theological (discipline yourself against sin). But it is a pleasure to read.

Communion with God is, IMHO, a more theological work. Much of his focus is echoed in Piper.

Click to expand...

I started reading Puritans for devotional purposes, not theology. My first exposure to Owen was Jerry Bridges book "Pursuit of Holiness" which was very helpful to me. It's almost like a simplified, modernized version of "The Mortification of Sin". Owen's work on the atonement is what finally made me able to join a Calvinist church although since then I have reconsidered the idea of a limited atonement. You are right about the difficulty of reading him. I have one book which is mostly hand written copies and it's almost impossible to read. Most people don't realize when they read the Puritans they are reading what almost amounts to translations. I do think that my being brought up reading the King James Bible has made it a lot easier to jump to Puritan writings. Still, if anyone is interested in reading Puritans, start with Bunyan or Baxter and only later go to Edwards and Owen. (The Calvinists are probably piling up wood since I mentioned Baxter).

DaveXR650 said:

I started reading Puritans for devotional purposes, not theology. My first exposure to Owen was Jerry Bridges book "Pursuit of Holiness" which was very helpful to me. It's almost like a simplified, modernized version of "The Mortification of Sin". Owen's work on the atonement is what finally made me able to join a Calvinist church although since then I have reconsidered the idea of a limited atonement. You are right about the difficulty of reading him. I have one book which is mostly hand written copies and it's almost impossible to read. Most people don't realize when they read the Puritans they are reading what almost amounts to translations. I do think that my being brought up reading the King James Bible has made it a lot easier to jump to Puritan writings. Still, if anyone is interested in reading Puritans, start with Bunyan or Baxter and only later go to Edwards and Owen. (The Calvinists are probably piling up wood since I mentioned Baxter).

Click to expand...

I think you are right that being brought up with the KJV helps. Reading Bunyan (as you mention) and the KJV helped me as well. We are also of an age where we read Chaucer, Marlowe, and Shakespeare in school....so that helps at least reading "difficult" works.

Edwards is one of my personal favorite. I view Edwards as more theological/ philosophical and Owen as more pastoral. Where Edwards gives theological ideas to consider Owen gives simple truth to apply.

I read Owen for devotional purposes, but I don't think I'd appreciate Edwards in the same context....there is a reason Edwards didn't go down in history as a great (or even good) pastor where as Owen was, for a time, the pastor of England.

My absolute favorite of the "old dead preachers" is C.H. Spurgeon. He was not a theologian, but his way of simplifying and explaining things in an applicable way inspired my early preaching. I realize his sermons are what he wrote after actually preaching (not exactly what he preached) but they are beautiful. He had a way of painting a picture with his words. And he liked cigars.

D.L. Moody and A.W. Tozier are also very good.

DaveXR650 said:

See, you ARE upset with that, as I predicted.

Click to expand...

Not. Not at all upset. Where did you predict my 'upset'?

I reiterate my position:

kyredneck said:

There's something very wrong with dictating what God, or Christ, can or cannot do dependent on our belief or willingness.

Click to expand...

Is this what Owen espouses? Provide a citation please.

kyredneck said:

Is this what Owen espouses? Provide a citation please.

Click to expand...

4. THE GLORY OF CHRIST, APPLIED TO SINNERS AND SAINTS (Vol. 1.418) Kindle location 10335 if you have one.
Post 13 I said that many of the Calvinists on here would be upset if I said that, yet there is what Owen said. Don't worry. Owen was a good Calvinist. It's just that he was also a preacher, as Jon C mentioned, and he explored these issues to a very detailed extent. He did a good job of showing what you have to preach, and what you expect of men, as well as the background theology of why these things happen and how they happen. What tends to happen on here, and I mean just in general, not you or Iconoclast in particular, but in general, is that we take a theological principle and use it as a primary point of doctrine to test orthodoxy. We shouldn't do that. If someone says they got saved because they believed the gospel don't tell them they can't believe unless they are first regenerated or else they can't truly be saved. I try to discuss theological differences and show respect to those with other beliefs and that to you is wishy-washy. What are you trying to do? In post 14 you're slamming Owen! Get real.