Anyone here read "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ"?

[asterisktom]

This book by John Owen was a real eye-opener for me when I read it years ago. It helped me to understand the nature of the Atonement, that both Calvinists and Non-Calvinists (for want of better terms) believe in some sort of limitation to the Atonement, the one to extent, the other to effect.

It also helped me to understand a more Scriptural understanding of death, that often physical death is not meant. Very often I have been asked (both here and on another board) how I can be a Preterist in light of Rev. 21:4:

"He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death".

I was told that I must redefine death to maintain my position. But, actually, the other person also has to redefine death, seeing that John 11:26 is from the same inspired writer, where Jesus said:

"Everyone who lives in me and believes in me will never ever die."

Clearly, Jesus did not mean physical death. So where is the necessity that Rev. 21:4 has to be physical death? Clearly none.

 

[JonShaff]

This book by John Owen was a real eye-opener for me when I read it years ago. It helped me to understand the nature of the Atonement, that both Calvinists and Non-Calvinists (for want of better terms) believe in some sort of limitation to the Atonement, the one to extent, the other to effect.

It also helped me to understand a more Scriptural understanding of death, that often physical death is not meant. Very often I have been asked (both here and on another board) how I can be a Preterist in light of Rev. 21:4:

"He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death".

I was told that I must redefine death to maintain my position. But, actually, the other person also has to redefine death, seeing that John 11:26 is from the same inspired writer, where Jesus said:

"Everyone who lives in me and believes in me will never ever die."

Clearly, Jesus did not mean physical death. So where is the necessity that Rev. 21:4 has to be physical death? Clearly none.

Greetings, brother!

I'm tracking you here. Revelation 21 starts with John "seeing" a new "dwelling place" of God (His people)--and there will never be "death" again--in other words, there will never be separation (not necessarily physical death) from God and His people.

 

[asterisktom]

Greetings, brother!

I'm tracking you here. Revelation 21 starts with John "seeing" a new "dwelling place" of God (His people)--and there will never be "death" again--in other words, there will never be separation (not necessarily physical death) from God and His people.

Very good! And the older we get the clearer we are that separation from God truly is death. God gives life and meaning to all that we do and are. He is life Himself!

 

[37818]

He makes a retorical argument in his To The Reader which I do believe and yet he denies:
". . . To what purpose serves the general ransom, but only to assert that Almighty God would have the precious blood of his dear Son poured out for innumerable souls whom he will not have to share in any drop thereof, and so, in respect of them, to be spilt in vain, or else to be shed for them only that they might be the deeper damned? . . ." Emphasis mine. He is well aware of Romans 8:34 and Romans 14:9.

 

[tyndale1946]

Well Tom I would like to get into the discussion but I'm now in the process of reading Death Of Death In The Death Of Christ... The last time I checked I'm on Chapter 8... Hopefully I'll finish it before the OP closes... I'm plugging along... Brother Glen

 

[asterisktom]

Well Tom I would like to get into the discussion but I'm now in the process of reading Death Of Death In The Death Of Christ... The last time I checked I'm on Chapter 8... Hopefully I'll finish it before the OP closes... I'm plugging along... Brother Glen

Owen is not someone you can just breeze through, is he? You almost need to have your own glossary reading him. Yet it is worth it.

He certainly made compelling arguments that led me to preterism, yet he himself was not one. Not in all the consistent ramifications. He was more like a theological Socratic midwife.