What people dont understand is that the call/invite is only to and effectual for the Sheep Jn 10. Christs invitations are effectual producing, effecting the ones called to do just that, to follow Him, and they are already saved when they are called, because Christ has already taken away their sins, and Spirit has already quickened them.
I don't have a problem with the idea like Owen believed, that God's salvation is comprehensive and completely effective for those who get saved. So to Owen, it made perfect sense that the ones effectively called and the ones who respond are the ones, and the only ones who Christ died for. Just understand that within that overall sovereignty of God, somehow are real invitations issued by the gospel and real decisions taken by men that have real consequences. Owen said this over and over.
Given the fact that the invitation is a reality, and the possibility of rejection is also a reality, I can see how people would say that the destiny of a person then is not set at the time of the crucifixion or at the earlier time when the atonement was planned. You've got two things going on that we as humans can't reconcile. Once God knows something He wants to do, or knows something He has determined to allow to happen - it will and must certainly happen. Yet, at the same time, until it happens, it actually has not happened - and you cannot make a statement that doesn't take that into account. To say that the elect are saved at the atonement will not work if you insist by that that it does not matter if the person comes to Christ by faith. If you do that you are going against all the Calvinist Puritans like Owen. It does not mean that you have to go so far the other way, where God is portrayed as somewhat anxious and maybe a little befuddled - waiting to see if anyone chooses to accept His "offer". And that would have offended Owen greatly.
If you are so much into God's sovereignty, that you deny man has any real responsibility, you are going against Owen. Which is fine as Owen was a man. But I wouldn't quote him without knowing the whole story of how he taught.