Owen’s Introduction

Often Calvinists appeal to John Owen’s the Death of Death in the Death of Christ as the definitive work on the atonement. By simply mentioning the name they have thereby proven that Christ did not die for everyone, but rather for the elect alone. I intend to address some of Owen’s arguments.

The Death of Death in the Death of Christ is a difficult read. It’s massive, complex and quite detailed. Owen’s style is as much rhetorical as it is argumentative, which makes for volume. As such, Owen’s work is not as accessible to today’s reader as perhaps it could have been. So my strategy is to distill his arguments down to simple syllogism and then address them. I will not quote Owen’s text at length. It’s just too bulky and awkward. I will however, provide links back to the section I am addressing.

I plan on starting at chapter 7.

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." (Link)

This chapter is perhaps the most important in the whole work, because it’s vital to Owen’s entire argument. It’s Owen’s attempt to hold the ship together. To see the problem and importance of this chapter, we have to look at the introduction.

Owens lays out 5 effects of Christ’s death: 1) reconciliation, 2) justification, 3) sanctification, 4) adoption and 5) eternal inheritance. He then goes on to argue:

"Now, the masters of this opinion [i.e. that Christ died for everyone] do see full well and easily, that if that be the end of the death of Christ which we have from the Scripture asserted [i.e. the 5 points above], if those before recounted be the immediate fruits and products thereof, then one of these two things will necessarily follow:— that either, first, God and Christ failed of their end proposed, and did not accomplish that which they intended, the death of Christ being not a fitly-proportioned means for the attaining of that end (for any cause of failing cannot be assigned); which to assert seems to us blasphemously injurious to the wisdom, power, and perfection of God, as likewise derogatory to the worth and value of the death of Christ; — or else, that all men, all the posterity of Adam, must be saved, purged, sanctified, and glorified; which surely they will not maintain, at least the Scripture and the woeful experience of millions will not allow. Wherefore, to cast a tolerable colour upon their persuasion, they must and do deny that God or his Son had any such absolute aim or end in the death or blood-shedding of Jesus Christ, or that any such thing was immediately procured and purchased by it, as we before recounted; but that God intended nothing, neither was any thing effected by Christ, — that no benefit ariseth to any immediately by his death but what is common to all and every soul, though never so cursedly unbelieving here and eternally damned hereafter, until an act of some, not procured for them by Christ, (for if it were, why have they it not all alike?) to wit, faith, do distinguish them from others. Now, this seeming to me to enervate the virtue, value, fruits and effects of the satisfaction and death of Christ, — serving, besides, for a basis and foundation to a dangerous, uncomfortable, erroneous persuasion"

Words in brackets were mine as was the bolding of "immediately".

If you stopped reading half way through the quote, perhaps you can appreciate my point about Owen's style, but please do go back and finish, as it’s important. As we go forward, if anyone thinks I miss-summarize Owens, please let me know.

Notice that little word "immediately". Owens is sharp. He knows the Arminian position is that Christ’s work is in two parts, His death and the application of His blood in the life of the believer. This first part Christ accomplished on the cross for everyone, the second part is accomplished through intercession and is for the believer alone. Owen’s knowing this is why he uses the word immediately, ruling out any two step process. He has to tie Christ’s death so closely with His intercession that there can be no room for one to be for all men and the other only for the elect.

The problem is if Christ's death immediately 1) reconciles us to God, 2) justifies us 3) sanctifies us, 4) adopts us and 5) gives us an eternal inheritance, there is no room for justification through faith. According to Owen, I was justified in 33 AD and was born justified. I was not justified when I came to faith. But this is clearly inconsistent with scripture. Further, what's the point of Christ's interceding? He is already done.

In spite of this clear problem, Owens goes on in attempting to tie Christ's death and intercession together. Let’s see how he does.

Connection between Offering and Intercession - Chapter 7 section 1

Owen’s Argument #1

P1: intercession is inseparably connected with oblation
P2: Christ’s intercession is made for the elect alone
C1: Therefore, Christ’s oblation was made for the elect alone

Scripture support for P1:

“By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities,” . “He bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors; Isaiah 53:11-12

He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. Romans 8:32-34

(link)

Refutation

P1 & P2 are valid, but the conclusion does not follow. Just because Christ died for everyone that He intercedes for does not mean He did not die for others. Oblation is the basis of intercession, so it‘s true that intercession is connected with oblation. But it doesn’t work the other way around. Just because there’s oblation, doesn’t mean there is intercession. The passages quoted do prove that Christ’s death is the basis for justification, but Owens’s conclusion does not follow.

Owen’s Argument #2

P3: Christ died with the intent of justifying those He died for
P4: not all are justified
C2: therefore, either Christ’s aim failed, or He did not die for all
P5: Christ’s aim cannot fail
C3: therefore, Christ did not die for all

Scripture support for P3:

“He was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” Romans 4:25

(link)

Refutation

P3 requires clarification. If Owens means Christ died with the intent of immediately justifying those He died for, or justify them without also interceding for them, P3 is false. The scripture passage does not say immediately, or without intercession and based on passages teaching justification through faith we know that justification is not immediate and that Christ does intercede. But if Owens means that Christ died with the intention of everyone coming to faith and being justified, then P3 is true.

P5 is false. Christ did come to save the world (John 3:17), but not everyone is saved.

Owens Argument #3

P6: Christ’s oblation was for an equivalent number of people as His intercession
P2: Christ’s intercession is made for the elect alone
C1: Therefore, Christ’s oblation was made for the elect alone

Scripture support for P6:

He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. Romans 8:32-34

(link)

Refutation

P6 is false. The passage’s scope is limited to people who have been justified. There is no reason to work backward from it and exclude everyone else from Christ's death. No one doubts that Christ’s died for them and that His blood has been applied to them through intercession. The passage does not address those who have not been justified. So while the passage does prove that Christ died for everyone He intercedes for, it does not prove that He died for no one else.

Is the High Priest doing His job? - Chapter 7 section 2

Here is Owen’s primary argument:

P1: A High Priest wouldn’t be fulfilling his duties if he offers a sacrifice on someone’s behalf, but didn’t intercede for them
P2: Christ is a faithful High Priest, fulfilling His duties
C1: therefore, Christ does not make an offering for someone without also interceding for them.

Scripture support for P1:

“If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation for our sins.” 1 John 2:1-2

In support of his argument, he makes another:

P3: Christ offered His blood to God at the entrance of the holy place
P4: Christ entered the holy place by His blood to intercede for the elect
C2: Therefore, offering and intercession are two parts of the same tabernacle function

Scripture support for P3 & P4:

But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? (Hebrews 9:7-14)

(link)

Refutation

P1, P3 & P4 are incorrect. Offering and intercession are not part of the same ceremonial function. By examining the book of Leviticus, you will not find a single reference to intercession, prayer, entreatment, mediation or the like. What you will find is priests making sacrifices and offering them to God. So offering and intercession should not be joined together as if they were two parts of the same duty. The passage Owens cites in support of P1 is 1 John 2:1-2:

“If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation for our sins.”

Intriguingly Owens leaves off, “and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” But that aside for the moment, the passage is not saying advocating and propitiation are two parts of one ceremonial function a high priest performs. It is true propitiation is the basis of advocation, but that doesn’t mean the two are not separate duties of a high priest.

P3 is false as is plain from the passage that Owens cites in support of his claim. It says Christ goes into the holiest of holies to offer His blood to God. He has not already offered it.

P4 is false because 1) Owens is confusing offering with intercession (as is seen in P3) and 2) Christ’s intercession is done at the right hand of God after He has made His offering, and 3) the offering is once, but the intercession is ongoing.

Christ’s duty as Mediator (or Intercessor) starts after and based on His offering His blood to God. Once Christ offers His blood to God, He sits down and from there He advocates for us. With Christ sitting at God’s right hand, we have no need to fear approaching the throne in a time of need.

How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. (Hebrews 9:14-15)

Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,
a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. (Hebrews 8:1-2)

Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. (Hebrews 10:19-22)

By contrasting Hebrews 7 with Hebrews 10, we should note that the offering is one time, but intercession is continual. Therefore, they are twoo different duties of a high priest.

The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. (Hebrews 7:23-25)

For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:14)

Is Intercession a Prayer? - Chapter 7 Section 3

Recap of Owen's Argument

P1: Christ's intercession is not vocal or supplication, but rather a presentation of Christ Himself
P2: The presentation of Christ to God is joined with the offering of Christ to God
C1: Therefore, intercession is joined with the offering of Christ to God

Scripture supporting P1:

Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? (Hebrews 9:12-14)

For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: (Hebrews 9:24)

(link)

Refutation

P1 is false. Owens is confusing the offering Christ made, which is one time and before Christ sat down at the Father's right hand, from intercession which is ongoing and done from the Father's right hand. Intercession is vocal and a supplication. It's a prayer. In John 17 Christ prays to the Father to sanctify believers. He says:

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

And also:

17Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; (John 17)

How can Owens claim intercession is not vocal? It is a prayer. Owen's confuses the offering, which is the presentation of Christ's blood to the Father, with intercession, which is Christ's request of the Father to sanctify believers. Is it based on the offering? Sure, but we shouldn't confuse the two.

Chapter 7 Section 4

In this section Owens relies on arguments he makes in chapter 3. As such, his argument here lacks a full explanation in chapter 7. So we will bypass it for now and come back to it latter. (link)

John 17 - Chapter 7 Section 5

Owen's Argument

P1: In John 17 Christ both offered and interceded
P2: Christ intercedes for the elect alone
C1: therefore, Christ offered for the elect alone

Scripture quoted in support of P1:

I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. (John 17:4)

And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. (1 Corinthians 15:17)

Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. (Hebrews 9:12)

(link)

Refutation

P1 & P2 are true but the conclusion does not follow. Just because Christ offered for everyone He intercedes for does not mean He intercedes for everyone He offers for. Christ's offering is the basis for His intercession, so of course Christ talks about both in John 17.

Assurance - Chapter 7 - Section 6 (final section)

Owen's Argument

P1: the strict connection between Christ’s offering and His intercession gives assurance to those who believe Christ offered for them
P2: Arminians think Christ may offer for those whom He does not intercede.
C1: Under Arminian thinking, those who believe Christ offered Himself to the Father for them have no assurance.

Scripture supporting P1:

“Who is he that condemneth? “It is Christ that died,” (Romans 8:34)

(link)

Refutation

The conclusion does not follow, because a strict connection between Christ’s offering and His intercession is not the only way to explain that fact that those who believe that Christ died for them have assurance. They have assurance because: Christ intercedes for those who believe. So it’s true that everyone who believes Christ offered for him has assurance, but it’s not true because of P1.

C1 should read:

C1*: Under Arminian thinking, those who believe Christ offered Himself to the Father for them have no assurance, based on “a strict connection between Christ‘s offering and His intercession”.

Which would be true, but so what? Arminians have assurance for other reasons. As Romans 8 continues: yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

This was Owen’s 6th and final argument supporting his critical point in Chapter 7. Chapter 7 set out to prove:

“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.”

These arguments failed to prove Owen’s point. As I demonstrated in the intro to this series on Owens, this point was critical to Owen’s whole argument. Since Owen’s misunderstands offering and intercession, his whole understanding of the atonement is off base.

Part 2 – Top 10 Reasons to believe Christ Died for all

Owen Index