Skip to content

Owen’s misleading historiographical comments

October 16, 2007

Yesterday I was searching for Prosper on the atonement. I came across a post on a blog that cited Prosper to the effect of apparently saying that only the regenerate are redeemed: Limited Atonement, Part 3.

I didnt actually read the post. I buzzed him a comment and he directed me to the post, where it was actually Owen quoting Prosper.

This morning I went and replied. My comment is in moderation mode now. But here it is with some editing.

Ah sorry I didnt read the post. I was searching on Prosper and saw the comment. Do you think Owen is reliable there? Owen is clearly incorrect there. Prosper himself clearly said:
QUALIFICATION ARTICLE 9: Likewise, he who says that the Saviour was not crucified for the redemption of the entire world does not take into account the power of the mystery of the cross, but considers only the portion of mankind who have no faith.

And Prosper the man cited by so many early Reformers as teaching that Christ died for all men, in one sense, but for the elect in another sense. I have been documenting the early Reformer’s use of Prosper for some time now.

Regarding Calvin, do you think that the fact that he says wicked and not reprobate (or non-elect) may make a difference in what he was saying?

The quotation from Ignatius does not prove the necessary claim to negation, “Christ only died for…”, or “Christ did not die for…” Ditto for Clemens and Cyprian. He is just flat out misleading on Athanasius. Anyone can consult his Incarnation and see what he taught: Athanasius on the Incarnation.

Ambrose clearly had Christ died for all men, in one sense, and for the believers in another sense. He is the father of the expression, Christ died for all men, but especially for believers (my paraphrase).

On Augustine he is wrong too: Augustine on the Death of Christ

I have always skipped that part of Owen’s death of death. But what he says there for the most part is just plain wrong. Most of this stuff is online now and can be checked if you search for some of these works. If you get stuck, I can supply copies of some of the material.

David Now: Owen is just flat out deceptive. I am not saying that Owen did it knowingly, but what he does say is just so misleading. This really bothers me. Prosper’s Defence of Augustine was a standard text in the 16th and 17thC.


2 Comments leave one →
  1. October 17, 2007 4:47 pm

    Good to see someone is steadfast…keep it up David

  2. Flynn permalink
    October 18, 2007 1:58 pm

    ho ho he lives

    Man, whats happening? You guys are bad, so bad.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: