There is an old argument that seeks to correlate John 11:51-52 with 1 John 2:2. John Owen is probably one of the first to make this connection;
Owen:
1) Hence are those terms of the world, all men, all nations, every creature, and the like, used in the business of redemption and preaching of the gospel; these [...]
I have been wanting to post this for a long time. I have included some of the text so the reader can get something of the context. Its that footnote I really want folk to zero in on right now, footnote 115. The underlining is mine.
The Source: Carl Trueman, The Claims of Truth, John [...]
Continue reading about Carl Trueman on Owen’s “seeming” reliance on a crude commercial atonement
[Part 1, here.]
I want to come back to this and close out my interest in this form of Owen’s trilemma.
Recall that I tackled Owen’s trilemma:
The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either:
All the sins of all men.
All the sins of some men, or
Some of the sins of all men.
Now [...]
Continue reading about Owen’s Trilemma and Ursinus: a case study in comparison (part 2)
A long time ago I once made the claim that hypercalvinism arose out of Protestant Scholastic categories, ie, hypercalvinism could not have arisen directly out of the pre-Protestant Scholastic categories, such as, Bullinger’s, Calvin’s, Zwingli’s or Luther’s. When I said that on one list I was slammed heavily. Okay… but I still stand by this. [...]
Continue reading about My hope built on nothing less than Owen’s Reason and Death of Death :-)
Here is something interesting. Over there at PuritanBoard, which can be found here, Gomarus posted an extended quotation from Alan Clifford, which I assume he found here. The point of Clifford’s polemic is to refute the trilemma Owen posits. The key argument Clifford posits can be summed up in this paragraph from that extract:
For [...]
Continue reading about Clifford on Owen’s Triple Choice: Reply to a Reply
Recent Comments