We are now looking at how John Owen deals with these issues. In his treatise on Arminianism he goes on to say this:
“As a desire of self-sufficiency was the first cause of this infirmity [depravity], so a conceit thereof is that wherewith he still languisheth; nothing doth he contend for than an independency of any supreme power, which might either help, hinder, or control him in his actions. This is that bitter root from whence have sprung all those heresies and wretched contentions which have troubled the church, concerning the power of man in working his own happiness, and his exemption from the over-ruling providence of Almighty God. All which wrangling disputes of carnal reason against the word of God come at last to this head, Whether the first and chiefest part, in disposing of things in this world, ought to be ascribed to God or man…Never did any men…more eagerly endeavour the erecting of this Babel than the Arminians, the modern blinded patrons of human self-sufficiency” (Works of Owen, Volume 10, p. 13).
Owen goes on to say that the Arminians desire and pursue self-sufficiency in order to exempt themselves from God’s jurisdiction. They do this when:
- They deny the eternity and unchangeableness of God’s decrees.
- They question the foreknowledge of God.
- They depose the all-governing providence of this King of nations, denying its energetical, effectual power, in turning the hearts, ruling the thoughts, determining the wills, and disposing the actions of men, by granting unto it but a general power and influence, to be limited and used according to the inclination and will of every particular agent.
- They deny the irresistibility and uncontrollable power of God’s will, affirming that oftentimes he seriously willeth and intendeth what he cannot accomplish, and so is deceived of his aim; nay, whereas he desireth and really intendeth, to save every man, it is wholly in their own power whether he shall save any one or no; otherwise their idol free-will should have but a poor deity, if God could, how and when he would, cross and resist him in his dominion.
What Owen sets out for us is simply breathtaking. The desire for free will is the desire to overthrow the rule of God over us and to pursue self-sufficiency. This is the same thing that Eve was promised by Satan and sought in the garden. She was told that she could be as God or like God if she took of the fruit (Genesis 3:5-6). The desire of the fallen heart is to be like God in all ways. Here is where the desire of man to be self-sufficient comes from. Here is where man’s desire to have wisdom in a way that is not from God comes from. Here we see man throwing off the rule and wisdom of God in order to set up his own rule.
But again notice what Owen sets out as the devastating effects of what the tsunami of this theology really is. It is a direct affront to the character and glory of God that Scripture sets out so clearly. The God that Paul preached to the pagans was a supreme and sovereign God:
“The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children'” (Acts 17:24-28).
Again this is so hard for the mind to grasp, but we must not flee from the ramifications. We must set ourselves to prayer and Scripture. If the Word of God is breathed forth from God (II Timothy 3:16), then it is reality and we must bow to that reality. Whatever is breathed of God is what is true and not what the majority of people say today. This is certainly reminiscent of the Historical Introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will in which (the book itself) is said much the same as Owen and Turretin. “To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time.” A corresponding thought is that it was said that “whoever puts this book down without realizing that evangelical theology stands or falls with the doctrine of the bondage of the will has read it in vain.” Luther, Turretin, and Owen all fought for the bondage of the will because they fought for a Gospel that was of a sovereign God who could show mercy to whom He pleased and willed. You can’t have one without the other.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment