Could God Forgive Sin Without Satisfaction? Owen Answers Twisse | John Owen

Deep Dive into A Dissertation on Divine Justice by John Owen - Twisse’s first argument — Its answer — A trifling view of the divine attributes — Whether God could, by his absolute power, forgive sins without a satisfaction — To let sins pass unpun- ished implies a contradiction; and that twofold — What these contradictions are — Whether God may do what man may do — Whether every man may renounce his right — Whether God cannot forgive sins because of his justice — The second argument — Its answer — Dis- tinctions of necessity — God doth no work without himself from absolute necessity — Condi- tional necessity — Natural necessity twofold — God doth not punish to the extent of his power, but to the extent of his justice — God always acts with a concomitant liberty — An argument of the illustrious Vossius considered — God “a consuming fire,” but an intellectual one — An exception of Twisse’s — Whether, independent of the divine appointment, sin would merit punishment — In punishment, what things are to be considered — The relation of obedience to reward and disobedience to punishment not the same — The comparison between mercy and justice by Vossius improperly instituted.This text presents John Owen's defense of the necessity of divine justice and the requirement of satisfaction for the forgiveness of sins, primarily responding to arguments from Twisse and Vossius. Owen argues that God cannot simply forgive sins by His absolute power without satisfying His justice, as the divine attributes cannot be contradictory or isolated from one another. Letting sin pass unpunished would create a contradiction, implying that humans are not subject to God as their Creator and Lord. Because sin cuts off the natural and moral dependence of the creature on the Creator, this relationship can only be amended through punishment.Owen rejects the comparison between human and divine forgiveness. While a private human can forgive a personal hurt, God acts as the supreme public governor forgiving an injury against the good of the entire universe. Renouncing this right of government would be an affront to the glory of divine justice.Addressing the argument that God would be acting out of absolute, mindless necessity if He is forced to punish sin, Owen distinguishes between absolute necessity and a necessity based on a supposed condition. God punishes sin not as a senseless, inanimate agent, but freely, with intellect and volition, punishing to the extent of His justice rather than the full extent of His power.Finally, Owen differentiates between the consequences of obedience and disobedience. He argues against the idea that if sin inherently merits punishment, obedience must inherently merit reward. Since rational creatures already owe complete obedience to God, God is not obligated to provide a reward. Conversely, disobedience destroys the creature's dependence on God, making punishment an indispensable requirement to restore divine order. Additionally, while God's mercy is entirely free in its exercise, His justice demands a necessary response to its proper object, which is sin.Reformed Theologian GPT: https://chat.openai.com/g/g-XXwzX1gnv-reformed-theologianYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/@ReformedExplainerSpotify Music: https://open.spotify.com/artist/1t5dz4vEgvHqUknYQfwpRI?si=e-tDRFR2Qf6By1sAcMdkdwhttps://buymeacoffee.com/edi2730