Why God Must Punish Sin | John Owen

Deep Dive into A Dissertation on Divine Justice by John Owen - The defence of Sibrandus Lubbertus against Twisse — The agreement of these very learned men in a point of the utmost importance — A vindication of his argument from God’s hatred against sin — Liberality and justice different — The opinion of Lubbertus undeservedly charged with atheism — What kind of necessity of operation we suppose in God; this pointed out — The sophistical reasoning of this learned writer — How God is bound to manifest any property of his nature — The reasons of Lubbertus, and Twisse’s objections to the same considered — That passage of the apostle, Rom. i. 32, considered and vindicated — His44 mode of disputing rejected — The force of the argument from Rom. i. 32 — The “righteous judgment of God,” what — Our federal representative, and those represented by him, are one mystical body — An answer to Twisse’s arguments, Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7 — The learned writer’s answer respecting that passage — A defence of the passage — Punitory justice a name of God — Whether those for whom Christ hath made satisfaction ought to be called guilty — Ps. v. 4–6, the sense of that passage considered — From these three passages the argument is one and the same — Lubbertus’ argument from the definition of justice weighed — How vindicatory justice is dis- tinguished from universal — The nature of liberality and justice evidently different — Punish- ment belongs to God — In inflicting punishment, God vindicates his right — Will and necessity, whether they be opposite — The end of the defence of Lubbertus.The text presents John Owen's defense of Sibrandus Lubbertus against the arguments of William Twisse concerning the nature of divine justice and the necessity of punishing sin. At the heart of the debate is whether God's punishment of sin is an essential, natural necessity or merely a product of His free will. Twisse asserts that while justice is essential to God, the actual hatred and punishment of sin are not natural necessities, comparing the exercise of justice to mercy, which God exercises freely according to His good pleasure. Twisse further argues that claiming God must punish sin reduces Him to a necessary rather than a free agent, a stance he equates to atheism.Owen dismantles these objections by demonstrating that God's hatred of sin is identical to His corrective justice. He clarifies that while God is not absolutely bound to manifest any specific property, once He decreed the creation of rational beings who subsequently sinned, His immutable nature necessitated that He punish that transgression to preserve His own natural rights and dominion. Owen distinguishes justice from mercy, noting that while mercy is freely given, justice is a debt God owes to His own holy character to honor His perfections.Twisse objects that if punishment were a natural necessity, the elect could never be saved, as they too are sinners deserving of death. Owen counters this by explaining the concept of federal representation. He argues that the elect were indeed punished, not in their own persons, but through their surety, Jesus Christ. Because Christ and the elect form one mystical body, God perfectly satisfies the demands of His natural justice without condemning those He has chosen to save. Drawing on scriptural references from Romans, Exodus, and the Psalms, Owen concludes that vindicatory justice is an essential attribute of God, compelling Him to punish all iniquity either in the sinner or in their substitute.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