J.I. Packer Essay Questions & Guide

Study Guide for J.I. Packer’s Introductory Essay to John Owen’s The Death of Death in the Death of Christ

Overview

J.I. Packer’s essay, written in 1958 for the Banner of Truth Trust’s reprint of John Owen’s The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (1647), is a theological introduction that defends the doctrine of limited (or particular) atonement and critiques modern evangelical trends. Packer argues that Owen’s work is a vital corrective to a man-centered “new gospel” that dilutes the biblical gospel’s God-centered focus. He emphasizes the scriptural and historical basis of Calvinistic soteriology, particularly the atonement’s definite purpose, and provides guidance for studying Owen’s dense treatise. The essay is both a call to recover the “old gospel” and a primer on Reformed theology’s relevance.

Key Themes

God-Centered Gospel vs. Man-Centered Gospel Packer contrasts the “old gospel” (biblical, God-focused, emphasizing divine sovereignty) with the “new gospel” (man-focused, prioritizing human comfort and autonomy). The old gospel exalts God’s glory, while the new gospel reduces salvation to human decision-making, weakening Christ’s atoning work.

Particular Atonement Packer defends Owen’s view that Christ’s death was intended to secure salvation definitively for the elect, not to make salvation merely possible for all. This doctrine, rooted in Scripture, ensures the atonement’s efficacy.

Critique of Universal Redemption Owen’s treatise, as Packer explains, refutes universal redemption (the idea that Christ died for all without distinction) as unscriptural and destructive to the gospel’s integrity. Packer underscores Owen’s biblical arguments against Arminianism, Amyraldianism, and the views of Thomas More (a 17th-century advocate of universal redemption).

Relevance of Reformed Theology Packer argues that what is often called “Calvinism” is simply the biblical gospel, supported by patristic and Reformation teachings. He challenges the prejudice against Calvinism as a distortion of its true nature.

Practical Guidance for Studying Owen Packer provides three tips for engaging with Owen’s work: start with the epistle “To the Reader,” read the treatise sequentially, and reread it to grasp its depth. This reflects the treatise’s complexity and theological rigor.

Study Questions

Comprehension Questions

What is the primary purpose of Packer’s essay, and how does it relate to Owen’s The Death of Death in the Death of Christ?According to Packer, what are the key differences between the “old gospel” and the “new gospel” in terms of their focus and effects on believers?How does Packer define the doctrine of particular atonement, and why does he believe it is central to the biblical gospel?What historical theological positions (e.g., Arminianism, Amyraldianism, Thomas More’s universal redemption) does Packer mention as opposing Owen’s view, and how does Owen address them?What practical advice does Packer offer for reading Owen’s treatise, and why does he emphasize these steps?

Analytical Questions

How does Packer use the contrast between God-centered and man-centered theology to argue for the recovery of the biblical gospel? Provide specific examples from the essay.Why does Packer argue that calling the doctrine “Calvinism” is misleading? How does he support this claim with historical evidence?Evaluate Packer’s claim that the “new gospel” fails to produce deep reverence, repentance, and humility. What theological assumptions underlie this critique?How does Packer’s defense of particular atonement address potential objections, such as the charge that it limits God’s love or hinders evangelism?In what ways does Packer suggest that Owen’s work remains relevant to modern evangelical challenges, particularly in the context of 1958 and today?

Reflection and Application Questions

How does Packer’s emphasis on God’s sovereignty in salvation challenge or affirm your understanding of the gospel? How might this shape your approach to evangelism?Consider a modern sermon or Christian book you’ve encountered. Does it reflect the “old gospel” or the “new gospel” as Packer describes? Explain your reasoning.Why might some Christians resist the doctrine of particular atonement, as Packer notes? How would you respond to their concerns based on the essay?Packer suggests that Owen’s work requires hard study but yields great reward. How can you apply this principle to your own study of Scripture or theology?Reflect on Packer’s call to “search the Scriptures” and test traditions. How can you practically implement this in your personal or church life?Did any of us grow up in a Reformed church or tradition? If so, how did this shape your early understanding of the gospel?Did any of us grow up in a church that rejected Reformed theology? If so, what alternative views of salvation were emphasized, and how do they compare to Packer’s “old gospel”?Why does God’s sovereignty make a difference in how we understand salvation, according to Packer? How does this perspective influence your trust in God?What are the effects of the “new gospel” in our society and worship, as Packer describes? Can you identify examples of these effects in contemporary churches or culture?How does embracing “Calvinism” (or the biblical gospel, as Packer defines it) change your worship, obedience, hope, rest, joy, or other aspects of your Christian life?

Study Guide Activities

Scripture Comparison Packer emphasizes Owen’s biblical basis for particular atonement. Read key texts cited by Owen (e.g., John 10:11–15, Ephesians 5:25, Romans 8:32–34) and compare them to passages used by universal redemption advocates (e.g., 1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9). Write a short analysis of how these texts inform the debate.

Historical Context Research Research one of the theological positions Packer mentions (e.g., Arminianism, Amyraldianism, or Thomas More’s universal redemption, noting that this refers to the 17th-century author of The Universality of God’s Free Grace, not the Catholic saint). Summarize its key beliefs and how Owen’s arguments, as described by Packer, counter them. Use at least one primary source if possible.

Group Discussion In a study group, divide into two teams. One team defends the “old gospel” as Packer describes it, and the other defends the “new gospel.” Use Packer’s essay and Scripture to support your arguments. Conclude by discussing which view aligns more closely with biblical teaching.

Personal Reflection Journal Write a 300–500-word reflection on how Packer’s essay challenges your view of the gospel. Consider how a God-centered perspective might influence your worship, prayer, or sharing of the gospel.

Outline Owen’s Treatise Using Packer’s guidance, read the epistle “To the Reader” from Owen’s The Death of Death (available online via Monergism.com). Create an outline of its main points and discuss how they set the stage for Owen’s arguments, as Packer suggests.

Additional Resources

Key Quotations from Packer’s Essay The following quotations from Packer’s essay highlight his critique of modern evangelicalism, his contrast between the “old” and “new” gospels, and his defense of Calvinistic soteriology, particularly through Owen’s work. Each is accompanied by a brief explanation of its significance:

On the State of Evangelicalism:

There is no doubt that Evangelicalism today is in a state of perplexity and unsettlement. In such matters as the practice of evangelism, the teaching of holiness, the building up of local church life, the pastor’s dealing with souls and the exercise of discipline, there is evidence of widespread dissatisfaction with things as they are and of equally widespread uncertainty as to the road ahead. This is a complex phenomenon, to which many factors have contributed; but, if we go to the root of the matter, we shall find that these perplexities are all ultimately due to our having lost our grip on the biblical gospel. Significance: Packer identifies a crisis in evangelicalism, attributing practical and spiritual shortcomings to a departure from the biblical gospel. This sets the stage for his argument that Owen’s treatise offers a corrective by restoring a God-centered theology. The reference to the PC(USA) decision on missions (not detailed in the essay but possibly a contemporary example of theological drift) underscores the relevance of his critique.

On the Substitution of the Gospel:

Without realising it, we have during the past century bartered that gospel for a substitute product which, though it looks similar enough in points of detail, is as a whole a decidedly different thing. Hence our troubles; for the substitute product does not answer the ends for which the authentic gospel has in past days proved itself so mighty. The new gospel conspicuously fails to produce deep reverence, deep repentance, deep humility, a spirit of worship, a concern for the church... One way of stating the difference between it and the old gospel is to say that it is too exclusively concerned to be “helpful” to man... and too little concerned to glorify God. Significance: This quote encapsulates Packer’s central thesis: the “new gospel” prioritizes human needs over God’s glory, resulting in shallow spirituality. It contrasts the old gospel’s focus on divine sovereignty with the new gospel’s anthropocentric emphasis, framing Owen’s work as a recovery of the true gospel’s priorities.

On Preaching Half-Truths:

[T]he biblical gospel is now preached as if it were the whole of that gospel; and a half-truth masquerading as the whole truth becomes a complete untruth. Significance: Packer warns that selective preaching of gospel elements (e.g., God’s love without His sovereignty) distorts the truth, leading to a false gospel. This critique supports Owen’s rigorous defense of particular atonement as essential to the gospel’s integrity.

On Modern Preaching Practices:

Thus, we appeal to men as if they all had the ability to receive Christ at any time; we speak of His redeeming work as if He had done no more by dying than make it possible for us to save ourselves by believing; we speak of God’s love as if it were no more than a general willingness to receive any who will turn and trust; and we depict the Father and the Son, not as sovereignly active in drawing sinners to themselves, but as waiting in quiet impotence “at the door of our hearts” for us to let them in... [T]his set of twisted half-truths is something other than the biblical gospel. Significance: Packer critiques evangelical preaching for undermining God’s sovereignty and Christ’s effectual atonement, presenting instead a gospel dependent on human initiative. This aligns with Owen’s refutation of universal redemption, emphasizing the need to recover biblical preaching.

On Arminianism’s Principles:

[Arminianism] stemmed from two philosophical principles: first, that divine sovereignty is not compatible with human freedom, nor therefore with human responsibility; second, that ability limits obligation... Hence, they maintained, Scripture must be interpreted as teaching... (1.) Man is never so completely corrupted by sin that he cannot savingly believe... (4.) Christ’s death did not ensure the salvation of anyone... Thus, Arminianism made man’s salvation depend ultimately on man himself... Significance: Packer outlines Arminianism’s core assumptions, which Owen opposes, particularly its view of universal atonement. This clarifies why Owen’s treatise targets such views, as they shift salvation’s certainty from God to human effort.

On Calvinism’s Biblical Basis:

The “five points of Calvinism”... stem from a very different principle—the biblical principle that “salvation is of the Lord”... (3.) The redeeming work of Christ had as its end and goal the salvation of the elect... These five points are conveniently denoted by the mnemonic TULIP... Significance: Packer frames Calvinism as rooted in Scripture, with limited atonement central to its soteriology. This supports Owen’s arguments and counters misconceptions about Calvinism as merely a human system.

On the Unity of Calvinism:

[T]o Calvinism there is really only one point to be made in the field of soteriology: the point that God saves sinners... This is the one point of Calvinistic soteriology which the “five points” are concerned to establish and Arminianism in all its forms to deny... Significance: Packer emphasizes the organic unity of Calvinism, with limited atonement inseparable from God’s sovereign salvation. This underscores Owen’s holistic defense of the gospel against fragmented views like Thomas More’s universal redemption.

On Election and Faith:

Where the Arminian says: “I owe my election to my faith,” the Calvinist says: “I owe my faith to my election.” Clearly, these two concepts of election are very far apart. Significance: This succinct contrast highlights the theological divide between Arminianism and Calvinism, with Owen’s work defending the latter’s view that God’s election precedes and enables faith, not vice versa.

On Owen’s Critique of Universal Redemption:

[T]he true evangelical evaluation of the claim that Christ died for every man, even those who perish, comes through at point after point in Owen’s book. So far from magnifying the love and grace of God, this claim dishonours both it and Him, for it reduces God’s love to an impotent wish... [I]t cheapens [Christ’s death], for it makes Christ die in vain... [I]t destroys the Scriptural ground of assurance altogether... Significance: Packer summarizes Owen’s argument that universal redemption diminishes God’s glory, Christ’s work, and believers’ assurance, reinforcing the necessity of particular atonement for a robust gospel.

On the Effects of Modern Preaching:

And it is, perhaps, no wonder that our preaching begets so little reverence and humility, and that our professed converts are so self-confident and so deficient in self-knowledge, and in the good works which Scripture regards as the fruit of true repentance. Significance: Packer links the “new gospel” to spiritual shallowness, contrasting it with the reverence and humility produced by the old gospel, which Owen’s work seeks to restore.

On the Meaning of the Cross:

For the full meaning of the Cross only appears when the atonement is defined in terms of these four truths. Christ died to save a certain company of helpless sinners upon whom God had set His free saving love. Christ’s death ensured the calling and keeping—the present and final salvation—of all whose sins He bore... The Cross saved; the Cross saves. Significance: Packer encapsulates the heart of Owen’s doctrine: the Cross’s effectual power to save the elect. This triumphant view, echoed in Cowper’s hymn, grounds evangelical faith in Christ’s finished work.

Explanation of Arminianism and Amyraldianism Packer notes that Owen’s The Death of Death refutes theological positions like Arminianism and Amyraldianism, which differ from the Reformed doctrine of particular atonement. Below are explanations of these views and how Owen, as described by Packer, opposes them:

Arminianism Arminianism, rooted in the teachings of Jacobus Arminius (1560–1609), emphasizes human free will in salvation and rejects the idea that God’s sovereign election determines who is saved. Regarding the atonement, Arminians hold to universal redemption, teaching that Christ died for all people without distinction, making salvation possible for everyone. Salvation, however, is contingent on an individual’s free choice to accept Christ. This view prioritizes human responsibility over divine sovereignty, arguing that God’s grace is resistible and that Christ’s death provides a potential atonement, not a definite one. Owen, as Packer explains, critiques Arminianism as unscriptural because it undermines the efficacy of Christ’s atonement. Owen argues that if Christ died for all, yet some perish, His death fails to accomplish its purpose, which contradicts passages like John 10:11 (Christ dies for His sheep) and Romans 8:32–34 (Christ’s death secures salvation for the elect). Packer underscores Owen’s point that Arminianism dilutes the gospel by making salvation dependent on human decision rather than God’s sovereign purpose. Amyraldianism Amyraldianism, developed by Moïse Amyraut (1596–1664), is a modified Calvinist position, also known as “hypothetical universalism” or “four-point Calvinism.” It seeks a middle ground between Calvinism and Arminianism. Amyraldians affirm God’s sovereign election and irresistible grace but propose that Christ’s atonement has a dual purpose: universally, it makes salvation hypothetically possible for all humanity (based on passages like 1 Timothy 2:4), and particularly, it effectually saves the elect through God’s sovereign application. This view distinguishes between the atonement’s extent (for all) and its application (to the elect). Owen, as Packer highlights, rejects Amyraldianism as inconsistent with Scripture, arguing that it creates a logical contradiction: if Christ’s death is sufficient for all but only applied to some, it implies a disunity in God’s redemptive purpose. Owen insists, per Packer, that passages like Ephesians 5:25 (Christ gave Himself for the church) show the atonement’s definite intent for the elect alone. Packer notes that Owen’s treatise rigorously dismantles Amyraldianism by demonstrating that the atonement’s design and effect are inseparable, rooted in God’s unified will to save His chosen people.

Scripture References for Limited Atonement (Particular Redemption) The following Bible passages are commonly cited by John Owen and other Reformed theologians, as referenced by Packer, to support the doctrine of particular redemption, which holds that Christ’s atoning death was specifically intended to secure salvation for the elect:

John 10:11, 15 – Jesus, the Good Shepherd, lays down His life for His sheep, implying a specific group rather than all humanity. John 17:9, 20 – In His high priestly prayer, Jesus prays for those given to Him by the Father, not for the world, indicating a definite scope of His intercession. Ephesians 5:25 – Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her, suggesting His death was for the church specifically. Romans 8:32–34 – God delivered up His Son for “us all” (the elect), and Christ’s intercession is for those justified, linking atonement to a specific group. Acts 20:28 – Christ purchased the church with His blood, emphasizing the particularity of His redemptive work. Isaiah 53:11–12 – The Suffering Servant justifies “many” and bears the sin of “many,” not all, pointing to a definite atonement. Matthew 1:21 – Jesus will save “His people” from their sins, indicating a targeted redemption. Titus 2:14 – Christ gave Himself to redeem a “people for His own possession,” highlighting the particularity of His sacrifice. Hebrews 9:28 – Christ was offered to bear the sins of “many,” reinforcing a specific atonement. These passages emphasize the definite, effectual nature of Christ’s atonement for a particular group (the elect), as opposed to a general or potential atonement for all.

Primary Text: J.I. Packer’s Introductory Essay (available via Monergism.com or Chapel Library’s free PDF).

Owen’s Work: The Death of Death in the Death of Christ by John Owen (Banner of Truth Trust edition or free eBook on Monergism.com).

Supplementary Reading:

Knowing God by J.I. Packer for further exploration of his theology.The Cause of God and Truth by John Gill for patristic support of Reformed soteriology.

Audio Resource: Theology Simply Profound podcast episode reading Packer’s essay (ReformedForum.org).

Notes for Facilitators

Encourage participants to read the essay slowly, as Packer’s arguments are dense and assume some theological familiarity.Be prepared to clarify terms like “limited atonement,” “universal redemption,” and “Calvinism” for newcomers.Foster a respectful environment for discussing controversial doctrines, emphasizing Scripture as the authority, as Packer does.If time is limited, focus on the section “What is the Gospel?” (Part 2 of the essay) for its core argument.When discussing the new questions (16–20), encourage personal sharing while keeping the focus on Packer’s arguments and Scripture to ground the conversation.

Conclusion

Packer’s essay is a powerful call to return to a God-centered, scripturally grounded gospel. By engaging with its themes, quotations, and questions, readers can deepen their understanding of the atonement, appreciate Owen’s contribution, and critically examine modern evangelical trends. This study guide equips individuals and groups to wrestle with these truths and apply them faithfully.