"
What does Owen say about Luke 22:19-21
where Jesus includes Judas in His atonement?"
"
What does Owen say about Luke 22:19-21
where Jesus includes Judas in His atonement?"
The main significance of John Owen's thoughts were on:
"The Cross Ratifies a New Covenant.
On the cross, Jesus completed the work He was sent to do.
He was faithful to the very end.
He set His face like a flint for Jerusalem (Luke 9:51),
anticipating the death that awaited Him.
He went to the cross knowing that His blood would be poured out
and ratify the New Covenant (Luke 22:20)."
How John Owen Would Run an Accountability Group
Check this out.
Here is what John Owen said on Luke 22:20-23;
Notice that which is
in red. Interesting.
Looks like a great Commentary to have.
"Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,
l This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you."
I 1 Co. 10 : 16.
Likewise, i. e. having offered thanks to God (Matthew and Mark),
and holding it in his hand to give to his disciples.
New testament or new covenant.
Matt. 26 : 28. The same word is employed here as in Heb. 8:8.
It signifies a covenant or promise on the part of God to His people,
sanctioned with the blood of victims (see Exod. 24 : 3-12; Deut. 5 : 2),
and depending upon certain stipulated conditions.
It is here called the new covenant, in contradistinction
rather from the Mosaic than from the Abrahamic covenant
(Gen. 15:1-18; 17 : 1-19 ; Gal. 3 : 17),
which in its most enlarged sense embraced all the blessings
and provisions of the new covenant, in the promise that in
"His seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed"
(Gen. 22 : 18).
This new testament, unlike the old covenant,
which was ratified by the blood of bulls, and goats, and calves,
was ratified by the blood of Christ,
"
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God,
to purge the conscience from dead works to serve the living God ;
"for which cause he is the mediator of the new testament,
that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions
that were under the first testament,
"they which are called
might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."
Heb. 9 : 14, 15.
The cup of the new testament was so called, because the wine was emblematical of its ratification by the blood of Jesus Christ. See Heb. 9:11-28.
Which is shed, &c. This grammatically refers to cup,
but in reality to blood, as will be seen
by a reference to the parallel passage in Matthew and Mark.
The wine, expressed from the bruised and trodden grapes,
and poured forth into the cup, becomes an apt
and striking emblem of the blood of Christ shed
or poured out for the sins of men.
For you, i. e. in behalf of you.
An expiatory or vicarious shedding of blood
is clearly taught in this form of expression.
21
"But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me
is with me on the table."
Ps. 41, Mat. 26: 21,23; Ma. 14: 13; John 13 : 21, 26.
Matt. 26 : 21 ; Mark 14 : 18.
According to the order of events in Luke,
it would appear that Judas partook of the Eucharist.
But we have seen in this evangelist so many instances
of a departure from the strict order of events,
that we should hesitate very much in taking this as conclusive evidence
that such was the real fact.
Matthew and Mark both represent the incident referred to here by Luke,
as taking place while they were eating the passover,
and before the establishment of the Lord's supper.
No one who compares the order of these two evangelists
with John 13 : 21-35, can well avoid the conclusion
that Judas left the table on his dark and traitorous errand,
before the establishment of the institution of the Lord's supper.
The hand, &c. An Oriental mode of expression,
to denote that a person was reclining at the same table with another.
The odiousness of his act is also strongly set forth
in the violation of all the laws and rites of hospitality,
which was evinced in this betrayal of one with whom
he had been on intimate terms of intercourse.
That betrayeth me has in all the Evangelists the participial form
in the present tense, which gives the sense that is betraying me.
His mind was filled with his traitorous plans,
and although the overt act had been only in part performed
(see vs. 3-6),
yet as he reclined at the table,
his thoughts were busy in devising and maturing the means
of effecting his promise made to the chief priests and Pharisees.
22
"And truly the Son of man goeth, ° as it was determined:
but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!"
Mat. 26: 24. o Ac. 2 : 23; & 4 : 28, Mark 14: 21.
Luke's as it was determined,
is in Matthew and Mark, as it is written of him.
The literal signification is according to that which has been
accurately defined or bounded off in the plan or determination of God.
The idea is that the whole transaction, including not only the main
or principal event, but all its accessories, was in accordance
with the sovereign purpose and foreknowledge of God.
Hence his betrayal by Judas was a part of this divine plan,
and yet such is the liberty of human choice and purpose,
so free was Judas in all that he did to have done otherwise,
had he chosen thus to do, that his guilt was the same
as though his deed of betrayal
had never been contemplated in the divine mind.
Compare Acts 2 : 23, where it is expressly declared that Jesus
was delivered to be crucified, by the determinate counsel
and foreknowledge of God, and yet that it was with wicked hands
that he was crucified and slain by his enemies.
23 "
And they began to inquire among themselves,
which of them it was that should do this thing."
Mat. 26 . 22 ; John 13 : 22, 25.
It was no excuse for their atrocious deed,
that the Lamb without blemish and without spot
was foreordained before the foundation of the world
to be slain for the redemption of man (1 Pet. 1:18-21).
They acted as free moral agents. They planned, counselled,
purposed, executed, just as men do in all the concerns of life,
freely and without constraint.
Yet the great truth is here revealed that the wrath of man,
in this most awful act ever performed on earth, was praising God
(Ps. 76 : 10),
in the carrying out of his purpose that His Son Jesus Christ
should die for the sins of men,
and by precisely the same death
which was inflicted upon Him on Calvary
(Ps. 22:16).
...
Calvin doubles down on those whom he says
would have 'salvation provided',
to the extent that it could save Satan.
Calvin. In his commentary on 1 John: "I pass by the dotages of fanatics,
who under this pretense extend salvation to all the reprobate,
and therefore to Satan himself.
Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation . . . .
Then under the word 'all' or 'whole,' he does not include the reprobate,
but designates those who should believe
as well as those who were then
scattered through various parts of the world."
HOW TO HANDLE SO-CALLED PROBLEM PASSAGES ON THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT by Curtis I. Crenshaw
...
