8. Conclusion: Reaffirming Owen’s Legacy and the Doctrine of Preservation
John Owen’s writings on the authority, inspiration, and preservation of Scripture provide a robust theological framework that stands in sharp contrast to Enlightenment-influenced approaches to textual criticism. Owen’s doctrine, grounded in a confessional understanding of divine providence and the self-authenticating nature of Scripture, offers a clear challenge to methodologies that elevate human reason and empirical investigation above the sufficiency of God’s revelation.
Owen’s Enduring Legacy
Owen’s defense of the integrity of the Hebrew and Greek texts remains relevant today, particularly in the context of contemporary debates within confessional bibliology. His commitment to the doctrines of inspiration and preservation as inseparably linked reflects a confessional approach that emphasizes God’s ongoing care for His Word. By affirming that God has preserved the Scriptures “whole and entire,” Owen provides a theological basis for trusting the received text without the need for critical reconstructions.
Owen’s critique of Brian Walton’s Biblia Polyglotta reveals his deep concern for maintaining the integrity of the Scriptures against critical methodologies that prioritize human judgment. Walton’s introduction of a critical apparatus, with its emphasis on resolving textual variants, implied that the authority of Scripture depended on the success of scholarly efforts to verify and correct the text. In response, Owen rejected this approach and reaffirmed the sufficiency of divine preservation, warning that human efforts to reconstruct the text would lead to endless disputes and undermine confidence in the authority of Scripture.
Owen’s writings demonstrate a clear theological commitment to the sufficiency of divine preservation, the self-authenticating nature of Scripture, and the priority of God’s providence over human efforts to verify the text. These principles continue to serve as a foundation for the confessional bibliology tradition, which seeks to uphold the integrity of God’s Word in the face of modern critical challenges.
The Theological Divide with Enlightenment Approaches
The contrast between Owen’s pre-modern confessional approach and Enlightenment-influenced methodologies highlights a fundamental theological divide. Enlightenment scholars, such as Brian Walton, emphasized the need for empirical verification and critical analysis to resolve textual discrepancies and establish the integrity of the biblical text. This emphasis on rationalism and human judgment reflected a shift away from the confessional view that prioritized divine action and the self-authenticating nature of Scripture.
Richard Fraser Brash’s reinterpretation of Owen’s doctrine, while attempting to reconcile these differing approaches, ultimately risks misrepresenting Owen’s theological commitments. By emphasizing the role of external evidence and critical inquiry, Brash’s portrayal reflects Enlightenment assumptions that prioritize human responsibility in preserving and verifying the text. However, Owen’s writings consistently reject these assumptions and affirm that the authority of Scripture is rooted in God’s sovereignty and the work of the Holy Spirit, not in human efforts to reconstruct an “original” text.
Reaffirming the Doctrine of Preservation
Owen’s integrated doctrine of inspiration and preservation provides a clear theological framework for understanding the integrity of Scripture. His belief in the sufficiency of divine preservation challenges the notion that human efforts to resolve textual discrepancies are essential for maintaining the authority of the biblical text. Instead, Owen’s doctrine affirms that God has actively preserved His Word throughout history, independent of human intervention.
For those engaged in contemporary discussions within confessional bibliology, Owen’s writings offer a valuable resource for defending the integrity and reliability of the Scriptures. By emphasizing the self-authenticating nature of Scripture and the sufficiency of divine preservation, Owen’s theology provides a clear alternative to critical methodologies that undermine confidence in God’s Word.
Concluding Thoughts
John Owen’s legacy as a theologian and defender of the Scriptures remains a powerful testament to the importance of maintaining a confessional approach to the authority and preservation of God’s Word. His writings challenge modern critical methodologies that prioritize human reason over divine revelation and serve as a reminder that the ultimate foundation for the authority of Scripture lies in God’s faithfulness and the testimony of the Holy Spirit.
By reaffirming the doctrines of inspiration and preservation as inseparably linked, Owen’s theology provides a robust framework for understanding the integrity of the biblical text. His rejection of Enlightenment assumptions and his critique of Walton’s critical methods offer a clear warning against adopting approaches that elevate human judgment above God’s providence.
As contemporary debates about the authority and preservation of Scripture continue, Owen’s writings serve as a valuable guide for those in the confessional bibliology tradition. His commitment to the sufficiency of divine preservation, the self-authenticating nature of Scripture, and the priority of God’s action over human intervention offers a timeless reminder of the enduring truth and reliability of God’s Word.
[PART 1][PART 2][PART 3][PART 4][PART 5]
