Contrary to much of the recent literature on the trinitarian theology of John Owen, which often ascribes radical personal distinction to his account of triune relations and actions, this paper argues that Owen's account of distinct divine persons and trinitarian actions ought not to be contrasted with his theological forebears: Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and Calvin. Instead, his account of trinitarian ontology and operation is thoroughly consistent with (and dependent upon) the Augustinian principles that these interpreters suspect Owen is rejecting. The argument unfolds by presenting four putative points of strong personal distinction in John Owen's trinitarian theology and then reinterpreting each of the themes and passages that these four points are supposedly rooted in, evidencing his Augustinian account of trinitarian unity and distinction.

与最近的许多关于约翰欧文三位一体神学的文献相反，这些文献经常将激进的个人区别归因于他对三位一体关系和行动的描述，本文认为欧文对不同的神圣位格和三位一体行动的描述不应该与他的神学先驱：奥古斯丁、托马斯·阿奎那和加尔文。相反，他对三位一体本体论和操作的描述完全符合（并依赖于）这些解释者怀疑欧文拒绝的奥古斯丁原则。通过在约翰欧文的三位一体神学中提出四个具有强烈个人区别的假定点，然后重新解释这四点所植根的每个主题和段落，这一论点得以展开，