Justin Taylor helpfully points to some quotes from N. T.Wright that seem to clearly affirm a penal substitutionary view of the atonement. I am left, though, with two questions from the article Wright published earlier in the week.

1. Why then does he respond so very negatively to the new book Pierced For Our Transgressions?

2. Does Steve Chalke really believe what Wright does despite his clear condemnation of all forms of PSA?

• THE ATONEMENT DEBATE – Steve Chalke Confirms He Does Not Believe in Penal Substitution
• The Atonement – Penal Substitutionary Atonement Defined
• THE ATONEMENT DEBATE – Steve Chalke Argues Against Penal Substitutionary Atonement
• The Atonement – Romans 1-3 and Penal Substitutionary Atonement
• The Atonement – N. T. Wright Attacks Both Sides of the Debate
• The Atonement – Romans 4-5 on Penal Substitutionary Atonement
• Penal Substitutionary Atonement – Precious Gospel or Divine Child Abuse?
• INTERVIEW – Wallace Benn on Penal Substitutionary Atonement
• 11th Most Read Post – The Atonement: Wright Attacks Both Sides of the Debate
• The Atonement – Romans 6-7 and Penal Substitutionary Atonement
• THE ATONEMENT DEBATE – Steve Chalke’s Further Arguments Against Penal Substitution
• Penal Substitutionary Atonement Summarized in Romans 15
• John Piper, N. T. Wright, and Gracious Discernment
• ATONEMENT – Who is Preaching Another Gospel?
• The Atonement – Is Penal Substitution the Only Thing That Happened at the Cross?