From the category archives:

The Atonement Debate

THE ATONEMENT DEBATE – Steve Chalke’s Further Arguments Against Penal Substitution

November 21, 2008

This is the last in my short series on Steve Chalke and The Atonement Debate. The previous posts in this series can be found by clicking on the links below:

Update on Steve Chalke and The Atonement Debate
Steve Chalke Confirms He Does Not Believe in Penal Substitution
Steve Chalke Argues Against Penal Substitutionary Atonement
Steve Chalke and Neglect [...]

Read the full article →

THE ATONEMENT DEBATE – Steve Chalke and Neglect of the Resurrection

November 20, 2008

In his arguments against penal substitutionary atonement (PSA), Chalke parodies what its advocates believe, claiming that, according to those who hold to PSA,
. . .it is Jesus’ death alone that becomes our “good news.” This approach reduces the whole gospel to a single sentence: “God is no longer angry with us because Jesus died in [...]

Read the full article →

THE ATONEMENT DEBATE – Steve Chalke Argues Against Penal Substitutionary Atonement

November 19, 2008

In his chapter in the recent book The Atonement Debate, Steve Chalke begins to argue against penal substitution (PSA). He starts in a surprising, and to me, a deeply concerning way. One of my major concerns about this whole debate is what a rejection of PSA does to our view of the Bible. The concept [...]

Read the full article →

THE ATONEMENT DEBATE – Steve Chalke Confirms He Does Not Believe in Penal Substitution

November 18, 2008

I do want to thank Steve Chalke for the honesty and openness in his contribution to the recent book, The Atonement Debate. He is very bold, and explains his position with far more clarity than I feel he has done before. Reading his chapter was worthwhile as there is much confusion about what Chalke really [...]

Read the full article →

Update on Steve Chalke and The Atonement Debate

November 17, 2008

Somehow I missed a book published earlier this year by Zondervan called The Atonement Debate. The book was described to me as a “cool-headed” approach to the whole debate on penal substitutionary atonement (PSA) that has been raging in evangelicalism since Steve Chalke popularized attempts to dismiss it as a form of “cosmic child abuse.” [...]

Read the full article →