Clear and heart warming - Rated 
Not only is this book comprehensive, well argued, biblical and convincing - it is also encouraging, awe-inspiring and heart-warming. Excellent.
A thorough biblical defence of penal substitutionary atonement - Rated
This is an excellent book: highly readable, with careful exegesis, a logical structure and a compelling case for an orthodox understanding of the atonement. Contrary to what some of the critics (and even endorsers!) of the book suggest, the authors are not attempting to provide a comprehensive work on the atonement as a whole. Their aim is more modest, to provide a defence ofthe orthodox doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement. Their argument is straightforward: penal substitution is not the only aspect of God's redeeming work in Christ but it is central. And just like removing a central piece from a jigsaw, removing penal substitution from the cross grossly distorts the picture. This is clearly and helpfully explained in chapter 4 (The Pastoral Importance of Penal Substitution) a must-read chapter for those who think that penal substitution can be discarded with little if any consequences.
The book is divided into two parts: the first sets out the case for penal substitution, biblically, theologically, pastorally and historically; the second, responds to the objections against penal substitution and adopts a scholastic (prosecution - defence) style which is clear and engaging.
Some readers may find the exegetical chapter (chapter 2) heavy going but perseverance is rewarded as the chapter provides a compelling case for penal substitution. The authors anticipate common objections to their exegesis and provide careful and precise responses. The chapter dealing with the historical pedigree of penal substitution (chapter 4) is particularly helpful as it demonstrates that penal substitution can be found in writings that pre-date Athanasius. Hopefully this will put to bed once for all the claim that penal substitution is a creation of the reformation (alas I doubt it will). The chapter also helpfully and concisely records recent affirmation of penal substitution by leading evangelicals and organisations.
Part 2 is a real resource for those seeking to defend penal substitution against the recent attacks of Green, Baker, Fiddes, Mann, Chalke, Wink, Goldingay, Stump. The chapters on penal substitution and violence (chapter 9) and penal substitution and justice (chapter 10) are particular highlights which will be invaluable to readers seeking to engage with the current debate.
The Final Word nicely summarises the mood and substance of current (popular) objections to penal substitution. Critics frequently resort to 'the vague objection' (unsubstantiated criticism) or 'the emotional objection' (forceful language in the absence of a reasoned argument) to discount penal substitution. The authors of Pierced for Our Transgressions are not guilty of using either. Rather they have provided a clear, careful and rigorous defence of a most important biblical doctrine.
Good as far as it goes, but a missed opportunity - Rated 
This book has been heralded with the kind of fanfare that earlier ages reserved for Kings returning gloriously from battle. Witness the 10 pages of endorsements at the front of the book.
What is the fuss about and does this book deserve this wave of acclamation?
Many people sensed that the banner for the age old message of the gospel had to be raised when well known British evangelical Steve Chalke described the doctrine of penal substitution, that Jesus bore the penalty for our sins on the cross, as `Cosmic Child abuse' in his book `The Lost Message of Jesus'. He was not making an original comment. The phrase was first used by feminist theologians. What was shocking was to hear it from someone thought to be part of the evangelical establishment.
It was not only the repudiation of traditional doctrine, but the manner in which it was made that was deeply unsettling. There was an atmosphere of emotional and moral blackmail about it. The traditional doctrine is nasty, nice people don't believe it.
It is to the credit of the three authors here that they steer well away from the attempts at emotional manipulation that pollute much theological debate at present. Instead they present their case in an objective manner, basing it on their chosen texts from the Bible.
However, while this book is good as far as it goes, I do not think that this is the book succeeds in putting forward a full biblical doctrine of the atonement that can answer present attacks.
The book is divided into two sections `Making the Case' and `Answering the Critics'. The first section is drawn far too narrowly and there is not enough room in the second section to answer the 27 criticisms addressed in sufficient depth.
The great mistake of the book is to think that penal substitution can be best defended by being defended in isolation. It is a key truth, but it is not the whole truth of what Jesus did for us on the Cross. Yes Jesus bore the penalty for our sins on the Cross, but he also defeated the powers of evil there and put the power of sin, and sin itself, to death. More than that this book deals with Jesus as victim on the cross but where is the detailed exposition of the equally necessary truth that Jesus was and is our Priest as well as victim? This more than anything else proves the `Cosmic Child Abuse' charge wrong. Concentrating on Jesus as victim can give the impression that at the cross God the Father is acting as God and Priest wielding the knife, as it were, over his victim his son. It has to be said that there is many a sermon that leaves this impression because the truth is not clearly put: that Jesus at the cross is both Priest and Victim who then presents his own sacrifice before the Father, and lives to intercede on the basis of it on our behalf.
So, while this book makes some good points it is a missed opportunity.
A good short introduction to everything Jesus has done for us to save us is provided in 'Aspects of Atonement' by Howard Marshall. What is needed is a more detailed book with the breadth of vision displayed in it.
In the meantime older books like John Stott's The Cross Of Christ provide a more balanced, better rounded exposition of penal substitution.
Unlikely to change anyone's mind - Rated 
This book fails to prove its main thesis regarding the importance of Penal Substitution (PS) in the minds of the biblical authors and the early Christians. The conclusions of this book are founded upon ignorance, poor logic, and misinterpretation of evidence. Alternative views are not even considered. Biblical texts which draw their conclusions into serious question are ignored. Circular arguments are used extensively. Claims of "clearly proving" conclusions are prolific, yet almost never supported by the arguments. Lastly, the very small amount of evidence found in support of PS in the writings of the early Christians is grossly misinterpreted. It is wrongly concluded from this evidence that PS was "a central theme" to the authors, rather than a peripheral theme that is barely even mentioned (which is what most scholars conclude, even those who support PS). Some claims are simply misleading from the truth. Perhaps it is for these reasons that N.T. Wright considered this book "deeply, profoundly, and disturbingly unbiblical."
Part 1 of this book aims to "build the case" for PS. Yet it is unlikely to persuade any of its critics, and indeed it invites heavy criticism from scholarship. Yet the condescension and cursory dismissals of those who hold different opinions in the introduction make it even less likely to be well-received by any who do not already agree with the authors. Hence, it is unlikely that this first part of the book will have the effect desired by its authors.
In Part 2 the authors give responses to common objections to PS. While the intent of this part is to be applauded, the quality of the arguments is again poor. Many of the objections are over-generalized or mistaken for other ideas, and the underlying issues are not addressed. Some of the objections to PS are even strengthened by their responses. In cases where the objections have been addressed, invalid assumptions, faulty logic, and ignorance of alternative interpretations dominate their arguments. The response of the authors here leaves most of the strong objections to PS in full force.
The biggest problem with Part 2, however, is how limited in scope it is. The authors only address objections to PS as an interpretation of what occurred on the cross. The theological system in which PS plays a central part is largely ignored. Yet many strong objections to the system of PS can be made, with a weight of evidence from the New Testament authors and early Christian fathers. These objections bring into serious doubt the centrality of a theological system that centers around PS in early Christian theology, yet they were not even mentioned here.
In short, it is unlikely that this part of the book will silence the objections being made to both the specific doctrine of PS, and the theological system in which it is central. Despite the authors' frequent assertions that their responses will silence their critics, this poor defense of PS will likely give them even more cause for criticism. Most discerning critics of PS will be not be persuaded by the responses here. At the start of Part 2 the authors "invite readers to make up their own minds" (p206), and no doubt readers will. It seems likely that whatever the opinion of readers prior to reading this part, it will not be changed.
(Search Google for "'pierced for our transgressions' critique" for more detailed critiques of the arguments in this book.)
Read Larry Shelton's "Cross and Covenant" as well - Rated
Read Larry Shelton's "Cross and Covenant" as well as this book. Shelton's book offers an interpretation of key Biblical passages which allow us to understand the breadth of meaning of the atonement. Vitally, we are encouraged to read the descriptions of sacrifices and scapegoats in Leviticus, and to consider how this impacts our understanding of the sacrifice of Jesus.
|
