Greg Gilbert on the 9Marks (Mark Dever's ministry) blog recently wrote an article about the trend of the absence of penal substitutionary atonement in modern Christian books. He would know. As he describes in the introduction of the article, he is one of the main book critics for 9Marks. Here's part of the conclusion: At the end of the day, and really in the face of all the comments to the contrary, Scripture makes it clear that the cross—that is, the death of Jesus in the place of sinners, taking the punishment they deserved—must remain at the center of the gospel. We cannot move it to the side, we cannot replace it with any other truth, and we cannot reimagine it as something less offensive than it really is. Otherwise, we present the world with something that is not saving, and that is therefore not good news at all. I've already shared it in Google Reader, but it's so good that I wanted to try to give it a bit more of an audience, small result as that might be on my part.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Amen.
I like his 5th and 6th last paragraphs. I think part of the reason people are eager to "rediscover new sides of the cross" is because they are seeing new links (like the idea of the Gospel of peace or of Kingdom inaugeration or of taking of our shame) that they hadn't seen before.
He well states the danger, though, that in rediscovering something that we may have neglected, we may twist and warp something of even greater importance.
Now understanding them better, I love preaching these different sides of the cross -- expiation, reconciliation, ransom, etc. But, in preaching these, we must still emphasize the justice, wrath and mercy of God in order to remain true to the heart of the Gospel.
Agreed, both to your post and Jer's comment, so long as the words "penal" and "substitutionary" do not lose their own meaning in the audience!
That's a really good point, Kin. Words are useless if they're not understood.
Post a Comment