Kiwis respond to "Pierced for Our Transgressions"

I posted earlier about Reuben and Andrew’s initial reactions from New Zealand to the book Pierced for Our Transgressions.

Since then Andrew has posted seven times in response to this book: his first impressions; on the word hilasterion; on penal substitution in the early church; on a comparison with the Ransom from Satan model; and on the views of the atonement of Gregory Nazianzus, Athanasius, and Anselm and Aquinas – all these in just three days! He has certainly been busy, and is justifying his blog name Theo Geek. All very worthwhile background material, showing how one-sided is the evidence presented in the book.

And now his flatmate Reuben, a generally much less prolific blogger at Notions Incognito, has posted the first part of his full review of Pierced for Our Transgressions. The conclusion he comes to from chapter 2 is that there is indeed reasonable biblical evidence for the doctrine of penal substitution, but that this is much less widespread and certain than the authors claim, and there is no proper basis for their insistence that it is a central theme throughout the Bible. He also notes, concerning chapters 2 and 3, that they have “omitted all views and doctrines which do not fit with PS”; so effectively they presuppose rather than argue their point that “it is the foundation of all Christian theology”. His notes on chapter 5 reflect and summarise (but do not reference) what Andrew has written about the history of the doctrine. Reuben rounds up his review of Part I by agreeing with NT Wright’s assessment that the book is “deeply, profoundly, and disturbingly unbiblical.”

I look forward to the forthcoming second part of this review.

Andrew and Reuben are certainly getting value for money out of their shared copy of the book!

0 thoughts on “Kiwis respond to "Pierced for Our Transgressions"

  1. Pingback: Threads from Henry’s Web » Blog Archive » Theological Blog for my Blogroll

  2. Thanks, Peter, for keeping us abreast of discussion on this issue.

    It is always disturbing when the people of God, to judge from their theologians, have no words to describe what it means that he was pierced for our transgressions.

    It is no less disturbing when said theologians harp on one way to describe what it means, to the exclusion of all others, no matter how well-attested the others are in scripture and tradition.

  3. Pingback: Speaker of Truth » Reuben continues to review “Pierced for Our Transgressions”

  4. I am eager to read Reuben’s review of “Pierced for our transgression”. However, readers need to be invited to access his blog. Can you pass on my request to Reuben? Thanks.

  5. Hon, I cannot now access Reuben’s blog myself. But his friend Andrew’s blog is open. I suggest you comment on one of Andrew’s posts asking to be put in contact with Reuben.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Anti-spam image