Tom Wright discusses Jeffery John, Steve Chalke and others on penal subsitution (update)

Tom Wright weighs into the penal substitution debate with this lengthy essay on the fulcrum site (hat-tip to Sean). He says why he describes with both Jeffery John and the conservative evangelical offering that is Pierced for our Trangressions and offers his views on Chalke-gate (the reaction to Steve Chalke's The Lost Message of Jesus). Typical Wright! There is so much from it that is quotable:

I hope it is now clear what I meant by saying that my main problem with Pierced for Our Transgressions is that it is hopelessly sub-biblical.

the debate I have reviewed – with the honourable and brief exception of Robert Jenson’s article which began this whole train of thought – shows every sign of the postmodern malaise of a failure to think, to read texts, to do business with what people actually write and say rather than (as is so much easier!) with the political labelling and dismissal of people on the basis of either flimsy evidence or ‘guilt by association’.

Andrew Sachs one of the authors, who I met a few times whilst at King's, commented on my earlier post. So it would be interesting to hear your reaction to Bishop Wright's essay. Update 24/4: The authors of Pierced for our Trangressions have responded to Wright here.

Comments

[Marcus Bull]

Thanks for posting this, Andy. It's a good essay - very balanced. It's obvious when someone puts things as clearly as this. Why can't more people see it?