Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 165:659 (Jul 2008)
Article: Book Reviews
Author: Matthew S. DeMoss

BSac 165:659 (July-September 2008) p. 359

Book Reviews

By The Faculty of Dallas Theological Seminary

Matthew S. DeMoss

Editor

The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views. Edited by James Beilby and Paul R. Eddy. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006. 208 pp. $20.00.

“This book is concerned with the complexities of the Christian view of the atonement—that is, the saving work of Jesus Christ” (p. 9). The four contributors share a common evangelical Christian faith in the saving work of Jesus Christ in His death and resurrection, and all agree that the Atonement is substitutionary, but they describe that atoning work by different metaphors. As is common in books of this genre, each of the authors contributes a chapter defining his view and then the other three authors respond to that presentation. Each chapter provides biblical support for the position held and each author agrees that the Atonement is too complex to be reduced to one model alone. Each of the first three authors, however, insists that his model is the most important and the most comprehensive one. The final model is an attempt to provide an eclectic approach that includes elements of a number of diverse perspectives.

Gregory A. Boyd defends the Christus Victor model of the Atonement, arguing that this view “is more fundamental and more encompassing than other atonement models” (p. 25), since it is “the one model of the atonement that makes the call to resist the powers and imitate Christ in these ways [ways that Boyd lists] the centerpiece of what it means to follow Christ” (p. 49). According to Boyd this model provides a unifying framework for the work of Christ because “through the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Christ, God defeated the devil” (p. 24).

Thomas R. Schreiner insists that “the theory of penal substitution is the heart and soul of an evangelical view of the atonement” (p. 67). He concludes, “Penal substitution is not all that needs to be said about the atonement, but it is the anchor of all other theories of the atonement precisely because of its God-centered focus” (p. 93). He defends this theory based on the biblical emphases on human sin and guilt, the justice of God in judging sinners, and the necessity of sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins.

Bruce R. Reichenbach argues for an understanding of the Atonement as healing. This model is rooted particularly in Isaiah 52–53 and “sees the atonement as healing of sin and its resultant sickness” (p. 142). This theme is developed further in the New Testament description of Jesus as

BSac 165:659 (July-September 2008) p. 360

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe