Reasonable Faith Podcast Scholars Scuffle Over The Atonement Part One
8 snips
Jan 19, 2026 A lively debate unfolds around penal substitutionary atonement, with Dr. Craig and Andrew Rillera sparring over critical interpretations. The concept is dissected, revealing differing views on Christ's sacrifice and its implications. Rillera's focus on biblical theology is scrutinized, as critics argue he overlooks essential penal aspects. The podcast highlights the attraction of Rillera's book to progressive audiences while debating its exegetical merit. Key disagreements on Old Testament interpretations and New Testament reshaping of sacrifice add layers to this engaging theological clash.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Core Definition Of Penal Substitution
- Penal substitutionary atonement teaches that Christ endured the punishment we deserved for our sins.
- This doctrine claims his suffering frees us from liability to punishment.
Rilera's Narrow Biblical Focus
- Andrew Rilera focuses his critique on substitution and the narrower expiatory sense of atonement rather than the punitive element.
- He distinguishes sacrificial atonement language from broader theological notions of atonement and affirms Jesus' death in an eschatological sense.
Two Senses Of 'Atonement' Matter
- William Lane Craig distinguishes two senses of 'atonement': the broad 'reconciliation' sense and the narrower sacrificial 'expiation' sense tied to kippur.
- He warns English's single word obscures this biblical ambiguity and cites German terms that separate the senses.
