Yesterday, Christianity Today released a wonderful and edifying article on the atonement from Mark Dever: "Nothing But the Blood." Simply put, every follower of Christ should read this article.
But Scot McKnight has decided to respond to it on his blog in "Atonement Wars on Good Friday?" Claiming to take the high ground, he essentially says that Dever should have given a positive description of the death and resurrection of Christ rather than defending the penal substitutionary view of the atonement. (Huh? The penal substitutionary view is a positive description of the death and resurrection of Christ!)
In light of McKnight's petty squabble, Phil Johnson appropriately rebukes Scot in his reply: "What's more worth fighting for on Good Friday?" Here is how he begins:
Here's a bit of hypocrisy that is stunning indeed: Scot McKnight publicly scolds Mark Dever for getting polemical about the atonement "during this Holy Week."
Let me get this straight: The occasion is too "holy" for any arguments about the actual meaning of the atonement?
But it's not too holy for Scot McKnight to pick an argument with Dever regarding the timing and the propriety of Dever's article in Christianity Today?
Yet McKnight's own post and the long comment-thread that ensues turn out, after all, to be little more than McKnight's latest salvo in what he calls the "atonement wars."
Johnson's entire post is worth reading. Then, re-read Dever's article and meditate on Isaiah 53:4-10. May we all worship God this Resurrection Sunday in light of Jesus' glorious work of substitution for us on the cross!