Steve Chalke "Lost Message" Sparks Debate on Atonement among UK theologists

A stormy debate is going on among the evangelicals and theologists across Britain concerning the controversial book “The Lost Message of Jesus” written by Rev Steve Chalke. The book directly challenges the theological view of most Evangelicals in the UK and holds upon the idea of penal substitution.

Theologically, Penal Substitution is one of the ways that Evangelicals understand the meaning of the cross. It suggests that God had to punish people for their sin, but Jesus took their place, and God punished him instead by sending him to the cross.

In Rev Steve Chalke’s newly published book “Lost Message”, a number of pages questioned this penal substitutionary view as it encompasses a misunderstanding of the character of God, as revealed in His son Jesus Christ.

Strictly holding to the fact that the cross provides forgiveness of sins and reconciliation to God, Rev Chalke claimed that the image of God portrayed by the Evangelicals based on Penal Substitution is often perceived to be harsh, censorious and ungracious, and that this can hamper evangelism.

At a recent debate in Westminster organised by the Evangelical Alliance UK (EAUK), Rev Chalke made clear that he accepted ideas of sin, God’s anger, substitution, sacrifice and redemption, contained in traditional atonement theory. He said however that it was the idea of a vengeful and vindictive God that was at odds with the revelation of Jesus Christ in the Gospels.

EAUK is particularly in strong defence on the Evangelicals’ side against Rev Chalke’s critics. From the official statement released by EAUK, it publicly attacked Rev Steve Chalke for questioning the doctrine of Penal Substitution, urging him to “think again” and said he had “insufficient appreciation” of the extent to which the idea had shaped Evangelicalism.

It also pointed out that Rev Chalke “has avoided, rather than seriously address, the key biblical texts typically cited in defence of the penal substitutionary view.” Some examples are Isaiah 53:6-10; Romans 1:18; 3:22-5; 5:8-9; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 3:13; Hebrews 9:11-28; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 4:10.

EAUK also refused to accept Rev Chalke’s assertion of a causal or necessary link between affirming penal substitution and being harsh, censorious and ungracious.

EAUK is disappointed with Rev Chalke and have suggested that he has not been positive enough in debates. However, it recognised his “contribution to the church’s social mission and community engagement” and acknowledged his call “for more detailed study and discussion on this matter”. The debate organised by the EAUK with Rev Chalke in Westminster was in fact attended by around 1,000 people, and has promoted public awareness and interest on theology.

EAUK reaffirmed its position in the statement as well, “While the Evangelical Alliance Basis of faith does not use the explicit terms ‘penal’, ‘penalty’ or ‘punishment’ in relation to what it calls the ‘substitutionary sacrifice’ of Christ, our research confirms that the Executive Council which approved the Basis in 1970 took it as entailing and implying penal substitution.”

“We believe that its affirmations of universal human sin and guilt, divine wrath and condemnation, and the substitutionary, sacrificial and redemptive nature of Christ’s death, together comprise the key elements in the doctrine of penal substitution.”

So far, no conclusion has been drawn from the debate. The Alliance is therefore planning a special symposium on the atonement.