What Did the Cross Accomplish?: A Conversation about the Atonement

by N.T. Wright

Some make representation the key theme. Some make liberation the key theme. Some make one specific aspect of the Old Testament the key that unlocks the meaning of the atonement. Several of these scholars, and those on whom I focus in the book, argue that there is a particular key theme in the atonement, which therefore means that substitution cannot really be one of the central aspects of the atonement. What I try to do in Defending Substitution is to show that substitution is actually an integral part of what is meant in the atonement in the New Testament. Attempts to say that it is philosophically dubious or that it is morally outrageous—the classic rhetoric about cosmic child abuse or whatever—is just so much useless rhetoric and simply demonstrates the presuppositions and prejudices of scholars rather than having anything particularly to do with the New Testament. Although for many, substitution seems like a natural part of the atonement, in the academic culture in which I live it is something regarded with a lot of suspicion. In fact, one senior scholar has even argued that Paul, in 1 Corinthians, is attacking substitution rather than propounding it. As I was writing this book, I remember talking to one specific scholar who asked me what I was up to. I explained that I was writing a book about substitution. This scholar replied, “Oh, Simon! Substitution! Even the word—ugh!” What had perhaps once been a sort of thought-out reaction against substitution had turned into ...