This is a very clear and readable account of the debates over the two millennia (and particularly the last two centuries) since Jesus died on "The Wondrous Cross" on what it actually achieved. This is generally known as the various theories of the atonement, which then look at their strengths and weaknesses.

Holmes convincingly suggests that we do better -- and we are more Biblical -- if we try not to find a single one that is the "right one" or even the "best one". That's not how St. Paul or the rest of the NT writers seems to work. So he concludes that the post-reformation favourite (Penal Substitution) should sit alongside earlier ones, when we understand how far to push each one. He also suggests how each major theory was to some extent a product of its age, or at least resonates most loudly in a particularly age. He sketches another possible image that might resonate better in what some people call our 'post-guilt' world.

Holmes finishes with a few responses on comments about "cosmic child abuse" and other recent challenges to penal theories, showing that controversy in the US and UK is somewhat misplaced.

(There's a much more detailed review at http://cruciality.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/the-wondrous-cross-atonement-and-pena... which is also very positive.) ( )