There is a new edition of the newfrontiers magazine out and it has just been made available on the web. The theme of this edition is the cross, and, as expected there is a strong affirmation of a commitment to a substitutionary understanding of the atonement.

I particularly appreciated two things about their approach. First is the irenic tone, even when addressing the attacks on penal substitution from within evangelicalism (see in particular Mick Taylor’s article). Second, is that the doctrine of the atonement is not reduced to, or summed up entirely in the model of penal substitution. They recognise the importance of a symphonic view, with Andrew Wilson’s great article on Christus Victor demonstrating a willingness to embrace a fully orbed biblical understanding of significance of the cross.

Another thing that caught my eye was Adrian Holloway’s brief evangelistic message. The reason I found it interesting was because it represents exactly the type of gospel presentation that many in the emerging church are criticising. It is personal rather than about community, and it has a clear focus on eternal salvation and going to heaven without really mentioning the gospel’s power to transform life on earth.

But having said that, given the small space he had available, did he do a bad job? I think not. The initial presentation of the gospel will always have to be somewhat limited in scope. We can hardly expect people to be fully educated in the entire biblical metanarrative on our first occasion of sharing the gospel with them. He managed to fit in the concepts of universal sin, the love of God, substitutionary atonement, the resurrection and eternal life all in the space of a few paragraphs. There is of course much more to be said about the gospel. But should we really be bashing each other for failing to get the entire thing into a 60 second summary?