What do you think?
Rate this book
The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross
This modern classic of biblical scholarship explains what the apostles meant when they used such words as "redeem," "covenant," "propitiate," "reconcile," and "justify." Leon Morris carefully explores these themes against the backgrounds of both Old Testament Judaism and New Testament Christianity -- a rewarding task that results in a more complete understanding of these key Christian terms. This third edition is revised throughout.
318 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1955
14 people are currently reading
347 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
August 5, 2020
I first read this book over 30 years ago, so it was good to revisit it and also to be reminded how much I enjoy Morris’ writing.
Whilst a knowledge of NT Greek is a major advantage for the analysis done in this fine book, it is not essential. I first read this book before I studied NT Greek (and I would say books like this help motivate that study), and now my NT Greek is sadly pretty poor - yet I got a lot out of it, both times.
This is a good coverage of the Atonement, and the language and theology behind it. Two excellent chapters on Propitiation, which include an examination on Expiation, were perhaps the highlight for me - though the two chapters on Justification were also very good. I appreciated that the Author examined language usage in the Septuagint as well as in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, but with more emphasis on the former due to the use of Greek. There is also appropriate examination of contemporaries such as Josephus and Philo.
The Author also gives a fair covering of those with alternate views - though of course the book is 55 years old, and thus doesn’t address more recent arguments. I find that Morris is very gracious in dealing with those he disagrees with - and thus I find his scholarly approach very appealing.
An excellent book if you want to dig deeper into the Atonement, and especially if you want to see some good arguments for the Substitutionary nature of it!
Whilst a knowledge of NT Greek is a major advantage for the analysis done in this fine book, it is not essential. I first read this book before I studied NT Greek (and I would say books like this help motivate that study), and now my NT Greek is sadly pretty poor - yet I got a lot out of it, both times.
This is a good coverage of the Atonement, and the language and theology behind it. Two excellent chapters on Propitiation, which include an examination on Expiation, were perhaps the highlight for me - though the two chapters on Justification were also very good. I appreciated that the Author examined language usage in the Septuagint as well as in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, but with more emphasis on the former due to the use of Greek. There is also appropriate examination of contemporaries such as Josephus and Philo.
The Author also gives a fair covering of those with alternate views - though of course the book is 55 years old, and thus doesn’t address more recent arguments. I find that Morris is very gracious in dealing with those he disagrees with - and thus I find his scholarly approach very appealing.
An excellent book if you want to dig deeper into the Atonement, and especially if you want to see some good arguments for the Substitutionary nature of it!
December 10, 2024
Above my pay grade. This is much more academic than I thought it'd be and assumes proficiency with Biblical Hebrew and Greek. I powered through, and I'm glad I did. Morris takes clear stances on the important of capital concepts like Justification and Substitution while also not using absence of evidence as evidence of absence (regarding certain perspectives on the mechanisms of salvation). Readers with a one-dimensional belief regarding atonement will be challenged to ditch the myopia and embrace something closer to Eastern holisticity, while those who chalk Christ's death up to an opaque mystery never to be explained will be challenged to plant a stake where things are elucidated with Western, academically rigorous interrogation of the documents.
May 26, 2018
Leon Morris is a brilliant biblical scholar an well worthy of attention. So, I was delighted to receive The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross as a generous gift. In reading this volume, there were times when I was annoyed at what I was reading, only to discover that Morris was doing his usual careful job of sifting through various positions before finalizing on the evidence he perceives as most cogent or probable. At times, I found myself in “violent agreement” with his arguments while, at others, I found myself scratching my head with regard to his inconsistency and what I perceived as an unexpected naivete regarding language and culture.
Perhaps, I shouldn’t refer to an unexpected naivete regarding language and culture as opposed to the willingness to engage in a polemical use of language and culture. No, Morris doesn’t throw epithets and defamatory phrases around, but he does seem willing to obfuscate the obvious to advance his point. Ironically, it is a point in which I have some sympathy. That point being that Jesus’ death was necessary to redeem us from the entropy of humankind’s weak, sinful state. But where some interpreters focus on words like wrath, depravity, and propitiation, I tend to focus on what Jesus’ death potentially (ie. It isn’t forced on humanity.) does for those who accept it as the liberating gift for which it was intended.
With that in mind, the initial chapter was excellent. “Redemption” focused on the Greek word as being inextricably tied to ransom, a buying back and, in a related word, a buying back from. To demonstrate this, Morris follows the word for “redemption” through ordinary Greek usage, the usage in the Septuagint translation (Greek) for various Hebrew words, and even how the rabbinic usage tied to those Hebrew words support that idea of “ransom.” Then, Morris advances from this to arguing the necessity of Jesus as a substitute for humanity.
My mind started to hit the brakes in the second chapter. At first, it looked like Morris was trying to get rid of the significance of the Hebrew phrase, “cutting a covenant.” He quickly performs a logical pirouette to apply that “cutting” to a substitutionary atonement, but suddenly pulls up short of recognizing the “sprinkling of blood” as necessary for that ritual (“…there appears no obvious reason for equating sprinkling of blood with the division of corpses.” p. 75), arguing on the basis of silence. It turns out that there is a reason for his reticence to see the blood as functional because Morris clearly delineates between one giving one’s life (through the blood) and one giving one’s life (in death), a distinction that bugs me.
Conveniently ignoring the idea of life in the blood found in Leviticus 17:11 and Genesis 9:4 (as well as parallel and primitive cultures), Morris performs a reductionist logic arguing that “blood” means death, but not life (p. 115). He even reduces the metaphor of the “blood of the life” to say it only means death and not life (p. 116). Why does he jump such a chasm? He does so because he (to me somewhat illogically) separates the idea of giving life and substituting for a death sentence.
The chapter on the “Lamb of God” makes a rather interesting introductory concession. Morris writes: “It is the habit of the Fourth Evangelist to use expressions which may be taken in more ways than one, evidently in a way to including all the possible meanings.” (p. 129) This seems incredibly remarkable when one notices his methodology which attempts to tie every usage into one primary possibility. It is interesting that Morris argues against seeing the “Lamb of God” as the Passover victim because the Passover sacrifice wasn’t always a lamb. So, Morris dismisses connections to the Passover victim and the “Lamb of God” as a “modern” notion which would not have been in the mind of the 1st century believers (p. 133). He rejects the idea of the “Lamb of God” as connected with the “lamb led to the slaughter” of Isaiah 53:7 because the “Lamb of God” does not appear to be a messianic term prior to the apocalyptic of Revelation (p. 139). In a similar fashion, Morris discounts the connection with the lamb as the lamb which Abraham promised Isaac that God would provide in the Akedah (Genesis 22—binding of Isaac) because the eventual provision was a ram (wouldn’t that have potentially been even more valuable than a “lamb?”) instead of a lamb (p. 141). These arguments seem rather restrictive compared to the manner in which Morris began the discussion.
But it was the two chapters on “Propitiation” which gave me the most pause. Morris states that the word traditionally translated “propitiation” (and having “expiation” as a substitute in many modern translations) comes from the root idea of “making joyous” and, hence, “appeasing” someone (p. 145). Morris wants to focus on “propitiation” as meaning the placating of the wrath of God rather than merely expunging the sin and its consequences (“expiation”). Although he does write that the wrath of God is not equivalent to the capricious, arbitrary, and passionate wrath of pagan gods (p. 148), as well as observing that this wrath is due to God being a moral being with wrath directed to any form of wrongdoing (p. 149), he quickly moves away from this targeting of sin to a targeting of the sinner (p. In so doing, he attempts to delineate God’s wrath as a “righteous anger” upon the sinners rather than upon the destructive consequences of sin (p. 152). And therein, is the problem for conveying Morris’ conception of “propitiation” to modern humanity.
No matter how many qualifiers Morris may adopt, his position still suggests personal enmity from God toward the sinner. My perception (though it may be unsophisticated) is that God’s punishment of the sinner is something like a hospital placing a quarantine upon a patient. It is not because the medical professionals are devaluing the worth of the patient. To the contrary, the medical professionals are trying to eliminate the contamination process and protect others while giving the patient every opportunity to heal. The extreme measures are directed at the bacteria and the patient is affected because of her/his contact with the bacteria or virus. In a similar fashion, I would see God’s wrath coming down on sin and causing, at times, the suffering of the sinner as a result of God’s desire to eliminate the contamination and protect others.
At one point, Morris almost acknowledges my position with a quotation from Ryder Smith within a footnote: “When a theist looks at the world, is he not bound to say: ‘God has made the world in such a way that if men and nations sin, misery befalls them’?...Where a modern theist says that God has so made the world that if men sin, they suffer, the Biblical writers speak of the ‘wrath of God’.” (p. 224) However problematic that may be from the standpoint of omnipotence, it seems to me less repugnant that the Jonathan Edwards-style assertion that “The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spier or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked; his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else but to be cast into the fire.” Morris doesn’t quote Edwards, but that is where we end up.
The question is whether one wishes to sum up God’s dealing with humanity as focused on the condition as sinner or on the potential of individual persons given a God-initiated reconciliation. But even here in the idea of reconciliation, Morris cannot give up the emphasis on wrath. Indeed, after admitting that the thrust of Romans 5:10 builds on humanity’s hostility toward God, he insists one must not overlook God’s enmity toward humanity (pp. 226-227). As one reads further, one quickly discovers that Morris’ fear is that removing the idea of enmity and hostility will remove the God-initiated nature of reconciliation (pp. 230-232) and place it wholly within the action of humanity. But the wrath can be directed at the sin and consequences of sin without hostility toward the individual.
Apparently, Morris doesn’t agree with me (and his credentials are somewhat better than mine in terms of his academic and writing/researching career). His two chapters on “Justification” begin on a solid footing by comparing the Old Testament view of the law with making something right in a law court. But even after building this foundation, he jumps directly from judgment to “wrath.” “It was inevitable that the wrath of God should be the divine answer to all sin.” (p. 253) Yet, does a judge with integrity need to show “wrath” to produce justice?
I like the idea that justification is obtained through faithfulness, but I like the corrective that Morris offers: “But, for a Hebrew, faithfulness under difficult circumstances could arise only from reliance on Jehovah.” (p. 265) Indeed, perhaps the most significant part of his discussion of righteousness is the idea that “righteous” is a term for those accepted by God (p. 271) as opposed to those who thought it possible to lead a meritorious life by oneself. Then, citing a verse where “righteousness” is considered a “gift,” Morris goes on to conclude: “If righteousness is a gift, obviously it cannot be a quality of living.” (p. 281) Actually, the “gift” of righteousness CAN be a “quality of living;” it’s the idea of the “works” in the Epistle of James and “fruit of the Spirit” in the letters of Paul—a result of the gift and not the cause of the status.
When all is said (or written) and done, Morris underscores the necessity of a substitution—Christ who voluntarily allowed His life to become entangled with humanity, takes upon Himself the consequences of going against the legal rules God established to protect us from the death to which we would otherwise be driving ourselves (p. 303). And for all of my disagreements with regard to Morris’ understanding of God’s “wrath,” The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross provides a challenging reminder of the importance of what God did in Christ.
Perhaps, I shouldn’t refer to an unexpected naivete regarding language and culture as opposed to the willingness to engage in a polemical use of language and culture. No, Morris doesn’t throw epithets and defamatory phrases around, but he does seem willing to obfuscate the obvious to advance his point. Ironically, it is a point in which I have some sympathy. That point being that Jesus’ death was necessary to redeem us from the entropy of humankind’s weak, sinful state. But where some interpreters focus on words like wrath, depravity, and propitiation, I tend to focus on what Jesus’ death potentially (ie. It isn’t forced on humanity.) does for those who accept it as the liberating gift for which it was intended.
With that in mind, the initial chapter was excellent. “Redemption” focused on the Greek word as being inextricably tied to ransom, a buying back and, in a related word, a buying back from. To demonstrate this, Morris follows the word for “redemption” through ordinary Greek usage, the usage in the Septuagint translation (Greek) for various Hebrew words, and even how the rabbinic usage tied to those Hebrew words support that idea of “ransom.” Then, Morris advances from this to arguing the necessity of Jesus as a substitute for humanity.
My mind started to hit the brakes in the second chapter. At first, it looked like Morris was trying to get rid of the significance of the Hebrew phrase, “cutting a covenant.” He quickly performs a logical pirouette to apply that “cutting” to a substitutionary atonement, but suddenly pulls up short of recognizing the “sprinkling of blood” as necessary for that ritual (“…there appears no obvious reason for equating sprinkling of blood with the division of corpses.” p. 75), arguing on the basis of silence. It turns out that there is a reason for his reticence to see the blood as functional because Morris clearly delineates between one giving one’s life (through the blood) and one giving one’s life (in death), a distinction that bugs me.
Conveniently ignoring the idea of life in the blood found in Leviticus 17:11 and Genesis 9:4 (as well as parallel and primitive cultures), Morris performs a reductionist logic arguing that “blood” means death, but not life (p. 115). He even reduces the metaphor of the “blood of the life” to say it only means death and not life (p. 116). Why does he jump such a chasm? He does so because he (to me somewhat illogically) separates the idea of giving life and substituting for a death sentence.
The chapter on the “Lamb of God” makes a rather interesting introductory concession. Morris writes: “It is the habit of the Fourth Evangelist to use expressions which may be taken in more ways than one, evidently in a way to including all the possible meanings.” (p. 129) This seems incredibly remarkable when one notices his methodology which attempts to tie every usage into one primary possibility. It is interesting that Morris argues against seeing the “Lamb of God” as the Passover victim because the Passover sacrifice wasn’t always a lamb. So, Morris dismisses connections to the Passover victim and the “Lamb of God” as a “modern” notion which would not have been in the mind of the 1st century believers (p. 133). He rejects the idea of the “Lamb of God” as connected with the “lamb led to the slaughter” of Isaiah 53:7 because the “Lamb of God” does not appear to be a messianic term prior to the apocalyptic of Revelation (p. 139). In a similar fashion, Morris discounts the connection with the lamb as the lamb which Abraham promised Isaac that God would provide in the Akedah (Genesis 22—binding of Isaac) because the eventual provision was a ram (wouldn’t that have potentially been even more valuable than a “lamb?”) instead of a lamb (p. 141). These arguments seem rather restrictive compared to the manner in which Morris began the discussion.
But it was the two chapters on “Propitiation” which gave me the most pause. Morris states that the word traditionally translated “propitiation” (and having “expiation” as a substitute in many modern translations) comes from the root idea of “making joyous” and, hence, “appeasing” someone (p. 145). Morris wants to focus on “propitiation” as meaning the placating of the wrath of God rather than merely expunging the sin and its consequences (“expiation”). Although he does write that the wrath of God is not equivalent to the capricious, arbitrary, and passionate wrath of pagan gods (p. 148), as well as observing that this wrath is due to God being a moral being with wrath directed to any form of wrongdoing (p. 149), he quickly moves away from this targeting of sin to a targeting of the sinner (p. In so doing, he attempts to delineate God’s wrath as a “righteous anger” upon the sinners rather than upon the destructive consequences of sin (p. 152). And therein, is the problem for conveying Morris’ conception of “propitiation” to modern humanity.
No matter how many qualifiers Morris may adopt, his position still suggests personal enmity from God toward the sinner. My perception (though it may be unsophisticated) is that God’s punishment of the sinner is something like a hospital placing a quarantine upon a patient. It is not because the medical professionals are devaluing the worth of the patient. To the contrary, the medical professionals are trying to eliminate the contamination process and protect others while giving the patient every opportunity to heal. The extreme measures are directed at the bacteria and the patient is affected because of her/his contact with the bacteria or virus. In a similar fashion, I would see God’s wrath coming down on sin and causing, at times, the suffering of the sinner as a result of God’s desire to eliminate the contamination and protect others.
At one point, Morris almost acknowledges my position with a quotation from Ryder Smith within a footnote: “When a theist looks at the world, is he not bound to say: ‘God has made the world in such a way that if men and nations sin, misery befalls them’?...Where a modern theist says that God has so made the world that if men sin, they suffer, the Biblical writers speak of the ‘wrath of God’.” (p. 224) However problematic that may be from the standpoint of omnipotence, it seems to me less repugnant that the Jonathan Edwards-style assertion that “The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spier or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked; his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else but to be cast into the fire.” Morris doesn’t quote Edwards, but that is where we end up.
The question is whether one wishes to sum up God’s dealing with humanity as focused on the condition as sinner or on the potential of individual persons given a God-initiated reconciliation. But even here in the idea of reconciliation, Morris cannot give up the emphasis on wrath. Indeed, after admitting that the thrust of Romans 5:10 builds on humanity’s hostility toward God, he insists one must not overlook God’s enmity toward humanity (pp. 226-227). As one reads further, one quickly discovers that Morris’ fear is that removing the idea of enmity and hostility will remove the God-initiated nature of reconciliation (pp. 230-232) and place it wholly within the action of humanity. But the wrath can be directed at the sin and consequences of sin without hostility toward the individual.
Apparently, Morris doesn’t agree with me (and his credentials are somewhat better than mine in terms of his academic and writing/researching career). His two chapters on “Justification” begin on a solid footing by comparing the Old Testament view of the law with making something right in a law court. But even after building this foundation, he jumps directly from judgment to “wrath.” “It was inevitable that the wrath of God should be the divine answer to all sin.” (p. 253) Yet, does a judge with integrity need to show “wrath” to produce justice?
I like the idea that justification is obtained through faithfulness, but I like the corrective that Morris offers: “But, for a Hebrew, faithfulness under difficult circumstances could arise only from reliance on Jehovah.” (p. 265) Indeed, perhaps the most significant part of his discussion of righteousness is the idea that “righteous” is a term for those accepted by God (p. 271) as opposed to those who thought it possible to lead a meritorious life by oneself. Then, citing a verse where “righteousness” is considered a “gift,” Morris goes on to conclude: “If righteousness is a gift, obviously it cannot be a quality of living.” (p. 281) Actually, the “gift” of righteousness CAN be a “quality of living;” it’s the idea of the “works” in the Epistle of James and “fruit of the Spirit” in the letters of Paul—a result of the gift and not the cause of the status.
When all is said (or written) and done, Morris underscores the necessity of a substitution—Christ who voluntarily allowed His life to become entangled with humanity, takes upon Himself the consequences of going against the legal rules God established to protect us from the death to which we would otherwise be driving ourselves (p. 303). And for all of my disagreements with regard to Morris’ understanding of God’s “wrath,” The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross provides a challenging reminder of the importance of what God did in Christ.
June 15, 2022
A well-known Christian theologian has said that this book is a "must read for anyone who loves the Gospel". Someone who "loves the Gospel" shouldn't be criticized for not reading this book, but I get what he means. The content of the book is very technical (looking at words in the original biblical languages and other writings from the first century), but it really is important to understand key words correctly in order to understand the Gospel correctly.
With the rise of liberal Christianity (theologically liberal, not politically), there are arguments for redefining key terms relevant to the Gospel such as propitiation, justification, and attempts to downplay the wrath of God. This book defends the more "traditional" views, and is extremely exegetical in nature as the author looks at words from the Old Testament (original Hebrew and the Greek Septuagint), inter-testamental writings, and New Testament to really make his case, which I believe he does decisively.
I do feel like the book could have been shorter (some ideas felt repetitive), and I will likely read it again if I ever get more familiar with Greek. I wouldn't recommend reading this book if you have no familiarity with linguistics.
With the rise of liberal Christianity (theologically liberal, not politically), there are arguments for redefining key terms relevant to the Gospel such as propitiation, justification, and attempts to downplay the wrath of God. This book defends the more "traditional" views, and is extremely exegetical in nature as the author looks at words from the Old Testament (original Hebrew and the Greek Septuagint), inter-testamental writings, and New Testament to really make his case, which I believe he does decisively.
I do feel like the book could have been shorter (some ideas felt repetitive), and I will likely read it again if I ever get more familiar with Greek. I wouldn't recommend reading this book if you have no familiarity with linguistics.
August 14, 2022
Excellent discussion on the importance of the objective view of the atonement--Christ did something real and objective for those for whom He died. He did not merely die as an example or as an inspiration. A true scholarly work that has stood the test of time. Especially interesting were the two chapters on propitiation in which he interacts with C. H. Dodd's views on the Greek hilasmos and hilasterion as being expitation (removal of sin) instead of propitiation (appeasing God's wrath).
Overall, a very enjoyable and informative read.
Overall, a very enjoyable and informative read.
November 1, 2023
One of the best and most helpful books I have had the providential good fortune to read is this careful study of the cross, the meaning and precise distinctions between the words used in describing how we have been saved by Christ's death on the cross.
I read this back in the mid 70's, shortly after I became a Christian. I highly recommend this book. Not a breezy, easy read. But a rich rewarding one. A Christian's proper understanding of the cross safeguards us from all sorts of soul-harming errors.
I read this back in the mid 70's, shortly after I became a Christian. I highly recommend this book. Not a breezy, easy read. But a rich rewarding one. A Christian's proper understanding of the cross safeguards us from all sorts of soul-harming errors.
September 27, 2018
Having now read most of what Leon Morris has published in the process of writing his biography, this is my must read ... especially for any person in christian ministry. Leon's detail here takes a bit of concentration but you can read it one chapter at a time ... what he teaches on the atonement richly rewards us concerning the depth of God's love in the death of Christ to respond to our need of a Saviour.
February 20, 2020
The best reading I've ever done of exegettic stuff. Exegesis is so often quite flat, but Morris is doing an excellent job to make it legible and appropriate. But for the casual reader, perhaps still too much. 5 stars for theologians / academics who like info. For all the others, perhaps 3. I encourage Murray to keep the path straight until "Redemption Reached and Passed."
April 7, 2021
It is a classic work looking at the words and concepts associated with the cross of Christ. These words are ones like "redeem, propitiate, and justify" among others. Morris presents extensive research for each concept and grounds it in the Bible.
July 13, 2022
As others have mentioned, this is a classic Don Carson "sell your shirt" book (as in, do whatever it takes to buy this book), and I can see why. Rigorous scholarship, pointed conclusions. Worth a read, though it takes some effort!
November 9, 2022
High-level academic book focused on how the Apostles would have used different "salvation words" concerning the work of Christ on the cross. I appreciated Morris' use of linguistics and in-depth exegesis to help aid his point. Very well-written, but not an easy read.
October 14, 2018
Great book but requires an understanding of Biblical Hebrew & Greek.
Read
May 25, 2023Used to be treated a basic book on the topic, but no one seems to cite it anymore.
May 18, 2016
Many years ago I remember hearing Don Carson mentioned this book in passing during a conference with a local chapter of The Gospel Coalition. The sermon by Carson really blessed me and I couldn’t forget the book he mentioned since I wondered what treasure I would find if I were to read it myself. It took me nearly a decade to finally purchased this book but I finally did it: I bought it, read it and was exceptionally blessed by it.
This is the first work I read by Leon Morris and I was very impressed. From what I understand The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross was originally Morris’ doctoral dissertation completed at the University of Cambridge in England. It is an impressive work that looks at the doctrines related to the Gospel and the atonement. Morris’ careful scholarship is worth emulating and definitely worth reading if only to learn from his example. But it is more than that, this work is a robust exposition of doctrines that are held precious to those who love the Gospel. Morris does this by going back to the Old Testament, other post-Old Testament sources such as the Rabbinic literatures and the Greek Septuagint in order to understand the New Testament background that shapes the New Testament preaching of the Gospel. I must add that this work is not just a survey of background materials, Morris does examine and interact with the New Testament itself and properly employ the background materials to bear. The chapters that really stood out to me were Morris’ chapters on redemption, propitiation and justification. Morris powerfully argues for the historic Protestant views of those doctrines from an exegetical basis and I loved how he does it with the conscious awareness of Old Testament marching to the New Testament. I like works that defend doctrines that organically flow from progressive revelation as I think it contribute to avoid mere proof texting, a real risk whenever we try to develop doctrines in systematic theology. I really appreciated his word studies, how he handle the semantic ranges of words and considers Hebrew and Greek terminologies both in its Scriptural and also noncanonical usage (such as secular and LXX contexts).
For pastors reading this book I would say use this as a research material. However, realize that there would be much work to bridge between the information in this work and what is shared in the pulpit to minister to those in the pews. This is especially true with the doctrines’ implications.
I highly recommend this book. Just to put it in perspective originally I borrowed this book from the library but then a few pages into it I realized I have to purchase my own copy so I can take notes and highlight it for future reference. I bought it because I thought it was worth being a reference in my own library and indeed it has been.
This is the first work I read by Leon Morris and I was very impressed. From what I understand The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross was originally Morris’ doctoral dissertation completed at the University of Cambridge in England. It is an impressive work that looks at the doctrines related to the Gospel and the atonement. Morris’ careful scholarship is worth emulating and definitely worth reading if only to learn from his example. But it is more than that, this work is a robust exposition of doctrines that are held precious to those who love the Gospel. Morris does this by going back to the Old Testament, other post-Old Testament sources such as the Rabbinic literatures and the Greek Septuagint in order to understand the New Testament background that shapes the New Testament preaching of the Gospel. I must add that this work is not just a survey of background materials, Morris does examine and interact with the New Testament itself and properly employ the background materials to bear. The chapters that really stood out to me were Morris’ chapters on redemption, propitiation and justification. Morris powerfully argues for the historic Protestant views of those doctrines from an exegetical basis and I loved how he does it with the conscious awareness of Old Testament marching to the New Testament. I like works that defend doctrines that organically flow from progressive revelation as I think it contribute to avoid mere proof texting, a real risk whenever we try to develop doctrines in systematic theology. I really appreciated his word studies, how he handle the semantic ranges of words and considers Hebrew and Greek terminologies both in its Scriptural and also noncanonical usage (such as secular and LXX contexts).
For pastors reading this book I would say use this as a research material. However, realize that there would be much work to bridge between the information in this work and what is shared in the pulpit to minister to those in the pews. This is especially true with the doctrines’ implications.
I highly recommend this book. Just to put it in perspective originally I borrowed this book from the library but then a few pages into it I realized I have to purchase my own copy so I can take notes and highlight it for future reference. I bought it because I thought it was worth being a reference in my own library and indeed it has been.
June 7, 2016
This work is one of the high points of 20th-century New Testament studies. Over 300 pages spent on 7 terms/phrases: redemption, covenant, the blood, lamb of God, propitiation, reconciliation, and justification. Morris examines closely the OT background of these terms, as well as their usage in Koine Greek and contemporary Jewish texts. Much of his work is in response to newfangled theories percolating in the mid-20th century. For instance, some tried to argue that "the blood" of a sacrifice referred to the life of the animal, not its death. Morris thoroughly debunks that. Some try to argue that the hilaskomai word-group in Greek meant merely "expiation," not "propitiation." He takes that premise down too. This was related to the idea that "wrath" was not a trait of the "NT God" (as opposed to the OT one, supposedly). Morris shows from the NT that this cannot be the place, and then demonstrates the implication of God's wrath for both propitiation and reconciliation.
Morris arrives at orthodox conclusions, and he shows his work fully (which any mathematics teacher would tell you is necessary for full credit). The most interesting chapter (to me) discussed the concept of the Lamb of God. What is the background to this title of Christ? Most probably assume it is the Passover lamb, but Morris raises good objections to this view (as well as 10 or so other possibilities), concluding that the referent is a general sacrificial lamb (unspecified in the OT), with perhaps some coloring from an expected eschatological lamb yet to come. I cannot do his argument justice, so read the book.
He is also well-balanced on the concept of imputation. He does not reject it, but neither does he embrace it in a way that almost seems transactional, as some Calvinists tend to do. He focuses more on our union with Christ, which seems to me to be the right move. His balance is well appreciated here. He also tackles the idea of substitution. This he accepts, even though he might not use fully Calvinian language.
All in all, a great work at the major terms that NT writers use to describe the work of Christ on the cross. What more important topic could there be?
Morris arrives at orthodox conclusions, and he shows his work fully (which any mathematics teacher would tell you is necessary for full credit). The most interesting chapter (to me) discussed the concept of the Lamb of God. What is the background to this title of Christ? Most probably assume it is the Passover lamb, but Morris raises good objections to this view (as well as 10 or so other possibilities), concluding that the referent is a general sacrificial lamb (unspecified in the OT), with perhaps some coloring from an expected eschatological lamb yet to come. I cannot do his argument justice, so read the book.
He is also well-balanced on the concept of imputation. He does not reject it, but neither does he embrace it in a way that almost seems transactional, as some Calvinists tend to do. He focuses more on our union with Christ, which seems to me to be the right move. His balance is well appreciated here. He also tackles the idea of substitution. This he accepts, even though he might not use fully Calvinian language.
All in all, a great work at the major terms that NT writers use to describe the work of Christ on the cross. What more important topic could there be?
Read
August 6, 2011amazing book..Dr. Morris digs deep on significant new testament terms regarding the substitutionary death of Christ and sheds light on them using old testament, new testament, and the current jewish literature references of that era which would have most definitely influenced the terms and meanings used in the writing of the new testament. picking the most pivotal terms in new testament theology...REDEMPTION, COVENANT, THE BLOOD, PROPITIATION, RECONCILIATION, JUSTIFICATION. i recommend highly. it is heavy in greek, and at times leaves you frustrated that you aren't a greek genius...but well worth the temporary dumb spells.
March 22, 2014
Morris' classic work on the work of Jesus at the cross covers the various aspects associated with the cross extremely thoroughly. He addresses issues including redemption, covenant, and reconciliation through word studies and etymology. He addresses the various challenges brought up against ideas of the atonement as propitiation and discusses the nature of the atonement as a sacrifice. Particularly helpful is his discussion on justification especially as it relates to the New Perspective on Paul. At times, the etymological discussion is tedious to go through but in the end it serves him in making informed conclusions about the apostolic understanding of the cross.
February 9, 2016
The easiest read of exegetical material I've ever done. Exegesis is so often very dry, but Morris does a fantastic job of making it readable and relevant. However, still probably too much for the casual reader. 5 stars for academics/theologians/people who like details. Probably 3 for all others. I recommend Murray's "Redemption Accomplished and Applied" before this to make the road straight.
April 23, 2012
Classic work on the atonement. It reads more like a reference book and, as such, is an invaluable tool. I suspect that many who want to deny the concepts of propitiaion and penal substitution would be well served by this book.
Want to read
August 9, 2009paused.
July 10, 2009
Every minster of the Gospel should study this book. It is an enriching study of the various aspects of the believer's salvation. Must read!
January 10, 2011
Classic book on atonement, defending propitiation view.
December 6, 2011
Along with John Stott's, "The Cross of Christ," a must read.
June 9, 2012
While I am not sure his reading of apolutron in the New testament is as air-tight as Morris wants it to be, neither will I dismiss his larger argument. I think he is generally correct.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews