What do you think?
Rate this book
Lamb of the Free: Recovering the Varied Sacrificial Understandings of Jesus’s Death
Lamb of the Free analyzes the different sacrificial imagery applied to Jesus in the NT in light of the facts that (a) there is no such thing as substitutionary death sacrifice in the Torah—neither death nor suffering nor punishment of the animal has any place in the sacrificial system—and (b) there are both atoning and non-atoning sacrifices. Surprisingly, the earliest and most common sacrifices associated with Jesus’s death are the non-atoning ones. Nevertheless, when considering the whole NT, Jesus is said to accomplish all the benefits of the entire Levitical system, from both atoning and non-atoning sacrifices and purification. Moreover, all sacrificial interpretations of Jesus’s death in the NT operate within the paradigm of participation, which is antithetical to notions of substitution. The sacrificial imagery in the NT is aimed at grounding the exhortation for the audience to be conformed to the cruciform image of Jesus by sharing in his death. The consistent message throughout the entire NT is not that Jesus died instead of us, rather, Jesus dies ahead of us so that we can unite with him and be conformed to the image of his death.
522 pages, Kindle Edition
Published April 11, 2024
203 people are currently reading
675 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 - 30 of 53 reviews
April 30, 2024
⚰️🔨👷🏻♀️
This is me putting the final nail in the coffin of Penal Substitutionary Atonement after finishing this book. Girl, bye! I've been wanting to fully ditch you for awhile cuz tbh you've never passed the vibe check and now I am fully convinced that PSA is actually pretty bad exegesis. Rillera spends a lot of time making sure we understand Levitical sacrifices before we get any further. Guess what?
Substitutionary death is NOWHERE IN LEVITICUS. Seriously. I know that might take a bit to sink in 🥰 Atonement is, but atonement applies blood (which represents LIFE not death) to sacred places to ritually cleanse the areas. The idea of another life taking the punishment (death) that you deserve is not 👏🏻 in 👏🏻 Leviticus 👏🏻 (deep breaths, I promise you'll be okay).
Rillera doesn't need to get down to too much nitty gritty to get this point across. I'm studying Leviticus right now and already in my short time I've recognized this. If Leviticus is our framework for understanding Jesus' death, then babe it ain't a substitutionary death 😗
The rest of the book confronts other passages in the Bible that people use for their PSA theology but honestly the book is pretty heady and I wouldn't recommend it unless you're ready to get your nerd on. Suffice it to say we mostly read PSA into all the new testament passages because we are taught to. If you want to fight me you gotta read the book first tho 🙂↔️
Be free! God never wanted to punish you with death (be honest you always thought that was weird anyway). Hallelujah.
This is me putting the final nail in the coffin of Penal Substitutionary Atonement after finishing this book. Girl, bye! I've been wanting to fully ditch you for awhile cuz tbh you've never passed the vibe check and now I am fully convinced that PSA is actually pretty bad exegesis. Rillera spends a lot of time making sure we understand Levitical sacrifices before we get any further. Guess what?
Substitutionary death is NOWHERE IN LEVITICUS. Seriously. I know that might take a bit to sink in 🥰 Atonement is, but atonement applies blood (which represents LIFE not death) to sacred places to ritually cleanse the areas. The idea of another life taking the punishment (death) that you deserve is not 👏🏻 in 👏🏻 Leviticus 👏🏻 (deep breaths, I promise you'll be okay).
Rillera doesn't need to get down to too much nitty gritty to get this point across. I'm studying Leviticus right now and already in my short time I've recognized this. If Leviticus is our framework for understanding Jesus' death, then babe it ain't a substitutionary death 😗
The rest of the book confronts other passages in the Bible that people use for their PSA theology but honestly the book is pretty heady and I wouldn't recommend it unless you're ready to get your nerd on. Suffice it to say we mostly read PSA into all the new testament passages because we are taught to. If you want to fight me you gotta read the book first tho 🙂↔️
Be free! God never wanted to punish you with death (be honest you always thought that was weird anyway). Hallelujah.
December 28, 2025
The sum total of text I highlighted in this book probably exceeds the text of half the books I read this year, so naturally it falls into the “impossible to review” category.
In short, the book builds a case for “participatory atonement” or “cursed solidarity atonement” as opposed to the more orthodox view of “substitutionary atonement”
If none of the above makes sense, it all boils down to the question, “how did Christs work save us?”, and then what are the implications that answer has upon our lives.
This is one of those books where the author is too smart and thorough for me to truly contend with his ideas. I know they’re contentious because others who are equally as smart and thorough do contend. It is hard, however, for me to sit here and dissect his arguments. Though I mostly disagree with his conclusions, I would need four years to prepare for a debate with him and would still most likely lose.
Surprisingly, I don’t dock a star due to the book’s ideas, but due to its tone, and more significantly, the effect I think it will have.
Concerning the tone, it is basically haughty and self-assured. If someone is defying the majority of the collective witness of the global and historic church (to which the author belongs), they ought to do so with a tone of charity, sympathy, and heavy-heartedness. I get that the author is trying to scream truth against lies into a megaphone (in his own view), but I think he lacks respect for those who either disagree or are unenlightened.
My biggest concern about this book is its effect. For some it will provide a thought-provoking, potentially even corrective, view on at least their reading of certain texts, and potentially their entire soteriology as well. However, for many more, I think this book will provide an excuse to deconstruct and challenge authority based on a falsely held sense of pseudo-intellectualism that often follows the reading of a book that escapes academia and makes its rounds among us mortals.
This book, or the family tree of podcasts and shorter books that descend from it, is going to grow in influence. I think lay theologians in the next 10 years will all need to form concrete views on the atonement, and contending with this book is one way to expand one’s view beyond the most traditional evangelical views.
I simply hope that care and humility define any theological journey, and I’m not sure that this book will promote those two qualities in many who read it.
In short, the book builds a case for “participatory atonement” or “cursed solidarity atonement” as opposed to the more orthodox view of “substitutionary atonement”
If none of the above makes sense, it all boils down to the question, “how did Christs work save us?”, and then what are the implications that answer has upon our lives.
This is one of those books where the author is too smart and thorough for me to truly contend with his ideas. I know they’re contentious because others who are equally as smart and thorough do contend. It is hard, however, for me to sit here and dissect his arguments. Though I mostly disagree with his conclusions, I would need four years to prepare for a debate with him and would still most likely lose.
Surprisingly, I don’t dock a star due to the book’s ideas, but due to its tone, and more significantly, the effect I think it will have.
Concerning the tone, it is basically haughty and self-assured. If someone is defying the majority of the collective witness of the global and historic church (to which the author belongs), they ought to do so with a tone of charity, sympathy, and heavy-heartedness. I get that the author is trying to scream truth against lies into a megaphone (in his own view), but I think he lacks respect for those who either disagree or are unenlightened.
My biggest concern about this book is its effect. For some it will provide a thought-provoking, potentially even corrective, view on at least their reading of certain texts, and potentially their entire soteriology as well. However, for many more, I think this book will provide an excuse to deconstruct and challenge authority based on a falsely held sense of pseudo-intellectualism that often follows the reading of a book that escapes academia and makes its rounds among us mortals.
This book, or the family tree of podcasts and shorter books that descend from it, is going to grow in influence. I think lay theologians in the next 10 years will all need to form concrete views on the atonement, and contending with this book is one way to expand one’s view beyond the most traditional evangelical views.
I simply hope that care and humility define any theological journey, and I’m not sure that this book will promote those two qualities in many who read it.
October 3, 2025
Paradigm shifting. Maybe THE book all Westerners both inside and outside the church should read to better understand the NT’s use of the Levitical system to understand Jesus work. I’m probably going to have to re-read again slowly with a notebook to really do it justice. Not going to even try to do it justice with a summary until I’ve had some time to sit with it.
March 28, 2024
Man y'all, this book! Its comprehensive exegesis really puts popular understandings of atonement to shame; it's almost embarrassing. All of my objections were addressed, and then objections I'd never even considered were addressed. I'm giving it 4.5 stars because I wish more time was spent on the servant song in Isaiah, the treatment of Leviticus 16:30 was admittedly difficult to follow, and I kinda wish there was a topical/author index and not just a scripture index. Also, Dr. Rillera really stuck to his main argument and didn't digress at moments even when I wished he would (particularly topics relating to wrath and judgement, and the parts of the servant song outside the scope of his purposes--maybe we'll get another book 👀). I implore that this book be read by anyone whose teaching/preaching attends to the subject of the work of Christ as it relates to the OT. I probably sound dramatic, but this is really important and Dr. Rillera is just right! We've let prior theological commitments obscure what is actually in the text long enough.
July 30, 2024
A great book; and one that I’ve wanted to exist for a long time. I do have some quibbles at times with his reading of OT texts; but those don’t detract much from the broader theology of the book, which I largely agree with. In an attempt to systematize, Rillera is largely synchronic in his analysis of the OT material—which won’t be everyone’s cup of tea. Also, Milgrom is one of my favorite scholars of all time; but I do think Rillera sometimes follows him to a fault. E.g., I find Milgrom/Rillera’s reading of the guilt/forgiveness language in Lev 4-5 to be doubtful; and I disagree with Rillera’s reading of the parturient woman in Lev 12. The view that *only* the sancta is purged with the hattat (and offerers are not) is a reasonable view to have; but I am not convinced, and such a view is not necessary for having a non-PSA understanding of sacrifice. I also would have liked to see more engagement with sacrificial theology in 2TJ. Even if Rillera is correct about the *original* meaning of the priestly texts, Second Temple and NT writers did not necessarily share those same understandings.
In any case, I don’t want this review to sound overly negative. This is still a fantastic book overall; and I’m really impressed with the breadth of Rillera’s scholarship. His grasp of the OT literature on this topic is especially impressive given that he is primarily a NT scholar. He’s also just about convinced me of the “votive gift” rendering of hilasterion in Rom 3:25. I’ve always found the sacrificial rendering of that word to be both semantically and theologically problematic; but Rillera has offered a new (to me) way forward that has proved really helpful. I have already recommended this book several times and will likely continue to recommend it in the future. While I don’t agree with Rillera across the board, no other book like this comes as close to what I think as this book does.
In any case, I don’t want this review to sound overly negative. This is still a fantastic book overall; and I’m really impressed with the breadth of Rillera’s scholarship. His grasp of the OT literature on this topic is especially impressive given that he is primarily a NT scholar. He’s also just about convinced me of the “votive gift” rendering of hilasterion in Rom 3:25. I’ve always found the sacrificial rendering of that word to be both semantically and theologically problematic; but Rillera has offered a new (to me) way forward that has proved really helpful. I have already recommended this book several times and will likely continue to recommend it in the future. While I don’t agree with Rillera across the board, no other book like this comes as close to what I think as this book does.
September 10, 2025
Rillera’s work doesn’t make sense of the whole biblical narrative. He preposes that Jesus did not die a substitutionary for his people, but was a moral example for people to follow into a death like his. The theory he puts forward is sort of a works based, moral influence, participation model. He also puts forth the idea that the Old Testament doesn’t teach about blood atonement for sin. I’m not sure how he could read Isaiah 53 alone and come to this conclusion. It certainly makes no sense when we look at the New Testament. The sacrificial nature of Christ’s atonement is so significant in the New Testament that the blood of Christ is mentioned 3 times more often than the cross and 5 times more often than his death. It is quite clear that there is no forgiveness without the shedding of blood. I wouldn’t recommend spending the time to read this book.
December 31, 2025
I came to Lamb of the Free with a settled theological framework already in place. Like many, my understanding of the atonement was shaped by Reformed soteriological assumptions that I had largely presupposed into my reading of Scripture. Penal Substitutionary Atonement functioned as the unquestioned center of that framework—rarely examined, almost never challenged, and when it was, I tended to assume the critique reflected a misunderstanding rather than a serious problem.
There were aspects of it I never quite knew what to do with. The language of wrath, the cup borne by Christ, the mechanics of punishment and satisfaction—these ideas were not intuitive or emotionally easy. Yet the discomfort they produced felt necessary, even virtuous, as though unease itself were evidence that sin was being taken seriously. They weren’t comfortable, but they also weren’t contested. This was simply the lens through which I approached Scripture.
Part of why critiques of Penal Substitutionary Atonement provoke such strong reactions, I think, is that PSA often functions as a kind of moral safeguard. It reassures us that sin is real, that injustice carries weight, and that God’s justice is not permissive or arbitrary. Questioning it can feel like loosening the very mechanism that guarantees accountability. For me, breaking that framework down felt risky… not only intellectually, but theologically. If PSA were removed or even weakened, I wasn’t sure what would be left to ensure that evil, guilt, and consequence were still taken seriously.
It is precisely at this pressure point that Lamb of the Free presses hardest and most carefully.
Rather than beginning with the cross and reading backward, Andrew Rillera moves slowly and deliberately through the world of Israel’s Scriptures. He reconstructs the logic of the Levitical sacrificial system on its own terms, attends to the prophetic critiques of sacrifice, and traces the Bible’s long-standing hope for restoration. Central to his argument is the claim that sacrifice is primarily about purification, access, and renewal (not punishment or substitution) and that concepts like kipper and the Day of Atonement are best understood as acts of decontamination rather than penal exchange.
This groundwork reshapes how later biblical texts are read. The prophets repeatedly challenge the idea that sacrifice can compensate for injustice, while envisioning forgiveness through divine cleansing and restoration. Against this backdrop, Rillera highlights that the only sacrificial imagery Jesus explicitly applies to his own death is Passover… a rite of protection and liberation, oriented toward participation rather than appeasement. The same careful attention to language and context carries through the New Testament, where familiar terms (particularly propitiation aka hilasterion) are shown to operate within frameworks of reconciliation, peace, and renewed relationship.
The result is not a diminished view of sin or the cross, but a reframing of what problem the cross is addressing. Lamb of the Free does not argue that sin lacks consequence; it challenges whether penal substitution is the biblical mechanism by which those consequences are resolved.
Whether one ultimately agrees with every conclusion or not (I certainly didn’t agree with every conclusion), this is not a polemical book. It is patient, text-driven, and demanding in the best sense. Lamb of the Free invites readers to slow down, to read Scripture on its own terms, and to reconsider how deeply inherited theological frameworks shape what we think the Bible is saying. It is a challenging book, but a careful and rewarding one, especially for those willing to examine long-held assumptions rather than simply defend them.
There were aspects of it I never quite knew what to do with. The language of wrath, the cup borne by Christ, the mechanics of punishment and satisfaction—these ideas were not intuitive or emotionally easy. Yet the discomfort they produced felt necessary, even virtuous, as though unease itself were evidence that sin was being taken seriously. They weren’t comfortable, but they also weren’t contested. This was simply the lens through which I approached Scripture.
Part of why critiques of Penal Substitutionary Atonement provoke such strong reactions, I think, is that PSA often functions as a kind of moral safeguard. It reassures us that sin is real, that injustice carries weight, and that God’s justice is not permissive or arbitrary. Questioning it can feel like loosening the very mechanism that guarantees accountability. For me, breaking that framework down felt risky… not only intellectually, but theologically. If PSA were removed or even weakened, I wasn’t sure what would be left to ensure that evil, guilt, and consequence were still taken seriously.
It is precisely at this pressure point that Lamb of the Free presses hardest and most carefully.
Rather than beginning with the cross and reading backward, Andrew Rillera moves slowly and deliberately through the world of Israel’s Scriptures. He reconstructs the logic of the Levitical sacrificial system on its own terms, attends to the prophetic critiques of sacrifice, and traces the Bible’s long-standing hope for restoration. Central to his argument is the claim that sacrifice is primarily about purification, access, and renewal (not punishment or substitution) and that concepts like kipper and the Day of Atonement are best understood as acts of decontamination rather than penal exchange.
This groundwork reshapes how later biblical texts are read. The prophets repeatedly challenge the idea that sacrifice can compensate for injustice, while envisioning forgiveness through divine cleansing and restoration. Against this backdrop, Rillera highlights that the only sacrificial imagery Jesus explicitly applies to his own death is Passover… a rite of protection and liberation, oriented toward participation rather than appeasement. The same careful attention to language and context carries through the New Testament, where familiar terms (particularly propitiation aka hilasterion) are shown to operate within frameworks of reconciliation, peace, and renewed relationship.
The result is not a diminished view of sin or the cross, but a reframing of what problem the cross is addressing. Lamb of the Free does not argue that sin lacks consequence; it challenges whether penal substitution is the biblical mechanism by which those consequences are resolved.
Whether one ultimately agrees with every conclusion or not (I certainly didn’t agree with every conclusion), this is not a polemical book. It is patient, text-driven, and demanding in the best sense. Lamb of the Free invites readers to slow down, to read Scripture on its own terms, and to reconsider how deeply inherited theological frameworks shape what we think the Bible is saying. It is a challenging book, but a careful and rewarding one, especially for those willing to examine long-held assumptions rather than simply defend them.
March 8, 2025
⭐️ 4.8/5
Medium: Kindle 📱 (found maybe 3 typos throughout).
🎧 Audiobook Friendly? Probably not, but I don't think there is one yet.
Reading Level: 4/5; Academic. Assumes the reader has facility in biblical and theological categories. Does not assume the reader has original language training. Explains linguistic debates with anglocized forms of key terms. Prose is accessible but categories may be unfamiliar to newer students of scripture. Frequent footnotes add a great deal to the discussion.
Review: Painfully Persuasive.
The Old Testament section alone more than justifies this purchase! I leave this read with my thinking about biblical sacrifices‐-their types, uses, and logic--radically clarified. I left the Old Testament section grateful to Rillera for having distilled so much learning (especially Milgrom's extensive work on Leviticus) into such an accessible and memorable package. Before reaching the New Testament section, I was already beginning to apply OT sacrificial logic afresh to Jesus and several key passages about "atonement" in the NT. The suite of important biblical ideas eluciadated in the OT section are numerous--offering, kipper, ritual, holiness, (im)purity, forgiveness, blood manipulation, sacrificial eating, exile, major/minor sin, washing, sacred space, sancta, and more. Rillera's bold claim: a substitutionary death has no place in the logic of Israel's priestly system. This claim runs counter to so much of my theological exposure, I had imagined it a nearly impossible task to support. But to my suprise, Rillera, by my lights, succeeds.
Arriving at the New Testament section, I was not disappointed. Rillera applied his OT insights in ways I anticipated and beyond. Points I found vague were often addressed more fully by the end of the book. I believe, by the end, all of my 'what-abouts' had been addressed by Rillera's remarkably thorough (but not exhaustive) treatment of sacrifice and atonement. What's left, I believe, can be addressed by the model(s) put forward therein. The picture of Jesus, the love of God, and the call to the Church that emerges as all streams join in themes of union and participation are beautiful and challenging. The summary-conclusion to the book was deeply impactful. This book felt like a missing puzzle piece that nested neatly with so many other great works I've read in recent years.
Reading this book was a complex emotional endeavor. I have for a long time considered myself an advocate of Penal Substitutionary Atonement. I've even convinced friends that PSA is demanded by God's justice. In recent years, I had shifted to articulating PSA in governmental (i.e. Grotius/Edwards) categories to avoid some of the strange and problematic entailments of classical PSA. But this process of rethinking, in a round-about way, led me to this book, curious but skeptical. After reading, I find myself basically convinced of Rillera's argument(s) and I know this will be problematic in the circles I run in and put me at odds with a great deal of theologically-minded evangelicals. To be clear, this not a squishy "liberal" critique of PSA. Rillera's argument is deeply exegetical and grounded in the thought of the biblical authors. He's by no means embarrassed by "archaic blood rituals." In fact, I think he has a more positive view of sacrifice and blood ritual than most. When I wanted to employ a progressive-redemptive hermeneutic (i.e. William Webb) to explain how God could ever use such a system, Rillera didn't. He was unapologetic about the realities of sacrifice. He simply points out that the sacrificial animal is not being punished, nor is the creature experiencing God's wrath. Sacrifice is still important and unavoidably biblical. But what does sacrifice do? Maybe not what you'd expect. If Jesus is a sacrifice, in the pattern of OT sacrifices, what does that sacrifice accomplish? Rillera's answers are soaked in scriptual antecedent. The result is, again, both exciting and scary. I want to call the Church to participation but fear they only have substitutionary categories.
Fearing I was a little too pursuaded too quickly, I tried to look to see if anyone had substantively critiqued the book. As of yet, I've found nothing but would imagine this will soon happen, given the force of the argument and the caliber of scholars offering endorsement. Maybe someone else will dampen my enthusiasm, but until then, as best I can tell, this is a must-read.
Medium: Kindle 📱 (found maybe 3 typos throughout).
🎧 Audiobook Friendly? Probably not, but I don't think there is one yet.
Reading Level: 4/5; Academic. Assumes the reader has facility in biblical and theological categories. Does not assume the reader has original language training. Explains linguistic debates with anglocized forms of key terms. Prose is accessible but categories may be unfamiliar to newer students of scripture. Frequent footnotes add a great deal to the discussion.
Review: Painfully Persuasive.
The Old Testament section alone more than justifies this purchase! I leave this read with my thinking about biblical sacrifices‐-their types, uses, and logic--radically clarified. I left the Old Testament section grateful to Rillera for having distilled so much learning (especially Milgrom's extensive work on Leviticus) into such an accessible and memorable package. Before reaching the New Testament section, I was already beginning to apply OT sacrificial logic afresh to Jesus and several key passages about "atonement" in the NT. The suite of important biblical ideas eluciadated in the OT section are numerous--offering, kipper, ritual, holiness, (im)purity, forgiveness, blood manipulation, sacrificial eating, exile, major/minor sin, washing, sacred space, sancta, and more. Rillera's bold claim: a substitutionary death has no place in the logic of Israel's priestly system. This claim runs counter to so much of my theological exposure, I had imagined it a nearly impossible task to support. But to my suprise, Rillera, by my lights, succeeds.
Arriving at the New Testament section, I was not disappointed. Rillera applied his OT insights in ways I anticipated and beyond. Points I found vague were often addressed more fully by the end of the book. I believe, by the end, all of my 'what-abouts' had been addressed by Rillera's remarkably thorough (but not exhaustive) treatment of sacrifice and atonement. What's left, I believe, can be addressed by the model(s) put forward therein. The picture of Jesus, the love of God, and the call to the Church that emerges as all streams join in themes of union and participation are beautiful and challenging. The summary-conclusion to the book was deeply impactful. This book felt like a missing puzzle piece that nested neatly with so many other great works I've read in recent years.
Reading this book was a complex emotional endeavor. I have for a long time considered myself an advocate of Penal Substitutionary Atonement. I've even convinced friends that PSA is demanded by God's justice. In recent years, I had shifted to articulating PSA in governmental (i.e. Grotius/Edwards) categories to avoid some of the strange and problematic entailments of classical PSA. But this process of rethinking, in a round-about way, led me to this book, curious but skeptical. After reading, I find myself basically convinced of Rillera's argument(s) and I know this will be problematic in the circles I run in and put me at odds with a great deal of theologically-minded evangelicals. To be clear, this not a squishy "liberal" critique of PSA. Rillera's argument is deeply exegetical and grounded in the thought of the biblical authors. He's by no means embarrassed by "archaic blood rituals." In fact, I think he has a more positive view of sacrifice and blood ritual than most. When I wanted to employ a progressive-redemptive hermeneutic (i.e. William Webb) to explain how God could ever use such a system, Rillera didn't. He was unapologetic about the realities of sacrifice. He simply points out that the sacrificial animal is not being punished, nor is the creature experiencing God's wrath. Sacrifice is still important and unavoidably biblical. But what does sacrifice do? Maybe not what you'd expect. If Jesus is a sacrifice, in the pattern of OT sacrifices, what does that sacrifice accomplish? Rillera's answers are soaked in scriptual antecedent. The result is, again, both exciting and scary. I want to call the Church to participation but fear they only have substitutionary categories.
Fearing I was a little too pursuaded too quickly, I tried to look to see if anyone had substantively critiqued the book. As of yet, I've found nothing but would imagine this will soon happen, given the force of the argument and the caliber of scholars offering endorsement. Maybe someone else will dampen my enthusiasm, but until then, as best I can tell, this is a must-read.
February 16, 2025
Simply do not know what to do with this information
November 13, 2025
"...all Christian theologies that attempt to derive a view of justice on the mistaken view that biblical sacrifice is about punishment or substitutionary death must be utterly rejected by any Christians seeking to anchor their views in the biblical texts themselves. There is no biblical warrant to sustain any such views." - Andrew Remington Rillera
Well. Rillera definitely has an axe to grind! As Leithart pointed out in his review, Rillera's absolutisms pretty early on in the book signified where he is coming from. The language of Jesus's death and the Levitical sacrifices "never, ever, in any way, absolutely never, under any circumstances, ever, at all, do anything in the realm of substitutionary/atoning death" made me think of Michael Scott talking to David Wallace.
I'll just say this: I think Rillera is wrong. That is not to say he asks many good questions and points out some very important textual features. But his arguments such as the extended footnote on Gen. 22 and the sacrifice of the ram instead of Isaac NOT being about an animal being substituted for a person, or that sacrifice is actually not about death but life, or the cursory interaction with texts like Isa. 53 and 2 Cor. 5:21, all of it points me in the opposite direction: Jesus did die for sinners. He didn't die ahead of sinners, giving them an example to follow (which I think is his argument). Our Lord died for our sins and rose victorious. Much more I could say that I won't get into. I'll link below Peter Leithart's critique that shares more of my concerns. I'm sure there are other critiques from evangelicals that are worth reading as well.
https://peterleithart.substack.com/p/...
Well. Rillera definitely has an axe to grind! As Leithart pointed out in his review, Rillera's absolutisms pretty early on in the book signified where he is coming from. The language of Jesus's death and the Levitical sacrifices "never, ever, in any way, absolutely never, under any circumstances, ever, at all, do anything in the realm of substitutionary/atoning death" made me think of Michael Scott talking to David Wallace.
I'll just say this: I think Rillera is wrong. That is not to say he asks many good questions and points out some very important textual features. But his arguments such as the extended footnote on Gen. 22 and the sacrifice of the ram instead of Isaac NOT being about an animal being substituted for a person, or that sacrifice is actually not about death but life, or the cursory interaction with texts like Isa. 53 and 2 Cor. 5:21, all of it points me in the opposite direction: Jesus did die for sinners. He didn't die ahead of sinners, giving them an example to follow (which I think is his argument). Our Lord died for our sins and rose victorious. Much more I could say that I won't get into. I'll link below Peter Leithart's critique that shares more of my concerns. I'm sure there are other critiques from evangelicals that are worth reading as well.
https://peterleithart.substack.com/p/...
January 28, 2025
Whether or not you come to agree with all the arguments in this book, this book's case must be dealt with for any advocate of PSA. While I continue to have reservations about some of pieces, the precision and clarity with which Rillera lays out his argument was enjoyable, impressive, and compelling.
The book is laid out in two sections, the first of these focusing on correcting common misconceptions as well as laying out the functions of Levitical sacrifice, the purity system, and even getting into some of the prophetic "critiques" of sacrifice. It is here that Rillera begins his contention against penal substitution, arguing that the logic of the sacrifices is neither penal, nor substitutionary. By walking carefully through the logic, workings, and limitations of Levitical sacrifice, Rillera lays a solid foundation to build upon in part two.
The second half of this book examines the New Testament texts in light of what has been presented so far, and Rillera continues to build a powerful case. Especially enlightening was the demonstration that when the NT authors present Jesus death in sacrificial terms, at least most of the time (his contention is almost in every case), they explain it on analogy to the *non-atoning* sacrifices. Jesus death is a new passover and inaugurates the new covenant, but moral purification is accomplished by the washing of the Spirit, analogous to how ritual purification happened under Mosaic law. And the authors that do present Jesus' death in the language of atoning sacrifice (Hebrews and 1 John) argue for cleansing of the heavenly tabernacle by these, rather than that they effect our forgiveness.
My favorite part of this book is when he is making his positive statements for how Christ's work accomplishes our salvation, because here he not only presents a strong exegetical case based on biblical studies, but bolsters his arguments with patristic support. I did not expect to find a model akin to Athanasius and Irenaeus here, but I was pleasantly surprised when he began to not only build a case from scripture that sounded like these ancient authors, but then explicitly cited recapitulation as the means of our redemption. It is not too common to find works that pull together biblical studies and historical theology in this way, and here, Rillera has given us a treat.
Despite my enjoyment for this book, certain important questions remain for me. I'm not sure if his (or Milgrom's, whom he follows at almost every point) explanation of forgiveness in Leviticus 4-5 is sufficient, although I acknowledge my own lack of study for the workings of the sacrificial system. The argument for "hilasterion" in Romans 3:25 as a votive/conciliatory gift made sense, more sense than the common mercy seat explanation, but I need to do more thinking on that. Finally, I was also left wondering if he leaves the door open to a judicial angle at Christ's death, particularly with his discussion of proleptically embodying the temple's destruction. Here lays my main objection; while his critiques of substitution cannot be called strawman, as he cites Gathercole to establish a definition, I do find that it's problematic to assume only one valid articulation of substitution, and therefore to set it up as a complete incompatibility with participation. While his presentation of the centrality of participation is powerful, and for the most part, correct in my estimation, I do think there is room for an explanation of Christ's saving work that has place for both ideas of "substitution" and "participation".
However these questions are answered, this book is a must read for anyone interested in questions of atonement, or seeking a biblical rebuttal to PSA. Rillera has raised tall questions for PSA, and built an impressive case for a participatory understanding of Christ's saving work, and our place in it.
The book is laid out in two sections, the first of these focusing on correcting common misconceptions as well as laying out the functions of Levitical sacrifice, the purity system, and even getting into some of the prophetic "critiques" of sacrifice. It is here that Rillera begins his contention against penal substitution, arguing that the logic of the sacrifices is neither penal, nor substitutionary. By walking carefully through the logic, workings, and limitations of Levitical sacrifice, Rillera lays a solid foundation to build upon in part two.
The second half of this book examines the New Testament texts in light of what has been presented so far, and Rillera continues to build a powerful case. Especially enlightening was the demonstration that when the NT authors present Jesus death in sacrificial terms, at least most of the time (his contention is almost in every case), they explain it on analogy to the *non-atoning* sacrifices. Jesus death is a new passover and inaugurates the new covenant, but moral purification is accomplished by the washing of the Spirit, analogous to how ritual purification happened under Mosaic law. And the authors that do present Jesus' death in the language of atoning sacrifice (Hebrews and 1 John) argue for cleansing of the heavenly tabernacle by these, rather than that they effect our forgiveness.
My favorite part of this book is when he is making his positive statements for how Christ's work accomplishes our salvation, because here he not only presents a strong exegetical case based on biblical studies, but bolsters his arguments with patristic support. I did not expect to find a model akin to Athanasius and Irenaeus here, but I was pleasantly surprised when he began to not only build a case from scripture that sounded like these ancient authors, but then explicitly cited recapitulation as the means of our redemption. It is not too common to find works that pull together biblical studies and historical theology in this way, and here, Rillera has given us a treat.
Despite my enjoyment for this book, certain important questions remain for me. I'm not sure if his (or Milgrom's, whom he follows at almost every point) explanation of forgiveness in Leviticus 4-5 is sufficient, although I acknowledge my own lack of study for the workings of the sacrificial system. The argument for "hilasterion" in Romans 3:25 as a votive/conciliatory gift made sense, more sense than the common mercy seat explanation, but I need to do more thinking on that. Finally, I was also left wondering if he leaves the door open to a judicial angle at Christ's death, particularly with his discussion of proleptically embodying the temple's destruction. Here lays my main objection; while his critiques of substitution cannot be called strawman, as he cites Gathercole to establish a definition, I do find that it's problematic to assume only one valid articulation of substitution, and therefore to set it up as a complete incompatibility with participation. While his presentation of the centrality of participation is powerful, and for the most part, correct in my estimation, I do think there is room for an explanation of Christ's saving work that has place for both ideas of "substitution" and "participation".
However these questions are answered, this book is a must read for anyone interested in questions of atonement, or seeking a biblical rebuttal to PSA. Rillera has raised tall questions for PSA, and built an impressive case for a participatory understanding of Christ's saving work, and our place in it.
November 17, 2025
2025 reads: 22
Rating: 4.5 stars
Well this is a provocative book to say the least. A couple thoughts: 1) I was blown away by my own ignorance of the Levitical cult; 2) Rillera's thesis expands the entire biblical (and STJ/Rabbinic) literature in some very creative and satisfying ways; 3) it is quite repetitive but I found this helpful as he continued to correct me and remind me of how new data/arguments would/could fit into what was previously argued; 4) there are some exceptions to the rule (of his arguments) but they are that: exceptions; 5) the NT appropriation of the OT cult shows a remarkable awareness of the details and manner in which those rituals were carried out; 6) Rillera's argument shows how the new covenant promises work outside of the OT-kipper framework: moral impurity that defiles the sanctuary and land had no atoning option: it was death and exile; 7) I do have several questions as of course Rillera could not cover every text; 8) this work has helped several categories and ideas click for me in ways that hadn't before; 9) I think this book is approached incorrectly if one comes with the question of, is PSA biblical? Rillera does address this throughout, but it is first and foremost a reading of Leviticus and then the prophets and NT in light of that reading; 10) it colors the nuance and complexity of the NT writings in powerful ways with strong historical/theological precedent; 11) more needs to be said about death and not just blood—if blood is the pure life symbol that is is, why not just cut animals (or humans for that matter), why actual death? 12) I loved how thoroughly textual and exegetical this book was; and 13) Lamb of the Free will no doubt shake up the field and readers and scholars will have to reckon with it, even if it means aspects of his argument will be toned down or sharpened—it cannot be ignored.
Rating: 4.5 stars
Well this is a provocative book to say the least. A couple thoughts: 1) I was blown away by my own ignorance of the Levitical cult; 2) Rillera's thesis expands the entire biblical (and STJ/Rabbinic) literature in some very creative and satisfying ways; 3) it is quite repetitive but I found this helpful as he continued to correct me and remind me of how new data/arguments would/could fit into what was previously argued; 4) there are some exceptions to the rule (of his arguments) but they are that: exceptions; 5) the NT appropriation of the OT cult shows a remarkable awareness of the details and manner in which those rituals were carried out; 6) Rillera's argument shows how the new covenant promises work outside of the OT-kipper framework: moral impurity that defiles the sanctuary and land had no atoning option: it was death and exile; 7) I do have several questions as of course Rillera could not cover every text; 8) this work has helped several categories and ideas click for me in ways that hadn't before; 9) I think this book is approached incorrectly if one comes with the question of, is PSA biblical? Rillera does address this throughout, but it is first and foremost a reading of Leviticus and then the prophets and NT in light of that reading; 10) it colors the nuance and complexity of the NT writings in powerful ways with strong historical/theological precedent; 11) more needs to be said about death and not just blood—if blood is the pure life symbol that is is, why not just cut animals (or humans for that matter), why actual death? 12) I loved how thoroughly textual and exegetical this book was; and 13) Lamb of the Free will no doubt shake up the field and readers and scholars will have to reckon with it, even if it means aspects of his argument will be toned down or sharpened—it cannot be ignored.
December 8, 2025
Tremendous resource.
I simply do not have the exegetical knowledge to know how to assess his claims fairly. So many texts. So many words. But this is an eye-opening conversation starter for sure.
Questions/concerns I still have:
- How does the wrath of God factor into the death of Jesus? How does his death transform our relationship to God’s wrath?
- Is there a better way to relate participation and substitution besides just opposing them to one another?
- Is there an aspect of “finishedness” that the work of Christ secures? Or is it ultimately all dependent on my response to his saving work?
I simply do not have the exegetical knowledge to know how to assess his claims fairly. So many texts. So many words. But this is an eye-opening conversation starter for sure.
Questions/concerns I still have:
- How does the wrath of God factor into the death of Jesus? How does his death transform our relationship to God’s wrath?
- Is there a better way to relate participation and substitution besides just opposing them to one another?
- Is there an aspect of “finishedness” that the work of Christ secures? Or is it ultimately all dependent on my response to his saving work?
January 24, 2025
Devastating critique of substitutionary atonement theologies
February 16, 2025
If you don’t like penal substitution, read this book. If you like penal substitution, definitely read this book.
October 4, 2025
This book! For the scholarly-minded who have balked at, or felt dissatisfied with, evangelicalism’s way of explaining Jesus’s death merely as an atoning sacrifice.
August 14, 2025
Full review coming soon. This is a sophomoric piece of scholarship at my most generous. This includes strange and uncompelling biblical exegesis, weird lack of awareness of how people he’s interacting would answer what he presents as knock-down arguments. Major scholars in this debate are completely absent. I can’t see anyone being persuaded by this book that wasn’t already primed to reject penal substitution. He makes some good points but they’re all logically compatible with and embraced by people who disagree with so-called participatory interpretation of the cross.
December 15, 2025
Theologically important... but also turgid to the point of being unreadable in parts.
May 20, 2024
Lamb of the Free provides the perfect compliment to a preexisting body of work that is revisiting and reexaminjng some commonly held beliefs about the Atonement, the cross, and our understanding of salvation, including David M. Moffitt's Rethinking the Atonement: New Perspectives on Jesus's Death, Resurrection, and Ascension, The Sacrifice of Jesus: Understanding Atonement Biblically by Christian A. Eberhart, works by Douglas Campbell and Matthew Thiessen, just to name a few. More than simply a compliment, I do believe that this phenomenonal and monumental work by Rillera will become a definitive resource regarding the larger umbrella of modern biblical scholarship to which this belongs, not least because it brings all these different voices together into a complete and cohesive examination-Eberhart's emphasis on the OT sacrificial system, Moffitt's emphasis on the letter to the Hebrews, and Thiessen's emphasis on the Gospels. Rillera adds a robust and researched treatment of Leviticus to the picture, connecting the pieces of the puzzle in a way that feels exhaustive, proven and convincing. Indeed, this is required reading for anyone truly interested in exploring the concept of Biblical sacrifice and atonement.
One of the great strengths of this book is its structure, moving methodically through the Torah with an emphasis on Levitivus, Exodus and Deuteronomy, then moving to the prophets, and finally to the NT. Each chapter begins with a clarifying set of points that the chapter will be looking to argue and show, and ends with a summary of those arguments, making the complex set of data and information easy to follow. Rillera is deeply interested as well in bringing together faithful study and academics on both a historical and theological front with a robust interest in matters of faithful practice and allegiance to the text. At the root of his central thesis is an interest in showing what he believes the text is actually saying about matters of sacrifice and atonement.
It would be nearly impossible to summarize this book in a simple set of sentences. One part of its agenda is to do away with the concept of penal substitution, which the author sees as the primary problem when it comes to misreading and misunderstanding the function of sacrifice and atonement in the Scriptures. Another part of its agenda is explaining and showing how the sacrificial system operated in the ancient world, allowing this to inform our understandings of the prophets and the NT writers application to the person and work of Jesus.
Obviously both of these points are interconnected. By understanding the sacrificial system, it can help us understand how Jesus functions within this system, and subsequently find the means to counter the misunderstanding that penal substitution presents with a more faithful view of atonement.
At the core of the sacrificial system is a dual function. "There are two main categories for sacrifices broadly speaking: these are “the categories of gift-offering-display and/or pollution removal." In the terms I have been using thus far, in the Torah these are the “non-atoning well-being sacrifices” and the “atoning sacrifices,” respectively... Atonement rituals decontaminate the dwelling place and ritual purity regulations ensure that human beings (both priest and lay) are fit to access the sacred space and foods... (the well being sacrifices) elicit God’s presence (and thereby God’s blessing)... The primary function for the non-atoning sacrifices is to share in a holy meal in God’s presence, often to give thanks for some prior act of divine deliverance."
Rillera goes to great lengths to show the primary sacrificial language used in association with Jesus comes from the Exodus, which has nothing to do with sin. Where we find atonement is not in the death of Jesus but in the resurrection and ascension. Further, as Rillera insists and demonstrates, "Neither death nor suffering nor punishment of the animal has any place in the sacrificial system. Therefore, all Christian theologies that attempt to derive a view of justice on the mistaken view that biblical sacrifice is about punishment or substitutionary death must be utterly rejected by any Christians seeking to anchor their views in the biblical texts themselves."
The fundamental means by which he makes this claim is by recognizing precisely what a blood sacrifice was seen to be and do in practice. In a Jewish context, it was seen to deal with the problem of death. Death is never ritualized in the Jewish rites, and in-fact what we find is precisely the opposite. Sacrifices revolve around feasts, and a Jewish understanding saw the spilling of any blood as murder, or more aptly a result of a creation (land) that is under the reign of Sin and Death. What blood sacrifice does is take death and reconstitute it as life by bringing it into the presence of God.
The primary purpose of atonement then is to purge (remove) the pollution of sin and death from the sanctuary while also preparing the Priest to enter it. While there are greater complexities at play, this becomes an important facet for understanding how the NT affords Jesus a Priestly duty using the sacrificial language. Perhaps most important is recognizing how the sacrifices themselves were never seen to deal with corrupted land or people, which in rhe Jewish view is interconnected. This requires another work that is not sacrificial in nature and whcih we find in the water purification rites.
As Rillera summarizes in his concluding remarks,
"The consistent message throughout the entire NT is not that Jesus died instead of us; rather, it repeatedly indicates that Jesus dies ahead of us so that we can unite with him and be conformed the image of his death (Rom 6:5; Phil 3:10)... Jesus’s death is soteriologically unique. And part of its uniqueness is because Jesus is our pioneer and forerunner, setting the pattern and paradigm for what covenant faithfulness of loving God and loving neighbor means. Jesus’s death is unique, especially since it generates the singular reality that grounds Christian ethics that all can share in—or rather, will share in (Col 1:27 and 3:10–11). We are baptized with his same baptism of the cross, we drink from his same cup of the cross (cf. Mark 10:38–45). The point is union with Christ (participation and solidarity), not separation and distance (substitution). It is solidarity and participation all the way down."
If it's not clear by this point (and it should be), I really loved this book. More than that, I think it's a book that anyone interested in theology needs to read. It's a reclamation of an important facet of the Chtistian confession, and it does amazing work in helping us navigate a foreign language and culture with all its practices, language and customs. It is from this ancient culture that we find a window into the revelatory work of God in Jesus. There is a sense in which this is a simple truth. But simplicity can also go very wrong, especially when the cross-cultural context is misread and those ideas become firmly entrenched. This requires untangling the complexities behind the misunderstandings. It is from this position then that we can arrive back at that simplicity, simply with the work of scholars like Rillera clearing the landscape and rearticulating the basic claims of the Gospel. Here the key words can be described as liberation and participation and renewal. For this I am grateful.
June 22, 2024
Well this book blew up a lot of paradigms for me. I went in skeptical that this book was going to convince me that Jesus’ death should not be understood as a substitutionary act. As the author says over and over again, “Jesus didn’t die instead of us, he died ahead of us.” What foolishness, right? But after reading his arguments and conclusions, I think the author may be on to something. This is an important book. Whether you agree with everything or not, you can’t deny that this book is well researched, has clear and consistent arguments, and takes seriously what scripture does and does not say in regards to the OT sacrificial systems and passages about the death of Jesus.
June 12, 2024
Yes! Yes! Yes!
This book is an absolutely essential read for all who wish to understand the sacrificial death of Christ. Rillera clearly presents the meaning of Christ as sacrifice by (finally) properly placing the idea on the foundations of an Old Testament paradigm which, once untethered from extra-biblical claims, becomes so powerfully, beautifully, and functionally clear.
This book is an absolutely essential read for all who wish to understand the sacrificial death of Christ. Rillera clearly presents the meaning of Christ as sacrifice by (finally) properly placing the idea on the foundations of an Old Testament paradigm which, once untethered from extra-biblical claims, becomes so powerfully, beautifully, and functionally clear.
February 24, 2025
Jesus did not die instead of us, but as an example of how we are called to die.
I will start with the cruciform theology of what Jesus did for humanity front and centre (with a full co-sign). The gospel is not that Jesus suffered God's punishment instead of you, but instead that God loves you so deeply that He gave His Son to free us from the power of Death and Sin and that we are called to live and die and be raised again as He was. Jesus fully participated, shared, and suffered in humanity's plight under Sin and Death, and nullified their powers to free us.
Andrew does an absolute mayhem with this one, I'm not going to lie. Going through the whole of the Bible, he interrogates the Biblical passages that people assume have to do with substitutionary atonement - and shows how the conceptual package of substitution is quite literally nowhere to be found in the whole Bible.
He starts by spending the first half of the book going through... the entirety of the Levitical sacrificial system, and takes great care to explain how it works and what it can and can't do. The Levitical sacrifices are (generally) twofold: (1) non-atoning gift offerings that are eaten and (2) non-substitutionary atoning cleansing rituals that clean the Temple and the holy objects in the Temple like the altar. The point of the sacrifices are to (1) draw God's presence near and (2) to remove anything from God's dwelling place that would cause His presence to leave. He also takes great care to show how the prophetic critique, the theology we get in psalms like 51, and what is even prescribed in the Levitical system show that the sacrifical system is not about the forgiveness of sins, but instead forgiveness of sins comes only by requesting that God chooses to wash the individual clean.
Then, he spends the second half on the New Testament and how when the New Testament does make reference to Jesus as sacrifice, it is as the non-atoning sacrifices (except for 1 John and Hebrews who take it to a different non-substitutionary cleansing ritual). Not once does a single author of the New Testament make reference to Jesus doing something instead of us, but instead that Jesus is an example for us on how to live and die. The soteriological uniqueness of Jesus is not that He singularly suffered the wrath of God (a concept quite literally with no Biblical warrant at all), but that He creates the new reality apart from Sin and Death that we are called to participate in. He does not "take on the punishment we rightly deserve" but instead is the One who frees us from the bondage we were under.
If you have a question about "what about this verse", I promise you Andrew directly responds to it. This book is very, very comprehensive. Added side benefit of buying Andrew's premises: no need for a concept of retributive justice at all - shoutout restorative justice! Shoutout to Tim He for getting me this book!
(-0.5 stars on this book for lowkey being a work of apologetics and harmonization, but I don't think it damages the weight of the majority of the argument, but he does rely a little bit too much that the Scriptures have a single unified message which is not the consensus view of scholarship but whatever little tiddles about that would never get to PSA because there is no conceptual package of substitution going on at all. If you are someone who buys the Bible Project's messaging on that front, you basically will love this book, also they have an episode with Andrew.)
I will start with the cruciform theology of what Jesus did for humanity front and centre (with a full co-sign). The gospel is not that Jesus suffered God's punishment instead of you, but instead that God loves you so deeply that He gave His Son to free us from the power of Death and Sin and that we are called to live and die and be raised again as He was. Jesus fully participated, shared, and suffered in humanity's plight under Sin and Death, and nullified their powers to free us.
Jesus' death is...according to the NT, the reality that those united with Jesus literally participate and share in experientially by the Spirit... The concept of substitution grates against the call to participate in the cross since, by definition, it conceptualizes Jesus's death as something he endured so that others can avoid it. Penal substitutionary atonement names the cross as what those who benefit from Jesus's death necessarily get to escape since it is construed as "in our place" and "instead of us". It thereby opens the door to the satanic idea that one can be a disciple of Jesus and avoid the cross (Mark 8:33)... The consistent message throughout the entire NT is not that Jesus died instead of us; rather, it repeatedly indicates that Jesus died ahead of us so that we can unite with him and be conformed to the image of his death (Rom 6:5; Phil 3:10).
Andrew does an absolute mayhem with this one, I'm not going to lie. Going through the whole of the Bible, he interrogates the Biblical passages that people assume have to do with substitutionary atonement - and shows how the conceptual package of substitution is quite literally nowhere to be found in the whole Bible.
He starts by spending the first half of the book going through... the entirety of the Levitical sacrificial system, and takes great care to explain how it works and what it can and can't do. The Levitical sacrifices are (generally) twofold: (1) non-atoning gift offerings that are eaten and (2) non-substitutionary atoning cleansing rituals that clean the Temple and the holy objects in the Temple like the altar. The point of the sacrifices are to (1) draw God's presence near and (2) to remove anything from God's dwelling place that would cause His presence to leave. He also takes great care to show how the prophetic critique, the theology we get in psalms like 51, and what is even prescribed in the Levitical system show that the sacrifical system is not about the forgiveness of sins, but instead forgiveness of sins comes only by requesting that God chooses to wash the individual clean.
Then, he spends the second half on the New Testament and how when the New Testament does make reference to Jesus as sacrifice, it is as the non-atoning sacrifices (except for 1 John and Hebrews who take it to a different non-substitutionary cleansing ritual). Not once does a single author of the New Testament make reference to Jesus doing something instead of us, but instead that Jesus is an example for us on how to live and die. The soteriological uniqueness of Jesus is not that He singularly suffered the wrath of God (a concept quite literally with no Biblical warrant at all), but that He creates the new reality apart from Sin and Death that we are called to participate in. He does not "take on the punishment we rightly deserve" but instead is the One who frees us from the bondage we were under.
If you have a question about "what about this verse", I promise you Andrew directly responds to it. This book is very, very comprehensive. Added side benefit of buying Andrew's premises: no need for a concept of retributive justice at all - shoutout restorative justice! Shoutout to Tim He for getting me this book!
(-0.5 stars on this book for lowkey being a work of apologetics and harmonization, but I don't think it damages the weight of the majority of the argument, but he does rely a little bit too much that the Scriptures have a single unified message which is not the consensus view of scholarship but whatever little tiddles about that would never get to PSA because there is no conceptual package of substitution going on at all. If you are someone who buys the Bible Project's messaging on that front, you basically will love this book, also they have an episode with Andrew.)
December 6, 2025
I will likely edit my review but for now I will say that the author works hard to dispel any reading of the Bible that would support penal substitutionary atonement (PSA). While I do not think he ultimately succeeds, his thoroughness of argumentation and analysis is commendable. As such, this will be a book that serious advocates of PSA will be required to engage with. A few brief reasons why I didn't find his overall argument persuasive.
First, I am not convinced he was completely able to refute any penal aspect to the atonement. Let me explain. By 'penal,' what I mean is that the atonement is in some way relates to God's justice and thus God's wrath and, yes, punishment against sin. Related to this, secondly, is the often seen error of insisting that restorative and retributive justice are mutually exclusive categories. This is something that Rillera assumes throughout his book without demonstrating why or how this is in fact the case. Third, much of Rillera's exegesis I would describe as atomistic, i.e., so focused on the details that the overall picture is lost; put another way, he pays much more attention to the diverse data rather than how or if the various pieces fit together. Again, like my prior point, this is a methodological choice that needs to be argued for rather than just assumed. Fourth, and related t my second point, Rillera' seems to assume that the various metaphors used of salvation, such as commercial, sacrificial, etc., are mutually exclusive, i.e., that there is a hard, impenetrable boundary between, say, the social and the commercial. While it is important to allow the depth of each metaphor, or perhaps better, category to explored, there are many instances in Scripture where these different categories are used interchangeably or, at least, in a way that suggests connection rather than complete categorical distinction. Lastly, Rillera's book definitely seemed to be something of a hobby horse or, to use another idiom, as if he has an axe to grind. For those who already have made the assumption that PSA is incorrect or wrong, this won't be a bother, but for the reader who still needs to be persuaded of this assumption, Rillera's wholesale unwillingness to consider that even a few readings of biblical texts could be realistically marshaled in support of PSA begs the question.
To conclude, read this book. Regardless of your stance, read it. But don't think this is the final word, the final refutation against PSA. PSA, it must be added, is a doctrine that is often portrayed in a manner that does not reflect its strongest and best articulations. In other words, before buying into any refutation of PSA, make sure it's not a straw man.
First, I am not convinced he was completely able to refute any penal aspect to the atonement. Let me explain. By 'penal,' what I mean is that the atonement is in some way relates to God's justice and thus God's wrath and, yes, punishment against sin. Related to this, secondly, is the often seen error of insisting that restorative and retributive justice are mutually exclusive categories. This is something that Rillera assumes throughout his book without demonstrating why or how this is in fact the case. Third, much of Rillera's exegesis I would describe as atomistic, i.e., so focused on the details that the overall picture is lost; put another way, he pays much more attention to the diverse data rather than how or if the various pieces fit together. Again, like my prior point, this is a methodological choice that needs to be argued for rather than just assumed. Fourth, and related t my second point, Rillera' seems to assume that the various metaphors used of salvation, such as commercial, sacrificial, etc., are mutually exclusive, i.e., that there is a hard, impenetrable boundary between, say, the social and the commercial. While it is important to allow the depth of each metaphor, or perhaps better, category to explored, there are many instances in Scripture where these different categories are used interchangeably or, at least, in a way that suggests connection rather than complete categorical distinction. Lastly, Rillera's book definitely seemed to be something of a hobby horse or, to use another idiom, as if he has an axe to grind. For those who already have made the assumption that PSA is incorrect or wrong, this won't be a bother, but for the reader who still needs to be persuaded of this assumption, Rillera's wholesale unwillingness to consider that even a few readings of biblical texts could be realistically marshaled in support of PSA begs the question.
To conclude, read this book. Regardless of your stance, read it. But don't think this is the final word, the final refutation against PSA. PSA, it must be added, is a doctrine that is often portrayed in a manner that does not reflect its strongest and best articulations. In other words, before buying into any refutation of PSA, make sure it's not a straw man.
January 6, 2026
To those who are looking for a critique of penal substitutionary atonement (PSA), I would not recommend this book.
Now, I am not saying this because I am a fan of PSA myself. I think PSA suffers from critical exegetical, philosophical, and theological problems. With that being said, I do think the New Testament (NT) portrays the death of Jesus in a substitutionary light, even though that is not the only image. I think the whole enterprise of trying to reduce the work of Christ to one "theory" misses the kaleidoscope of metaphors utilized by the NT to describe Jesus's incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension. However, Rillera seems to conflate all notions of substitution with PSA, and I think that is simply unwarranted.
To be sure, Rillera has done his homework. He rarely argues without exegetical or scholarly warrant. However, he doesn't always clarify which of his views are mainstream scholarship and which are more debated interpretations (this is especially important for his treatment of the OT). The book is full of valid as well as, in my view, invalid critiques. He at times fails to properly explicate the texts most pertinent to the debate. The Suffering Servant is described as a "guilt/trespass offering." The Passover is perpetually remembered by the ransom of the firstborn, in which an animal dies to remind the Israelites that the firstborns were spared in Egypt. Jesus claims to be a ransom not simply "for" (ὑπέρ) many, but "in the place of" (αντι) many. Examples like these needed more time to develop, which he simply did not do.
But my number one critique with this work is the time spent dedicated to the Levitical sacrificial system. As someone who loves the Old Testament, I love topics like this. But the Levitical system is mostly utilized by the NT in general, rather than in specific, ways. It is wrong to import too much of the Levitical system into discussions of NT atonement theology, whether you are persuaded by PSA or alternative theories (Rillera describes his view as "participation"). I think his entire methodology began in the wrong place, and so I ended up being dissatisfied with where he ended up.
There are things that I enjoyed in this book (he had an excellent discussion on the meaning of ίλαστεριον). But for the length of the book, I did not find it particularly worthwhile. I think the reviews of this book (especially the claim that it "killed" PSA) are greatly overstated. I think this will mostly convince those who already think PSA is false as well as those who have a simplified, outdated understanding of the Levitical system. All in all, I think there are better critiques of PSA out there.
Now, I am not saying this because I am a fan of PSA myself. I think PSA suffers from critical exegetical, philosophical, and theological problems. With that being said, I do think the New Testament (NT) portrays the death of Jesus in a substitutionary light, even though that is not the only image. I think the whole enterprise of trying to reduce the work of Christ to one "theory" misses the kaleidoscope of metaphors utilized by the NT to describe Jesus's incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension. However, Rillera seems to conflate all notions of substitution with PSA, and I think that is simply unwarranted.
To be sure, Rillera has done his homework. He rarely argues without exegetical or scholarly warrant. However, he doesn't always clarify which of his views are mainstream scholarship and which are more debated interpretations (this is especially important for his treatment of the OT). The book is full of valid as well as, in my view, invalid critiques. He at times fails to properly explicate the texts most pertinent to the debate. The Suffering Servant is described as a "guilt/trespass offering." The Passover is perpetually remembered by the ransom of the firstborn, in which an animal dies to remind the Israelites that the firstborns were spared in Egypt. Jesus claims to be a ransom not simply "for" (ὑπέρ) many, but "in the place of" (αντι) many. Examples like these needed more time to develop, which he simply did not do.
But my number one critique with this work is the time spent dedicated to the Levitical sacrificial system. As someone who loves the Old Testament, I love topics like this. But the Levitical system is mostly utilized by the NT in general, rather than in specific, ways. It is wrong to import too much of the Levitical system into discussions of NT atonement theology, whether you are persuaded by PSA or alternative theories (Rillera describes his view as "participation"). I think his entire methodology began in the wrong place, and so I ended up being dissatisfied with where he ended up.
There are things that I enjoyed in this book (he had an excellent discussion on the meaning of ίλαστεριον). But for the length of the book, I did not find it particularly worthwhile. I think the reviews of this book (especially the claim that it "killed" PSA) are greatly overstated. I think this will mostly convince those who already think PSA is false as well as those who have a simplified, outdated understanding of the Levitical system. All in all, I think there are better critiques of PSA out there.
June 6, 2024
Rillera makes an ambitious (and successful, I think) case that the view of penal substitutionary atonement is not biblically supportable. He begins by detailing the sacrificial system of the Torah, and as his argument progresses, PSA becomes more and more nonsensical. In the latter half of the book, Rillera turns his attention to the gospels and epistles, and invites readers instead to contemplate the participatory and incarnational generosity of God's redemptive work.
On pg. 175, Rillera writes "...sometimes what is indeed obvious and right there in front of us goes either unnoticed or underappreciated."
My copy of this book is full of exclamation points in the margin and notes to the effect of "Of course! How have we missed this!?!" as Rillera's careful explanations continually spotlighted things "unnoticed or underappreciated" - from the interpretive leaps required to sustain PSA to the pre-assumptions Christians bring to the sacrificial system to the casual use of atonement language that replicates incomplete and inaccurate understanding to the unique parallels between the old and new covenants that would have been intuitive to the biblical authors.
Rillera does a meticulous job thoroughly explaining the atoning and non-atoning sacrifices and then connecting this to the sacrificial imagery utilized by the New Testament authors. This in itself gives readers much to consider, but there are also additional insights to appreciate that come along the way - an expansive perspective on the prophetic role, understanding of the exile and pollution of the land, and the participatory nature of redemption.
It's worth noting that this is an academic work - at times I found it challenging to follow sections that were clearly designed to rebut specific arguments made by other academics. The academic approach isn't a weakness of the book, but it did make me wish there was a digestible companion volume I could hand to fellow parishioners and others who have long been taught PSA from the pulpit and in mainstream Christian discipleship materials.
Because, as Rillera points out in his conclusion, none of this is theoretical. A commitment to PSA is not only exegetically unsupportable and inaccurate, but it leads to problematic application for the Christian life, something that makes this an immensely practical book as well as academic one. Highly recommend!
On pg. 175, Rillera writes "...sometimes what is indeed obvious and right there in front of us goes either unnoticed or underappreciated."
My copy of this book is full of exclamation points in the margin and notes to the effect of "Of course! How have we missed this!?!" as Rillera's careful explanations continually spotlighted things "unnoticed or underappreciated" - from the interpretive leaps required to sustain PSA to the pre-assumptions Christians bring to the sacrificial system to the casual use of atonement language that replicates incomplete and inaccurate understanding to the unique parallels between the old and new covenants that would have been intuitive to the biblical authors.
Rillera does a meticulous job thoroughly explaining the atoning and non-atoning sacrifices and then connecting this to the sacrificial imagery utilized by the New Testament authors. This in itself gives readers much to consider, but there are also additional insights to appreciate that come along the way - an expansive perspective on the prophetic role, understanding of the exile and pollution of the land, and the participatory nature of redemption.
It's worth noting that this is an academic work - at times I found it challenging to follow sections that were clearly designed to rebut specific arguments made by other academics. The academic approach isn't a weakness of the book, but it did make me wish there was a digestible companion volume I could hand to fellow parishioners and others who have long been taught PSA from the pulpit and in mainstream Christian discipleship materials.
Because, as Rillera points out in his conclusion, none of this is theoretical. A commitment to PSA is not only exegetically unsupportable and inaccurate, but it leads to problematic application for the Christian life, something that makes this an immensely practical book as well as academic one. Highly recommend!
June 14, 2025
Penal Substitutionary Atonement deboonked?
Throughout this very ambitious book, Rillera attempts to argue that (1) the Levitical sacrificial system had nothing to do with substitutionary atonement; (2) the earliest NT texts do not picture Jesus as an atoning sacrifice, and (3) later NT texts such as Hebrews and 1 John, while picturing Jesus as an atoning (kipper) sacrifice, do not picture Jesus as a substitutionary sacrifice. Rather, so argues Rillera, the NT consistently paints the crucifixion of Jesus as a participatory reality for all disciples – something PSA categorically denies.
I lack the requisite knowledge to properly evaluate Rillera's reading of the Levitical system. Developing a coherent picture of exactly what is happening during the Levitical rituals is not easy, and some of the distinctions drawn by Rillera (and, by extension, Milgrom) may be guilty of oversimplifying the text. However, the portrait Rillera paints of the sacrificial system makes a ton of sense, and he demystifies many of the stranger Levitical sacrifices.
Even if you quibble with certain aspects of Rillera's exegesis, I still think he does massive damage to most conceptions of PSA. I'm sure someone could nuance PSA in a way that would bypass some of Rillera's objections, but even so, I think the arguments presented here shift the debate miles away from the common view of PSA as nothing less than the "core of the Gospel."
I suspect that for many readers, the most difficult pill to swallow will be Rillera's contention that Levitical sacrifices are not about death, but about ritual death "reconceptualized as life." I think I agree with Rillera's logic here. However, I imagine that for those of us unfamiliar with ritual language and practice (practically everyone), it's difficult to see how the Levitical system – which is founded upon the constant slaughter of animals – can be about anything else but "death."
Although yeah, I might take issue with a few of of Rillera's points, this is a definite 5-star read for me. This is one of those rare books that makes everything click and gets me even more excited about the Bible (and about Leviticus, no less!). Bonus points for some great observations about baptism as well.
Throughout this very ambitious book, Rillera attempts to argue that (1) the Levitical sacrificial system had nothing to do with substitutionary atonement; (2) the earliest NT texts do not picture Jesus as an atoning sacrifice, and (3) later NT texts such as Hebrews and 1 John, while picturing Jesus as an atoning (kipper) sacrifice, do not picture Jesus as a substitutionary sacrifice. Rather, so argues Rillera, the NT consistently paints the crucifixion of Jesus as a participatory reality for all disciples – something PSA categorically denies.
I lack the requisite knowledge to properly evaluate Rillera's reading of the Levitical system. Developing a coherent picture of exactly what is happening during the Levitical rituals is not easy, and some of the distinctions drawn by Rillera (and, by extension, Milgrom) may be guilty of oversimplifying the text. However, the portrait Rillera paints of the sacrificial system makes a ton of sense, and he demystifies many of the stranger Levitical sacrifices.
Even if you quibble with certain aspects of Rillera's exegesis, I still think he does massive damage to most conceptions of PSA. I'm sure someone could nuance PSA in a way that would bypass some of Rillera's objections, but even so, I think the arguments presented here shift the debate miles away from the common view of PSA as nothing less than the "core of the Gospel."
I suspect that for many readers, the most difficult pill to swallow will be Rillera's contention that Levitical sacrifices are not about death, but about ritual death "reconceptualized as life." I think I agree with Rillera's logic here. However, I imagine that for those of us unfamiliar with ritual language and practice (practically everyone), it's difficult to see how the Levitical system – which is founded upon the constant slaughter of animals – can be about anything else but "death."
Although yeah, I might take issue with a few of of Rillera's points, this is a definite 5-star read for me. This is one of those rare books that makes everything click and gets me even more excited about the Bible (and about Leviticus, no less!). Bonus points for some great observations about baptism as well.
December 29, 2025
Understanding the NT’s sacrificial imagery ought to re-frame our imaginations. For example, when we think about the story of Passover and the covenant inaugurated on Sinai, the story of the exodus, we realize that eating from the table of the Lord as the ultimate Passover lamb and mediator of the new covenant fundamentally reframes our relationship to all the nations, let alone our home nation. These are the “Egypts” from which we are being liberated, we who are being ruled over by what Paul calls the “powers”—the “pharaohs,” Sin and Death—and what Peter calls “your empty way of life handed down from your ancestors” (1 Pet 1:18). Jesus is the “lamb of the free” (cf. 1:19) because he sets us free from the reign of these pharaohs and their futile disorderly forms of life, which manifest in the various idols all peoples have worshiped since the beginning; and the church has been lured into as well (wealth, security, pleasure, punishment, strength, etc.). We are being liberated to be a corporate well-being sacrifice for the life and healing of all the nations of world. We are announcing to the world the conquest of the pharaohs Sin and Death, which enslave and trap the nations in all manner of systems of oppression and domination. So when we get the sacrificial concepts right by understanding the larger story of which they are a part, then we can find our place within that story, and as Paul says, become sharers and partakers of the body and blood of Jesus (1 Cor 10:16–17). And by so doing we become a living well-being sacrifice ourselves (Rom 12:1), narrating the death of Jesus in our bodies for the life and reconciliation of the world (2 Cor 4:10–12; 5:14–21).
What a great summary for why we need to clearly define what justice and atonement mean today. When viewed rightly, what Jesus did is about giving us harmony and enabling us to bring about harmony, not about taking our punishment so we don’t have to.
Such a healing book for someone who grew up struggling with the idea of penal substitutionary atonement.
What a great summary for why we need to clearly define what justice and atonement mean today. When viewed rightly, what Jesus did is about giving us harmony and enabling us to bring about harmony, not about taking our punishment so we don’t have to.
Such a healing book for someone who grew up struggling with the idea of penal substitutionary atonement.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 11, 2024
If you are taught something long enough you assume that it is true. To prove your point you can even go to the Bible to show the "rightness" of your stand or the "wrongness" of someone else's stand. My Christianity cut its teeth on "Penal Substitution Atonement" the theory which says that Jesus Christ took the punishment for humanity's sins as a substitute, resulting in forgiveness. Closely related is propitiation, which says that Jesus appeases God's wrath on the cross. About a decade or so ago I started to question these views mostly because it did not seem like the God of the Bible. Of course, my struggle was understanding the different sacrifices in the Old Testament and how to justify some of my thoughts. Penal Substitution was not even on the mind of the early church until the 4th Century and was not even well developed until hundreds of years later. I say all this to share my latest read of "Lamb of the Free" by Andrew Remington Rillera. Rillera does a masterful job of showing that many of the sacrifices in the Old Testament have nothing to do with substitution, retribution, or punishment. Certainly, Jesus' death has saving significance. But the point of the cross is not that Jesus is dying instead of us but that he encounters death so that we might follow him from death to life. Jesus pioneers the way through death. Ultimately he has what the early church fathers would call "Christus Victor" The enemy has been defeated, and death has been overwhelmed by the life of Jesus. This is not an easy read but it is well worth diving into for the serious Bible student
October 13, 2024
Outstanding.
This book, I think, has permanently shifted how I will think about Atonement (and what this word even means to begin with) and what exactly Jesus’ death accomplished.
The first half of the book unpacks what kipper (atonement) was and is, and importantly what it isn’t. Rillera’s reading and unpacking of the sacrificial system in Leviticus (and other parts of the OT) blew my mind. I was constantly going back and rereading the texts and starting to make sense of things that I usually would just skip over. Very refreshing.
The second half of the book narrows in on the NT, Jesus’ life/death/resurrection/ascension and how the authors understood atonement in relation to those. Which Rillera (convincingly, I think) argues is primarily viewed through the lens of participation and solidarity with humanity. He entered into our suffering to pull us out of it, not just he took the shot on our behalf so we don’t die.
A few flaws emerged while going through this; at times it felt like Rillera could be a bit myopic because of how forcefully he is making his arguments. And I would have also liked for him to engage other perspectives aside from just PSA.
Nonetheless, I overall loved the book. I learned a ton. I didn’t agree with 100% of it, but that’s the fun part of reading different perspectives on things - which Rillera has inspired me to continue digging and learning what else is out there on the subject of atonement :-)
This book, I think, has permanently shifted how I will think about Atonement (and what this word even means to begin with) and what exactly Jesus’ death accomplished.
The first half of the book unpacks what kipper (atonement) was and is, and importantly what it isn’t. Rillera’s reading and unpacking of the sacrificial system in Leviticus (and other parts of the OT) blew my mind. I was constantly going back and rereading the texts and starting to make sense of things that I usually would just skip over. Very refreshing.
The second half of the book narrows in on the NT, Jesus’ life/death/resurrection/ascension and how the authors understood atonement in relation to those. Which Rillera (convincingly, I think) argues is primarily viewed through the lens of participation and solidarity with humanity. He entered into our suffering to pull us out of it, not just he took the shot on our behalf so we don’t die.
A few flaws emerged while going through this; at times it felt like Rillera could be a bit myopic because of how forcefully he is making his arguments. And I would have also liked for him to engage other perspectives aside from just PSA.
Nonetheless, I overall loved the book. I learned a ton. I didn’t agree with 100% of it, but that’s the fun part of reading different perspectives on things - which Rillera has inspired me to continue digging and learning what else is out there on the subject of atonement :-)
July 9, 2024
Great read man. I was slightly nervous he wouldn’t execute what the cover reviews said he would and tear down PSA effectively and convincingly. From the start, Rillera gets into the text of leviticus with a fine tooth comb and clears all the ground for himself. As boring as that could be, i would say he lands somewhere in the middle leaning toward the side of very interesting in this portion of analysis .
Other reviewers have noted the difficulty in following some of this, as a lot of it is untranslated (although he defines them at some point.)
Overall, this is a successful takedown of PSA, while being fairly readable for tackling the task at hand. It is in the sweet spot of biblical studies books like this- it entertains, is robustly argued, and gives you much to think about no matter how much you agree with.
I would recommend this to anyone who is interested in hearing why penal substitution may not be biblical , with the caveat that you have to be willing to roll up your sleeves a bit.
To anyone who already has their doubts, this book will serve as the nail in the coffin. You’ll get pounded .
Other reviewers have noted the difficulty in following some of this, as a lot of it is untranslated (although he defines them at some point.)
Overall, this is a successful takedown of PSA, while being fairly readable for tackling the task at hand. It is in the sweet spot of biblical studies books like this- it entertains, is robustly argued, and gives you much to think about no matter how much you agree with.
I would recommend this to anyone who is interested in hearing why penal substitution may not be biblical , with the caveat that you have to be willing to roll up your sleeves a bit.
To anyone who already has their doubts, this book will serve as the nail in the coffin. You’ll get pounded .
Displaying 1 - 30 of 53 reviews