Book excerpt: When a popular British evangelical leader appeared to denounce the idea that God was punishing Christ in our place on the cross as a twisted version of events, morally dubious, and a huge barrier to faith that should be rejected in favour of preaching only that God is love, major controversy was stirred. Many thought the idea of penal substitution was at the heart of the evangelical understanding of the cross, if not the only legitimate interpretation of the death of Christ. Yet for some time less popular evangelical theologians had been calling this traditional interpretation of the atonement into question. So, is the traditional evangelical view of penal substitution the biblical explanation of Christ's death or one of many? Is it the non'negotiable heart of evangelical theology or a time bound explanation that has outlived its usefulness? What does the cross say about the character of God, the nature of the law and sin, the meaning of grace, and our approach to missions?