Discussing Mark Baker’s Apology

Others of differing view points who are discussing Mark Baker’s apology reported in the MB Herald:

The pieces we’re missing

Forum Index » MB Herald »
A Plea Against Unbelief



Apologies, Regrets, and True Repentance

There is a difference between saying sorry and being sorry.

There is a difference between being sorry that you got caught and being sorry that you did wrong.

There is a difference between regret and repentance. Regret happens when you are caught; repentance happens when you are convicted.

There is a difference between apologizing for one’s remarks before men and repenting and turning from one’s error before God.

Which does God accept – Apology/lite or Repentance/contrite?

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Psalm 51:17 KJV

In the following article from the April 2010 MB Herald (page 18), Mark Baker apologizes for his remarks.

MB seminary professor apologizes for remarks

Mark Baker, associate professor of mission and theology at MBBS-Fresno and author of Recovering the Scandal of the Cross: Atonement in New Testament and Contemporary Contexts, has written a letter of apology to the B.C. conference executive and pastors for remarks he made in public and in writing concerning penal substitution.

In November, B.C. conference minister Steve Berg sent an email to the seminary board expressing his concerns, saying “it is troubling to us that Mark Baker states that penal substitutionary atonement is unbiblical.

“We believe that penal substitutionary atonement is an essential part of the biblical presentation of how Christ’s death on the cross and resurrection saves us … [and] is part of a beautiful diamond that the Bible presents in giving a full picture of the atonement. Mark’s ‘unbiblical’ rhetoric gives the impression that the penal substitution atonement theory is ‘anti-biblical.’

“In what is already a very challenging time for MBBS, we are concerned that there is a disconnect underway between BCMB churches and MBBS, and the atonement debate is accelerating the process.”

Although Baker’s basic theological position, which is outlined in his book and articles, remains unchanged, he says he hasn’t always communicated in the most accurate or charitable ways. In his letter, Baker says he regrets that he “wrote that penal satisfaction is not biblical. I recognize that those who use the penal substitution theory are seeking to faithfully interpret the Bible.

“I regret that some people have felt that by critiquing the theory of penal substitutionary atonement I am rejecting their ministry or claiming God does not use them. That was not my intention and I apologize.

“I regret that some people reading my books and articles interpreted me as communicating that everyone who hears a presentation of penal substitution theory experiences God as an angry judgmental figure. That was not my intention.

“I regret how I responded to two people at a recent study conference in Saskatoon. They affirmed the diamond image of the cross having many facets and asked why I did not accept penal substitution theory as one of the facets. I wish that I would have first strongly affirmed them for using diverse atonement imagery in their evangelism and preaching. We do have significant common ground. I did not acknowledge that and I apologize.”

Baker went on to say that he upholds the MB Confession of Faith Article Five on salvation. He also affirms that “God’s work through the cross is richer and deeper than any of our explanations of it. Therefore I advocate following the New Testament in using a diversity of images and metaphors to proclaim the saving significance of the cross and resurrection.”

In a subsequent letter from MBBS president Lynn Jost to Berg and BCMB executive, Jost thanked the provincial conference for communicating their concerns directly with the seminary and said that “all of us at MBBS are committed to biblical authority and to interpreting the Bible in a way consistent with the MB Confession of Faith. We at MBBS do not all have identical interpretations of atonement. All of us seek to be thoroughly biblical…. We are grateful for the opportunity to clarify and correct statements that fail to express our biblical convictions clearly.”

For a more complete look at Baker’s writing on the atonement, see http://www.mbseminary.edu/baker/atonement.—LK


Has Mark Baker truly repented for teaching his unbiblical interpretations of the penal substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ, or has he just apologized? He may have escaped the wrath of some Mennonites by expressing regret for his comments, and in doing so he may have kept his job. But has he humbled himself before the Lord Jesus who took the wrath of the Father in his place? Even though Jesus knew that one day a man named Mark Baker would trivialize His costly sacrifice, and write a book that would attack the very authority of the Bible – He did it anyways. For you, for me, for Mark Baker.

“God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” Romans 5:8-10

RELATED: Book Review:

A critique of the book, “Recovering the Scandal of the Cross,” which was required reading for pastors attending Fuller Seminary’s “2004 President’s Theological Conference for Pastors.”
Recovering the Scandal of Liberalism: Disdaining the Cross

By Richard Nathan, M.A.*

See also:

The Atonement Wars
There is no Substitute for Substitution

by Orrel Steincamp

Do you know that the Atonement is being Redefined by an Emerging Professor at the Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary?

Mennonite Seminary Professor Debunks the Gospel


For further reference and research purposes only, see here:
Mark Baker talks to Tony Jones about Atonement