Ep 1232 | John Mark Comer & the Penal Substitutionary Atonement Debate
Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey
Blaze Podcast Network
4.8 • 25.8K Ratings
🗓️ 20 August 2025
⏱️ 54 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | Popular evangelical author and former pastor, John Mark Comer, seems to deny penal substitutionary atonement. |
| 0:10.5 | What does this mean and why does it really, really matter? |
| 0:15.1 | We've got all of this and more on today's episode of Relatable. |
| 0:19.1 | It's brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers. |
| 0:20.7 | Go to Good Ranchers.com. Use code Ali to by our friends at Good Ranchers. Go to |
| 0:20.9 | GoodRanchers.com. Use code All Hope everyone is having a wonderful week so far. |
| 0:39.7 | All right, we pulled you guys on Instagram and we asked you, which two subjects do you want to hear about? |
| 0:45.3 | And you guys chose PSA or penal substitutionary atonement. And if you're like, well, that sounds boring. |
| 0:53.6 | And I don't even know what any of those |
| 0:55.2 | things mean. It's not boring. It's actually very fascinating. And it has to do with something that |
| 1:00.1 | is going on in the Christian evangelical world right now. Before we get into that debate and |
| 1:06.5 | most importantly, what the Bible has to say about what Christ actually accomplished on the cross. |
| 1:13.0 | I just want to take a moment to talk about something cool that happened. |
| 1:17.9 | Well, part of it's not cool and it's sad, but part of it is really cool. |
| 1:22.2 | So the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit just issued a decision. And this decision was |
| 1:31.5 | about a case between an LGBTQ campus group on West Texas A&M and the university itself. The university |
| 1:42.6 | banned drag queens and drag queen performances on campus. |
| 1:47.8 | And then this LGBTQ group sued the university. And unfortunately, the Fifth Circuit |
| 1:55.8 | court of appeals said, no, you can't ban drag queens. This is a First Amendment violation. Well, the dissent in this, what I think was a terribly decided case, was written by a judge by the name of Judge James Ho, who is an amazing constitutionalist judge, and he wrote a very compelling dissent against the |
| 2:21.0 | majority in this case. And on page 34 of this decision within his dissent, he said this. He |
| 2:30.6 | cites an argument. But, quote, if we accept that people can change genders, |
| 2:35.5 | or even if we don't, but, or even if we don't, but agree to be polite and call a man she, |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Blaze Podcast Network, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of Blaze Podcast Network and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.

