Major Theories of Atonement—Classic Theory, Satisfaction Theory and Moral Influence Theory

CLASSIC THEORY

Classic Atonement Theory is based on the concept that Jesus’ death on the cross ended the war in the heavenly realms; that Christ’s sacrifice accomplished reconciliation to God through blood payment. This system is accurate, except that many who believe in Classic Atonement Theory believe that the blood payment had been paid to Satan, when in fact it had been made to God Himself. It is God who placed the curse upon man and God who is going to stand as judge over us, therefore, it is God who requires payment.

It’s almost like some place Satan on equal ground, or above God. Satan is no different than any other creation in that he will pay eternally for His sins. This is shown in the book of Revelation, “…the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur…[where he] will be tormented day and night for ever and ever” (v. 20.10).

SATISFACTION THEORY

Of any of the major atonement theories, I find this to be the most accurate, although it is not without fault. It is not unlike Classic Atonement Theory in that it recognizes that payment must be made. In this case, the payment must be made in order to satisfy the wrath of a vengeful God. However, in this model, it takes an infinitely perfect sacrifice to make payment for all mankind; all being the keyword. “For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God” (1 Peter 3.18). Christ did not just die for the finite amount of people who would choose Him, but for all mankind, so that all have the opportunity to follow Him.

Most of the problems with this theory have to do with detachment of the members of the trinity. The theory is sound and biblical, so long as it is understood that Jesus is God, not a separate entity who came to earth to satisfy a God who is only vengeful. Remember, “God [The Father] so loved the world that He gave His only Son[Jesus Christ] that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3.16).

MORAL INFLUENCE THEORY

In my opinion, this theory is completely bogus. It puts the power of salvation onto man. It basically says that we are saved through repentance; in essence that through we can become righteous. God wants us to come to Him as we are. We are not to repent and then be saved; we repent as a product of our salvation. Remember, “by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Ephesians 2.8). All we do is accept Christ’s gift and we are saved. It is then because we believe and have faith that we would repent and follow.

There is another flaw with this theory. If we are saved through repentance, and we know from experience that repentance can be abandoned, then it is only logical that a moral theorist believes they can lose their salvation. And that is unbiblical, for we have been given to Jesus by the Father and He “is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of [the] Father’s hand” (John 10.29).

Image Credits: CWMGary, sxc.hu