The Moral Influence Theory- an alternative to the Penal Substitution Theory?
What was the purpose of the sacrifice of Christ? Most Christian churches teach what is called the “Penal Substitution Theory”, or variations of it, which is summarized as follows:
Our sin has separated us from God.
The sacrifice of Christ, by dying on the cross, atoned for this sin by paying the penalty for our sin in our stead.
This sacrifice appeased God’s wrath.
Christians then accept this sacrifice and are granted forgiveness and eternal life
Preachers tell us that “Christ’s death is worth more than all the lives of people who have ever lived so His death is just retribution for their sin”, or “God had to pay the Devil, who owns our souls due to sin, with a payment that was worth more than all the lives of all the people who have ever sinned- and only the sinless life of God in the form of Christ could do this”. Statements like this are commonly used in sermons about Christ’s sacrifice. Although some few scriptures are taken out of context to support such spiritual mathematics, these sorts of deals between God and Christ and/or God and the Devil are nowhere mentioned in the Bible. Therefore if we are to accept such arguments as valid we must admit that our understanding of what Christ’s sacrifice means is not based on what the Bible teaches but on mans philosophy and logic.
The Penal Substitution Theory tell us that God is a deity who is angry about human sin and is only able to be placated and appeased by a sinless human (albeit God in the flesh) offering his life’s blood as a sacrifice. It also suggests that God is forced by the demands of His own law to require the death of His own Son before it could be possible for Him to forgive human sinners.
However, despite a large number of churches teaching the Penal Substitution Theory, it is not the only theory as to how Christ’s sacrifice works. Many theologians see significant problems with it and propose other theories, including “The Moral Influence Theory” which to me seems the most scripturally accurate.
The Moral Influence Theory claims that when we “accept the sacrifice of Christ” we are not accepting some kind of notional “payment in our stead” but are simply agreeing to follow His real example, which is His sacrifice, including the real potential consequences of exclusion, punishment and death at the hands of those that oppose His Way of Life.
In addition to the example and the physical consequences that we must accept from living “the Way of Life”, Christ’s example also provides us with the great and mighty promise of the spiritual and eternal consequences: the resurrection to eternal life as children of God in order to become members of the family of God. Our moral transformation in this life is rewarded with a spiritual transformation from physical mortal human to spiritual immortal beings made in the image of and with the mind of God. We therefore become at one with God and His Son (John 17:21-23).
Before accepting Christ and His challenge to live His way we know that we are mortal, living a life that is ignorant or hostile to the way of life. When we accept Christ he tells us to change our way and follow His example, which is the way of life, and he will grant us the gift of eternal life, including His Spirit which is His eternal life living in us. When we then follow His example by being led by the Spirit in us then he promises us that we will follow His example in the next life also. That, according to the Moral Influence Theory, is the total plan of redemption and justification.
The life that Christ puts before us is not easy, but it is straightforward: we must accept his sacrifice by following his example as to how we live on this Earth in order to live eternally as Son’s of God.
To me the Moral Influence Theory seems simple and elegant and without any unscriptural additions. What do you think? A good link to a more detailed article on this topic is http://churchofthemalcontent.wordpress.com/2011/04/14/atonement-part-4-moral-influence-theory/Atonement part 4: Moral Influence Theory
