the biblical view is penal substitution...the governmental theory and the satisfaction theory are saying basically the same thing from a slightly different perspective...all three are reasonable...
the ransom theory is based on a scriptural analogy but it makes the mistake of taking the analogy too far...and coming to a conclusion that is not supported by scripture...namely the idea that God is obligated to make any kind of payment...
the christus victor theory is pretty much useless...it states the obvious fact that jesus was victorious without actually bothering to explain -how- he won the victory...strangely most people who hold to this theory seem oblivious to this problem...
the recapitulation theory does not bother to address the importance of christ crucified...it also leans towards the mystical...which led to the borderline heretical doctrine of 'theosis' in the eastern orthodoxist churches...
finally the moral influence theory is just a product of nineteenth and twentieth century theological liberalism...and it demotes christ crucified to a footnote...
The Catholics teach that it is the "Biblical View" that the doctrine of Transubstantiation is true.
The Catholics teach that it is the "Biblical View" that the rock upon which Christ would build His church was Peter.
The Protestants teach that it is the "Biblical View" that the righteousness of Jesus is credited to the account of the believer while they are still inwardly wicked.
The Protestants teach that it is the "Biblical View" that the Jesus "paid the price" as a "penal substitute" so that the believer is "no longer under condemnation."
The Bible can be used to teach many a supposed "Biblical View" and you are free to "believe" whatever you want.
That fact is that Jesus came to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify a people for Himself. An individual who has been redeemed has been set free from the "bondage of sin" not simply the "condemnation of sin" by executive decree.
The Pharisees were in error by putting their faith in the bloodline of Abraham for their salvation. They were wrong.
The Catholics are in error for putting their faith in the corporate church and the sacraments for their salvation. They are wrong.
The Protestant Reformers were in error for putting their faith in a legal judicial exchange for their salvation. They were wrong.
Jesus said this to the Pharisees...
Mat 23:26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
Mat 23:29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
The religious establishment has always become corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. The same error is held by all, they all deny the possibility of true heart purity in this life and they all teach that you can in fact sin and not surely die. Different clothes yet the same error.
That theologians of each system will defend "with the Scripture" that their particular theology is true. The adherents of each system are emotionally tied to their beliefs. Very FEW will come out.
It amazes me how so few people can even conceive that the whole "system" could be in error when an "error laden system" is historically the rule and not the exception. Especially when the modern errors are so easy to expose with the simple words of Jesus.
Approach a typical pastor and ask him how to get saved and he will tell you that you have to confess you are a sinner and to then trust in the finished work of Christ on the cross.
No mention of the strait gate and narrow way.
No mention of picking up your cross, denying yourself and following Jesus.
No mention of losing your life in order to save it.
No mention that MANY will be deceived and only a FEW will make it.
No mention of "love not the world, nor the things in the world, for if any man love the world the love of the Father is not in Him."
None of that. Just "Confess, Trust and Receive."
It's a false Gospel that tickles the ears of many people and when they are shown the truth they despise it vehemently.
Penal Substitution was never taught until the Protestant Reformation. History clearly proves it originated from the pens of lawyers who added a judicial aspect to the Satisfaction View of Anselm.
Jesus never taught anything even remotely close to Penal Substitution. Jesus taught you must be a DOER of the Word, not trust in a judicial transaction.
Penal Substitution is not clearly laid out anywhere in the Bible, it is a doctrine which is proved by selectively quoting passages while ignoring the aspect of the believer actually dying with Christ and crucifying the flesh with the passions and desires.
There is not a single scripture which states that Jesus bore the wrath of God as your substitute. Not a single word in the entire Bible.
Yet you are free to believe it and you are also free to call it "the Biblical View."
