SECTION I

SALVATION THEORIES

For God so loved the world

that He gave His only begotten Son,

that whoever believes in Him should not perish

but have everlasting life.

Gospel of John 3:16      

What do the expressions “Christ died for our sins” and “Christ died for us” mean?¹ The answer is not as obvious as we imagine, and it has occupied theologians for almost two thousand years without a universally accepted interpretation; although this is one of the cornerstones of faith, we are not yet able to give an unequivocal explanation. We have always held the doctrine of salvation accepted by our Church to be the one and only universally recognised and irrefutable truth. However, if we delve into the history of theology, we will realise that this is not the case, and that over the centuries various theories have followed one another, finding moments of great acceptance only to be forgotten; so much so that different Christian denominations have very different theories. We will also discover that the most popular theories today are relatively recent, and very different ideas were in use by the first Christian communities and throughout the first millennium A.D.

Although redemption through Christ has always been the basis of Christian faith, no final and universally accepted definition of the manner of its achievement has ever been formulated.²

Some modern theologians, noting the multiplicity of existing theories, have gone so far as to say that in the end it is not important to establish which theory is the most correct, since it is the way the Bible represents reality using different images and metaphors:

Amongst many scholars today, there is a preference not to insist that any one theory is central, dominant or “right”, needing to “win out” over others. This reflects the variety of ways offered by scripture for understanding how Christ’s life and death is efficacious in the salvation of fallen humanity.³

Perhaps, but if the theories are incompatible with each other, one must be right and the others wrong, or they are all wrong, but it cannot be that they are all equally right. For this reason, in the first section of the book, we will analyse in detail all the various theories that have followed one another over the centuries, to show how there is no unanimity of views and to acquire various opinions that will be useful to outline a comprehensive theory of salvation.

It is essential to underline the centrality of the study we are about to undertake, because from it descend an infinity of implications that touch every aspect of faith and consequently of our life; because “wrong ideas about God create wrong ideas about everything else too.”⁴ Understanding the dynamics of salvation is vitally important, as it enables us to understand who we are, who God is, what relationship exists between us and him, and how Jesus affected this relationship.

1. Salvation theories⁵

In this first part of the book, we will examine all the main theories of salvation, according to the chronological order in which they were adopted:

1. Moral Transformation theory (1^st century)
2. Recapitulation theory (2^nd century)
3. Union with Christ theory (2^nd century)
4. Ransom theory (3^rd century)
5. Christus Victor theory (3^rd century)
6. Satisfaction theory (11^th century)
7. Moral Influence theory (12^th century)
8. Acceptance theory (14^th century)
9. Penal Substitution theory (16^th century)
10. Governmental theory (17^th century)

In the last chapter of this Section, we will finally present some lesser-known modern theories and other interpretations that will be useful for our study. Before we begin, however, it is worth clarifying the fundamental questions that need to be answered if any theory is to be considered sufficiently comprehensive:

• According to this theory, why was Jesus' death necessary for salvation? Could it have been otherwise?
• How do the life, works, preaching, miracles, death and resurrection of Jesus fit into the framework of the theory?
• Does the theory under consideration correspond to the entire language of the Bible or only partially? Are there elements that have not been considered?
• Does the theory fit coherently into the broader theological context, e.g., in relation to Trinitarian and Christological doctrine?
• What influences from the historical, social and cultural context may have affected or shaped the theory under consideration?

It is therefore essential to keep these points in mind in our work in order to clarify the capacity of each theory to explain the reality of the facts, which is the only thing that matters to us, namely, to arrive at a synthesis that allows us to know the truth about salvation.