So I've looked up some of the main theories, but each seem to have pros and cons, is there any kind of synthesis which can be made?
The extent of my research is small, but I tend to agree most with, in no particular order the Penal Substitution Theory, the Moral Influence Theory, and the Example Theory to the degree that I understand them.
Penal Substitution theory is often considered the standard interpretation, and there are good reasons for this since it emphasizes the same sacrificial ideas that the Bible supports, but it tends also to be far too favorable to a sola fide approach, that because the punishment has already been borne, just believing that it has is the correct relationship of gratitude to the divine and thus it doesn't really speak to the importance of works.
Moral influence theory seems to be almost baptismal, that God baptized the world by pouring out His blood on it, that might not be correct, just my interpolation that might be heresy. This does have a weakness however in that it doesn't speak at all about Christ as Logos and that His sanctifying grace existed throughout all time, which I was told was the proper way to think of it theologically by a Catholic priest, although I may have gone about explaining it wrongly.
Lastly Example Theory, pretty basic, I like it because it focuses on Jesus's ministry and sacrifice as the example, even though it could easily be made into secular bullshit like the Jeffersonian Bible, which is just plain insufficient no matter how many atheists and deists say they follow Jesus but not religion like total tards indulging their pride everywhere they go.
I'd like to know your thoughts because this seems very connected to the church one should attend, and since it's Sunday it's an ideal thread. However I'll stay silent on denomination because I don't want to bring in meme answers.