Oh, whoops. I confused Penal Substitution with Substitutionary Atonement…
What you are asking about here, Cindy, is nothing less than the central feature that makes the entire gospel relevant. For everyone. Atonement; not appeasement, (we’ve no need to effect God’s stance towards us; He’s already completely in our corner…) but to make us as one again. (To say “again” assumes an original condition of “oneness” – that condition in which we were created… There are problems with this approach of course; see some of Tom T’s posts in his corner which touch upon this…) Restoration and Reconciliation also approach this task – this relational reality – of making us “one” again. Both restoration and reconciliation imply a return to a former state, or condition, or mindset.
But there has intruded a huge problem; atonement is that problem’s solution. So it’s incredibly important to identify that problem…
… See it as un-payable legal infraction; your solution is penal substitution - payment of penalty.
See it as lostness; your solution to regaining oneness is to be found again.
See it as estrangement; your solution is restoration of relationship - adoption even.
See it as loss of our sense of identity, and worth; your solution is to regain a focus on our sonship.
See it as being imprisoned by the forces of darkness; your solution is the light of truth which hides nothing.
See it as bondage and slavery; your solution is that Christ has ransomed you! Those images – and more! – are all richly represented in scripture.
Our problem (from which Atonement is the escape…) is also likened to darkness. Which implies ignorance; lack of knowledge; unawareness of foundational realties…
What might those realities be?
– God is the source of our very being… Birthed from His very breath, we are His offspring; His children. His image resides within us; badly as we may have abused it.
–Underlining this reality, God comes Himself – in the person of His Son – as personal witness to His kinship with us. Not a mission to be entrusted to a creature, God comes Himself. Incarnation. Immanuel. God with us.
–Life comes from God; not from chance, and favored randomness plus time. Death in this realm is a mere temporal curiosity; it has no actual power. The cross amply demonstrates this reality; deaths greatest victory – the claiming as victim God Himself – is rendered a mere cruel hoax. For the grave has not power over life. That’s the kind of light which liberates…
–Given that all Life comes from God, it is inescapable that we are all brothers. The Atonement calls us to live that reality. The Atonement unabashedly requires us to treat all humanity as God does; as family.
–Universalism is merely the embrace of the realities of the Cross:
our reconciliation with God;
our essential origins from Him;
thus our kinship with all humanity;
“connection” with God is Life;
our participation in the great rescue mission of the Cross; – sharing the Good News!
In the Atonement, God comes to us Himself – not via some intermediary. He seizes the initiative; He is relentless in His pursuit. The Atonement is our invitation to embrace humanity as God has. This embrace does not recommend us to God, rather it demonstrates our recognition that we too are part of the great river of God’s humanity. The very humanity God has come to save.
At the Cross, to effect Atonement, God teaches us - reminds us - who we are, that we matter profoundly to Him, and that the battle is His - not ours… The cross calls us home again; to rest, to restoration, to family. No mere legal accounting, the cross demonstrates His authorship of Life, His unity and bond with His creation, and His answer to the forces of darkness and despair and hopelessness. He triumphs over all of these and bids us share in His victory. The Atonement is God’s proof of His solidarity with us - His creation.
Huge huge topic – the depths of which shall enthrall us on into eternity.
Bobx3
Hi Cindy,
I am glad that you gave us up to four options in this poll because my view is a combination of Governmental, Healing, and Ransom/Christus Victor 
Thanks for voting, James!
I’ll have to read your post again later, Bobx3. Too much going on here 
and I think I may be a little ADD. It’s hard for me to tune out distractions. It looks good and worth another read when I can concentrate.
Love to all, Cindy
put like that, i don’t think i can believe Christus Victor. i can’t imagine that God would owe anyone any kind of ransom. that would imply He negotiates with terrorists 
. i may be missing the point here, but as someone who does not believe in a literal satan (except as a locus of human evil (new favourite word, locus)), i find it even harder to understand this view.
sadly i don’t know enough about the alternative viewpoints to really say for certain what perspective i am…but saying what i’m not is a decent start. substitutionary atonement to me feels flawed.
however, you (WAAB) posted a link to a Christus Victor article (which may have been relinked above, i’m too lazy to check atm), which i thought was amazing. so i willingly concede that i might be missing the point here.
Since I see Satan as metaphorical rather than a real thing, and Christus Victor is victory both over death (spiritual) and evil (Satan), I don’t have a problem with it.
But if we consider Satan a separate being, yes. But having Satan as a separate being never made sense to me, anyway.
Corpselight,
Considering what I’ve read so far, it seems there are a number of different angles from which people view Christus Victor. In the view apparently espoused by CS Lewis (as seen in “Wardrobe,” God does in fact “owe” a ransom to the devil (at least metaphorically). This may not be Lewis’ fully orbed view, as it’s a parable and one written primarily for children, however. The Eastern Orthodox Church apparently represents that God did what had to be done and in this sense “paid” what needed to be paid, though more to the situation and the circumstance than to any force or entity.
I’m with you on this one. I’m not decided on whether the devil is a discrete personality or not, but even if he is, I can’t see God owing him anything or not being able to take what He desires to take from him – unless of course to do so would cause harm or fail to bring complete restoration to the one He desires to save – that would be us.
Love in Jesus, Cindy
Bobx3,
I just reread your post, and it is well worth rereading. Thanks! I agree with you that this is central and vital. It certainly ties in with God’s eternal purpose in creating to begin with. God is so terribly awesomely beautiful. I don’t think we’ll ever come to the end of exploring His infinite greatness and loveliness, but it is an amazing journey that keeps calling me onward.
Love in Him, Cindy
I don’t see it so much as owing the devil, but again from the story angle. God subjected creation to the bondage of corruption, so that He could set us free. He led Israel into Egypt by bringing the famine on the land, knowing what would happen to them, so that He could set them free and show who He is.
He has shut up all in disobedience so that He might show mercy on all, oh the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God. Who has known the mind of the Lord (it would be cruel from our POV for Him to subject us to bondage only to release us later) or who has been His counselor, who has given Him a gift that it might be repaid.
For from Him, through Him and to Him are ALL things. A M E N
How can you not get excited when you hear Paul break out into such glorious praise at the glimpse of the story he was given. I know I do, I can’t ever stop that quote without finishing it. GLORY
Yay, who is the other person who voted Satisfaction/Penal Substitution? 
I’m not an expert on Christus Victor, so I can only present what little I understand. I don’t have a problem with Yahweh enduring the unjust rules of the Accuser in order for us to be redeemed. The cross was unjust under any model of atonement. And I don’t think Christus Victor depends on your view of S/satan.
I can’t remember posting any links to Christus Victor. Perhaps you’re thinking of Derek Flood’s article? Dirtboy linked to it above.
yeah…i remember that in Wardrobe. i had a problem with it there too, but i generally let it slide as it is as you say just a parable. imo, it’s the weakest of the 7 Narnia books mostly because of that parabolic nature, whereas i prefer the Silver Chair which if i remember it correctly had more applicability than analogy. also, it had odd beasts…i am a sucker for odd beasts
sorry, back to topic!
oh i’ve no issue with Jesus subjecting Himself to injustice to rescue us from justice…that shows His love. it’s merely the idea of Him “owing” the devil a debt…or paying a ransom. i don’t like that…the hero of a story doesn’t simply pay off the debt of the prisoners He’s rescuing…He might give His life so they can escape, but He wouldn’t negotiate with the villain…He’d charge in and tear down the very gates of hell. if legality was an issue, it would be sorted by right of conquest.
i just have issue with any idea that puts the devil over God, or makes God a debtor. this to me seems a way to take away from God’s sovereignty.
like i say, unless i’m missing something!!!
thanks, yeah i’ve now checked the link and i’m pretty sure you sent me that a while back on a slightly different topic. it’s a great article, so i may have to think about this for a bit!
To be truthful, I do have a very low view of Yahweh’s “sovereignty”. So perhaps my view isn’t for everyone. (And of course, my view is most probably wrong).
i guess that’s the Arminian background 
for me, i have to believe in both God’s sovereignty and ultimate power as much as i believe He is Light and Love as per 1 John.
contrariwise, i have a low view on our human will (it’s arguably VERY limited), though i do believe it’s important. God didn’t create robots.
being a universalist helps me resolve these things. though i’d vehemently disagree with Calvinists that argue that God somehow shows His sovereignty and power by damning people. that to me would just show bullying. God isn’t a bully, though He is VERY persuasive.
I think I’m pretty much on the same page as you with this, corpselight
lol…then if i’m wrong at least i don’t go down alone
Well that too! 
But it’s mainly because I believe that the divine nature is perfectly an-archistic. If I think that Yeshua is an an-archist who rejects authority and is the express image of God, then I can only believe that Yahweh rejects authority too. I think His greatest authority and power comes from servitude – though He maintains an omnipotence and Kingship (traditionally understood) and could choose to exercise as much of this power as He so wished. He is radically self-regulated though and even goes so far to place Himself under the demands and power of S/satan and Death (to redeem us! – what wondrous love is this?!). S/satan doesn’t rightfully have authority over anything. But God is that humble! What a radical, eh?! I love it! I think calling Yeshua a ‘King’ is really just a mockery of worldly power. For Yeshua is actually the King (greatest/humblest) of servants. So these days, my Arminianism and low view of “sovereignty” actually flows from this kind of thinking. I hope my Christus Victor makes a bit more sense now.
aaaaand i’m back on the page with you lol
i haven’t thought all this out yet, but i agree, Jesus didn’t consider equality with God something to be grasped…definitely seems anarchic to me.
that does speak to me of anarchy. and i don’t think God would find eternity fulfilling if He just spent it Lording it over us all. He’s the God that walks in the garden with us.
probably like in good family situations when a child grows up and is treated as an equal by the parents, or nearly.
i’m sort of a Christi-anarchist, in the sense that i don’t approve of man’s authority over man, but i do think Christ has the right to authority, and He has my trust that He will use it for good…totally the opposite to how we would use it.
yes, this may take some more thought.
thanks for expounding on that, though. i get where you’re coming from now!
Glad that helped sort that out a little. The family is a good metaphor. Hmm… I probably consider myself a Christian anarchist – I’m not sure anyone has noticed, (I admit I have poorly drawn the Ω), but my display picture is actually a Christian variant of the Ⓐ commonly used to symbolize Proudhon’s famous maxim “Anarchy is Order!”, to show that Yeshua is indeed the “Alpha and Omega”! I take no credit for the idea and though I would not normally embrace anarchist symbolism, I love it anyway!
yep i did notice that
altruistic, pacifist anarchism is the way forward!!! which to me is pretty much what Jesus taught!!! and even where governments still exist (ie everywhere), the values of Christian anarchy (or the Kingdom of God as i like to call it) bring good things.