Cindy,
I’m sorry I keep forgetting that I come from the Calvinism of John Piper/R.C. Sproul. The Presbyterian Church I use to go to teaches that we undergo change. According to John Piper in his book “Finally Alive”:
I agree with you there, Cindy.
And, while I don’t believe in the PSA, just to be fair, I kind of want to defend the notion, or, rather those that believe in it, because of the positive impact such a belief has had on their lives.
For many, PSA truly IS good news, and I think this is so for two kinds of people:
Those who struggle with deep self-loathing and self-condemnation - I think some people who are are enslaved to all sorts of putrid, heinous sins, and, who absolutely loathe themselves, not only feel that they need a “covering” to hide them from their shame and guilt, but, they also tend to think that they are worthy of the deepest, and blackest hell. In such cases, the notion of having a perfect righteousness imputed to one’s account, and having the punishment one deserves meted out on another - is absolutely liberating. It satisfies the need both for righteousness, (which a person in such a condition knows they are bankrupt of, as well as in need of, if they are to approach a Holy God), and the need for acquittal of punishment. I think that this belief can and does actually change a person (as I have witnessed in others lives) because they feel absolutely indebted to their Saviour, and marvel at His Love for hell-deserving wretches as themselves. They are motivated to leave the sin their Saviour bled and died to save them from. For these people, it is also easier to become disentangled from sin, once they know the penalty is already removed. Therefore, they are able to move on from simply being “looked upon” as righteous, to actually becoming righteous.
Those who struggle with legalism trying to earn their salvation. I think PSA can be just as liberating for those who struggle with performance-based salvation, and trying to be “good enough” to gain God’s approval. Obviously, the thought of being credited with a perfect righteousness, not your own, can be just as freeing. And, I think this also motivates to person to leave behind their sin - no longer in order to be accepted by God, but because they already are accepted. It’s a change from living one’s life for salvation, to living one’ life from salvation. And, this is where real change is found for some people.
PSA doesn’t have this effect on me though. I guess because I have a hang up on a God who demands blood in order to forgive me.
Exactly, Cole. 
CH, you make some good points. When you pull a person out of a burning building you don’t worry about giving them a balanced diet, good therapy routine, etc. to heal their burns. You go straight for the ice packs (or whatever is appropriate for the level of burning). The damage has to be stopped, and the pain abated first, and if that takes PSA, then that’s the picture they need to see. Typically the logical inconsistencies and the horrible notion of God needing to sacrifice His Son to Himself via the heinous torture of crucifixion don’t get a lot of airtime. 
Once the person is on the mend and begins to ask questions about these details, that’s time enough to break the news that there are a number of other ways to look at atonement.
While I can’t speak for everyone, I think that it’s precisely the people who have been mended by their belief in PSA, that can’t bring themselves to question it, or look at other atonement theories. For them, PSA is the very marrow of the Gospel.
I think in their eyes it is the solution to man’s problem which is primarily a judicial problem - hence the need for a legal accounting. As it turns out, this point of view can also be effective in saving a person from their sin (not merely from a legal standpoint, but a practical reality). I think it comes down to a person loving much because s/he feels that s/he has been forgiven much…even more than that, s/he has been given much - a perfect righteousness.
Yes, there are some logical inconsistencies - primarily in the PSA purpose of the crucifixion as you pointed out. But, you know what, not everyone will agree with you, or I, on that. For the particular group of people I have in mind, the blood-sacrifice of the Son of God IS the most beautiful event in History. And, I would trace this back to PSA believers having an unjust view of justice. There is something in our nature that demands appeasement when we are wronged - the guilty MUST be punished, ie, they must suffer in proportion to the suffering they have caused. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. If this is justice, and, it is just and good for God to punish the wicked, then, Jesus taking our punishment for us is perceived as an act of great love and mercy. I think this recognition, on the part of PSA believers, can effect radical transformation.
So, as long as justice is perceived this way, PSA is the only solution. You lose that, you lose the Gospel. That’s why some people are so terrified to explore different atonement theories. I know I was. However, if one sees justice for what it is (which I will define as an act of mercy towards both the offender AND the one offended), PSA becomes despicable and futile, and has no power to effect change in one’s life. On the contrary, it is God’s mercy towards the offender, in freely forgiving their heinous offenses, and healing him/her from the malady of sin, that ignites radical heart-change, driven by love —At least, that is what I have seen happen to those who do not believe in PSA. For me, well, I don’t know where the heck I am 
Cindy,
What you are missing is that in Penal Substitution Christ is carrying the sins of the whole world. That’s a lot of sin! We should expect the suffering to be so severe. Especially since it lasted for only a few hours. My faith is in God that the punishment was in direct proportion to the sin. As someone who has struggled with emotional issues my whole life, Penal Substitution can be quite liberating. The driving force of most sin is unhealthy fear and fear is always future based. As Richard Beck has shown, the Eastern Orthodox believe that sin springs from the fear of death. I would agree. I would just add that it’s not just the fear of death but the fear of the future. As we learned in A.A., the corroding thread of the seven deadly sins is fear. When I daily repent and confess my sins to God and another and trust Christ my future is secure - His promises become mine. I die to the old self when I come into a faith union with Christ and I become a partaker of the promises. The future promises push the desires that lead to sin out of the heart. But they also bring strong desires to the heart. When all guilt, fear, and frustration are removed by faith I have a new appetite to experience more grace. I am then thrown into the current of love. The past is gone the future is secure and therefore I’m free to live in the NOW. I have hope. Fear is uprooted and the major defects of character lose their power. I came to see that at the cross all that was lifted from me. Whether I live or die I have a God in heaven that holds my future in His hands. This is when anxiety and frustrations are broken and sin looses its grip as God’s wrath is lifted. In faith union with Christ I have peace of mind as I am more sensitive to the beauty in the world. I let go and have faith that God is in control and that He will work all things together for good. The blood is beautiful because it cleanses sin. Blood in the Bible symbolizes life. In faith union we are washed clean by the blood as it gives us spiritual life. God is simply pleased with the blood of Christ because by it we are healed.
Sin and God’s wrath obstruct my vision from seeing and feeling the beauty of Christ. The removal of this sin and wrath is what the Gospel is for.
I largely agree with what you’ve said CH. I think people naturally tend to gravitate to what seems most comfortable for them. For example, I think many Christians are comfortable enough with the idea of hell simply because they try not to think about it much. Certainly in the UK, I think the church largely doesn’t mention hell, simply because they know in our society that the idea of people suffering for all eternity is not going to be taken well; because the church here is very small compared to what it once was, things like hell are not prioritised in preaching. So people end up believing it because they think the Bible clearly teaches it (and it would be very uncomfortable to go against the majority view) but they often end up taking the most comfortable version of it, e.g. CS Lewis’s view - that way they can almost completely dismiss the idea that ECT makes God tyrannical.
Similarly with penal substitution, if you concentrate on the good sides of it, like there being no condemnation anymore, no guilt, no sins ever being counted against you again, Christ’s righteousness being imputed to you etc then of course it’s going to be more comfortable for people. It’s the same way with Calvinism - if you think that God has predestined you to be saved, has made certain of it and nothing you can do will alter that, then you’ll find comfort in it.
What most on this forum have (which can be a gift and a curse) is the tendency to be what I’ll call ‘severe thinkers’. That doesn’t in any way mean we are more intelligent than others, but it means that we’ll analyse everything about something, sometimes to our own downfall. Hence when we come across a view like penal substitution, we won’t be able just to look at the good bits - we’ll have to look at the negative parts as well (of which there are many).
It’s why I dislike it so much when more ‘orthodox’ believers say that those who don’t believe PS or ECT or other doctrines along those lines are just looking for a comfortable option or are trying to dismiss God’s judgement. I’m sure there are some who do that but primarily the issues I, and many others, have with those doctrines are not of God’s anger or judgement. They’re far bigger than that.