I’m most probably Christus Victor. I’m still working out the many details though. I know of no one comprehensive work on this atonement model, though there are a few books that do specifically treat it. Aulén who wrote the definitive historical-introduction (Christus Victor, 1931), likens the Bible to a dramatic story that describes a victory over sin. I think it’s inherently more appealing to universalists and pacifists (who can perhaps see more clearly, the triumph of radical love over sin). To Aulén the atonement (the whole story that climaxes in Yeshua) resists cold systematization.
MacDonald’s view, whilst ambigious, seems to be Christus Victor (the Eastern Orthodox view). This was the view of C.S. Lewis also. The view you are describing as “renewing our minds” may be the Moral Influence model.
I think the atonement is one of those huge over-arching doctrines that affects every facet of our theologies. I couldn’t tell you mine exactly because it’s a large story to tell, but mainly because I haven’t really sorted through every facet yet. Any explanation I could provide would probably be very flawed and wouldn’t represent Christus Victor fairly. But I can state that Penal Substitution largely depends on a pagan understanding of Hebrew sacrifice. Christus Victor, as far as I understand, doesn’t. “Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins” is misleading when divorced from its context. Hebrews 9:22 says: “And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.”. Two quick things to note here, firstly, forgiveness is predominately deliverance from slavery, not appeasement from a haughty, blood-lusting god. Secondly, sacrifices in the Hebrew scriptures were also offered in times of obedience and victory too, and when offered were not always blood offerings (grain and fruit sacrifices were welcome). Yonah details that the whole city of Nineveh received forgiveness through repentance alone. So whatever the writer of Hebrews might be saying here, there is no reason to believe that one can or must buy appeasement with blood (Yeshua’s or anyone else’s). It is Penal Substitution atonement and this foreign notion of sacrifice (amongst other views foreign to the Tanakh) that Jews find so difficult. A dear fundamentalist friend of mine runs a Christian camp and in the dining hall there is a large (rather foreboding) sign declaring the misquote “without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins”. Needless to say, the Orthodox Jews who annually attend this camp can easily recognize the foreign theology – it’s too bad that they probably attribute that to Christianity in general and not just Penal Substitution atonement.
With the strong prevalence of PSA in Protestantism knowing that there are reasonable alternatives is, I think, comforting and liberating. I recommend reading the Four Views: The Nature of the Atonement (Eds. Beilby and Eddy, 2006) for a great overview and defense of the stronger models. Boyd does a great job of outlining Christus Victor, and in my opinion, seemed the strongest. I recommended some works to I Sit In Awe on the book reading thread. You may be interested in considering these also. I really wish you the best with this Cindy!
