Rant against anti-atheist agnostics.

[Mudhammam]

On the vicarious nature of redemption, some Christians have held to a moral influence view of the cross, where Jesus is leading the way in rejection of sin and violence. In this case Jesus points towards a sacrifice we all make (the rejection of violence, even in response to evil). It has a very long history in the Church (it is a much more traditional view than 'Penal substitution', for example).

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_inf..._atonement

Certainly it should also be remembered that 'penal substitution' was not an atonement theory held for the first 1,500 years of the Church, and today is rejected by all the ancient Churches: the Catholic, Orthodox and Coptic Churches (though it is probably the theology held to most commonly in the US).

Basically, ignore the entire Old Testament and its explicit use of the scapegoat upon which Christianity formed, along with numerous verses in the New Testament that repeat the point that without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness?