“Christ gave Himself as ransom for our freedom. It was His will to do so. In doing so He destroyed death because death had no power over Him. This has been the doctrine of atonement from the beginning. Then came Anslem...and then, oh Lord, the Portestants.”
Hehehe!
Now I see why the EOs reject the clear teaching of Scripture concerning the Blood of Christ being a propitiation for sin. Since you clearly believe the OT to be nothing but Jewish myths, which the logical conclusion being that God inspired myths, or the OT is not God breathed at all, it is not surprising that you would SAY you do not reject the propitiatory nature of the Atonement but then deny what propitiation means and it's ramifications, as well as totally ignoring all of the passages I've cited that clearly teach it.