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.
MLG, as Kosta pointed out in his post, what Orthodoxy believes and teaches about atonement is that which The Church has taught from the beginning. If you are correct in your recent theology, why did God allow humanity to wallow in darkness for 1500 years until some Western Europeans who were angry with an Italian pope/monarch finally set everyone straight...except of course Holy Orthodoxy which is the same today as it was when the Reformers revolted against Rome.
Were there no “elect” around for those 1500 years, or is it that correct theology or belief is of no consequence for the elect? The problem you face, indeed the one which all Protestants face when confronting Orthodoxy, is to explain just where the HS was for those 1500 years before Calvin and Luther started grinding their axes and why, given what must be manifest Orthodox heresy to you people, there was nothing even approaching a reformation in Holy Orthodoxy.