Do all Arminians deny the penal substitutionary view of the atonement? I have been talking with someone who is a Wesleyan and he denies that Jesus literally paid for our sins, was literally punished for our sins, etc.
Mant of them claim to hold to actual substitutionary atonement, but in light of their view of Universal Atonement and the inevitable nature that gives the atonement as "potential" rather than effectual and actual, they cannot ultimately be totally consistent in affirming actualy substitutionary atonement.