How do proponents of Christus Victor interpret passages that emphasize blood sacrifice and substitutionary atonement?

The Christus Victor model of atonement emphasizes Christ’s victory over sin, death, and the powers of evil, rather than focusing primarily on substitutionary punishment or satisfaction. However, several New Testament and prophetic passages seem to frame atonement in terms of sacrifice, blood, and substitution. - Hebrews 9:22 --*“Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.”* - Isaiah 53:5–6 -- *“But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the punishment that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—every one—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.”* - Paul the Apostle (e.g., Ephesians 2:15) -- *“by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances…”* - Paul the Apostle (e.g., Hebrews 10:12) -- *“But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.”* Given these passages: 1. How do proponents of the Christus Victor model interpret such texts? 2. How are ideas like “shedding of blood,” “bearing sin,” and “final sacrifice” integrated into a primarily victory-centered framework? 3. Do they understand sacrificial and substitutionary language as metaphorical, complementary, or secondary to the theme of victory?