User:Sharktacos

Look I have a page!

Dear Brother Sharktacos, In searching for further information on Christus Victor (which I read many years ago, and remember being favorably impressed with, but am unable to recall any specifics today), I linked to your dissertation(?)and was gloriously thrilled by the Introduction and Parts One through Three. The occasion for this search was my refutation of the Satisfaction and Penal Theories. (Parenthetically, I am of the opinion that there is a move toward disguising the Penal Theory by slipping it into the Satisfaction category.) We are in complete agreement about both, except that you express it more poignantly and with greater clarity. In a summary concerning the Ransom Theory, it was noted that there were three forms, of which one does not regard Christ as a ransom paid to Satan, but as a conqueror. I disputed this. The Holy Spirit subsequently notified me, "Not so fast. You leave the impression that His victory was not as significant as it is, and you need to learn more about the victory." Hence, I doubly appreciate your dissertation.

Now comes the problem: Toward the end of Part Three, you had a sidebar with the observation "Sin was not overcome through a payment to satisfy the Powers, but by God triumphing over the Powers." As something was incomplete with my understanding, an important cog (as in cognition) is missing in yours. So as I continued to read, what began to concern me most was that what was beautiful, moving and illuminating, suddenly became flat. You transitioned from the experience of the heart to theological explanations supporting your intense commitment to non-violence and in the process do injustice to at least some of the Early Church Fathers; but more importantly negate the clear Old and New Testament witness to the significance of both Ransom and Redemption. There is a connection between these two themes and the Victory/Conquering theme which we both have yet to learn and understand. The question I would ask is, Can you give up your preconceptions and predispositions to allow THS to lead us into whatever His truth (relational) is and to complete your magnificent presentation, or is the propositional principle so ingrained that you cannot turn loose of it without some form of self-destruct? I acknowledge that I have two advantages here: (1) I was raised in Mennonite/Amish territory and have a deep abiding respect for their adherence to pacifism in Jesus' name. (2) With a moderate amount of experience in spiritual warfare, I am also aware that tactical compliance/non-compliance is not always a viable option nor a feasible solution.

Yours in Christ, Robert H. Loreaux 18:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC) lrx@current.net