(C) Shaun Aisbitt 1997. Based on an idea found on the 'net', and dedicated to my favorite Theology Teacher(all round good guy and part time heretic!), Bob Mihuc!
Compose millions of impressive sentences. Select a phrase from
each column to form statements which sound profound.
Those who have not yet mastered theological conversation will find
this guide invaluable in conversing with peers and authorities.
Simply think of any 4 letter word (say, JABI) and read off the
similarly numbered phrases from columns 1.2.3.& 4. (For example,
JABI is "Kiel's assimilation theories beg that the meaning of major
elements imposes smothering constraints upon excessive use of the
19th century frameworks."). Never mind what it means; just use it and
watch the way you bring conversation to a halt. You can compose
profound reports or theology lessons by using varied letter
combinations. {nb.It has been rumoured that some members of the Jesus
Semminar have been using something like this for years without
detection.}
As you become more proficient in its use, you may wish to
experiment with varying the column sequence, e.g. , 2134, 3214, etc.
These advanced configurations are not recommended for beginners,
however, requiring as they do sophisticated dexterity with
punctuation.
It is also believed and evident that the philosophers, theology
teachers and theologians have actually used this grid to write their
works. They will be exposed now!.
|
(1)
|
(2)
|
(3)
|
(4)
|
|
(A.) A formal analysis will quickly show that
|
(A.) the meaning of major elements
|
(A.) is further compounded by considering
|
(A.) the relevant dynamics of Luke-Acts
|
|
(B.) From an exegetical point of view
|
(B.) the linguistic consideration
|
(B.) imposes smothering constraints upon
|
(B.) the ramifications of consensus building
|
|
(C.) Although Moltmann does not state it in so many
words, the implication is clear that
|
(C.) a structural dynamic analysis
|
(C.) necessitates that urgent consideration be made of
|
(C.) the clarity of the sociological dimensions.
|
|
(D.) There can be no doubt that
|
(D.) the eschatological structure
|
(D.) adds considerable urgency to
|
(D.) the unfortunate faux-pas of neo-orthodoxy.
|
|
(E.) Based upon interdisciplinary considerations
|
(E.) the homiletic problem
|
(E.) calls into question
|
(E.) any attempt to introduce historical analysis.
|
|
(F.) In the last analysis
|
(F.) a liturgical perspective
|
(F.) must give way to
|
(F.) an emphasis on dogmatics.
|
|
(G.) From a strictly theological view point
|
(G.) the introduction of gnosticism
|
(G.) orients the serious scholar toward
|
(G.) undue reliance on derivative materials.
|
|
(H.) Most scholars seem to have forgotten that
|
(H.) the underlying question
|
(H.) provokes an examination of
|
(H.) global perspectives.
|
|
(I.) Under the guise of liberalism
|
(I.) an ahistorical stance
|
(I.) tends toward
|
(I.) excessive use of the 19th century frameworks.
|
|
(J.) Kiel's assimilation theories beg that
|
(J.) the rationalisic worldview
|
(J.) avoid the questions of
|
(J.) neo Platonic epistimilogical modial-monarchianism
|
|
(K.) Not all Pentecostal theologians believe
|
(K.) the Universalist theology
|
(K.) leads further away from
|
(K.) the peripatetic message of the Evangelical churches.
|
|
(L.) Bullinger emphatically states in his 'Magnum Opus'
|
(L.) deconstructionilisim
|
(L.) brings a closer understanding of
|
(L.) the femminist matriarchial stance
|
|
(M.) One might say
|
(M.) a need to master the data
|
(M.) drives us to consider
|
(M.) a soteriological point of view
|
|
(N.) A Kantian stance on
|
(N.) figurative interpertation breeds ideas that
|
(N.) distract from
|
(N.) Hyper Calvinism
|
|
(O.) Some Greek scholars postulate
|
(O.) assimilationry theology
|
(O.) blinds many who would otherwise be favourable
towards
|
(O.) a syncratistical Jungian / Arian world view
|
|
(P.) Theosophical schools teach that
|
(P.) diadactical introspection shows
|
(P.) a positive ideology towards
|
(P.) the metaphyscial teachings of Maria Montessori
|
|
(Q.) Rudolph Bultmaan's earlier views regarding
|
(Q.) non-interredactive thetrotrospectionisim
|
(Q.) indeed favours further investigation of
|
(Q.) the principle of the noematico-epochosynthetic
correleticity
|
|
(R.) Husserl's scholarship in this area is without
|
(R.) the sense of ideally intended noesis therefore shows
|
(R.) Scriptural extrapolation or
|
(R.) the finite-infinite limits of transcendental
apodicticity
|
|
(S.) Logic clearly dictates
|
(S.) a destitutive analysis coufounds
|
(S.) understanding due to
|
(S.) partially reducible noematicasticy.
|
|
(T.) Reductionalistic scholarship destroys the
quintessential ideas
|
(T.) that evolve from Descartes' realization, so
|
(T.) deconstructionalism, though not as heretically harsh
as
|
(T.) a destitutional noema expressing quasi-intra
consolidated invectionalism.
|
|
(U.) Cornotaural tenacity has been expressed
|
(U.) in the proto -foundationalism of relative
diadactilists that
|
(U.) liberational theologians shouldn't involve
themselves in
|
(U.) a full scale synthetic analysis on the level of
transcendent egologicism
|
|
(V.) S.Aisbitt's self-developmental theology allows
|
(V.) through relativism the function of theodic
diadactilism is
|
(V.) Nietzschian in it's concept paralell to
|
(V.) chronopantraumatherapy
|
|
(W.) Epistemilogical students avoid
|
(W.) the elementary caution expressed in
|
(W.) hesychasm and it derritives which leads to
|
(W.) amorous terricircumflexion
|
|
(X.) J.Vermaak's theories are based on the view that
|
(X.) Emanuel Sweedenborg's mathematical eisegises brings
|
(X.) analytic philosophy which is altogether contrary to
|
(X.) theological autoproctolepsy
|
|
(Y.) Biblical phenominological redactionalists regard
|
(Y.) classic foundationalism contrary to
|
(Y.) existential idealism, though not alienaited from
|
(Y.) eccleastical dorsal mordancy
|
|
(Z.) Aisbittian quantum introspectionary greco-hebraic
logic clearly states
|
(Z.) invectionalism at it's worst is due to
|
(Z.) pelegianic Christiology being a by-product of
|
(Z.) quasi-quasi-seminological intranitional inverse
redactionalism
|
|
|
|
|
|