Well, if it isn't little miss Aaron Christianson Back on the blog scene again. due to numerous requests for more fine programing, I'm back in action.

Nothing interesting. I'm at a bible school, and everyone acts like a freakin' nun. Nothing scandalous to report. No chemistry with the babes here either. All the interesting girls are married or engaged, which is great for them, but it doesn't help me any. We'll see what santa brings to school next year. I actually attribute the boredom here to a lack of rockin' babes (certainly couldn't have anything to do with the bachelors).

Damnit CTS, do something interesting before I go to class naked just to see what happens. This is a threat. The academics here are great, and I actually enjoyed writing my papers... and writing everyone else's papers (you know who you are [edit: this is a joke. I edited some papers, but I didn't actually write any but my own]), but nobody ever does anything freaky.

In other news, I'm thinking about writing my own systematic theology on the Word of God. While writing my last paper, I realized that there is a wealth of biblical material relating to the doctrine of scripture that is NOT considered in the systematic theologies I have read so far (admittedly not too many). I also realized that hermeneutical methods are entirely dependent upon this, and somehow that our hermeneutics aught to reflect our doctrine of inspiration. That is not to say that the current models are bad, they have served the church very well for quite some time, and I believe that they are fundamentally solid. However, it seems that the finer points, even in conservative circles, are more based on modern logic than the Biblical witness. Certainly they can be supported biblically, but it seems that they come to the text with answers rather than questions. I would like to try to look at scripture with a clean slate, assuming only that it in some way is representative of truth (Drawing this conclusion the inner witness of the Holy Spirit). I realize that this is impossible, but it must be attempted at least. Luther said at one point that the church should constantly be in a state of reformation, constantly evaluating old positions.

It must seem very impetuous of me to think that I am qualified to do such a thing. Well, I think that really, nobody is qualified to do it. Further, even though there may be others that are more qualified than me, I want to give it a try myself. So try and stop me. I know you can't!
In my defense, I do have at least one qualification: I am contemporary. Because this is true, it means that I at least have a decent shot at re-articulating the doctrine to communicate to the contemporary audience. The problem, I feel, lies in the rigid language used to express the doctrine, especially in contrast to the divers methods that God has used to reveal himself, even within the canon of scripture. In past times, the former model of inspiration may have been very effective to communicate what is truly in scripture, but when I read it through my cultural lenses, I get a very rigid picture that does not conform to what I see in the text.

I assume there will be many problems along the way.

Therefore, I would like to post my ideas as they are being developed on this blog so that I can get feedback from my readers.

More coming soon.  ¶ 2:26 AM