Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In this impressively comprehensive study of the history and theology of the doctrine of holiness, Ayars (Old Testament), Bounds, (church history), and Friedeman (New Testament) contribute their considerable expertise to a survey of how holiness is understood both in scripture and by theologians from different eras and denominational backgrounds, and to a fresh reading of the doctrine that is thoroughly Wesleyan both in method and outcome. In doing so they provide an overview of holiness that is firmly biblically rooted, traceable as a thread running discernibly through the history of the church, and effectually applicable today.The writers begin in the introduction to the book by nailing their Wesleyan colours firmly to the mast, but in doing so set the irenic tone for the rest of their study by outlining in a balanced way the three major positions—the ‘shorter, longer, and middle ways’—taken by Wesleyans on the nature of the experience of entire sanctification (3–4). Declaring themselves to be advocates of a ‘neo-holiness’ middle way, the authors return to further expound this perspective later in the volume but begin their study with an exploration of the biblical roots of the doctrine of holiness, focusing on the range of writings and genres in the Old and New Testaments in three chapters each for both parts of the canon. Their exegesis throughout is meticulous and deserves careful study.The focus of the third section of the book is on the thread of holiness theology that can be traced through Christian history, with chapters focused on the patristic era, the Middle Ages, and the modern and postmodern eras, including the Reformation. Here the authors challenge the idea that ‘perfectionist’ views of holiness are a recent Wesleyan innovation by highlighting their presence at each stage of the church’s development.In the final chapters of the book, the authors turn their attention to outlining a ‘middle way’ approach to a Wesleyan understanding of holiness and sanctification, which they dub a ‘neo-holiness’ position. One suspects that their standpoint will not gain the agreement of all Wesleyans, particularly some committed to the classical position of sanctification being a ‘longer way’ of continual growth. It does, however, have the merit of treating in an even-handed manner the ‘shorter way’ of immediately available sanctification by total consecration advocated by Phoebe Palmer and other nineteenth-century Holiness Movement theologians, being honest about its strengths and weaknesses. The coherence of the authors’ position is further strengthened by placing the provision of God’s grace and the work of the Holy Spirit as central in the call to holiness, in repudiation of the charges of legalism often levelled at the doctrine.The volume concludes with some suggestions for further reading. Here, and indeed in the main body of the text, the focus is almost entirely on North American Wesleyan theology: apart from Newton Flew rightly being referenced, little twentieth-century scholarship from outside the United States is acknowledged. One might have expected, in the chapter on the modern age, for example, the work of British Methodists William E. Sangster and Samuel Chadwick, along with the Swede Harald Lindstrom, to feature in any survey of holiness thought.The book’s arguably over-exclusive North American orientation does not, however, impair its immense usefulness as a well-written and comprehensive one-volume Wesleyan theology of holiness, which shows the doctrine to be thoroughly grounded in scripture, as well as woven into the scope of Christian tradition. Its value as an academic text is substantial; in framing holiness not just as a key biblical and historical doctrine but also as a possible present reality, its worth as a call to holy living is arguably even greater.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,031 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».