Bibliographic record
Abstract
passage in Pesukei de-Zimra section of the morning prayer service which begins Yehi Khevod consists of various verses from different books of the Bible. However, one verse is actually a composite of three biblical verses rather than a complete verse in itself: Ha-Shem melekh (Ps. 10:16), Ha-Shem malakh (Ps. 93:1), and Ha-Shem yimlokh le-olam va'ed (Ex. 15:18): reigns, God has reigned, God shall reign for all eternity. This passage is one of the most familiar in the entire liturgy, but, surprisingly enough, it is not found as a complete verse in Scripture. Rather, each phrase comes from a different part of the Bible. In combination, the three phrases express the eternity of God's reign. (1) Two questions arise: When Scripture uses past, present, and future with regard to God, does the choice of tense have any particular theological meaning? Or do we have here representation of different aspects and variant temporal reflections in relation to a concept of similar eschatological connotation embodied in the well-known phrase, the Kingdom of God? It should be noted that this phrase is not found in the Tanakh but is derived from statements in the Writings and Prophets; for example, And the Lord shall be King over all the earth and in that day there shall be one Lord with one name (Zech. 14:9). There is a great contrast between the prominence of the Kingdom of God in the Prophets and Writings on the one hand, and the paucity, indeed almost total absence, of the concept in the Torah. Torah had already established God as the eternal ruler when Moses and the children of Israel sang the verse Ha-Shem yimlokh le-olam va'ed--The Lord will reign forever and ever (Ex. 15:18) as the sudden, incidental conclusion at the Song at the Sea. This verse is the single expression in all of the Torah--abbreviated, at that--as to the vision of His eternalness. Jacob Chinitz was ordained at Yeshiva University and is a member of Rabbinical Assembly. He has taught at several colleges, and has written a few hundred articles in twenty journals in the United States, Canada, and Israel. He has served as rabbi in Philadelphia and Halifax, and recently at Congregation Shaare Zedek, Montreal. His three books are: In My Opinion, Divrei Torah for Shabbat and Chagim, and Ten Illusions about Judaism. Though eschatological, it seems to celebrate a single set of His miracles on behalf of a single nation. It follows upon the verse: You [God] will bring them [the people] and plant them upon the mountain of Your inheritance, Your established residence which You have formed, O Lord, a Sanctuary O Lord, that Your hands have set up (Ex. 15:17). Is this the Kingdom of God? Has God decided to narrow Himself, at best, to the national kingdom of Israel, over which He will rule forever from His Sanctuary, His residence, His mountain? Or does the verse prophesy by implication a Kingdom that covers His creation, the entire earth? word le-olam [forever and ever] in Exodus 15:18, seems to refer not to the entire world, but to eternal time. In his book on Moses, Martin Buber reinforces the translation that the Lord will reign in Time and Eternity. He goes on to interpret this Kingship, not in terms of the world, but in terms of Israel. Whoever recognizes the one effective power on every given occasion, must desire that the whole life of the should be made subject to that power. The life of the community obviously refers to Israel, who had just been saved by a God whom Moses wished to be King over the people He had saved. Buber continues on the theme of the Kingdom of God in the context of the Song at the Sea, and in the context of kingship over Israel: melekh [King] proclamation stands with full meaning at the close of the hymn which deals with the miracle on the sea. Under the echo of this miracle the children of Israel [just now rescued after 200 + years from a polytheistic Egypt] learned that they had a God Who, alone among all the protective gods of the peoples, could really perform miracles. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".