Hermeneutics and the Apostolic Form of the Church: David Demson's Question
Bibliographic record
Abstract
David E. Demson's book, Hans Frei and Karl Barth: Different Ways of Reading Scripture, displays in exemplary fashion the careful and insightful textual analysis Professor Demson's colleagues and students have come to expect of him. Taking, as he puts it, a neutral but not impartial view (HFKB, p. vi), Demson draws upon his profound and nuanced knowledge of Barth and Frei to compare and contrast the ways in which they interpret the gospel accounts of our Lord. He argues that the most significant hermeneutical distinction between the two theologians can be seen, first, in the more concrete and direct relation Barth develops between the identity of Jesus Christ and the identities of the apostles, and, second, in the way Barth places the church's identity within the apostolic identity, and (only) thereby within Jesus Christ. In drawing attention to Frei's underdeveloped account of these relations, Demson raises a significant question—and one that is significantly formulated — regarding the relation between Christology, hermeneutics and ecclesiology.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".