MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992562050 · doi:10.1163/156853300506369

ADULTEROUS JERUSALEM'S IMAGINED DEMISE: DEATH OF A METAPHOR IN EZEKIEL XVI

2000· article· en· W1992562050 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVetus Testamentum · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdulteryInterpretation (philosophy)Punishment (psychology)Hebrew BibleMetaphorBiblical studiesAssertionCovenantPhilosophyLawDemiseLiteratureTheologyPolitical scienceArtPsychologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Scholars typically assert that the punishment section of Ezekiel xvi includes several features that accurately depict the appropriate and lawful punishment for adultery in ancient Israel. This article refutes the standard scholarly interpretation in two ways. First, it demonstrates that the standard interpretation is based on a flawed understanding of the nature of metaphor. It concludes that, although scholars claim that they are reading metaphorically, in fact they are taking the language literally. Secondly, it reviews all of the biblical and extrabiblical evidence cited by scholars in support of asserting that four of the features of the depicted punishment reflect the lawful punishment for adultery. It concludes that the evidence cited does not support the assertion. Rather, the punishment depicted draws upon consequences threatened for breach of covenant, which is the transgression that the people of Jerusalem are accused of committing in Ezekiel xvi.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it