Is Lesslie Newbigin's Model of Contextualization Anticultural?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Newbigin's understanding of contextualization has been criticized as being countercultural, even anticultural. Is this a fair criticism? There are a number of reasons that this critique has been made: Newbigin's theoretical expression of contextualization stresses the judging character of the gospel; at certain points he lacks a well-articulated doctrine of creation; and his missionary experience in India and in Britain led to the emphasis on the antithetical side of the cultural task. However, Newbigin's understanding of contextualization affirms the two sides of the cultural task: solidarity in cultivating creation in cultural development and opposition to the sinful twisting of that development. This is rooted in Christ's relation to the creation as Creator and Redeemer and revealed most clearly in the death and resurrection of Jesus. These two sides of the cultural task are formulated in Newbigin's notions of "missionary encounter" and "challenging relevance." The latter notion is borrowed from Alfred Hogg and is further shaped by Hendrik Kraemer's notion of "subversive fulfillment" and by Willem Visser "t Hooft"s notion of "subversive accommodation." Newbigin's understanding is quite similar also to J. H. Bavinck's notion of "possessio" and Sander Griffioen's concept of "inner reformation." Newbigin utilizes the missionary communication of John's gospel as a model of challenging relevance. An analysis of these varying concepts uncovers an inner connection between affirmation and rejection, solidarity and opposition, development and antithesis in the church's responsibility to its cultural context. Newbigin's model of contextualization is not anticultural; it may be termed "countercultural" if it is recognized that the church's opposition to the distortion of culture that comes from its formative idolatrous core is for the sake of healthy cultural development. The church only takes a countercultural stance as it is engaged in cultural development and for the sake of obedient cultural unfolding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it