MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998945922 · doi:10.1163/157338302x00233

Is Lesslie Newbigin's Model of Contextualization Anticultural?

2002· article· en· W1998945922 on OpenAlexaff
Michael W. Goheen

Bibliographic record

VenueMission Studies · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicChristian Theology and Mission
Canadian institutionsRedeemer University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContextualizationGospelOpposition (politics)SolidarityDoctrineSociologyEpistemologyPhilosophyCriticismHistory of religionsAestheticsTheologyLiteratureLawArtPolitical scienceLinguisticsInterpretation (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.025
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.300
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.026 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMission StudiesSame topicChristian Theology and MissionFrench-language works237,207