MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008043861 · doi:10.3138/tjt.26.suppl_1.65

Reformed Preaching and the Conundrum of Calvin's Example

2010· article· en· W2008043861 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Paul Scott Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGospelPhilosophyInterpretation (philosophy)DoctrineDutyJesus christTheologyPrincipal (computer security)CentralityFaithLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Reformed preaching is grounded in understandings of the nature and purpose of the Word of God found in various confessions and catechisms. Some of the reformers' hermeneutical practices continued Roman Catholic practice and some contrasted it. They had clearer understandings than are common today on the role of the Spirit in interpretation, the role of the hearers, and the purpose of preaching as salvation. Concerning the last, Calvin is particularly helpful: preaching is to present Jesus Christ and the centrality of the gospel, preaching is a sacrament, and preaching is inspired doctrine. His third and principal use of the law is essentially gospel. However, his sermons give a conflicting message, for Jesus Christ and the gospel are largely absent, and law and Christian duty seem foremost. Suggestions are offered to account for these differences and for preachers to benefit from the Reformed heritage.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.039
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToronto Journal of TheologySame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207