MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033883182 · doi:10.1017/s0028688503000134

Reciprocity and ‘Favour’ in the Parable of the Undeserving Servant (Luke 17.7–10)

2003· article· en· W2033883182 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

VenueNew Testament Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Divinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsServantJudaismReciprocity (cultural anthropology)HeavenParallelsMeaning (existential)PhilosophyTheologySociologyEpistemologyEconomicsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At least for Jewish audiences, the meaning of the parable of the undeserving servant (Luke 17.7–10) is clear enough: slaves can claim no credit for doing what they have been ‘commanded’ (the redoubled τα διαταχθεντα of vv. 9–10). Both the passive voice and parallels from Jewish literature indicate that ‘Master’ and ‘slave’ are ciphers for God and the pious. Mishnah 'Abot 1.3, for example, is widely cited: ‘Do not be like slaves who serve the Master for the sake of reward, but be as slaves who serve the Master other than for reward, and let the fear of Heaven be upon you.’ J. D. M. Derrett has adduced a wealth of material documenting master–slave relations in Judaism as they relate to the circumstances depicted in the text.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.182 · 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