Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This article uses the work of Irenaeus to understand Paul's words about creation being subjected by God to futility and travail until the revelation of the sons of God, from an eschatological perspective rather than the customary protological one: instead of postulating an original pristine, perfect creation, distorted by the Fall, Irenaeus envisions the economy from the perspective of Christ's Passion and assertion from the cross that “it is finished,” so that the economy has always included human apostasy and death as the means whereby we finally learn of our weakness and mortality, so also coming to know of the strength of God “made perfect in weakness,” resulting in a living human being, “the glory of God,” manifest most clearly in the martyrs, no longer living by a breath of life but by the life-giving Spirit. While all other aspects of creation were brought into being by a divine “fiat,” God's own project, to make human beings in his image requires, however, creatures who are able to say “fiat,” conforming themselves to Christ by taking up his cross. The perfection of creation, thus, does not lie in the past, but in the end, in Christ, and so from the beginning, Adam, as a type of the one to come, points to him, and the final revealing of the sons and daughters of God in Christ and the groaning of creation, which must necessarily pass away, as it produces the fruit of immortality, is an intrinsic part of this process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.062 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".