MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047878011 · doi:10.1177/0142064x08095180

The Use of `Story' in the Letter of Jude: Rhetorical Strategies of Jude's Narrative Episodes

2008· article· en· W2047878011 on OpenAlexaff
Robert L. Webb

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the New Testament · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhetorical questionNarrativePlot (graphics)LiteratureJudaismArgument (complex analysis)HistoryPhilosophyArtTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jude's use of `story' is integral to his rhetorical argument. The author uses narrative episodes drawn from the Jewish scriptural tradition, the story of Jesus, and the story of the Christian community to whom he writes to accomplish his rhetorical purposes. The narrative episodes drawn from the Jewish scriptural tradition and from the story of Jesus do not create a coherent story with a plot, but the narrative episodes concerning the Christian community do have a coherent story with plot and conflict. Jude weaves narrative episodes from the Jewish scriptural tradition and from the story of Jesus into the story of the readers' Christian community in order to have a rhetorical impact on the direction of the future plot-line of this community's story.

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 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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Study of the New TestamentSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207