MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061336857 · doi:10.1177/000842980703600306

Raymond Brown and the sensus plenior interpretation of the Bible

2007· article· en· W2061336857 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew W.I. Dunn

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisInterpreterInterpretation (philosophy)PhilosophyMeaning (existential)Order (exchange)Subject (documents)LiteratureEpistemologyTheologyLinguisticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In their exegesis of the sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments, Christian interpreters believed that they were uncovering other levels of meaning in the biblical text when read in the light of Jesus and of the church. In the last century, some Catholic scholars posited a distinct sense of scripture (the sensus plenior or "fuller sense") in order to explain this peculiar form of exegesis. Raymond E. Brown (1928-98) treated this subject several times during his impressive career, eventually rejecting it as too problematic. This article will discuss his definition of the theory and the difficulties he later identified with it. It will also offer some observations on the development of the idea in his thinking.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.004
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Religion/Sciences ReligieusesSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207