Walter Brueggemann, Prophetic Imagination, and the Productive Science of Homiletics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review asks to what degree Walter Brueggemann locates biblical interpretation within homiletics, particularly where homiletics is defined as a ‘productive science’ – the goal of which is to make or create something. To the degree this is true, biblical interpretation is not determined by an a priori referent, whether that referent be a closed rationality of social scientific description (or historical reconstruction) or whether that referent be a resistant theological ideology which one imposes on the text. Rather, such a hermeneutic – a productive hermeneutic – would be determined by a desired goal or outcome. Homiletics, thus defined, is a means to an end – an end achieved by naming God as an acting subject in the world to bring about said goal or outcome. This review suggests that Brueggemann’s biblical interpretation can be described in this way and that a productive hermeneutic may be both social scientifically viable and beneficial for the church.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".