MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116018845 · doi:10.1177/0014524613490369

The Antioch Incident and a Textual Variant: “ΗΛΘΟΝ” or “ΗΛΘΕΝ” in Galatians 2:12

2013· article· en· W2116018845 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

VenueThe Expository Times · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Divinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPluralReading (process)GospelNarrativeContext (archaeology)Key (lock)EpistemologyCritical readingEvent (particle physics)LiteraturePhilosophyHistoryLinguisticsComputer scienceTheologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Antioch incident is a crucial event in the history of the early church, especially the key role it plays in the debate regarding the relationship between gospel and law. However, most commentators who discuss this passage pay little attention to an important textual variant, between ἦλθον and ἦλθϵν in Gal 2:12. While most simply take ἦλθον (third person plural) to be the original reading based on internal evidence considerations, I will argue that the evidence suggests an ἦλθϵν (third person singular) reading. This is based primarily on external evidence, but internal evidence is also considered. I will argue that the ἦλθϵν reading makes sense of both external and internal evidence, and fits in well with the context of the narrative.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.199 · 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