MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172150558

Rethinking the Gay Centurion: Sexual Exceptionalism, National Exceptionalism in Readings of Matthew 8:5-13//Luke 7:1-10

2015· article· en· W2172150558 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher B. Zeichmann

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Bible and Critical Theory · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExceptionalismSubtextInterpretation (philosophy)JudaismSociologyNationalismContext (archaeology)American exceptionalismNarrativeGender studiesPhilosophyReligious studiesLiteratureLawHistoryPoliticsTheologyArtPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some recent publications suggest that Matt. 8:5-13//Luke 7:1-10 features a couple that engaged in same-sex intercourse: a centurion and his slave. This article examines the subtexts of sexual exceptionalism present in arguments both for and against this reading, as well as their collusions with narratives constitutive of western colonialism. Operative in interpretations both favouring and opposing a homosexual subtext is the assumption that Jesus’ Judaism was somehow unique with respect to sexual mores. For opponents of the LGBT interpretation, this exceptionalism manifests in a homogeneous Judaism that was exempt from the practice of same-sex intercourse; in that Jesus’ Jewishness is not in doubt, nor should his disdain for male-male intercourse be questioned. For proponents of the LGBT interpretation, Jesus emerges as unique with respect to his repressive Jewish context, evident in his attitude of liberal tolerance. I examine these readings through the optic of Jasbir Puar’s work on homonormative nationalism (i.e., “homonationalism”) and conclude that the logic of these readings is inseparable from the demands of neoliberal imperialism.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Bible and Critical TheorySame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207