Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many scholars and church leaders, both Korean and Western, have usually considered Hardie’s repentance as the main reason for the Wonsan great revival from 1903. Therefore, during the centennial anniversary of the Pyongyang great revival in 2007 ‘revival by repentance’ was a popular formular for a resurgence of the great revival among Korean churches. However, Hardie’s repentance was not the cause but the effect of the Wonsan great revival. After experiencing baptism of the Holy Spirit or revival, Hardie confessed his sins. Thus, his repentance was not the main cause of the Korean revival. If it was not contingent on Hardie’s personal repentance, it could be asked why God allowed the great revival to occur in Korea and chose to use Hardie for that work. There may be four possible explanations that can be posed: (1) Hardie’s knowledge of revival, (2) his prayer for revival with devotional Bible study, (3) his pursuit of a high ideal, and (4) his lofty motivation. In other words, Hardie regarded baptism of the Holy Spirit as revival and he had been praying for Spirit baptism with Bible study along with his Canadian supporters and some missionary colleagues. Also, like most early Methodist missionaries in Korea, Hardie tried to gain real Christians instead of nominal or professing Christians, which was defined as ‘a high idea’ by a Presbyterian missionary (Robert E. Speer, 18671947). The main purpose of Hardie's life and missionary work was Jesus Christ. In order to maintain loving Jesus Christ, Hardie remained sincere toward people, and followed not money but God’s will. In short, because Hardie understood the true meaning of revival or Spirit baptism, he prayed for revival with sincere Bible study, pursued a high ideal making real Christians, and kept lofty motivation based on loving Jesus Christ. Thus, God not only allowed the early Korean great revival, but also utilized Hardie to do it. In this writing, the writer mainly deals with whether ‘revival by repentance’ is a biblical idea or not, and why God chose Dr. Hardie as one of the main figures for the early Korean great revival.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.015 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".