Beyond Ordinance: Pentecostals and a Sacramental Understanding of the Lord’s Supper
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most Pentecostal churches define the Lord’s Supper as an ordinance, and they practice it mainly as a cognitive act of remembrance. This article argues that this ordinance/memorialist position is inconsistent with Pentecostal belief and practice in other areas and that a more sacramental understanding of the Lord’s Supper would provide an opportunity for an intensification and revival of other Pentecostals core beliefs, particularly in the areas of pneumatology, eschatology, and ecclesiology. Despite a problematic and inconsistent history with sacramental thought, this study shows that Pentecostals inherently hold a sacramental worldview in their most distinctive belief of glossolalia, which provides a launching point for all other sacramental discussions in Pentecostal theology. The conclusion emerges that a more sacramental understanding of the Lord’s Supper within Pentecostalism will provide a unique opportunity to promote, extend, and at times revive core Pentecostal beliefs and values and reinvigorate Spirit-centered worship in Pentecostal churches.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it