The new family of Jesus and the relativization of the natural family: An exposition on honor and shame (Mark 1:16–20; 2:13–14; 3:13–35)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the time of Jesus, the social values of honor and shame were embedded in the family. The Gospel of Mark not only evidences these social values but also radically redefines them through their narrative reversal. The narrative reversal seeks to persuade the readers to view as honorable what they have valued as shameful, and to regard as dishonorable what they have seen as honorable. Although the natural family is important in the Gospel, Mark transforms it and the honor–shame value system by emphasizing the greater value of the new family that Jesus is forming (“fictive family”) over the importance of the natural family. In Mark 1:16–3:35, I see the narrative reversal of the family in two ways: (i) Mark highlights the three instances when Jesus calls to himself his new family with a transformed honor–shame value system; and (ii) Mark relativizes (i.e., takes away the foremost importance of) the first-century concept of family in favor of the new family of Jesus. Specifically, I will explore the three stories of the disciples’ call (1:16–20; 2:13–14; 3:13–19) and the intercalated story of Jesus’ natural family seeking to gain custody of him (3:20–21, 31–35).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".