MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215823302 · doi:10.1111/ijst.12510

Barth’s Reception of Nineteenth‐Century Exegesis and Theology in <i>The Resurrection of the Dead</i>

2021· article· en· W3215823302 on OpenAlex
Steven Edward Harris

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

VenueInternational Journal of Systematic Theology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicKarl Barth and Christian Theology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWycliffe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisEschatologyPhilosophyProtestantismInterpretation (philosophy)LiteratureMythologyHistorical JesusReading (process)TheologyArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the early 1920s Karl Barth was searching for historical resources in his own magisterial Protestant tradition that would enable constructive theological work outside the confines of nineteenth‐century neo‐Protestantism and its contemporary heirs. This article takes up his 1924 commentary on 1 Corinthians, centred on the fifteenth chapter, The Resurrection of the Dead , to examine the impact of such searching. It demonstrates that Barth, first, is sharply opposed to the framework for modern critical interpretation of the letter influentially established by F.C. Baur; second, finds an alternative to a mythological reading of 1 Corinthians 15 in the heilsgeschichtlich exegesis of J.C.K. von Hofmann; and, third, remains latently marked by the eschatology of Friedrich Schleiermacher. This shows another way in which Barth was creatively appropriating elements of the historical Protestant tradition at the same time as visibly breaking with others.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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