MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206084049 · doi:10.3138/tjt.27.2.203

French Apocalyptic Messianism: Isaac La Peyrère and Political Biblical Criticism in the Seventeenth Century

2011· article· en· W4206084049 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeffrey L. Morrow

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisMessianismPoliticsHistorical criticismCriticismBiblical studiesLiteraturePhilosophyScholarshipContext (archaeology)Biblical criticismTextual criticismLiterary criticismHistoryClassicsTheologyArtLawJudaismLiterary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Isaac La Peyrère is one of the most important and yet little-known seventeenth-century intellectuals involved in developing modern biblical criticism. His work on the Bible resembles that of his later contemporaries Thomas Hobbes, Baruch Spinoza, and La Peyrère's friend Richard Simon, all of whom his writings may have influenced. Through his attempt to get behind the biblical texts and his use of comparative extra-biblical historical literature from across the globe, La Peyrère's methods attempted to mould biblical exegesis into historical criticism. His social and political context in seventeenth-century France during the reign of King Louis xiv provides an important glimpse into the historical background that shaped La Peyrère's thought and project. At its core, La Peyrère's work was not scholarship for its own sake, but was politically motivated. His exegesis entailed an elaborate theo-political messianic vision, which his historical method was an attempt to bolster. La Peyrère's biblical exegesis was in service of his French apocalyptic messianic vision, the heart of which supported the political designs of his employer, the Prince of Condé.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToronto Journal of TheologySame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207