MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Emergence of Biblical Canons in Orthodox Christianity

2022· book-chapter· en· W4281251228 on OpenAlexaff
Lee Martin McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristianityJudaismEarly ChristianityOld TestamentNew TestamentHebrew BibleLiteratureClassicsHebrewPhilosophyHistoryReligious studiesBiblical studiesArtTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter focuses on the factors that led to the emergence of both Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT) canons in early Christianity. This begins with the recognition of the authority of Jesus, followed by the not-yet-formed Jewish scriptures largely from the Septuagint (LXX) and the emerging apostolic tradition. The limited evidence is derived from early church father citations, ancient canon lists, surviving biblical manuscripts, early translations, and local council decisions. Orthodox Christianity gave priority to the Hebrew scriptures in their OT canons, but welcomed for teaching and liturgical use the additional books in the LXX. Most OT/NT books were widely welcomed, but some books took longer.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical and Linguistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207