MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327637167 · doi:10.1017/9781846150418.007

Non-Representational Images of Christ

2002· other· en· W4327637167 on OpenAlexaff
Michael W. Herren, Shirley Ann Brown

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Religious Studies of Rome
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristianityAllegiancePersecutionMessiahPhilosophyPopulationReligious studiesProtestantismAestheticsLiteratureArtHistorySociologyTheologyLawPoliticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the first centuries of Christianity, there was a continuing and often bitter debate as to the propriety of representational art in the service of the new religion. Although the Christian West created and employed representational religious art in the form of painting and sculpture from at least the third century on, the Christian East remained wary of its acceptance. Opposing viewpoints and policies were forcefully promulgated during the great iconodule/iconoclastic controversies of the eighth century. The reluctance to allow representations of Christ, the central figure and focal point of the religion, was undoubtedly at first due to the influence of Judaism on Christianity – note the injunction in the decalogue against graven images (Exodus 20:4). Two additional reasons came to play: Christ’s divine nature could not be truly captured in the form of mere human flesh and portraying him as a man would be a denial of his true nature as the Son of God, Second Person of the Trinity, the almighty Redeemer and Messiah; and, since the older religions of the Mediterranean portrayed their gods as ideal human beings, doing the same for Christ would place him in concert with these gods, thus denying his essential difference. These reasons, combined with the intermittent fear of persecution and the desire to retain the notion of a special, or even secret, society within the larger population, led, very early in the history of Christianity, to the adoption of certain signs and symbols by which the adherents could both identify themselves and profess their allegiance to Christ. As a substitute for the figure of Christ, who could not be truly represented, the fish, the vine, and the cross, along with the Chi Rho monogram became the most common and universally employed symbols. The fish was chosenas a proxy image of Christ because its Greek spelling ( IXθYΣ ) formed an acrostic of a profession of faith (’ Iησovs Xpiστòs Σεov Yiòs Σωτήρ ) ‘Jesus Christ Son of God and Saviour’. The vine could represent Christ because of the words which John used in reference to him: ‘I am the true vine’ (John 15:1). The cross became the other widely used substitute image of Christ since it had come to signify Christ’s triumph over death and the accompanying promise of personal salvation and eternal life as the reward for the true believer.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistorical and Religious Studies of RomeFrench-language works237,207