MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367159131 · doi:10.7202/1078962ar

Early Christianity’s Polemical views of Jews and Judaism: a Sociological Perspective

2021· article· en· W4367159131 on OpenAlexaff
Jack N. Lightstone

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristianityHeavenJudaismOrthodoxyReligious studiesPhilosophySociologyHistoryTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early Christians had no single, shared perception of Jews and of Judaism. For some, Jews are demonic, while for others, they provide access to heaven’s blessings. It appears difficult to account for such variation in theological terms alone. Rather, distinctive social patterns extant in Late Antique Christianity better explain either the abhorrence of, or fascination with, Jews and Judaic rites. One such social pattern characterizes emergent Roman orthodoxy. Another reflects an earlier, more decentralized Christianity which persisted alongside the former well into the late 4th century, if not beyond. For each type of Christian community the characterization of jews is shown to “fit” the group’s “mapping” (1) of the loci of the sacred and (2) of social order and authority. These congruences help render each mapping cogent—and with them, the perceptions of Jews and Judaism.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.334 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCultureSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207