MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Old Wesleys and ‘the New Luther’: Rethinking the Relationship Between their Soteriologies

2023· article· en· W4383378441 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John R. Tyson

Bibliographic record

VenueWesley and Methodist Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoteriologySanctificationTheologyConversationPhilosophyDoctrineFaithAdmirationReading (process)Martin lutherReligious studiesLiteratureArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This article explores John and Charles Wesley’s ambiguous relationship with the soteriology of Martin Luther. Their early admiration for Luther’s theology of justification by faith played a significant role in the conversion experience of both men, but subsequently, John wrote that Luther was ‘ignorant of the doctrine of sanctification’ and ‘confused in his conception of it’. The ‘new’ Finnish reading of Luther’s soteriology, pioneered by Tuomo Mannermaa, opens new avenues for soteriological conversation and consensus between Lutherans and Methodists. A few of the old misunderstandings are untangled and more congenial theological trajectories are suggested by this article.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.084 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWesley and Methodist StudiesSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207