Bibliographic record
Abstract
a non-Lutheran for whom Martin Luther has been, since I first .xVencounteredhim half a century ago, the most interesting historically prominent Christian of them all, I have gradually come to the conclusion that, of all the major voices of the Protestant Reformation, Luther's is the least familiar.That seems obvious enough where Anglo-Saxon Protestants are concerned, but sometimes I have the impression Luther remains something of a stranger even among the churches which call themselves by his name.Perhaps, like many renowned figures of history, Luther's fame has obscured his reality.3We English-speaking Protestants of WASPish origin usually think we know Luther.After all, he did 'launch' the Reformation with his famous Hallowe'en prank there in Wittenberg nearly five centuries ago.But we tend, most of us, to lump Luther together with all the other heroes of our religious past-Zwingli and Calvin and Knox and the English reformers right down to Wesley.And the truth is, he's significantly different from all of them.Luther's 'difference' can be discussed in many ways.For instance, it can be said that he is still a late-medieval man and a mystic, whereas the other reforming spirits (including Melanchthon!) were 'modern', trained in the humanist tradition, and tending towards rationalism.Or that Luther, though a scholar, never lost touch with his peasant origins, whilst Calvin and the others were already part of the emerging Middle Classes.And so forth.But what really separates Anglo-Christianity from Luther, I think, is his theology.There are shadings and nuances in his way of articulating Christian faith that the typical English-speaking Protestant finds puzzling-even uncomfortable.And this discomfort isn't limited to Presbyterians, Methodists, and Anglicans.Many avowed Lutherans feel it, too.For Luther's most basic ideas are conspicuously 'out of
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".