Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Paul and the Gift John M. G. Barclay (henceforth JB) explores the language of gift in Paul and particularity how it is to be understood in the Letter to the Galatians and in the Letter to the Romans.The reading of aul o ered in this boo , as the author himself presents it, "may be interpreted either as a re-contextualization of the Augustinian-Lutheran tradition, returning the dynamic of the incongruity of grace to its original mission environment where it accompanied the formation of new communities, or as a reconfiguration of the ne perspective , placing its best historical and exegetical insights within the frame of Paul's theology of grace" (573).JB's proposition is to show that the notions of gift and perfection of grace found in the apostle Paul are best understood in terms of "incongruity," that is, the unconditioned gift of God-in-Christ to Jews and Gentiles without regard to superior ethnicity, status, or cultural prestige (360).The first section of the boo surveys multiple meanings of gift and grace throughout history, e.g. in the Greco-Roman World, Augustine, Luther, Barth, Sanders and recent discussions of Paul and grace.Starting with Marcel Mauss's famous work "Essai sur le Don" (1925), JB highlights that our modern western idea of gift (the estern pure gift), here the beneficiary is not re uired to give bac , is completely alien to the ancient world where one can simply not think of the notion of gift ithout also having to give receive something in return.Indeed, this concept of reciprocity is clearly found in the Greco-Roman World in both Roman patronage and Greek euergetism, for instance.As for the Jews, JB points out that although they do not appear to have adopted this "Mediterranean culture of reciprocity," the Je ish ideology is undergirded not by the ethos of a pure , unreciprocated gift, but by an emphasis on the certainty of reciprocation from God (44).In studying the concept of "perfection" (following the work of K. Burke, 1954), JB will go on to suggest six ways in which the gift/grace is perfected: superabundance, singularity, priority, incongruity, e cacy, non-circularity (66-75).To be sure, JB argues, they do not constitute a "package deal" since one may perfect one or several without perfecting them all.In the second section of Paul and the Gift, JB analyses a variety of texts portraying di erent understandings of divine grace in Second Temple Judaism.According to JB, the Wisdom of Solomon shows that mercy cannot be extended to the undeserving to the point of undermining the justice that sustains the universe (194)(195)(196)(197)(198)(199)(200)(201)(202)(203)(204)(205)(206)(207)(208)(209)(210)(211) 310), while 4 Ezra maintains that God will reward the righteous with congruous mercy and that those who will be saved will be saved qua the righteous and the Torah-observant, "not on the grounds of sentiment or arbitrary preference"
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".