The true vine and the branches: Exploring the community ideation in John 15:1–16:3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An exploration of the Johannine narrative reveals that John addresses the problem of the relational dimension of a believing community as one of its ‘authorial intentions’. With its concomitant emphasis on communalism, the characterisation of community in John 15:1–16:3 makes it legitimate to propose that it is one of the narratives that address this problem. Therefore, the article aimed to contribute to the discussions on the Johannine community, focusing preponderantly on how the vine metaphor guides the reader to explore the community theme as the Johannine prescription for this sociocultural malady. The study employed a narratological analysis because it studies the poetics and meaning of the narrative, thereby helping to recreate the theological ideation of community in the narrative. The findings indicated that a believing community is defined by its relationship with Christ – the vine – and its concomitant incarnation of the divine community’s communalistic values. It also established that the incarnation of these collectivistic values in the believing community is a product of a divine-human partnership: the members of the divine and believing communities perform various roles, corporately and idiosyncratically to fulfil this mission. Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: The portrayal of the believing community in John 15:1–16:3 redefines a community as people participating in the divine community and reflecting its values, replacing the anthropocentric and anthropological characterisation of community with a theocentric classification. Consequently, the research intersects with the disciplines of anthropology and sociology.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".