BIBLICAL REASONING: CHRISTOLOGICAL AND TRINITARIAN RULES FOR EXEGESIS. By R. B.Jamieson and Tyler R.Wittman. Grand Rapids, MI, USA: Baker Academic, 2022. Pp. xxvi + 320. Paper, $29.99.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jamieson and Wittman excellently bridge the gap between theological and biblical studies with the very idea of “biblical reasoning.” Biblical reasoning is drawn from Scripture and Scripture alone as the revelation of God through Jesus Christ and his apostles. From Scripture, we see and read its pressures, grammar, concepts, communication, and such, which forms our theology, humbly submitting to the Holy Spirit's guidance in illumination as students to be transformed into Christ as we behold him, the end goal of biblical reasoning. For Jamieson and Wittman, the Trinitarian and Christological heart and essence of Scripture becomes key in that it is extracted from the pages of Scripture exegetically and is read back into Scripture as a doctrinal lens to provide definable rules that guide its study—having the source provide its own interpretation as the Spirit's inspiration and illumination for readers. The book is separated into three parts. First is the methodology of biblical study (the knowledge and worship of Christ as the end goal), understanding the pedagogy of God in the biblical texts, divine economy, and understanding the source of study (covering the inspiration of the Spirit, the Church, scriptural pressures, authorship, etc.). The second part is focused on the Trinity and Christ in providing definite principles and rules, covering Scripture's pedagogy to God-fittingness rules, the Trinity's inseparable work and nature, commonalities and yet distinct personhood and attributes, and Christ's nature, the use of idioms, partitive exegesis, and so on. The final part puts into practice the compilation of the principles and rules by exegeting and biblically reasoning through John 5:17–30, which excellently applies the content. Biblical Reasoning is suited for scholars and students of theology who want to deepen their understanding of biblical and theological studies, their mutual interdependence, and the Trinity and Christ as Scripture's revelatory essence, author, and end goal and vision of our worship.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.005 |
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".