MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396558434 · doi:10.1111/rsr.17028

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.

2024· article· en· W4396558434 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsTyndale University College & Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.335 · 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