MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414381254 · doi:10.1111/ijst.12777

Palamism Does Not Disfigure the Gospel: A Reply to Thomas Weinandy

2025· article· en· W4414381254 on OpenAlexaff
Travis Dumsday

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Systematic Theology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheology and Philosophy of Evil
Canadian institutionsConcordia University of Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParagraphCore (optical fiber)Point (geometry)Key (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In a 2024 article in the IJST, Fr. Thomas Weinandy argues that the theological system of Gregory Palamas is in grave error, especially with respect to its commitment to an objective ontological distinction between God's essence and His energies. In his concluding paragraph Fr. Weinandy goes so far as to say the following: ‘Although Gregory Palamas wanted to clarify and enhance the biblical Christian notion of God, he, in the end, utterly failed, for he disfigured the very heart of the Christian gospel.’ In this response piece I first clarify the core distinctives of Palamism and then point out deficiencies in Weinandy's argument.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Systematic TheologySame topicTheology and Philosophy of EvilFrench-language works237,207