Paul’s inclusive missionary theology for people living with disabilities in Kilifi, Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates how Paul’s Missionary Theology (PMT) in the church at Corinth can enhance the Church Missional Paradigm (CMP) in the Anglican Kilifi Archdeaconry for People Living with Disabilities (PLWD). Limited to the biblical texts of 1 Corinthians 12:1–14 and 2 Corinthians 8:1–9, the study identifies critical focuses on Paul’s inclusive and community-centred theology of mission. The research aimed to explore the current CMP to PLWD in Kilifi Archdeaconry, critically analyse Paul’s approach in Corinth, and examine how these practices could enhance the missional engagement of Kilifi Archdeaconry to PLWD. Guided by Kirk Franklin’s theory of Friendship and Community in the missio Dei, the study employed qualitative research methods including interviews and focus group discussions. The oral sources gathered from 12 respondents, the basis for generating basic, organising and global themes, were analysed using Jennifer Attride’s thematic analysis – a social scientific tool for thematic analysis – to address the question: What has Kilifi Archdeaconry accomplished regarding the mission of PLWD? The research findings reveal a grounded theory, namely, cultural tensions, leadership instability and societal stigmatisation hinder effective inclusive missions to PLWD. However, PMT that emphasises inclusivity in diversity portends the potential for enhancing missional outreach to PLWD by regarding them as crucial members of God’s family. Contribution: By using Paul’s missionary theology to enhance missional outreach to PLWD, the study contextualises biblical theology in religious traditions in Africa. Similarly, the inclusivity in diversity complements Mojola and Dhunpath’s call for South African organisations to develop disability employment policies for PLWD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".