MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416211643 · doi:10.1080/09637494.2025.2577540

Christian Zionisms in historical depth and geographical breadth: a typology

2025· article· en· W4416211643 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Freston

Bibliographic record

VenueReligion State & Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTypologyField (mathematics)Work (physics)Ethnic group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contribution contends that the longue durée of the Christian Zionist phenomenon, its geographical breadth, and its ideological diversity, suggest the need for a typology of Christian Zionisms, based on the plurality of motivations. As background to this, the contribution briefly portrays the lengthy history of restorationism/Christian Zionism in terms of its mutability, having evolved in stages determined by the relationship between the two major Christian expectations regarding the Jews: conversion to Christianity and restoration to Palestine. There have also been changing perceptions of enemies and allies, and a changing focus, from homeland to state to extent of territory. Regarding geographical expansion, the emphasis is on religious geography as the major determinant. Reasons are mooted for the overwhelmingly Protestant nature of CZ, and for its recent growth in the Global South. A typology is then presented, of seven ‘ideal types’ of CZ: prophetic, prosperity, covenantal, cultural, humanitarian, Islamophobic, and indigenous. The contribution concludes with remarks on the many surprises in the historical and geographical trajectory of CZ.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligion State & SocietySame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207