MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W66300799 · doi:10.51644/bbse3274

The Irony of the Resurrection

2014· article· en· W66300799 on OpenAlex
Robert A. Kelly

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

VenueConsensus · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIronyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1:18ff (The Octave of Easter)his version of the Easter story, which might well be the oldest version, has always made the church uncomfortable.I'm sure you've all learned from Tim that from early on the Christian community, unable to be satisfied with the ending of Mark as it stood tried to make it better.There were at least two main attempts which made it all come together much more nicely.In those endings the disciples were not silent.They spread the story to the ends of the earth.Of course, the first communities who added these endings knew that they had heard precisely because those original women and men had not remained silent.So they improved on what Mark had written.In the process, though, they missed the point about Easter that Mark was trying to make.The original Easter was not at all pretty.There were no cute bunny rabbits, no chocolate eggs, no pastel colours, no new dresses and bonnets, no parades, no mass choirs singing alleluia this and alleluia that, no lilies adorning Friday's cross.The first Easter was bleak.The disciples were hiding for fear of ending up just like their erstwhile leader -the one they thought might lead the revolution -the Romans and their clerical collaborators were comfortably asleep in their palaces and nice houses, the stark, bloody cross was still presiding over the world.In this bleakness the women went out to do what they had not had time to do on Friday, prepare the body for an eternity in the grave and found the scene not at all what they expected.Not a sealed tomb, but some guy dressed in white telling them some cock and bull story about Jesus being raised and heading off to Galilee.No wonder they ran off afraid and kept their mouths shut.I have no doubt that we are just as dissatisfied with the ending of Mark as the earliest Christians were.Of course, we are much too sophisticated to just make up a better ending -God forbid!We're not a bunch of crazy Fundamentalists!No, we, in our academic smugness interpret the story.We spin out some long, involved hermeneutical theory about "narrative" and "story" and "mythos" to make ourselves feel better.In the end, though, our sophisticated tricks are just our own version of running off afraid.We say nothing by talking our silly heads off.Whether the early communities or ourselves, either way we miss the point that Mark is trying to make.We can begin to see that point when we listen to the first lesson we read this evening from Paul: "The message of the cross is sheer folly to those on the way to destruction ." Wait a minute!Cross?Isn't that Friday's message?By Sunday haven't we moved beyond the now empty cross?Actually, no we haven't.Easter is still about the crucified Jesus.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.270 · 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