Bibliographic record
Abstract
My NPO looks at how the dichotomy of secular and sacred hinders North American Christians from embracing work as ministry. It was apparent that the dichotomy of secular and sacred was deeply engrained in each participant. They had a difficult time maneuvering around it during the NPO process. Christians look to the church to assist with the integration of one’s faith into their secular vocations. It clear that the local church doesn’t routinely discuss ways to bridge the dichotomy of the “sacred versus secular” gap. I currently serve as an adjunct professor at Clearwater Bible College in Canada, while pastoring a small church and working as a real estate agent in the Seattle area. After teaching a course on the theology of vocation and serving as a pastor, I have observed that the widely accepted dichotomy between sacred and secular has hindered many Christians from embracing their jobs as expressions of their service to God. My project is a book entitled Work: Does it Matter to God? This book introduces the reader to a theology of vocation through the framework of kingdom theology and the lordship of Jesus Christ. The book is divided into three sections. Section one looks at what kingdom work is and why it is important. Section two unfolds how Christians are created, redeemed, and gifted for kingdom work. Section three looks at the reality of being a kingdom worker in a secular culture. The book is designed to help equip undergraduate students at Clearwater Bible College to equip them to build bridges between faith and work. Many of these students come from a rural setting in Canada and are homeschooled. The majority of the students will engage in careers in the marketplace. A small percentage of them will become bi-vocational pastors of rural churches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".