Holism: Serving the Whole Person
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Any analysis of the world’s population at the beginning of the 21st century reveals the fact that the vast majority of the Unreached People Groups (UPG) are extremely poor, live in difficult circumstances and are located in regions where traditional evangelical missions are not allowed or wanted. Since this segment of the earth’s population represents approximately two billion people or nearly 1/3rd of the globe, they cannot be ignored or considered too difficult to reach. Hesselgrave related how his university professor had visited Japan after WWII to find a poverty-stricken and demoralized population. After Hesselgrave gave his proposal for his missionary objectives his professor commented, "You might want to do some more thinking about that. My observation was that the Japanese people want a changed economic picture right now, not a pie in the sky by and by " (Hesselgrave, 2005, p. 117). The needs of people are varied. Any mission must take into account the whole of human needs: spiritual, social and personal. Holistic mission include both evangelism and church planting as well as development and social transformation. The amount of involvement will depend upon needs in specific environments, the need of the missionary
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| 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".