Form and relationship of the social networks of the New Testament

The four canonical Gospels represent parallel narratives from multiple sources, and their relationship to each other has been studied using a variety of textual approaches. Here, social network analysis techniques are applied to social networks derived from the New Testament narratives contained in the Gospels and Acts, in order to explore their structure and relationships. Using maximum likelihood estimation, the degree distributions of the social networks of a Combined Gospel comprised of the four individual Gospels, and Acts, both approximate to a power law with exponential cutoff. The heavy-tailed forms of the degree distributions are emergent from the process of composition, and amalgamation of sources, and represent a complex process of self-organization. Nodes (characters) that deviate from the best fit line are shown to identify unusual or key features in a narrative. The use of network alignments, utilizing edge identity, is introduced in order to measure similarity between social networks. This approach allows the construction of a pairwise distance matrix for the four individual Gospels social networks, from which a ‘phylogenetic tree’ of social network relatedness can be generated. Using minimum evolution, least squares and neighbor-joining tree construction approaches, a Gospel ‘phylogenetic tree’ was calculated, utilizing nonparametric bootstrapping as a test for tree stability. The analysis recovered the close relationship between the three synoptic Gospels, with Mark most closely related to Matthew, consistent with the proposed heavy borrowing from Mark during the composition of Matthew. The Gospel of John is recovered as an outgroup, reflecting its divergent nature. Consequently, the network tree methodology appears a promising technique for delineating similarity between empirical networks in general, and a range of potential applications are described.

[1]  Ralph Kenna,et al.  Network analysis of the Viking Age in Ireland as portrayed in Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh , 2017, Royal Society Open Science.

[2]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[3]  Behnam Neyshabur,et al.  NETAL: a new graph-based method for global alignment of protein-protein interaction networks , 2013, Bioinform..

[4]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  The Psychobiology of Language , 2022 .

[5]  Claudia Bank,et al.  A systematic survey of an intragenic epistatic landscape , 2014, bioRxiv.

[6]  Andrea Montanari,et al.  The spread of innovations in social networks , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  M. Newman,et al.  Why social networks are different from other types of networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[8]  W. Dreyer The amazing growth of the early church , 2012 .

[9]  R. Schiffer Psychobiology of Language , 1986 .

[10]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[11]  D. Goldfarb A family of variable-metric methods derived by variational means , 1970 .

[12]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[13]  Jugal K. Kalita,et al.  A comparison of algorithms for the pairwise alignment of biological networks , 2014, Bioinform..

[14]  Natasa Przulj,et al.  Integrative network alignment reveals large regions of global network similarity in yeast and human , 2011, Bioinform..

[15]  Steven E. Massey,et al.  Social network analysis of the biblical Moses , 2016, Applied Network Science.

[16]  John Scott,et al.  Social Network Analysis, Overview of , 2009, Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science.

[17]  Burnett Hillman Streeter,et al.  The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins, Treating of the Manuscript Tradition, Sources, Authorship, & Dates , 2008 .

[18]  Kathleen McKeown,et al.  Extracting Social Networks from Literary Fiction , 2010, ACL.

[19]  A. Mehri,et al.  Variation of Zipf's exponent in one hundred live languages: A study of the Holy Bible translations , 2017 .

[20]  Andrzej Kulig,et al.  Quantifying origin and character of long-range correlations in narrative texts , 2014, Inf. Sci..

[21]  Ralph Kenna,et al.  Universal properties of mythological networks , 2012, ArXiv.

[22]  S. N. Dorogovtsev,et al.  Evolution of networks with aging of sites , 2000, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[23]  Q. Vuong Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-Nested Hypotheses , 1989 .

[24]  J. McKenzie Alexander,et al.  The Structural Evolution of Morality , 2008 .

[25]  W. Förster,et al.  Palestinian Judaism in New Testament times , 1964 .

[26]  Gert Sabidussi,et al.  The centrality index of a graph , 1966 .

[27]  Peer Bork,et al.  iPath2.0: interactive pathway explorer , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[28]  Ralph Kenna,et al.  Network analysis of the Íslendinga sögur – the Sagas of Icelanders , 2013, ArXiv.

[29]  P. Sellew Oral and Written Sources in Mark 4.1–34 , 1990, New Testament Studies.

[30]  V. Eguíluz,et al.  Growing scale-free networks with small-world behavior. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[31]  A. G. Pedersen,et al.  Computational Molecular Evolution , 2013 .

[32]  D. Carson Current Source Criticism of the Fourth Gospel: Some Methodological Questions , 1978 .

[33]  Hugues Bersini,et al.  Topology Analysis of Social Networks Extracted from Literature , 2015, PloS one.

[34]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[35]  J. Bull,et al.  An Empirical Test of Bootstrapping as a Method for Assessing Confidence in Phylogenetic Analysis , 1993 .

[36]  J. Miro-Julia,et al.  Marvel Universe looks almost like a real social network , 2002 .

[37]  Mihail N. Kolountzakis,et al.  Efficient Triangle Counting in Large Graphs via Degree-Based Vertex Partitioning , 2010, Internet Math..

[38]  John B Rundle,et al.  Self-organized complexity in the physical, biological, and social sciences , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[39]  J. Krause,et al.  Personality in the context of social networks , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[40]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .

[41]  C. G. Broyden The Convergence of a Class of Double-rank Minimization Algorithms 2. The New Algorithm , 1970 .

[42]  H E Stanley,et al.  Classes of small-world networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[43]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[44]  J. Felsenstein CONFIDENCE LIMITS ON PHYLOGENIES: AN APPROACH USING THE BOOTSTRAP , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[45]  Richard P. Taylor,et al.  Fractal analysis of Pollock's drip paintings , 1999, Nature.

[46]  D. Shanno Conditioning of Quasi-Newton Methods for Function Minimization , 1970 .

[47]  R. Fletcher,et al.  A New Approach to Variable Metric Algorithms , 1970, Comput. J..

[48]  R. Jackson,et al.  The Matthew Effect in Science , 1988, International journal of dermatology.

[49]  Albert Wilansky,et al.  Topology for Analysis , 1970 .

[50]  Marshall D. Johnson The Purpose of the Biblical Genealogies: With Special Reference to the Setting of the Genealogies of Jesus , 1969 .

[51]  B. Mishra,et al.  On the Origin of Biomolecular Networks , 2019, Front. Genet..

[52]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Hierarchical organization in complex networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[53]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[54]  E. Sanders The Historical Figure of Jesus , 1993 .

[55]  P. M. Gleiser How to become a superhero , 2007 .

[56]  N. Saitou,et al.  The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. , 1987, Molecular biology and evolution.

[57]  C. G. Broyden The Convergence of a Class of Double-rank Minimization Algorithms 1. General Considerations , 1970 .

[58]  Yifan Hu,et al.  Efficient, High-Quality Force-Directed Graph Drawing , 2006 .

[59]  Philip K. Maini,et al.  Turbulent Luminance in Impassioned van Gogh Paintings , 2007, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision.

[60]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  Accessibility of Cities in the Digital Economy , 2004, cond-mat/0412004.

[61]  Michael Houseman,et al.  Kinship Network Analysis , 2009 .

[62]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[63]  Christian Borgs,et al.  Emergence of tempered preferential attachment from optimization , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[64]  M. Goodacre,et al.  The Synoptic Problem: A Way through the Maze , 2001 .

[65]  Stephen B. Seidman,et al.  Network structure and minimum degree , 1983 .

[66]  David Hinkley,et al.  Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife , 2008 .

[67]  L L Cavalli-Sforza,et al.  Phylogenetic analysis. Models and estimation procedures. , 1967, American journal of human genetics.

[68]  M. Noth A history of Pentateuchal traditions , 1972 .

[69]  B. Efron,et al.  Bootstrap confidence levels for phylogenetic trees. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[70]  Joshua A. Tucker,et al.  Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[71]  Mathieu Bastian,et al.  Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating Networks , 2009, ICWSM.

[72]  B. Efron,et al.  Bootstrap confidence levels for phylogenetic trees. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[73]  M E J Newman Assortative mixing in networks. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[74]  N. Galtier Sampling properties of the bootstrap support in molecular phylogeny: influence of nonindependence among sites. , 2004, Systematic biology.

[75]  S. Piantadosi Zipf’s word frequency law in natural language: A critical review and future directions , 2014, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[76]  Stefano Mossa,et al.  Truncation of power law behavior in "scale-free" network models due to information filtering. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[77]  M. Newman Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law , 2005 .

[78]  Alan M. Frieze,et al.  Random graphs , 2006, SODA '06.

[79]  Larry Nazareth,et al.  A family of variable metric updates , 1977, Math. Program..

[80]  Luca Ridolfi,et al.  Complex Networks Unveiling Spatial Patterns in Turbulence , 2016, Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos.

[81]  G. Vermès,et al.  The Quest for the Historical Jesus , 2002 .

[82]  Michael Mitzenmacher,et al.  A Brief History of Generative Models for Power Law and Lognormal Distributions , 2004, Internet Math..