Ashmore OTS 502 Spring '09

Divinity School Program Learning Outcomes<= o:p>

Mission= Statements

MRE Program Mission<= /st1:City>

MDiv Program Mission

The mission of = the Master of Religious Education degree is to equip persons for competent leadership in Christian Education to serve congregational ministries and other religious institutions. This purpose is consistent with the mission= of Shaw University Divinity School; the Master of Religious Education program focuses on leadership in the “practice of ministry,” particularly in the African American Church

The mission of = the Master of Divinity degree is to prepare persons for ordained ministry, for chaplaincy, general pastoral and religious leadership responsibilities in congregations and other settings, and to prepare some students for admiss= ion to advanced programs oriented to theological research and teaching. The purpose is consistent with the mission of Shaw University Divinity School; the Master of Divinity program focuses on leadership in the “practi= ce of ministry,” particularly in the African American church

= Program Goals

MRE Program Goals

MDiv Program Goals

1. to eq= uip students with the capacity for critical and constructive theological reflection regarding the content and processes of educational ministry;

2. to he= lp students understand the educational, social, and behavioral sciences that undergird educational practice, as well as the cultural contexts in which educational ministry occurs;

3. to as= sist students with personal growth and spiritual maturity; and

4. to pr= ovides skills in teaching and in design, administration, and assessment of educational programming.

1.= to provide students with an intellectual atmosphere and a comprehensive, discriminating understanding of our relig= ious heritage;

2.= to enhance student training for Christian ministry, mindful of global, and diverse cross cultural, and non-American Christianities, and interaction with other faith traditions;

3.= to support students' development in the pe= rsonal and spiritual capacities necessary for pastoral and religious leadership, advancing growth in personal faith, emotional maturity, moral integrity, = and public witness;

4.= to expand programmatic activities, service= s, and academic programming to enhance student capacity for ministerial and publ= ic leadership.

Program Learning Outcomes=

MRE Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)<= /o:p>

MDiv Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)=

1. Gradu= ates will demonstrate a capacity to articulate an understanding of the scriptu= ral, historical, and theological traditions of particular Christian traditions= and of the broader community of faith

2. Gradu= ates will evaluate teaching and learning theories for the purpose of developin= g a distinctly Christian philosophy of educating God’s people;

3. Gradu= ates will demonstrate a capacity for critical reflection on how their unique personalities, backgrounds, and gifts and abilities relate to the ministr= y of Christian education;

4. Gradu= ates will demonstrate a capacity to design and to carry out a lesson plan nece= ssary for effective educational ministries

2. Gradu= ates will develop a consciousness about and a capacity to reflect critically on issues of diversity, globalization, and cross cultural concerns;

3. Gradu= ates will demonstrate a capacity for critical reflection on how their unique personalities, backgrounds, and gifts and abilities relate to the role of= the minister as leader, guide, and servant of the faith community;=

4. Gradu= ates will demonstrate a capacity to create programs and have a critical voice = in ministerial and public leadership

Texts and Blackboard

Required

Brown, Michael Joseph. 2004. Blackening of the Bible. Trinity Press International. =

Gorman, Micha= el J. 2001. Elements of Biblical Exegesis. Hendrickson.

Soulen, Richa= rd and R. Kendall Soulen. 2001. Handbook of Biblical Criticism<= /i>. 3^rd Edition. Westminster John Knox. =

Tiffany, Fred= erick, and Sharon Ringe. 1996. Biblical Interpretation: A Road= Map. Abingdon.

Weems, Renita= . 2005. Just A Sister Away. Revised Edition. Warner Books.

=

Optional<= /o:p>

Hauerwas, Stanley. 1993. Unleashing = the Scripture. Abingdon.

Levenson, Jon= . 1994. Creation and the Persistence of= Evil. Princeton Universit= y Press.

Weems, Renita= . 1995. Battered Love. Fortress.
=

Please bring a= Bible to class every day. The following Bibles are acceptabl= e for use in this class:

NRSV: HarperCollins Study Bible, New Interpreter’s Study Bible, New Oxford Annotated Bible.

NIV: Zondervan’s NIV Study Bible<= o:p>

Do not<= /b> use the Authorized Version (King James), Ne= w King James, any Amplified Bible, New Living Translation, Contemporary English Version, or any paraphrased Bible (such as The Message) in this clas= s.

=

Blackboard

This course will = use Blackboard. The new Blackboar= d site can be accessed from the University’s main website, www.shawuniversity.edu.

=

=

= Course Description
Prerequisite:<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> OTS 501

The focus of this= course is building interpretative skills. In addition to learning and applying critical methods to various tex= ts, students will also examine the philosophical and theological presupposition= s of the methods. Students will co= nsider issues relating to the interpretation of the text, such as the canonical process, the authority of the text, the relationship of the Old Testament to the New, etc.

Student Learning Outcomes<= /b>

Student Learning Outcomes (SLO)

At the completion of this course, students= will be able to:

Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

(Assessment Tools)

Linkage to M= Div Program Learning Outcomes

Linkage to MRE Program Learning Outcomes

1. describe at least three different contemporary approaches to the interpretation of the text and how each operates

Blackboard Assi= gnments

1

1

2. describe how her/his own context affects her/his interpretation of the text

Blackboard Assi= gnments

1, 3=

1, 3=

3. describe how theology and interp= retation are interrelated

Blackboard Assi= gnments,

Book Review

1

1

4. describe how to use the following resources for interpretation: Bible dictionary, commentary, concordance

Library Assignm= ent,

Exegesis Paper<= o:p>

1

1

5. write an exegesis paper using a standard format

Exegesis Paper<= o:p>

1

1

6. explain the possible ways one ca= n move from the text to teaching or preaching the text

Contemporary Application Paper

1

1, 3=

7. explain in her/his own words how= the text of the Old Testament applies to us today

Contemporary Application Paper

1

1

=

=

Attendance and Classroom Decorum

Attendance

The University po= licy on absences applies in this class. Students may not have more unexcused absences than the number= of times the class meets in a week (1). Students must keep excused absences to a minimum. It will be very difficult for a stu= dent to pass this course if she/he misses more than 1/4 of the class meetings (3).   Students who have multiple absences should consult with the instructor to determine if she/he should withdraw from the class. Each student is responsible for getting class notes, handouts, and o= ther materials and for submitting any assignments for any class she/he misses.

Decorum=

Class will begin = and end on time. Please respect your = fellow students by arriving before class starts and remaining until class is over. Please turn cell phones= off before class begins. Vigorous discussion is encouraged in class. Students will demonstrate respect for each other in all class discussions. As adult learner= s, students are expected to dress and conduct themselves appropriately in clas= s.

=

=

= Assignments

Please Note! All assignments are due on the date(s) indicated below. Any assignment submitted after the= due date for any reason cannot receive an A.&n= bsp; The highest grade possible for any such assignment is B.

=

Honor Pledge

All assignments a= re submitted with the following honor pledge implied.

I affirm that the= content of this assignment is my own work. Nothing in this work is copied from a textbook, other book or online source, or another student except where permitted and properly documented.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> I understand that if I violate this affirmation I will receive a failing grade on this assignment and possibly = in the class. =

The University Ha= ndbook states that repeated instances of plagiarism will result in suspension and/= or expulsion from school. <= /o:p>

=

M.Div./M.R.E. Assignments

Because this is a required course both for M.Div. and M.R.E. students, different requirements will apply. The differences in assignments will be noted below.

Attendance, Preparation, Participation

Students are expected to attend class and participate fully in all discussions and exercises. St= udent who have attend class regularly, arrive on time and remain for the full per= iod, participate in all activities, and demonstrate they have prepared for class will receive the highest grades. The rubric for class participation applies to this assignment, with = 2.5 points assigned to each criterion.

Students who have missed a class will submit a brief summary of a= nd reaction to the assigned reading for the date. This summary will be no more than = one page and will be submitted on the Discussion Board on Blackboard.

Date:           &= nbsp;   each class meeting

Weight:        &= nbsp; 10%

=

Blackboard Assignments

Students will res= pond to specific topics posted on Blackboard that relate directly to issues that ha= ve been discussed in class. The = topics are noted on the Class Schedule below, and fuller descriptions will be post= ed on the Discussion Board.

Dates:    &nb= sp;        Jan. 24, Jan. 31, Feb. 7, Feb. 14, Feb. 21, Feb. 28

Weight:    &n= bsp;      10%

Book Review<= /o:p>

Each student will= write a review on one of the optional texts, as assigned by the instructor. The review will follow the format = given at the end of the syllabus. I= t should not exceed eight pages, typed, double-spaced. The rubric for the assignment is available on Blackboard.

Date:           &= nbsp;   Feb. 14

Weight:        &= nbsp; 15%

Library Assignment

Students will complete an assignment that requires work in the Library that relates to using tools for exegesis. Details are at the end of this syl= labus. The rubric for the assignment is available on Blackboard.

Date:    &nbs= p;          Mar. 7

Weight:    &n= bsp;      15%

Exegesis Paper

Each student will= write an exegesis paper on a text from the Old Testament. The paper will follow the format g= iven in Gorman. It should be approximately 12-15 pages, typed, double-spaced. The paper will be completed in the following stages: 1) each stu= dent will complete a rough draft of the paper; 2) each student will exchange her= /his rough draft with an assigned member of the class; 3) each student will writ= e a critique of the rough draft she/he has been given and return it to both the student and the instructor; 4) each student, using the comments from the ro= ugh draft critique, will write a final draft of the paper for final submission.= The rubric for the assignment is a= vailable on Blackboard.

Dates:             First Draft, March 21

     &nb= sp;            =       Critique of Draft, April 4

     &nb= sp;            =       Final Draft, April 18

Weight:        &= nbsp; 25%

=

Contemporary Application Paper

Each student will submit a paper reflecting on how the text she/he examined in the exegesis paper applies to the contemporary world.

M.Div.<= /b> students will write a paper describing thre= e ways the text might be used in the life of the church. At least one of these must be a description of how the text might be preached (but you are not asked= to write a sermon). At least one= of these must be a use of the text in a context other than preaching (use in worship such as a funeral, wedding, baptism, etc.; use in pastoral care; us= e in teaching; etc.). Each descrip= tion of a use must include a detailed explanation of why this text is appropriat= e to this use, how this text speaks to the needs of the contemporary world, and = what other resources one might use in conjunction with the text (e.g., which hym= ns would be appropriate with a sermon on the text, which other texts one might= use along with this text in teaching, etc.).

M.R.E.<= /b> students will write a paper describing three different creative means of teaching the text (i.e., something other than lecturing or class discussion). Each description must include a description of an age/interest group= for which it is intended, a detailed explanation of why this text is appropriat= e to this group, how this text speaks to the needs of the contemporary world, and what resources would be needed in order to present the text in this manner.=

The assignment will be graded on the following: 1) how well the student makes a ca= se for the connections between the text and the contemporary world; and 2) how thoroughly the student demonstrates the appropriateness of the text to the context. The assignment shoul= d not exceed eight pages, typed, double-spaced.&= nbsp; The rubric for the assignment is available on Blackboard.=

Date:           &= nbsp;   May 2

Weight:    &n= bsp;      25%

=

=

Class Schedule

<= /p> <= /p> Date	<= /p> <= /p> Topics =	Student Learning Outcome=	<= /p> Assigned Reading	<= /p> Mode of Instruction	<= /p> Related Assignment=	<= /p> <= /p> Resources	<= /p> Assessment Tool
Jan. 17	Introduction	2=				Syllabus, handouts<= o:p>	Assessment
Jan. 24	Self – Identi= ty	2=	Blackening of th= e Bible, 1-88	Discussion, group w= ork	Blackboard Discussi= on: Who are you?	Class handouts=	Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment
Jan. 31	Self – Theolo= gy	2=	Blackening of th= e Bible, 89-119	Discussion	Blackboard Discussi= on: How do you read the Bible?<= /o:p>	Assigned book<= /o:p>	Class Participation= , Book Review, Blackboard Assignment
Feb. 7	Self – Commun= ity	1, 2, 3<= /span>	Blackening of th= e Bible, 120-183	Discussion, group w= ork	Blackboard Discussi= on: What does your community say?	Assigned book<= /o:p>	Class Participation= , Book Review, Blackboard Assignment
Feb. 14	Text – The Wo= rld Behind the Text (Diachronic Methods)	1, 2, 3<= /span>	Biblical Interpr= etation: A Roadmap, 13-66; Handbook of Biblical Criticism, entries on Biblical Criticism, Diachronic – Synchronic, Exegesis, Hermeneutics, Historical – Critical Method, Form Criticism, Graf-Wellhausen Hypothesis, Historical Criticism, Redaction Criticism, Rh= etorical Criticism, Source, Criticism, Text Criticism	Discussion, group w= ork	Book Review Due<= /span> Blackboard Discussi= on: Critique of one diachronic metho= d	Examples of Diachro= nic Approaches	Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment
Feb. 21	Text – The Wo= rld of the Text (Synchronic Methods)	1, 2, 3<= /span>	Biblical Interpretation: A Roadmap, 67-125; Handbook of Biblical Criticism, entries on Canonical Criticism, Deconstruction, Literary Criticism, Intertextuality, Narrative Criticism	Discussion, group w= ork	Blackboard Discussi= on: Critique of one synchronic metho= d	Examples of Synchro= nic Approaches	Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment
Feb. 28	Text – The Wo= rld in Front of the Text (Existential Methods)	1, 2, 3<= /span>	Biblical Interpretation: A Roadmap, 129-180; Handbook of Biblical Criticism, entries on Advocacy Criticism, Afrocentric Biblical Interpretation, Existentialist – Existential, Feminist Biblical Interpretation, Hermeneutical Circle, Womanist Biblical Interpretation<= /p>	Discussion, group w= ork	Blackboard Discussi= on: Critique of one existential metho= d	Examples of Existential approaches	Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment
Mar. 7	Text – Exeget= ical Method	1, 2, 3, 4	Elements of Bibl= ical Exegesis, 1-73	Discussion, individ= ual meetings	Library Assignme= nt Due		Class Participation= , Library Assignment, Exegesis Paper
Mar. 14	World – Exege= ting the World	2, 3, 4, 5	Elements of Bibl= ical Exegesis, 75-145	Discussion, individ= ual meetings			Class Participation= , Exegesis Paper
Mar. 21	World – Making Connections	2, 3, 4, 5	Elements of Bibl= ical Exegesis, 147-236<= /span>	Discussion, individ= ual meetings	Rough Draft Due<= o:p>		Class Participation, Exegesis Paper
Mar. 28	No Class Meeting
Apr. 4	Using the Text=	2, 3, 4, 5	Just a Sister Aw= ay, 1-107	Discussion, individ= ual meetings	Critique of Roug= h Draft Due	Examples of sermons=	Contemporary Applic= ation Paper
Apr. 11	No Class Meeting -- Easter Break
Apr. 18	Using the Text=	6, 7	Just a Sister Aw= ay, 109-220	Discussion	Final Draft of E= xegesis Paper Due	Examples of Church School Lessons=	Contemporary Applic= ation Paper
Apr. 25	Using the Text=	6, 7		Discussion			Class Participation=
May 2=	No Class Meeting	Contemporary App= lication Paper Due

<= /p>

Date

<= /p>

Topics =

Student Learning Outcome=

<= /p>

Assigned Reading

<= /p>

Mode of Instruction

<= /p>

Related Assignment=

<= /p>

Resources

<= /p>

Assessment Tool

Jan. 17

Introduction

Syllabus, handouts<= o:p>

Assessment

Jan. 24

Self – Identi= ty

Blackening of th= e Bible, 1-88

Discussion, group w= ork

Blackboard Discussi= on: Who are you?

Class handouts=

Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment

Jan. 31

Self – Theolo= gy

Blackening of th= e Bible, 89-119

Discussion

Blackboard Discussi= on: How do you read the Bible?<= /o:p>

Assigned book<= /o:p>

Class Participation= , Book Review, Blackboard Assignment

Feb. 7

Self – Commun= ity

1, 2, 3<= /span>

Blackening of th= e Bible, 120-183

Discussion, group w= ork

Blackboard Discussi= on: What does your community say?

Assigned book<= /o:p>

Class Participation= , Book Review, Blackboard Assignment

Feb. 14

Text – The Wo= rld Behind the Text (Diachronic Methods)

1, 2, 3<= /span>

Biblical Interpr= etation: A Roadmap, 13-66; Handbook of Biblical Criticism, entries on Biblical Criticism, Diachronic – Synchronic, Exegesis, Hermeneutics, Historical – Critical Method, Form Criticism, Graf-Wellhausen Hypothesis, Historical Criticism, Redaction Criticism, Rh= etorical Criticism, Source, Criticism, Text Criticism

Discussion, group w= ork

Book Review Due<= /span>

Blackboard Discussi= on: Critique of one diachronic metho= d

Examples of Diachro= nic Approaches

Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment

Feb. 21

Text – The Wo= rld of the Text (Synchronic Methods)

1, 2, 3<= /span>

Biblical Interpretation: A Roadmap, 67-125; Handbook of Biblical Criticism, entries on Canonical Criticism, Deconstruction, Literary Criticism, Intertextuality, Narrative Criticism

Discussion, group w= ork

Blackboard Discussi= on: Critique of one synchronic metho= d

Examples of Synchro= nic Approaches

Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment

Feb. 28

Text – The Wo= rld in Front of the Text (Existential Methods)

1, 2, 3<= /span>

Biblical Interpretation: A Roadmap, 129-180; Handbook of Biblical Criticism, entries on Advocacy Criticism, Afrocentric Biblical Interpretation, Existentialist – Existential, Feminist Biblical Interpretation, Hermeneutical Circle, Womanist Biblical Interpretation<= /p>

Discussion, group w= ork

Blackboard Discussi= on: Critique of one existential metho= d

Examples of Existential approaches

Class Participation= , Blackboard Assignment

Mar. 7

Text – Exeget= ical Method

1, 2, 3, 4

Elements of Bibl= ical Exegesis, 1-73

Discussion, individ= ual meetings

Library Assignme= nt Due

Class Participation= , Library Assignment, Exegesis Paper

Mar. 14

World – Exege= ting the World

2, 3, 4, 5

Elements of Bibl= ical Exegesis, 75-145

Discussion, individ= ual meetings

Class Participation= , Exegesis Paper

Mar. 21

World – Making Connections

2, 3, 4, 5

Elements of Bibl= ical Exegesis, 147-236<= /span>

Discussion, individ= ual meetings

Rough Draft Due<= o:p>

Class Participation, Exegesis Paper

Mar. 28

No Class Meeting

Apr. 4

Using the Text=

2, 3, 4, 5

Just a Sister Aw= ay, 1-107

Discussion, individ= ual meetings

Critique of Roug= h Draft Due

Examples of sermons=

Contemporary Applic= ation Paper

Apr. 11

No Class Meeting -- Easter Break

Apr. 18

Using the Text=

6, 7

Just a Sister Aw= ay, 109-220

Discussion

Final Draft of E= xegesis Paper Due

Examples of Church School Lessons=

Contemporary Applic= ation Paper

Apr. 25

Using the Text=

6, 7

Discussion

Class Participation=

May 2=

No Class Meeting

Contemporary App= lication Paper Due

= Evaluation and Grading

This course will = employ a 10 point scale:

90-100 A

80-89 &= nbsp; B

70-79 &= nbsp; C

60-69 &= nbsp; D

below 60 = F

Please note: because this is a required course, students will have to receive a minimum grade of C to avoid repeating the course.

Incomplete

An Incomplete may= be granted only when extraordinary circumstances prevent a student from comple= ting the work before the end of the semester.&n= bsp; A student must request an incomplete, state a reason why he/she cann= ot complete the work, and sign the I-Grade Form in order for the incomplete to= be granted. This must be complet= ed prior to the date for final submission of grades (May 12).

Selected Bibliography

In addition to th= e text books, students may find the following books useful in thinking about interpretation of the text.

Bailey, Randa= ll, Ed. Yet With a Steady Beat= : Contemporary U.S. Afrocentric Biblical Int= erpretation. Semeia Studies. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. This collection of essa= ys follows up on the work in Stony the Road. Bailey and a variety of authors (including Dr. Kirk-Duggan) examine biblical texts and issues from an Afroc= entric perspective.

Barton, John.= Reading the Old Testament: Method in Biblical Study. Revised Edition. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996. A very= good examination of the philosophical underpinnings of the various approaches to interpretation that have been applied to the Old Testament.

Felder, Cain Hope. Troubling Biblical W= aters. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1989. Before Stony the Road, Feld= er wrote this book that lays out his approach to African American interpretati= on.

-------------= -----. Stony the Road We Trod. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1991. This collection of essays remains = one of the most significant resources for understanding African American Biblical interpretation. A variety of scholars describe the issues related to interpretation in general in relate= d to specific biblical texts.

Gillingham, S= usan E. One Bible, Many Voices:= Different Approaches to Biblical S= tudies. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. This i= s a very readable description of the various approaches to biblical interpretat= ion, the strengths and weaknesses inherent in each.

Goldingay, Jo= hn. Models for Interpretation of Scripture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Goldingay organizes his study by t= ypes of literature in the Bible. T= his study emphasizes the theological implications of different approaches to interpretation, and is written from a self-consciously Evangelical perspective.

Hayes, John H= . and Carl R. Holladay. Biblical Exegesis: A Beginner’s Handbook. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1987. Do not be fooled by the subtitle &= #8211; this is a very complicated approach to exegesis that emphasizes Historical-Critical issues and approaches.

Hayes, John H= ., Ed. Methods of Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2004. This collection of essays is repri= nted from the general articles in the New Interpreter’s Bible. The articles are very uneven. Many are useful and very readable,= but some are either very difficult or far too brief to cover the subject adequately.

Steck, Odil.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Old Testament Exegesis: A Guide to the Methodology. Second Edition. Trans., James D. Nogalski. Society of Biblical Literature Res= ources for Biblical Study. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998. An approach to exegesis that is st= eeped in the Historical-Critical Method. <= /span>

Stuart, Dougl= as. Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastor= s. Third Edition. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001. A good alternative to Steck and Hayes and Holladay. Stuart also emphasizes the Historical-Critical Method, but his approach is much more accessible and ea= sier to follow than either Steck or Hayes and Holladay.

Trible, Phyll= is. God and the Rhetoric of Sexuali= ty. Overtures to Biblical Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978. Although it is thirty years old, t= his is a very, useable examination of the Old Testament from the perspective of feminist scholarship. Trible = argues that the Hebrew Bible presents many images of God that imply feminine quali= ties in God’s interaction with the world.

Ukpong, Justi= n, Ed. Reading the Bible in the Global Village. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002. This collection of essays from a m= eeting in Cape Town, South Africa, looks at how pe= ople in non-Western cultures read and interpret the text. Most of the contributors are Afric= an, and the essays challenge the Western, Euro-centric models of interpretation.

Book Review

Purpose=

This assignment i= s an exercise in critical reading, a skill that all students should develop. The assignment has four parts, and= must not exceed eight pages. =

The following par= ts must be in the paper in the following order.&nb= sp;

1. Identificatio= n (5 pts.)

Identify the book= through standard bibliographic format.

2. Contents = (20 pts.)

Briefly= give a factual summary of the main points t= he author makes.

3. Thesis (10 pts.)

State the author's thesis, that is, the main point the author wishes to convey. Note whether the thesis is explici= tly stated or only implied. =

4. Evaluation (65 pts. total)

This is the most important part of the assignment and should constitute the bulk of the pape= r.

Does the author successfully demonstrate his= /her point? (30 pts.)

How effective<= /span> is the author in proving the thesis of the book? Why is the author’s argument effective or ineffective? What about the author’= ;s argument is persuasive or not persuasive and why?&n= bsp; You should make specific references to the evidence the author employs. You should also note= other ways of interpreting this evidence, in so far as you are able to determine this.

What is the author’s attitude toward t= he subject? (15 pts.)

By specific refer= ence to the author's work, describe the author’s attitude to the subject matter. Does the author gener= ally appear objective? Does she/he reveal a particular attitude towards the subject matter? How does this effect the way he/she evaluates the evidence? =

Are there others who agree or disagree? (10 = pts.)

Does the author m= ention other positions on the issue(s) he/she discusses? How does he/she evaluate these positions? Does he/she appear= to be fair in these evaluations? &nbs= p;

Does the book contribute to your understandi= ng of the subject? (10 pts.)=

You should include consideration of whether or not this book is worth reading. Does it contribute significantly to scholarly debate? Did it help= you to understand the issue better or only confuse you? Would you recommend this book to o= thers interested in the topic?

Library Assignment

The purpose of th= is assignment is to familiarize students with the resources available for bibl= ical interpretation. In addition to understanding how to use these tools, this assignment will also help studen= ts differentiate among varieties of perspectives within these tools. The whole written assignment sh= ould not exceed eight pages, typed, double-spaced.

Text

The text for this assignment is Deuteronomy 8:1-10.&n= bsp; Use this text in reference to the parts below.

Bible Translat= ions

Read the text in the following translations:

New Revised Stand= ard Version

Today's New Inter= national Version

Contemporary Engl= ish Version

Amplified Bible

Answer<= /b> the following:

What are the chief differences you note among these translations? Of these translations, is there on= e that stands out as significantly different from the others? If so, why? Notice that the Amplified Bible ha= s some words in brackets. These are = added to the text (that is, these are the amplifications). How do these words change the sens= e or meaning of the text? Having r= ead over these texts, why do you think the Contemporary English Version and the Amplified Bible are not permitted for use in this class?

=

Bible Dictiona= ries

The following Bib= le Dictionaries will be of use in this section:

Anchor Bible Dictionary

Eerdmans Bible Dictionary

HarperCollins = Bible Dictionary

New Interprete= r's Dictionary of the Bible (us= e the older version if you can't find the new)

Select two of these and read the entry on the book of Deuteronomy.

Answer<= /b> the following:

Describe three po= ints of agreement among the articles. Describe at least one disagreement between the two. How does this material help you understand the text (8:1-10) better? Having read the text, what other articles do you think would be help= ful to read? Why? Read one other article in both dictionaries that you think would be helpful. What did you discover? Does it help you understand the te= xt better? How?

=

Bible Commenta= ries

There are many di= fferent types of commentaries. There = are several different ways of distinguishing the types, but for this assignment= we will divide them into three categories:&nb= sp; Critical Commentaries, Homiletical Commentaries, and Popular Commentaries. Within each of = these broad categories, there are significant differences of theology and perspective. Some series have= a strong theological commitments, others attempt to represent a broad range o= f theological views, and some series have a stronger commitment to academic study than theological reflection. Fo= r the purposes of doing the exegesis paper, students should use only critical= and homiletical commentaries, but for this assignment, students will need to consult a very common popular commentary in order to compare it with the ot= her types.

Select<= /b> from the list below two critical and= two homiletical commentaries on Deuteronomy, and get access to Matthew Henry's commentary.

Critical:        &= nbsp;   Anchor Bible (Moshe Weinfeld)

            =             J= PS Torah Commentary (Jeffrey Tigay note - reads from back to front)

Old Testament Lib= rary (Gerhard von Rad)

Word Biblical Commentaries (Duane Christensen)

Homiletical:     Interpretation (P= atrick Miller)

            =             N= ew Interpreter's Bible (Ronald Clements)

            =             S= myth and Helwys Commentaries (Mark Biddle)

Read the introductory material on the book and t= he commentary on the text of 8:1-10 (note that the different commentaries divi= de the material differently, and not all have a section devoted exclusively to verses 1-10). Also read Matthew Henry's commentary on Deut. 8:1-9 (he groups verse 10 with the next section).

Answer<= /b> the following:

How would you des= cribe the major differences among the three types of commentaries? How much attention does each comme= ntary pay to issues of translation, grammar, Hebrew text? Are there any items that you find = in common among the critical and homiletical commentaries? What, if any, are the significant = points of disagreement among the commentaries?&nb= sp; What are the two most important things that you discovered from the commentaries that affect your understanding of the text? Having read all the commentaries, = why do you think we would discourage use of Matthew Henry for exegesis?

=

Concordances

The purpose of a concordance is to find how a particular word or phrase is used in other tex= ts in the Bible. Concordances are keyed to specific translations. If you are reading the text in the NRSV, then you must have an NRSV concordance. Please remember = that there is little point in looking up very common words like "God" = or "love" in a concordance, unless you are trying to find verses in which a very common word occurs in the same verse as a much less common one.

Select<= /b> three words in Deut. 8:1-10 that you think = would be useful to look up in a concordance.

Look up the word and note where these words are = used in Deuteronomy, and in the rest of the Old Testament.

Read several of the other texts in which these w= ords are used.

Answer<= /b> the following:

Why did you selec= t these words? What did you discover = about how they are used in Deuteronomy? in the Old Testament? = Having done this, do you still think these are the best words to look up? Why or why not? What other words might you want to= look up? Why? Why do you think this assignment w= ould restrict the examination to the Old Testament?

=

Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) At the completion of this course, students= will be able to:	Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes (Assessment Tools)	Linkage to M= Div Program Learning Outcomes	Linkage to MRE Program Learning Outcomes
1. describe at least three different contemporary approaches to the interpretation of the text and how each operates	Blackboard Assi= gnments	1	1
2. describe how her/his own context affects her/his interpretation of the text	Blackboard Assi= gnments	1, 3=	1, 3=
3. describe how theology and interp= retation are interrelated	Blackboard Assi= gnments, Book Review	1	1
4. describe how to use the following resources for interpretation: Bible dictionary, commentary, concordance	Library Assignm= ent, Exegesis Paper<= o:p>	1	1
5. write an exegesis paper using a standard format	Exegesis Paper<= o:p>	1	1
6. explain the possible ways one ca= n move from the text to teaching or preaching the text	Contemporary Application Paper	1	1, 3=
7. explain in her/his own words how= the text of the Old Testament applies to us today	Contemporary Application Paper	1	1