COURSE DESCRIPTION COURSE OBJECTIVES REQUIRED TEXTS

Transcription

1 5080 Minor Prophets Syllabus Spring Semester 2014 Feb 7-8, April 11-12, May 2-3 Prof. Kevin J. Youngblood Phone: It is the policy of Harding University to accommodate students with disabilities, pursuant to federal and state law. Any student with a disability who needs accommodation should inform the instructor at the beginning of the course. Students with disabilities are also encouraged to contact Steve McLeod, the Registrar, at COURSE DESCRIPTION An introduction to the theological message, historical background, and rhetorical methods of each of the twelve minor prophets. Special consideration will be given to the question of the redactional/literary unity of the Book of the Twelve though the interpretation of these books in this class will treat each prophetic book as a discreet literary unit with its own message before attempting any kind of a synthesis of meaning with the other books in the collection. COURSE OBJECTIVES 1. To enable students to place the minor prophets in their proper historical, geographical, and cultural settings. 2. To enable students to outline the literary structure of eaach of the twelve books of the minor prophets on the basis of objective criteria within the text. 3. To enable students to discern the theological significance of each of these prophetic books via careful application of literary and rhetorical analysis. 4. To enable students to evaluate theories of the unity of the Book of the Twelve with a view to developing an appropriate reading strategy. 5. To enable students to preach and teach from the minor prophets in an engaging and relevant manner. REQUIRED TEXTS Ben Zvi, Ehud. Two Sides of a Coin: Juxtaposing Views on Interpreting the Book of the Twelve / the Twelve Prophetic Books. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, (ISBN:

2 Fretheim, Terence. Reading Hosea-Micah: A Literary and Theological Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth Helwys, (ISBN: ) Hill, Andrew E. Haggai, Zachariah, Malachi (TOTC). Downers Grove, IL: IVP, Roberts, J. J. M. Nahum, Habbakuk, and Zephaniah (OTL). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1991 (ISBN: ) Youngblood, Kevin J. Jonah: The Scandalous Love of God (HMS). Grand Rapids: Zondervan, (ISBN: ) Textbooks can now be ordered through a link on the HST website. The Textbooks tab can be viewed on the navigation bar on any page of the website. Check the book list provided under the Textbooks tab ( for correct ISBN s and editions to insure correct ordering. A link provided there will take you to Amazon where you will only need to enter the ISBN to order your books. By going through our website, HST will receive some credit from the order. Thanks for your support. COURSE REQUIREMENTS 1. Synthetic outline of each prophetic book. a. Prior to each class meeting, students should submit to the instructor a synthetic outline of the prophetic books to be covered that weekend. These outlines should be the student s own assessment of the book s structure based on clues found in the text. Divisions of the book should be based on more than just changes of topic. Students should look for repeated phrases, formulaic statements, changes in addressee, etc as structural markers. An introductory paragraph should be included at the beginning of the outline explaining the bases for the divisions indicated. b. These should be sentence outlines in which each division heading is a complete sentence followed by the scripture reference it includes. They may also include a section at the end where students submit questions that came up during their analysis that they would like the instructor to address in class. They should be submitted on the Canvas website under assignments and synthetic outlines. c. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah outlines due 2/1/2014. d. Jonah-Nahum, Micah, Habakkuk, Zephaniah outlines due 4/4/2014 e. Haggai-Zechariah, Malachi outlines due 4/25/ Discussion questions related to assigned readings. a. Prior to each class meeting, students should complete the discussion questions posted on Canvas related to the assigned readings for that particular class meeting. These will be set up as a discussion thread so that students will have access to eachother s responses. In addition to composing your own answer for each of these questions, you should respond to at least two of you classmates answers. These responses should be something more substantive than good thought or I agree/disagree. 2

3 b. Students may consult the textbooks and any notes that they made while reading the textbooks for assistance in answering the questions. c. Fretheim on Hosea Obadiah due Feb 8 by 9:00am d. Fretheim on Micah; Youngblood on Jonah; Roberts on Nahum & Habakkuk due Apr. 11 by 9:00am e. Hill on Haggai Malachi; Ben Zvi & Nogalski, Two Sides of a Coin due May 2 by 9:00am. 3. An exegetical paper on a passage from one of the Minor Prophets a. Students will select a text from one of the books studied to serve as the focus of an exegetical paper based on the procedure and methods demonstrated in class. b. The paper must conform to guidelines laid out in the SBL manual of style and must be no more than 13 pages in length. c. The paper should conclude with theological reflections (i.e. reflections on the nature and activity of God, his relationship with his people, and his relationship with creation as a whole) inspired by the text that point in the direction of the culmination of God s work in Christ and are suggestive of how the student might preach/teach this text in a church setting. d. The paper will be due April 26 and should be submitted as an attachment to an e- mail addressed to kyoungb1@harding.edu e. A handy guide and helpful resource for succesfully fulfilling this requirement may be found at the following website: You should also consult the grading rubric in the appendix to this syllabus. 4. On-line final exam a. A final essay exam will be posted on Canvas May 5 at 9:00 am and will close May 7 at 12:00am. b. The exam will be based on the lectures and the book Two Sides of a Coin by Ehud ben Zvi and James Nogalski. c. Students are welcome to use their textbooks and class notes to assist with writing the exam but will be held to a strict 2 ½ hr time limit imposed by Canvas. COURSE EVALUATION AND GRADING SCALE Category Percent of Final Grade Synthetic Outlines 25% Exegetical Paper 25% Canvas Discussion Threads 25% Final Exam 25% A B C D

4 F 60 > ADDITIONAL CLASS & INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES Credit Hour Workload For every course credit hour, the typical student should expect to spend at least three clock hours per week of concentrated attention on course-related work, including but not limited to time attending class, as well as out-of-class time spent reading, reviewing, organizing notes, preparing for upcoming quizzes/exams, problem solving, developing and completing projects, and other activities that enhance learning. Thus, for a three-hour course, a typical student should expect to spend at least nine hours per week dedicated to the course. Textbooks Textbooks can now be ordered through a link on the HST website. The Textbooks tab can be viewed on the navigation bar on any page of the website. Check the book list provided under the Textbooks tab ( for correct ISBN s and editions to insure correct ordering. A link provided there will take you to Amazon where you will only need to enter the ISBN to order your books. By going through our website, HST will receive some credit from the order. Thanks for your support. Students with Disabilities It is the policy of Harding University to accommodate students with disabilities, pursuant to federal and state law. Any student with a disability who needs accommodation should inform the instructor at the beginning of the course. Students with disabilities are also encouraged to contact Steve McLeod, the Associate Dean, at Library Resources If you have not taken 5990 (Advanced Theological Research) or 5770 (Research in Counseling), or took either class more than a year ago, go to the HST Web site ( for information concerning library services to students. Under the library tab you will find a link to and instructions for searching the HST online catalog (called Quest). There are also instructions for using the following databases available through the library: OCLC FirstSearch, EBSCOhost, Infotrac, PsycINFO, and Religious and Theological Abstracts. Contact the library for passwords to these databases. Also available are the research guides distributed in 5990 and These annotated bibliographies list basic tools you will find helpful in your research. Academic Integrity Academic dishonesty in all its forms is inconsistent with Christian faith and practice, and will result in penalties which could include a failing grade for the assignment, a failing grade for the course, dismissal from the course, and even dismissal from the school. 4

5 SCHEDULE Feb 8 1:00 4:00 pm Hosea 1-6 6:00 9:00 pm Hosea 7 12; Joel (part 1) Feb 9 9:00 am 12:00 pm Joel (part 2) & Amos 1-4 1:00 pm 4:00 pm Amos 5-9 & Obadiah April 11 1:00 4:00 pm Jonah 6:00 9:00 pm Nahum April 12 9:00 12:00 Micah 1:00 4:00 Habakkuk/Zephaniah May 2 1:00 4:00 pm Haggai; Zechariah 1-8 5

6 6:00 9:00 pm Zechariah 9-14 May 3 9:00 12:00 pm Malachi 1:00 4:00 pm Reflections on the Unity of the Twelve 6

7 APPENDIX Criteria for Grading Exegesis Papers Grade A B Criteria 1. Paper reflects insightful interaction with both the assigned readings and the biblical text. By insightful interaction I mean: a) penetrating analysis that leads to a refinement of one s theological ideas b) interaction with primary and secondary sources as well as specific biblical texts that allows the ANE culture to influence one s reading of the text as indicated by examples of how one s interpretation has changed, been challenged, or been refined by reading the biblical text in its ANE context. 2. Paper betrays a deep understanding of the assigned readings indicated by the ability to state the ideas of the readings in one s own words and the ability to apply the principles learned from the readings in the cultural and theological interpretation of OT texts. 3. Paper is very well written i.e. well organized, logically argued, and carefully worded with almost no grammatical and stylistic errors. Clear evidence of proof-reading and revising is evident in the smooth transitions between sentences and paragraphs. The paper as a whole has a clear sense of progression proceeding either from a thesis to the bases that support it or from a systematic organization of observations leading to a sound conclusion. 1. Paper reflects thoughtful interaction with both the assigned readings and the biblical text. By thoughtful interaction I mean: a) A meaningful analysis that connects with theological ideas b) Interaction with specific biblical texts that recognizes the connections between ANE culture and the biblical text and is able to offer specific examples of influence. 2. Paper betrays a good understanding of the assigned readings indicated by the ability to state the ideas of the readings in one s own words and the attempt to apply the principles learned from the readings in the cultural and theological interpretation of OT texts. 3. Paper is well written i.e. well organized, logically argued, and Clearly expressed with relatively few grammatical and stylistic errors.the response as a whole is coherent and makes a relevant point 7

8 C D 1. Paper reflects reasonable interaction with both the assigned readings and the biblical text. By reasonable interaction I mean: a) A sensible analysis that connects with theological ideas b) interaction that identifies at least one legitimate ANE cutltural influence on a relevant biblical text. 2. Paper betrays only a very basic understanding of the assigned readings indicated by the student s difficulty expressing the main ideas. 3. Paper is mostly coherent i.e. somewhat organized with an attempt at explanation and argumentation. They are expressed with moderate attention to correct grammar and style. The response as a whole makes sense though with a number of infelicities of wording or syntax. 1. Paper is brief or sketchy or incoherent. a) logical contradictions b) incorrect use of words 2. Paper betrays little or no understanding of the assigned reading or minimal interaction with them. Paper also fails to connect ANE culture with biblical texts or theological ideas in any meaningful way. 3. Paper lacks any recognizable organization and makes no real progress toward a meaningful point. 8