The Bible & Contemporary Issues

Prof. Mark K. George
Office: I-113, (303) 765-3168
Email: mgeorge@iliff.edu
Office hours: I am happy to arrange a meeting with any student. Please contact me by email to make arrangements.
Weekly gatherings (optional): I will hold weekly "Bible & Contemporary Issues Happy Hours" (BCI HH) on Zoom every Thursday, 7:00–8:00 pm MT, except in Wk 10. Should fewer than 3 people be able to join me, I reserve the right to close out the happy hour in the first 10 minutes. Please note this meeting has a password, and you will enter a waiting room before reaching the session.

Elyse Pierce, GTA (Graduate Teaching Assistant)
Email: epierce@iliff.edu

BCI Happy Hour : each week (Wks 1–9) on Thursday evening at 7:00 pm MT (Zoom link here ), Mark will open an optional synchronous Zoom session. The purpose? To hang out, chat about what we're learning, have conversation, be with one another. Mark will not present new materials or expect what is discussed during these sessions to be material for which you are accountable. Rather, think of these sessions as opportunities for a conversation over an adult beverage (since we are not on campus and thus unable to walk over to a bar or coffee shop and have conversation together). It's informal. It's ungraded. It's optional. It's fun and relaxing!

Catalogue Course Description

Using current events and issues as a starting point, various approaches for reading the Bible are studied to see how they help interpret the Bible in light of those issues. This course helps students learn more about exegesis and become more comfortable interpreting the Bible with scholarly tools along with understanding how these tools provide a means of addressing current issues with the Bible as a theological resource.

Extended Course Description

The Bible (Hebrew Bible and New Testament) is an accepted cultural resource in the United States that seems to go without question or challenge in public discourse. This is particularly true for those of us who participate in Christian and Jewish communities that hold the Bible as having a particular authority. It is, however, a set of texts that require questioning, interpretation, and challenge. This course, designed for master’s degree students, seeks to enhance students’ skills in reading and interpreting the Bible in the context of the current issues facing our communities. Our regular examination of contemporary issues, explored from a variety of perspectives and angles, will be paired with an examination of the Bible as we consider how it might function as a resource for communities negotiating these issues.

Prerequisites

Either the introductory course in Hebrew Bible or the introductory course in New Testament.

Course Learning Outcomes

By the end of this course, students should be able to:

• be better able to analyze contemporary issues from a variety of perspectives and theological understandings;
• think in creative and informed ways about how biblical texts can be brought into conversations about contemporary issues;
• demonstrate improved critical knowledge and reading skills related to the Bible and its contexts;
• have greater knowledge of critical approaches to the Bible and its contexts as well as familiarity with using them.

Books

Required

New Revised Standard Bible (NRSV). This is the translation we will use in the course for all class and written work. Digital or print format is acceptable, but please note that there are very few apps that contain the NRSV due to copyright license fees, so please make sure your chosen app includes it and you have it readily available. If you would like to purchase a print copy of the NRSV, we recommend Harold W. Attridge, ed. The HarperCollins Study Bible-Student Edition: Fully Revised and Updated . San Francisco: HarperOne, 2006. ISBN 9780060786847.

Additional readings will be made available each week.

All students are expected to have full access to at least one high-quality breaking news source, such as The New York Times , The Washington Post , The Wall Street Journal , Slate , BBC , Fox News (the news side), NPR, PBS NewsHour, The Atlantic , etc. It must be a source that reports on current events using their own reporters and bureaus. In other words, this is not a news aggregator or social media platform (yes, that includes Facebook, The Daily Show with Trevor Noah , Twitter, Instagram, etc.).

The required work/assignments for this course include:

• Participation in weekly discussions; (T & Th);
• Class presentations (2 each, one on an issue, one on the Bible and an issue);
• Exegesis papers (2 each, one due in Week 6, the other at the end of the term [due date depends on whether or not you are graduating this term);
• Paper responses (2 each; due dates are tied to paper due dates)
• Details for each of these assignments are provided below

Details

• Participation in weekly discussions. As a hybrid course, the success or failure of the class depends on you and your participation in our discussions. Our participation begins Tuesdays and is due again on Thursday. Our materials in Weeks 2–9 will consist of assigned readings and recorded or written student reflections.
  • Tuesday is when our discussion for the week begins and is the one in which your voice and engagement with the issue and materials for the week are most clearly articulated.
    • Read the assigned materials. For “Issues” weeks, you need to spend at least two hours reading up on the issue, from a variety of political, social, economic, and other perspectives. Become informed. Give careful, patient, gracious consideration of perspectives contrary to your own. Also read others with whom you disagree a little to a moderate amount. In each case, make sure you understand the point and argument being expressed so you can articulate it before you criticize it. Everyone wants to be heard, as they choose to articulate their views. Listen carefully and respectfully. Note your counter-arguments as you read, but first make sure you can articulate the point being made by the author whose work you are reading, whether or not you agree.
    • Read (or listen to) your classmates. In Weeks 2–9, 2–3 students in class will offer initial reflections on the issue or Bible & issue materials. These reflections provide us with initial focusing perspectives on the week’s materials. They are intended to offer perspectives on the issues, not definitive statements, and therefore to start our discussions for each week.
    • By 11:45 p.m. MT, please log in and offer your considered reflections and contribution for the week. Respond to one (or two or all) of the student presentations and the assigned readings. Based on what you have learned about the week’s issue(s), add your voice and considered reflection to our discussion. For example, what did the presentation(s) or readings help you learn that is new about the issue(s)? Or helped you see a different perspective on it? Or understand something you’ve heard but not really understood? Our goal is to explore issues from multiple perspectives, to listen and hear one another and those whose materials we read or listen to, to expand our critical awareness of the complexities of these issues. This work is important for how we bring together the Bible and these issues. They can be in dialogue with one another and with us, and one of our goals is to learn how we can move beyond proof-text approaches to how the Bible provides resources for thinking about these contemporary issues.
    • The readings in the course come from a variety of perspectives, not all of which I or Elyse agree with, or that we expect you to agree with. Practice and develop your critical reading skills with them. What I mean by this is, as you read, engage them with a critical and analytical perspective. Ask a series of questions about them: what is the central argument being made, on what assumptions does that argument depend, how is the being made (evidence, organization, etc.), and what is at stake in making this argument? In other words, practice listening carefully to others to learn from them. When you feel confident you have listened carefully and understand the point(s) being made in a reading, then have a conversation with the author. What kind of conversation do you want to have with that scholar, why, and on what grounds? What are your own assumptions, and what is at stake for you?
    • Recognizing when we are confused by something, or noting when something doesn’t make sense, or where you got lost, or the myriad other ways in which we don’t understand what we are reading is a part of critical thinking. This can form the basis of your posting. However, don’t simply say, “I’m confused,” or “George’s argument doesn’t make sense to me.” Do your best to diagnose what you don’t understand. For example, ask yourself where, precisely, in a reading you get confused or lost, and try to figure out why. Ask yourself if the thesis of a reading matches the conclusion. If so, does reading the conclusion help you figure out how the reading is organized, and thus alleviate your confusion? If not, where does it break down, and why? These sorts of questions involve hard (mental) work but can be very helpful in unearthing our own reading habits and assumptions.
    • When you are making your Tuesday contribution, the more specific you can be in explaining your thinking, the more it helps the rest of us hear you, understand how you think about the materials, help us think about them with you, and thus facilitates our learning together. But please keep the next point in mind!
    • Please don’t write everything you are thinking about the week’s materials. Three (3) paragraphs (no more than one page total) should be enough to get us going. What are the 1 or 2 most important ideas, arguments, questions, connections, or take-aways for you from the week’s materials in terms of how you are thinking about what it means to be human in the Bible? You may have more than this in mind, so please remember you can introduce other ideas about the materials during the week’s discussion.
  • Thursday: By 11:45 p.m. MT, please read through the Tuesday contributions and respond to at least 2 othersin your group. The goal of these responses is to advance our learning and understanding of the week’s materials. Answer a question. Pose a question. Connect the dots between ideas of one person with those of another. Tell us how your own thinking is developing as you think about something another person contributed. Your responses do not have to be lengthy; a (short-ish) paragraph normally is sufficient.
• Class presentations. Each student will make two short presentations this term, one on a contemporary issue, the other on the Bible and a contemporary issue. These will be made during Weeks 2–9 (presentations during Week 5, Gathering Days, will be made in person).

• • Each presentation is to be posted to the week’s Canvas site no later than the Friday evening preceding the week your topic is being discussed. These are to be posted no later than 11:45 pm MT.
  • Presentations are to be 5–7 minutes in length (no longer than 7 minutes!). Use the video record feature on Canvas to record your presentation. If you are uncomfortable recording yourself, you may write out your response, in 500–700 words (no longer than 700 words!).
  • For the weeks focused on contemporary issues (Wks 2, 4, 6, & 8), the content of your presentation is based, minimally, on the assigned readings. Because 2 or more students will be presenting each week, you may agree among yourselves to divide materials, but you must reach agreement in writing and email your agreement to the professor and GTA before the week in which you are presenting. You also may do additional research and reading in news sources to increase your understanding and knowledge if you choose to do so. Please be certain to record bibliographic information or URLs for materials so you can share them with the class.
    • Your presentations are to give focus to the week’s materials and offer 2–3 aspects/topics/themes/concerns of it for our consideration during the week. We recommend dividing your presentation in half: first half an explanation of the focus you are giving to the issue, and the second half offering your 2–3 aspects/topics/themes/concerns.
    • Provide the class with an understanding of the perspectives put forth on these issues and how to think about them, as per the guidelines for discussions noted above (1.a.i., 1.a.iii, 1.a.iv). Remember we seek to understand these issues in their complexities and varying perspectives. This will help us in our work with the biblical texts.
  • For weeks focused on Bible and a contemporary issue, the content of your presentation is based on the assigned reading and the associated biblical texts. As noted for the contemporary issues presentations, students who are presenting may divide materials, but must reach agreement in writing and email that agreement to the professor and GTA before the week in which you are presenting. Additional research is not expected or required. Should you undertake such work, please focus it on scholarly books and peer-reviewed academic journals, or blogs or other internet-based resources of scholars. You must create a bibliography of these resources to share with others.
    • Your presentations are to give focus to the week’s materials and offer 2–3 ways of understanding it for our consideration during the week. We recommend dividing your presentation in half: first half an explanation of the focus you are giving to the issue, and the second half offering your 2–3 aspects/topics/themes/concerns.
    • Identify the author’s central argument and how the author makes it. This may include identifying the author’s approach or method or theoretical framework to the Bible. Is it historical? Queer? Womanist or feminist? Something else? What do you understand to be the benefit of such an approach—and does the author tell you/us? Why that approach to this topic? We are learning how to engage with the Bible and biblical texts and scholarship as we address these contemporary issues, so help the class see how this is being done.
• Exegesis papers. Two (2) exegesis papers re required. The first paper is due on Wednesday, 4 May no later than 11:45 pm MT on Canvas. The due date of the second paper varies depending on whether you are graduating this term. For graduating students, the second paper is due on Wednesday, 25 May, no later than 11:45 pm MT. For continuing students, the second paper is due on Wednesday, 1 June, no later than 11:45 pm MT.

• • Expectations for the exegesis papers.
    • Each paper is to be 1400–1600 words (approximately 4–5 pages) on a contemporary issue and biblical text of the student’s choice. Students are advised to consult with the GTA or professor about their topics well in advance of the due dates, and to meet with the GTA to discuss their project, outline, and working bibliography. Students also are encouraged to make use of the Iliff Writing Lab resources.
    • Each student is to formulate a critical, analytical argument about the chosen contemporary issue and then address that issue through an exegesis of a biblical text. Attention is to be given to the method or approach used for interpreting that biblical text. A clear thesis or central argument is to be made and then logically and carefully argued throughout the paper with the help of that approach. To put this somewhat differently, your thesis and method should be clear, that is, what are you going to say and how will you say it?
    • Because these are scholarly papers, engagement with the work of other scholars is required and expected and normally will be demonstrated through citations in footnotes that include minimally 1 monograph and 2 peer reviewed journal articles. (Commentaries, dictionaries, encyclopedias, websites, and other reference works are not monographs.) These sources are to be recent, by which I mean they were published no more than 20 years ago. Older sources may be included but participation in the current scholarly discussion is expected in these papers.
    • Papers are to be double-spaced (including notes), in 12-point font, with one (1) inch margins on all sides. They are to follow the style guidelines for The Chicago Manual of Style, 17^thedition (this resource is available through Taylor library), as well as the guidelines for papers in biblical studies provided by The SBL Handbook of Style, 2^nd edition (which specifies how to cite biblical materials, books, scholarly resources, and other matters). Also, please make use of the resources of the Iliff Writing Center as a way of improving your skills at writing, organizing your thinking, refining ideas and organization, finding research help, and the other ways the Writing Center staff can help you.
    • Note the word count for the paper before the bibliography. Neither the paper title nor the bibliography count toward the total
  • Warning: Bible software makes it very easy to look up Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek terms, thereby tempting students who have not studied these languages to include original language terms in their papers along with definitions and the like. Please do not do this unless you have demonstrated to Dr. George that you have at least one year of Hebrew and/or Greek study. Minimally 10 points (one full letter grade) will be deducted from your grade unless you have demonstrated your knowledge of these languages before you include it in your papers.
• Student paper responses. As a graduate school elective course, each student will read and provide a written response to one student paper (as assigned automatically by the Canvas system) for each of the two exegesis papers. Twenty-four hours after the assigned due date, Canvas will make these assignments. Student then have 48 hours to read the paper and write up no more than a 1 page response. Students are to follow these guidelines for their responses. First response due date: Saturday, 7 May, no later than 11:45 pm MT. For graduating students, the second response due date is Saturday, 28 May, no later than 11:45 pm MT. For continuing students, the second response due date is Saturday, 4 June, no later than 11:45 pm MT.

The GTA for this course, Elyse, is available to you at all points of the writing process for your two exegesis papers. Having trouble choosing a topic or approach? Email Elyse. Struggling to gather evidence that supports your argument? Email Elyse. Nervous about all that 'exegesis' entails? Email Elyse. Completed an initial draft you want looked at for general writing conventions and it is still three days before the due date? Email Elyse.

She is available to help via email (elyse.pierce@du.edu or epierce@iliff.edu) or zoom, at both GTA and student convenience. She has been a writing tutor at the college level for many years, and so is very experienced working with students in all stages of the composition process. Feel free to reach out at any point and schedule a meeting or send a draft, and she will be more than happy to help!

 

Writing Tips video:

 

Writing Tips handout: Writing Tips.docx 

 

Reminder of Assignment Requirements:

• • • ~ 1400–1600 words/4–5 pages (not including bibliography and title) on a contemporary issue + biblical text
    • ~ Thesis/central argument and critical logical analysis of contemporary issue + exegesis of biblical text in support of argument and analysis, use of explicit biblical method or approach 
    • ~ Minimum citation of 1 monograph and 2 peer-reviewed journal articles that are <20 years old
    • ~ Formatting and Style: double-spaced, 12-point font, 1-inch margins; follow The Chicago Manual of Style, 17^thedition and The SBL Handbook of Style, 2^nd edition (Iliff Writing Center can help)

 

Participation and discussions................................................................................ 30%
Class presentations (2 ea.)..................................................................................... 10% (5% each)
Exegesis Paper 1...................................................................................................... 20%
Exegesis Paper 2...................................................................................................... 30%
Paper responses....................................................................................................... 10% (5% each)

Pass/Fail requests must be submitted to the instructor by e-mail no later than Sunday, 3 April 2022. Incomplete grades will be granted only in the rarest of cases and follow the policy in the Masters Student Handbook, which is online.

Late work is unacceptable. It adversely affects our collective discussion work by depriving us all of your voice and ideas. This holds true especially for the exegesis papers because of student responses. For this reason, late contributions to the Tuesday discussion will be graded down one full letter grade if made up within 24 hours. At the professor’s discretion, contributions made later than 24 hours will receive a grade of zero (0). The Thursday discussion is not graded individually but is part of the overall participation grade, so failure to participate or consistently late participation will adversely affect your participation grade. Each paper will be graded down one full letter grade for each 24 hour period it is late, up to a maximum of 48 hours. After that time, a late paper will receive a grade of zero (0). Additionally, because another student’s paper response grade depends on having a paper to read, the student who does not submit a paper will receive a grade of 0 (zero) for the paper response because it prevented the other student from completing that assignment. The upshot is please, please, please submit your papers on time! Everyone is depending on you.

Please review the topics in the Policies & Services page. Please note that the statements contained in this syllabus regarding Pass/Fail and Incompletes are the policies for this course.

Use of biblical languages. There are many apps that make it easy to see the underlying Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek words behind English translations. These give users who have never studied these languages the illusion they understand these words and languages and can use them in papers (or sermons or talks) on the Bible. Please do not do this in this course. If you have studied biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and/or Greek and wish to use in in your written work, please contact the professor for a 5–10 minute discussion to demonstrate you have competency (note: not full comprehension or fluency!) in any or all of these languages. If you use any of the biblical languages in your written work without meeting with the professor beforehand, you will incur, at minimum, a 10 point deduction on the assignment.

A   94–100
A-  91–93
B+ 88–90 (NB: a 90 is a B+)
B    83–87
B-  80–82
C+ 78–79
C   73–77
C-  70–72
D+ 68–69
D   60–67
F    59 or below

Grades are earned, based on your work and performance on assignments. The professor is comfortable assigning grades from A to F, in accordance with what students earn. Please note that a B+ extends to 90, making the “B” range a bit wider than usual. Grades of 100 points are rare, on assignments, papers, and the course overall.

If a student turns in all materials on time and satisfies the minimal requirements of the assignment, this is a “C” or pass. With greater analytical insight and engagement in the assignment comes a higher score and grade. Exceptional performance on assignments merits a score and grade that is exceptional. This schema holds for all graded assignments.

Grading for participation and discussions in class: Students are expected to participate in weekly discussions (and Gathering Days sessions) prepared to engage the assigned readings and other assigned materials (e.g., student presentations). They also are expected to respond to at least two others in their discussion group each week (i.e., in the discussion threads of two others, not simply responding to two others who respond in the student’s own thread). Demonstration that a student has done the reading, viewed the week’s presentations, and understood the issue and its complexities is most highly valued. Students who cannot do the reading or only a portion of it will earn a “C” or below. Those who demonstrate they did some of the reading and have begun to develop critical and analytical perspectives on the topic/issue generally earn a “B” grade. Those who demonstrate thorough understanding of the topic/issue, from a variety of perspectives, and can integrate those perspectives into a critical, analytical consideration of the topic/issue, generally earn an “A” grade.

Grading for class presentations: “C” grade means your presentation spoke to the assigned materials and topic in a general, unfocused, and uncritical fashion. Your knowledge and understanding of the materials and issue demonstrates a lack of study and research. You do not demonstrate an understanding of alternative perspectives and the reasoning and value they offer on the issue. You do not offer 2–3 aspects or topics for class consideration except in a very general way. A “B” grade means your presentation offered a relatively clear focus and an issue or two for class consideration. You are aware of alternative perspectives but missed important elements of them. An “A” grade demonstrates outstanding creativity in its thesis and argument, engages with the biblical text and topic for the week in discerning ways that offer insight to the biblical passage that is thought provoking, and has no formatting, spelling, documentation, or other formal errors.

Grading for exegesis papers: a “C” grade means you have a weak or muddied thesis that you argue with 1–2 poitns that may or may not thoughtfully engage the biblical text you chose as your exegetical focus. You met the minimum requirements for outside sources (two recent journal articles and one recent monograph), formatted your paper more-or-less appropriately, correctly cited sources, spell-checked your paper, and other such basic matters (I assume all graduate students know these aspects of writing a paper; if not, please contact the Writing Center staff and seek their help). A “B” grade has a clear thesis suitable to the length of the paper and provides several arguments that demonstrate broader engagement with the biblical text and secondary materials, but has several weaknesses in logic and argument, while formatting, documentation, spelling, and other formal features of the paper largely are correct. An “A” grade demonstrates outstanding creativity in its thesis and argument, engages with the biblical and secondary literature in discerning ways that offer insight to the biblical passage that is thought provoking, and has no formatting, spelling, documentation, or other formal errors.

Grading for student responses: a “C” grade indicates you read the paper and offer general comments about it. A “B” grade indicates you read the paper and are able to offer a point or two about both its strengths and areas needing improvement (assuming there are any). An “A” grade indicates a careful reading of the paper, the ability to identify, with specific examples, strengths and areas of improvement.

Guidelines for Respondents to Papers
Adapted from Materials Originally Produced by Dr. Pamela M. Eisenbaum
(Available as a pdf)

The primary objectives of responding to a paper are: 1) to assist the author with constructive criticism so the author might thereby improve the quality of the paper; 2) to articulate issues and questions that will generate discussion (if the paper is being presented to a class) or help the author think further about the arguments made in the paper.

To that end, please follow these guidelines:

1. Articulate in your own words what you understand to be the author’s primary thesis in the paper, including what you think its significance is or might be. You should do this in no more than 3–5 sentences. If there is a thesis statement that you wish to highlight by quoting, that is fine, but it is not a substitute for putting it in your own words; you still must interpret that thesis statement. Be sure, however, you can state the page on which you see the author’s thesis statement (if there is one). If the thesis is not clear, articulate what you think is the general topic, and then say you are uncertain what is the central thesis. Do not summarize the contents of the paper.
2. Identify the strengths of the paper. If it is very well-written and -argued paper and you find yourself listing more than a half dozen, limit yourself to what you see as the most important ones (e.g., ones that get at issues central to the themes and topics of the class, one that you think fulfill the assignment particularly well). If you only can find one strength, then name only one—do not try to force it. For each strength you name, you must give a reason why you think it is a strength. Do not engage in unnecessary or (even worse) insincere flattery.
3. Identify the weaknesses of the paper. Your focus here should not be on very minor things (e.g., “incorrect spelling of the author’s name in footnote 2”) but on things that characterize the paper or major sections of it (if the author has used inappropriate footnote style or bibliographic citation throughout, that deserves comment). As with Guideline #2, any weakness you name must be backed up with an argument or example explaining why you think it is a weakness.
4. Wherever possible, make constructive and concrete suggestions about how the paper might be improved. Here you most likely will focus on the paper’s weaknesses, but you need not limit your comments to them. You may also see ways the author can build on the paper’s already existing strengths (e.g., a particular passage, secondary reading, or argument may add subtlety to the author’s arguments).
5. Highlight anything in the substance of the paper that you find especially compelling, illuminating, or convincing, as well as points of agreement between yourself and the author of the paper.
6. Articulate points you find unconvincing, strained, obvious, or untrue. As always, you must explain why this is the case. If you cannot say why, don’t mention it.
7. Articulate questions. Questions may serve different purposes. Here are a few examples:
   1. They may enable the author to see the same issues from a different, perhaps better, perspective, thereby assisting the author in improving the paper.
   2. They may signal to the author certain issues or subtopics either are unclear (i.e., poorly explained or argued in the paper) or that require further elaboration in order to become cogent and persuasive to future readers.
   3. If you are doing the review for the purpose of a class discussion, questions may enable you to generate material for discussion that you think will be of interest to the group.
8. Do not make generalizations about the person (or even the person’s academic work) drawn from the paper. In other words, you job is to provide a critique of the paper, not the person.
9. All critical comments—positive and negative—should use language appropriate to an academic context and discourse and be as substantive and specific as possible.
   1. Inappropriate: “Your first example was stupid.”
   2. Appropriate: “Your first example failed adequately to illustrate your point, because…”
10. Respect the limits articulated for the review, so as to be as effective as possible in relation to the primary objective articulated above.

Revision date: 30 March 2022

The syllabus and assignments are subject to change at any time at the sole discretion of the professor.