THO 4103 Johannine literature
UPDATED: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 12:35 PM
Overview of the Course
| CODE: THO 4103 |
Title: Johannine Literature |
CREDITS: 3 cr.
|
Room: GUI 101
|
| SESSION: Fall, 2010 |
Professor: L. Gregory Bloomquist (contact) |
| DESCRIPTION |
This course is intended to
introduce students to the Gospel and Letters of John and in particular to the
theological implications of the Gospel of John.
|
| OBJECTIVES |
To gain familiarity with
the Fourth Gospel and exegetical approaches to a non-Synoptic Gospel
text. To examine the historical setting of the Gospel, rhetorical
devices, and scholarly approaches to the text. To analyze in detail
the Gospel of John. (Where pertinent, material from 1-3 John and the
Apocalypse to John will be brought in.) To see the message of John in
terms of its theological implications.
|
| WORKLOAD |
As a 4000-level course, this course will employ
active learning technologies that are both geared to the above objectives (rather
than lectures geared to content retention) and assume a significant level of student understanding and participation. This will mean that
most of the work will be done in preparing for the class and in
class. The workload will include
- Class attendance and participation
- Discussion outside of class and group-work (where possible)
- Regular readings for each class (completed BEFORE the class).
- Three papers
- Benchmark exam ("Do I know enough to keep going and to build on what I know?")
- Final exam
|
| EVALUATION / REVIEW |
- Benchmark exam -- 1.5 hours (10%)
- Topic: Who, what, when, where, and why questions for understanding the Gospel and Letters of John.
- Short paper -- around 5 pages, excluding notes and bibliography (10%):
- Topic: Initial reflections on the significance of the social, cultural, and historical background for understanding the Gospel of John.
- Short paper -- around 5 pages, excluding notes and bibliography (20%):
- Topic: The role of the Jewish Scriptures in understanding the Gospel of John.
- Short paper -- 5-10 pages, excluding notes and bibliography (20%)
- Topic: The signs of Jesus: What do they mean? What do they point to?
- Final exam - written -- 3 hours (40%)
- Background of the Gospel and Letters
- Exegesis of a passage
- Theological significance
Please see GRADING SCALE for an interpretation of what a given grade means.
Please see CLASS PROTOCOL for an overview of expectations in the class.
|
| REQUIRED READING: |
- Bible and/or Four Gospel Synopsis, such as SYNOPSIS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS (GREEK AND ENGLISH): THIRTEENTH EDITION
- Quast, Kevin. Reading the Gospel of John: An Introduction
(Paulist Press, 2002 revised edition)
- You will also be required to identify at least one commentary to use for discussion in each class. You may wish to choose a single commentary or compare different ones throughout the course. Please choose from the list below, on reserve or for purchase. (NB: The edition listed below may differ from the one on RESERVE in the Library. If you are going to purchase one, you should always get the latest edition.)
-
Barrett, C. K. The Gospel
According to St. John. Second ed. London: SPCK, 1978.
-
Brown, Raymond E. The
Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist, 1979.
-
---. The Epistles of John. Anchor Bible 30. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982.
-
---. The Gospel According to
John (1-12). Anchor Bible. Garden City: Doubleday, 1966.
-
---. The Gospel According to
John (13-21). Anchor Bible. Garden City: Doubleday, 1970.
-
Bultmann, Rudolf K. The Gospel
of John: A Commentary. Trans. G. K. Beasley-Murray. Oxford: Basil
Blackwell, 1971.
-
Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of
John: A Commentary. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003.
-
Kysar, Robert. John, the
Maverick Gospel. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007.
-
Painter, John. 1, 2, and 3
John. Ed. Daniel J. Harrington. Sacra Pagina Series 18.
Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2002.
-
Rensberger, David. 1 John, 2
John, 3 John. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries. Nashville, TN:
Abingdon Press, 1997.
-
---. The Epistles of John. Westminster Bible Companion. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox
Press, 2001. (Not available in our Library.)
- Schnackenburg, Rudolf. The Gospel According to St. John (New York: Crossroad, 1982).
|
| SUGGESTED BIBLIOGRAPHY AND/OR WWW SITES: |
|
Calendar for the course
|
DATE
1:15 - 4 PM |
SUBJECT
(Notes are available here after the class) |
READINGS
(All readings must be completed BEFORE the class) |
ASSIGNMENTS
(Course grades can be found here) |
| September 13 |
Introduction and Overview ( Notes)
|
|
|
|
September 20
|
|
Quast, chapter 1-2 |
|
|
September 27 |
John 2-3 |
Quast, chapter 3 |
First paper due
DUE TIME:Hard copies: by 1:15 PM
/ E-mail attachment: by 8 PM |
|
October 4 |
1st hour: John 4
2nd hour: Benchmark Exam (see below for results)
|
Quast, chapter 4 |
|
| October 11 |
No class: Thanksgiving |
|
|
| October 18 |
|
Quast, chapter 5-6 |
|
| October 25 |
No class: SPU / U of O Study Break |
|
|
|
November 1 |
|
Quast, chapters 7-9 |
Second paper due
DUE TIME: Hard copies: by 1:15 PM
/ E-mail attachment: by 8 PM
|
| November 8 |
|
Quast, chapters 10-11 |
|
| November 15 |
|
Quast, chapters 12-13 |
|
| November 22 |
No class: annual meetings of the Society of Biblical Literature |
|
|
|
November 29 |
John 18-19 (Notes) |
Quast, chapter 14 |
DUE TIME: Hard copy ONLY: by 1:15 PM
|
|
December 6 |
John 20-21
|
Quast, chapters 15-16 |
|
|
December 8 |
1st hour: 1, 2, 3 John
2nd hour: Roundtable discussion / Final exam overview
|
|
|
| tbd |
FINAL EXAM |
|
|
Benchmark Exam results:
A+ 1 / A 1 / A- 2 || B+ 3 / B 2 || C+ 2 / C 2 || D+ 1 / D 1 || E 2 (E means that you may re-take the exam if you wish to do so)
General comments:
While not a test of memory, the exam attempted to make sure that students have a grasp of some essential critical information that one needs to have to talk about John.
The exam revealed that most students in the class have a good basic grasp of some essential features of the critical analysis of John. (Please note that you will revisit these discussions for the final exam to see how you have improved.)
Since this is not a class in English, there were no penalties for mistakes in grammar and spelling; however, I have noted where there are flagrant errors.
Paper 2 (Use of the OT in John) results:
A 2 / A- 1 || B+ 1 / B 3 || C+ 4 / C 2 || D+ 2 / D 2
General Comments:
The challenge of this paper was to provide a succinct commentary on the general question of OT uses in John or on such use in a specific passage in John. As such, this paper clearly tested your ability to deal with a complex question with clear and sharp focus.
The papers ranged over the whole spectrum of possibilities within the passing range: excellent (3), very good (4), good (6), and passable (4). I would encourage those in the "passable" range to discuss with me or in small groups of class members how to improve on the final paper.
Paper 3 (Signs in John) results:
A+ 4 / A 1 / A- 3 || B+ 2 /B 2 || C+ 2 /C 3
General Comments:
First of all: Congratulations!! You all succeeded in producing papers that were clearly above C-level! Furthermore, there were a noteworthy 4 Exceptional papers, in other words, papers that I would have been happy to have written myself. (One of those is almost of publishable quality.) So, this was a very impressive effort on your part. I know that, for the most part, you all worked extremely hard, and it shows.
I suppose that the major challenge of this paper -- and it is something that you will learn in time -- is to break free of the force of the commentaries. I can ask you this in two simple questions:How many signs are in fact narrated in John's Gospel? and How do you know that these are all signs? This is a tough question since the majority of you indicated 7 signs, but didn't tell me necessarily why you thought these 7 were in fact "signs". I attribute this to the fact that many, though not all commentaries, say that there are 7, so "they must be right" is the conclusion. The very best papers questioned whether this was so.
Finally, the only major flaws in the papers were structural and formal. In some cases, the logic of a paper was so difficult to follow that it actually dragged down the positive contribution that the paper made. In others, there were signs of haste and sloppiness that should be avoided in any formal academic submission of work. I tried, as much as possible, to overlook these problems, except where they were so glaring as to make it difficult to read the paper.
But, to end on a positive note: again, my sincere congratulations for a job well done.
|
THO 4103 Johannine literature (2010)
