Assignment Prompt & Instructions
Read the instructions
– 2 years ago
**files (4)**
– ## book.docx
– ## Instr..docx
– ## HO-P1.pdf
– Mc-text.pdf
**## book.docx**
[hurlers-bedside0o@icloud.com](mailto:hurlers-bedside0o@icloud.com)
pw : 123456789Hurler@
**## Instr..docx**
**Read the pdf text “Experience," from 71-88**
**Then read the “HO-P1”**
**Here are the author’s books**
·
**Grenz, Stanley J. Theology for the Community of God. Eerdmans, 2000. ISBN 978-0802847553. [295 pp. assigned]**
·
**Olson, Roger E. The Mosaic of Christian Belief, 2nd ed. IVP Academic, 2016. ISBN 978-0830851256 [149 pp. assigned]**
·
**Vondey, Wolfgang. Pentecostal Theology. London, UK: T&T Clark, 2017/18. ISBN: 978-0-567-68517-9 [181 pp. assigned].**
·
**McGrath is the text PDF “Experience 71-88**
**## HO-P1.pdf**
1
A Quick Guide to Writing
Paper 1: Experience in Theology
The Basics
The point of this paper is to help you develop several skills that you will use in the later writing
assignment—namely synthesis and evaluation. Where ATCSs are designed to help you learn to
read and begin to analyze texts, this paper is going to help you develop evaluative skills in
technical reading and to reinforce the idea that all evaluation takes place from a particular
perspective. These papers will force you to look at the way each author independently views a
topic at a content level but then push deeper by comparing and contrasting what the authors say
from the evaluative perspective of a particular author. There’s an old saying among jazz
musicians: imitate, assimilate, innovate. This exercise will cause you to imitate (by stating the
position of each author), then assimilate as you have to go beyond mere imitation to try and think
like one of the authors. This will help prepare you for the future of your ministry where new
challenges will cause you to innovate. The first part of the paper will be descriptive, and the
second part will be evaluative. Keep in mind this is not a research paper. You should have all
you need to write the assignment based on reading the assigned texts.
Elements
Description: For the first part of the paper you will give a description of how each of our authors
(Olson, Grenz, Vondey, and McGrath) view the role of experience in theology. Each author must
be treated separately but the total word count for the description should be between 1000 –1500
words in total. You must label each author—either with stand-alone subheadings (like Elements
above) or inline headings (like Description above). Do not make me guess who you are
describing! A few additional things to note: (1) McGrath’s section on experience (read only
pages 71-88) is the author you will be trying to assimilate; therefore, it is most likely that you
will have the most to say in describing McGrath’s understanding of experience in theology. (2)
Vondey’s position is the most philosophical and spread out of the authors but try not to get too
bogged down in the deep weeds of his position. (3) Grenz’s position is the one most likely to trip
you up—be very careful in understanding what he is and is not saying, especially how and where
he is using the term experience. (4) All these authors are evangelical of one flavor or another so
there will be overlap in their positions, but also possibly some differences you might not see at
first. Don’t be too quick to assume that they are all in perfect agreement with each other or that
they all fundamentally disagree. (5) Remember to provide citations, even when not directly
quoting, so the reader can see where you are drawing your ideas from. Use intext author-date
citations, e.g., (Olson 2016, 25), not footnotes. If you do not have a copy of Turabian here is the
official website which is quite helpful:
https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html
Evaluation: This is where you are going to do your best to channel your inner McGrath. Trying
to think like McGrath, how would McGrath evaluate each author’s understanding of experience
in theology. What would he endorse and what would he be cautious of? How strongly would he
endorse or how much caution would he show? How important would McGrath think the
particular point would be? This section should be 500 –1000 words in length. It may be
organized by author or by topics. Regardless of which organizational path you take, please
provide subheadings. If you are organizing by author, then use the author’s name as the
subheading. If by topic, then the topic—but if you do this you need to be very clear in your
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html)
2
writing who you are talking about at any given point. And, again, use intext citations to leave
breadcrumbs for the reader to see where you are drawing from in our readings.
Bibliography/Reference List: For this paper you may use either a bibliography or a reference list.
Everything you cite, not just quote, in your paper must be found in the bibliography or reference
list. See Turabian for further information about preparing a bibliography or a reference list.
Bibliography: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html
Reference List: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html
Length
This paper has a wordcount of between 1250 –2750 words This wordcount requirement includes
the entire assignments: description, evaluation, and bibliography. Papers which do not meet the
minimum wordcount will receive a maximum score of 50%. Papers which exceed the maximum
will receive a maximum grade of 75%.
Formatting
The only hard and fast requirements regarding formatting of the assignment are to facilitate ease
of grading: double-spaced with margins of at least one inch, so I can easily enter comments;
clear indications of separate paragraph (either indented or extra lines between blocks); 12-point
Times New Roman or similar serif font, so my tired, old eyes can easily read it on the screen.
Otherwise, I ask that you just be consistent with your formatting.
Submitting the Paper
Please upload your paper in MS Word format (.doc or .docx) as a single document on Discovery.
Almost all word processing programs have the ability to save a document in MS Word format; if
you are having difficulties contact IT or the professor. Remember, your uploaded paper will go
through Turnitin to check for issues of plagiarism and AI usage. See course schedule for the
deadline and the syllabus for details of the policy regarding late assignments.
Revised: 25 January 2025
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html)
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html)
**Mc-text.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/mc-text-pdf)
**Mc-text.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/mc-text-pdf)
**## book.docx**
[hurlers-bedside0o@icloud.com](mailto:hurlers-bedside0o@icloud.com)
pw : 123456789Hurler@
**## Instr..docx**
**Read the pdf text “Experience," from 71-88**
**Then read the “HO-P1”**
**Here are the author’s books**
·
**Grenz, Stanley J. Theology for the Community of God. Eerdmans, 2000. ISBN 978-0802847553. [295 pp. assigned]**
·
**Olson, Roger E. The Mosaic of Christian Belief, 2nd ed. IVP Academic, 2016. ISBN 978-0830851256 [149 pp. assigned]**
·
**Vondey, Wolfgang. Pentecostal Theology. London, UK: T&T Clark, 2017/18. ISBN: 978-0-567-68517-9 [181 pp. assigned].**
·
**McGrath is the text PDF “Experience 71-88**
**## HO-P1.pdf**
1
A Quick Guide to Writing
Paper 1: Experience in Theology
The Basics
The point of this paper is to help you develop several skills that you will use in the later writing
assignment—namely synthesis and evaluation. Where ATCSs are designed to help you learn to
read and begin to analyze texts, this paper is going to help you develop evaluative skills in
technical reading and to reinforce the idea that all evaluation takes place from a particular
perspective. These papers will force you to look at the way each author independently views a
topic at a content level but then push deeper by comparing and contrasting what the authors say
from the evaluative perspective of a particular author. There’s an old saying among jazz
musicians: imitate, assimilate, innovate. This exercise will cause you to imitate (by stating the
position of each author), then assimilate as you have to go beyond mere imitation to try and think
like one of the authors. This will help prepare you for the future of your ministry where new
challenges will cause you to innovate. The first part of the paper will be descriptive, and the
second part will be evaluative. Keep in mind this is not a research paper. You should have all
you need to write the assignment based on reading the assigned texts.
Elements
Description: For the first part of the paper you will give a description of how each of our authors
(Olson, Grenz, Vondey, and McGrath) view the role of experience in theology. Each author must
be treated separately but the total word count for the description should be between 1000 –1500
words in total. You must label each author—either with stand-alone subheadings (like Elements
above) or inline headings (like Description above). Do not make me guess who you are
describing! A few additional things to note: (1) McGrath’s section on experience (read only
pages 71-88) is the author you will be trying to assimilate; therefore, it is most likely that you
will have the most to say in describing McGrath’s understanding of experience in theology. (2)
Vondey’s position is the most philosophical and spread out of the authors but try not to get too
bogged down in the deep weeds of his position. (3) Grenz’s position is the one most likely to trip
you up—be very careful in understanding what he is and is not saying, especially how and where
he is using the term experience. (4) All these authors are evangelical of one flavor or another so
there will be overlap in their positions, but also possibly some differences you might not see at
first. Don’t be too quick to assume that they are all in perfect agreement with each other or that
they all fundamentally disagree. (5) Remember to provide citations, even when not directly
quoting, so the reader can see where you are drawing your ideas from. Use intext author-date
citations, e.g., (Olson 2016, 25), not footnotes. If you do not have a copy of Turabian here is the
official website which is quite helpful:
https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html
Evaluation: This is where you are going to do your best to channel your inner McGrath. Trying
to think like McGrath, how would McGrath evaluate each author’s understanding of experience
in theology. What would he endorse and what would he be cautious of? How strongly would he
endorse or how much caution would he show? How important would McGrath think the
particular point would be? This section should be 500 –1000 words in length. It may be
organized by author or by topics. Regardless of which organizational path you take, please
provide subheadings. If you are organizing by author, then use the author’s name as the
subheading. If by topic, then the topic—but if you do this you need to be very clear in your
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html)
2
writing who you are talking about at any given point. And, again, use intext citations to leave
breadcrumbs for the reader to see where you are drawing from in our readings.
Bibliography/Reference List: For this paper you may use either a bibliography or a reference list.
Everything you cite, not just quote, in your paper must be found in the bibliography or reference
list. See Turabian for further information about preparing a bibliography or a reference list.
Bibliography: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html
Reference List: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html
Length
This paper has a wordcount of between 1250 –2750 words This wordcount requirement includes
the entire assignments: description, evaluation, and bibliography. Papers which do not meet the
minimum wordcount will receive a maximum score of 50%. Papers which exceed the maximum
will receive a maximum grade of 75%.
Formatting
The only hard and fast requirements regarding formatting of the assignment are to facilitate ease
of grading: double-spaced with margins of at least one inch, so I can easily enter comments;
clear indications of separate paragraph (either indented or extra lines between blocks); 12-point
Times New Roman or similar serif font, so my tired, old eyes can easily read it on the screen.
Otherwise, I ask that you just be consistent with your formatting.
Submitting the Paper
Please upload your paper in MS Word format (.doc or .docx) as a single document on Discovery.
Almost all word processing programs have the ability to save a document in MS Word format; if
you are having difficulties contact IT or the professor. Remember, your uploaded paper will go
through Turnitin to check for issues of plagiarism and AI usage. See course schedule for the
deadline and the syllabus for details of the policy regarding late assignments.
Revised: 25 January 2025
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html)
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html)
**Mc-text.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/mc-text-pdf)
**## book.docx**
[hurlers-bedside0o@icloud.com](mailto:hurlers-bedside0o@icloud.com)
pw : 123456789Hurler@
**## Instr..docx**
**Read the pdf text “Experience," from 71-88**
**Then read the “HO-P1”**
**Here are the author’s books**
·
**Grenz, Stanley J. Theology for the Community of God. Eerdmans, 2000. ISBN 978-0802847553. [295 pp. assigned]**
·
**Olson, Roger E. The Mosaic of Christian Belief, 2nd ed. IVP Academic, 2016. ISBN 978-0830851256 [149 pp. assigned]**
·
**Vondey, Wolfgang. Pentecostal Theology. London, UK: T&T Clark, 2017/18. ISBN: 978-0-567-68517-9 [181 pp. assigned].**
·
**McGrath is the text PDF “Experience 71-88**
**## HO-P1.pdf**
1
A Quick Guide to Writing
Paper 1: Experience in Theology
The Basics
The point of this paper is to help you develop several skills that you will use in the later writing
assignment—namely synthesis and evaluation. Where ATCSs are designed to help you learn to
read and begin to analyze texts, this paper is going to help you develop evaluative skills in
technical reading and to reinforce the idea that all evaluation takes place from a particular
perspective. These papers will force you to look at the way each author independently views a
topic at a content level but then push deeper by comparing and contrasting what the authors say
from the evaluative perspective of a particular author. There’s an old saying among jazz
musicians: imitate, assimilate, innovate. This exercise will cause you to imitate (by stating the
position of each author), then assimilate as you have to go beyond mere imitation to try and think
like one of the authors. This will help prepare you for the future of your ministry where new
challenges will cause you to innovate. The first part of the paper will be descriptive, and the
second part will be evaluative. Keep in mind this is not a research paper. You should have all
you need to write the assignment based on reading the assigned texts.
Elements
Description: For the first part of the paper you will give a description of how each of our authors
(Olson, Grenz, Vondey, and McGrath) view the role of experience in theology. Each author must
be treated separately but the total word count for the description should be between 1000 –1500
words in total. You must label each author—either with stand-alone subheadings (like Elements
above) or inline headings (like Description above). Do not make me guess who you are
describing! A few additional things to note: (1) McGrath’s section on experience (read only
pages 71-88) is the author you will be trying to assimilate; therefore, it is most likely that you
will have the most to say in describing McGrath’s understanding of experience in theology. (2)
Vondey’s position is the most philosophical and spread out of the authors but try not to get too
bogged down in the deep weeds of his position. (3) Grenz’s position is the one most likely to trip
you up—be very careful in understanding what he is and is not saying, especially how and where
he is using the term experience. (4) All these authors are evangelical of one flavor or another so
there will be overlap in their positions, but also possibly some differences you might not see at
first. Don’t be too quick to assume that they are all in perfect agreement with each other or that
they all fundamentally disagree. (5) Remember to provide citations, even when not directly
quoting, so the reader can see where you are drawing your ideas from. Use intext author-date
citations, e.g., (Olson 2016, 25), not footnotes. If you do not have a copy of Turabian here is the
official website which is quite helpful:
https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html
Evaluation: This is where you are going to do your best to channel your inner McGrath. Trying
to think like McGrath, how would McGrath evaluate each author’s understanding of experience
in theology. What would he endorse and what would he be cautious of? How strongly would he
endorse or how much caution would he show? How important would McGrath think the
particular point would be? This section should be 500 –1000 words in length. It may be
organized by author or by topics. Regardless of which organizational path you take, please
provide subheadings. If you are organizing by author, then use the author’s name as the
subheading. If by topic, then the topic—but if you do this you need to be very clear in your
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html)
2
writing who you are talking about at any given point. And, again, use intext citations to leave
breadcrumbs for the reader to see where you are drawing from in our readings.
Bibliography/Reference List: For this paper you may use either a bibliography or a reference list.
Everything you cite, not just quote, in your paper must be found in the bibliography or reference
list. See Turabian for further information about preparing a bibliography or a reference list.
Bibliography: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html
Reference List: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html
Length
This paper has a wordcount of between 1250 –2750 words This wordcount requirement includes
the entire assignments: description, evaluation, and bibliography. Papers which do not meet the
minimum wordcount will receive a maximum score of 50%. Papers which exceed the maximum
will receive a maximum grade of 75%.
Formatting
The only hard and fast requirements regarding formatting of the assignment are to facilitate ease
of grading: double-spaced with margins of at least one inch, so I can easily enter comments;
clear indications of separate paragraph (either indented or extra lines between blocks); 12-point
Times New Roman or similar serif font, so my tired, old eyes can easily read it on the screen.
Otherwise, I ask that you just be consistent with your formatting.
Submitting the Paper
Please upload your paper in MS Word format (.doc or .docx) as a single document on Discovery.
Almost all word processing programs have the ability to save a document in MS Word format; if
you are having difficulties contact IT or the professor. Remember, your uploaded paper will go
through Turnitin to check for issues of plagiarism and AI usage. See course schedule for the
deadline and the syllabus for details of the policy regarding late assignments.
Revised: 25 January 2025
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-notes-and-bibliography-citation-quick-guide.html)
[https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html](https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/turabian/turabian-author-date-citation-quick-guide.html)
**Mc-text.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/mc-text-pdf)