BC The Spirit of God Hovered Over the Waters Article Critical Review

Article:

• Fettke, Steven. “The Spirit of God Hovered Over the Waters” Journal of Pentecostal Theology, 17.2 (2008): 170-182. SEU library permalink: 

Submit a critical review of the required text. Use Turabian formatting throughout.

The critique should be 750-900 words, reflecting the common requirement for reviews submitted to academic journals. The audience consist of members of an academic community who would access a critical review in an academic journal in church history.

Use University of Chicago (Turabian) formatting. Use formal language. Write in third person. Use gender inclusive and ethnic sensitive language. Instead of a cover sheet, use a heading. Instead of using a footnote for indicating page numbers cited, place the page number within the critique within parentheses, like this (23). Consistent with University of Chicago format, double space the paper, use one-inch margins on all sides, and indent each paragraph by one-half inch.

The organization of the paper should have four sections: 1) introduction, 2) critical summary, 3) critical interaction, and 4) conclusion.

Engage the reader in the first sentence in such a way that the reader desires to continue reading. If the reader is lost or bored in the first sentence, she or he will not continue. Such an engagement demands your knowing your audience and writing for that audience.

The introduction should identify the purpose of your writing. This includes the focus of the text that you are reviewing. This focus should include your identification of the thesis of the book or article, identification of most significant issues, and identification of the dominant contribution of the book or article.

The second section is a critical summary of the text. Herein you engage the thesis of the writer, showing how the main themes intersect with the thesis. This section should attempt to present the writer’s perspective, identifying the issue in a manner in which the writer would identify and appreciate your analysis. In most cases, do not provide a sequential summary, but a conceptual summary of the book.

The third section is the critical interaction with the text. Herein you engage and critique the issues of the text, identifying the strengths and evaluating weaknesses. This should be the most extensive section of the critique, making up to fifty percent of the paper.

The fourth section is the conclusion. Provide a brief summary of your critique, identifying the most significant elements of the book and a reiteration of the value of the book to the whole of the academic community.