Three more reviews (two English, one German)

Three more reviews of my books have been published recently. The first is by Martin Hailer in the Theologische Literaturzeitung. He’s reviewing The Church’s Book; here’s the final paragraph:

Der Vf. legt eine analytisch klare, gelehrte und konstruktive Studie über das Verhältnis von Schriftlehre und Ekklesiologie vor. Kritiken sind mitunter deutlich, jedoch fair und übergehen auch die positiv rezipierte Position Robert W. Jensons nicht. Die ekklesiologische Typologie gegen Ende des Bandes verwendet sprechende Bilder und könnte dem notorisch schwierigen ökumenischen Gespräch auf diesem Feld aufhelfen. Zeitigt eine theologische Schrifthermeneutik (auch) hier positive Effekte, dann hat sie viel erreicht.

Being complimented in German is a new experience for me. I think this is when I wave at the camera and say, Look, Ma, I’m a real scholar now!

The second review is also of The Church’s Book; it’s by Robert W. Wall in Catholic Biblical Quarterly. He writes that I “offer both diagnostic and prognostic help to propose an orderly—or at least a more wakeful—approach to [the current] messy hermeneutical topology” in a “reworking of his brilliant Yale Ph.D. dissertation” (!). Final paragraph:

East has given us an important and wonderfully written book. Its constructive impulse is aptly captured by his concluding mention of Matthew Levering’s “participatory biblical exegesis,” which engages a Spirit-animated Scripture in ways that guide one holy catholic and apostolic church into a deeper understanding and more satisfying fellowship with the holy Trinity.

The final review is of The Doctrine of Scripture; it appears in Pro Ecclesia and is written by Brett Vanderzee. Brett’s review is a full 2,000 words long; it’s more of a review essay than a brief summary and evaluation. It also gets my project better than anything else I’ve seen in print; probably better than my own attempts to explain or defend it. Brett simply understands what I’m up to. If anyone wants to know what that is, you can now access it in clear, friendly prose that clocks in under 2K words. That’s 80K fewer than the book in question.

Brett says many kind things about me and the book. I won’t quote them here. What I will quote is a lovely image he uses that I will be borrowing from here on out:

In a sense, the church stands in relationship to Scripture like an art restorer in possession of a masterpiece; stewardship of the work’s welfare is entrusted to her unmatched skill and unimpeachable eye, but the masterpiece itself demands that the restorer answer to the integrity of the art. In the end, if the Bible and the church belong to God, they also belong to one another…

Scripture is a joy; the doctrine of Scripture is likewise a joy; hence, writing my book was a joy; and now, reading Brett’s exposition and elaboration of my book proves to be a joy, too. It’s joy all the way down. Thanks to Brett and to all other generous readers who make writing theology such a pleasure.

Three more reviews

I’ve spied three new reviews of The Doctrine of Scripture. One is glowing; one is decidedly not; one liked it, but has some questions. Here are links and excerpts.

Joey Royal in Living Church (published in the print magazine; review not online):

Brad East’s short and unassuming title reveals the simplicity of this book, but conceals its profundity and beauty. Its main objective is simple: to describe the way God uses Scripture in the life of the Church. He does this by “showing rather than telling” in order to help the reader “understand the terms, concepts, claims, and explanations that constitute the Christian doctrine of Scripture.” In this task he has succeeded admirably. This book is clearly written, concise but comprehensive, tightly argued but generous and fair. …

At times East’s writing is beautiful, almost devotional, as when he speaks of the Church’s liturgy as the “native habitat” of Scripture … This book — clear, profound, and beautiful — deserves to be widely read and deeply pondered.

Drew Collins in International Journal of Systematic Theology:

In many ways then, East’s book might be construed as a sort of post-post- critical work of Christian theology. Whereas post-critical theologians like Hans Frei sought, and in the minds of many (including myself), succeeded in offering an account of Scripture that was simultaneously orthodox and responsive to contemporary questions without itself being a systematic apologetic response to such concerns, it is nonetheless the case that the work of postcritical theologians often takes shape in contradistinction to the claims and commitments that shaped the ‘critical’ approach to theology, however construed. Reading Frei, one gets the impression that he found the conceptual pool of Christian theology so cloudy that he could do nothing else but work first to clear the water of silt. This is to say that postcritical theology and its clarifying concern, while of the utmost importance, invites work such as East’s book, which could certainly be seen as a companion to that project. In this respect, and for those of us who remain compelled by much of the work of Frei, Kelsey, Webster, etc., East’s book provides helpful ways of framing and describing Scripture that, while not expressed in a popular voice exactly, does not require background familiarity with Kant or Kermode. Perhaps connected to this is the simple fact that this book is a joy to read. East’s prose conveys not just the significance of Scripture, but to some extent, enacts its celebration.

Kaylie Page in Anglican Theological Review (DOI: 10.1177/00033286231161026):

Brad East’s The Doctrine of Scripture is a perplexing book to review: on the one hand, much of it is both beautiful and helpful, but on the other hand, many Christians will be hard-pressed to find East’s overall position persuasive. East admits that this is a “deeply un-Protestant work,” a claim that proves so true that it calls into question his meaning when he says that “the assumptions of this work are catholic” with a small and not a big C (p. 6). East takes great care throughout the text to problematize Protestant approaches to Scripture both recent and historical, with varying levels of persuasiveness. He returns constantly to the authority of the church as primary, but he fails to account for or even acknowledge the fractured and indefinable nature of “the church” for most of today’s believers. …

East’s desire to keep Scripture from becoming the weapon of any would-be lone interpreter is a worthy one. However, in challenging the Reformation doctrines of Scripture in the way he has here, East leaves the reader with the sense that she must be or become a part of a denomination that speaks with the authoritative voice of “the church” or remain paralyzed in the face of a morass of interpretive issues with no one to help her through them—since Scripture itself cannot.

Two reviews, a pod, and a Pole

A roundup of links…

My colleague and friend David Kneip interviewed me on the podcast Live From the Siburt Institute. We talk a lot about Christian tradition and digital technology. A bit less buttoned up than I usually am on pods, I think.

In the latest issue of Interpretation, Joshua E. Leim reviews The Doctrine of Scripture. He’s very generous. Here’s the last paragraph:

This is undoubtedly an excellent book, from which anyone hoping to reflect carefully—indeed devotionally—on the gift of Scripture will profit greatly. That is not to say that I agreed with everything in it. It seems to me, for example, that East leaves too little space for the disruptive potential of Scripture, i.e., its ability to stand over the church and rebuke it. Or, as another example, while East certainly does not reject tout court modern academic approaches to Scripture, he tends to lump together “biblical scholars” and their aims (e.g., pp. 183, 135, 137 n. 62) as problematic. Those concerns notwithstanding, this is a beautifully written, compelling theological articulation of the doctrine of Christian Scripture.

Likewise, in the latest issue of The Expository Times, Gregory Vall reviews The Church’s Book. He too is kind! Last paragraph:

This volume is a work of constructive criticism, and Brad East has mastered the genre. His critiques do not result in the denigration of the theological systems he engages. Rather, they disclose what is of true and lasting value in each of them. East’s own theological perspective proves to be broadly and deeply catholic and genuinely ecumenical. His writing is clear, precise, and refreshingly free of baroque diction and pretentious rhetoric.

Finally, Sławomir Zatwardnicki, who is part of the Pontifical Faculty of Theology in Wrocław, Poland, has taken an interest in my work. He has written not one but two articles engaging The Doctrine of Scripture, albeit in Polish—not a tongue in which I have any facility. Nevertheless, I wanted to acknowledge this gift with gratitude as well as offer links for anyone who does know Polish:

• ‘Brada Easta doktryna Pisma Świętego,’ in Biblica et Patristica Thoruniensia

• ‘Protestant krytycznie o „sola Scriptura”. Brada Easta argumenty przeciw reformacyjnemu pryncypium,’ in Teologia w Polsce

A double review of my books in The Christian Century

A few days ago a co-authored review of both my books on the Bible—The Doctrine of Scripture (2021) and The Church’s Book (2022)—appeared in The Christian Century. It was written by Zen Hess and Chris Palmer. The title is “We Do Not Read Alone.” Here’s a taste, from about a third of the way through:

East writes with engaging confidence as he moves through the writings of Webster, Jenson, and Yoder. It is no small contribution to offer charitable and careful interpretations of these three men’s doctrines of scripture. But East goes beyond the descriptive. The Church’s Book begins to lay the groundwork for an account of what scripture is. He gestures toward this in the final two chapters of The Church’s Book and turns to it more fully in The Doctrine of Scripture.

The latter book feels like it’s written to a more immediate audience: his students. East teaches at Abilene Christian University, in the heartland of American evangelicalism. If you live in Texas, like we do, it’s not hard to imagine him strolling through coffee shops filled with young Christians, their note-scribbled Bibles open, wondering how their underlined words will reveal God’s presence to them. East, we imagine, invites these students to deepen their reading practices and to move from the individual toward the communal, showing how scripture can be more fully understood within the economy of salvation and the historic faith of all God’s people. East’s basic word to his students is this: scripture needs the church as much as the church needs scripture.

They’re not wrong. It almost feels like they’ve been following me around, or interviewing my students. It’s eerie.

Go read the whole thing. It is generous, gracious, perceptive, and thoughtful. (Is this what being reviewed is always like?) I’m gratified and grateful. Thanks to the authors and to the editors at the magazine.

I’m in Theopolis with Alastair Roberts

Peter Leithart was kind enough to host a little conversation about my new book over at Theopolis: a long first round by Alastair Roberts, followed by my reply, and concluded by Alastair’s reply to my reply. Alastair is his usual gracious, perceptive self, and it’s an honor to have his keen eye range over my work. Thanks to him and to Peter. Enjoy the conversation.

Creatura verbi divini

On the Mere Fi podcast earlier this week, both Derek and Alastair pressed me on the question of whether the church is “the creature of God’s Word.” The theological worry here is that if one affirms, with catholic tradition, that the church creates the canon, then the proper order between the two has been inverted, since the people of God is the creatura verbi divini, not the other way around. How, after all, could it be otherwise?

You can listen to my answer on the pod. My reply was simple, though I can’t speak to how well I articulated it there. Here, at least, is what I would say in expanded form.

The word of God creates the church; but the church creates the canon. This is not a contradiction because, even though Holy Scripture mediates and thus is the word of the living God to his people, the canon of texts that Scripture comprises is wholly (though not only) human, historical, and just so a product of the church. Moreover, the canon as such does not exist at the church’s founding, traditionally identified with Pentecost. No apostolic writing is extant at that moment. Apostolic writings begin to be written a decade or two following; they are not completed for at least a half century hence (maybe more); and the canon or formal collection or list of apostolic writings received as authoritative divine Scripture on the part of the church does not exist in any official way for some centuries. And even once the canon is explicit, unanimity and universality of its acceptance take even more centuries to arrive. (If one agrees with the Protestant reformers regarding the excision from the canon of such deuterocanonical books as the Wisdom of Solomon and Tobit, then in point of fact the canon takes a full fifteen centuries to come into its final, public form.)

In my view, magisterial Protestant doctrines of Scripture elide this crucial distinction in their claim that the church is created by the word of God and, thus, that Scripture creates the church. The word of God does indeed found the church, both (1) in the primary sense that the risen incarnate Logos from heaven pours out the Spirit of the Father on his apostles and (2) in the secondary sense that the apostles’ proclamation of the word of the gospel convicts and converts sinners to Christ wherever they travel, bearing witness to the good news. This is the running theme of the book of Acts. Nevertheless it remains the case that, within the very narrative of Acts, no canon of Scripture exists. Recall that St. Luke does not record the writing of any canonical text! Those texts he does record, such as the letter of St. James and the Jerusalem council to gentile believers, are not found elsewhere in the canon, but only here, as reported speech.

In our conversation, Alastair pressed a different point, an important one with which I agree but which, I think, I understand differently than he does. He observed that what doctrines of Scripture often overlook is the manifold and altogether material ways in which the production and dissemination of graphai influenced and shaped the early messianic assemblies dotting the shoreline of the Mediterranean basin. Apart from and prior to any theological redescription, that is, we can see just how letter-centric and letter-formed the early Christian communities were, evident in the extraordinary literary production of St. Paul alone. Letters (and homilies, and histories, and apocalypses, and …) are written, copied, distributed, shared, read aloud in worship, studied by the saints, transmitted and republished, so on and so forth, and this diverse and fascinating process is up and running, at the absolute latest, by the end of the second decade of the church’s existence.

As I say, I agree wholeheartedly with this observation. And it certainly bears on our theological and not only our historical understanding of the church’s origins. But, so far as I can tell, it doesn’t bear on the specific point raised by the question of whether the canon creates the church or vice versa.

That is to say: Granting the existence and influence of Pauline and other literatures in the first century of the church’s life (and on, indefinitely, into the future), this phenomenon seems to me to confirm rather than to contradict or even to complicate my original answer offered above. Yes, God’s word founds the church, both from heaven and through the spoken and, later, written words of the apostles. But from this undeniable fact we may not draw the conclusion that the canon—or even the apostolic writings eventually canonized—“create” the church, and for the same reasons. The canon does not exist in the time of the apostles. And although, intermittently and somewhat haphazardly, written apostolic documents begin circulating in the second half of the first century AD, these are far from universally shared by ekklesiai around the known world. There are churches in Africa and India and Spain and elsewhere that simply lack all or most of the apostolic writings later canonized until the second and even sometimes into the third or fourth centuries. The church simply cannot be said to be a creature of the canon or even of the apostolic texts subsequently included in the canon. The church predates both by decades, even centuries. Certain churches do receive and benefit from certain texts authored or commissioned by apostles. But for some time they are in the minority, and even they (i.e., the churches in question) preexisted their reception of any apostolic text whatsoever. Not that they preexisted apostolic teaching—but then, this question concerns graphai, not oral doctrina.

I hope this clarification is responsive to both Derek’s and Alastair’s questions and concerns. I hope especially that it is cogent. I look forward to hearing from them or others regarding where I might be wrong.

I’m on Mere Fidelity

Did I say quit podcasts? I meant all of them except one.

I’m on the latest episode of Mere Fidelity, talking about my book The Doctrine of Scripture and, well, the doctrine of Scripture. (Links: Google, Spotify, Apple, Soundcloud.) It was a pleasure to chat with Derek and Alastair and (surprise!) Timothy. Matt had to bail last minute. I can only assume he was nervous.

No joke, it was an honor to be on. For the last decade, I have lived by the mantra, “No podcasts before tenure.” I’ve turned down every invitation. In 2020–21 I participated in three podcasts as a member of The Liberating Arts, the first two as the interviewer (of Alan Noble and Jon Baskin, respectively) and the third as interviewee, speaking on behalf of the project (this was 11 months ago, but the podcast just posted this week, as it happens). In other words, this experience with Mere Fi was for all intents and purposes my first true podcast experience, in full and on the receiving end.

It was fun! I hope I didn’t flub too many answers. I tend to speak in winding paragraphs, not in discrete and manageable sentences. Besides, it’s hard to compete with Alastair’s erudition—and that accent!

Check it out. And the Patreon, where there’s a +1 segment. Thanks again to the Mere Fi crew. I give all of you dear readers a big glorious exception to go and listen to them. They’ve got the best theology pod around. What a gift to be included on the fun.

Webinar: God’s Living Word

Earlier this week I was honored to participate in a live webinar hosted by the Siburt Institute for Church Ministry, which is a part of the College of Biblical Studies here at ACU. The webinar was in a series called Intersection; the topic was Scripture, using my book published last year as a point of departure. The conversation was hosted by Carson Reed and Randy Harris and lasted about an hour. It was a pleasure to participate. I’ve embedded the video below, but you can also find it here and here. Enjoy.

Lecture recording: “The Word of the Lord”

A few weeks back I delivered a lecture here in Abilene for the Center for the Study of Ancient Religious Texts, at the cordial invitation of my colleague Jeff Childers, who is a world-class scholar of ancient and Syriac Christianity in the Graduate School of Theology. The lecture is an amalgamation of a few different sections of my book The Doctrine of Scripture, but it is also followed by 20-30 minutes of Q&A. Thanks to CSART for having me and to all the students, colleagues, and friends in town who attended. It was a pleasure.

The link above will take you to the CSART page hosting the video. Here is the link straight to Vimeo. If I can figure out how to embed it below, I’ll do so. Enjoy.

2021 recap: writing

This past year was a big one for me, writing-wise. I published my first book, wrote about a dozen essays, curated a book forum in an academic journal, and got published for the first time in three of my favorite magazines. Here’s a quick rundown.

(Though first, here is a journal article that became available right as the clock turned from 2020 to 2021 a year ago—it’s an exploration of criteria for judging the success or failure of theological interpretation of Scripture—and a book review of Steven Duby’s volume on metaphysics, Scripture, and the doctrine of God’s life in se; the review was published in 2020 but I didn’t realize was in print until just a few months ago.)

*

The Doctrine of Scripture. The book! My first. Its topic is its title: it is about what it says it is. I’m very proud of this book. I hope you’ll give it a chance. Here’s more information about it. Click on the link to buy it on Amazon; click here to buy it from the publisher (use EASTBK2 for a discount); click here to get it from Bookshop. If you’ve got some Christmas cash on hand, I’ve a notion how you could spend it!

Theology in the Dark. This was my introduction to a forum I edited in an issue of Political Theology in response to Karen Kilby’s new volume of essays on the Trinity, evil, and suffering. The six contributors were Sarah Coakley, Andrew Prevot, Katherine Sonderegger, Kathryn Tanner, Miroslav Volf, and Rowan Williams. (I know.) You should go read all six of their essays, as well as Kilby’s reply, right this instant.

The Circumcision of Abraham’s God. A New Year’s Day reflection in First Things on the happy convergence of a number of distinct feasts on different liturgical calendars, centered on Mary, Jesus, and his circumcision.

To See God in the Darkness. A review essay in Mere Orthodoxy of Tish Harrison Warren’s outstanding book Prayer in the Night; the through-line of the piece is the long Lent of Covidtide.

Covidtide Triduum. A sort of sequel, and another liturgical reflection for First Things, this time for Holy Week.

When Losing Is Likely. My first essay for The Point: a lengthy response to the socialist critic George Scialabba on the politics of Wendell Berry (and why Scialabba should be friendlier to Berry’s subtle understanding of the personal and the political in their connection to mass policy consequences).

Market Apocalypse. A review essay in Mere Orthodoxy of Rodney Clapp’s book Naming Neoliberalism. I was impressed and chastened by the work, but also frustrated by the overall approach.

Statistics as Storytelling. A review essay in The New Atlantis (my first for them) of Jason Blakely’s We Built Reality. The critique of scientism on display here leads nicely to the next entry…

Dragons in the Deep Places. A review essay in Mere Orthodoxy of Ross Douthat’s The Deep Places, his memoir of chronic Lyme disease. As it happens, Douthat’s wife Abigail Tucker’s book Mom Genes gets a shout-out at the end of the next entry…

Power in the Blood. A review in The Hedgehog Review (my third first of the year) of Eugene F. Rogers Jr.’s Blood Theology. What a weird and wonderful read, even if the politics of the book turn out to be needlessly predictable in an otherwise surprising work.

Still Supersessionist? A long review for Commonweal of Timothy Jackson’s Mordecai Would Not Bow Down. A major contribution whose shortcomings concern not its treatment of Jews or Judaism but Christ and Christianity.

A test for your doctrine of Scripture

Here’s a test for you.

Suppose that scientists created a sort of time machine. Not one that could transport someone from the present into the past. But one that could give anyone in the present a perfect window onto the past: clear, detailed, and controlled. Like a God’s-eye documentary recording of all that transpired in then and there, whenever and wherever. You wouldn’t be able to affect or change anything—what’s past is past, what’s done is done—but you could observe it.

Here’s the question.

Would the time machine obviate the necessity or utility of the Bible for Christians?

Better put: Would the time machine render redundant any and all narrative texts in the church’s canon of Holy Scripture? Because the function of those narratives is to inform us of what happened at such-and-such a time in such-and-such a place with such-and-such persons? And with the advent of the time machine, those happenings would be available to us in exponentially greater detail, minus literary and genre trappings and revisions and agendas and interpretations, plus supremely wider historical and factual context?

Your answer to these questions says a great deal about your understanding of the nature and purpose of Holy Scripture in the church.

And allow me to say, ever so gently, that if your answer to these questions is Yes, then there is a problem in your doctrine of Scripture.

Running errata

The first feeling one has upon publishing a book is a mixture of relief and elation, at least ideally. The second is the dawning realization that whatever mistakes one didn’t fix before the manuscript went to the printers are now there, in black and white, forever.

Accordingly, I’m going to keep this page as a running list of errata in The Doctrine of Scripture, errors discovered by myself or by readers friendly enough to point them out to me. So far the count is three:

xvi – Liv Stewart Lester (not “Stuart”)

53, footnote 43 – exemplify (not “exemplary”)

77 – magistra (not “magister”)

106, footnote 24 – comes (not “come”)

124 – Rom in first parenthetical citation (chapter and verse cited, no book)

124, footnote 36 – Gospel (not “gospel”)

If you spot any others, fill me in!

My new book is out! Order The Doctrine of Scripture today!

My first book, The Doctrine of Scripture, is officially out and ready for purchase. Technically it became available on Friday, August 27, but the book wasn’t yet in my hands and it wasn’t yet available for order online. (Does a book really exist if you can’t add it to your Amazon cart?) But yesterday I received my author’s copies of the book in the mail and the book appeared on Amazon. It’s real! It exists! It’s alive!

Here’s the wonderful cover, as designed by Savanah Landerholm, featuring a watercolor of the annunciation by Gabi Kiss:

And here is the full front and back, along with some of the endorsements:

Speaking of endorsements, I was and remain positively bowled over by the stature and kindness of the scholars—heroes all—who read the book and deigned to say it’s worth a read. That begins with Katherine Sonderegger, whose foreword opens the book. I won’t quote the whole thing, but here’s how it concludes:

The Doctrine of Scripture is a wonderfully ecumenical text. Here we find St. Francis de Sales next to Calvin and Turretin; they in turn next to St. Thomas, St. John of Damascus, St. Cyril, and St. Augustine. Not surprisingly, the list of authors is decidedly pre-modern. East has, it seems, followed C. S. Lewis's dictum ad litteram: Read old books! The book sings. The text displays a clear, poetic style, and wisely reserves the disputation with authors ancient and modern, across several communions, to footnotes. The whole work dedicates itself to showing how Holy Scripture, in its unique yet creaturely status, must be interpreted as the Viva Vox Dei, the living voice of the Living God. The Doctrine of Scripture is an ambitious, learned, and deeply moving work of Ressourcement theology, and I am grateful to have learned from this fine teacher.

The book sings. Can you please carve that on my gravestone? The Great Kate Sonderegger wrote those words. My work is done.

Other brilliant theologians lent a similarly gracious hand to my little book. Here is the inimitable Ephraim Radner:

A magnificent achievement! Brad East has taken his years of theological reflection upon the Bible and crafted a compelling and synoptic discussion of Scripture's divinely granted being and place within the Christian church's life and vision of reality. In the end, East's volume provides a modernized version of a generally classical view of Scripture's form and function, respectfully taking up traditional claims with a critical eye, and weaving old and new perspectives into a lucidly ordered whole that is fundamentally grounded in a living and humble faith. Sprightly written, substantively resourced, carefully argued, and pastorally adept, East's Doctrine of Scripture should be required reading for theological students and scholars alike.

And the redoubtable Bruce Marshall:

It would be hard to imagine a more winsome and helpful introduction to the Christian doctrine of Scripture than this. In an area that has been a minefield of controversy, Brad East writes with clarity yet without polemic, with ecumenical sympathy yet without failing to take a clear position on all the important and contested issues. Whatever your convictions about the Bible and how it should be read, you will benefit from this book.

And the formidable Matthew Levering:

What an exciting book! East's basic moves are recognizable: he carries forward and integrates elements of the doctrines of Scripture of Webster, Boersma, and Jenson. This would be accomplishment enough for a normal book, but East is even bolder ecumenically than the masters upon whom he builds. Without ceasing to value the Reformers, he challenges sola scriptura and the perspicacity of Scripture, and he offers a deeply Catholic account of dogma and apostolicity. This book is a rare gift—a richly comprehensive theology of Scripture that lays the foundation for real ecumenical breakthroughs.

And Darren Sarisky, a once rising star who now is unquestionably one of the leading lights in Christian theology of Scripture:

Brad East writes about the Bible with joy, verve, and insight. His presentation is highly readable, opening the subject up to all those who want to explore a theological perspective on Scripture. His strategy of working from church practice back to the nature and qualities of the text gives us all much to ponder.

And last but not least, Steve Fowl, whom I sometimes affectionately call the pope of the discipline (in his case, theological interpretation of Scripture):

Brad East's The Doctrine of Scripture raises all the key issues for theologians and biblical scholars to think about with regard to the nature and place of Scripture in a Christian theological framework. In a lucid and highly accessible style, he makes a compelling case for why these issues matter for theology and Scriptural interpretation.

When I read those names and their comments, and when that evil demon Imposter isn’t haunting my addled brain, I think, after pinching myself, that maybe I did something right. Or at least wrong in interesting ways. In either case, you should pick up a copy for yourself!

Speaking of which: I’ve buried the lede. You may want to purchase the book from Amazon or some other typical online outlet, but if you buy it from the publisher’s website, you can use the coupon code EASTBK2 to get 40% off the listed price (currently $28). Come on, y’all! You can spare an extra $20 bill for a book that sings, can’t you?

Here, by the way, is a description of the book’s contents:

When Holy Scripture is read aloud in the liturgy, the church confesses with joy and thanksgiving that it has heard the word of the Lord. What does it mean to make that confession? And why does it occasion praise? The doctrine of Scripture is a theological investigation into those and related questions, and this book is an exploration of that doctrine. It argues backward from the church’s liturgical practice, presupposing the truth of the Christian confession: namely, that the canon does in fact mediate the living word of the risen Christ to and for his people. What must be true of the sacred texts of Old and New Testament alike for such confession, and the practices of worship in which it is embedded, to be warranted?

By way of an answer, the book examines six aspects of the doctrine of Scripture: its source, nature, attributes, ends, interpretation, and authority. The result is a catholic and ecumenical presentation of the historic understanding of the Bible common to the people of God across the centuries, an understanding rooted in the church’s sacred tradition, in service to the gospel, and redounding to the glory of the triune God.

Head over to my page dedicated to the book here on the website for further information; I’ll be updating it with links, excerpts, and reviews in the coming weeks, months, and years.

I conceived the idea for this book in the summer of 2018; I drafted it, start to finish, in the fall semester of 2019; I revised it in May/June of 2020, then put the finishing touches on it last December. The copyedits came in May earlier this year, then the proofs a month later, then the physical book a couple months after that. That’s by comparison to my next book, which comes out in April, whose creation will have encompassed a full decade by the time of its publication. (It’s a former dissertation: enough said.)

All that to say: This has been an incredibly fast process, and so it’s somewhat surreal to see the physical book in my hands more or less two years to the day after I began writing it. I’m extremely proud of what I’ve written. I can’t speak to the quality, but I can tell you that it’s my best work. If I have anything whatsoever to say on this topic—if I have any skill in writing or in theological thinking—then you’ll find it on display in this book. I hope you’ll give it a chance. I hope people find it useful, thought-provoking, persuasive, invigorating. But most of all I hope it serves Christ’s church, whose sacred book is my book’s subject matter. That book is Christ’s book, and if my little book leads anyone to understanding or reading or loving it more, or more deeply, then I will be satisfied, and then some.

But right now I’m all gratitude, from top to bottom. So thanks in advance to you, too, if you end up giving it your time.