Trinity, Revelation, and Reading —— A Theological Introduction to the Bible and its Interpretation

This is a phenomenal book for helping those who are little familiar with scripture better appreciate the very nature of scripture. Swain shows that, in the reading of scripture, God communicates himself to us such that we might have a sincere, real friendship with him. It is precise, deep, carefully thought out, and very readable. It is a great intro for knowing how to better read scripture.

Concise but yet thorough and incredibly trinitarian! Recommend to anyone who wishes to get grounded in the relationship between covenant relationship and scripture.

Great for pastors and lay leaders alike! Read this and be reminded of Gods love in the revelation of scripture.

Read as a textbook for a DMin program of study, Swain shows a methodology for biblical interpretation that requires the reader to interact with both the biblical text and the author himself. This book cannot be read without being challenged to look into the Word.

A masterful job of showing the sovereignty of God in His Self revelation to whom He wills, and reminding us that the true beauty of the Scriptures, is that Christ is found as the pearl of great price.

This is a helpful resource for anyone who desires to better understand the Bible. God reveals much about himself through the holy Scriptures. It's worth the effort to read this helpful guide.

Purchased these for a friend in seminary. They are a book so should be 100% what you are looking for if you have the title and author right. I didn't hear of any issues with quality from him.

Very explicit and foundational booj

EXTREMELY PAINFUL TO READ. RTS Prof Robert Cara uses this book in his class on Advanced Biblical Hermeneutics. So, as a seminary student, I really wanted to eagerly dive in and gain some insights. But the book is SO painful to read - extremely boring, dry, drags on, and clearly written for academics. Why do Christians write like this? Why do they make learning about Christianity EXCRUCIATING? Why do they erect language barriers between God's word and humans? Does he really HAVE to use Latin (and Greek!) throughout this book without translation or definition? Even the New Oxford Dictionary does not have definitions for some of the words Swain uses (Swain uses "characterized by hilaritas" instead of the easy "cheerfulness")! Why do Christian authors lose their ability to say things in a simple straight-forward way? Swain's writing style comes across as out-of-touch with his audience, with reality and a When a seminary student must re-read EVERY other sentence 2-3 times just to grasp what the author is saying - what a tragedy! GOALS DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND: Per pg 1, the book answers: "What roles do Holy Scripture and the reading of Holy Scripture play within the unfolding drama of the commerce and communion between God and humanity?" Per page 7: "The central thesis of this book is that we may best appreciate the theological significance of the Bible and biblical interpretation if we understand these two themes in a trinitarian, covenantal context." What are the two themes? Page 6 says: "two modes of divine self-communication" "the triune life of communication and communion must be considered from two vantage points, one internal to God (the divine life ad intra) and one external to God (the divine life ad extra)." Or is "Covenant" one of his themes because he says on page 7: "The relation between God’s fatherly self-communication ad intra and his fatherly self-communication ad extra brings us to one of the most important themes of this book, namely, that of “covenant.”" But he doesn't mention a second "theme" after talking about covenant and he didn't mention any "theme" before he started talking about covenant. So... maybe we should just go back an re-read the ENTIRE section? No. It was too painful to begin with and didn't seem to say anything except basically, "We'll be studying the covenants in this book." So pressing on... to page 7-8: "The entirety of this book is devoted to tracing the place of Holy Scripture and its interpretation within the economy of trinitarian, covenantal self-communication and communion." BIBLE MISINTERPRETED: Also shocked to see RTS's Scott Swain's interpretation of Mt 11:25-27: He somehow claims on page 5: "The Trinity is thus the ultimate mystery of salvation, the secret hidden in ages past but now unveiled to us (cf. Mt. 11.25–27)." What does it mean? Is he implying the Trinity was hidden in ages past? As if the OT saints did not know Jesus Christ who led them through the wilderness or the Spirit to dwelt in the temple? Also, reading Mt 11, the passage is about God hiding the truth from "the wise" (Jewish Pharisees) and revealing it to "the babes" (the little people). The context has nothing to do with hiding the doctrine of the Trinity from an entire AGE of people. That sounds so Dispensationalist! Very disappointing. Hopefully this was just a slip up and does not indicate deeper concerns with Scott's views on Biblical interpretation. We don't want to be interpreting the Bible like this! INFLUENCES INCLUDE ROMAN CATHOLIC: Read carefully page 11: "This is an effort to retrieve theological thought and argumentation from older confessional dogmatics… to the broad churchly tradition… A Protestant voice on the matters in this book is not necessarily antithetical to Rome or Orthodox voices. ...the arguments of this book resonate at a number of points with the recent proposal of Matthew Levering, one of the most inspiring Roman Catholic theologians writing today. (11) I have found in these old (and often maligned!) wells a tradition of theological scope and spiritual breadth that I hope readers from other ecclesial traditions will appreciate." (11) As suggested by his above paragraph, Swain makes free use of Roman Catholic authors (without any warning or identification) Henri de Lubac, Scott Hahn, and Matthew Levering. Also quotes freely from concerning NPP author N.T. Wright. ...it will be clear to many readers that its arguments are unimaginable apart from the recent development in academic theology known as “Theological Interpretation of Scripture.”" (11) Influenced by Kevin Vanhoozer and John Webster. And then... Scott Swain spends Chapter 5 discussing lectio divina but he doesn't tell you what it is (yes, he likes to use Latin and not define it). Lectio divina means "sacred reading" in Latin and it describes a mystical practice that conservative evangelical scholars and the Reformed generally reject as "Roman Catholic." Remember the Passion Conferences, Beth Moore and Loui Giglio getting ripped all over YouTube for this? Go watch some YouTube videos. OVERALL RATING: I rated this book 2-stars because it loses 3 stars for being so completely painful to read and for its misinterpretation. It gets 2 stars for offering those who can get through it some learning. REVISED TO 1 STAR: After further consideration, after finishing the Conclusion, I'm so disgusted with the hours I put into struggling over needless Latin and incomprehensible sentences that I'm changing this book to a 1 star. No one should waste their time. Scott Swain is a TERRIBLE writer. Seminary students should not have to look up 1-2 words in every paragraph!

Like all of Dr. Swain’s writings, this is an extremely well written theological introduction to the study of scripture. What makes it unique is that he really grounds the practice of Bible study in the theology of scripture itself before getting into the practical process of reading and learning. I strongly recommend this book for all serious students of God’s Word, but especially if you’re thinking about seminary or if you’re a first year seminary student. I also recommend it to those interested in or new to Reformed theology.

EXTREMELY PAINFUL TO READ. RTS Prof Robert Cara uses this book in his class on Advanced Biblical Hermeneutics. So, as a seminary student, I really wanted to eagerly dive in and gain some insights. But the book is SO painful to read - extremely boring, dry, drags on, and clearly written for academics. Why do Christians write like this? Why do they make learning about Christianity EXCRUCIATING? Why do they erect language barriers between God's word and humans? Does he really HAVE to use Latin (and Greek!) throughout this book without translation or definition? Even the New Oxford Dictionary does not have definitions for some of the words Swain uses (Swain uses "characterized by hilaritas" instead of the easy "cheerfulness")! Why do Christian authors lose their ability to say things in a simple straight-forward way? Swain's writing style comes across as out-of-touch with his audience, with reality and a When a seminary student must re-read EVERY other sentence 2-3 times just to grasp what the author is saying - what a tragedy! GOALS DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND: Per pg 1, the book answers: "What roles do Holy Scripture and the reading of Holy Scripture play within the unfolding drama of the commerce and communion between God and humanity?" Per page 7: "The central thesis of this book is that we may best appreciate the theological significance of the Bible and biblical interpretation if we understand these two themes in a trinitarian, covenantal context." What are the two themes? Page 6 says: "two modes of divine self-communication" "the triune life of communication and communion must be considered from two vantage points, one internal to God (the divine life ad intra) and one external to God (the divine life ad extra)." Or is "Covenant" one of his themes because he says on page 7: "The relation between God’s fatherly self-communication ad intra and his fatherly self-communication ad extra brings us to one of the most important themes of this book, namely, that of “covenant.”" But he doesn't mention a second "theme" after talking about covenant and he didn't mention any "theme" before he started talking about covenant. So... maybe we should just go back an re-read the ENTIRE section? No. It was too painful to begin with and didn't seem to say anything except basically, "We'll be studying the covenants in this book." So pressing on... to page 7-8: "The entirety of this book is devoted to tracing the place of Holy Scripture and its interpretation within the economy of trinitarian, covenantal self-communication and communion." BIBLE MISINTERPRETED: Also shocked to see RTS's Scott Swain's interpretation of Mt 11:25-27: He somehow claims on page 5: "The Trinity is thus the ultimate mystery of salvation, the secret hidden in ages past but now unveiled to us (cf. Mt. 11.25–27)." What does it mean? Is he implying the Trinity was hidden in ages past? As if the OT saints did not know Jesus Christ who led them through the wilderness or the Spirit to dwelt in the temple? Also, reading Mt 11, the passage is about God hiding the truth from "the wise" (Jewish Pharisees) and revealing it to "the babes" (the little people). The context has nothing to do with hiding the doctrine of the Trinity from an entire AGE of people. That sounds so Dispensationalist! Very disappointing. Hopefully this was just a slip up and does not indicate deeper concerns with Scott's views on Biblical interpretation. We don't want to be interpreting the Bible like this! INFLUENCES INCLUDE ROMAN CATHOLIC: Read carefully page 11: "This is an effort to retrieve theological thought and argumentation from older confessional dogmatics… to the broad churchly tradition… A Protestant voice on the matters in this book is not necessarily antithetical to Rome or Orthodox voices. ...the arguments of this book resonate at a number of points with the recent proposal of Matthew Levering, one of the most inspiring Roman Catholic theologians writing today. (11) I have found in these old (and often maligned!) wells a tradition of theological scope and spiritual breadth that I hope readers from other ecclesial traditions will appreciate." (11) As suggested by his above paragraph, Swain makes free use of Roman Catholic authors (without any warning or identification) Henri de Lubac, Scott Hahn, and Matthew Levering. Also quotes freely from concerning NPP author N.T. Wright. ...it will be clear to many readers that its arguments are unimaginable apart from the recent development in academic theology known as “Theological Interpretation of Scripture.”" (11) Influenced by Kevin Vanhoozer and John Webster. And then... Scott Swain spends Chapter 5 discussing lectio divina but he doesn't tell you what it is (yes, he likes to use Latin and not define it). Lectio divina means "sacred reading" in Latin and it describes a mystical practice that conservative evangelical scholars and the Reformed generally reject as "Roman Catholic." Remember the Passion Conferences, Beth Moore and Loui Giglio getting ripped all over YouTube for this? Go watch some YouTube videos. OVERALL RATING: I rated this book 2-stars because it loses 3 stars for being so completely painful to read and for its misinterpretation. It gets 2 stars for offering those who can get through it some learning. REVISED TO 1 STAR: After further consideration, after finishing the Conclusion, I'm so disgusted with the hours I put into struggling over needless Latin and incomprehensible sentences that I'm changing this book to a 1 star. No one should waste their time. Scott Swain is a TERRIBLE writer. Seminary students should not have to look up 1-2 words in every paragraph!