Scriptural reasoning: texts or/and tents?

This article engages in a critique of the nature of the scriptural reasoning (SR) discourse by considering the writings of some of the chief players in the movement. This is important if we are to consider what is gained from the kinds of meetings taking place and perceive the ways in which SR hopes to impact on the public square. The article begins by briefly considering the place of SR in the debate about post-secular politics before delving more deeply into the 'return to scripture' that SR recommends and the nuanced descriptions, particularly those of Peter Ochs and Nicholas Adams, that have been offered to locate conceptually the discourse and its intended outcomes. What repeatedly emerges is an emphasis on the sense of friendship that is sustained, despite possible disagreements and the improvised or spontaneous nature of the triadic discussions that take place. It is not a scientific or grounded discourse, but sapientia: a wisdom that comes from the three faiths in conversation around their scriptures. The final parts of the article discuss the implications of this emphasis on sapientia. In particular, does it mean that the events or 'moments of meeting' are more significant than the scriptures themselves: the tent rather than the text? And, how do we pass on the insights of SR meetings or impact on the public square?