Book Review Guidelines

1. Eligibility and approval

• Reviewers should possess relevant subject knowledge through scholarship, doctoral study, ministry, teaching or substantial independent research.
• Unsolicited review proposals are welcome, but publication is not guaranteed.
• A reviewer must disclose personal, professional or financial relationships with the book’s author, editor or publisher.
• Authors may not review their own books. Reviews by close collaborators, supervisors, students or immediate colleagues will normally be declined.

2. Books considered

• Academic monographs, edited collections and substantial scholarly works relevant to the journal’s aims and scope.
• Books should normally have been published within the previous three years.
• Older books may be considered when a new edition, translation or major scholarly development gives them renewed significance.
• Digital review copies are preferred. Physical copies should be sent only after written agreement with the editor.

3. Length and presentation

• Standard length: 1,000–1,500 words.
• Comparative review essays may be considered at 2,000–3,000 words with prior editorial approval.
• Submit an editable DOC or DOCX file in clear academic English.
• Use concise headings only when they materially improve readability.
• Quotations must include page numbers. References to works other than the reviewed book should follow the journal’s author guidelines.

4. Bibliographic heading

Begin the review with complete publication information in this form:

5. What a strong review should do

• Identify the book’s principal argument, purpose, structure and intended readership.
• Explain its contribution to the relevant scholarly discussion.
• Evaluate the evidence, method, theological reasoning and use of sources.
• Recognise genuine strengths before presenting substantial criticism.
• Distinguish disagreement from error and avoid personal, dismissive or promotional language.
• Conclude with a clear assessment of the audiences for whom the book will be most useful.

6. Ethics and originality

• The review must be original, accurate and not under consideration elsewhere.
• Reviewers must not use confidential correspondence or unpublished information without permission.
• Any use of generative artificial intelligence must comply with the journal’s authorship and disclosure requirements. AI-generated evaluation cannot replace the reviewer’s own reading and judgment.
• Suspected plagiarism, fabricated quotations or undisclosed conflicts may result in rejection or later correction or retraction.

7. Editorial process

1. The editor checks relevance, conflicts of interest and basic suitability.
2. Suitable reviews receive editorial assessment for accuracy, balance, clarity and scholarly value.
3. Revision may be requested. Acceptance is confirmed only in writing.
4. Accepted reviews are copy-edited and published within the current issue as a clearly labelled Book Review.

Book reviews are editorially reviewed; they are not classified as double-blind peer-reviewed research articles.

8. Licence, fees and copies

• There are no submission fees, publication fees or article processing charges.
• Published reviews are open access under CC BY 4.0 unless otherwise stated.
• Review copies remain the reviewer’s responsibility and do not influence the editorial decision.
• The journal does not guarantee that every book received will be reviewed.