Share your insights on how you put the AI Smart Tool to work. Share your prompts.

Prompt your exegetical questions in the AI Smart search tool or let it bring out information aboutscholarly positions, approaches and more.

Why did Tom Schreiner changed his position on the Millennium?

Which lenses does dr.Beale use when doing Biblical theology?

What position does dr.Beale holds regarding his hermeneutical approach of revelation and why?

Very helpful results for sure! I love the AI smart tool.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Renold Burke

What position dr.Beale hold regarding his hermeneutical approach of revelation?

Dr. Gregory Beale's hermeneutical approach to Revelation is characterized by a nuanced understanding of John's use of Old Testament texts, particularly Daniel. Beale posits that John employs a strategy of midrash on key chapters of Daniel, especially Daniel 7, to draw parallels between the situations of his readers and the tribulations predicted in Daniel[1]. He describes John's method as using a "hermeneutical magnet" to draw in related scriptures through common themes or catch words[1]. Beale argues that John respects the original context of Old Testament passages while also transforming their meaning to address the new context of his churches[2]. This approach is part of a broader "modified futurist" or "eclectic" interpretation of Revelation, which Beale shares with other scholars like D.A. Carson and Robert Mounce[3]. This perspective primarily views Revelation chapters 4-22 as describing future events that will end world history, while also acknowledging elements of preterist and idealist interpretations[3].

[1] Moyise, S. (1995). The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation (S. E. Porter, Ed.; Vol. 115, p. 59). Sheffield Academic Press.
[2] Osborne, G. R. (2006). The hermeneutical spiral: a comprehensive introduction to biblical interpretation (Rev. and expanded, 2nd ed., p. 342). InterVarsity Press.
[3] Akin, D. L. (2016). Exalting Jesus in Revelation (D. L. Akin, D. Platt, & T. Merida, Eds.; p. 19). Holman Reference.

Renold Burke

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1318325#Comment_1318325

Why did Tom Schreiner changed his position on the Millennium?

Tom Schreiner, a respected theologian and preacher, changed his position on the millennium while preaching through Revelation. Initially an amillennialist, Schreiner altered his view upon reaching Revelation 20[1]. This shift highlights the importance of being open to new interpretations and maintaining charity towards differing views on non-central issues of faith[1]. Schreiner emphasizes that while some doctrines are non-negotiable, such as the Trinity and justification by faith alone, matters like the millennium are less clear and should not be grounds for division among Christians[1]. It's worth noting that Schreiner has demonstrated a willingness to revise his positions on other theological matters as well, such as his interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:11-13 regarding women in church leadership[2]. Schreiner's approach to scholarship is described as confessional, committed to Reformed theology while prioritizing New Testament teaching[3]. The articles do not provide specific details about Schreiner's new position on the millennium or his reasons for changing, focusing instead on the broader implications of such a shift for Christian unity and biblical interpretation[1][4].

[1] Platt, D. (2012). What Ultimately Matters regarding the Millennium. In David Platt Sermon Archive (p. 3702). David Platt.
[2] Hübner, J. (2015). The Evolution of Complementarian Exegesis. Priscilla Papers, 29(1), 12.
[3] Mohler, R. A., Jr. (2019). Foreword: In Appreciation of Thomas R. Schreiner. In God’s glory revealed in christ: essays on biblical theology in honor of thomas r. schreiner (p. xi). B&H Academic.
[4] Ortlund, G. (2020). Finding the Right Hills to Die On: The Case for Theological Triage (p. 130). Crossway.