I haven't read G.K. Beale's book and am already puzzled over its blurb. Yet I plan to get it, so while looking for reviews I came across these:
James McGrath posted his disagreement with Beale, suggesting that,
Beale is wrong. Inerrancy is dying of natural causes, or perhaps to choose a better metaphor, it is being eaten up by dry rot from within because it is inherently diseased in the very fiber of its being, in its very bones...Art Boulet, a student at Westminster Theological Seminary, comments,
Beale's interest is not in doing justice to questions of ancient and modern cosmologies and the Biblical context, but of defending his view of Scripture at all costs.
I wouldn’t recommend Beale’s book to anyone unless they have a lack of something to blog about.Add to that I've also listened to the panel discussion with Beale at the Reformed Forum. Contrary to the two reviewers above, the panel holds a high view over Beale's work. And I've learned from the discussion that Carl Trueman thinks that B.B. Warfield's exegesis on 'inerrancy' is still unsurpassed. Of course, I did raised my eye brows. Both sides to be sure.