When you say a “new perspective” on the Bible it sends up a red flag for me because the Bible is not a new Book.
When we speak of a “new perspective,” we are not using the word to suggest something before unknown; but rather something unorthodox or non-traditional in contrast to nominal Christianity. Our first concern is to be faithful to the God behind the Bible, promoting His words and His thoughts, which means that we cannot agree with all traditional teachings about the Bible. I realize this is an open-ended statement and needs support, but please refer to our published literature on the various subjects, and I think you will understand.
Is it reasonable to accept a doctrine just because it has been taught for a thousand years by thousands of people—if that doctrine is not solidly grounded in the Word of God? Just because a position has been taken by thousands of people before us does not make it true. Our continual question is: What says the Lord? What says the Book? For all the voices in the world combined do not have the weight of one word from God.