I see you are doing the 2 Peter and Jude commentary. I preached through those two books a couple of years ago. One of the hopes I would have from this volume is to help us think clearly about the Genesis 6:1-4 passage as Peter and Jude see it (2 Pet 2:4 and Jude 6). Which begs the question of IF this is what they are referring to. Since so many in the past have thought it is, it obviously has to be dealt with. I found Bauckham and Schriener's comments quite helpful as well as others as I was going through those texts.
I know most Reformed people just tote the Augustinan line about this being Sethites marringly Cainites. Of course, Augustine took that position by his own words, because he could not believe the alternative. And Calvin just dismissed the ancient interpretation as "absurd." So much for arguments.
I know it is very easy to just dump the ancient "giant" view in with wacky Dispensationalism, especially when so many have come out of that. But I see no logical connection between a "giant" view and Dispensationalism, unless the ancients were all Dispensational. So I hope that you will deal with this thorny question, whichever side you come down on and really work with the ancient Jewish and Christian interpretation and especially Bauckham's treatment of it, without just dismissing the whole thing as looney.
I look forward to this book whatever side you come down on.
I enjoyed your first two books. They really helped me cement my understanding of eschatology at college. Looking forward to these commentaries by you as well!.
The website doesn't appear to be up yet. Please give us a reminder when the series' release is imminent. There are some very good people involved and I'm be interested in picking up some or all of the set.
Reader Comments (7)
I know most Reformed people just tote the Augustinan line about this being Sethites marringly Cainites. Of course, Augustine took that position by his own words, because he could not believe the alternative. And Calvin just dismissed the ancient interpretation as "absurd." So much for arguments.
I know it is very easy to just dump the ancient "giant" view in with wacky Dispensationalism, especially when so many have come out of that. But I see no logical connection between a "giant" view and Dispensationalism, unless the ancients were all Dispensational. So I hope that you will deal with this thorny question, whichever side you come down on and really work with the ancient Jewish and Christian interpretation and especially Bauckham's treatment of it, without just dismissing the whole thing as looney.
I look forward to this book whatever side you come down on.
The website will be up soon. I'll keep everyone updated.
You may want to get a sub to look at the list of names. Unless Daniel R Hyde and Danny R Hyde are two different individuals?