Genesis 6:1-4 and Historical Christian Thought

Posted By on April 20, 2013

Ever wonder how folks like Aquinas, Luther, and Calvin thought about Genesis 6:1-4? This essay I came across today provides a decent overview. I’m thinking some readers will find it interesting.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

About The Author

Comments

4 Responses to “Genesis 6:1-4 and Historical Christian Thought”

  1. blop2008 says:

    Thank you!

    I like the conclusion:
    “Fifth, exegetes uncomfortable with parallels between Near Eastern and Hebrew texts cannot seek a remedy for their discomfort by transforming apparently mythological elements in the Hebrew texts into palatable and mundane accounts. It makes no sense to obscure the literal meaning of Scripture in order to maintain faith in the literal meaning of Scripture! Sixth and finally, in no case should a confessional tradition that takes revelation seriously shy away from a preternatural interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 on philosophical grounds. Rather, evangelical religious epistemology requires the interpreter to submit to Scripture even when the text challenges one’s comfortable conceptions of the created order.”

  2. Malkiyahu says:

    He writes, “Thus, he points to the standard passages showing that spirits are not flesh and blood (e.g. Luke 24:39), though one might note that such passages do not deny the potential for angels to take physical forms, only that they do not have flesh and bones.” Does Jesus really say in that verse that spirits don’t have flesh and bones, or just that they don’t have flesh and bones like His (“as you see that I have”)?

    • MSH says:

      My view is that he’s saying they by nature are not embodied, but he’s not denying they could be (i.e., Jesus knew his Old Testament).

Leave a Reply

Please note: Comment moderation is currently enabled so there will be a delay between when you post your comment and when it shows up. Patience is a virtue; there is no need to re-submit your comment.