<aside> 📌 John Walton’s The Lost World of Genesis One re-evaluates modern interpretations of the Creation Account in light of growing knowledge of Ancient Near Eastern culture and thought. He explains his Cosmic Temple Inauguration View in detail pulling out the functional perspective of the author when a de novo creative perspective is usually assumed. He compares his view with other views, discusses its relationship to science, as well as implications for the public school classroom.

</aside>

Key Points

• Genesis One is a God-inspired ancient near east account accommodating the scientific understanding of the day and not trying to teach anything new about science.
• The creation account describes how God creates a functioning universe to serve as his cosmic temple in which he dwells and we partner with Him in His rule (ie. Cosmic Temple Inauguration view).
• The Cosmic Temple Inauguration (CTI) view is advantageous in that it helps the reader see God as both the creator and sustainer of the universe. We gain a more accurate outlook on the world and a better face-value reading of the text. This view removes the unnecessary barriers to belief for scientifically minded non-believers, as well as frees the reader from having to let science inform what Scripture means. Importantly, the CTI view is not merely an attempt to skirt the science vs religion debate. Instead, the CTI view is a legitimate conclusion of sound exegesis of the original text.
• Science can only speak to physical realities whereas Scripture speaks in metaphysical terms. A rivalry between the two need not exist. However, there are significant implications for how science is taught within our public school systems.

<aside> ⚙️ We are willing to bind reason if our faith calls for belief where reason fails. But we are also people who in faith seek learning. What we learn may cause us to reconsider interpretations of Scripture, but need never cause us to question the intrinsic authority or nature of Scripture (206).

</aside>

The Cosmic Temple Inauguration (CTI) View: A Functional Perspective

One of the main assumptions of this account is that it is describing the material creation of the Universe (eg. a divine Big Bang where God spoke everything we know into existence). The other consideration is that this account is more focused on the creation of order and function rather than material. Below is a brief look at the supporting evidence for the Cosmic Temple Inauguration view which contains a functional perspective:

• The Hebrew word translated “create” (bārā) concerns assigning functions, not creating new material.
• The recurrent comment that “it is good” refers to its functionality, not its material quality.
• The account begins in Genesis 1:2 with material that has no functions (rather than no material). Each day of creation focuses on creating order in each of the pre-created materials and then putting functionaries within the different cosmic spheres.
• The first 3 days pertain to the 3 major functions of life: time, weather, and food. The next 3 days pertain to functionaries in the cosmos being assigned their roles and spheres. The last day, the climax of the account, focuses God taking up residence in his ordered cosmic temple.

Introduction

Language and culture are always interconnected. Therefore, when we want to translate a language to our own we must also make an attempt to translate the culture which that language assumed and served. Culture, however, cannot be translated. Instead, it must be entered into. The rest of the book will help us enter into the ANE culture through 18 propositions. The Bible is ancient near eastern (ANE) literature set in ancient near eastern culture. The Lost World of Genesis One helps us enter into the ANE culture and interpret Scripture through the lens of the author and the original audience.

What role does other ANE play in biblical interpretation? The biblical authors that God revealed himself to and spoke through were not immune per se to the cultural influences surrounding them. Every society in the ANE had a similar view of the world though each society had some differences, and the Israelites some significant differences. God has always accommodated humans in how he interacts with them; in their language, through their mediums, in their analogies and ways of understanding. God spoke to them through their ANE understanding of the world and if we understand their perspective, we’ll better understand the text we have today.

Does the Bible contain mythology like other ANE literature? Mythology is a term today that carries a lot of baggage, especially post-enlighthenment and with rising confusion on doctrines of the innerrancy of Scripture and what that means (‣). It is a term best avoided in the discussion for that reason however a few comments on it would be beneficial.

<aside> ⚙️ Mythology by its nature seeks to explain how the world works and how it came to work that way, and therefore includes a culture’s “theory of origins” (15).

</aside>

Post-enlightenment, we regard mythology or myth as naïve and immature stories that contradict modern scientific conclusions. ANE societies, such as the Canaanites or Assyrians, did not consider myths to be imaginative stories. Rather, these stories reflected their beliefs about the way the world was and how their world worked. This was their “science” of the day.

<aside> ⚙️ Genesis 1 offered explanations of their view of origins and operations, in the same way that mythologies served in the rest of the ancient world and that science serves our Western Culture (15).

</aside>

It is, as CS Lewis said, chronologically snobbery for us today to consider their way of viewing the world as inferior to ours. Our materialistic framework may help us explain the world mechanically, but it fails to help us define our meaning, purpose, and identity. While their mythological framework fails to explain natural laws of physics, it sufficiently provided them these necessary aspects for human flourishing.

1. Genesis 1 is Ancient Cosmology