Hayley Yukihiro
CRST290: History of Life
Cosmic Temple View of Genesis One
John Walton, an Old Testament scholar at Wheaton college, proposed a non-traditional
Genesis view to the theological pallet known as the cosmic temple. The cosmic temple represents
a Genesis account that is functional within Ancient Near Eastern Literature. Thus, conforming
creation to a temple analogy and further explaining the meaning behind the seventh day of rest.
Walton’s cosmic temple interpretation has proven to be controversial in the theological
community for the over-usage of outside analysis instead of the literal reading of the Word. The
cosmic temple is a convincing Genesis analysis but at the price of turning the creation account
into philosophical naturalism.
Overview of the Cosmic Temple
In 2009, John Walton challenged the evangelical community by looking beyond the old
earth and young earth views of material origins to find a philosophical functional view that can
be incorporated to either side. He proposed the Genesis 1 account to be a cosmic temple
inauguration. Since God spoke through human writers, Scripture would be influenced by the
Ancient Near Eastern. Therefore, the literal readings we receive from Scripture need cultural
context to explain the account of Creation. The cultural context interprets Creation in Genesis to
be an ancient cosmology that leads to a functional creation. The function of Creation is to build a
temple for God to dwell in and rule over the cosmos. The cosmic temple functionality view ties
in to how the Bible states that God is omnipresent and in control. Walton’s specific view of day
still holds to the reading of twenty-four hour days. Walton sides with the Hebrew textual reading
of Genesis which always implied day as the day we know today. However, Walton believes the
creation of materials preceded the seven days listed in the Bible. The days still hold to the
chronological order listed in the Bible but only the functionality of created things were
established and not their material birth. God made everything to glorify Him in the functionality
of the cosmic temple. Even our place in the universe, as man created in His image, we have a
functionality in the cosmic temple to serve Him. Since we are created in God’s image, Walton
wrote in another analysis of man’s function in the temple, “. . . the first cosmology account of
Genesis . . . is an account of the functional origins of the cosmos, which has been designated as
sacred space, serving humans who are in the image of God” (Walton 2012, 876). His explanation
stems from God’s placement of man over his created creation like animals and plants. He goes
on to explain that God rested on the seventh day because God took his place in the completed
cosmic temple after the six days of functionalities being established. In an analysis of Walton’s
view of Creation week, the journalist states, “For Walton, Genesis 1 does not describe the
material origin of the cosmos taking place in seven days. Rather it describes the ceremonial
liturgical creation of the cosmos in seven days.” (Hanna 2011, 180).
Response to the Cosmic Temple
The cosmic temple analysis of the Genesis narrative is a viewpoint that caters to
theological and scientific beliefs. Walton seems to pick what he likes from the Biblical narrative
and chooses to overlook the Genesis narrative as literal truth to bring a middle-man creation
account. Walton does agree with the twenty-four hour seven days written in the Genesis account.
Yet, he creates a side interpretation that differs from the literal Biblical understanding and caters
to open ended theories on the origins of creation. The cosmic temple does not consider the seven-
days of creation to be the days everything was materially formed by God. Walton proposed that
God already had all the materials of the universe created before the seven twenty-four hour days
described in the Bible. A critic of Walton’s cosmic temple study states, “. . . philosophical
naturalism that was the basis of long-age and evolutionary interpretations of the universe also
corrupted the interpretation of the Bible . . . his ‘Cosmic Temple’ is just deference to the claims
of those who would deny God’s supernatural, six-day creation of the universe” (Ambler
2015). Walton takes the material formation of Creation out and proposes God outlined the
functionality in six days. Biblical scholars are troubled by Walton’s conclusions because
Walton is conforming the Genesis account to fit all scientific theories. Additionally, Walton
brings Biblical error by claiming death precedes the Fall. In his theory statement, “Since the
material phase precedes the seven days of Genesis 1, these would all be relegated to the
obscure and distant past. The anthropological specimens would not be viewed as humans in
the image of God. They would not be assessed morally . . . and they were subject to death”
(Walton 2009, 168). Biblical scholars agree that Walton’s statement includes all forms of
bad theology and one criticized, “Walton’s dismissive moral assessment of these human
ancestors implicitly allows for violence, deceit, murder, rape, theft, and so-forth, all before
sin entered the world at the Fall, a truly bizarre and un-Biblical position to take” (Cox 2019).
The cosmic temple view compromises all types of Genesis truths listed in the Bible that it is
hard to be accepted as correct Christian doctrine. Hans Maudeme, a theological professor,
succinctly describes Walton’s Genesis view by stating, “Walton seeks to show that a high
view of Scripture can accommodate the scientific consensus . . . Walton uses the language
of ANE studies and speech act theory, but his argument unwittingly implies a “neo-Gnostic”
view of Scripture—regarding human origins—which is to say the Bible has less and less to
say about material things and science sets the rules of play” (Maudeme 2016, 180).
Overall, Walton created a Genesis analogy known as the cosmic temple that strives to
relate the Biblical Genesis narrative to the current day evolutionary theories. The cosmic
temple from face value seems to be a weird but solid Biblical representation of God’s place in
Creation. God asserts His reign in the temple which is His Creation. Everything in His Creation
are meant
to glorify Him. Yet, Walton demonstrated his compromised view of the Creation account by
denying God’s seven-day creation of the material forms and replaces it with God outlining the
functionality of created kinds. His view compromises the Genesis account of the Fall by making
claims that death precedes God’s outline of functionality. It is quite saddening to see a theologian
stray far from the Word and create interpretations that conform to the world and reject Biblical
truths. The cosmic temple is a perfect example of theologians conforming Biblical narratives,
like the Genesis account, to fit both theological and scientific views of our day.
Bibliography
Ambler, Marc. “Evolutionists on the Bible.” Creation.com. Creation Ministries International,
May 19, 2015. https://creation.com/evolution-on-bible.
Cox, Gavin. “The Lost World of Walton.” Creation.com. Creation Ministries International,
March 14, 2019. https://creation.com/lost-world-walton.
Hanna, Martin. “It Takes a Miracle: An Analysis of John H. Walton’s View of Cosmic Temple
Inauguration.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 49, no.1 (Spr 2011): 177-89.
https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=lsdar&AN=ATLA0001874576&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Madueme, Hans. “Adam and Eve: An Evangelical Impasse?—A Review Essay.” Christian
Scholar’s Review 45, no. 2 (Winter 2016): 165-83.
https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=asn&AN=112239235&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Walton, John H. “Human Origins and the Bible.” Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science 47, no. 4
(December 2012): 875-89. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=pif&AN=PHL2198658&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Walton, John H. The Lost World of Genesis One. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009.
