Reading the Lost World of Genesis One by John Walton. My question is, is it a defensible position?

hughross
johnwalton
genesis

(RZIM Connect Member) #1

Mr. Ross:

I recently read The Lost World of Genesis One by John Walton. Are you familiar with his work? He takes the position the text is not an account of actual material creation by God but the assigning of function to his creation. Walton based this on his finding that "the ancient world did not believe that something existed by virtue of its material properties, but by virtue of its having a function in an ordered system." Additionally, he maintains that Genesis 1 is the inauguration of the cosmos as God's temple his dwelling place in his creation that he might live among his people which has always been his intention.. This view is in the old earth camp but without the baggage of trying to square what Walton says is a literary account of creation with modern day science.

My question, can you comment on this? Is it a defensible position? I like the framework but as with all positions there are some unresolved major points. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to a response.


Genesis metaphorical or literal?
(Hugh Ross) #2

I have read John Walton’s book, The Lost World of Genesis One, and have written a 16-page review and critique of the book. You will find my review here: Defending Concordism: Response to The Lost World of Genesis One

John Walton denies that Genesis 1 gives us an historical, chronological account of the history of Earth and Earth’s life. He views Genesis 1 as only describing the function of what God had created. I agree with Walton that Genesis 1 does describe the function of what God had created but that it also describes an historically and chronological accurate account of the history of the universe, Earth, and Earth’s life that is consistent with the creation texts in Job, Psalms, and Proverbs. For more on this subject and my response to Walton see my book, Navigating Genesis.


(Kay Kalra) #3