Creation as a Temple: Ancient Pagan Belief & Practice

Pagan temples provide the oldest record of the thinking and theology of the Ancients regarding God and religion. Their temple-ruins and writings provide a historical record across the Ancient Near East. Given Abraham’s origins in Mesopotamia and Israel’s later sojourn in Egypt, it is possible that Hebrew thinking was influenced by these cultures that contemporaneously dwelt side-by-side with Israel. So it is appropriate to examine the practices of various ancient pagan religions as insights can be gained into the religious and cultural thinking that existed in antiquity. From that beginning, we can then examine similarities and differences with Judaic thought.

Temples & Creation – Pagan Belief & Hebrew Echoes

To understand the cosmos as a temple, the perspective of the ancients must first be established as their views differ fundamentally from ours:

The role of the temple in the ancient world is not primarily a place for people to gather in worship like modern churches. It is a place for the deity – sacred space. [1]

Ancient temples were fundamentally the dwelling place of the gods. The temple had no value to the ancients if it wasn’t inhabited by the gods. There was an expectation that the temple, as the house of their god would be occupied by the god and it was at the house of the god that service to the god was conducted. The Hebrew cult had a similar notion of the tabernacle/temple as the house of God, a term frequently used in Scripture. [2] The Hebrew expectation that God would be resident in His house is aptly seen in the consecration rituals of the tabernacle and temple where His visible presence was seen to inhabit His house (Exodus 40:34-35; 1 Kings 8:10-11; 2 Chronicles 5:13-14).

A second pagan notion was that the temple was a place of rest for the god. The Sumerian Temple Hymn of Keš is instructive. It specifies the temple as the place from which the god ruled using language familiar to the Hebrew conception of the Sabbath, describing the temple as a “reposeful dwelling”, implying a place of rest. [3]

Not only was the temple’s establishment indicative of rest, it was mythically tied to creation. The hymn of Keš states, “House, which was planned together with the plans of heaven and earth”, language indicative of a cosmic temple. [4] The prayer of Eridu refers to the pre-creation state as lacking a temple, linking temple building to creation and the cosmos. [5] The story of Marduk also links temple-building to the completion of creation and the end of conflict with the forces of chaos.

It suggests the pagan god must be victorious over the powers of chaos. It would be accomplished through creation, after which rest came to the god that followed completion of creation and temple. The parallel to Hebrew thought is revealing, with Yahweh subduing the chaos through establishment of cosmic order where order is seen in separating spaces and filling them with life. Following completion of creation, Yahweh could rest and temple-building could proceed. This notion is in evidence in the narrative of David who desired to build a temple after he had subdued the land and Israel was at rest with her enemies.

The Sumerian text of Gudea’s temple construction reveals that temple- building was a critical link in creation:

The Sumerian text of Gudea’s construction of a temple shows the temple serving a cosmic function. Toward the end of Cylinder B, the god Ningirsu, speaking to Gudea, suggests that it is the temple that separates heaven and earth, thus associating it with that most primordial act of creation:

[Gu]dea, you were building my [house] for me,
And were having [the offices] performed to perfection [for me],
You had [my house] shine for me
Like Utu in [heaven’s midst],
Separating. Like a lofty foothill range,Heaven from earth. [6]

Temple-building was at the heart of the separation of heaven and earth. Establishment of the house of the gods revealed the separation between heaven and earth and its comic function linking two spaces that were infinitely separated. The cosmic creation-function of the temple is seen in the various names given pagan temples:

Many of the names given to temples in the ancient world also indicate their cosmic role. Among the dozens of possible examples, note especially the temple Esharra (“House of the Cosmos”) and Etemenanki (“House of the Foundation Platform Between Heaven and Earth”). [7]

The name of the temple Etemenanki is salient as it parallels the Hebrew notion that the ark of the covenant in the Most-Holy-Place was God’s footstool (a platform for his feet linking His throne in heaven with His presence on earth) and thus a meeting point between heaven and earth and meeting point between God’s throne in heaven and His earthly temple. Similarities are also seen in Egyptian temple-building, suggestive temples were models of the cosmos:

The Egyptian temples served as models of the cosmos in which the floor represented the earth and the ceiling represented the sky. . . . Indeed, the temple is, for all intents and purposes, the cosmos. This interrelationship makes it possible for the temple to be the center from which order in the cosmos is maintained. [8]

Egyptian temples not only modeled the cosmos, but they were constructed with a tripartite structure like Israel’s tabernacle and temple. Beale notes:

. . . the tabernacle was modelled for polemical purposes, at least in part, on mobile Egyptian military tent camps that consisted of almost exactly the same three-part structure with the same measurements and that was oriented eastward (courtyard, inner reception area and the innermost chamber, where an image of the divine Pharaoh was flanked by two winged creatures!) There is even evidence that the Egyptian military tent was surrounded by troops divided into four units similar to the four distinct units of Israel’s tribes that camped around the tabernacle (Numbers 2). Just as the divine Pharaoh led his army into battle, so likewise did Yahweh, though he was the true god dwelling in his tabernacle in contrast to Pharaoh’s idolatrous tent. Therefore, Israel’s tabernacle may well have been conceived to be a travelling war headquarters from where the Lord directed the troops until all opposition was put down. When the enemies are defeated, then a more permanent dwelling can be built to signify God’s sovereign “resting” from opposition, as happened during Solomon’s reign. [9]

The similarity in temple structure is striking, evident in the mobile temple-tent used during military campaigns, lending insight to erection of permanent temple-structures to follow subduing enemies and bringing the land/kingdom to rest. Egyptian temples were not the only temples to evidence a tripartite structure:

Likewise, ancient Greek temples were typically divided into three sections; outer court (with an altar and, sometimes, a wash-basin); an inner section; an inmost sanctuary where the idol of the god was placed. The tomb of Phillip of Macedon was apparently considered a temple: an outside paved section called “the road”, where the king’s body was burned and burnt offerings were made for forty days; a section entered by huge marble doors, where Phillip’s wife was buried, where also was found a large gold disc and smaller ones, all of which had stars in the middle; the innermost section of the cultic burial site held Phillip’s remains, who was considered to be divine. [10]

Often, Ancient Near Eastern custom viewed the earthly temple as a model of a heavenly temple, a belief in keeping with Hebrew tradition. [11] The evidence hints temples in the Ancient Near East were symbols of creation, structures built to memorialize the victories of the gods over chaos, houses wherein their gods dwelt and from which they maintained cosmic order, and where rest from creation’s mythical battles could be realized.

Hebrew understanding of the temple as the house of God, a structure whose erection followed creation and occurred when there was rest from His creative activities show some consistency with these pagan notions. Yet unique to Hebrew thought was the idea of a Sabbath cycle of rest on every seventh day where the Sabbath was a covenant and sign. Despite this important difference, the faint outline of a pattern can be seen. A similar pattern can be seen in pagan ritual.

 Pagan Temple Rituals & Hebrew Echoes

Since the temple was the meeting point between heaven and earth and place where priests served their gods to seek community blessing and rest from chaos, it was critical to the ancients that the temple was occupied by their god. Without his residency, petitions would not be heard, nor mediation successful.

Thus, temple-building often involved rituals to install the god’s presence in the temple and make the temple his home. It was a procedure essential for an operational temple. Pagan ritual often involved complex annual festivals to reinstall the god resident in the temple. For pagans in the Ancient Near East, the most important ritual was a festival which involved the king and represented the annual re-creation of the world:

The all-important cultic period for the king and his society came at the time of the chief annual festival. Usually taking place at one of the equinoxes [12]

In Babylon, as elsewhere in the East, the chief annual festival was regarded as an actual recreation of the world. [13]

Though the festival could be held at either equinox, it most often occurred in the fall as the harvest season ended, the vegetation died off and the days became shorter, all indicative of the death of creation. The festival was often associated with the New Year and was re-enacted each year to assure a good planting season and harvest.

The festival was seen as a re-creation of the world. The powers of nature had been decaying, relapsing again toward chaos over the course of the year. The cycle had run its limit, and, if the natural order were to go on, the forces of chaos and death had to be defeated anew. During the days of the festival the creation story was therefore either ritually enacted or, at the least, ceremonially read. For these reasons the festival can be described, as it often was, as the festival of the New Year or the feast of the end or turning of the year. [14]

The re-enactment centered upon the king, who would act as the representative of his people and slay the chaos monster. In so doing, the powers of chaos subsided giving way to order, security and safety. In this role, the king not only represented his people but served as God’s representative on earth:

As the chief actor and in the role of the king-god the king must fight the creation battle against the primeval forces of darkness, evil and chaos. These powers are often represented as beasts or a chaos monster. [15]

The body of the slain chaos monster became the substance of the new creation and often provided the food and sustenance to the king’s subjects:

Out of the body of the slain chaos monster the new creation is made. [16]

A Hebrew parallel is found in Psalm 74:14, where Leviathan is slain and given as food to the creatures in the desert. Yet there is no reference to an annual reenactment. In pagan practice however, during the re-enactment, the king acted as a deity, fully representing the god in heaven yet also maintaining his form as a man. In this capacity he is king and god as well as priest:

The stage was cosmic; distinctions between earth and heaven were temporarily suspended. The king and the king-god could, representatively, be one, their attributes confused. The human king, if not strictly regarded as a divinity for these purposes . . . became a sacred personage. “In certain respects a union of divine and human takes place in his representative person.” [17]

In the drama, the king is often mortally wounded or humbled through death and must be rescued from death and hell. The rescue was performed by his god above. In the rescue, the man passed from death to life, having been freed from the abode of the dead. In the process, the king takes on the role of “son of God”, having a new relationship to accompany the new creation. [18] A celebratory processional followed with an enthronement ritual, its purpose to validate the king’s authority over his subjects:

He [the king representing the king-god] is born, arises and is pronounced the divine son, the rightful claimant to the throne. He becomes the adopted son or representative of the god, the true king. The defeated enemies are led in triumphal procession. The king ascends to a high mountain, symbolically to heaven. [19]

The “high mountain” represented the temple, and it was from this earthly temple (the mountain) that ascent into the heavenly temple occurred. The enactment of the ritual implied a connection between the earthly temple and the heavenly temple in which the heavenly god dwelt.

Borsch has noted the existence of ancient beliefs in a heavenly man, after whom the earthly man was modeled. [20] It would seem that there was a cooperative effort between the king on earth (who quite possibly represented the heavenly man) and the god in heaven to slay the chaos monster, re-establish the authority of the king and his god, subdue the powers of chaos and bring the new creation to reality.

. . . There follows the enthronement of the king, emulating the enthronement of the king-god in heaven. (Usually this was, of course, performed in the temple of the city-state either built like or actually set upon a mountain or hill. It would appear, however, that at times the enthronement might have taken place in a ritual hut, a hut which was constructed both as a symbol of the order of the new creation and as a replica of the god’s heavenly temple. . . The king is anointed. The holy garment is put on him together with the crown and other royal regalia. He is said to be radiant, to shine like the sun just as does the king-god. . . He is permitted to sit upon the throne, often regarded as the very throne of the god. He rules and judges; all enemies are subservient. All do him obeisance. [21]

Note how the earthly enthronement ritual emulated a belief in the re-enthronement of the god (or his heavenly man) to rulership in a temple where chaos has been defeated and rest restored. With the enthronement ritual came the consummation of a royal wedding and wedding banquet. Feasting followed by orgiastic celebration; a fertility festival intended to bring new life and good harvests.

. . . The final stage is one of great rejoicing. In several cultures the king now consummated the sacred marriage with a woman who was herself regarded as a representative of the goddess, wife of the king-god. This union not only demonstrated who the king was, but it was mimetic act, intended to signal and encourage the reproductive processes of the world of nature. . .

Feasting ensues. The king fulfills his role as the great provider, giving to his people gifts of food and drink . . . Mythically it is the food of paradise, for now he rules in paradise next to the tree of life and beside the river of life which is peaceful and ordered again and over which he exercises control. All nature is his dominion. It is the beginning of creation all over again, and the king is the First Man and ruler restored, the father of his people. The cycle is ready to repeat itself. [22]

The setting up of the earthly temple or hut was a critical step in the ritual to subdue chaos and rebirth creation. The temple was the place of the king’s enthronement, his adoption as “son of the gods” and his status as a god-man. The temple legitimized the king and his queen, granting them virtual deification.

All these endowments came through the temple. The setting up of the ritual hut and processional to the temple following the subjection of chaos suggests a link between the temple’s function and ritual actualization of creation. The link between the earthly temple and the heavenly temple to which the king-god ceremonially ascends emphasizes the cosmic importance of the temple as the dwelling place of the gods and as the control room from which order is maintained throughout the universe.

Without the gods present and dwelling within the temple, all is lost. Existence itself is jeopardized as order cannot be maintained. Chaos would quickly subsume the cosmos. The king, partnering with his god, must subdue the chaos monster to assure an orderly creation. Otherwise, all life and ordered creation, would cease to exist. Cosmology is at the heart of ancient theology.

The festival pattern is recurrent in varying degrees throughout the Ancient Near East, an example being the festival of Marduk. The king played the role of Marduk, doing battle over chaos. The king was wounded, imprisoned and put to death before triumphing over these powers, his triumph following ceremonial sprinklings or washing with what symbolically was the water of life.

Following the battle and rescue of the king, the temple was set up – “set up” to assure a functioning orderly creation. [23] The annual re-creation of the cosmos was interchangeable with the establishment of a functioning temple in which the gods would dwell and from which the gods would maintain control and order over the cosmos. This ritual myth was ubiquitous throughout the Ancient Near East:

After comparing the cosmogonic myths from India, Sumer, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Greece, and Canaan, Mary Wakeman concluded that the essential elements are virtually identical. In these ancient myths, chaos is generally personified as an anti-creative monster whose defeat by the heroic god results in a regulated cosmos. The hero-god, consequent to his creative victory over the forces of chaos, establishes a royal residence from which he exercises his sovereignty in preserving cosmic order. This pattern of victory over draconic chaos followed by temple building is fundamental to the epic cosmogonies of the ancient Near East. [24]

The texts quoted are important first in establishing the central role of pagan temple ritual to creation and second in establishing the relationship between the king-god, acting as the first man, who seems to carry the principal role in the ritual and the establishment of the temple as his god’s dwelling place.

Parallels with the scriptural account of Jesus as the heavenly man, pre-ordained as High Priest between God the Father and earthly king/man are obvious. These similarities have driven some scholars to conclude that Jewish festivals were based upon the Mesopotamian rituals where the Feast of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement served originally as annual re-creation festivals reinterpreted to follow Jewish history.

Though some correspondence exists between the Passover and vernal equinox and the Feast of Tabernacles and the autumnal equinox, it is not easily proven that reinterpretation occurred. While the pagan festivities were focused upon fertility in the land and assuring next year’s harvest and livestock productivity, Israel’s Passover celebrated Israel’s creation, not the creation of the world.

Israel’s Feast of Tabernacles also followed two other important autumnal festivals, the Feast of Trumpets and the Fast of Atonement before the celebration of Tabernacles, with the Feast of Trumpets and Fast of Atonement significant theological improvements. The Feast of Tabernacles, while aligned with the harvest, celebrated God’s faithfulness in keeping His promise to establish His people in the land. It also provided great theological significance in its sabbatical provisions. [25]

While Judeo-Christian tradition anticipates God’s people as a bride or wife to God, the basis is vastly different and clearly superior. The pagan wedding legitimized the earthly king, designed to secure a future heir to perpetuate his kingly line. It also initiated orgiastic festivities that run totally counter to Jewish and Christian thought, which looks to God’s people as holy and pure, abstaining from carnality and sexual infidelity. Rather, the people are envisioned as pure, like a virgin, faithfully awaiting the day their betrothal will be consummated.

Finally, while there seem to be parallels between the pagan belief in an earthly and heavenly man, Judaism’s history shows no festivities involving a heavenly or earthly representative battling chaos or its representative monster to restore order and subdue chaos. Chaos was not an annual “season” in which vegetation died, portending the death of earthly order and a coming assault of the chaos monster.

Here Hebrew thought is clearly superior. Their view was that the outbreak of chaos was tied only to unfaithfulness to the covenant they had prior agreed to honor. Hence mediation through sacrifice would be needed to restore relationship with God, and with restored relationship, the return of blessing and prosperity and the elimination of judgment – judgment that destroyed God’s creation, Israel.

Based upon these differences, it is best to consider the aforementioned pagan practices suggestive of the mindset of ancient near eastern sages. They suggest the temple was not merely the god’s house, nor simply the meeting point between the god(s) and men, but it was the cosmic “center” of creation, the place from which the god(s) subdued chaos, exercised control over the cosmos and assured that creation proceeded daily in an orderly and predictable fashion. It was also a place central to the king-man who served as the god’s representative in subduing the chaos monster and maintaining order. It thus served as a prototypical meeting point between heaven and earth.

 Relevance to Christians Today

 For many Christians, posts like this can be unsettling. There can be an accompanying discomfort with analysis that shows the similarity of pagan belief to Hebrew concepts. Discomfort can be elevated by scholars who have claimed that Hebrew practice was influenced by pagan conception but where Hebrew theology was more highly developed.

However, it could just as easily be the other way. It’s quite possible that God’s revelation to mankind began at the beginning of His redemptive program but became perverted by fallen thinking or demonically motivated false teaching. Scripture tends to support this idea, consistently showing how sin and the demonically inspired idolatry worsened with increasing sin. Thus, there is no reason for a Christian to become unsettled with the information presented. Importantly, Hebrew conceptions are consistently superior to pagan conceptions steeped in idolatry.

Nevertheless, teachings such as this can seem remote, if not irrelevant to modern Christians. But the same could be said of temple studies in general. For many Christians, understanding the temple and its cultic practices seem of little value.

For those who have puzzled over the temple and its importance to Scripture, this post provides a first important link: the temple was a representation of the cosmos “in miniature”. The temple was a model of God’s creation. Linking the temple to creation enhances creation’s importance in Scripture especially in light of the extensive development of the temple throughout Scripture.

The requirement that temples be built or established when the land was brought to rest establishes a secondary link. It links establishment of God’s temple to completion of creation. Thus, the temple links not only to creation, but to the timing of its completion. Given creation is a model of redemption, redemption’s completion aligns with the establishment of God’s temple. It makes temple studies critical to understanding God’s redemptive program and eschatological events as the means to that end.

Further, if the establishment of temple points to the completion of creation/redemption, then one might conclude that destruction of the temple signifies the destruction of God’s creation/redemptive program. And such a conclusion would be accurate. Destruction of the Solomonic temple portended the destruction of God’s people, those He called to partner in redemption. With destruction of those God created as redemptive partners would be destruction of God’s redemptive plan. Hence why so many prophets spoke of Jerusalem’s (and the temple’s) destruction using apocalyptic language, prophesying the end. It was the end of God’s created redemptive partner and thus the end of creation as they knew it.

It leads to two important important outcomes: First, it should signal to Christians how important the destruction of the second temple was, an event greatly underappreciated by Christians. The linkage between its destruction and Israel’s rejection of Christ is also of great importance. Future posts will attempt to reveal the eschatological significance and its relation to the rejection of Israel as God’s redemptive partners. We will argue that eschatology cannot be understood apart from understanding the temple and its role/relation to redemption.

Second, it was prior argued that sin was boundary-breaking that de-created God’s cosmos. Sin broke God’s order unleashing chaos upon God’s creation. This post has built upon that claim, showing how the Ancients across the Middle East all held to this belief. With the link between creation and temple established, it should be clear that sin also destroys God’s temple. As the temple was God’s house (His home where He dwelt), sin becomes a direct assault upon God and all that He has created.

It emphasizes the seriousness of sin. Sin is not to be winked at, or in any way minimized. Nor is forgiveness of sin and restoration of relationship. Sin is an attack on God’s redemptive program that thwarts it. Sin’s effects are far-reaching and can stymie God’s redemption of the unsaved, potentially even destroying God’s people. It is affirmed in Paul’s claim the church the temple of God (1 Corinthians 3:16). No wonder then God takes such strong offense to sin. Christians must also.

Finally, if creation is to be secured . . . and with it redemption is to be secured, it means God must provide a means for restoring order and ultimately eliminating sin. Ancient festivals seemed to entrust restoration to one of a kingly role who mediated between God and the people. In him was entrusted the renewal of creation.

It points the way to Christ as priest and king who will mediate peace with God, bringing a renewal of creation and restoration of relationship with the Father. Enigmatically, Christ referred to Himself as God’s temple that would be destroyed and resurrected again in three days (Matthew 26:61; Mark 14:58; John 2:19). It hints of a temple-transformation, much like the transformation of creation prior discussed. It brings to the fore the importance of temple studies, all of which we will attempt to explain in this series of posts.

[1] Walton, John H., The Lost World of Genesis One, Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate, Downers Grove IL, InterVarsity Press, 2009, p. 75

[2] The term “house of God” was a common description of Israel’s tabernacle/temple (e.g. Judges 18:31; 20:18, 26, 31, 21:2; 1 Chronicles 6:48; 9:11, 13, 9:26-27), extending into the New Testament (Matthew 12:4; Mark 2:26; Luke 6:4).

[3] Walton, John H., The Lost World of Genesis One, Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate, Downers Grove IL, InterVarsity Press, 2009, p. 75

[4] Ibid, p. 75

[5] Ibid, p. 78

[6] Ibid, p. 80

[7] Ibid, p. 80

[8] Ibid, p. 81

[9] Beale, G. K., The Temple and the Church’s Mission, A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God, Downers Grove IL, InterVarsity Press, 2004, p. 64

[10] Ibid, p. 58, footnote 70

[11] Borsch, Frederick Houk, The Son of Man in Myth and History, Philadelphia PA, SCM Press Ltd, 1967, p. 95

[12] Ibid, p. 92

[13] Ibid, p. 90, footnote 3

[14] Ibid, p. 92

[15] Ibid, p. 93

[16] Ibid, p. 95

[17] Ibid, p. 93, quoting Mowinckel.

[18] Borsch, quoting Kapelrud, speaks of the annual autumnal festival of Baal, where there is little evidence of a Baal being represented by a man. Rather, Baal descended into the earth amidst weeping, only to be victorious and re-installed in the temple. The procedure emphasizes the importance of having the god resident in the temple for subduction of chaos, establishment of order and rest. Ibid, p. 102-103, footnote 5.

[19] Ibid, p. 95

[20] Ibid, p. 55

[21] Ibid, p. 95

[22] Ibid, p. 95-96

[23] Ibid, p. 96-97

[24] Gage, Warren Austin, The Gospel of Genesis, Winona Lake IN, Carpenter Books, 1984, p. 18

[25] That there is no evidence of harvest season being celebrated by the patriarchs also shows these institutions tied to the land God had covenantally given Israel, rather than a reinterpretation of an earlier harvest celebration for which evidence is lacking.