Discovery Bible Study 1 (Genesis 1:1-25)

[DamianWarS]

The Discovery Bible Study guide is a group discovery of what the bible says. There are no extra-biblical commentaries or material and although there are groups of passages you can follow there are no set passages to read (you can use this guide on any passage)

The goal is to read a passage and allow natural discovery of it and what it means using a set of the same questions to naturally bring out what it says. The rules are to only answer/discuss the questions provided and only based on the passage (don't add what the passage does not say)

I won't answer the questions myself nor give "answers" at the end but I will keep you accountable to the text and if the text doesn't say it I will challenge you and encourage all participating to do the same. I might put a synopsis at the end of what people have discovered, but it will be their discoveries, not mine. I would ask anyone who is a Christian to not participate but of course, you may obverse so as not to force or manipulate the discussion. This is also to leave room for purer revelation from God instead of established opinions and doctrines.

If you want to naturally learn what the bible says and draw out true revelation from God without the risk of competing theories and outside influences in a group discussion then this is the study for you.

I will try and start a new study every week based on demand, please keep up and follow along to the end. (the first study will be in the next post) . I'll update this post with links to new studies

UPDATE:
Here's a list of the posted studies. If this is your first time make sure you start at the beginning before going to the next

Study 1 (Genesis 1:1-25) ⬅ you are here
Study 2 (Genesis 2:4-24)

 

[DamianWarS]

Study 1
Creation: God creates the world
Genesis 1:1-25 ESV

Step 1: Read the story
Read or listen to the following passage

The Creation of the World
1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 And God made the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so. 8 And God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” 21 So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.​

Step 2: Retell the Story
Take a few moments to retell the story in your own words. You may want to speak it out loud, or write it down. If you find you are struggling to remember it, read or listen to it again.

Step 3: Discover the Story
When you feel that you are familiar with the story, take some time to think over or discuss the following questions

The Questions: (what you answer)

1. What does this story tell me about God?
2. What does this story tell me about people?
3. If this is really God's word, what changes would I have to make in my life?
4. Who am I going to tell?

(the last question doesn't have to be answered in a post and may be left for personal action) . ideally, quote the questions and answer them in your post, then allow discussion of these answers and how they relate to the passage.

 

[cloudyday2]

Here is a summary in my own words of Genesis 1:1-25

The story begins with deep waters in total darkness.
God creates light and says it is good.
God designates day for light and night for dark.
God makes heaven to separate waters below from waters above.
God gathers the waters below together to expose dry land.
God creates plants and animals to live on the dry land.

What does this tell me about God?
- God may or may NOT have created the world from nothing. The beginning has something rather than nothing.
- God's goal in the story seemed to be creating plants and animals.
- God seems to call things "good", but doesn't call anything "bad" (unless that is implied by the absence of "good").
- If God considers some things "bad" such as darkness then it is interesting that He does not destroy "bad" things but separates them from "good" things. This behavior might explain why "bad"/"evil" exist in the world.

What does this tell me about people? - nothing

If this is really God's word, what changes would I make in my life?
- take better care of the environment
- ponder whether God considers me "good"

 

[DamianWarS]

Here is a summary in my own words of Genesis 1:1-25

The story begins with deep waters in total darkness.
God creates light and says it is good.
God designates day for light and night for dark.
God makes heaven to separate waters below from waters above.
God gathers the waters below together to expose dry land.
God creates plants and animals to live on the dry land.

What does this tell me about God?
- God may or may NOT have created the world from nothing. The beginning has something rather than nothing.
- God's goal in the story seemed to be creating plants and animals.
- God seems to call things "good", but doesn't call anything "bad" (unless that is implied by the absence of "good").
- If God considers some things "bad" such as darkness then it is interesting that He does not destroy "bad" things but separates them from "good" things. This behavior might explain why "bad"/"evil" exist in the world.

What does this tell me about people? - nothing

If this is really God's word, what changes would I make in my life?
- take better care of the environment
- ponder whether God considers me "good"

thanks for contributing (and for staying on track). I know the text doesn't really talk about humans (maybe the animals??), but I still like that you caught that. Great life questions at the end.

 

[ananda]

The Questions: (what you answer)

1. What does this story tell me about God?
2. What does this story tell me about people?
3. If this is really God's word, what changes would I have to make in my life?

1. It tells me that the author(s) and/or translator(s) believed "God" was:

• incomplete in himself & was therefore motivated to create;
• limited by space ("hovering over the face of the waters"), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some unknown reason;
• limited by time (his acts of creation spanned over a period of days & because he was "in" the beginning rather than "outside" of the beginning), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some unknown reason;

2. It doesn't tell me anything about people (mankind).

3. No change, it just provides me with additional material which continues to make me question the nature of "God".

 

[DamianWarS]

1. It tells me that the author(s) and/or translator(s) believed "God" was:

• incomplete in himself & was therefore motivated to create;
• limited by space ("hovering over the face of the waters"), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some reason;
• limited by time (his acts of creation spanned over a period of days & because he was "in" the beginning rather than "outside" of the beginning), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some reason;

2. It doesn't tell me anything about people (mankind).

3. It provides material which continues to make me question the nature of this "God".

Thanks for contributing. I will encourage you to try and keep to what ideas are formed from the text itself and not conclusions based on what the text doesn't say. For example where does the text tell us God is limited? Where does the text tell us God is incomplete? Where does the text tell us the Author's/translators doubted these things?

I don't want to manipulate the thought process here so I'll ask others who wish to participate what they think on this (and of course you're free to answer).

Where does it say God is incomplete, or limited in space/time from this text? Do you agree with @ananda conclusions? Do you have anything to add to it?

 

[ananda]

Thanks for contributing. I will encourage you to try and keep to what ideas are formed from the text itself and not conclusions based on what the text doesn't say. For example where does the text tell us God is limited? Where does the text tell us God is incomplete? Where does the text tell us the Author's/translators doubted these things?

It is a function of inferences based on language and logic. For example, if I say "I was walking on a trail in the park at a specific time", we can also logically infer that I was also stating that I was not on an airplane at that time.

In the same way, the text does not say, but cloudyday2 logically inferred that God "may NOT have created the world from nothing", inferred God's "goal", "doesn't call anything 'bad'" (maybe he did, it's just not in the text), & concludes why "bad/evil exists in the world", yet you state that you believe that he stays on track. Perhaps it's because my inferences are not quite as agreeable to your own position?

Also, if we are limited to only what the text explicitly says, without applying logical inferences (including inferences and expectations regarding the word "God" itself), then wouldn't you agree that we can only regurgitate the actual words of the text as answers?

 

[dlamberth]

The Questions: (what you answer)

1. What does this story tell me about God?
2. What does this story tell me about people?
3. If this is really God's word, what changes would I have to make in my life?
4. Who am I going to tell?

1. What the story tells me about God is that the Soul of Christ is the Light of the Universe which means that God is inherent in Life itself with God being the Life Force of everything. And that even a leaf contains the Word of God.

2. About people...what the story tells me is that every Human Soul, in fact every living being and even all of Creation itSelf is an activity of God.

3. What changes would I have to make in my life? That every where I look, there God is and as such all of life is sacred. And I need to treat it as such.
Edited to add: I need to work more on Animating God in Nature.

 

[cloudyday2]

@DamianWarS , what translation did you quote? The link is to the American Standard Version.

I watched a series of lectures about the book of Genesis, and the professor said that there are a couple of translations that do a much better job of capturing the Hebrew. I can't remember the translations, but here is a link to an article that might be discussing one of them.
After More Than Two Decades of Work, a New Hebrew Bible to Rival the King James

Only problem is finding a good translation that is online and free-of-charge.

 

[DamianWarS]

It is a function of inferences based on language and logic. For example, if I say "I was walking on a trail in the park at a specific time", we can also logically infer that I was also stating that I was not on an airplane at that time.

In the same way, the text does not say, but cloudyday2 logically inferred that God "may NOT have created the world from nothing", inferred God's "goal", "doesn't call anything 'bad'" (maybe he did, it's just not in the text), & concludes why "bad/evil exists in the world", yet you state that you believe that he stays on track. Perhaps it's because my inferences are not quite as agreeable to your own position?

Also, if we are limited to only what the text explicitly says, without applying logical inferences (including inferences and expectations regarding the word "God" itself), then wouldn't you agree that we can only regurgitate the actual words of the text as answers?

I appreciate keeping me in check. Since I prefer to have this group led I'll leave it as a question out to those who participate. does everyone agree that @ananda inspirit is staying on track? Does anyone have anything to add to what @ananda says?

 

[cloudyday2]

does everyone agree that @ananda inspirit is staying on track? Does anyone have anything to add to what @ananda says?

I think the points made by @ananda are good, but maybe only need to be worded more neutrally?

For example:
"incomplete in himself & was therefore motivated to create"
-> might be: "God had a desire to create and was therefore dissatisfied with the state before creation"

"limited by space ("hovering over the face of the waters"), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some unknown reason"
-> might be: "God was not everywhere and everything before creation. God and the oceans of the deep were distinct."

"limited by time (his acts of creation spanned over a period of days & because he was "in" the beginning rather than "outside" of the beginning), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some unknown reason"
-> might be: "There was time, space, deep oceans, and God at the beginning of the creation story."

Probably my rephrasing distorts what @ananda was saying in various ways, but I tried to capture the ideas.

 

[cloudyday2]

FWIW, I found this download for a free 1917 translation from the Jewish Publication Society. Genesis 1 looked about the same from a quick skimming.

https://jps.org/download-the-tanakh-1917-translation/

 

[dlamberth]

does everyone agree that @ananda inspirit is staying on track?

Yes and No.

Does anyone have anything to add to what @ananda says?

The Creation story is based on oral Myth stores of the ancient middle-east past. With in those stores where they become alive to the community is in animating the Creating Life Force that can be experienced with in not only the Genesis Creation Story but are inherent with most all Creation Stories of the indigenous peoples of the world.

I think ananda is correct in one way that when focusing on what the text explicitly says is limiting. But I think that when applying logical inferences to spiritual text is also limiting. To those long past ancients what they listened to in the Genesis Creation story, what they experienced and what became alive for them is a sensuous animated God in Creation. For those folks it wasn't a thing that happened. But was rather a subjective experience that was alive and vibrant in life itSelf. They were less concern about the logical problems, such as God creating out of nothing ( which is a modern issue) and way more concern about God being a reality in their lives... Which for us moderns we don't see much of these days.

 

[DamianWarS]

1. What the story tells me about God is that the Soul of Christ is the Light of the Universe which means that God is inherent in Life itself with God being the Life Force of everything. And that even a leaf contains the Word of God.

2. About people...what the story tells me is that every Human Soul, in fact every living being and even all of Creation itSelf is an activity of God.

3. What changes would I have to make in my life? That every where I look, there God is and as such all of life is sacred. And I need to treat it as such.
Edited to add: I need to work more on Animating God in Nature.

thanks for contributing. Does every one agree with what @dlamberth says? As @ananda reminded me I will try and refrain from directing the conclusions but I still do encourage to seek things that the isolated text can support. Does anyone have thoughts as to what @dlamberth says? how do it line up with what the text says?

 

[DamianWarS]

Yes and No.


The Creation story is based on oral Myth stores of the ancient middle-east past. With in those stores where they become alive to the community is in animating the Creating Life Force that can be experienced with in not only the Genesis Creation Story but are inherent with most all Creation Stories of the indigenous peoples of the world.

I think ananda is correct in one way that when focusing on what the text explicitly says is limiting. But I think that when applying logical inferences to spiritual text is also limiting. To those long past ancients what they listened to in the Genesis Creation story, what they experienced and what became alive for them is a sensuous animated God in Creation. For those folks it wasn't a thing that happened. But was rather a subjective experience that was alive and vibrant in life itSelf. They were less concern about the logical problems, such as God creating out of nothing ( which is a modern issue) and way more concern about God being a reality in their lives... Which for us moderns we don't see much of these days.

thanks for the thoughts. there's a lot in there. What I'm not going to say is you're right/wrong but a lot of what you said cannot be found in the text. I'm sorry if I'm harping on this but once this is opened to more outside understanding then it turns into a debate and becomes less and less productive. Let's keep to what the details of the text can support even if looked at as a non-literal account.

Let me give you a simple example, when does the text say this creation took place?

A) 4.54 billions years ago?
B) 6,000-10,000 years ago?
C) in the begining​

If we read the text and stick to only the information given A and B cannot be supported and only C is what the text says. Even though A or B may or may not be the correct answer this text doesn't give us that information. Since we are all coming at this from different perspectives we're going to disagree on these things so let's let the text itself keep us on track and commit to not using outside sources (even other biblical sources) to explain it.

I don't want it to seem like I'm trying to force a literal view either, another simple example would be the text reveals to us creation took place in 6 days. Is this literal or non-literal? Well that's not the focus of the text and what it reveals to us is creation took 6 days and that's all the information we have. Was each day a million years? Well, I have no idea but that's not important in the text nor does it tell us this.

So with every effort, even if the details seem silly, keep to what the text and only the text tells us even if this means looking at it as a non-literal account. In non-literal accounts, only the details in the account are important, even if they don't make sense all the time and I would encourage you to approach it the same way.

This study is not about forcing views, but rather reading a passage and seeing what that passage tells us in isolation using these questions as our guide.

thanks for understanding, I still appreciate taking the time to participate

 

[DamianWarS]

@DamianWarS , what translation did you quote? The link is to the American Standard Version.

I watched a series of lectures about the book of Genesis, and the professor said that there are a couple of translations that do a much better job of capturing the Hebrew. I can't remember the translations, but here is a link to an article that might be discussing one of them.
After More Than Two Decades of Work, a New Hebrew Bible to Rival the King James

Only problem is finding a good translation that is online and free-of-charge.

the version is ESV, the links are automatically generated by CF (out of my control), I'll add the version to the post so it's more clear. I chose the ESV because it is a modern and widely accepted translation with easy to understand English. for the sake of consistency, I wasn't going to change the version but anyone is welcome to check out other versions. The spirit here is not to find the one version that will disagree with everything which just feeds debate and what I'm trying to avoid. So if you check out other versions try and keep the conversation balanced.

 

[DamianWarS]

I think the points made by @ananda are good, but maybe only need to be worded more neutrally?

For example:
"incomplete in himself & was therefore motivated to create"
-> might be: "God had a desire to create and was therefore dissatisfied with the state before creation"

"limited by space ("hovering over the face of the waters"), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some unknown reason"
-> might be: "God was not everywhere and everything before creation. God and the oceans of the deep were distinct."

"limited by time (his acts of creation spanned over a period of days & because he was "in" the beginning rather than "outside" of the beginning), or, alternatively, that he limited himself for some unknown reason"
-> might be: "There was time, space, deep oceans, and God at the beginning of the creation story."

Probably my rephrasing distorts what @ananda was saying in various ways, but I tried to capture the ideas.

I like your suggestion. let's try more balanced perspectives and try and avoid overtly bias views (I am saying this to myself as well ) also let's keep each other accountable to what the text says, not what it doesn't say.

 

[cloudyday2]

This study is not about forcing views, but rather reading a passage and seeing what that passage tells us in isolation using these questions as our guide.

When you say "isolation" I understand you to be requesting that we temporarily forget any commentaries we might have read about a bible quote, but what about the cultural context of the authors? For example, I believe this story was composed over many centuries by many different people before it reached a final form when the Jews returned from exile at the time of Ezra. So the cultural context of the Bible quote is very complicated, but there IS a cultural context that is different from our modern cultural context. If we pretend that Genesis was written yesterday in English for a modern Christian audience then we might understand it differently than the authors intended.

On the other hand, if the Bible is divinely inspired and divinely protected and maintained then I suppose it is possible that God INTENDS for us to understand Genesis differently than the authors intended. So I'm not saying it is necessarily wrong to read the Bible as though God wrote it yesterday specifically for us, but I want to clarify that this is what you want.

 

[DamianWarS]

When you say "isolation" I understand you to be requesting that we temporarily forget any commentaries we might have read about a bible quote, but what about the cultural context of the authors? For example, I believe this story was composed over many centuries by many different people before it reached a final form when the Jews returned from exile at the time of Ezra. So the cultural context of the Bible quote is very complicated, but there IS a cultural context that is different from our modern cultural context. If we pretend that Genesis was written yesterday in English for a modern Christian audience then we might understand it differently than the authors intended.

On the other hand, if the Bible is divinely inspired and divinely protected and maintained then I suppose it is possible that God INTENDS for us to understand Genesis differently than the authors intended. So I'm not saying it is necessarily wrong to read the Bible as though God wrote it yesterday specifically for us, but I want to clarify that this is what you want.

I mean is to read the passage in a vacuum without any other influences, be it commentaries or cultural/historical context which all can risk piling on things that the text simply cannot support. We all probably can throw in a pile of things that are somewhat "in between the lines" (and Christians are the worst at this) but an important part of biblical study is to take time and listen to the words presented not the words that aren't there.

I am not demanding you accept these passages as divinely inspired but rather, just for this study, you read them as if they were (even if you don't accept this) If it is God speaking through them then valuing the words as they are should be important and worthy of our attention.

I appreciate the questions to clear this up. This is new for me too but if this is truth then no one should have to sugar coat it to make it look better. I'm sure Gd is big enough to reveal himself through his own words so let's take time and let him do just that.

 

[dlamberth]

thanks for the thoughts. there's a lot in there. What I'm not going to say is you're right/wrong but a lot of what you said cannot be found in the text. I'm sorry if I'm harping on this but once this is opened to more outside understanding then it turns into a debate and becomes less and less productive. Let's keep to what the details of the text can support even if looked at as a non-literal account.

Let me give you a simple example, when does the text say this creation took place?

A) 4.54 billions years ago?
B) 6,000-10,000 years ago?
C) in the begining​

If we read the text and stick to only the information given A and B cannot be supported and only C is what the text says. Even though A or B may or may not be the correct answer this text doesn't give us that information. Since we are all coming at this from different perspectives we're going to disagree on these things so let's let the text itself keep us on track and commit to not using outside sources (even other biblical sources) to explain it.

I don't want it to seem like I'm trying to force a literal view either, another simple example would be the text reveals to us creation took place in 6 days. Is this literal or non-literal? Well that's not the focus of the text and what it reveals to us is creation took 6 days and that's all the information we have. Was each day a million years? Well, I have no idea but that's not important in the text nor does it tell us this.

So with every effort, even if the details seem silly, keep to what the text and only the text tells us even if this means looking at it as a non-literal account. In non-literal accounts, only the details in the account are important, even if they don't make sense all the time and I would encourage you to approach it the same way.

This study is not about forcing views, but rather reading a passage and seeing what that passage tells us in isolation using these questions as our guide.

thanks for understanding, I still appreciate taking the time to participate

With out the spiritual content of any Holy text, in this case the Creating life force of God with in the Genesis Creation story, you are left with a very limited literal account. You want to look at detail, the text says that God Created...to me that's a pretty big detail, especially when God is alive and vibrant in every way with in the Creation process itself. When exploring the studied Text with out an animated God in the process, I just don't know how to do that. It's way too limiting of meaning AND of God.

I'm sorry, but with out the inclusion of spiritual content I probably should not be a part of this Bible study. I thought it would be fun. But I don't know how to limit God in Sacred Text in the way your suggesting.

Genesis 1:2 - And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. That's a pretty important text there that needs to be looked at. Those are words that with a spiritual experiential exploration can take a person a long way in knowing God in the Creation Story.

Genesis 1:3 - Let there be Light, - Is this the birth of Christ? After the Creation of Light, than God started to Create. Is Creation then the first body of Christ? Is the Light of Christ inherent with in Creation itSelf?

As I said above, perhaps this study isn't for me. I just don't know how to do literal.

I'm not at all looking for debate. What I added is how I experience God in this Creation from the Genesis Story.