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

[DamianWarS]

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.

Thanks for sharing, although I have tried to put some boundaries to what the text shows us I also don't want to hinder your process of working through it. I welcome anyone else who desires to add or comment @dlamberth thoughts on this. The creation account is just one study, and there will be others where perhaps the text allows you to get more spiritual because of its content.

 

[dlamberth]

Thanks for sharing, although I have tried to put some boundaries to what the text shows us I also don't want to hinder your process of working through it. I welcome anyone else who desires to add or comment @dlamberth thoughts on this. The creation account is just one study, and there will be others where perhaps the text allows you to get more spiritual because of its content.

I guess what it is for me is the importance of including God in the study. With out exploring that most important spiritual content of God with something like the Creation Story, the study from my perspective comes up short. And I don't know how to do that. The Creation Story sets up everything that comes after. To treat the Creation Story as an object apart from God I feel misses the whole point of the Story. I might add, the text of the Creation Story very much is about spiritual content. I don't believe it can be truly understood otherwise. Please, I understand that exploring the mystery in Sacred Text is my thing and may not be for others.

 

[cloudyday2]

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.

My two cents is that the Hebrew apparently doesn't match the English translations precisely. The typical translations suggest that "let there be light" was the first step, but actually the story seems to start AFTER the creation has been on-going for awhile. LOL, I can imagine God working with great difficulty in a more primordial phase and then finally sighing with relief when He is able to turn the lights on.

The difficulties of translating the Hebrew Bible begin with the first word of Genesis. The King James Bible of 1611 translates Genesis 1:1 as “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Almost all succeeding versions have followed this formulation. But, as it turns out, the Hebrew word bereshit, traditionally rendered as “in the beginning,” has long been misconstrued. For grammatical reasons, this term has to be understood as a conjunction. Thus, in Robert Alter’s new translation, we read: “When God began to create heaven and earth, and the earth then was welter and waste and darkness over the deep and God’s breath hovering over the waters, God said, ‘Let there be light.’ ” In place of the stark solemnity of the King James Version we have a passage, with clauses hovering like God’s breath itself, that suggests the turbulence of the first creation.

‘The Hebrew Bible’ and ‘The Art of Bible Translation’ Review: An Ear for Scripture

 

[dlamberth]

My two cents is that the Hebrew apparently doesn't match the English translations precisely. The typical translations suggest that "let there be light" was the first step, but actually the story seems to start AFTER the creation has been on-going for awhile. LOL, I can imagine God working with great difficulty in a more primordial phase and then finally sighing with relief when He is able to turn the lights on.

‘The Hebrew Bible’ and ‘The Art of Bible Translation’ Review: An Ear for Scripture

Thanks for the interesting piece.

A follow up question that I get from the link because I like bringing God into the picture is "God's Breath". What is that? It seems to be an important part of the the Genesis Creation Story where you found it. Is God's Breath inherent and carried forward in Creation itself?

And the Light? What is that Light of God? For the same reasons that I ask above, is the Light of God also inherent and carried forward within the Genesis Creation story and thus within Creation itSelf? Or is that something that's left outside of the story and really not part of it or Creation for that matter.

 

[cloudyday2]

Thanks for the interesting piece.

A follow up question that I get from the link because I like bringing God into the picture is "God's Breath". What is that? It seems to be an important part of the the Genesis Creation Story where you found it. Is God's Breath inherent and carried forward in Creation itself?

And the Light? What is that Light of God? For the same reasons that I ask above, is the Light of God also inherent and carried forward within the Genesis Creation story and thus within Creation itSelf? Or is that something that's left outside of the story and really not part of it or Creation for that matter.

Here is an idea: We could imagine primordial ocean to be the cloud of dust that coalesced to form the sun and the planets. Eventually light is emitted when fusion begins in the sun.

The breath of God seems to be associated with life. Life seems to be about replication of a pattern. Maybe the breath of
God is related to entropy or computation or something? ... Just brain-storming weird ideas.

 

[dlamberth]

Here is an idea: We could imagine primordial ocean to be the cloud of dust that coalesced to form the sun and the planets. Eventually light is emitted when fusion begins in the sun.

Or perhaps the "Light of God" is God being manifested in the Physical Creation and has nothing to do with the kind of light being emitted by the sun.

The breath of God seems to be associated with life. Life seems to be about replication of a pattern. Maybe the breath of
God is related to entropy or computation or something? ... Just brain-storming weird ideas.

The Hebrew word for "Breath" is the same for "Spirit" which is "Ruah", if that helps at all. So when the word Breath is uses, what's going on there in Creation?

 

[cloudyday2]

Or perhaps the "Light of God" is God being manifested in the Physical Creation and has nothing to do with the kind of light being emitted by the sun.

I think it must be sunlight, because a later section describes the sun to rule the day and the moon to rule the night. BTW, apparently the author chose to say "greater light"/"lesser light" rather than "sun"/"moon", because the word for the physical sun and the word for the sun god was the same word and therefore inappropriate.

Of course when Moses goes up Mt. Sinai there is a light that comes from God, but this light seems to make anything it touches similarly radiant afterwards (the face of Moses needed to be veiled to protect the Hebrews). So "let there be light" might be describing the moment when God decides to radiate "the glory of God" or "holiness" onto creation in an attempt that his created objects would become similarly radiant with holiness.

The Hebrew word for "Breath" is the same for "Spirit" which is "Ruah", if that helps at all. So when the word Breath is uses, what's going on there in Creation?

I believe the Jews believe this breath is what makes animals and humans breath? I don't know if plants are considered to have this breath or not. Plants convert CO2 to O2. Up until the time of Noah the humans were not allowed to eat animals, and maybe that is due to this breath issue.

 

[dlamberth]

I think it must be sunlight, because a later section describes the sun to rule the day and the moon to rule the night. BTW, apparently the author chose to say "greater light"/"lesser light" rather than "sun"/"moon", because the word for the physical sun and the word for the sun god was the same word and therefore inappropriate.

So the sun was created twice?

Of course when Moses goes up Mt. Sinai there is a light that comes from God, but this light seems to make anything it touches similarly radiant afterwards (the face of Moses needed to be veiled to protect the Hebrews). So "let there be light" might be describing the moment when God decides to radiate "the glory of God" or "holiness" onto creation in an attempt that his created objects would become similarly radiant with holiness.

Wonderful example.

I believe the Jews believe this breath is what makes animals and humans breath?

The Hebrew word for "Breath" is the same for "Spirit". How would Spirit interchange with Breath in your example? With the perspective of the animated process of God Creating Creation with the Life Force of God, I'd think images of the Breath/Spirit might be a good way to express it that Spark of Life.

 

[DamianWarS]

Interesting discussion. It seems there is a lot being said here about what the light of God is on Day 1 (v3-5) so I'll encourage to reapply the questions to keep things on track. What does this light tell us about God and what does it tell us about ourselves (humans)? And to take it further is there is an action for us to mirror with this spoken light from darkness? Compare day 1 (v3-5) and day 4 (v14-19). Is there a difference with these lights? Does it change how we look at the light of day 1, how we see God's action in this light or any action we may infer for ourselves from this?

 

[cloudyday2]

So the sun was created twice?

Good point. I have heard some explain the two creations narratives in Genesis as a retelling of the same story from two perspectives. So it's possible that the creation of the sun and moon is described twice - once in general terms "and there was light" and once in more detail "there was a sun and a moon and stars and blah blah blah".

Of course it is also possible the light mentioned at the beginning is not the same as the light emitted by the sun.

The Hebrew word for "Breath" is the same for "Spirit". How would Spirit interchange with Breath in your example? With the perspective of the animated process of God Creating Creation with the Life Force of God, I'd think images of the Breath/Spirit might be a good way to express it that Spark of Life.

Originally there was no concept of life after death in Judaism, so "spirit" was tightly-coupled to biology. When the body died the spirit died. It's easy to see how primitive people would connect breathing with life, because there is a parallel in many animals. Of course bacteria don't show obvious signs of breathing, and plants breath CO2 instead of O2. Computers may someday be an obvious form of life without breathing. It's complicated.

I guess I don't know what to think about God's breath other than to assume it is simply the process of living. From an atheistic perspective life is only chemistry, so maybe God's breath is the beginning of chemical processes? IDK LOL

 

[cloudyday2]

Interesting discussion. It seems there is a lot being said here about what the light of God is on Day 1 (v3-5) so I'll encourage to reapply the questions to keep things on track. What does this light tell us about God and what does it tell us about ourselves (humans)? And to take it further is there is an action for us to mirror with this spoken light from darkness? Compare day 1 (v3-5) and day 4 (v14-19). Is there a difference with these lights? Does it change how we look at the light of day 1, how we see God's action in this light or any action we may infer for ourselves from this?

I'm drawing on blank on most of those topics you suggested aside from the issue @dlamberth mentioned about the light in day 1 vs the light in day 4.

 

[dlamberth]

I guess I don't know what to think about God's breath other than to assume it is simply the process of living. From an atheistic perspective life is only chemistry, so maybe God's breath is the beginning of chemical processes? IDK LOL

The Mystics talk about the Breath of God as not chemistry process but as a very refined awareness of God's presence with in all of this Creation. That's from a non-duality experience of God in Creation though.

 

[dlamberth]

Interesting discussion. It seems there is a lot being said here about what the light of God is on Day 1 (v3-5) so I'll encourage to reapply the questions to keep things on track. What does this light tell us about God and what does it tell us about ourselves (humans)? And to take it further is there is an action for us to mirror with this spoken light from darkness? Compare day 1 (v3-5) and day 4 (v14-19). Is there a difference with these lights? Does it change how we look at the light of day 1, how we see God's action in this light or any action we may infer for ourselves from this?

The Light in v3-5 I take as the birth of Christ in this physical world. It was kind of the first thing created in this physical world. So Creation is the first Body of Christ is how I understand it. As Creation progressed the Light of God/Christ became inherent within and through out all there is, from the smallest atomic particle to the largest cosmic wide form. Everywhere one looks, there Christ is.

v14-19 is the creation in the physical world of light and darkness.

 

[ananda]

Interesting discussion. It seems there is a lot being said here about what the light of God is on Day 1 (v3-5) so I'll encourage to reapply the questions to keep things on track. What does this light tell us about God and what does it tell us about ourselves (humans)? And to take it further is there is an action for us to mirror with this spoken light from darkness? Compare day 1 (v3-5) and day 4 (v14-19). Is there a difference with these lights? Does it change how we look at the light of day 1, how we see God's action in this light or any action we may infer for ourselves from this?

Without deviating too much from the text itself, we can infer that the creation of (the properties of?) light and darkness (3-5) is separate from the creation of specific instances of light and darkness on the physical plane, like stars (14-19).

 

[DamianWarS]

I'm drawing on blank on most of those topics you suggested aside from the issue @dlamberth mentioned about the light in day 1 vs the light in day 4.

I get it, the question can seem limiting but if these things are true then they are the ones we should be asking. I'll start another passage and you may find some more things of interests to contribute and even new things may emerge if you keep on participating.

 

[DamianWarS]

Without deviating too much from the text itself, we can infer that the creation of (the properties of?) light and darkness (3-5) is separate from the creation of specific instances of light and darkness on the physical plane, like stars (14-19).

Re-read the passage. What is created or "spoken" into being? light, darkness or both? Does this tell us anything about God or give insight into the purpose of the "let there be light" event... or maybe it doesn't.

Does anyone else have thoughts on this?

 

[ananda]

Re-read the passage. What is created or "spoken" into being? light, darkness or both? Does this tell us anything about God or give insight into the purpose of the "let there be light" event... or maybe it doesn't.

Both. According to the text, light was created by being "spoken" into being, and darkness was created by being separated from light. Unless, of course, you wish to say that darkness was created by something else other than "God".

I don't see how this says much of anything about "God" or the purpose of "let there be light" unless we deviate far beyond the text itself.

 

[dlamberth]

Re-read the passage. What is created or "spoken" into being? light, darkness or both? Does this tell us anything about God or give insight into the purpose of the "let there be light" event... or maybe it doesn't.

Purpose? I'll keep up the point of the Light of God inherent with in Creation itSelf.

 

[DamianWarS]

Both. According to the text, light was created by being "spoken" into being, and darkness was created by being separated from light. Unless, of course, you wish to say that darkness was created by something else other than "God".

I don't see how this says much of anything about "God" or the purpose of "let there be light" unless we deviate far beyond the text itself.

does everyone agree with this that God created both darkness and light? I know this sounds very philosophical but let's put that aside for a moment and first establish the framework of God based on what the text tells us.

We know God explicitly says "let there be light" but does the text show us he is also the creator of darkness? When is darkness first mentioned and how does God interact with or change it? What does he call the light and does he call the darkness the same? Do we think the text shows us light and darkness could be representative of something else and if so what parts are of God... does the text even show us?

 

[DamianWarS]

Purpose? I'll keep up the point of the Light of God inherent with in Creation itSelf.

dlamberth, you said you see the light as the "birth of Christ in this physical world" what characteristic of the light are you identify with the birth of Christ? for example why he is not the darkness. Obviously, the text is not explicit with this so why do you see the words "Let there be light" as "Let there be Christ"?

does anyone have something to add with how @dlamberth sees the light? Does it fit? does everyone agree?