The atheist response to the text of the Bible is based primarily upon the young earth creationist interpretation, which is flawed. If I put myself objectively in the position of the atheist attempting to debunk the Bible I would start with Genesis Chapter 1. The Chapter passed the inspection of this former atheist.
The Hebrew verb consists of two different states. The perfect state indicates an action which is complete, whereas the imperfect state indicates a continuous or incomplete action.
At Genesis 1:1 the word bara, translated as created, is in the perfect state, which means that at this point the creation of the heavens and the Earth were completed. Later, as in verse 16 the Hebrew word asah, translated as made, is used, which is in the imperfect state, indicating continuous action. The heavens and Earth were created in verse 1 and an indeterminate time later they were being prepared for habitation, much the same as a bed is manufactured (complete) and made (continuous) afterwards.
What this means is that the creation was complete even before the six "days" of creation even began, in fact, later verses in the chapter reveal it was more than likely a long time in between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
David, I am not fluent in Hebrew and honestly have no idea what the difference between bara and asah is but, I'll take your word for it. But, that being said I don't have to debunk Genesis 1:1 because it debunks itself later in the same book. There are two different creation stories one starting in Genesis 1:1 and the other starting in Genesis 2:4 (http://bible-wonderings.blogspot.com/2006/01/two-creation-stories.html). So me trying to debunk it by looking up the original Hebrew is a waste of time when it cannot agree with itself.
Also this blog (http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/blogpost/23) shows some pretty interesting discrepancies including, but not limited to the story of Lilith, (which is one of my favourite fake stories that was somehow not good enough for the "final version" of a book made up of fairie tales).
The Hebrew word lilith is sometimes rendered as "little owl." The Athene noctua (From Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros, by L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner, Leiden, 1958, p. 428) The word is used at Isaiah 34:14, one of the creatures haunting Edom's ruins. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, edited by G.A. Buttrick, 1962, Vol. 2. p. 252 compares the Hebrew lilith to the Strix, or tawny owl.
Various translations render it to the "Screech owl" (KJ) "night-monster" (AS) "nightjar" (NE) and "night hag." (RS)
The Book of Zohar, or Sefer ha-zohar (Hebrew: Book of Splendor, which the blog you linked to refers is a 13th century text of Jewish mysticism.
So Adam was having sex with an owl? I thought bestiality was looked down on. So it is ok for men to have sex with owls as long as they are on top. Interesting.
And thank you for the information about the book of zohar, I always thought that the entire bible was just Jewish mysticism.
I'm picturing a giant owl-lady, like a harpy. Which I'm actually kind of okay with.
Harpy is probably not far from the truth. Lilith seems to me to be an invention of misogynistic intent.
Lilith seems to me to be an invention of misogynistic intent.
As opposed to the curse of pain during childbirth, the "uncleanness of women on their period, forbidding women to speak in church or teach men, forcing them to marry their rapist, killing them if they don't scream loud enough if they are raped, etc. Those are just peachy.
The uncleanliness of the period was due to the blood. The blood, according to the Bible, is the life, and sacred to God. But the menstrual cycle also had the effect of making the man respect his wife and the pleasure she gave him. It sort of had the effect of him not taking it for granted.
Women were not forbidden to speak in church or to teach men, they were simply instructed to wear a head covering if men were present out of respect for God's headship arrangement.
I once had a Bible study where a woman's husband who was supposed to conduct the study had to take his place due to him being held up at work. She explained it to me and put a hat on. It was, at first, very uncomfortable for me. I guess I had the same disgust you have. But into the study I began to realize what a tremendously wonderful thing it was. I had such a new found respect for her it literally brought me to tears.
Jesus, the greatest man who ever lived, and the head of the congregation just as Jehovah is the head of Jesus, said: Why do you call me good? No one is good except God.
Ah yes, Jesus, the greatest man who never lived - I remember him from the Greatest Story Ever Sold!
Are you completely overlooking the fact that that bible says that no women can hold a position of power over a man? Seriously, have you ever read this book like you said?
1 Timothy 2:11-14 (KJV)
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
1 Timothy 2:11-14 (NLT)
11Women should listen and learn quietly and submissively. 12I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly. 13For God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve. 14And it was the woman, not Adam, who was deceived by Satan, and sin was the result.
Come on now, you cannot be serious. I can not accept your willful blindness when it comes to this tone. Snap out of it.
No one is good except God.
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Zohar? Isn't there an Adam Sandler movie about the Zohar, who is not to be messed with?