Sandslice

This may have been answered before... many times... but on another forum I frequent, the "behemoth is a member of Suborder Sauropoda" has popped up again.

The problem is, it's become rather difficult to find information on behemoth that wasn't written by, or heavily quoting of, YECs (who will, almost invariably, accuse the poor Apatosaurus of being behemoth.)

Could someone render a spot of assistance?

Crucifiction

A hideously idiotic Xian website mentioning Behemoth-http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/behemoth.html
http://www.baptistlink.com/dman/lpage2.html

On Behemoth and it's demonological aspects- http://www.deliriumsrealm.com/deliri...y/behemoth.asp

It probably describes an elephant or some other large land mammal. The Leviathan is likely a desription of a whale or seal.

http://www.bibleandscience.com/science/dinosaurs.htm

I have pretty much come to the concludion that the Behemoth may have been some type of large crocodile; certainly not a dinosaur. Crocodiles DO lay in reeds and marshes.

Sandslice

The first one, I'd seen before, and gotten a kick and a half out of it... though I will give them credit for not mentioning the non-existent Sauropod "Brontosaurus." That name irks my love of palaeontology to no end.

From the IBSS article... it seems to suggest the water buffalo, which would be consistent with the Bull of Heaven comparison and actual lion vs. buffalo encounter footage which basically showed that hunting the buffaloes was more or less a matter of luck for the lions.

Thanks much ^^

Crucifiction

It's fucking hillarious that the first site still perpetuates the myth of the Glen Rose man. Check this out- http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html

And the site also doesn't seem to understand there were HUNDEREDS of species of dinosaurs. Yes, some had teeth several inches, but others had teeth the size of a human forearm. Also, some dinosaur babies were the size of dogs.

Dust

Some (those who believe the earth and universe is only 6000 years old) say that Dinosaur existed along with man, despite radioactive decay chain dating of fossil. The implications of saying this, means that all Dinosaur abruptly became extinct somewhere within the last 5000 years.

Many will say that a global flood in the story of Noah caused the dinosaur extinction. They say the “giants� in those days were the dinosaurs. This word giants is very vague for one to consider it a dinosaur, especially when you consider the story of David and Goliath. In this instance, if dinosaur became extinct at the flood, it clearly made no mention of them to be left behind. This puts an incredible cramp in the idea.

Then others say dinosaurs were taken on the Ark with Noah. Considering the dinosaurs would not fit, the idea is supposed that the eggs only were taken. Which in turn rises question of not only being able to discern male from female by looking at an egg (which is impossible), but also that Noah would have had to gather ALL of these eggs himself, since an egg surely can’t go anywhere on it’s own.

These pose major difficulties in the supposition of dinosaur co-existing with man. Nonetheless, many will assert the book of Jobs reference to an animal that “moves his tail like a cedar�, being a dinosaur. Not only does that verse mean nothing about the size of the animals tail, but if taken as dinosaur, it completely shatters the idea of those that say dinosaur became extinct in the flood, and then raises an even bigger question. What then plucked the dinosaur out of existence, since there is nothing in the history of science or the bible that could have done this within the 5000 year span claimed by creationists? If God, with great precision, plucked each dino out from the crowd of humans and other beasts, why would such a Great event have not been written? And if we suppose that this was a dinosaur in the book of Job, and that they just mysteriously and silently died off, why no writing of encounters with these great beasts. All manner of life as we know it today is mentioned multiple times. Why not a dinosaur? I am quite sure that kind of encounter with a T-rex, or something, would have been text worthy. Not to mention, how the heck a human would have dominion over one of those things?

The fact is…the Bible mentions nothing of dinosaur.


Behemoth, would certainly be a large animal like a Hippo, Elephant, Rhino, Buffalo, or some other great beast. I’m not sure about it being a crocodile though. It mentioned it ate grass like an ox. But it damn sure isn’t a dinosaur.

CX

I think this might do better in E/C...

SEF

The bible version I have here (as opposed to the several I own elsewhere) includes illustrations and comments as does the concordance from a different version. Both reckon the behemoth was a hippopotamus:

NB the stiff "tail" is a euphemism for penis just like "feet" is a euphemism for the same in many descriptions of humans in the bible. An aroused charging hippo is probably not something an ancient peasant/shepherd would want to be trifling with...

... leave it to the scientists with tranquiliser guns!

Peez

I don't know much about the language useage, but Behemoth is a proper name in the Bible, suggesting a singular individual.

Peez

Writer@Large

I find any attempt to "identify" Behemoth and Leviathan futile. They are both made-up animals in a book full of made-up stories; Behemoth is a unicorn, Leviathan a mermaid.

--W@L

lpetrich

I would not dismiss Behemoth outright; there are some large herbivores in that part of the world that approximately fit its description, especially if one supposes "tail" to be a bowdlerization of "penis":

Wild ox
Water buffalo
Hippopotamus
Rhinoceros
Elephant

Leviathan is a different story -- it may be a crocodile, but it seems more likely to be some mythical sea monster.