Freethought & Rationalism Archive

RaptorRed · 04-14-2002, 11:50 AM

Could anyone point me to a good critique of the descriptions of "dinosaurs" found in the Book of Job? Thanks in advance.

bluefugue · 04-14-2002, 01:13 PM

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000451" target="_blank">This thread</a> went into some detail about that topic. Hope it helps.

tronvillain · 04-14-2002, 07:22 PM

So you really enjoyed the book RaptorRed?

Oolon Colluphid · 04-15-2002, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tronvillain:
So you really enjoyed the book RaptorRed?

I read Dinosaur Heresies ages ago, and picked up RR last time I was in the States. Still haven't read it. Is it any good? Good non-fiction writers do not always good fiction writers make

Oolon

excreationist · 04-15-2002, 09:08 PM

<a href="http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=36;t=000130" target="_blank">BaptistBoard thread - "Dinosaurs, dragons, behemoths and leviathans"</a>

In that thread I basically came to the conclusion that dragon myths weren't inspired by encounters with dragons, that the leviathan description matches a crocodile almost exactly - except for the parts about breathing fire. Creationists usually think it is a plesiosaurus but I explained why this wouldn't be so in that thread.
I'm not sure what the behemoth was though. The problem is the part about "a tail like a cedar". The NIV text note says it probably is an elephant or a hippo. It says that tail could also mean trunk. (Though it has been translated as tail) It seems to match a herbivore dinosaur better than an elephant. But there should be more evidence that dinosaurs existed recently than a single Bible verse. (about a tail like a cedar)

Seth K · 04-15-2002, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by excreationist:

I'm not sure what the behemoth was though. The problem is the part about "a tail like a cedar". The NIV text note says it probably is an elephant or a hippo. It says that tail could also mean trunk. (Though it has been translated as tail) It seems to match a herbivore dinosaur better than an elephant. But there should be more evidence that dinosaurs existed recently than a single Bible verse. (about a tail like a cedar)

Other bible scholars say that "tail" was sometimes a euphemism for [eh-hehm] another appendage, which could be a bit more cedar-like.
.

Jesse · 04-16-2002, 03:56 AM

I had a debate with Douglas about Behemoth a while ago on <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001054;p=4" target="_blank">this</a> thread:

Jesse:
From <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262661659/internetinfidelsA" target="_blank">Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against The New Creationism</a>:

Quote:

Dinosaurs, they claim, are mentioned in the Bible as the Behemoth and the Leviathan. Institute for Creation Research (ICR) scientists say that the former was probably a dinosaur because of its Scriptural description. They give away posters of a seated man observing what appears to be an Apatosaurus with the scriptural passage from Job: "Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together" (40:15-17). At the Museum of Creation and Earth History, our guide drew the children's attention to the phrase "he moveth his tail like a cedar," noting that no animal we know of besides dinosaurs had a tail so large. Scholars of biblical Hebrew would have to stifle a chuckle if they heard this exegesis, for the King James translation utilizes the term "tail" as a common euphemism for the male genital member. Stephen Mitchell's authoritative translation of the book of Job removes the linguistic fig-leaf and renders the passage somewhat differently: "Look now: the Beast that I made: he eats grass like a bull. Look: the power in his thighs, the pulsing sinews of his belly. His penis stiffens like a pine; his testicles bulge with vigor."

Since neither reptiles nor birds have external genitals, dinosaurs almost certainly didn't either.

Douglas:
Stephen Mitchell's "authoritative" translation of the book of Job is rolling-on-the-floor-and-holding-my-aching-sides laughable. It is a very simple thing to check all occurrences in the Bible of the Hebrew word translated in the King James Bible, in Job 40:17, as "tail" (or "tails"). Using Strong's Concordance, one can easily find that there are 10 times that word translated as "tail"/"tails" is used: ("tail") - Exodus 4:4, Deuteronomy 28:13, Deuteronomy 28:44, Judges 15:4, Job 40:17, Isaiah 9:14, Isaiah 9:15, and Isaiah 19:15; ("tails") - Judges 15:4, and Isaiah 7:4. And it is also very easy to see that in none of those passages is that Hebrew word used in the sense of "penis".

Furthermore, God is not "phallically-minded" - the context of the passage in Job is to make obvious to Job God's power. Describing the "male genitalia" of some large creature wouldn't serve to inspire in Job an "awed sense of God's power in His sovereignty over His creation", as would describing the strength and huge size of some great creature.

The quote you gave said:

Quote:

...for the King James translation utilizes the term "tail" as a common euphemism for the male genital member.

No, it does not. One must intentionally and with great difficulty and design manufacture that as an explanation. And even then it does not stand up under scrutiny.

Jesse:
You may be right Douglas. But what is the Hebrew word which the KJV translates as "stones?" The fact that the passage talked about both the beast's "tail" and "stones" in succession makes me a bit suspicious.

Douglas:
just checked, and Strong's Concordance says that the Hebrew word translated as "stones" in Job 40:17 means either "testicle" or "stone" ("stone" being the primary definition given). However, it says that it is the exact same as another Hebrew word which means "shake; fear", so that context determines what it means, I would guess (or which word was intended). In the context of Job 40:17, it would seem that "stones" would imply "testicles". Although, in the NKJV, apparently that Hebrew word is translated as "thighs" (with what justification, I don't know).

So, if the meaning of "stones" in Job 40:17 is that of "testicles", then my description of Stephen Mitchell's translation as "laughable" (etcetera) is incorrect. That is, his translation would have some, perhaps even a fair amount, of merit. But that wouldn't change the fact that the "behemoth" described still seems to be a very large dinosaur, in that the behemoth was not "disturbed" though the river might rage. Of any of the modern-day creatures, it might best describe an elephant, I would think.

And, that doesn't explain the dragon described in Job 41 ("Leviathan"). Fire-breathing, with scales, and unable to be overcome by men with any mere hand-held weapons (including swords, spears, and javelins).

Jesse:
Incidentally, Stephen Mitchell is not alone in his translation of "tail." From John Gill's (1697-1771) lengthy Bible commentaries, here's what he said about that verse:

Quote:

Verse 17. He moveth his tail like a cedar,.... To which it is compared, not for the length and largeness of it; for the tail both of the elephant and of the river horse [hippopotamus] is short; though Vartomannus {c} says, the tail of the elephant is like a buffalo's, and is four hands long, and thin of hair: but because of the smoothness, roundness, thickness, and firmness of it; such is the tail of the river horse, being like that of a hog or boar {d}; which is crooked, twisted, and which it is said to turn back and about at pleasure, as the word used is thought to signify. Aben Ezra interprets it, "maketh to stand": that is, stiff and strong, and firm like a cedar. One writer {e} speaks of the horse of the Nile, as having a scaly tail; but he seems to confound it with the sea horse. Junius interprets it of its penis, its genital part; to which the Targum in the King's Bible is inclined: and Cicero {f} says, the ancients used to call that the tail; but that of the elephant, according to Aristotle {g}, is but small, and not in proportion to the size of its body; and not in sight, and therefore can hardly be thought to be described; though the next clause seems to favour this sense:
the sinews of his stones are wrapped together; if by these are meant the testicles, as some think, so the Targums; the sinews of which were wreathed, implicated and ramified, like branches of trees, as Montanus renders it. Bochart interprets this of the sinews or nerves of the river horse, which having such plenty of them, are exceeding strong; so that, as some report, this creature will with one foot sink a boat {h}; I have known him open his mouth, says a traveller {i}, and set one tooth on the gunnel of a boat, and another on the second strake from the keel, more than four feet distant, and there bite a hole through the plank, and sink the boat.
{c} Navigat. l. 4. c. 9. {d} Aristot. Plin. Solin. & Isidore ut supra. (See Job 40:16.) {e} Nicet. Choniat. apud Fabrit. Gr. Bibliothec. vol. 6. p. 410. {f} Epist. l. 9. ep. 22. {g} Hist. Amimal. l. 2. c. 1. {h} Apud Hierozoic, par. 2. l. 5. c. 14. col. 758. {i} Dampier's Voyages, vol. 2. part 2. p. 105.

From <a href="http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/large/gill/job40.htm" target="_blank">http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/large/gill/job40.htm</a>

.............

BTW, an easier-to-read version of the John Gill's commentary on Job can be found at:

<a href="http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/gill/job40.htm" target="_blank">http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/gill/job40.htm</a>

He seems to think behemoth was probably either a hippotamus or an elephant. Also, in his commentary on Job 41:

<a href="http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/gill/job41.htm" target="_blank">http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/gill/job41.htm</a>

...he suggests leviathan was probably a crocodile, or possibly a whale.

[ April 16, 2002: Message edited by: Jesse ]

excreationist · 04-16-2002, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Douglas:
And, that doesn't explain the dragon described in Job 41 ("Leviathan"). Fire-breathing, with scales, and unable to be overcome by men with any mere hand-held weapons (including swords, spears, and javelins).

Here's <a href="http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=Job+41&language=english&version=NIV-IBS" target="_blank">Job 41</a>:

1 Can you pull in the leviathan with a fishhook [they'd probably weigh a ton or more] or tie down his tongue with a rope? [I guess they'd have tongues]
2 Can you put a cord through his nose [they have a nose hole]
or pierce his jaw with a hook? [they have really big jaws]
3 Will he keep begging you for mercy? Will he speak to you with gentle words?
4 Will he make an agreement with you for you to take him as your slave for life? [they're probably not smart enough to be tamed]
5 Can you make a pet of him like a bird or put him on a leash for your girls?
6 Will traders barter for him? Will they divide him up among the merchants?
7 Can you fill his hide with harpoons or his head with fishing spears?
8 If you lay a hand on him, you will remember the struggle and never do it again! [crocodiles struggle (thrash about) and they are half land creatures so you can get close and put your hand on them]
9 Any hope of subduing him is false; the mere sight of him is overpowering.
10 No one is fierce enough to rouse him. Who then is able to stand against me?
11 Who has a claim against me that I must pay? Everything under heaven belongs to me.
12 I will not fail to speak of his limbs, [crocodiles have legs] his strength and his graceful form.
13 Who can strip off his outer coat? Who would approach him with a bridle?
14 Who dares open the doors of his mouth, ringed about with his fearsome teeth? [crocodile's mouths are ringed with fearsome teeth]
15 His back has rows of shields tightly sealed together;
16 each is so close to the next that no air can pass between.
17 They are joined fast to one another; they cling together and cannot be parted. [that's an excellent description of their back]
18 His snorting [crocodiles snort] throws out flashes of light; his eyes are like the rays of dawn.
19 Firebrands stream from his mouth; sparks of fire shoot out.
20 Smoke pours from his nostrils as from a boiling pot over a fire of reeds. [maybe this is about the snorting - and someone saw vapour coming out]
21 His breath sets coals ablaze, and flames dart from his mouth.
22 Strength resides in his neck; [they have very strong necks] dismay goes before him.
23 The folds of his flesh are tightly joined;
they are firm and immovable.
24 His chest is hard as rock, hard as a lower millstone.
25 When he rises up, the mighty are terrified;
they retreat before his thrashing. [crocodiles thrash around]
26 The sword that reaches him has no effect,
nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin. [it would already be in a frenzy anyway and it is heavily armoured]
27 Iron he treats like straw and bronze like rotten wood.
28 Arrows do not make him flee; slingstones are like chaff to him.
29 A club seems to him but a piece of straw;
he laughs at the rattling of the lance.
30 His undersides are jagged potsherds,
leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing sledge. [they move along in the mud]
31 He makes the depths churn like a boiling caldron and stirs up the sea like a pot of ointment. [some species go far out into the sea and hide underwater]
32 Behind him he leaves a glistening wake;
one would think the deep had white hair.
33 Nothing on earth is his equal-
a creature without fear. [crocodiles are probably fearless - at least the first time they meet the crocodile hunter]
34 He looks down on all that are haughty; he is king over all that are proud. [that part is a bit of a problem though... if you read "looking down" in a literal sense]

Creationists -
If the leviathan wasn't a crocodile then what was it? Note that it had rows of shields on its back and this would be visible on the fossil - if you think it was a dinosaur.

Douglas J. Bender · 04-23-2002, 07:47 AM

excreationist,

(Note that I have not posted in this thread prior to today.)

You quoted the passage in Job regarding "Leviathan" (from the KJV, I believe), and added some comments:

Quote:

7 Can you fill his hide with harpoons or his head with fishing spears?

Well, could people pierce a crocodile through with harpoons? Or are you claiming their hide is too tough for a harpoon to pierce it?

Quote:

8 If you lay a hand on him, you will remember the struggle and never do it again! [crocodiles struggle (thrash about) and they are half land creatures so you can get close and put your hand on them]

Ever heard of "The Crocodile Hunter"? Of course, if you think this passage is referring to the really large crocodiles (the really, really large ones), then this might apply.

Quote:

9 Any hope of subduing him is false; the mere sight of him is overpowering.

Again, this wouldn't seem to be referring to crocodiles, unless to the gargantuan ones (15 feet long, maybe, and over). Of course, even those could probably have been fairly easily "subdued" by using a suitably strong and large net. So, again, this does not seem to be referring to crocodiles.

Quote:

10 No one is fierce enough to rouse him. Who then is able to stand against me?

If "one" is speaking of an individual, rather than a group, and if "Leviathan" is referring to a "gargantuan" crocodile, this could fit.

Quote:

11 Who has a claim against me that I must pay? Everything under heaven belongs to me.

So there.

[quote]12 I will not fail to speak of his limbs, [crocodiles have legs] his strength and his graceful form.[Quote]

Now, why would God "highlight" a crocodile's "limbs" as though they were something to inspire "awe", as would his "strength" and "graceful form"? For that matter, crocodiles have a "graceful form"??

Quote:

13 Who can strip off his outer coat? Who would approach him with a bridle?

Again, if "who" is referring to only an individual, and not a group, then this might fit.

Quote:

14 Who dares open the doors of his mouth, ringed about with his fearsome teeth? [crocodile's mouths are ringed with fearsome teeth]

This might fit, if referring to a "gargantuan" crocodile.

Quote:

15 His back has rows of shields tightly sealed together;
16 each is so close to the next that no air can pass between.
17 They are joined fast to one another; they cling together and cannot be parted. [that's an excellent description of their back]

Are the scales of an alligator's back "so close to the next that no air can pass between"? Are they joined together such that they "cannot be parted"?

Quote:

18 His snorting [crocodiles snort] throws out flashes of light; his eyes are like the rays of dawn.
19 Firebrands stream from his mouth; sparks of fire shoot out.
20 Smoke pours from his nostrils as from a boiling pot over a fire of reeds. [maybe this is about the snorting - and someone saw vapour coming out]

Let's see - the Bible here mentions: "flashes of light"; "firebrands"; "sparks of fire"; and "smoke". And the best explanation you can come up with is that water vapour from the crocodile "snorting" accounts for the description of "smoke" pouring from his "nostrils"? I'm afraid, if this Bible passage is going to be accepted as even possibly accurate, that there is no way a crocodile could fit the "fiery" descriptions.

Quote:

21 His breath sets coals ablaze, and flames dart from his mouth.

Please don't try to argue that this is a poetic description of crocodiles' bad breath.

Quote:

22 Strength resides in his neck; [they have very strong necks] dismay goes before him.

Crocodiles have necks?

Quote:

23 The folds of his flesh are tightly joined; they are firm and immovable.
24 His chest is hard as rock, hard as a lower millstone.

I always thought that the underside of crocodiles was relatively "soft", at least in comparison to their "topside". In what way, then, could a crocodiles chest be described as "hard as rock, hard as a lower millstone"?

Quote:

25 When he rises up, the mighty are terrified; they retreat before his thrashing. [crocodiles thrash around]

This might fit, if it is referring to a "gargantuan" crocodile. But I would be rather embarassed if I was one of the "mighty" who became "terrified" when a crocodile "rose up", and if I "retreated" (I'm thinking a "Monty Pythonesque" retreat) when a crocodile started "thrashing" around. I'd stay a healthy distance away, if I was all by my lonesome, of course.

Quote:

26 The sword that reaches him has no effect, nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin. [it would already be in a frenzy anyway and it is heavily armoured]

Hold it right there. You ASSUME that a thrashing crocodile could not be pierced by a spear, dart, or javelin (or sword). Since when would that be the case? Imagine a 20-foot long crocodile thrashing about in a frenzy - it's not moving in a wide area, but it's moving quite a bit in a limited area. Imagine a skilled warrior standing on the river bank, eyeing the thrashing monster, and preparing to heave, with all of his might, a pinpoint-sharp javelin at the crocodile. Imagine the javelin is thrown at an angle such that the crocodile turns into the javelin as it arrives. Would it pierce the crocodile? Basically, only poorly thrown javelins (and spears and darts) would fail to pierce even a large crocodile, I am pretty sure.

Quote:

27 Iron he treats like straw and bronze like rotten wood.

Crocodiles treat iron like straw, and bronze like rotten wood? Do you know what that implies? It implies that a crocodile can break in pieces iron and bronze implements, even strong weapons. Are you claiming that this is the case for crocodiles (large ones)?

Quote:

28 Arrows do not make him flee; slingstones are like chaff to him.

This might fit with a very large crocodile.

Quote:

29 A club seems to him but a piece of straw;
he laughs at the rattling of the lance.

I would think that even a large crocodile could be threatened by a large lance.

Quote:

30 His undersides are jagged potsherds,
leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing sledge. [they move along in the mud]

This could fit a crocodile.

Quote:

31 He makes the depths churn like a boiling caldron and stirs up the sea like a pot of ointment. [some species go far out into the sea and hide underwater]

This might fit a crocodile.

Quote:

32 Behind him he leaves a glistening wake;
one would think the deep had white hair.

This doesn't quite sound like a crocodile - a "glistening wake"? Maybe it would apply to crocodiles, but not based on what I've seen of them on television shows (and how much more scientific can you get than that?).

Quote:

33 Nothing on earth is his equal-
a creature without fear. [crocodiles are probably fearless - at least the first time they meet the crocodile hunter]

I've always heard that crocodiles fear hippos. Or at least defer to them. In which case, hippos would be their "equals", and that verse would be in error. So, this does not sound like it is describing crocodiles.

Quote:

34 He looks down on all that are haughty; he is king over all that are proud. [that part is a bit of a problem though... if you read "looking down" in a literal sense]

I don't read "looking down" in a "literal sense". It is a figure of speech for the self-exalting nature of "pride". Now, I've never thought of crocodiles as particularly "prideful" - they've always seemed to me to be rather "unthinking" eating machines. And, given how crocodiles appear to "defer" to hippos, I rather doubt that they could thus be described as "king over all that are proud" - all that pride would get punctured everytime the crocodile had to "defer" to a hippo.

In Christ,

Douglas

Douglas J. Bender · 04-23-2002, 07:51 AM

excreationist,

You asked:

Quote:

If the leviathan wasn't a crocodile then what was it? Note that it had rows of shields on its back and this would be visible on the fossil - if you think it was a dinosaur.

I do not claim that the Leviathan was a dinosaur, and I claim that it was not a crocodile. I believe it was a literal, fire-breathing Dragon. Now, lest you go and say that "fire-breathing" creatures are an impossibility and a myth, I would point out creatures with similar or even stranger characteristics: the bombardier beetle; electric eels; (and probably some others I can't think of right now, or am not aware of).

In Christ,

Douglas

04-14-2002, 11:50 AM	#1
RaptorRed Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 25	"Dinosaurs" in the Book of Job Could anyone point me to a good critique of the descriptions of "dinosaurs" found in the Book of Job? Thanks in advance.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-14-2002, 01:13 PM	#2
bluefugue Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,427	<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000451" target="_blank">This thread</a> went into some detail about that topic. Hope it helps.

04-14-2002, 07:22 PM	#3
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	So you really enjoyed the book RaptorRed?

04-15-2002, 09:08 PM	#5
excreationist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Australia Posts: 4,886	<a href="http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=36;t=000130" target="_blank">BaptistBoard thread - "Dinosaurs, dragons, behemoths and leviathans"</a> In that thread I basically came to the conclusion that dragon myths weren't inspired by encounters with dragons, that the leviathan description matches a crocodile almost exactly - except for the parts about breathing fire. Creationists usually think it is a plesiosaurus but I explained why this wouldn't be so in that thread. I'm not sure what the behemoth was though. The problem is the part about "a tail like a cedar". The NIV text note says it probably is an elephant or a hippo. It says that tail could also mean trunk. (Though it has been translated as tail) It seems to match a herbivore dinosaur better than an elephant. But there should be more evidence that dinosaurs existed recently than a single Bible verse. (about a tail like a cedar)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.