Jump to content


Photo

Behemoth And Leviathan Mythical Creatures?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 09 December 2014 - 11:45 AM

Came across a young earth pastor that preached behemoth and leviathan were likely "mythological creatures" and not real animals.  He's staunch in the young earth camp, and doesn't mind the dinosaur interpretation, but seems very influenced by commentators on Job. Here are some the reasons he cited for his position.

 

After reading dozens of commentators, he found no agreement on these passages (probably because most commentators don't take genesis literally, as I explained).

 

The hebrew word for tail could be interpreted phallus (something liberals commentators often put forth).  

 

Sauropods were not water dwelling animals (to which I agree, but I don't think the passage requires behemoth to be semi-aquatic like a hippo).  

 

There's a lot of uncertainty about hebrew words in Job.  

 

Behemoth is connected in thought with Leviathan and Leviathan breathes fire and cannot be real.  

 

Some objections I brought up were, if behemoth was a mythological creature, then why did God say he "made" him?? Mythologies are products of men not God. He then claimed there's uncertainty about the hebrew word "made".  Problem is, it's the same word God used saying, "let us make man in our image." and the same word Moses used in Ex. 20:11.  Also, if he was mythological, how would that support the point God was making??  How do you lecture someone about creation using non-created examples? 

 

Be curious about people's take on this.  I think liberal theology has crept into the churches far beyond what we realize.  There are myriads of "conservative commentators" that just don't have the faith to believe straightforward passages, and their influence is far and wide. 

 

Also, I'd be curious as to opinions on what Behemoth and Leviathan actually were.  Yes they were real creatures, but are Sauropods and Kronosaurs the best match?  

 

Does "chief of the ways of God" mean largest?  The word there is re'shiyth, which means beginning (as in Gen. 1:1).  ESV says of behemoth, "He is the first of the works of God".  And he is depicted as big, but does he have to be the biggest?  Could he have been a Hadrosaur or some other duckbilled dinosaur?  Were those even semi-aquatic?

 

Could Leviathan have been a semi-aquatic dinosaur like Spinosaurus?  E34D9EE5-A7CC-4F79-9073-1140C33E18C3_mw1

 

Looking forward to your insights.  



#2 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 09 December 2014 - 12:52 PM

BTW, I spied this interesting theory on fire-breathing dragons.

 

The existence of fire breathing dragons

Creation WorldView Ministries

 

Definitely interesting.  



#3 rico

rico

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 669 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Jesus, computers, physics, video games, philosophy, epistomology
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • USA

Posted 09 December 2014 - 01:35 PM

It looks like cow flatulence and burps can be a problem.  Here is a link to a news article: (flatulent cows set fire to german farm)

http://www.thelocal....-to-german-farm

 

Looking on youtube the cow flatulence fireballs were really big, I didn't know if it was real or fake!



#4 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 09 December 2014 - 01:47 PM

We have electric eels and bombardier beetles.  And we have cows that produce highly flammable gasses.  


  • Calypsis4 likes this

#5 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 09 December 2014 - 02:14 PM

What is the difference between this:

 

T-Rex_zps05d7a808.png

 

...and this?

 

T-Rexdragon_zpsc667b807.png

 

Did you know that T=Rex fossils have been discovered with twin (combustion?) chambers in their heads and that two narrow passage ways lead from those twin chambers to the nostrils? Scientists have not figured out just what those chambers are for.

 

T-Rexcombustionchambers_zps196bfe2f.jpg

 

After all this one is reminded of the description of the creatures in Job 40 & 41

 

 

 18 By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
 
 19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.
 
 20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.
 
 21 His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.

 

The fact is that Before 1842 dinosaurs & dragons were thought to be the same.  Sir Richard Owen, FRS KCB (20 July 1804 – 18 December 1892) was an English biologist, comparative anatomist and paleontologist. Despite being a controversial figure, Owen is generally considered to have been an outstanding naturalist with a remarkable gift for interpreting fossils. Owen produced a vast array of scientific work, but is probably best remembered today for coining the word Dinosauria (meaning "Terrible Reptile" or "Fearfully Great Reptile").

 

More evidence that some T-Rex's do indeed have such twin chambers...just above the brain:

 

T-Rexmuseumpiece_zps873dc149.png

 

Sorry, I could not find the name of the museum where this item stands. I'll keep looking.



#6 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 10 December 2014 - 02:35 PM

What is the difference between this:
 
T-Rex_zps05d7a808.png
 
...and this?
 
T-Rexdragon_zpsc667b807.png
 
Did you know that T=Rex fossils have been discovered with twin (combustion?) chambers in their heads and that two narrow passage ways lead from those twin chambers to the nostrils? Scientists have not figured out just what those chambers are for....

 
So what do you propose?  The chambers held distinct chemicals which react when combined?  And is T-Rex the only one they've found to have these?  I ask because they've now determined that some bipedal carnivores like Spinosaurus were actually semi-aquatic.  
 
BTW, I spied this video, and article from a site called, truthingenesis.com.
 

 

Here's the corresponding article: Were there really fire breathing dragons?

 

I like the 4 points they use to sum up the issue.  There's no reason christians should be running from this.  



#7 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 10 December 2014 - 02:51 PM

 

So what do you propose?  The chambers held distinct chemicals which react when combined?  And is T-Rex the only one they've found to have these?  I ask because they've now determined that some bipedal carnivores like Spinosaurus were actually semi-aquatic.

 

 

Thanks, Calminian. No, I don't think T-Rex is the only dinosaur that might have had that capability. It does appear that more than one species of dinosaurs had hollow chambers connected to nasal passages that might indicate such capabilities.
 

 

I like the 4 points they use to sum up the issue.  There's no reason christians should be running from this. 

 

 

Good video. I agree.



#8 nmp9463

nmp9463

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Age: 22
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 10 December 2014 - 09:44 PM

I'm a YEC definitely, but you do have to wonder: Did dinosaur bones people stumble upon inspire the accounts of Behemoth and Leviathan?

Also, I'd be interested in the article that does say those chambers in the TRex skull function are unknown.



#9 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 11 December 2014 - 01:22 AM

I'm a YEC definitely, but you do have to wonder: Did dinosaur bones people stumble upon inspire the accounts of Behemoth and Leviathan?

Also, I'd be interested in the article that does say those chambers in the TRex skull function are unknown.

 

From what I understand, finding fossils and piecing them together is quite an advanced technology.  Had they stumbled upon fossils would they be able to glean all that was spoken of in Job?  

 

But in the text, God clearly says, 'look at this creature' to Job.  And whatever it was, it was alive, very large, ate plants, and had a huge tail.  I don't want to be dogmatic on too many things, but that seems unavoidable.  



#10 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 12 December 2014 - 02:36 PM

I'm a YEC definitely, but you do have to wonder: Did dinosaur bones people stumble upon inspire the accounts of Behemoth and Leviathan?

Also, I'd be interested in the article that does say those chambers in the TRex skull function are unknown.

 

In part here: http://www.oucom.ohi...inuses_main.htm

 

Quote: "Dinosaur air heads. The role of complicated sinuses and convoluted airways.

 

 Air spaces such as the airway and sinuses comprise a neglected anatomical system. CT scanning and advanced 3D computer visualization provided the most complete view ever of the air spaces in two groups of dinosaurs and their modern relatives (birds and crocodilians), with a mammal of parochial interest (humans) thrown in for comparison. Modern alligators and ostriches both show great diversity in air sinuses, revealing that the complex air spaces of dinosaurs were part of their archosaurian heritage. All of the air spaces were modeled in the predatory theropod dinosaursMajungasaurus and Tyrannosaurus, revealing in both a simple arcing airway, large olfactory regions, and lots of sinuses. But the major finding was just how much of the head was occupied by air. The brain cavity was tiny in comparison. An outcome of digitally reconstructing all the head tissues was that head mass could be calculated, allowing an assessment of potential weight savings due to the sinuses. The fully fleshed-out head of Majungasaurusweighed 32 kg (70 lbs), whereas that of T. rex weighed an enormous 515 kg (over 1100 lbs, as much as five or six adult men). Having all the sinuses saved about 8% of head mass but as much as 18% of skull mass, which is significant given how metabolically expensive bone is to maintain. The skulls of armored ankylosaurian dinosaurs also were studied, particularly those of Panoplosaurus and Euoplocephalus. Although it previously had been widely thought that their snouts were riddled with sinuses, the new, surprising results were that, instead of sinuses, their snouts housed a long convoluted nasal airway. This “crazy-straw” airway ran close to large blood vessels and so may have provided a physiological mechanism for dealing with heat. Likewise, the complicated airway would have acted as a vocal resonator, perhaps allowing for species- or even individual specific vocalization. Clearly, the spaces that make up these dinosaurian “air heads” represent a new, largely untapped, window into dinosaur function and behavior."

 

They did everything except to admit outright that they don't have a clue what all that air space was for.

 

P.S. the same investigators into this mystery also said, "Overall, the amount of air space was much greater than the brain cavity."

 

So just substitute 'air space/brain cavity' with 'fuel tanks'...a la flammable liquid that operated in much the same way that bombardier beetles function in our day.



#11 nmp9463

nmp9463

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Age: 22
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 12 December 2014 - 09:16 PM

 

From what I understand, finding fossils and piecing them together is quite an advanced technology.  Had they stumbled upon fossils would they be able to glean all that was spoken of in Job?  

 

But in the text, God clearly says, 'look at this creature' to Job.  And whatever it was, it was alive, very large, ate plants, and had a huge tail.  I don't want to be dogmatic on too many things, but that seems unavoidable.  

Very true, and something I hadn't really thought of. The chapter describes all sorts of things you can't tell by just looking at a few large bones buried in the desert, at least in those days.

As you were saying:

1. Eats plants

2. Very strong, bulky

3. Long tail

And also

4.) Lives in the marsh

5.) Thick skin.

6.) Peaceful with other animals

 

Similar attributes could be assigned to any mythological, alien-type monster and they don't have to exist, but this matches up too much with a dinosaur to make a comparison like that, 

 

I tend to struggle with Leviathan, though. We've matched creatures up that fit Behemoth (dinosaurs) but we really haven't seen anything that breathes fire like Leviathan. 

Do you guys think that scientists are so adamant that fire-breathing monsters are fairy tales, they don't even consider it? Why would God create fire-breathing sea monster?

 

---------



#12 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 13 December 2014 - 10:19 AM

nmp9463:

 

Do you guys think that scientists are so adamant that fire-breathing monsters are fairy tales, they don't even consider it? Why would God create fire-breathing sea monster?

 

In part, so that he could illustrate to Job that if men cannot handle Leviathan, how would they ever fight against or resist God? God brought forth to Job two of the greatest beasts He ever created just to illustrate that fact.



#13 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 14 December 2014 - 01:06 AM

 

In part here: http://www.oucom.ohi...inuses_main.htm

 

Quote: "Dinosaur air heads. The role of complicated sinuses and convoluted airways.

 

 Air spaces such as the airway and sinuses comprise a neglected anatomical system. CT scanning and advanced 3D computer visualization provided the most complete view ever of the air spaces in two groups of dinosaurs and their modern relatives (birds and crocodilians), with a mammal of parochial interest (humans) thrown in for comparison. Modern alligators and ostriches both show great diversity in air sinuses, revealing that the complex air spaces of dinosaurs were part of their archosaurian heritage. All of the air spaces were modeled in the predatory theropod dinosaursMajungasaurus and Tyrannosaurus, revealing in both a simple arcing airway, large olfactory regions, and lots of sinuses. But the major finding was just how much of the head was occupied by air. The brain cavity was tiny in comparison. An outcome of digitally reconstructing all the head tissues was that head mass could be calculated, allowing an assessment of potential weight savings due to the sinuses. The fully fleshed-out head of Majungasaurusweighed 32 kg (70 lbs), whereas that of T. rex weighed an enormous 515 kg (over 1100 lbs, as much as five or six adult men). Having all the sinuses saved about 8% of head mass but as much as 18% of skull mass, which is significant given how metabolically expensive bone is to maintain. The skulls of armored ankylosaurian dinosaurs also were studied, particularly those of Panoplosaurus and Euoplocephalus. Although it previously had been widely thought that their snouts were riddled with sinuses, the new, surprising results were that, instead of sinuses, their snouts housed a long convoluted nasal airway. This “crazy-straw” airway ran close to large blood vessels and so may have provided a physiological mechanism for dealing with heat. Likewise, the complicated airway would have acted as a vocal resonator, perhaps allowing for species- or even individual specific vocalization. Clearly, the spaces that make up these dinosaurian “air heads” represent a new, largely untapped, window into dinosaur function and behavior."

 

They did everything except to admit outright that they don't have a clue what all that air space was for.

 

P.S. the same investigators into this mystery also said, "Overall, the amount of air space was much greater than the brain cavity."

 

So just substitute 'air space/brain cavity' with 'fuel tanks'...a la flammable liquid that operated in much the same way that bombardier beetles function in our day.

 

 

Interesting Cal.  The description of a fire emitting animal in Job 41 is so clear, I don't see  any other way to look at it.  Yet admittedly, I'm shy about being dogmatic about it.  But if it's not based in truth, where do these legends comes from?  

 

And if they did exist what evidence in the fossil record could we possibly find to support this?  What would we expect to find? 



#14 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 14 December 2014 - 01:08 AM

Very true, and something I hadn't really thought of. The chapter describes all sorts of things you can't tell by just looking at a few large bones buried in the desert, at least in those days.

As you were saying:

1. Eats plants

2. Very strong, bulky

3. Long tail

And also

4.) Lives in the marsh

5.) Thick skin.

6.) Peaceful with other animals

 

Similar attributes could be assigned to any mythological, alien-type monster and they don't have to exist, but this matches up too much with a dinosaur to make a comparison like that, 

 

I tend to struggle with Leviathan, though. We've matched creatures up that fit Behemoth (dinosaurs) but we really haven't seen anything that breathes fire like Leviathan. 

Do you guys think that scientists are so adamant that fire-breathing monsters are fairy tales, they don't even consider it? Why would God create fire-breathing sea monster?

 

---------

 

But how would a man-made mythology fit with this passage where God himself says he made this creature?  Whether it's a dinosaur or not, I can't be dogmatic (though it seems to work the best), but I think the idea that this is an imaginary beast runs counter to the point God is making.  



#15 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 14 December 2014 - 02:51 PM



 

 

Interesting Cal.  The description of a fire emitting animal in Job 41 is so clear, I don't see  any other way to look at it.  Yet admittedly, I'm shy about being dogmatic about it.  But if it's not based in truth, where do these legends comes from?  

 

And if they did exist what evidence in the fossil record could we possibly find to support this?  What would we expect to find? 

 

I see.

 

Well, I think there is good evidence in that regard. 

 

dragon-pictograph_large.jpg

 

Why would the ancients produce such illustrations of fire-breathing dragons unless, as Job suggests in chapter 41 they acutally existed. And there is plenty of eyewitness testimony to such thing.

 

amargasaurus_zps88c461ee.jpg

 

What is the difference between this dinosaur (Amargasaurus) and a dragon of ancient lore? I see no difference. What modern man tries to figure out was not a problem for ancient man.



#16 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 15 December 2014 - 12:01 PM

No, and don't get me wrong, I agree.  I think the historical testimonial evidence is there and very persuasive.  I think also, the fossil evidence revealing mysterious sinus chambers is very interesting.  

 

But the bottom line, scripture describes a fire emitting aquatic dragon-like animal.  That has to settle it for the christian.  

 

Now I'm wondering if this animal was ocean or lake dwelling, or perhaps something semi-aquatic like a Spinosaur.  Got any theories or speculations on that?



#17 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 15 December 2014 - 12:46 PM

No, and don't get me wrong, I agree.  I think the historical testimonial evidence is there and very persuasive.  I think also, the fossil evidence revealing mysterious sinus chambers is very interesting.  

 

But the bottom line, scripture describes a fire emitting aquatic dragon-like animal.  That has to settle it for the christian.  

 

Now I'm wondering if this animal was ocean or lake dwelling, or perhaps something semi-aquatic like a Spinosaur.  Got any theories or speculations on that?

 

Nothing more than what has been popularly published by creationist organizations in the last fifteen years. 

 

You might check this one out: <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/3B4lsvrzfZI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

10-2-448.jpg



#18 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 15 December 2014 - 04:45 PM

 

Nothing more than what has been popularly published by creationist organizations in the last fifteen years. 

 

You might check this one out: <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/3B4lsvrzfZI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

 

Did you really mean to post a Star Trek scene??  That's what the embed link brought up. www.youtube.com/embed/3B4lsvrzfZI

 

Just wondering if there were any speculations beyond Kronosaurus.



#19 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 15 December 2014 - 06:14 PM

 

Did you really mean to post a Star Trek scene??  That's what the embed link brought up. www.youtube.com/embed/3B4lsvrzfZI

 

Just wondering if there were any speculations beyond Kronosaurus.

 

 Uh, oh. I better check that out again. Sorry.

 

That sometimes happens when I am concentrating on two things at once. 



#20 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 23 May 2015 - 07:27 AM

Came across a young earth pastor that preached behemoth and leviathan were likely "mythological creatures" and not real animals.  He's staunch in the young earth camp, and doesn't mind the dinosaur interpretation, but seems very influenced by commentators on Job. Here are some the reasons he cited for his position.

 

After reading dozens of commentators, he found no agreement on these passages (probably because most commentators don't take genesis literally, as I explained).

 

The hebrew word for tail could be interpreted phallus (something liberals commentators often put forth).  

 

Sauropods were not water dwelling animals (to which I agree, but I don't think the passage requires behemoth to be semi-aquatic like a hippo).  

 

There's a lot of uncertainty about hebrew words in Job.  

 

Behemoth is connected in thought with Leviathan and Leviathan breathes fire and cannot be real.  

 

Some objections I brought up were, if behemoth was a mythological creature, then why did God say he "made" him?? Mythologies are products of men not God. He then claimed there's uncertainty about the hebrew word "made".  Problem is, it's the same word God used saying, "let us make man in our image." and the same word Moses used in Ex. 20:11.  Also, if he was mythological, how would that support the point God was making??  How do you lecture someone about creation using non-created examples? 

 

Be curious about people's take on this.  I think liberal theology has crept into the churches far beyond what we realize.  There are myriads of "conservative commentators" that just don't have the faith to believe straightforward passages, and their influence is far and wide. 

 

Also, I'd be curious as to opinions on what Behemoth and Leviathan actually were.  Yes they were real creatures, but are Sauropods and Kronosaurs the best match?  

 

Does "chief of the ways of God" mean largest?  The word there is re'shiyth, which means beginning (as in Gen. 1:1).  ESV says of behemoth, "He is the first of the works of God".  And he is depicted as big, but does he have to be the biggest?  Could he have been a Hadrosaur or some other duckbilled dinosaur?  Were those even semi-aquatic?

 

Could Leviathan have been a semi-aquatic dinosaur like Spinosaurus?  E34D9EE5-A7CC-4F79-9073-1140C33E18C3_mw1

 

Looking forward to your insights.  

Hello,

 

If I'm not mistaken, I recall reading (a few months ago) that a Behemoth was dug up in South America.  It was a young Behemoth, they said.  And its estimated weight was over 60 tons.  Sounds like the Behemoth God was bragging to Job about.  And I must ask, why would God be bragging about a myth?

 

TeeJay






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users