English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

"The Bible refers to many the common animals we know today. The list includes lions, wolves, bears, sheep, cattle and dogs along with various kinds of birds, rodents, reptiles, and insects. What is interesting is that this extensive list includes three animals that we no longer recognize. These three are (in the original Hebrew language) tanniyn, b@hemowth (yes, it’s spelled correctly—at least as close as we can get in Roman characters), and livyathan.

Although we alter the spelling of behemoth and Leviathan slightly, we still use those same words in bibles today. However, tanniyn is always translated into another word when we write it in English. Tanniyn occurs 28 times in the Bible and is normally translated “dragon.” It is also translated “serpent,” “sea monster,” “dinosaur,” “great creature,” and “reptile.” Behemoth and Leviathan are relatively specific creatures, perhaps each was a single kind of animal.

2007-07-29 16:40:43 · 22 answers · asked by lady_phoenix39 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Tanniyn is a more general term, and it can be thought of as the original version of the word “dinosaur.” The word “dinosaur” was originally coined in 1841, more than three thousand years after the Bible first referred to “Tanniyn.”


Behemoth has the following attributes according to Job 40:15-24"
It “eats grass like an ox.”
It “moves his tail like a cedar.” (In Hebrew, this literally reads, “he lets hang his tail like a cedar.”)
Its “bones are like beams of bronze,
His ribs like bars of iron.”

2007-07-29 16:43:09 · update #1

“He is the first of the ways of God.”
“He lies under the lotus trees,
In a covert of reeds and marsh.”
Some bibles and study bibles will translate the word “behemoth” as “elephant” or “hippopotamus.” Others will put a note at the edge or bottom of the page, stating that behemoth was probably an elephant or a hippopotamus. Although an elephant or hippopotamus can eat grass (or lie in a covert of reeds and marsh), neither an elephant or a hippopotamus has a “tail like a cedar” (that is, a tail like a large, tapered tree trunk).

2007-07-29 16:43:26 · update #2

We would expect behemoth to be a large land animal whose bones are like beams of bronze and so forth, so whatever a behemoth is, it is large. A key phrase is “He is the first of the ways of God.” This phrase in the original Hebrew implied that behemoth was the biggest animal created. Although an elephant or a hippopotamus are big, they are less than one-tenth the size of a Brachiosaurus, the largest (complete) dinosaur ever discovered.[1] A Brachiosaurus could therefore easily be described as “the first of the ways of God.”
----www.clarifyingchristianity...

2007-07-29 16:43:34 · update #3

22 answers

You are entirely correct. If you search the internet under dinosaurs and man or something similar you will see Egytptian Hieroglyphs with dinosaurs, Asian temples with dinosaur art, Babylonian art with dinosaurs. If Dinosaurs are in man's early art then obviously man has a living memory of them.

Also to put a question on the "fossil record" is the coelocanth. It was supposedly dead like 560 million years ago, but it still lives. They fish them off Zanzibar every now and then. They should have stayed burried in their layer of the fossil layer right, but if they never died out what's that say for the "fossil record"

2007-07-29 23:06:43 · answer #1 · answered by Meng-Tzu 4 · 1 2

No reason why it couldn't be a dinosaur; since the word "dinosaur" didn't exist until the 1800s, they had to call them something. I've also read a really interesting idea about why the dinosaurs appear to be so deep in the ground and look like they lived so long ago: who says the water from the great flood couldn't have somehow caused the dinosaur bones (and lots of other fossils) to go deeper in the ground, thus throwing off our ideas about what creatures lived at what times? They wouldn't just make up animals to put in the Bible, so it has to be some other actual creature, if not dinosaurs.

2007-07-29 17:05:55 · answer #2 · answered by Lycanthrope777 5 · 2 1

In the manuscripts from which the KJV was translated, the verses make references to the behemoth's loins, thighs, and genitalia. The phrase, "his tail sways like a cedar" is not a reference to his tail, but is a poetic euphemism describing the erect penis. Also, the animal seems to be semi-aquatic and it eats grass; sauropods were land animals that existed before the grasses evolved, and whose teeth would not have been capable of eating grass. Thus, the behemoth is most likely a hippopotamus. Given the poetic nature of the passages, though, it could also be a wild bull, or any large male animal in the rutting season. The idea here is that, if even this highly virile, strong, and dangerous animal is under God's divine control, why should humans question God's control in their own lives?

It is too bad that the literalists are so blinded by their own dogma that they cannot read the poetry for what it is, but must evoke absurd notions of dinosaurs coexisting with humans. If they would learn to understand the texts in the context of the culture and religion in which they were written, they would not have so many problems figuring it out.

2007-07-29 17:04:35 · answer #3 · answered by Antique Silver Buttons 5 · 0 5

In the Black Hills (ND) the bones of ancient creatures are readily seen. The natives called them "Thunder Lizards".

Because these creatures are mentioned in the bible ("Behemoth" may have refered to elephants), does not mean that they were alive. For instance, the people of our day will "consume" the body of Leviathan. This suggests that Leviathan's body may be oil deposits. Really big deal in the Middle East right now, eh?

2007-07-29 16:46:16 · answer #4 · answered by Shinigami 7 · 1 1

no, it doesn't. There were, as you probably know, many different kinds of dinosaur. Many dinosaurs were the size of humans or smaller. The bible describes mythical animals that had scales and breathed fire and individually drank whole rivers. These are all much closer to mythical depictions of dragons than they are to dinosaurs.

2007-07-29 16:46:12 · answer #5 · answered by thatguyjoe 5 · 1 2

No. Dinosaurs were part of the Void that existed before The Beginning.

2007-07-29 20:33:47 · answer #6 · answered by Uncle MythMan 3 · 0 3

That's an elephant. The tail is the trunk (or another appendage).

"Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth."
That sounds like en elephant drinking with his trunk

"He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares."
That's how an elephant goes through the jungle.

2007-07-29 16:52:01 · answer #7 · answered by novangelis 7 · 2 2

Nope. The dinosaurs mostly died out about 65 million years ago. Whatever the authors of the bible were referring to, it wasn't dinosaurs.

2007-07-29 16:51:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

Yes, that does answer the question about God and dinosaurs. Have a star.

2007-07-29 16:45:34 · answer #9 · answered by January Love 4 · 2 2

ok science dates back that the only animals that lived in the same time piriod are snakes crocks/gators lizards amphibions fish and early birds. my question is how the he!l dose humankind exist eons before the first primate?

2007-07-29 16:48:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers