40:21 states that it lies under the lotus tree, is concealed by reeds, and lies in swamps. Verse 23 adds that it lives in a raging river. Both conditions are physically impossible for a sauropod dinosaur. Note that in verse 17 it's the actions of its tail that are compared to a cedar, not that it looked like a cedar, otherwise its long neck would look like a tree too, but no mention is made of that.
Plus, verse 19 indicates that it has a "sword," understood to be tusks. The NET Bible in its footnote states: “The sword is apparently a reference to the teeth or tusks of the animal, which cut vegetation like a sword. But the idea of a weapon is easier to see ... The [Revised Standard Version] probably has the safest: ‘He that made him has furnished him with his sword’ (the sword being a reference to the sharp tusks with which he can attack).” It must be noted that sauropods do not have tusks, but the hippopotamus does have two dangerous tusks that can penetrate crocodile hide. Likewise, the hippopotamus uses its tail for a variety of important functions, thus it acts as a strong and stiff appendage.
Thus, considering all the verses that exclude a dinosaur identification, is it only verse 17 that dinosaur-proponents use?
Related point:
Have dinosaur and man footprints been found together? Creationists say no:
"In 1986 a number of leading creationist researchers decided that the evidence of supposedly human and dinosaur footprints, found together at the Paluxy River in Texas, had *serious problems*. They decided that, pending further research to establish the correct interpretation of the prints, they could *no longer be safely used as evidence* ... that man and dinosaur lived at the same time."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v25/n2/magic-bullet
Select responses to an interlocutor:
It's not necessarily about one's worldview, but about reading comprehension and honesty. The habitat of both Behemoth and Leviathan is described as being associated with water, so they cannot be dinosaurs since dinosaurs were primarily terrestrial. Some could have visited watery places, but they could not have lived there like Behemoth and Leviathan. About Job 40:17: You're evidently confusing "looking like" with "acting like." Being stiff like a cedar matches a hippo tail just fine. Like I said, it's not about worldview but about reading comprehension. Also, animal death and human death are different per Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 and Psalm 49:12. Since man has fallen into sin and death, he is now at the same level as the beast.
I am not arguing semantics. I am arguing for accuracy. Dinosaurs do not match the descriptions in Job 40-41. 40:23 certainly does show that Behemoth withstood rushing rivers. Otherwise, it could have said anything no matter how unrelated. And I have a professional library on paleontology, so your quote there is either outdated or from an inaccurate source. The quote from Faussett, Jamieson, Fausset & Brown is reading way too much into a simple verse. Again, it's not about worldviews, but about responsible reading comprehension.
(I had another response, but Yahoo! deleted it when it switched over to a new format. It went something like this:)
About Mokele-mbembe, I noticed that in 2006 National Geographic had an expedition that failed to find it. I believe it remains elusive.
Thanks for posting that website. It appears to answer my question that the sauropod identification is based solely on Job 40:17. Also, concerning Leviathan, it compares the description of pyrotechnics in Job 41:18-21 with a bombardier beetle that sprays a high-temperature jet of gas out of its hind end. Problem: the Leviathan's pyrotechnics come from its head, not behind. Wrong end!
============================
Let me include the entire discussion log. At the time of me originally posting this, it appeared to be truncated as I commented on above, but it is all included now:
Update:
@ Donald: Hi there! Even a child can see that sauropods do not have horns or tusks.
@ Robert: Hi there! You're playing fast-and-loose with those definitions.
Update 2:
@ I worship Jehovah: Hi there! Actually the crocodile has been identified as Leviathan. Since we're on that subject, the Leviathan spends time in the water per 41:31-32, thus also not a dinosaur to educated people.
Update 3:
@ Donald again: ironically, what's "patently absurd" is that definition which ignores the entire description of Behemoth. Very dishonest and sensational in fact.
Update 4:
@ Alex de Alex: Hi there! It's not necessarily about one's worldview, but about reading comprehension and honesty. The habitat of both Behemoth and Leviathan is described as being associated with water, so they cannot be dinosaurs since dinosaurs were primarily terrestrial. Some could have visited watery places, but they could not have lived there like Behemoth and Leviathan. About Job 40:17: You're evidently confusing "looking like" with "acting like." Being stiff like a cedar matches a hippo tail just fine. Like I said, it's not about worldview but about reading comprehension. Also, animal death and human death are different per Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 and Psalm 49:12. Since man has fallen into sin and death, he is now at the same level as the beast.
@ a Real Truthseeker: Looks like your answer is a blind cut-and-paste job that has nothing to do with seeking truth. Step one in truth seeking is READING.
Update 5:
@ Alex de Alex again: I am not arguing semantics. I am arguing for accuracy. Dinosaurs do not match the descriptions in Job 40-41. 40:23 certainly does show that Behemoth withstood rushing rivers. Otherwise, it could have said anything no matter how unrelated. And I have a professional library on paleontology, so your quote there is either outdated or from an inaccurate source. The quote from Faussett, Jamieson, Fausset & Brown is reading way too much into a simple verse. Again, its not about worldviews, but about responsible reading comprehension.
Update 6:
You're welcome Alex, and thank you for the dialog. About Mokele-mbembe, its identification remains elusive, so it really cannot be called a sauropod. Wikipedia has a nice summary too. It says that in May 2006, National Geographic tried to find it, but failed. The "Dinosaurs and the Bible" site answers my question, that the dinosaur identification is based solely on verse 17, and a misreading of it at that, and dismissing the other the verses that exclude a dinosaur identification. (Dismissing verses in God's word!) It says it was brachiosaurus, yet it is known that it did not have tusks or horns and it is much too large to have found shade under the lotus tree. Good reading comprehension would have saved them from that egregious blunder.
Update 7:
(As an aside, that site, like other YECs, identifies Leviathan with Kronosaurus, not a dinosaur but an aquatic pliosaur. The pyrotechnics in Job 41:18-21 are hyperboles like elsewhere in Job's descriptions [see how the horse is described with exaggerations in Job 39:20, 22, 24]. But the site compares these pyrotechnics to the bombardier beetle's. One problem with this: The beetle is specifically designed to dispense with its noxious chemical spray in a rapid burst of pulses from special glands in its abdomen, not in its mouth. Wrong end. Thus, Leviathan's pyrotechnics are hyperbolic for the fear of death it gives its observer. Their exegesis is thus seen to be cartoonish.)
LINK
See also:
- Identifying Behemoth www.jimspace.000space.com/YEC/EB.htm
