Zoology and Job 40: Review and critique of the arguments for Behemoth as a dinosaur
Job 40:15-24 describes a monstrous creature named Behemoth, whom ancient Jewish literature treats as a supernatural monster. In contrast, much literature of the thirteenth century and later applies a zoological approach, interpreting Behemoth as a species of animal, usually the hippopotamus in publi...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Paternoster Press
2024
|
| In: |
Science & Christian belief
Year: 2024, Volume: 36, Issue: 1, Pages: 31-62 |
| Further subjects: | B
Argument
B sauropod B Iguanodon B ANCIENT literature B Zoology B DINOSAURS B Behemoth B Old Testament B hippopotamus B Occupation B Jewish literature B Creationism B Leviathan B OLD Testament B dinosaur B zoology |
| Summary: | Job 40:15-24 describes a monstrous creature named Behemoth, whom ancient Jewish literature treats as a supernatural monster. In contrast, much literature of the thirteenth century and later applies a zoological approach, interpreting Behemoth as a species of animal, usually the hippopotamus in publications from 1663 onward. Since 1974, numerous advocates of the zoological approach have reinterpreted Behemoth as a dinosaur, usually a sauropod. Arguments for Behemoth as a sauropod include allegations that Job 40 describes an animal that is herbivorous, aquatic, docile, and indomitable; drinks large amounts of water; has strong bones, strong hips, a bulbous midsection, tight sinews, and a cedar-like tail; and is the largest land animal that God made. Here, I investigate the relative popularity and temporal duration of each such argument and determine which such arguments are based on sound interpretations of the Hebrew text. This investigation reveals that no argument for Behemoth as a dinosaur survives scrutiny. Several, notably including the argument that Behemoth’s tail is like a cedar, are based on misinterpretations of the Hebrew text. In contrast, all parts of the Hebrew text are consistent with the interpretation of Behemoth as a primordial, supernatural monster. |
|---|---|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Science & Christian belief
|