Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible Cryptids/Dinosaurs?
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 72 of 202 (296912)
03-20-2006 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by LudoRephaim
03-20-2006 6:13 PM


Re: stones
BTW: I do know that "answersingenesis" website has an indepth article about the "tail" and "thigh" passage of Job 40, but since this is a young Earth site, and can go to extremes to prove a young Earth Biblically and scientifically, I am iffy on whether to post it or not. If you would like to see it, then i'll post a link. But THat particular website, although strong in it's standing on Genesis, is just not a super strong source to use for a debate here, if you catch my drift. Plus they are resentful of Old-Earthers like myself.
i've gotten in trouble for saying this before in a debate, because people read it as an ad hominem. but through experience i have found that aig is not a very reputable source, scientifically OR biblically.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-20-2006 6:13 PM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-20-2006 6:35 PM arachnophilia has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 75 of 202 (296915)
03-20-2006 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by LudoRephaim
03-20-2006 6:20 PM


Re: on the other hand....
If Behemoth was a mythologicalized dino based on dino fossils, then it seems to add greater weight to the idea that the "tail" and "thighs" mentioned in Job 40 where to be taken literally. A dinoraur's leg bones and tail bones can be fossilized, but their genetalia would not be fossilized, and therefore when the ancients saw the fossil skeleton of a dinosaur and it's leg bones and tail, they would more likely make up a mythological beast that included huge legs and a massive tail. Unless they mistook a femur for the fallice.
not neccessarily. ground dinosaur bones are still considered an aphrodesiac in china. and there's no gaurantee that they'd reconstruct the animal the right way. look at the origin of the cyclops...
Plus, God seems to be describing an animal that he himself made, not something of the human imagination based on fossils, and the animal seems to be something that Job new about.
did job know about leviathan?
behemoth doesn't seem overly mythicized, though, no. though you do have to remember of course that this is a science forum. and there's no gaurantee here (even in the bible forums) that god is indeed the author of the words attributed to him in the bible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-20-2006 6:20 PM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-20-2006 6:47 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 83 of 202 (296958)
03-20-2006 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by LudoRephaim
03-20-2006 6:47 PM


Re: on the other hand....
It seems to me like it is just another unknown animal like behemoth. The fact that it is named after the supernatural beast called "Leviathan" doesn't make it supernatural, anymore than the name "Tasmanian Devil" makes that animal a true demon,
well, as i pointed, livyatanim are indeed very real animals: they are large blubbery mammals that live in the ocean. in english, we call them "whales." livyatan is the modern hebrew word for whale.
but job is NOT describing a whale, is it? whales don't have scales. they don't breath fire (in ANY manner of speaking). the only real similarity is that they're darned hard to catch with fishhooks.
or the "Gorgon" a huge Protomammal carnivore that lived before the dinosaurs is a demon or mythical monster because it is named "gorgon" (also galled "Gorgonopsian)
but surely you realize that this gorgon is named for these gorgons, not the other way around?
Leviathan in this passage (Job 41)is probably called as such because it reminded the ancients of the supernatural monster that bared the name in question,
the difference here is that the REAL livyatanim, the whales, are called as such because they remind people of the mythological creature -- the one in job 41, and genesis 1. you've mixed up which one is real, and which one is the myth.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-20-2006 6:47 PM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-21-2006 6:24 PM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 87 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-21-2006 6:37 PM arachnophilia has not replied
 Message 88 by MangyTiger, posted 03-21-2006 7:48 PM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 91 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-21-2006 10:33 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 84 of 202 (296959)
03-20-2006 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by LudoRephaim
03-20-2006 7:01 PM


I had the idea once that the Leviathan here was in fact the monsterous "Liopleurodon" the 80 foot long 150 ton carnivorous sea reptile that lived in the Jurassic. But I dont think it could have survived up to the present, let alone if it had the same self defense mechanism as Leviathan does ("fire")
Good idea for a time, but it seems more likely that the "Leviathan" was some sort of crypto animal.
well, it an other similar aquatic reptiles DO fit the description in job rather well. it's certainly similar to the image a lot of people had in mind regarding whales in the past. i'm serious, too. there's a thread a while back where i posted some picture of interpretations of "jonah and the whale" that looked rather similar -- even as late as the renaissance.
but i think it's largely a coincidence. especially when we take into consideration the role leviathan plays elsewhere in the bible, and its relation to other ancient dragons in other cultures: lothan and tiamat.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-20-2006 7:01 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 85 of 202 (296960)
03-20-2006 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by LudoRephaim
03-20-2006 9:06 PM


Re: on the other hand....
BTW: Since your wife is a biologist, maybe you can answer this: Do testicles have sinews? That would be helpful with the thigh/stones part of this debate.
i doubt it matters, really. in depth biologically knowledge was is pretty new. we don't really get that until galen, and then it's lost again until about leonardo. and it's just a turn of phrase.
but more importantly, it's quibbling about semantics. clearly the verse is t alking about strength and sexual prowess/virility.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-20-2006 9:06 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 90 of 202 (297158)
03-21-2006 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by MangyTiger
03-21-2006 7:48 PM


Re: on the other hand....
Indeed not but they do blow large water spouts which could (at a bit of a stretch, or more to the point from a distance) be mistaken for steam or smoke - and we know there's no smoke without fire...
P.S. I assume the ANY was to head off this very point - but I thought it was worth mentioning in passing anyway.
that might be a good point... but the point i'm trying to make, to rephrase, is that leviathan is NOT a whale, even it is based on a whale. it's not a giant squid, even if it's based on a giant squid. it's a monster, and mythological, like the kraken, or like scylla in homer.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by MangyTiger, posted 03-21-2006 7:48 PM MangyTiger has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 92 of 202 (297161)
03-21-2006 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by LudoRephaim
03-21-2006 6:24 PM


Re: on the other hand....
I fail to see your point. Whales are named "Leviathan" in modern hebrew, yet any large animal of the prehistoric world and modern times can be called "Leviathan" do to it's size. Giant Squid? Leviathan! Whale Shark? Leviathan! Liopleurodon? Leviathan! If a massive sea reptile like Kronosaurus or Liopleurodon where around today in abundance, the they, not whales, might have been called "Leviathan" in modern hebrew. Usually anything massive and huge in the sea can and has been called "Leviathan". Just becuase whales are called as such in modern hebrew ultimately proves that the Leviathan of Job 41 is mythical?
well, that IS my point. the leviathan described is NOT a whale. it could be anything -- and that's the point. it's not a real animal at all. the whale is the real animal. the giant squid is a real animal two. leviathan is neither of these things -- he plays a mythicized role in the hebrew tradition. not just job, but elsewhere in the bible too.
look at the description of satan in revelation, the "great red dragon" with seven heads and ten horns. that "ancient serpent" is partially calling on the image of leviathan. is he a real animal?
So what if whales are named after Leviathan in modern hebrew? It doesn't automatically make the "Leviathan" of Job 41 mythical.
no, but fire-breathing dragons are. and leviathan is a fire breathing dragon, not a whale. the point is that it is not describing the very real animal we associate with the name "leviathan" but that it is describing something wholely different. it's not talking about a mosasaur or a kronosaur, either. it's talking about something more similar to lothan and tiamat. it's talking about a fire-breathing, serpentine, dragon that is highly associated with the chaos outside and before creation. that's the role leviathan and his relations play in other semitic cultures.
The scales? Crocs and snakes have scales, and they are not mythical.
they're also not whales.
"Fire" ? this is probably as I have said before, a self denfense mechanism. Bombarder Beetles shoot out super hot liquid from their abdomens. Fireflies generate light in their rears. The electric eel can generate electricity. Yet Leviathan in this passage has to be mythical becuase it emits "fire" which is more than likely something which resembled fire to the ancients?
his breath lights coals. smokes comes out of his nose. firebrands and sparks stream from his mouth. his sneezes make lightning.
i'm going to make another post out of this, i think. because if you look at this in comparison to the other animals in the last section of job, it's quite different.
If this was the supernatural Leviathan, the one with many heads (as Litan of Ugaritic legend and the "Leviathan" of Psalm 74:14) why does the "Leviathan of Job 41 have only one tongue, one nose, one jaw (Job 41:1-2)That does not sound like a multi-headed beast of myth/supernatural like That of Psalm 74:14 and Isaiah 27:1.
so are you saying that the leviathan of job is not related to the other mentions of leviathan elsewhere in the bible?
As for the Gorgons: Yes, I knew that the Protomammal "Gorgon" was named after the "Gorgons" of greek myth. That was the point I was making. If the Protomammal "Gorgon" was named after the "Gorgons" of Greek myth becuase it was horrendous and terrifying in appearance, then the "Leviathan" of Job 41 was most likely named after the supernatural "Leviathan" due to it's ferocity and formidability.
right, but you're still losing perspective here. the leviathan of the bible is the myth, and the livyatan (whale) of modern hebrew is the real animal that is named after it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-21-2006 6:24 PM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-22-2006 8:54 AM arachnophilia has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 93 of 202 (297163)
03-21-2006 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by LudoRephaim
03-21-2006 10:33 PM


Re: on the other hand....
BTW: You say that the modern hebrew word for "Leviathan" is for "whale" but what whale? What species? It seems that all whales are under the modern hebrew "Leviathan"
what species do you mean when you say "whale?"
it just means whale. they probably append adjectives to it to differentiate what kind of whale, much like we do: "gray whale" "balean whale" "blue whale" etc.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-21-2006 10:33 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 99 of 202 (297644)
03-23-2006 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by ringo
03-23-2006 10:32 AM


Re: on the other hand....
The fire-breathing ought to be your first clue.
what's even more curious to me is the crossover of this thread and another: leviathan, a fire breathing dragon, is a real animal. but snake has to be supernatural because it talks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by ringo, posted 03-23-2006 10:32 AM ringo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-24-2006 6:11 PM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 102 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-24-2006 6:14 PM arachnophilia has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 112 of 202 (297980)
03-24-2006 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by LudoRephaim
03-24-2006 6:11 PM


Re: on the other hand....
As for your "snake" comment:
There is a tale of a talking Donkey in Numbers 22:22-35. In this passage, the Donkey is given the ability to talk by God himself. This animal is not a supernautral spirit, just an animal that was divinly gifted with human speech
that's what i said!
(wonder if he knew Shrek....)
heh, good one.
The Serpent could no doubt have been supernaturally gifted with speech, though it was not likely from God (i'm thinking Satan possibly)This is not to be a scienftific discussion when dealing with the talking serpent. Just a theological one. But you are right that the serpent is seen as nothing more than a snake in the text.
one pseudepgiraphical work agrees with that position, that satan grants the snake the ability to speak. see the other thread (serpent in genesis and revelation) for more.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-24-2006 6:11 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 122 of 202 (298468)
03-26-2006 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by ringo
03-26-2006 10:52 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
As far as I know, arachnophilia and crashfrog would both agree that Leviathan is a mythical beast.
i would say that it's mythological, yes.
but let me give the "figurative language" idea a little thought, though. it does seem to be figurative for fire-breathing... but i'll see if i can dig anything else up.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by ringo, posted 03-26-2006 10:52 PM ringo has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 129 of 202 (298832)
03-27-2006 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by LudoRephaim
03-27-2006 8:33 AM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Crashfrog and Arachnophilia do believe that Leviathan is mythical, but my point is they actually posted sources that are reliable.
no i didn't. i'm far too lazy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-27-2006 8:33 AM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-31-2006 7:01 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 134 of 202 (299999)
04-01-2006 5:11 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by LudoRephaim
03-31-2006 7:01 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Arach, dont think that for a minute. Your one of the toughest dudes I've debated on here
well, thank you. but i think i was pointing out a something that is technically accurate -- i don't think i HAVE posted any sources (other than the occasional passage of the original text).
i find the external sources to be subjective (someone's interpretation) or inaccurate, or sometimes not even fitting the text very well. posting something from the talmud, for instance, is only useful for demonstrating what a certain rabbi thought something meant.
in an instance like this, the only useful sources are the ones that compare ancient literature, linguistic origins and cognates, and make observations that are clearly and obviously in agreement with the text -- and i am too lazy to go find some of those.
but i'm kind of taking a back seat right now, see what you and ringo come up with. you've pointed out a thing or two that goes against one of my readings, so i'm left without an opinion at this time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-31-2006 7:01 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 135 of 202 (300001)
04-01-2006 5:19 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by ringo
03-31-2006 7:34 PM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
No no no no wait wait wait wait. Nobody said the fire-breathing is literal.
i'm pretty sure i was. the book of job goes about saying "fire breathing" in a very figurative sounding way. but "his breath kindles coals" is figurative for "fire breathing." i don't suspect it's a metaphor, on top of the figurative language.
but i don't have an especially good argument for this right now. i'll wait to see what you guys come up with.
See, the problem is that you're ignoring the whole point of the story.
God says to Job, "Look at the Leviathan. You can't catch him with a fish hook or a spear. You can't harness him. You can't control him in any way, and how much more powerful than that is God? Who are you to question God?"
Now, if Leviathan was a croc, Job's reaction would have been, "Give me enough guys and enough weapons and I'll turn your croc into shoes and purses."
It only takes three guys with spears and ropes to kill a croc. If Leviathan was a croc it would make the whole story a joke.
[...]
It can not be any literal animal because God tells Job that men can not kill it.
this is a good observation.
i'd also like to point out leviathan is associated with the SEA, not just a river or watering hole. you don't go fishing for crocodiles. and as i mentioned before, leviathan is the modern hebrew word for "whale." it's something big, that lives in the water.
but i don't think it's a good enough reason to go reading prehistoric reptiles into it, either.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by ringo, posted 03-31-2006 7:34 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by ringo, posted 04-01-2006 10:11 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 137 of 202 (300094)
04-01-2006 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by ringo
04-01-2006 10:11 AM


Re: Why does it have to be real?
Hmmm.... Here's me thinking that a non-literal beast can not breathe literal fire.
I'm not suggesting that there's a metaphor "on top of the figurative language". I'm saying that if Leviathan is not literal, then the description of him is automatically not literal, regardless of how literal the language used to describe him.
don't confuse "literal" with "real." leviathan may not be a real animal, but parts of the description can be literal.
It sounds like there is only one Leviathan - no Mrs. Leviathan, no Leviathan Jr. (heir to the throne), no baby Leviathans, no Leviathan eggs....
tradition has it that leviathan is pissed because god killed mrs. leviathan at the beginning of the world.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by ringo, posted 04-01-2006 10:11 AM ringo has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024