Dinosaurs In The Bible? - Interpreting Job 40-41
For many years young-earth creationists have pointed to the book
of Job, chapters 40-41, as evidence that dinosaurs lived
recently. In order to set the record straight, let's examine
this passage of scripture, and see what the possibilities are. I
may surprise a few old-earth creationists by my conclusions with
this one. First, let's read the portion of Job 40 that is in
question, in the King James Version. Job 40:15-24 - Behemoth 15
Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as
an ox. 16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is
in the navel of his belly. 17 He moveth his tail like a cedar:
the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. 18 His bones are
as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. 19
He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make
his sword to approach unto him. 20 Surely the mountains bring
him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. 21 He
lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and
fens. 22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the
willows of the brook compass him about. 23 Behold, he drinketh
up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up
Jordan into his mouth. 24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose
pierceth through snares. What are the possible interpretations
for this passage? There are two mainstream interpretations for
this passage (I will give two other possibilities later in the
article.) Interpretation #1 First, behemoth represents a
dinosaur. This is the view of the young-earth theorists. They
claim the "moveth his tail like a cedar" is referring to a
sauropod dinosaur (a "saurapod" is a plant-eating dinosaur, such
as Apatosaurus, Diplodicus, etc.) However, it is not without
problems.
I see three problems with this interpretation. First, while most
of the passage could be attributed to a sauropod, verse 23, in
which he "drinketh up a river", does not sound like a sauropod.
The New American Standard version states "If a river rages, he
is not alarmed; He is confident, though the Jordan rushes to his
mouth. Given the smallness of the sauropod's mouth, this is
unlikely.
The second problem with the sauropod interpretation is verse 21.
The KJV is good, but a more literal translation is better here.
The NASB says, "Under the lotus plants he lies down, The
willows(reeds) of the brook surround him." It is difficult to
imagine the Argentinosaurus, at 100 feet long, and a height of
70 feet when standing (sitting, probably 20 feet), resting under
the limbs of a lotus plant (or, tree), nor would he be able to
take cover in reeds only a few feet tall.
The last problem I see with this interpretation is verse 18. The
NASB says, "His bones are tubes of bronze, His limbs are like
bars of iron." No dinosaur has ever had metal bones.
However, these three problems don't prove conclusive enough to
claim that behemoth was not a dinosaur, so the possibility
remains that the sauropod interpretation is correct. With that
said, there is one final thought to ponder...since there is no
physical evidence (fossils) of dinosaurs that lived in the past
6,000 years, this interpretation cannot possibly be correct.1
Interpretation #2 Second, many modern scholars interpret
behemoth to be a hippopotamus. This appears to be the most
likely explanation. The hippo theory solves the problem with
verse 23, and drawing up the Jordan into his mouth. The gaping
mouth of the hippo provides adequate credence to this verse. And
in verse 21, the hippo can easily rest under shade trees, and
hide in the reeds. However, there are two problems with this
theory. First, back to verse 17 and the tail like a cedar...this
is not at all like the tail of a hippopotamus. Second, the same
problem exists with verse 18, and the bronze bones. This
interpretation is favored by the old earth progressive
creationist Dr. Hugh Ross, and by well-known Christian apologist
Gleason L. Archer.2 You can see from these two interpretations,
that neither of them is perfect. Before we give the other two
possibilities, lets look at leviathan (Job 41:1-34);
1 Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with
a cord which thou lettest down? 2 Canst thou put an hook into
his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn? 3 Will he make
many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto
thee? 4 Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him
for a servant for ever? 5 Wilt thou play with him as with a
bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens? 6 Shall the
companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the
merchants? 7 Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his
head with fish spears? 8 Lay thine hand upon him, remember the
battle, do no more. 9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall
not one be cast down even at the sight of him? 10 None is so
fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before
me? 11 Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him?
whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine. 12 I will not
conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion. 13
Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him
with his double bridle? 14 Who can open the doors of his face?
his teeth are terrible round about. 15 His scales are his pride,
shut up together as with a close seal. 16 One is so near to
another, that no air can come between them. 17 They are joined
one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be
sundered. 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.
22 In his neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy
before him. 23 The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they
are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved. 24 His heart is as
firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether
millstone. 25 When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid:
by reason of breakings they purify themselves. 26 The sword of
him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the
habergeon. 27 He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten
wood. 28 The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are turned
with him into stubble. 29 Darts are counted as stubble: he
laugheth at the shaking of a spear. 30 Sharp stones are under
him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire. 31 He
maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot
of ointment. 32 He maketh a path to shine after him; one would
think the deep to be hoary. 33 Upon earth there is not his like,
who is made without fear. 34 He beholdeth all high things: he is
a king over all the children of pride.
As before, there are two main theories concerning leviathan.
Interpretation #1 First, according to some young-earth
believers, leviathan is one of the sea dinosaurs. Ken Ham, in
his book The Answers Book, states that it may have been
something like Kronosaurus or Liopleurodon (Page 243). The
Institute for Creation Research calls Leviathan a dragon, and
equates it to other passages in Isaiah and Revelation.3
What are the problems with this interpretation? First, verses
19-21 describe leviathan as breathing fire like a dragon. There
are no known dinosaurs, sea-going or otherwise, that had the
ability to breathe fire. Using this interpretation, it is not
possible to take this passage literally. In addition, verse 31
says he makes the deep to boil like a pot. Is he so hot from
breathing fire that he evaporates the water around him??? No
dinosaurs had this capability. Interpretation #2 The second
theory, put forth by modern Bible scholars, is that leviathan
represents a crocodile. This belief is held by Gleason Archer,
in his book Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, and by Dr. Hugh
Ross of Reasons to Believe. Archer makes a good case for the
crocodile, however, using a literal translation, there is no
possibility that this interpretation is correct. I've never
seen, nor heard of, a fire-breathing crocodile. New Theories I
propose two possible theories concerning behemoth and leviathan.
New Theory #1 We have seen that the dinosaur interpretation has
problems. Nevertheless, Behemoth and Leviathan could represent
dinosaurs, just as the young-earth theorists believe. However,
there is no proof in the geologic record that man and dinosaurs
lived together. With that said, I believe it is possible that
God used the extinct dinosaur as an example for Job. He may have
shown him an image, or created one on the spot, or merely talked
about the dinosaur...nobody knows. One thing is for
certain...the conversation between God and Job was
one-way...with Job on the receiving end. Since he was receiving
this scolding, he would not have interrupted God and asked him
what a behemoth was. More than likely, he was trembling in fear,
merely listening to God speak.
It is not out of the question that God could have used a
pre-existing species as an example of his creative power. There
is no doubt that God created the dinosaurs. They are a great
testimony to his power, whether alive or dead. This option
sounds very good, considering that there is no proof of
dinosaurs living only 6,000 years ago. New Theory #2 Behemoth
and Leviathan represent angelic creations of God, on the same
level as the Seraphim and Cherubim. They were never intended to
live on earth, but merely served as God's example in this story.
As such, we have no clue what their role is in God's creation.
Given the impossible literal interpretation of leviathan, this
is an attractive theory. However, it is not without problems. In
Psalm 74, Leviathan was killed and given to the beasts of the
field for meat. You could not do this for an angelic being!
Conclusion I agree with Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis...there
simply isn't enough evidence to decide conclusively. However,
there is one certainty about Job 40-41...they are not dinosaurs
that lived 6,000 years ago. With the possibilities presented, I
leave it up to the reader to decide for themselves what the
correct answer is. We probably won't know for certain until we
get to heaven. What do I believe? I lean toward the dinosaur
theory. You may say, "How can Bible writers, such as David in
Psalm 74, write about a dinosaur if it lived 65 million years
ago?" This is simple. There were certainly dinosaur fossils
available in Bible times. They are in the rocks now, so they
must have been in the rocks then. David, and others, probably
saw these fossils, and wrote about them). This interpretation
does not harm the inerrancy of the Scriptures.
--- 1 Dinosaur Evidences for an Old Earth, Answers In Creation
website, http://www.answers
increation.org/poop.htm
2 Archer, Gleason, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, page
239-240
3 icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-241.htm