|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 10:53:13 GMT
We can discount dinosaur or dragon as too silly. Rhinos don't really eat grass... Hippos, elephants, and water buffalo do. We're talking something that spends a lot of time in water... Hippos, elephants, and water buffalo again. Reference to lotuses lead us towards India/Asia. Hippos went locally extinct in India during the Pleistocene mega-fauna mass extinction, best guess about 17,000 BP. Which would, by a process of elimination, take us to an Indian elephant đ or a water buffalo đ QED Job didn't live in India. Lotus is found in more places than that.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 11:00:46 GMT
A rhinoceros. Or a hippopotamus. 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.ââJob 40:15-24 (KJV) The description sounds like a rhino, but itâs habitat is more like a hippoâs. Some of the descriptions cannot be made to fit a rhino or hippo. For example the bit about him âmoving his tail like a cedarâ. Rhinos and hippos have small tails. The text also indicates that no men were able to capture it, yet we have evidence of ancient Egyptians hunting down and slaying hippos. Elephants and rhinos also wouldnât be too difficult to take down by hunter gatherers with a spear you would think. The description of the cedar would not need to indicate the size of the tail, but the strength, power, or even girth. After all, the didn't use cedar to build stuff on the basis of its size. It would be interesting to see a man try to catch a hippo without help. Men can build any weapon to kill any animal
|
|
|
Post by Codyâą on Oct 16, 2019 11:01:38 GMT
Well the German translation is in error. Itâs also unlikely to be an elephant. They have small tails and are not that difficult to hunt down and slay. Maybe whoever wrote or translated the book of Job mixed up tail and trunk. I wouldn't put it past Bible authors or translators to be a bit challenged when it comes to natural sciences. Also maybe they really sucked at hunting. LOL
|
|
|
Post by Codyâą on Oct 16, 2019 11:20:11 GMT
Some of the descriptions cannot be made to fit a rhino or hippo. For example the bit about him âmoving his tail like a cedarâ. Rhinos and hippos have small tails. The text also indicates that no men were able to capture it, yet we have evidence of ancient Egyptians hunting down and slaying hippos. Elephants and rhinos also wouldnât be too difficult to take down by hunter gatherers with a spear you would think. The description of the cedar would not need to indicate the size of the tail, but the strength, power, or even girth. After all, the didn't use cedar to build stuff on the basis of its size. It would be interesting to see a man try to catch a hippo without help. Men can build any weapon to kill any animal âThe description of the cedar would not need to indicate the size of the tail, but the strength, power, or even girth.â Which again wouldnât fit the description of a rhino, hippo or an elephant. ââMen can build any weapon to kill any animalââ Do you think men of that time would have had the weaponry to take down a brontosaurus?
|
|
|
Post by Codyâą on Oct 16, 2019 12:40:35 GMT
Some of the descriptions cannot be made to fit a rhino or hippo. For example the bit about him âmoving his tail like a cedarâ. Rhinos and hippos have small tails. The text also indicates that no men were able to capture it, yet we have evidence of ancient Egyptians hunting down and slaying hippos. Elephants and rhinos also wouldnât be too difficult to take down by hunter gatherers with a spear you would think. Whatever....but itâs not a dinosaur. LOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2019 12:59:17 GMT
Of course, being an allegorical poem, the behemoth could just as likely be an imaginary creature, used to make a point.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 13:04:14 GMT
The description of the cedar would not need to indicate the size of the tail, but the strength, power, or even girth. After all, the didn't use cedar to build stuff on the basis of its size. It would be interesting to see a man try to catch a hippo without help. Men can build any weapon to kill any animal âThe description of the cedar would not need to indicate the size of the tail, but the strength, power, or even girth.â Which again wouldnât fit the description of a rhino, hippo or an elephant.  ââMen can build any weapon to kill any animalââ Do you think men of that time would have had the weaponry to take down a brontosaurus? I would argue a hippos tail is far stronger than an elephants. The scripture doesnât talk about weapons at all. Are you thinking itâs a dinosaur?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 13:04:50 GMT
Of course, being an allegorical poem, the behemoth could just as likely be an imaginary creature, used to make a point. Probably not since it would need to be something that made sense to Job. Otherwise an example is pointless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2019 13:06:45 GMT
Of course, being an allegorical poem, the behemoth could just as likely be an imaginary creature, used to make a point. Probably not since it would need to be something that made sense to Job. Otherwise an example is pointless. I disagree. Dragons are used and described in allegorical stories and poems... Nobody has ever seen one, they are fantasy creatures that don't exist.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Oct 16, 2019 13:33:26 GMT
According to Georgio Tsoukalos, it is an Extra Terrestrial.
|
|
|
Post by Codyâą on Oct 16, 2019 13:39:03 GMT
âThe description of the cedar would not need to indicate the size of the tail, but the strength, power, or even girth.â Which again wouldnât fit the description of a rhino, hippo or an elephant.  ââMen can build any weapon to kill any animalââ Do you think men of that time would have had the weaponry to take down a brontosaurus? I would argue a hippos tail is far stronger than an elephants. The scripture doesnât talk about weapons at all. Are you thinking itâs a dinosaur? ââAre you thinking itâs a dinosaur?ââ The description does seem to fit best with a dinosaur. Another clue is in verse 19 where it describes this Behemoth as âchief of the ways of Godâsâ. Chief would indicate the size of the creature. Obviously there are animals that exist far larger than Hippos, Elephants and Rhinos.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2019 13:47:44 GMT
I would argue a hippos tail is far stronger than an elephants. The scripture doesnât talk about weapons at all. Are you thinking itâs a dinosaur? ââAre you thinking itâs a dinosaur?ââ The description does seem to fit best with a dinosaur. Another clue is in verse 19 where it describes this Behemoth as âchief of the ways of Godâsâ. Chief would indicate the size of the creature. Obviously there are animals that exist far larger than Hippos, Elephants and Rhinos. Chief of the ways of God does not indicate size at all. Dinosaurs roaming the Jordan Valley it was then đ€Š Do me a favour, you can't be that ignorant really, can you đ€·ââïž
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 13:52:25 GMT
I would argue a hippos tail is far stronger than an elephants. The scripture doesnât talk about weapons at all. Are you thinking itâs a dinosaur? ââAre you thinking itâs a dinosaur?ââ The description does seem to fit best with a dinosaur. Another clue is in verse 19 where it describes this Behemoth as âchief of the ways of Godâsâ. Chief would indicate the size of the creature. Obviously there are animals that exist far larger than Hippos, Elephants and Rhinos. the notion of what is first would be in relation to who he is talking to. If Job came across a hippo, why would he not be impressed? Why would dinosaurs become extinct around the same time the Israelites were in Egypt?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 13:56:41 GMT
Probably not since it would need to be something that made sense to Job. Otherwise an example is pointless. I disagree. Dragons are used and described in allegorical stories and poems... Nobody has ever seen one, they are fantasy creatures that don't exist. the story is presented as Job being real not an allegory. It would make little sense for the story to switch from realism to fantasy without an explanation as to why. God is talking to Job about something Job would understand as well as the ones reading the account. So it may not have been a hippos since we are only going off what we would know by the description, but the description can easily fit the description of a hippo or perhaps an animal similar to it that is now extinct. If it is describing a dragon then it was based on a real vegetarian dragon which has not been found yet.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Oct 16, 2019 13:59:33 GMT
Maybe Job went insane temporarily after God allowed Satan to screw his life including killing his kids and started having paranoid delusions?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 14:02:56 GMT
Maybe Job went insane temporarily after God allowed Satan to screw his life including killing his kids and started having paranoid delusions? His companions would have to become insane too unless he imagined them as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2019 14:07:19 GMT
Maybe Job went insane temporarily after God allowed Satan to screw his life including killing his kids and started having paranoid delusions? His companions would have to become insane too unless he imagined them as well. It's an allegorical poem, the purpose of which is to say that satan can only do what he does because God gives him permission to. Everything about it, including Job himself, are most likely made up. When Jesus tells the parable of the Good Samaritan, whether or not it actually happened is a moot point. It doesn't matter, it's what you take away from the story that matters.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGSâș on Oct 16, 2019 15:17:16 GMT
His companions would have to become insane too unless he imagined them as well. It's an allegorical poem, the purpose of which is to say that satan can only do what he does because God gives him permission to. Everything about it, including Job himself, are most likely made up. When Jesus tells the parable of the Good Samaritan, whether or not it actually happened is a moot point. It doesn't matter, it's what you take away from the story that matters. [I understand that you think itâs an allegorical poem. Thatâs totally irrelevant to what the writer and intended audience viewed. You are basically pretending that the writer doesnât believe in God which there is no basis to believe. Then you think that a story told quite literally will all of a sudden throw a fantasy creature into it. Why would it do that? The parable of the Good Samaritan was always just that- a parable. Scripture almost always tells you intent and whether the story should be viewed as fictional or not. It would not matter at all if you view it as all fiction or not. The story wasnât meant for you.
|
|
fatpaul
Sophomore
@fatpaul
Posts: 502
Likes: 193
|
Post by fatpaul on Oct 16, 2019 17:28:19 GMT
Just as God is the personification of order and creation, the behemoth and the leviathan are the personification of chaos and destruction but moreover, God himself created these creatures, i.e., created chaos and destruction as well as order and creation. Basically God is saying to Job that if he thinks what he's going thru is chaotic and destructive then he should have been around while He was creating such things to truly understand the nature of chaos and destruction.
However, God uses the descriptive of powerful creatures to convey a sense of the power of this chaos and destruction because to do otherwise would be lost on any human, even psychologically harmful. It's God and God alone who can handle such revelations so He isn't being a condescending dick but protecting Job from such ideas which Job realises and accepts, unlike his interlocutors who have misrepresented God and need to atone for such matters.
Even though I'm an atheist, and so sceptical on many of the biblical stories, I love the story of Job. The interpretation that it talks about dinosaurs and man living at the same time, so as to refute evolution, is absolutely ridiculous and totally misses the point by a country mile. The beauty of Job's story is that it's an essay on the universal pessimistic view of suffering. If I could sum it up in one sentence it would be: ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do and die.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Oct 16, 2019 23:00:23 GMT
I can't believe that there is going on three pages of speculation on what real life animal is represented by a mythical allegorical tale, in a book written in the first century AD noted for its allegorical tales.
|
|