Unveiling the Mystery: Behemoth - A Dinosaur in Biblical Times?

Could Behemoth Have Been a Dinosaur?

The question of whether Behemoth could have been a dinosaur is an intriguing one that has sparked much debate among scholars. In order to address this question, we must carefully examine the biblical passage in which Behemoth is mentioned and consider the various proposals put forth by commentators throughout history. By analyzing the key clause in Job 40:17a and considering the characteristics of the proposed animals, we can arrive at a reasonable conclusion.

Key Question 1: Who or What is Behemoth?

The term "Behemoth" is derived from a common Old Testament word meaning "beast." However, most commentators and translators agree that in this context, it refers to a colossal or majestic beast. The description of Behemoth as the "chief of the ways of God" suggests that it was one of the largest creatures created by God.

Key Question 2: What are the Proposed Candidates for Behemoth?

Three main candidates have been proposed for Behemoth: the elephant, the hippopotamus, and some type of dinosaur. The interpretation that Behemoth was an elephant was common among medieval scholars, while the suggestion that it was a hippopotamus has remained the most widely accepted interpretation. The idea that Behemoth could be a dinosaur has only emerged in more recent times.

Key Question 3: Can Behemoth be Interpreted as a Mythological Creature?

Many commentators have dismissed the idea that Behemoth is a mythological creature. The First Speech of the Lord in Job deals with flesh-and-blood animals, and important conclusions are drawn regarding the nature of the world and man's place in it based on their existence. The descriptions of Behemoth's physical and behavioral characteristics are also not consistent with mythological creatures.

Key Question 4: Is Behemoth an Elephant?

The proposal that Behemoth is an elephant does not align well with the description given in Job 40. The unique features of the elephant, such as its trunk, great size, enormous appetite, and ears, are not mentioned in the passage. Additionally, the behavior of retreating to the depths of the forest during the hot part of the day does not fit with Behemoth's habitat described in Job 40:21.

Key Question 5: Is Behemoth a Hippopotamus?

The interpretation that Behemoth is a hippopotamus has been the most commonly accepted view. However, this proposal also faces challenges. The features of the hippopotamus, such as its weight, large and strong mouth with deadly tusks, thick skin, pink sweat, and ability to walk on the riverbed for long periods, are not mentioned in the passage. The behavior of staying in deeper water also contradicts Job 40:22, which states that Behemoth stays under trees on the bank.

Key Question 6: Could Behemoth Have Been a Dinosaur?

Considering the characteristics of the proposed animals and the description given in Job 40, it becomes clear that neither the elephant nor the hippopotamus adequately fit the passage. This leaves open the possibility that Behemoth could have been a type of dinosaur. While our knowledge of dinosaurs is limited to their skeletal remains, these creatures were certainly much larger than any known living land animal today. The large tails of certain dinosaurs, such as sauropods, could reasonably be compared to a cedar tree.

Key Question 7: What Does Job 40:17a Tell Us About Behemoth's Tail?

The key clause in Job 40:17a describes Behemoth's tail as moving or bending like a cedar. The exact meaning of the Hebrew verb is uncertain and has led to various translations and interpretations. Some translations suggest that Behemoth's tail is stiff or rigid like a cedar, while others propose that it hangs or stretches out like a cedar. The comparisons to the cedar tree could highlight the height, size, or length of Behemoth's tail.

Key Question 8: What Does the Whole Passage in Job 40 Reveal?

When examining the whole passage in Job 40, it becomes apparent that Behemoth is described as a large animal with unique characteristics. Neither the elephant nor the hippopotamus fully align with these descriptions, while the possibility of a dinosaur with a large tail remains plausible. The passage aims to highlight the marvelous design and distinctiveness of Behemoth as evidence of God's creation.

In conclusion, while the exact identity of Behemoth remains uncertain, careful analysis of the biblical passage and considering the proposed candidates leads us to conclude that Behemoth could have been a large, extinct animal with a large tail. The description given in Job 40 does not align well with known living animals such as the elephant or hippopotamus, but it does leave open the possibility that Behemoth was a dinosaur. As our understanding of dinosaurs is limited to their skeletal remains, we must rely on biblical interpretation and consider the unique features of these creatures to arrive at a reasonable conclusion.