Tanniyn (Behemoth / Lviathan)

[tyler_demerhcant]

So now we have agreed that the scriptures are not sufficient enough.

Lets describe some things that show that man and dinosaurs lived in the same time period.

Firstly, Canuckster, if you do have an open mind, I urge you to discuss this with me with an open mind. I am presenting my case not to argue, but let's compare facts. I am open to believing that dinosaurs were extinct long ago if the evidence shows the such.

Dinosaur Extinction: The Evidence


- Human & Dinosaur Fossils. Human bones and tools coexist in the same fossil layers as dinosaur bones in Texas and the Dakotas.
-Human & Dinosaur Footprints. Footprints of dinosaurs, humans and other mammals coexist in the same fossil layers in Texas and New Mexico.
-Native American Petroglyphs. Cave and cliff drawings in Utah and Colorado crudely depict certain dinosaur species (dated from 400 A.D. to 1300 A.D.).
-Ica Stones. Ceremonial burial stones discovered in Ica, Peru depict numerous species of dinosaurs, some in activities with man (dated from 500 A.D. to 1500 A.D.).
-Acambaro Figurines. Ceramic and stone figurines discovered in Acambaro, Mexico represent many species of dinosaurs (dated from 800 B.C. to 200 A.D.).
-Dragon Accounts. China, Europe and the Middle East share similar accounts of “dragons” and other beasts. Some cultures revered these creatures. For instance, records of Marco Polo in China show that the royal house kept dragons for ceremonies. In other cultures, it was a great honor to kill these beasts. There are numerous records of warriors killing great beasts in order to establish credibility in a village.
-Behemoth, Leviathan and the Dragons of the Bible ( we already disagree with eachothers views on this). Job writes of great creatures, Behemoth and Leviathan, nearly 4000 years ago. Although more recent Bible translations use elephant, hippo or crocodile instead, the original Hebrew does not allow for these interpretations. The word “dragon” (Hebrew: tannin) is used numerous times in the Old Testament, and most directly translates as “sea or land monsters.”
-Gilgamesh, Fafnir, Beowulf and other Legends. Many famous legends, including the mythology of Egypt, Greece and Rome, include specific descriptions of dragons and other dinosaur-like creatures.
-Dragons in Ancient Art. Dinosaur-like creatures are featured on Babylonian landmarks, Roman mosaics, Egyptian burial shrouds, and many other pieces of art throughout the ancient world.
-Current Legends & Discoveries. There is a huge and credible legacy of sea, lake and swamp “monsters,” even to this day.

[sandy_mcd]

- Human & Dinosaur Fossils. Human bones and tools coexist in the same fossil layers as dinosaur bones in Texas and the Dakotas.
-Human & Dinosaur Footprints. Footprints of dinosaurs, humans and other mammals coexist in the same fossil layers in Texas and New Mexico.

References? How convincing is the evidence?

-Dragon Accounts. China, Europe and the Middle East share similar accounts of “dragons” and other beasts. Some cultures revered these creatures. For instance, records of Marco Polo in China show that the royal house kept dragons for ceremonies. In other cultures, it was a great honor to kill these beasts. There are numerous records of warriors killing great beasts in order to establish credibility in a village.
-Gilgamesh, Fafnir, Beowulf and other Legends. Many famous legends, including the mythology of Egypt, Greece and Rome, include specific descriptions of dragons and other dinosaur-like creatures.
-Dragons in Ancient Art. Dinosaur-like creatures are featured on Babylonian landmarks, Roman mosaics, Egyptian burial shrouds, and many other pieces of art throughout the ancient world.
-Current Legends & Discoveries. There is a huge and credible legacy of sea, lake and swamp “monsters,” even to this day.

Where are the bones and other physical remnants of these creatures which lived with man, especially in the last 1 or 2 thousand years?

[Kurieuo]

I don't think one can conclude within the passage found in Job 40:15-19 to decisively decide whether or not a dinosaur or hippotamus is in mind, but given the description may not be clear I do not see any reason to postulate a dinosaur.

I see that poetical imagery is obviously being used in this passage. For example, in Song of Solomon 4:1:

• How beautiful you are, my darling!
  Oh, how beautiful!
  Your eyes behind your veil are doves.
  Your hair is like a flock of goats
  descending from Mount Gilead.

Given this, whatever creature is being spoken of in Job 40, there is a quality about its tail end which is comparable to that of a cedar. Notice I say "tail end" and not simply "tail". This could be key to justifying a hippopotamus explanation.

For I have observed that there exist passages within Scripture which support a dichotomy representation of the body. That is, the top part of the body represents the "head", and if something is not apart of the head then it is apart of the "tail" (the bottom part of the body). We tend to more often trichotomise the body into "head", "torso" and "legs" (or "tail"), and obviously in a trichomy perspective the hippo is not an adequate candidate for having a tail like a cedar. Yet, in a dichotomy representation where something is either of the head, otherwise it is of the tail (e.g., as in Deut 28:13; Deut 28:44); the hippopotamus fits perfectly with having its tail end, which is like a cedar, inclined or bent downward (chaphets) when submerged within water (see picture attached below).

Kurieuo

[Canuckster1127]

OK Tyler. I'll address your quote point by point.

I do try to have an open mind. I was a young earth creationist for a long time earlier in my life. What changed my mind was a better understanding of science which unfortunately I had to learn after I went to school, because I went to Christian Schools that chose to only present Young Earth Creationism and chose to not address anything that disagreed with their position. To this day, I still find it very ironic that many of these same people argue that public schools don't allow other points of view. If you want to see a school with no options, try learning applicable science in a school that espouses Young Earth Creationism.

But I digress.

Further an open mind is a wonderful thing. The problem is if you leave your mind too open, your brains will slide out.

With reference to your points. You do not quote sources for them. I will do your research for you and find where they are and what information about them there is to refute them if it exists. In the future, it will help if you reference where you are getting your facts from. I'll do the same for you.

- Human & Dinosaur Fossils. Human bones and tools coexist in the same fossil layers as dinosaur bones in Texas and the Dakotas.

You got all your points from http://www.allaboutcreation.org/dinosaur-extinction.htm This is a Young Earth Creationist site. In my examination of it, there are no references for the facts they assert.

Rebuttal 1. You've quoted from a source without reference, and the site itself has no supporting material.

Rebuttal 2. My search of the internet finds no specific information that substantiates this claim. So my comments need only be general. It is your responsibility to provide proof of your claim.

Reasons why there could be dinosaur bones in a specific instance with human bones and tools include, but are not limited to:

1. Strata shifting due to earthquakes or folding.
2. Dinosaur bones or fossils exposed by such an event then taken by humans and kept as artifacts or some utilitatian reason.
3. A single instance of this would not be much proof of anything. If you theorize that multitudes of people and dinosaurs died simultaneously in a world wide flood, then there should be multiple instances in multiple locations. There are not. That should tell you something.

That's enough for now. It's up to you to support your claim before I need spend anymore time on it.

Human & Dinosaur Footprints. Footprints of dinosaurs, humans and other mammals coexist in the same fossil layers in Texas and New Mexico.

This is an old chestnut claimed for many years in many locations. What it illustrates is the way, unfortunately, that Young Earth Creationist claims take on a life of their own much like an urban myth.

Here's a link to some of the information relating to a particular instance in Texas. Again, Young Earth Creationists take isolated instances of what they want to be true, and despite the fact that if man and dinosaurs coesisted, there should be Multiple - Wide Spread instances of coexisting bones, footprints, fossils etc. Of course there isn't.

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/creati ... prints.HTM

Native American Petroglyphs. Cave and cliff drawings in Utah and Colorado crudely depict certain dinosaur species (dated from 400 A.D. to 1300 A.D.).

Have you ever seen a lizard? This whole line is just ridiculous. Does this mean that ancient art should also be taken seriously when it illustrated women with no hands and feet? There's no point of reference in terms of size, or anything else other than some forms that look similar to what we know dinosaurs must have looked like. As is common in a lot of YEC type arguments, they leap to what they want to believe and don't examine the fact that lizards were common then in similar forms then they are now. An ancient petroglyph is not definitive proof of anything near what YEC proponents wish this to be.

Ica Stones. Ceremonial burial stones discovered in Ica, Peru depict numerous species of dinosaurs, some in activities with man (dated from 500 A.D. to 1500 A.D.)

Read this link. It gives clear references. This is yet another reasons why Christians, especially Young Earth Creationists whould be very careful about what is thrown about as proof.

There's a reason why there is so little Young Earth Creationist "science" that is published in peer-reviewed scientific publications. The reason is, Young Earth Creationism usually presents what its own proponents want to hear. THings that require proof have the same effect on a lot of Young Earth Creationism that kryptonite has on Superman.

I'm not trying to be unkind. It is truly frustrating to me to see these kinds of hoaxes and wild claims, thrown out in the name of Christianity and then repeated on YEC sites as if they are established facts to the degree that they need no references provided.

http://www.christianforums.com/t718625- ... tones.html

That's all I have time for now.

I'll deal with the rest later as I have time.

Bart

[Kurieuo]

I got drawn into look at Job 41 after my last post, which is about the dozenth time I've focused upon it. I previously accepted a crocodile as the most likely candidate where the smoke, fire and flames represented the ferociousness of the reptile. It seems plausible, but then it also seems too forced to fit.

For example, in Job 41 the descriptions such as "Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants?" (v.6), "Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears?" (v.7), "Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?" (v.9), "None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me?" (v.10) seems to speak of a scale of magnificance and strength beyond that of a crocodile which 1) seems to me could be injured with spears, 2) fear isn't necessarily striked in one at the sight of them unless perhaps in very close proximity, 3) people clearly do stir them up even today, wrestling and roping them; and 4) their skins are even traded and they are eaten, which goes against verse 6. I can't ignore that the crocodile really does seem like an inadequate candidate to me.

On the other hand, the legendary creature of a dragon seems very appropriate (and yes I am still very much Old Earth). I was previously against the thought, but if one reads the chapter as simply a form of poetic narrative without any rational commitments, something comparable to that of the legendary dragon can be very clearly envisaged. Perhaps there is something to YECs seeing significance to this chapter, and it is something that does raise a curiosity within me. I was intrigued by an article put forward by a YEC friendly site regarding stories of dragons (http://www.nwcreation.net/dinosdragons.html), and I don't think it can be denied they are certainly acknowledged within many ancient cultures. Perhaps like the crocodile, they had survived until relatively recent times? Or perhaps God was simply using a legandary belief which somehow developed (whether by real-life encouters, or seeing bones of dinosaurs which maybe inspired legends of dragons), to get across His point that whatever the most magnificant and powerful creature is within His creation, how much more powerful is God who is the creator of them?

Whatever the case, the focus of chapter 41 is on God's sovereignty and power rather than upon a particular creature's existence. Now even if one believed in the existence of dragons, which is certainly an interesting and romantic thought to entertain, such still does not prove that the many dinosaurs we have come to understand through palaeontology existed along side of mankind.

Kurieuo

[tyler_demerhcant]

OK Tyler. I'll address your quote point by point.

I do try to have an open mind. I was a young earth creationist for a long time earlier in my life. What changed my mind was a better understanding of science which unfortunately I had to learn after I went to school, because I went to Christian Schools that chose to only present Young Earth Creationism and chose to not address anything that disagreed with their position. To this day, I still find it very ironic that many of these same people argue that public schools don't allow other points of view. If you want to see a school with no options, try learning applicable science in a school that espouses Young Earth Creationism.

But I digress.

Further an open mind is a wonderful thing. The problem is if you leave your mind too open, your brains will slide out.

With reference to your points. You do not quote sources for them. I will do your research for you and find where they are and what information about them there is to refute them if it exists. In the future, it will help if you reference where you are getting your facts from. I'll do the same for you.

- Human & Dinosaur Fossils. Human bones and tools coexist in the same fossil layers as dinosaur bones in Texas and the Dakotas.

You got all your points from http://www.allaboutcreation.org/dinosaur-extinction.htm This is a Young Earth Creationist site. In my examination of it, there are no references for the facts they assert.

Rebuttal 1. You've quoted from a source without reference, and the site itself has no supporting material.

Rebuttal 2. My search of the internet finds no specific information that substantiates this claim. So my comments need only be general. It is your responsibility to provide proof of your claim.

Reasons why there could be dinosaur bones in a specific instance with human bones and tools include, but are not limited to:

1. Strata shifting due to earthquakes or folding.
2. Dinosaur bones or fossils exposed by such an event then taken by humans and kept as artifacts or some utilitatian reason.
3. A single instance of this would not be much proof of anything. If you theorize that multitudes of people and dinosaurs died simultaneously in a world wide flood, then there should be multiple instances in multiple locations. There are not. That should tell you something.

That's enough for now. It's up to you to support your claim before I need spend anymore time on it.

Human & Dinosaur Footprints. Footprints of dinosaurs, humans and other mammals coexist in the same fossil layers in Texas and New Mexico.

This is an old chestnut claimed for many years in many locations. What it illustrates is the way, unfortunately, that Young Earth Creationist claims take on a life of their own much like an urban myth.

Here's a link to some of the information relating to a particular instance in Texas. Again, Young Earth Creationists take isolated instances of what they want to be true, and despite the fact that if man and dinosaurs coesisted, there should be Multiple - Wide Spread instances of coexisting bones, footprints, fossils etc. Of course there isn't.

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/creati ... prints.HTM

Native American Petroglyphs. Cave and cliff drawings in Utah and Colorado crudely depict certain dinosaur species (dated from 400 A.D. to 1300 A.D.).

Have you ever seen a lizard? This whole line is just ridiculous. Does this mean that ancient art should also be taken seriously when it illustrated women with no hands and feet? There's no point of reference in terms of size, or anything else other than some forms that look similar to what we know dinosaurs must have looked like. As is common in a lot of YEC type arguments, they leap to what they want to believe and don't examine the fact that lizards were common then in similar forms then they are now. An ancient petroglyph is not definitive proof of anything near what YEC proponents wish this to be.

Ica Stones. Ceremonial burial stones discovered in Ica, Peru depict numerous species of dinosaurs, some in activities with man (dated from 500 A.D. to 1500 A.D.)

Read this link. It gives clear references. This is yet another reasons why Christians, especially Young Earth Creationists whould be very careful about what is thrown about as proof.

There's a reason why there is so little Young Earth Creationist "science" that is published in peer-reviewed scientific publications. The reason is, Young Earth Creationism usually presents what its own proponents want to hear. THings that require proof have the same effect on a lot of Young Earth Creationism that kryptonite has on Superman.

I'm not trying to be unkind. It is truly frustrating to me to see these kinds of hoaxes and wild claims, thrown out in the name of Christianity and then repeated on YEC sites as if they are established facts to the degree that they need no references provided.

http://www.christianforums.com/t718625- ... tones.html

That's all I have time for now.

I'll deal with the rest later as I have time.

Bart

Congradulations, you destroyed my arguement. It seems that I do have lack of evidence and am often too embrasive of "young earth" comments. It seems to me that I am defeated.

It does trouble me. It appears I am at a loss with this dinosaur thing.

Please, can you tell me why I should believe that the earth is old?

(I still believe in a young earth by the way, I just think I need to spend more time aquiring my material and picking my acusations.)

[Canuckster1127]

Tyler,

Don't sweat it. I'll give you a more detailed post later as I am limited on time.

You should not accept an Old Earth Position on my say so, anymore than you should accept a Young Earth Position on anyone's say so.

I would suggest a few things that should help you as you work this through on your own.

1. Don't accept anyone's "facts" without checking them.

2. Be Skeptical of any argument or arguer who uses absolute terms. They usually are trying to make up in strength of terms what they lack in strength of argument.

3. Ask yourself, when given a fact or argument if there are other possible explanations. If there are, then ask why you should accept their explanation rather than one of the others.

4. Be prepared to change your mind when the evidence demands it, but also be realistic about whether the evidence is complete or not.

In terms of understanding an OEC position.

Go to the main board here. Rich Deem, the founder of this site has done a marvelous job cataloguing information.

The two books I've found most helpful are:

New Evidence for an Old Earth - By Don Stoner

The Genesis Question - Hugh Ross

More later.

Glad you are seeing some of the difficulties of the YEC position. I think most YEC people are well intentioned and belive they are defending the Bible against being minimized.

Always remember that science can be wrong but Nature is what it is and there is truth in Nature, because God created it.

Always remember that theology can be wrong, but the Bible is inspired, inerrent and God's Truth for us, because God gave it.

Don't make the mistake of imagining that only Science is always wrong.
Don't make the mistake of imagining that Theology is always right.

That more than anything is the crux of why YEC position so often makes these kinds of errors in thinking in debate. OEC has problems too that have to be addressed honestly.

YEC or OEC are not integral to anyone's salvation so it is possible to disagree agreeably and still remain in fellowship with each other despite the differences in position.

Bart

[tyler_demerhcant]

I agree, but I like challenging sciences. It's fun!

I don't trust man either. Too many years on "medicine" that worsened my physical conditions while "helping me"

God bless

[Canuckster1127]

I agree, but I like challenging sciences. It's fun!

I don't trust man either. Too many years on "medicine" that worsened my physical conditions while "helping me"

God bless

I'm sorry to hear that Tyler. I've had medical issues in my life as well. I had cancer when I was 23.

Medicine was helpful to me. But since then I've been involved in Chaplain ministry to cancer patients and many times, medicine is very limited in what it can do in some situations. Medicine is a human science as well, and people can make mistakes and sometimes well-intentioned people, make things worth.

Hope things are better for you now.

Bart

[tyler_demerhcant]

Well, It wasn't serious, but you would be surprised how many medicines that they no longer use because of there effects. THe side effects were far to serious though and I was very much effected by it for a long time.

All human-science is based on observation and theary. Sometimes, mistakes are made and sometimes great things are achieved. This helps me to believe in my God because never once has he ever let me down. He gives us the tools to create and design and invent. This is just a side effect of being made in his immage. I have never once seen a beaver race another beaver down the river!

[brokentines]

I believe if you take all the "evidence" as a whole: Old art work (sometimes reffered to as "OOPART" (out of place art), Old writings before we ever assembled a dinosaur skeleton. And yes even the book of JOB, you could come to the conclusion that man has seen and lived with dinosaurs.
Isn't this what evolution theory does? It takes pieces of evidence and pieces them together to come up with a theory and portrays it as a fact.
The truth in the matter is you will never be able to take a single fossil and prove it gave birth to any offspring let alone that those offspring were changing. It takes imagination to fill in the gaps and tell a story of how it could have happened. The only reason to believe that dinosaurs never lived with man is to defend the" geological column" and evolutionary theory. It starts and ends with a world view. If you believe in OEC than you will say "man never lived with dinosaurs" and rationalize the evidence away (show me the source), if you are a YEC then you will look as said evidences and accept them for what they are.

[Canuckster1127]

Welcome brokentines.

I think if you take all the evidence as a whole, both scriptural and physical, there's no way a reasonable person could come to the conclusion that man and dinosaurs lived together. I think the YEC conclusion starts with an interpretative presupposition from Scripture and then attempts to fit the evidence into that already determined framework. There's been some pretty ridiculous theories in that regard and sadly, some outright hoaxes in the past that have come from that. But primarily, I think it's bad theology. Theology that doesn't reflect reality in other spheres is worth questioning. It may just be that an faulty hemeneutic is being employed.

That my opinion.

Regardless, welcome to the board.

bart

[dayage]

The descriptions of Leviathan, both how it looks and its environment, fit the crocodile. It is semi-aquatic. No living creature can have a heart as hard as stone or breath fire. The fire breathing and the stone like heart, probably refer to its fearless ferocity which is not tempered by mercy. Fire breathing (vs. 19 and 21) may also come from the color of the inside of a crocodile's mouth.

Smoke coming from Leviathan’s nostrils (Job 41:20), mirrors a description of alligators given by William Bartrom in 1791. The smoke was just a watery mist blown from its nostrils when it surfaced.

The description of the eyes as "eyelids of the morning" (aph aph shachar) is a phrase used earlier in Job 3:9 as a description of the rising sun. With respect to Leviathan it may refer to the eye's ability to reflect light, but more likely has to do with the way they open (the upper eyelid raises while the lower lid drops down) and/or the fact that when the crocodile wants to secretly observe its surroundings, it raises just its eyes above the water. Both of these simulate the rising of the sun above the horizon.

Some helpful information comes from the areas of trade mentioned by Job (Job 6:19, 28:16, 19). The one that seems most important to this discussion is in Job 28:19 where he speaks of Cush (Ethiopia). This, points to the probability of a trade route which may have used the Nile River as a means of travel. I believe that this mention of Cush can give us insight as to the identity of both the Leviathan and the Behemoth (Job 40:15-24).


Behemoth best fits an elephant. Anyone trading in Ethiopia would have heard of, or would have seen, elephants. Job 40:17 says that Behemoth has a tail that MOVES like a cedar, not that it is the size of one. Cedars just sway in the wind and an elephants tail just rocks back and forth.

I have some papers, which I put together, matching pictures with each verse, but they will not cut and paste here. Cush/Ethiopia is the big clue.