Apologeet.nl
Does the Bible mention dinosaurs? | What are Behemoth and Leviathan?Introduction
“If dinosaurs really did exist, why is there no mention of them in Genesis?”
That’s a question many people ask, and I’ve answered it many times before – and now I’d like to share my answer with you. Because, what if I told you that dinosaurs are indeed mentioned in the Bible, but that they’re simply called by different names, as the Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek?
What if I told you that people in ancient times, including those in the Bible, knew about them, saw them, and possibly even fought and hunted them?
In my view, the biggest problem isn’t science itself. The biggest problem is that much of this information is hardly ever discussed—not at school, and often not in church either. As a bonus, I’ll also show you later why Noah’s Ark might not be as big an issue in the debate as is often thought.
Two very well-known examples are Behemoth and Leviathan from the Book of Job. God Himself speaks of these creatures, which in itself makes these descriptions very interesting. But just wait until you see how God describes these animals. One detail in particular concerning Behemoth has been the subject of fierce debate for centuries.
The word ‘dinosaur’ did not exist in biblical times
The word ‘dinosaur’ is a modern term.
It was not until 1841 that this name was coined by the British scientist Richard Owen.
He combined two Greek words:
deinos — terrible, mighty or impressive
sauros — lizard
The word ‘dinosaur’ therefore literally means something like:
‘mighty lizard’ or ‘impressive lizard’.
But of course, the writers of the Bible did not use that word.
The Bible is thousands of years older than this name.
And that is hardly surprising.
For example, the Bible does not mention modern scientific categories such as:
- mammals
- reptiles
- amphibians
- dinosaurs
These are terms we have devised later on to describe the world around us. People in biblical times had their own language and their own way of describing animals.
So the question should not be:
“Why isn’t the word ‘dinosaur’ in the Bible?”
But rather:
“Which animals does the Bible describe?”
Large animals in the Bible
In the Old Testament, we come across various words for large and impressive animals.
One of these is the Hebrew word ‘tannin’.
This word can be translated as:
- sea monster
- giant snake
- dragon
In Genesis 1:21 we read:
And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
The word used here for ‘great sea creatures’, or ‘great whales’, is related to words that are translated elsewhere as ‘dragon’.
Keep that word ‘dragon’ in mind for a moment. Later on, you’ll see that this goes far beyond just this one Bible passage.
Now, we must be honest about this. The word does not automatically mean ‘dinosaur’. It simply describes a large or impressive creature. The translation depends on the context.
Sometimes the word is also used figuratively. But it does reveal something interesting: the Bible uses language to describe large, impressive creatures that we no longer know exactly what they are today.
Behemoth – a remarkable creature in Job 40
One of the most interesting passages can be found in Job 40. God speaks to Job and draws his attention to His mighty creation. He says:
Look now at the behemoth, which I made along with you; He eats grass like an ox.
(Job 40:15)
And:
Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
(Job 40:16)
And then… And here we come to the detail I mentioned at the beginning.
He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
(Job 40:17)
This is a remarkable description. Some Bible commentaries say: “This must be a hippopotamus.”
Well, a hippopotamus eats grass and is an enormously powerful and downright dangerous animal. But the description of the tail raises questions:
He moveth his tail like a cedar
A hippopotamus does not have a large tail resembling a cedar tree; it is more like a tuft. That is why other Bible commentators have suggested a large, extinct land animal.
But there is a second reason why many people struggle with the interpretation that Behemoth is a hippopotamus.
And it is precisely that second reason that actually makes this discussion even more interesting for many Bible scholars than the famous tail.
An animal that might resemble a sauropod dinosaur. Can we say this with absolute certainty? No. But it is striking that God does not point Job to a mythical creature, but to a creature from the real world.
Why do I say that?
Because Behemoth is not mentioned as part of a fairy tale or a legend.
And here is the second reason why many people struggle with the explanation of a hippopotamus. In His reply to Job, God mentions all sorts of familiar animals:
- the lion
- the raven
- the ibex
- the doe
- the wild donkey
- the wild ox
- the ostrich
- the horse
- the goshawk
- the eagle
And then He mentions: Behemoth and Leviathan.
It would be remarkable if God were suddenly to switch to a wholly mythical creature in this sequence. God uses these animals precisely as examples of His creative power. Job did not need to be convinced by a fantasy creature, but by something he knew to be part of God’s creation.
But if Behemoth already raises questions, then Leviathan is perhaps even more interesting. For it is precisely here that we find a description which Christians and sceptics alike have been debating for centuries.
Leviathan – the mighty sea creature
Here, too, we shall see why the choice of words we discussed earlier is so interesting. Immediately after Behemoth, God moves on to Leviathan. Job 41 begins:
Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?
(Job 41:1)
God describes a creature that man cannot control.
He says:
Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle?
(Job 41:13)
And:
His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.
(Job 41:15)
Some think of a crocodile when they read this. Others see in it a large sea creature that we no longer know today. What we know for certain is that God uses Leviathan as an example of something that is impossible for man to control.
And then God says:
Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.
(Job 41:33)
Some find the following passage particularly striking:
Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.
(Job 41:19)
This sounds almost like a fire-breathing dragon from ancient tales.
But before we immediately dismiss this as impossible, we must first consider something remarkable in nature itself.
When we read about a fire-breathing dragon, we need to treat it with caution. It may be a literal description, but it could also be poetic language used to describe Leviathan’s immense power and terrifying appearance.
But what does nature show us today? Today, we also see animals with remarkable chemical properties. Take, for example, the bombardier beetle, which can eject a hot chemical liquid. It shows that nature is far more surprising than we sometimes realise—nature shows that animals sometimes possess characteristics we would hardly expect.
Dragons in the Bible
An interesting point is that the word ‘dragon’ appears regularly in older translations of the Bible. This is because the Bible was not originally written using our modern classifications of animals. The Hebrew words were translated into the terms familiar to people at that time.
One example is Isaiah 27:1:
In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.
(Isaiah 27:1)
The word translated here as ‘sea monster’ is related to words that are translated as ‘dragon’ elsewhere.
But the question is, of course: are these merely biblical images? Or do we find similar stories outside the Bible as well?
When we hear the word ‘dragon’ today, we often think of fantasy stories. But in ancient times, a dragon could also refer to a large, impressive reptilian creature. And perhaps even more strikingly: we find such descriptions not only in the Bible, but also in the writings of various ancient historians.
Dragons in history – memories of real animals?
Let’s take a look at that. Throughout history, we find stories in various cultures about large snakes, dragons and impressive animals.
Of course, we must treat these with caution. Not every ancient story is automatically a historical account, and people have sometimes embellished or adapted stories over time. But it is striking that the image of large reptilian creatures occurs worldwide.
For instance, the Roman historian Cassius Dio recounts a story about Roman soldiers who are said to have killed an enormous snake in North Africa and taken it back as a trophy. We cannot verify the exact details, but it shows that people in ancient times told stories about exceptionally large reptiles. But this is not the only historical example.
Herodotus and Flavius Josephus also speak of extraordinary snake-like creatures.
And this is precisely where we must ask an important question: if large animals really did exist, does their disappearance automatically mean that they lived millions of years ago?
That does not automatically prove that all these stories are literally true, but it does show that the idea of large snake-like or dragon-like animals is not a modern invention.
Furthermore, we must bear in mind that the extinction of large animals is by no means exceptional. Throughout history, many impressive animals have become extinct.
Take, for example:
- the mammoth;
- the woolly rhinoceros;
- Another example can be found in Madagascar, where the elephant bird lived until a few hundred years ago. This enormous bird could grow to a height of about 3 metres and weigh over 500 kilos. Yet this animal became extinct due to human influence. It shows that large animals can also become extinct in recent history.
And this example is important, because it will help us to look at dinosaurs in a different light later on.
Humans often played a significant role in this. People hunted large animals and altered their habitats. Even today, we see that some large animals are threatened by human activity.
Another interesting point here is that structures resembling soft tissue have been found in some dinosaur fossils. For example, researchers have described remains that resemble blood vessels, cellular structures and protein-like materials such as collagen. For many researchers who subscribe to a young Earth model, this is a significant piece of evidence.
But what exactly does this mean? Does the presence of soft tissue automatically mean that dinosaurs are younger than previously thought? Or are there other possible explanations?
Researchers are rightly wondering how such biological structures could remain intact for millions of years, and see this as a possible indication that some dinosaurs lived much more recently than is often assumed in mainstream science.
At the same time, some scientists who subscribe to the old-Earth model point out that there may have been special circumstances that allowed such remains to be preserved for an exceptionally long time. A frequently cited explanation is that iron from blood, following the animal’s death, may have played a role in slowing down decomposition processes, allowing some biological structures to be preserved for longer than would normally be expected. However, others do not yet regard this explanation as sufficient to account for preservation over millions of years.
How one interprets these discoveries therefore depends in part on the worldview through which one examines the evidence. But it certainly shows that the story of dinosaurs and fossils is more complex than many people realise.
Whatever your conclusion on the matter, it certainly shows that there is still plenty of debate about how we should interpret the fossil record. And that is precisely why the example of the elephant bird is so relevant. For one thing is certain: if large animals that we no longer recognise today lived on after the Flood, then it is hardly surprising that some of them have disappeared.
Large animals often require vast habitats, reproduce slowly and are therefore vulnerable to human influence.
But if such large animals had continued to live after the Flood, the next question naturally arises: could humans and dinosaurs ever have encountered one another?
And that is precisely the question we are now going to examine.
Did humans and dinosaurs live together?
This brings us to an important difference in worldview. Many people believe that dinosaurs lived tens of millions of years ago, long before humans existed.
But Christians who believe in a young Earth interpret Genesis differently.
They believe that:
- God created all animals according to their kind (and I’ll come back to the word ‘kind’ in a moment, as that is precisely where a lot of confusion often arises);
- humans were part of creation from the very beginning;
- death and decay only came about after the Fall;
- the Flood brought about major changes in the world.
Genesis 1:24 says:
And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Kind, nature, ‘child’ and ‘baramin’
Just a quick aside, because, as promised, I’d like to pause for a moment to consider the word ‘kind’.
In modern Dutch Bible translations, we read that God made the animals “naar hun soort”, which is translated in English something like “according to their species”. The problem is that the word ‘soort’ in our language can easily be misunderstood. We are quick to think of the modern biological classification: a dog, a wolf or a fox as separate species.
But the Hebrew word used here is min. This does not necessarily mean a modern biological species, but rather refers to a particular category or nature of animals. That is why the Dutch Statenvertaling used to use the word ‘aard’: God created the animals according to their ‘aard’ (kind in English).
And this little word may seem unimportant, but it plays a huge role in the debate about dinosaurs, evolution and the Ark.
Within the young-earth model, this is often interpreted to mean that God created original creation groups from which different species could later arise.
Creationists sometimes use the word ‘baramin’ for this.
That word comes from Hebrew:
- bara = to create
- min = kind or category
A ‘baramin’ therefore literally means: a created kind.
The idea, for example, is that God did not create every canine species individually, but rather an original canine kind, from which various canine species such as dogs, wolves and foxes could later arise.
Dinosaurs and the Ark
But how could dinosaurs have survived the Flood?
Genesis 6:19 says:
And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
Many people imagine enormous adult dinosaurs that would have filled the entire ark. But that is not necessarily the case. Noah did not have to take adult animals with him. For many animals, it would actually have made more sense to take young ones. Young animals eat less, take up less space and can go on to reproduce after the Flood.
This also applies to dinosaurs. Even the largest dinosaurs hatched from eggs that were about the size of a football. A young dinosaur would therefore have been relatively small compared to an adult specimen.
But this brings us to an objection that many people immediately raise: even if you take young dinosaurs, was the ark actually big enough?
But is that objection justified? As soon as we work out the dimensions given in Genesis, a surprising picture emerges.
According to Genesis, the ark had roughly the following dimensions:
- 300 cubits long
- 50 cubits wide
- 30 cubits high
If we assume one cubit to be approximately 45 centimetres, that works out at roughly:
- 135 metres long
- 22.5 metres wide
- 13.5 metres high
The total volume would therefore have been around 40,000 cubic metres. By way of comparison: a modern large lorry with a semi-trailer has a load capacity of around 85 to 100 cubic metres. The volume of the ark is therefore equivalent to around 400 to 450 large lorries with semi-trailers.
And that brings us back to the question posed earlier. It turns out that the ark was, after all, a fair bit larger than many people imagine.
And now it gets interesting, because the question isn’t just how many animals could fit on the ark, but above all: how big were those animals on average?
It is generally assumed that the average size of land animals is much smaller than people often think. If you were to take the average of all the animals, the average size would be roughly comparable to that of a sheep.
If you assume animals the size of a sheep, many thousands of animals would fit into the available space. Even if you take into account larger animals, cages, food storage and space to move about, these calculations suggest there would still be plenty of capacity left over.
Within the young-earth model, it is therefore not necessary to envisage thousands of adult dinosaurs on the Ark. The idea is that Noah probably took representatives of the various created kinds, including young animals, after which these groups could later spread out and develop further.
So perhaps the biggest problem is not the space on the Ark, but the question of how one interprets biblical history.
Conclusion
Does the Bible mention dinosaurs? Not by the modern term. But the Bible does describe impressive creatures that raise questions.
Behemoth; Leviathan; great sea creatures; dragons.
Whether these all refer directly to dinosaurs is a matter on which Christians may hold differing views. But one thing is clear:
The Bible presents God as the Creator of an incredibly rich and impressive world.
As Psalm 104:24 says:
O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches.
Perhaps, therefore, we should not begin by asking:
“Does the Bible fit in with my modern ideas?”
But rather with the question:
“What does God’s Word actually say?”
Because ultimately, this discussion is not just about dinosaurs. It is about the question of who God is and whether we are prepared to listen to His Word.
Jesus Himself had very clear views on this. I explain what He believed about Scripture and Genesis in this article: Why I’m a Young-Earth Christian.
