Job speaks about another animal that is "The greatest in the ways of God" and it is called Be-he-moth. today we call them Sauropoda or sauropods, which are an infraorder of saurischian ("lizard-hipped") dinosaurs. They had long necks, long tails, small heads, and thick, pillar-like legs. They are notable for the enormous sizes attained by some species, and the group includes the largest animals to have ever lived on land. Which is the Mokèlé-mbèmbé of the Congo today, the river stopper.
Where is the Horn? The Unicornus had one huge horn, I can see how they would spark a mythology, such a large amazing animal untamed by mankind, but it had a huge horn, the unicornus rhino.
@dougmoerhoffman Scratch that, giraffes are a lot different--but I don't have the skills to compare their bone anatomy to determine this. BUT, you bring up a great point--in context, it makes sense that God would be talking about the biggest land mammal that ever existed, since He also talks about the biggest land creature that ever existed, and the biggest carnivorous sea reptile that ever existed. Not to be dogmatic about it, of course, but it's a Biblical induction.
@NathanH83, I just want to point out the importance of being cautious about concluding that the creature actually is a rhinoceros if it's only classified as such based on evolutionary phylogenies--since the same phylogenies classify birds as dinosaurs and apes as men and capybaras as horses.
Perhaps if the skeletal anatomy shows that it is indeed of the rhinoceros kind, then that would be reasonable to suppose. Looks a lot like a giraffe to me, though.
@dougmoerhoffman Scratch that, giraffes are a lot different--but I don't have the skills to compare their bone anatomy to determine this. BUT, you bring up a great point--in context, it makes sense that God would be talking about the biggest land mammal that ever existed, since He also talks about the biggest land creature that ever existed, and the biggest carnivorous sea reptile that ever existed. Not to be dogmatic about it, of course, but it's a Biblical induction.
Modern translations of Job 39:9 mention wild ox rather than unicorn. The latter is considered a mistranslation of the Hebrew re'em into the Greek monokeros and then into the Latin unicornis. Now, despite a plausible alternative of wild ox, why would you suggest another animal, extinct for over 23 million years instead? I suspect you've been smoking a little too much Hovind. May I suggest that you give it up for a bit and try a decent science text book? Any one would do.
Hey Nathan, nice video - I'd never heard of this beast before. Make more videos!
They say coal and diamonds are millions of years old too, yet they were tested and found to still contain a measurable amount of C14, which can barely even last 100,000 years before decaying away.
@ColdSideOfPillow136 It is also called Indricotherium. But it's also called Paraceratherium. The idea that it lived millions of years before man is just an evolutionary belief, not a scientific fact.
I am no expert on the bible so I do not mean to be critical here, but I am curious. Why go with a long extinct ancestor of the rhinoceros instead of a species that would have been around at the same time as man? I thank you for introducing me to such an incredible beast, but wouldn't a more modern species more likely be what it alludes to? Though I did find another animal you might like to use. Elasmotherium. Also extinct, but a true rhino with a single large horn.
@ElNerdoLoco First of all, you're false assumption that this creature went extinct long before man extisted is not only unbiblical, but it is based upon evolutionary belief, and not upon scientific fact. All land animals were made on day 6, the same day as man. The reason why I made this video is because I am presenting this as a possible idea. You see, the book of Job was written about 3,000 years ago. It could very well be that the Giant Giraffe Rhinoceros was alive in those days.
@ElNerdoLoco As for the elasmotherium, I've already presented this animal as a possibility for Job 39:9 in another video that I made called "Why Does the Bible Mention Unicorns?"
But when I found that Deut. 33:17 was actually talking about a two horned rhinoceros, I realized that there might be other scripture verses that are talking about a two-horned rhino as well. And since Job 39 doesn't even mention any horns, it could very well be talking about the peraceratherium, which has no horns.
@NathanH83 Ah, alright. I'll take your word for it that my viewpoint is unbiblical. Though most people I know are Christian, I do not think any of them take all of the bible literally. I was just curious about your point of view and am grateful you shared some of it with me. Sorry I wasted some of your time on an animal you happened to be aware of. I am not familiar with your work and clicked on this video mostly to learn what the creature shown in it is.
@ElNerdoLoco Many times Jesus spoke to His disciples figuratively. But He always explained what He was talking about afterwards. LIke, when He said, "Lazarus is sleeping, and we're going to go wake Him up."
Jesus explained later on, "Lazarus is dead," and then He raised him from the dead.
However, when Jesus spoke of Adam and Eve, he said they were created in the beginning. If there were million year time periods before Adam and Eve, then they weren't really at the beginning, then were they?
@ElNerdoLoco Jesus never came to His disciples later on and said, "Hey guys, remember when I said that Adam and Eve were created at the beginning, well, I was just speaking figuratively. They weren't really at the beginning. There were actually millions of years of death and extinction before they were created."
Jesus never said that. Whenever God is being figurative, He always explains Himself and says, "This is what I really meant by that."
But God never does that with the creation account.
@ElNerdoLoco It would be best to say that we don't really know for sure when the Giant Giraffe rhinoceros went extinct. Just because it isn't alive today, that doesn't give us the freedom to just assume that it went extinct long before man ever existed. That is unscientific and delusional. It makes a lot more sense to say that the fossils were caused by the flood waters in the days of Noah. Job lived not too long after Noah. I'm sure many animals that are extinct today were alive in his time.
@NathanH83 good point as these animals would have been the niphilim that the ancient texts of many cultures speak of.. they may have been the laviathons n behemoths of myths... after all wasnt the ceocanth fish recently thought extinct for milions of years found alive!!!! evolution is not about getting rid of the old its about survival and if you have a good design for survival than you'll survive...
I like Kent Hovind's idea that it is actually more like a brachiosaurus type dinosaur, the description fits it well and unlike the creature in this video, in Job God describes it as having a tail like a Cedar Tree, the animal in this video has the tail of a piece of rope.
A brachiosaurus has an enormous tail though and is much bigger also!
@TruthSeekingOne You are confusing this passage of scripture with Job 40, where it talks about the behemoth. Kent Hovind believes that the behemoth in Job 40 is a brachiosaurus. That's the passage that talks about it having a tail like a cedar.
This passage in Job 39:9 is about the unicorn "a.k.a. rhinoceros". In modern translations it says wild ox.
Kent Hovind believes the unicorn in the Bible is a monoclonius.
Why won't you uber-christians leave Science alone!! Be crazy on your own turf!
And desecrating BBC footage, no less! Blasphemer!!!
PrimordialBisque 2 months ago
Man, imagine if these were still alive, and we tame them and get to ride on them!
StickReverb 2 months ago
Job speaks about another animal that is "The greatest in the ways of God" and it is called Be-he-moth. today we call them Sauropoda or sauropods, which are an infraorder of saurischian ("lizard-hipped") dinosaurs. They had long necks, long tails, small heads, and thick, pillar-like legs. They are notable for the enormous sizes attained by some species, and the group includes the largest animals to have ever lived on land. Which is the Mokèlé-mbèmbé of the Congo today, the river stopper.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
Where is the Horn? The Unicornus had one huge horn, I can see how they would spark a mythology, such a large amazing animal untamed by mankind, but it had a huge horn, the unicornus rhino.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dougmoerhoffman Scratch that, giraffes are a lot different--but I don't have the skills to compare their bone anatomy to determine this. BUT, you bring up a great point--in context, it makes sense that God would be talking about the biggest land mammal that ever existed, since He also talks about the biggest land creature that ever existed, and the biggest carnivorous sea reptile that ever existed. Not to be dogmatic about it, of course, but it's a Biblical induction.
dougmoerhoffman 5 months ago
@NathanH83, I just want to point out the importance of being cautious about concluding that the creature actually is a rhinoceros if it's only classified as such based on evolutionary phylogenies--since the same phylogenies classify birds as dinosaurs and apes as men and capybaras as horses.
Perhaps if the skeletal anatomy shows that it is indeed of the rhinoceros kind, then that would be reasonable to suppose. Looks a lot like a giraffe to me, though.
God bless!
dougmoerhoffman 5 months ago
@dougmoerhoffman Scratch that, giraffes are a lot different--but I don't have the skills to compare their bone anatomy to determine this. BUT, you bring up a great point--in context, it makes sense that God would be talking about the biggest land mammal that ever existed, since He also talks about the biggest land creature that ever existed, and the biggest carnivorous sea reptile that ever existed. Not to be dogmatic about it, of course, but it's a Biblical induction.
dougmoerhoffman 5 months ago
Modern translations of Job 39:9 mention wild ox rather than unicorn. The latter is considered a mistranslation of the Hebrew re'em into the Greek monokeros and then into the Latin unicornis. Now, despite a plausible alternative of wild ox, why would you suggest another animal, extinct for over 23 million years instead? I suspect you've been smoking a little too much Hovind. May I suggest that you give it up for a bit and try a decent science text book? Any one would do.
monty156050 6 months ago
dude great video.
HaShim383 6 months ago
Hey Nathan, nice video - I'd never heard of this beast before. Make more videos!
They say coal and diamonds are millions of years old too, yet they were tested and found to still contain a measurable amount of C14, which can barely even last 100,000 years before decaying away.
Castaneadentata 7 months ago
Comment removed
Castaneadentata 7 months ago
UUUGGGGHHHH! That would be Indricotherium, and it lived MILLIONS of years before man.
ColdSideOfPillow136 8 months ago
@ColdSideOfPillow136 It is also called Indricotherium. But it's also called Paraceratherium. The idea that it lived millions of years before man is just an evolutionary belief, not a scientific fact.
NathanH83 8 months ago
@NathanH83 lol?
ColdSideOfPillow136 8 months ago
Wow! That would surely be cool pet! O__O *Its huge*
I love your videos. Keep up awesome working! :-)
Varjokani 9 months ago
I am no expert on the bible so I do not mean to be critical here, but I am curious. Why go with a long extinct ancestor of the rhinoceros instead of a species that would have been around at the same time as man? I thank you for introducing me to such an incredible beast, but wouldn't a more modern species more likely be what it alludes to? Though I did find another animal you might like to use. Elasmotherium. Also extinct, but a true rhino with a single large horn.
ElNerdoLoco 10 months ago
@ElNerdoLoco First of all, you're false assumption that this creature went extinct long before man extisted is not only unbiblical, but it is based upon evolutionary belief, and not upon scientific fact. All land animals were made on day 6, the same day as man. The reason why I made this video is because I am presenting this as a possible idea. You see, the book of Job was written about 3,000 years ago. It could very well be that the Giant Giraffe Rhinoceros was alive in those days.
NathanH83 10 months ago
@ElNerdoLoco As for the elasmotherium, I've already presented this animal as a possibility for Job 39:9 in another video that I made called "Why Does the Bible Mention Unicorns?"
But when I found that Deut. 33:17 was actually talking about a two horned rhinoceros, I realized that there might be other scripture verses that are talking about a two-horned rhino as well. And since Job 39 doesn't even mention any horns, it could very well be talking about the peraceratherium, which has no horns.
NathanH83 10 months ago
@NathanH83 Ah, alright. I'll take your word for it that my viewpoint is unbiblical. Though most people I know are Christian, I do not think any of them take all of the bible literally. I was just curious about your point of view and am grateful you shared some of it with me. Sorry I wasted some of your time on an animal you happened to be aware of. I am not familiar with your work and clicked on this video mostly to learn what the creature shown in it is.
ElNerdoLoco 10 months ago
@ElNerdoLoco Many times Jesus spoke to His disciples figuratively. But He always explained what He was talking about afterwards. LIke, when He said, "Lazarus is sleeping, and we're going to go wake Him up."
Jesus explained later on, "Lazarus is dead," and then He raised him from the dead.
However, when Jesus spoke of Adam and Eve, he said they were created in the beginning. If there were million year time periods before Adam and Eve, then they weren't really at the beginning, then were they?
NathanH83 10 months ago
@ElNerdoLoco Jesus never came to His disciples later on and said, "Hey guys, remember when I said that Adam and Eve were created at the beginning, well, I was just speaking figuratively. They weren't really at the beginning. There were actually millions of years of death and extinction before they were created."
Jesus never said that. Whenever God is being figurative, He always explains Himself and says, "This is what I really meant by that."
But God never does that with the creation account.
NathanH83 10 months ago
@ElNerdoLoco It would be best to say that we don't really know for sure when the Giant Giraffe rhinoceros went extinct. Just because it isn't alive today, that doesn't give us the freedom to just assume that it went extinct long before man ever existed. That is unscientific and delusional. It makes a lot more sense to say that the fossils were caused by the flood waters in the days of Noah. Job lived not too long after Noah. I'm sure many animals that are extinct today were alive in his time.
NathanH83 10 months ago
@NathanH83 good point as these animals would have been the niphilim that the ancient texts of many cultures speak of.. they may have been the laviathons n behemoths of myths... after all wasnt the ceocanth fish recently thought extinct for milions of years found alive!!!! evolution is not about getting rid of the old its about survival and if you have a good design for survival than you'll survive...
DBZass 5 months ago
I like Kent Hovind's idea that it is actually more like a brachiosaurus type dinosaur, the description fits it well and unlike the creature in this video, in Job God describes it as having a tail like a Cedar Tree, the animal in this video has the tail of a piece of rope.
A brachiosaurus has an enormous tail though and is much bigger also!
TruthSeekingOne 10 months ago
@TruthSeekingOne You are confusing this passage of scripture with Job 40, where it talks about the behemoth. Kent Hovind believes that the behemoth in Job 40 is a brachiosaurus. That's the passage that talks about it having a tail like a cedar.
This passage in Job 39:9 is about the unicorn "a.k.a. rhinoceros". In modern translations it says wild ox.
Kent Hovind believes the unicorn in the Bible is a monoclonius.
But the latin says "rinoceros."
So I thought, maybe its a paraceratherium.
NathanH83 10 months ago
@NathanH83 Ohhh excuse me lol :)
Yea I was referring to behemoth in chapter 40, silly me.
TruthSeekingOne 10 months ago
@TruthSeekingOne lol
NathanH83 10 months ago
Wonderful!
JamalYushua 10 months ago
excellent presentation. Behemoth was extremely well done and I'm looking forward to "Leviathan"? Hopefully :)
robertmcmc 10 months ago