Cryptids in the Bible Series: Leviathan

Normally, I keep things on this site pretty regional in nature. I concentrate on the goings on here in Texas and the surrounding states of Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico with the occasional glimpse into interesting happenings south of the border in Old Mexico. However, I’m going to widen things out a bit for this particular entry to discuss a question that has interested me for a long time; are cryptid creatures mentioned in the Bible?

A few weeks ago, I was reading in the book of Job. I’ve always found this Old Testament book very interesting. Whether you believe the book of Job to be a true historical account of events that really took place or just an allegory meant to make a point really makes no difference for our purposes here. What I’m interested in is a creature mentioned and described in great detail in the book. This creature has been the subject of much debate for centuries and may have inspired stories of a terrible monster that is found in the mythology of nearly every ancient culture the world over: the Leviathan.

The Leviathan is actually mentioned several times in the Old Testament. Psalm 74:14 and Psalm 104:26 reference the Leviathan. Of particular interest to me is Isaiah 27:1 which reads:

“In that day the Lord will take his terrible, swift sword and punish Leviathan, the swiftly moving serpent, the coiling, writhing serpent. He will kill the dragon of the sea.” (New Living Translation)

The books referenced above all describe a creature of great strength that lives in the sea: a classic sea serpent in every sense. Leviathan sounds like an animal for which a great amount of respect should be afforded. Most biblical scholars believe that, in Isaiah, the term Leviathan is being used symbolically as a term for Pharaoh, the king of Egypt. While this may be true, the writer of the passage is comparing the Egyptian ruler to what seems to be an animal known to the people of the time; a “coiling, writhing serpent” of great power. The “dragon of the sea.”

While the Old Testament books above make brief mention of the Leviathan, the book that actually goes into the greatest detail about the beast is the book of Job. It gives a very clear picture of the appearance, size, and abilities of the Leviathan.

For those unfamiliar with the story of Job allow me to provide a bit of context. Job is generally believed to be the oldest book of the Bible and has a little bit of everything. Job rises to a position of importance and prosperity only to lose everything (wealth, family, friends, and health) but gathers himself and rises again. The book centers around the eternal conflict between good and evil as Satan spars with God over whether or not Job will turn his back on his Creator if his life suddenly, and without warning, goes awry. Satan does everything in his power to get Job to curse God but ultimately fails, as Job remains faithful. The purpose of the book seems to be to address the age-old question of why bad things happen to good people. It is widely considered to be one of the greatest books in the history of world literature. It is during Job’s low period when he begins to question God as to why these terrible things have befallen him that God answers him sternly. It is during this exchange that the Leviathan is described in great detail. You can read the entire passage in Job: 41 but I’ll hit some of the highlights below.

Job 41: 1 – “Can you catch Leviathan with a hook or put a noose around its jaw?” (New Living Translation)

Job 41: 7 – “Will its hide be hurt by spears or its head by harpoons?” (New Living Translation)

Job 41: 9 – “No it is useless to try to capture it. The hunter who attempts it will be knocked down.” (New Living Translation)

In the passage God is making a point to Job. He is basically saying, “Who are you to question me?” He emphasizes his strength and omnipotence by asking if Job, or any human, can capture, kill, or tame the mighty Leviathan. Whatever Leviathan was it was obviously quite powerful and dangerous. Also, it was clearly a creature of the water. Other more descriptive passages follow:

Job 41: 12-17 – “I want to emphasize Leviathan’s enormous strength and graceful form. Who can strip off its hide and who can penetrate its double layer of armor? Who could pry open its jaws? For its teeth are terrible. Its scales are like rows of shields so tightly sealed together that no air can get between them. Each scale sticks so tight to the next. They interlock and cannot be penetrated.” (New Living Translation)

Now things are getting really interesting. The physical description above is pretty detailed. Based on these passages, most scholars believe that the creature being described is a Nile crocodile. I feel confident most people out there know that the Nile crocodile is a deadly predator. It is a known man-eater. Certainly the assumption that the Leviathan is a Nile crocodile is an understandable and logical assumption based only on Job 41: 12-17. The problem is that the descriptions of the Leviathan do not stop after verse 17. They continue and the features and abilities ascribed to the Leviathan are really quite fantastic.

Job 41: 18-21 – “When it sneezes, it flashes light. Its eyes are like the red of dawn. Lightning leaps from its mouth; flames of fire flash out. Smoke streams from its nostrils like steam from a pot of heated over burning rushes. Its breath would kindle coals, for flames shoot from its mouth.” (New Living Translation)

THAT is pretty wild stuff. It gets more incredible still as the strength of the Leviathan is described.

Job 41: 22-34 – “The tremendous strength in Leviathan’s neck strikes terror wherever it goes. Its flesh is hard and firm and cannot be penetrated. Its heart is hard as rock, hard as millstone. When it rises, the mighty are afraid, gripped by terror. No sword can stop it, no spear, dart, or javelin. Iron is nothing but straw to that creature, and bronze is like rotten wood. Arrows cannot make it flee. Stones shot from a sling are like bits of grass and it laughs at the swish of javelins. Its belly is covered with scales as sharp as glass. It plows up the ground as it plows through the mud. Leviathan makes the water boil with its commotion. It stirs the depths like a pot of ointment. The water glistens in its wake, making the sea look white. Nothing on earth is its equal, no other creature so fearless. Of all the creatures, it is the proudest. It is the king of beasts.” (New Living Translation)

Here is where I feel the Nile crocodile theory loses some steam. The crocodile was widely known even in ancient times and, while a predator worthy of inspiring terror, it was a far cry from the beast described in Job 41. Why would the author of Job ascribe fire-breathing abilities to a crocodile? What crocodile, fearsome though it might be, could ever “kindle coals” with the breath from its mouth? In addition to the fire-breathing qualities ascribed to the Leviathan, the animal is described as all but invulnerable. Again, crocodiles are big and dangerous reptiles and are well armored; however, the statement, “No sword can stop it, no spear, dart, or javelin,” certainly is not, nor has it ever been accurate when it comes to these animals. Crocodiles have been hunted and killed by men since ancient times. Certainly, the phrases “Iron is nothing but straw to that creature,” and “bronze is like rotten wood” do not apply to the crocodile.

It is possible that the writer of the book of Job engaged in a bit of hyperbole when describing the beast known as Leviathan. His point, after all, was to show how powerful and strong God was compared to his follower Job. He certainly makes his point. Still, this doesn’t ring completely true to me. If the writer was describing a crocodile, why would he describe abilities and characteristics that his audience would know this reptile did not possess? Wouldn’t that have hurt his credibility?

I want to ask those of you reading this a favor at this point. I would like any of you who have young children to read the description of Leviathan found in Job: 41 to them and ask them what animal they think is being described. I’d say chances are good they would come up with a candidate within moments:

A dragon.

I must admit that dragon myths have always interested me. How can ancient civilizations in Europe, China, Japan, Central America, and South America, and other locales around the globe all have stories of the same type of creatures? These cultures had little to no contact with one another. What was the basis for these similar legends? Was there an animal, found around the world, now long extinct that is the basis for the dragon myth? If so, is this mystery animal the creature described in the book of Job?

I suppose we’ll never know.

Cryptids in the Bible Series: Bigfoot and the Bible

Faith: (1) Belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): Firm belief in something for which there is no proof (3): Something that is believed with extremely strong conviction; especially a system of religious beliefs.

Faith can be the greatest thing in the world. Faith gives hope to those in terrible situations. Faith provides us with the strength to get out of bed each and every morning, even when things are not going well for us. Faith strengthens our resolve in difficult circumstances and comforts us in the knowledge that no matter how badly someone has screwed up they are not beyond redemption. Faith can be powerful and wonderful.

Faith: (1) Allegiance to duty, a person, or an idea (2): Believing something or someone without question.

Faith can also be twisted into something negative and frightening. Blind allegiance to a person or an idea can make one close-minded, obtuse, and blind to facts that might point to an answer or fact that the individual is uncomfortable with for some reason. Often, blind faith leads to denial even in the face of unrelenting fact. Sometimes the reason is as simple as someone not wanting to admit they have been wrong, maybe for decades, about something. Sometimes the individual has some sort of stake in the status quo and not only wants to deny newly discovered facts but to suppress them. It is my opinion that this is part of the reason the possibility of the sasquatch actually existing is ridiculed, scoffed at, and just plain ignored by so many. For some reason, many find the possibility that we might share our planet with another bipedal hominid to be a direct assault on their faith in God. If such a creature existed then it might render their faith meaningless.

Some have not merely dismissed the possibility of the sasquatch. Instead, they have taken a different tact and looked to scripture in an effort to unearth some possible mention of the creature in the Bible. If beings matching the description of bigfoot are mentioned in the Bible, that would mean the creatures were just another animal created by God. If that were true, then the implications of evolution, Darwinism, and missing links would need not be considered at all. Those who have sought bigfoot in the Bible have presented some interesting theories based on scripture. The more commonly discussed are presented below.



One of the more popular theories is that sasquatches are the descendants of Cain. The basis for this theory emerges from the fact that Cain was cursed by God to be a restless wanderer on the earth as punishment for slaying his brother, Abel. Cain was marked by God so that any who saw him would not kill him and end his torment (Genesis 3: 10-16). One interpretation of all this is that Cain could not die and wanders all over the earth to this day. The "mark," I've heard others say, is that he was covered in hair and naked. This, obviously, matches the description of the sasquatch. If you continue with the Genesis account, however, it says Cain went on to live in the land of Nod, east of Eden, and fathered Enoch, for whom he built a great city (Genesis 3: 17). The account goes on to name multiple descendants. I've seen nothing in the description of the descendants to lead me to believe that they were hair-covered beings. Obviously, sasquatches do not build cities. Neither do I believe that every sasquatch witness has actually had a Cain sighting. The fact that Cain went on to be a builder of cities, was the father of many, apparently, normal (non hair-covered) descendents, and that the theory is dependent on Cain being the one and only sasquatch on the entire earth makes this one a stretch to say the least, in my opinion.



Another popular biblical theory is that the sasquatch species is a remnant population of the legendary Nephilim (giants) of the Old Testament. Genesis 6: 4 reads:

"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days - and also afterward- when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children with them. They were the heroes of old, men of reknown."

Many have interpreted the verse to mean that the Nephilim were not human, at least not what we would consider human, and they were breeding with the "daughters of men." Whatever the case, the Bible seems to be clearly differentiating between the Nephilim, whatever they were, and the daughters of men (humans). The fact that the two different races could mate and have viable offspring certainly supports the idea that the Nephilim were primates of some sort. It is further posited by many that these offspring would have been very large and, to some degree, giants in their own right. Could the sasquatch be a descendant of these offspring? Some think so. Again, there is precious little to go on when it comes to what the Nephilim looked like. Obviously, they were very large and must have been at least “man-like” in order to breed with human women. While nothing close to the classic description of a sasquatch is attributed to the Nephilim, with the exception of their abnormal size, there does seem to have been something very different about them that made the “fraternization” between them and human females displeasing to God. Certainly, the thought of this kind of mixing between humans and other primates is an anathema to us now. Was this always the case? There has long been an underlying suspicion that sasquatches are more than open to mating with human females. Many of the Native American tribes relate tales to this day of sasquatches who, in the past, would abduct females that wandered too far away from the protection of the tribe. Albert Ostman himself speculated that the reason he was snatched from his remote campsite in British Columbia back in 1924 was that the big male who toted him off considered him a possible mate for the adolescent female within his family group. Such theories are, of course, mere speculation but it is interesting that the idea and/or fear of such couplings hangs on to this very day.



Another biblical character that is often mentioned when it comes to this topic is Esau. Certainly, Esau’s physical attributes are described in far more detail than whatever mark God afflicted Cain with or what exactly the Nephilim might have looked like. Many lean toward the idea that sasquatches are the descendants of Esau, son of Isaac and Rebekah. Genesis 25: 24-25 tells of the birth of Esau and his brother Jacob:

"When the time came for her to give birth, there were twin boys in her womb. The first to come out was red, and his whole body was like a hairy garment; so they named him Esau."

Esau is thought to have meant hairy. Esau was also called Edom, which meant red.

Genesis 25: 27-28 continues:

"The boys grew up and Esau became a skillful hunter, a man of the open country, while Jacob was a quiet man, staying among the tents."

The well-known story continues with Jacob tricking Esau out of his birthright and stealing Isaac's blessing for his first-born son by pretending to be Esau. Jacob tricks his father by covering himself with the hairy hide of a goat so that when his father laid hands on him he would believe it was Esau he was touching. The fact that this deception worked gives testament to how hairy Esau must have been. The reddish hue of Esau’s hair-covered body is reminiscent of the brownish-red coloration often attributed to sasquatches today. The fact that Esau is described as a skillful hunter that preferred living in the wild and the taste of wild game to camp life and less exotic fare lends more credence to this theory.

There are problems with the idea that the sasquatches seen today are the descendants of Esau, however. As is documented in the Bible, Esau used language, rode horses, wore clothing, and commanded men. To think that his descendants would have somehow devolved into beings that, by all accounts, are much more primitive is unlikely in my mind.

There are other, less popular, biblical theories floating around out there that involve beings that some believe might have been sasquatches or, at least, their ancestors. It is said that the Israelites, after making their exodus from Egypt, were pestered by rock-throwing primitives resembling apes during their desert wanderings. Rock throwing continues to be a big part of described sasquatch behavior today. Another account, now excluded from most biblical texts, is the story of a Nephilim (giant) named Og who bartered his way onto the ark of Noah in order to escape the flood that destroyed all of humanity by promising to become a servant of the family. Needless to say, this giant reneged on his promise once the waters receded from the earth and he was able to set his large feet on dry land. How he might have propagated, being the sole survivor of his race, never seems to be discussed by those who favor the theory.

I don't really put much stock in these various theories. I do think the sasquatch is more than just another animal. They are more intelligent, stealthier, more cunning, and more wary than any other animal of which I'm aware. My goal, and that of the TBRC, is to figure out what they are and where they came from (lineage). Hopefully, one day soon, we will do just that. Until then, speculation on whether or not they are the descendents of people mentioned in the Bible, surviving Gigantopithecus blackii, or a remnant population of Neanderthals will go on unabated.

I don’t really understand why people of faith are often threatened by the possible existence of this species. In my mind, the sasquatch is just another one of God's wonders. Whether the Bible does or does not mention them doesn’t matter to me a bit. Many, actually most, creatures are omitted from scripture. The Bible really isn’t the story of the animal kingdom, after all, so this should hardly be surprising. Neither does the idea that the sasquatch is closely related to we humans disturb me. The DNA of a chimpanzee is 96% identical to that of humans. Maybe a sasquatch is genetically 98-99% identical to we humans. No big deal to me. These thoughts don’t shake my faith at all.

I believe in God. I believe the sasquatch is a real living creature. I don’t think the two beliefs have to be mutually exclusive.