NARRATOR: There is a treasure
trove of strange and mysterious creatures,
inside a book we've known for thousands of years. The Bible is full of beasts -
did they really exist, can they be found today
or are they just myth? Investigators are now
re-examining the bible, finding clues that will help
us solve the mysteries surrounding
miraculous animals. We now, can find Jonah's
whale... but it's not in the sea! Moses' staff did not turn into
a snake! We can dig up something
bigger! If we can uncover Behemoth and
Leviathan, tradition says we have to eat the
monsters! And the serpent with legs in
the Garden of Eden may actually exist! To uncover the secrets we need
to decode ancient writings, and unlock the
hidden meanings inside symbols, myths and legends. If we succeed, we will come
face to face with the most mysterious beasts in the
Bible. [♪ ] [♪ ] NARRATOR: The most infamous
beast in the Bible is the serpent, the most
sinister inhabitant of the Garden of Eden. [♪ ] NARRATOR: It was the serpent
that tempted Eve. [♪ ] NARRATOR: In the Book of
Genesis, the serpent has some disturbing
characteristics. The traditional belief is that
it was a creature with legs. [♪ ] NARRATOR: The serpent found
Eve in the garden and told her to taste the
fruit from the Tree of Knowledge - the only fruit
that God had forbidden both Adam and Eve to eat. If she ate the fruit, the
serpent told Eve she would be like God and know the
difference between good and evil. Tempted, Eve bit into the
fruit and then shared it with Adam. [♪ ] NARRATOR: And so God banished
Adam and Eve from the garden and He cursed the
serpent, "On your belly you shall crawl, and
dust you will eat all the days of your life!" The ancients said that this is
the curse that changed the serpent into a
snake, its legs torn from its body. NARRATOR: It's not surprising
that this sinful tale has marked
serpents with nasty reputations. For the ancients, these
creatures always had dark and magical qualities. There's something unnatural
about their movements and character. And a snake with legs-well,
that's just creepy. There could never have been
such a creature... or could there? NARRATOR: Surprisingly,
ancient Christian manuscripts provide us with
several candidates. For centuries, the word
"serpent" was applied to a number of different beasts
with similar characteristics. There are detailed catalogues
of these creatures that just may lead
us to Eve's legged serpent. This is an 800-year-old
bestiary-a book of beasts. ORCHARD: Bestiaries are part
of an extraordinary long-lived tradition...going into the
middle ages, but one which has its roots going way back
into the Classical world. The one I'm looking at, dated
to around the 3~ 4h century, you can actually see
the pores of skin where the hide of the animal
has been scraped-the hair has been
scraped away-and on the other side you can see the
veins on the flesh side. So it's a book about beasts,
and it's made from the skin of beasts. NARRATOR: In the ancient
bestiaries, great attention was given to
bizarre, exotic, and monstrous creatures. And the possible suspects for
Eve's serpent - the legged snakes and salamanders
- played the most powerful roles. ORCHARD: Here in this
bestiary, a remarkable picture pertaining to the
salamander. Quite different from the
creatures that we know today. We have a dead man lying on
the ground. We have to the right a series
of snake-like salamanders emerging from
flames on the one side, and on the other side, the
tail of a salamander disappearing into a well to
infect it. And above, a spreading tree
with salamanders winding round the branches to
eat the apples and infect them to kill the man
below. "The salamander" is what it
says, I'll translate part of it: "Among all
poisonous creatures, it has the greatest power, for
other poisonous creatures kill one by one. But this creature kills very
many people at the same time. For if it snakes its way into
a tree it can infect all the apples with poison and
anyone who eats those apples it kills. Because this text mentions the
salamander poisoning apples by climbing into a
tree, very early on it gets associated then with the
serpent in the Garden of Eden. NARRATOR: Could the serpent
described in Genesis be a poisonous
"Salamandra"? If we go back in time, long
before these bestiaries were written, we
find a biblical commentary over 1600 years
old. And in it, Eve's serpent has
some tree-poisoning talents. BEAL: In this text called the
"Apocalypse of Moses", Eve tells her children... BEAL: ...her own version of
what happened with the tree and the serpent. And in her version, she says
that the serpent poured the poison of his
wickedness which is lust into the fruit of the tree and
then took and bent down the branch low so that
Eve could reach it. And she reached and took the
fruit and ate of it. And as soon as she did, she
knew everything had changed. NARRATOR: This manuscript
tells us that the serpent in Genesis poisoned the fruit
of the tree before giving it to Eve - and the
later bestiary images showS the creature known as "the
salamandra" doing exactly the same thing. It leads us to a surprising
new theory - the biblical serpent with legs
may actually have been a salamander. Amazingly, many salamanders
living today are poisonous. But could they really be
powerful enough to poison the fruit of a tree? SLIFKIN: This little guy is a
fire salamander. When he is full-grown he'll
measure about ten inches long. Now he is called a fire
salamander for two reasons: number one his skin
is marked with a very fiery pattern, so a warning to
predators. He has these beautiful vivid
yellow and orange markings on his body, which
advertise the fact that he secretes venom onto
his skin, which is why I'm going to have to wash
my hands carefully after handling this little
guy. In the middle ages it was
thought that they are highly venomous to the extent
that there were legends about how a single
salamander poisoned a river and killed thousands of
people. In truth the venom is not
particularly powerful, certainly not enough to kill a
person. The other reason why he is
called a fire salamander is because of the ancient
belief that he is generated in fire. People thought that
salamanders were born in fire and the medieval
commentaries explain that its blood therefore renders
one fireproof. [♪ ] NARRATOR: There is a long
tradition associating the salamander with flames and
hellfire. People believed that the
salamander couldn't be burned just like the souls of
the damned that remained unconsumed by the
fires of hell. These devilish characteristics
certainly make the beast an obvious candidate
for Eve's satanic serpent. The belief in the creature's
magical fireproof properties probably
originates from a behavior common to many
species of salamander-hibernating in
rotting logs. When wood was brought indoors
and put on the fire, the creatures
"mysteriously" appeared from the flames. People began to believe that
the salamander could grow fireproof wool, withstand
any heat, and even put out fires. SLIFKIN: Now this little guy
doesn't have any wool and he can't live in fire
either. In fact everything we know
about modern science tells us that no creature is
generated from fire. And many people likewise
dismiss the idea of salamander blood having
fireproof characteristics as being nothing more than
ancient myth with no basis in
fact. However zoologists have
recently discovered that newts and salamanders do
possess fireproof characteristics, not in their
blood but rather in various liquid secretions. Salamanders have glands which
secrete fluids over their body to keep them moist. Now zoologists have observed
that when these salamanders pass through fire,
they start secreting these fluids over their body. The fluids then froth up into
a foam, which amazingly means that the
salamander is able to pass through the flames unharmed. The foam dissipates the heat
from their bodies. So as much as people today
might dismiss the entire legend of the fireproof
salamander as myth, we see that there is truth to it as
amazing as that is. NARRATOR: So the ancients had
it right. The salamander can secrete
poison and walk through flames. But is this the legged serpent
that tempted Eve? It turns out, that the
salamander is not our best candidate. The positive traditions
surrounding the creature beat out its bad reputation. It was used most often to
represent the good and holy - like saints that could
withstand the flames of torture. The salamander even became a
symbol for Jesus after his crucifixion on his journey
through the fires of hell. And so, associating the holy
salamander with the sinful serpent that tempted
Eve is a contradiction. But there are other
contenders. If we go even further back in
time, not just centuries but millions of
years, we find evidence for an extraordinary prehistoric
predator that resembles the Genesis description... and that may lead us to a
living serpent with legs! [♪ ] NARRATOR: Today, biologists
and paleontologists regard the story of the serpent with legs
in the Garden of Eden as simply that, a story. But surprisingly, they do have
something to say about snakes with legs. HEAD: To the left we have a
Savannah Monitor lizard, and in my hand to the right
here we have a boa constrictor-two animals that
look superficially very different from each
another but we know from looking at their anatomy, the
fossil record and their genetic sequences that
these animals share a common ancestor about a
hundred million years ago. The snake body plan evolved
from a body very similar to what we see in this
lizard with four limbs, a short trunk and a
long tail, into the body that we see in this Boa with a
very long trunk, no forelimbs at all and no
shoulder-girdle and a very, very short tail. And amazingly enough if you
look at some species of snakes today you can still
see the remains of their hind limbs. In this Ball Python we can see
the remnants of the hind limbs as these very small
little spurs at the base of the tail. Within these spurs are very
small thighbones, the femura, which are the only
remaining elements left of the hind limb in primitive
snakes. NARRATOR: It's hard to believe
these tiny spurs are evidence that snakes once
had legs but recent discoveries of ancient fossils
reinforce the theory. HEAD: These fossils were
recovered from shell and marine rocks dated between 99
and 95 million years old. These snakes show the body
plan that we can see in living snakes such as this
python. The amazing thing about these
snakes is that complete skeletons have been
recovered that include external hind limbs,
including feet and toes. NARRATOR: Could this really be
the fossil of an ancient snake leg? It just so happens that there
is more evidence connecting this 95
million-year-old leg to modern snakes. Many living snakes today
possess a specialized form of feeding called wide gape
feeding. HEAD: Wide gape feeding in
snakes is a specialization where the bones of the skull
in the jaw joint are actually suspended far behind
the rest of the head relative to other
lizards. This allows snakes to have a
very long lower jaw that can swing out very deeply. Additionally the bones of the
lower jaw are not fused at the front of the
mouth as they are in mammals and other animals. Instead these two bones remain
separate and when a snake opens its mouth they are
able to swing wide apart to create a very deep
gape, which allows snakes to eat a variety of
large bodied prey. NARRATOR: Biologists consider
wide gape feeding an advanced characteristic
found only in snakes. The 99 million-year-old skulls
discovered among recent fossils show adaptations for
wide gape feeding. It means that these ancient
skulls are definitely snake-not lizard,
not dinosaur. And because the skulls are
attached to skeletal bodies that have legs, they
just may be a direct link connecting modern snakes
to ancient snakes with legs. Could a fossil snake with legs
be the great, great, great grandfather of all
modern snakes? It's an interesting idea
especially when comparing the Genesis story to the
evolution of snakes. In the Garden of Eden, after
being cursed by God, the serpent loses its legs. Modern science points to the
fossil record and millions of years of evolution
to show the same result: the serpent lost its
legs as it evolved to burrow. HEAD: Primitive living snakes
are all burrowers which has led some people to
conclude that snakes actually originated their
elongate body plan and reduce limbs for a burrowing
lifestyle. NARRATOR: And there is a
burrowing beast that exists today that biologists
classify under Squamata, the same lineage as
all snakes and lizards. It is in the strange
sub-category of Amphisbanea, the worm lizards,
which we find yet another suspect for Eve's
serpent with legs. This is the Bipes! [♪ ] These subterranean
amphisbanians have two powerful front legs. Each foot has five sharp claws
that allow the Bipes to tunnel efficiently through
the soil. They spend most of their time
in shallow tunnels feeding on ants, termites and
larvae. This particular species can be
found in Baja California and Mexico but it
has close relatives in the Mediterranean and the
Middle East. The legged serpent, a creature
considered by most as only mythical, may
actually exist today. The salamander, the
Amphisbaena, the prehistoric snake - all three
possess, or at one time possessed, legs. Exactly what kind of creature
the Book of Genesis tells us God cursed
may never be known, but we now have three possible
suspects... or perhaps, we have three
descendants of the serpent that tempted Eve. Whether legged or legless, the
serpent was an incredible symbol of power. It appears in many verses of
the bible and even slithers into the hands of
Moses... which leads us to another
mystery. But this time the secret is
inside a rod. And the serpent transforms
into something much more powerful. [♪ ] NARRATOR: The ancient Hebrew
of the Bible describes fantastic
beasts that are incredible symbols of power. But modern translations often
contain mistakes that are misleading. By going back to the original
text we can uncover animals lost to us for
centuries. And one of the most beastly
secrets in the Bible slithers beside the
serpent that God gave to Moses. [♪ ] It is written that God's voice
came to Moses from a burning bush. He told Moses to free the
Hebrews from Pharaoh's slavery, lead them out of
Egypt and into the Promised Land. He assured Moses that he would
help him to perform wonders to convince the
Egyptians of His power. He commanded Moses to throw
down his staff. The ancient texts tell us that
Moses' staff transformed into a "nachash" -
"nachash" in Hebrew means snake. "Grab it by its tail," said
God. And Moses did. The snake turned back into a
rod. And so Moses went back to
Egypt to enlist his brother Aaron. It was time to take the rod
and challenge Pharaoh. In ancient Israel and in
ancient Egypt, a rod was more than just a walking
stick. It was a symbol of power. It represented leadership and
authority. Uh, in Hebrew the word is
"matteh". And matteh means "rod" but it
also has another meaning which is "tribe" and
so matteh is not only the rod that the leader holds
but also the tribe over which the leader has
power. NARRATOR: In Exodus, we're
told that Moses' tribe was in trouble. Pharaoh had enslaved his
people. And so he and Aaron travel
into the heart of Egypt to challenge Pharaoh, to shout
their now famous words, "Let my people go." But this time, the Bible tells
us, God placed a mighty power in Aaron's rod! The Bible makes it clear that
it was Aaron, the brother of Moses, who threw
the rod before Pharaoh. Sure that the Hebrew's God was
powerless, Pharaoh demands to see a miracle... and Aaron throws down his
staff! Back at the burning bush, when
Moses threw down his staff, it transformed into a
"nachash", a snake. And most translations of the
Exodus story describe the same thing happening for
Aaron. But they've got it all wrong! That's not at all what
materialized in front of Pharaoh. The original Hebrew tells us
that when Aaron threw down his rod, it transformed
into a "tannin"-a beast considered to
be so powerful by the Egyptians that
they dedicated entire temples to the creature. Constructed with such devotion
that the massive ruins still stand 3000 years
later. What kind of beast was this
"tannin", why was it so revered, and how does it
change our understanding of the Bible? SLIFKIN: When Moses and Aaron
go before Pharaoh, and Aaron throws down his staff,
it turns into a tannin. Now the word tannin is used
here in reference to that stated in the book of
Ezekiel. The Book of Ezekiel speaks of
Pharaoh, king of Egypt, as being the great tannin who
lives in the River Nile and declares himself King
and creator of all his surroundings... SLIFKIN: What is the great
tannin and the River Nile? It's the Nile crocodile, the
number one predator in Egypt. NARRATOR: The way Ezekiel
tells it, God compared Pharaoh to the "great
tannin" crouching in the river. And then God warned the
crocodile, "I will put hooks in your jaws, and I will pull
you out of your streams..." SLIFKIN: Pharaoh, king of
Egypt... is symbolically represented as
being the great Nile crocodile. NARRATOR: And so, for
centuries, there has been a mistranslation of "tannin",
probably stemming back to when the
Bible was translated from Hebrew to Greek. But Ezekiel makes it clear
that a "tannin" is not a snake. So in the Book of Exodus, when
Aaron challenges Pharaoh and throws down his
staff, God gives him control of a monstrous Nile
crocodile! Pharaoh calls to his priests,
commanding them to throw down their staffs. [♪ ] And so begins the battle. [♪ ] What is the significance
behind the fact that Aaron's rod transformed into a
crocodile when challenging the ruler of
Egypt? The mystery surrounding this
biblical beast begins here. On these great stone columns
and walls is evidence that one of the
oldest and most revered of the Egyptian deities was the
crocodile god, Sobek. IKRAM: We are in the temple of
Kom Ombo in the southern part of Egypt, lying on the
banks of the Nile. It's an unusual temple because
it's dedicated to the infinitely glamorous
crocodile god, Sobek. IKRAM: Sobek is often shown as
a man with a crocodile head or just as a
crocodile. Sobek was one of the most
important gods in the Egyptian pantheon. He was probably one of the top
ten or fifteen gods. And over time his popularity
grew and grew. Part of this was because he
was a combination of a fertility god and a sun god. NARRATOR: The ancient
Egyptians chose a crocodile for Sobek because
they believed the crocodile had magical powers. Female crocodiles seemed to
know when the Nile's waters would flood. Just before the flood, they
would lay 18 to 80 eggs. Their nests would always be
above the line of the flood and therefore never disturbed
by the rushing waters. IKRAM: The other thing of
course, is that crocodiles
spend a lot of time on the
sandbanks, sunning themselves. And that made them a very
ideal choice to be a solar
deity. And if you look at the scales
of a crocodile, they shine in the light and
they look like gold and again this is reflective
of the sun. The Egyptians actually had a
live crocodile in a pool in the back of the temple, and
this was supposed to be the incarnation of... IKRAM: ...the god Sobek, and
pilgrims would come and visit him, bringing him
offerings of food and drink, meat... ...and bread and even wine so
the crocodile would be appeased. So to kill a sacred crocodile
would be an incredible crime. NARRATOR: So, in the tale of
Exodus, God transforms Aaron's staff into one of
Egypt's most celebrated animals. Aaron's control over the
mighty Nile crocodile would have challenged Pharaoh's
every fiber of belief. It looked as if his god Sobek
was in trouble! NARRATOR: If Aaron's crocodile
could win this battle, how much of a
challenge would that be to Pharaoh's power? The recently unearthed
mummified remains of 2000 year-old crocodiles just may
hold the answers. Believe it or not, there are
secrets inside the belly of this biblical beast. [♪ ] NARRATOR: The bible describes
marvelous and fantastic creatures. New investigations into the
origins of these beasts have uncovered shocking
truths. For centuries there have been
monsters hiding from us in plain sight. It all goes back to a
mistranslation in the biblical tale of the Exodus. In Hebrew text, Aaron's rod
does not transform into a snake, it becomes a
mighty Nile crocodile. For any Pharaoh, this would
have been very intimidating. The crocodile was one of
Egypt's most revered gods. If Aaron's crocodile could
swallow Pharaoh's, how much kingly power was at
stake? The true meaning behind the
Exodus showdown can finally be uncovered with the
help of a crocodile mummy. IKRAM: This crocodile is at
least 2000 years old, but probably more like 2,300
or something like that. Crocodiles were mummified
because the Egyptians believed that of course you
live eternally and gods too are eternal. And they believed that the
spirit of the god Sobek came into a sacred crocodile
that was in residence at the temple. And when the crocodile died,
they would mummify it and bury it with great pomp
and splendor because of course it was a god. Now sometimes so that the
crocodiles would keep their shape, they stuffed
their internal cavities with papyrus. And sometimes they were
inscribed. So some of the crocodile
mummies are not only interesting because they are
mummies of crocodiles. IKRAM: But also because they
have given us hundreds and thousands of
documents from ancient Egypt. NARRATOR: In the early 1900's,
hidden in the shifting sands outside the ancient
Egyptian town of Tebtunis, archaeologists uncovered 1500
crocodile mummies. Thirty-one of these mummies
were stuffed with papyri. The crocodile cavities
contained a veritable bouillabaisse of ancient texts
spanning not just centuries, but cultures. Amongst the writings were
Greek poems and plays suggesting that the crocodile
cult was not only popular with Egyptians. NARRATOR: A hundred years
later, archaeologists are still unearthing this city. What can the ancient fragments
tell us about the significance of Aaron's
crocodile in the Exodus story? Can the new discoveries here
shine light on our biblical beast? If you're asking crocodile
questions in Tebtunis, there's only one man to talk
to - Claudio Gallazzi. And one of this professor's
most favorite places to dig is just down
this ancient road and outside the walls of another
crocodile temple. NARRATOR: ...and many papyri
fragments unearthed by Gallazzi's team contain
questions to the crocodile god Sobek. NARRATOR: An oracular god was
considered a wise counselor, able to predict the
future. Because the ancient Egyptians
witnessed the crocodilian habit of
predicting flood lines-never laying eggs too
low on the banks of the Nile-they considered the
crocodile a psychic deity. NARRATOR: After receiving the
written notes in the crocodile temple, the priests,
apparently channeling Sobek, would
provide written answers. The original questions were
then buried in the sands outside the temple wall. These small papyri prayers
have been sealed shut for over 2000 years. The secrets they hold can show
us the true power behind Pharaoh's crocodile
god. [♪ ] NARRATOR: Some of them contain
simple requests, others, advice on marriage. Others still, list a variety
of suspects for a variety of crimes, asking
Sobek to pick out the culprits. NARRATOR: All together, they
paint a pretty vivid picture. NARRATOR: And what the picture
shows is that Sobek, the crocodile god, had
become one of the most popular deities in the Middle
Kingdom. Romans and Greeks began to
believe in the Egyptian god. Moses and Aaron's god would
have been up against some serious worship. And so when we read the
correct translation of the Exodus story and Aaron's rod
transforms into a crocodile - not a snake - the
symbolism becomes crystal clear. For the first time in
millennia, the true meaning behind this biblical
beast is unveiled. In the Exodus showdown, when
Aaron's crocodile faces Pharaoh's god Sobek,
ancient Egypt's entire world-view is at stake. [♪ ] NARRATOR: According to the
Bible, Aaron's crocodile slid across the bloodstained
courtyard... and gulped down every last one
of Pharaoh's reptiles. [♪ ] And Pharaoh's power went down
with them. [♪ ] NARRATOR: The Bible tells us
that Pharaoh didn't get the message. His heart was stubborn. He ignored the warnings and
crocodile casualties and he refused to free Moses
and Aaron's people. It was a mistake that brought
disaster upon Egypt. According to the Book of
Exodus, God punished Pharaoh and unleashed His many
beasts on land and in water. These were the ten biblical
plagues and six of them involved beasts. What's most concerning is that
every single one of these mini-monsters still
exists today. [♪ ] NARRATOR: The bible is full of
beasts. But just how literally are we
supposed to interpret the monsters of scripture? We've found the answers by
re-examining the ancient manuscripts. And what we've uncovered is
very real! In the Exodus story, when
Pharaoh refused to free the Israelites from slavery,
we're told that God unleashed "hell" upon
Egypt. Six of the ten biblical
plagues involved beasts. Being small didn't mean these
critters weren't deadly. Their incredible numbers made
these mini-monsters unbearable. And while some of these
creatures are well known, others are shrouded in
mystery. After turning the river Nile
to blood, the Bible says God commanded Aaron to
stretch his staff over the water. Hordes of frogs jumped out and
smothered Egypt. To decode what beasts followed
the frogs we have to go back to the original
words. BEAL: Unlike modern English,
biblical Hebrew has a very small vocabulary;
so one word can mean different things in
different contexts. So when we're looking at the
biblical plague stories, looking at these
words uh, referring to the different plagues, our English
translations might be very different from what
the ancients who first told and heard these
stories were imagining. NARRATOR: It's plague number 3
where the mysteries really begin. The popular understanding of
this plague and those that followed is ripe with
mistranslation. BEAL: The third plague is the
plague of, in Hebrew, "kinim". Kinim means biting insects. Now a lot of uh, traditional
English translations have translated
that as the plague of lice, and they do
bite. But it would make just as much
or maybe more sense to translate it as mosquitoes
or gnats, which are much more aggressive. NARRATOR: The aggressive blood
sucking and disease carrying swarms of mosquitoes
and gnats sound devastating and makes for a
much more monstrous plague number 3. The fourth plague was flies... or was it something much
worse? BEAL: The fourth plague is the
plague of "Arov". In Hebrew, Arov refers to a
swarm, a swarm of what is less clear. The idea that this was a
plague of flies probably goes back to the Septuagint,
the Greek translation of Hebrew
scriptures. In the Septuagint,... BEAL: ...the word "Arov" was
translated into a Greek word that refers... ...to a dog fly and so we get
for the fourth plague a plague of flies. NARRATOR: But the Greek got it
wrong, The Hebrew word "Arov" could apply to a
mixture of stinging swarms. So, in the tale of Exodus, God
most likely sent flies and swarms of stinging insects
like hornets and wasps - now that's a better
plague! According to the bible, God
removed this plague only after Pharaoh promised to
release the Hebrews. However, Pharaoh once again
broke his promise. And so God unleashed an
unspecified "killing disease", but exactly what
disease was it? The Bible tells us "the
horses, the donkeys, the
camels," all the Egyptian livestock was
dead within a day. Perhaps we should look to the
smallest, but deadliest beasts known to
man-bacteria! The highly lethal Bacillus
anthracis. It's the bacterium in anthrax. Once inside the bloodstream,
the anthrax bacilli release toxins that
destroy clotting agents causing horrible tissue
destruction and death. It literally causes the
infected animal or person to "bleed out" from every
orifice. This microscopic bacterium is
only 1 by 9 micrometers in size but it is one of the
most deadly beasts ever unleashed. The Biblical description of
the fifth plague and its devastation to Egypt's
livestock fits with modern scientific descriptions of the
effects of anthrax. But according to Exodus,
Chapter 9, this was not the only tiny beast God
unleashed. BEAL: For the sixth plague God
tells Moses and Aaron to go and get ashes from the
furnace and take them before Pharaoh and then have
Moses throw the ashes up into the heavens and the
ashes will spread out across the land of Egypt and
cause "shahin" on both animals and people. BEAL: "Shahin" in Hebrew uh,
usually means boils. This is the plague of boils. NARRATOR: Festering skin
eruptions on the Egyptians and their livestock - an
oozing, pus-filled beast that quite likely was another
bacteria-perhaps the group Staphylococcus
Aureus. While not as deadly as anthrax
it is still the cause of life-threatening
infections and is the most probable candidate for plague
number six. And then came the locusts. The great brown locust,
indigenous to Egypt, is about three inches in length. It has a large open mouth, two
jaws and four teeth, which work like scissors to
grab or cut. According to the Bible, the
eighth plague was locusts. Millions and millions of these
beasts filled the sky and cast a dark shadow
over Egypt. They consumed the fields and
trees, eating everything in their path. [♪ ] Frogs, flies, mosquitoes,
wasps, locusts and bacteria - the correct
translations and scientific analyses finally
provide a complete understanding of what would
have been total devastation to the land of
Egypt. After this barrage of beasts
Pharaoh finally let the Israelites go. The Bible tells us that their
trek to the Promised Land took 40 years. When they finally entered the
land of Canaan, the Israelites met the
Philistines, a formidable enemy who worshipped a god
that many say was half-human half-fish! Could such a creature really
exist? [♪ ] NARRATOR: There are
thousand-year-old mysteries surrounding
miraculous creatures in the Bible - beasts that seem
too "far out" to be real. But there have been many tales
of unfamiliar animals initially dismissed as
superstition that were later proven to have a
basis in biological fact. Today, we can uncover ancient
biblical clues to separate reality from myth... and the mermaids from the mere
men. Could merfolk really exist? [♪ ] Tradition suggests they were
worshipped as gods in ancient Judea. Legends of mermaids and mermen
are incredibly old and span the globe. [♪ ] Throughout history they have
been called many names: Sirens, Selkies,
Tritons, Morgans and Nixies. And in some places, like
Weekee Wachee Florida, they are very real creatures. [♪ ] TERRY: I do believe mermaids
exist. I think why not? The ocean's a big place. It's filled with many
creatures and there's been sightings throughout the
centuries of mermaids, so why not believe in them? [♪ ] NARRATOR: Surprisingly,
mermaid tales go as far back as the Bible. The first known mermaid story
is 3000 years old from Assyria. The tradition of the merman
has been said to go back even further. Sumer, located in southern
Mesopotamia-modern day Syria and Iraq-is one of the
earliest known civilizations in the world. And many Sumerian cultures
worshipped Dagon, the great god who became known as
half-man, half-fish. And the popular belief is that
the Biblical Philistines - the Israelites'
biggest rival, worshipped the same fish-god. MAEIR: In the Hebrew Bible... MAEIR: ...they describe the
Philistines as one of the primary enemies of the
Israelites. One of the aspects which is
depicted in the Hebrew Bible is the god of the
Philistines, Dagon. NARRATOR: Today, on a hilltop
in the middle of Tel Aviv, there are Philistine
ruins that just may have been an ancient
temple for Dagon. MAEIR: We know that the
biblical text talks about a temple of Dagon in Gaza, and a
temple of Dagon in Ashdod. There is a... MAEIR: ...a strong possibility
that the temple we see below us here at
Qasile, a Philistine temple, could also
be a Philistine temple of the god, Dagon. NARRATOR: Could it be that the
biblical enemies of the Israelites actually
worshipped a half-man, half-fish god behind these
very walls? MAIER: There's a popular
understanding of the name Dagon connecting it to a
fish-like god, and the reason being is that the name
Dagon reminded many people of the Hebrew word
"dag" which means fish. And so from the medieval
period and onwards, commentators in the Bible have
suggested that the god Dagon was a fish-like god. And in fact, if you Google
"Dagon" nowadays, you will come up with hundreds of
depictions and hundreds of uh, people writing and
connecting Dagon with a fish-like god. [♪ ] NARRATOR: Associating the
ancient religious text with merfolk is just as
prevalent today as it was in the Middle Ages. The half-human, half-fish
deity swims through hundreds of websites tagged as
the God of the biblical Philistines. How do we explain the enormous
amount of literature devoted to this
creature? For thousands of years, the
human-fish combo has crossed oceans and cultures
spanning Portugal, India, Haiti, China,
Africa, England, Germany, Russia, and Japan. Why has the mermaid been so
popular throughout the ages, right up until today, in
so many cultures? Cryptozoologists like Loren
Coleman will tell you it's because these
creatures actually exist... they're just not so pretty. [♪ ] COLEMAN: One of the animals of
interest to cryptozoology is the mermaid
and the popular image of a mermaid is of a
beautiful woman. But what if the creature is
something else? What if it's a sea cow? What if it's a manatee? A lot of people have said,
"How could people misinterpret this animal as a
mermaid?" Obviously to each other they
look beautiful. But to humans it is apparent
that they are a rather ugly animal. One thing that does speak to
the fact that manatees and sea cows sometimes look
like humans is that they have a posture in the
water in which they really sit upright and take the baby
sea cows and nurse them, very much like a human. And sailors on ships looking
very far away could have interpreted this as
human beings, as mermaids, giving milk to their
babies. But reports of mermaids are
cross-cultural, historically very old. And that gives us some clue
that mermaids cannot just be explained by sea cows
or manatees, because some of these reports are from
areas where there have never been manatees. So what else is going on? I myself think that a lot of
mermaid sightings may not be manatees but indeed may
be seals, because seals are thinner. They have a head that's much
more mermaid-like. NARRATOR: Seals and sea lions
certainly seem to fit better with the mermaid
description. Their large forward-facing
eyes and human-like faces make up a much prettier
package than the sea cow. Additionally, seals and sea
lions call to each other while on shore and the
quality of their cries can sound incredibly human. There are several species of
seals with habitats in most of the world's oceans,
seas, and even some freshwater lakes. Considering the theories of
mermaid misidentifications, the seal's
global presence makes it an ideal candidate to
propagate a worldwide myth. So merfolk are most likely
seals. But what does that tell us
about Dagon, the supposed half-human, half-fish god of
the biblical Philistines? Were the ancient enemies of
the Israelites simply confusing seals with gods? MAIER: If you would travel
through a time tunnel back to Philistia in 1,000 B.C. and ask them if there's any
connection between the god, Dagon, and a fish god, a
Philistine would probably say, that's a very
fishy idea. There's no basis for this, and
the reason being is in all our knowledge of
Philistine archaeology we don't have depictions of gods
in the shape of fish. It is something that appears
from the middle ages onwards. NARRATOR: Because the word
"Dag" means fish in Hebrew, medieval translators
of the bible depicted Dagon as a fish-god. And in mermaid-crazy medieval
Europe it became a hugely popular mistake that
even today we can't seem to unhook from the "good
book". The fact is that the entire
word "Dagon" relates much better to the
Hebrew word "Dagan" MAIER: The Hebrew word, Dagan,
which is grain. We know of a Semitic god, an
ancient Semitic god, from the period before the
Philistines, the bronze age, of a god by the name of
Dagon, who was related to fertility of grain and
agricultural fertility. And in fact, it seems from
what we can tell from the ancient remains of the
Philistines, is the, the main god of the Philistines
was in fact a goddess. And it was probably a goddess
like a, a mother goddess, sort of like a Gaia
of the ancient Greek cultures. And it could very well be that
the Dagon the male god of the Philistines was in
fact an evolution from something else that originally
was a female deity during the time of the
bible. NARRATOR: It makes more sense
that the Philistines worshipped a deity that they
believed supplied their daily bread. A mother goddess or a god of
fertile grain seems a smarter choice than a "fishy"
man with a tail. And so the mergod associated
with the bible is merely a myth resulting
from a medieval mistranslation. The belief in this biblical
beast is busted. But there are other beasts
most definitely described in the Biblical seas, much
more difficult to pass off as myth. What would you say if we told
you that we've found the whale that swallowed
Jonah? [♪ ] NARRATOR: There are strange
creatures in the bible that fall outside of
normal scientific classification. Did they ever exist, could
they be found today or are they just myth? One of the most famous
biblical beasts swallowed the prophet Jonah, whole. But how can a fish so large be
swimming in mystery - if it exists, why can't it
be found? According to the Hebrew Bible,
Jonah was consumed because of his sin against
God. He had refused God's order to
preach in a condemned city. Instead, he fled and set sail
across the Mediterranean Sea... God then called up a terrible
storm. Jonah told the sailors that he
was to blame. To satisfy God and calm the
storm, they would have to throw him overboard. The oldest Biblical texts tell
us that God summoned a "great fish", which later
texts translated as a "whale". But was this "great fish" a
whale or was it something else? [♪ ] The ancients did not have
scuba gear or underwater subs. What lurked in the deep, dark
waters of the sea was a mystery. Great underwater beasts would
surface now and then but they would only give sailors a
glimpse of their anatomy. Much was left to the
imagination. [♪ ] And so the descriptions and
illustrations of sea creatures back then often
don't match what we know of sea animals today. [♪ ] But the book of Jonah was
written thousands of years ago, perhaps there were
creatures then that no longer exist in our oceans. [♪ ] The Bible says Jonah survived
inside the belly of the "great fish" for three
days and three nights. He begged God forgiveness for
his disobedience. Only then did the fish spit
out Jonah. Is it possible that a man
could be swallowed whole and live? What sort of fish could
accomplish such a feat? BURGESS: This is a fossil
representation of a Great White Shark, but the
modern shark gets to about this size. This was a large shark
probably 20 feet or so in length and the teeth of white
sharks are large and serrated and designed for
taking chunks out of their victims. [♪ ] So as a result, most attacks
by White sharks on humans result in serious
injuries which then precludes the possibility of a
human being, being consumed whole by a white
shark without any damage. However in the past there were
large sharks in the fossil record that were large
enough to consume a human being without causing
such damage. These ancestors of the White
shark and the Mako shark grew to much larger
sizes than they are today. And one in particular-the
Megatooth Shark or megalodon-grew to a large size
of 40 feet or so in length. About a hundred million years
or so this animal was the granddaddy of all
sharksthe apex predator at the top of the food chain. We know it ate such things as
manatees and whales, ancestors to modern baleen
whales. NARRATOR: The enormous teeth
of the Megalodon have been found embedded in
the bones of pre-historic whales. This massive shark ate whales
for lunch! BURGESS: The problem with this
being our choice of an animal that consumed a
human whole is that it wasn't found on the earth at
the same time as humans. Humans simply were not here at
the same time as the megalodon was swimming in
the ocean. However there are other sharks
that get larger than the modern White shark. These are the Basking shark,
Megamouth shark and Whale shark, all of which get
to sizes twenty to forty feet in length. NARRATOR: The Basking shark
and Whale shark are commonly seen by divers but
the Megamouth shark is a rare species, only
discovered in 1976. BURGESS: What do these three
sharks have in common besides their large size? First and foremost all three
of these species are plankton-feeding sharks. NARRATOR: Plankton refers to
very minute, shrimp-like organisms that
live in the water column. To feed on plankton all three
species of shark, Whale, Basking, and Megamouth,
have very large mouths but small throats lined
with gill rakers - slender structures that form a
fine mesh which filters the minute organisms
from the water. BURGESS: A human if it was
unfortunate enough to be swallowed by one of these
animals would find the sieve-like structure and not
be able to go any farther. NARRATOR: The filter
structures found in plankton-eaters also rules out
the largest animals in the sea. Baleen whales like the Blue
whale, which grows to over 100 feet in length, have
sieve-like mechanisms that wouldn't allow a human
into their guts. But what about the toothed
whales? BURGESS: The Killer whale
despite its fierce reputation and large teeth
have never been documented as attacking a human being. The Sperm whale which get to
about 50 feet or more in length and have large teeth
much like the Killer whales also have never been
documented as actually attacking a human
being. So as a result, we can again
take these three groups of marine mammals and
cross them off our list. Even if one is so unlucky to
be swallowed by a whale or a shark, the acids in the
stomach of these animals is so caustic that
nobody could hope to survive even if one found
themselves in the belly of this beast. NARRATOR: It looks as if there
is no "great fish" existing today, or in the
past, that could perform Jonah's miracle. But this whale may be swimming
in metaphor. In the Book of Genesis it is
said that God divided the waters below heaven from
the waters above. Perhaps searching underwater
for the beast is altogether the wrong place
to start. Perhaps we should be looking
to the sky. This is a 400-year-old star
chart-an ancient mariner's map of the night
sky. It's covered by constellations
depicting all kinds of celestial beasts. NARRATOR: Between the Between
the 21st and 24th of December, the nights are
the darkest and longest of the entire year. And in 760 BCE, the days of
Jonah, the winter solstice was known to ancient
astrologers as the "Whale's Belly" because during
those long nights there was one constellation
that swallowed the sky. POIRIER: With modern
planetarium software, we can actually
travel back thousands of years to view the night sky
from any location on earth. So what I'm going to set up
here is the night sky for 760 BC. Going to set our location just
above the Mediterranean, and the date is
December 21st so this would have been the
longest night of the year during those really dark
winter months. Now. I want to bring up a
constellation known as Cetus. Now Cetus was fabled to be a
mythical sea monster or giant amphibious whale, and
this constellation is huge. It's actually the fourth
largest constellation in our night sky. It's made up of about 15 faint
stars, five of which make up the enormous head of
this creature, spanning down into its giant whale-like
tail. Because it's so enormous you
can actually only see it in its entirety between the
months of October and January. So on this date of December
21st, at about 8:30 in the evening, we can
just see that Cetus is just above the southern
horizon and you can see it just sitting there, stretching
across that part of the sky. NARRATOR: During the three
longest nights of the year, sailing under this
constellation was called "being in the whale's belly". [♪ ] The story of Jonah's whale may
be carrying a simple message: "a man who sins is
consumed by darkness, and a man who begs forgiveness
shall be released from darkness" For millennia, people have
taken the biggest fish story in history literally,
but this beast is really swimming in the
stars. However, there is another
biblical tradition linking beasts, bellies and
repentance. Two massive monsters are
supposed to appear at the End of Days. But they don't eat us; we get
to eat them! [♪ ] [♪ ] NARRATOR: Today, investigators
are re-examining ancient biblical texts,
uncovering clues that might lead us to the most
extraordinary animals. In the earliest commentaries
on the Hebrew Bible rabbis presented a
vision of a future feast. According to their
predictions, there will be two enormous roast beasts, one
taken from land and one from sea, prepared and
plopped on the dinner plates at the End of Days. BEAL: Based on their readings
of Hebrew scriptures, the earliest
rabbis began to imagine that there would be this
spectacular banquet at the end of time that would be
hosted for the righteous ones. And on the menu for this
banquet would be these two enormous monstrous creatures,
Behemoth and Leviathan. NARRATOR: It's made clear in
ancient texts that the righteous will dine on the
divine flesh of these creatures but exactly what are
they and where can they be found? BEAL: So when we try to take
these biblical texts... BEAL: ...literally, and just
look at these monsters, Behemoth and
Leviathan, what we find really is a very profound
sense of mystery, even unnerving mystery. NARRATOR: In the Book of Job,
the Bible describes Behemoth as having bones like
tubes of bronze, limbs like bars of iron. He can stiffen his tail like a
cedar and he can draw the river Jordan into his
mouth. SLIFKIN: The Behemoth is
described in the Book of Job as being a... SLIFKIN: ...large and powerful
animal that lives in the rivers and swamps. It's described as being an
animal that eats grass and that stiffens its tail like a
cedar and which has a large mouth. What is this animal? Some have suggested that it's
referring to a sauropod dinosaur, a sauropod
dinosaur like a famous brontosaurus. It's a large powerful animal. It lives in the swamp and it
has a tail like a cedar tree. NARRATOR: It's a bizarre
theory to suggest that dinosaurs will be eaten by
man, but cryptozoologists believe a sauropod could still
exist today. There are legends from deep in
the Congo that tell of a creature known as
mokele-mbembe-it means "the one who stops the flow of
rivers". COLEMAN: Intriguingly,
cryptozoologists actually know of a story in Central
Africa of a dinosaur-like creature. It's called mokele-mbembe, and
these animals seen in the Congo are said to look
like a sauropod, a dinosaur that looks like this. It has a big body, a bulbous
body, a tail straight out to the back, and
a neck that's long. The native peoples have seen
this. They talk about it. It's in their history. It's in their native
traditions. Many expeditions have gone to
Africa. In fact the Smithsonian was
the first organization to send an expedition in 1920
and '21 in search of evidence. NARRATOR: Is it really
possible that dinosaurs have remained hidden for
millennia deep in the African jungles? Is there a Behemoth in the
bush, just waiting to be eaten by the righteous at the
End of Days? COLEMAN: Some of the
expeditions indeed in the 1960's and 1970's brought back
the story of native villagers who had eaten part
of a mokele-mbembe and died. On all of these expeditions we
keep getting these stories of
different kinds of mokele-mbembe and another one
that we often hear about is represented here in
this carving called the Killer of Elephants. This is a native carving of
one of these creatures. They are said to have a big
body and a straight tail that we keep hearing in
the Behemoth story. And this may actually help us
with a misidentification that could
be going on. For indeed this kind of
mokele-mbembe may be an African version of an unknown
species of rhinoceros that's aquatic-not a dinosaur,
but a rhino. NARRATOR: The possibility of
an unknown species of rhinoceros is intriguing and
an undiscovered dinosaur, even more enticing,
but perhaps it's more reasonable to look at
another creature, alive, well known in many rivers
today and fitting most of the ancient descriptions of
the Behemoth. SLIFKIN: It seems the animal
being described is the hippopotamus. SLIFKIN: The hippopotamus is
certainly a large powerful animal, it eats grass
like cattle and it lives in the swamp. A hippopotamus can stand 5
feet tall and 10 feet long. They weigh up to four tons. Their jaws open to a gape of
four feet with teeth that are 20 inches long. They're herbivorous but they
are very territorially aggressive. They kill more people every
year in Africa than any other large animal. If you come into their part of
the river they will stomp you or they will
chomp you. Either way you're a goner. NARRATOR: Could the predicted
banquet for the righteous at the End of Days
really include hippo on the plate? It seems an overly strange
"surf and turf menu". Before we decide on the
"turf", let us turn the investigation to the "surf"
-the Leviathan. [♪ ] NARRATOR: The Book of Isaiah
describes the Leviathan as a "twisted sea
serpent". In the Book of Job, it is
written that when Leviathan is hungry, he sends
forth from his mouth a heat so great as to make all
the waters of the deep boil. Terror surrounds his teeth. He makes the mighty afraid and
is impenetrable by sword. Some scholars suggest that the
ancient texts are referring to a prehistoric
plesiosaur existing in the deepest depths of the oceans,
unchanged throughout the millennia. But others put forth living
creatures that have actually been seen-strange,
oceanic aliens like the oarfish. Also called the "King of
Herrings" the oarfish is the longest bony fish in the
ocean and can reach up to 36 feet in length. Its flesh is of a goopy,
gelatinous consistency and it sports a majestic cardinal
red dorsal fin. The oarfish is rarely seen
because it frequents depths up to 3,000 feet and it
wasn't until 1996 that an oarfish was filmed
alive. But as large as this fish
gets, fearsome it is not. The oarfish is toothless,
feeds on plankton and is quite harmless. Not really the apocalyptic sea
serpent described in the Book of Job. In fact, the deeper we fish
the biblical seas in search of clues for Leviathan,
the more we discover that the traditions
surrounding this creature are
contradictory. And if we chase the fish into
later Christian tradition, we find that we
really aren't fishing for a fish at all. BEAL: We see in Jewish
tradition how the rabbis... BEAL: ...imagined that
Leviathan was actually a creature of God who would
serve a purpose within creation in the end times as
the main course for this final banquet. In Christian tradition, it
goes in a very different direction. Part of the reason for that is
that in the uh, Greek translation of Hebrew
scriptures, known as the Septuagint, the proper
name Leviathan, gets translated into Greek as
"dracone". Dracone is simply Greek for
what it sounds like-dragon. So Leviathan became a kind of
generic dragon. NARRATOR: It seems that
Christian writers changed the great serpent-fish into a
dragon. In the books of the New
Testament, Leviathan has lost his fins, lost his name,
and has gone to the Devil. BEAL: Uh, Leviathan really
informs the image in the Book of Revelation of the red
dragon who is Satan and the devil in Revelation
12. NARRATOR: In Revelation, the
apocalyptic visions include God saving a Christ
child from being devoured by the red dragon. If this is the same dragon,
the same "dracone" that is Leviathan, then the
tasty fish for the God-given banquet has been
changed into very unpalatable and satanic
monster meat! NARRATOR: When it comes to
Leviathan and Behemoth, clearly there is disagreement
over the nature and purpose of the
biblical monsters. BEAL: The bible actually
glorifies and lifts up that sense of ambiguity and
mystery and unknowability in Leviathan and
in Behemoth. Mystery, the root of the word
"mystery" is unknowing, not knowing, and
these creatures really are in some sense
personifications, monstrous personifications of
unknowing. There is a sense of horror to
all religious experience insofar as
religious experience is about encountering otherness. And these figures of Leviathan
and Behemoth really represent that for us
in the biblical literature. You know, in some ancient maps
out there, along the edges of the mapped known
world, the terra cognita was the, the terra incognita, the
unknown territory. And on some maps you'd find a
note there uh, "here be dragons", or "here be
monsters". We have that in the uh,
biblical world as well. There are monsters out there
and they represent that sense of the terra
incognita, the unknown, the ungrounding, that is there
around the edges of the known and the
well-grounded. NARRATOR: And so the search
for Leviathan and Behemoth and will remain in
uncharted territory. Our attempts to uncover such
beasts seem futile, for it is their purpose to be
unknown. However, there are creatures
described in the bible that do provide access
to the unknown and the divine. These angels may open the
gates to heaven - in the End of Days. But they're not the pudgy,
cute babies with wings we all know. The cherub just may be the
weirdest and most horrific creature ever designed. [♪ ] NARRATOR: Scattered throughout
the Bible there are clues that point to a
famous but horrific messenger of God - a
tetra-morph, a combination of four creatures that make up
the angel known as the cherub. The real message this angel
carries has been lost through the centuries. It is a terrifying creature -
not the pudgy, naked boy many artists have
depicted. By examining its descriptions
in detail we can finally reveal the true
meaning behind its design? The best man for the job is
Ezekiel. He was the prophet who got the
best look at the cherub. NARRATOR: In a vision, Ezekiel
saw a storm. A wind was coming from the
north, a great cloud with flashing fire. Inside, there were figures
resembling four living beings and they traveled like
bolts of lightning. NARRATOR: The ancient text
explains, that inside the beings there was something
that looked like burning coals of fire. Each creature had four wings
and four faces - translated from the ancient
Hebrew as lion, man, ox, and eagle. NARRATOR: These were the
cherubim. We're told that they carried
the wheels to God's throne. And Ezekiel was taken on one
wild ride. NARRATOR: The cherub is one of
the most holy, yet most terrifying beasts in the
bible. It is ranked second in the
Bible's "top ten" of holy angels and it flies through
many of the Bible's books, chapters and
verses. BEAL: There are a number of
other references to cherubs or cherubim in the
Hebrew Bible besides in the Book of Ezekiel. For example, in Psalm 18, God
rides a cherub. In other Psalms, cherubim are
surrounding the throne of God or, or, or supporting
the throne of God and of course there are
two cherubim on top of the Ark of the Covenant,
acting almost as guardians of that ark. The most famous cherubim are
probably the cherubim that God places at the
entrance to the Garden of Eden in order to prevent Eve
and Adam from returning after they have been
exiled. NARRATOR: A guardian of arks
and gates-was the cherub simply considered a
brawny bouncer, keeping man from entering sacred
places? For the ancients it would have
represented ultimate power. MAEIR: The strongest animals
that existed in the ancient Near Eastern
repertoire are the lion and the bull-both represent
raw power at its ultimate. In addition to that you also
have the eagle the most powerful of the birds
that are in the sky, needless to say if you combine
all three of them the bull, the lion and the
eagle you have the ultimate power, you have the
strongest thing that you can imagine. In modern day terms it's
combining a nuclear submarine, an Abrams tank, and
an F-16 all packed into one package. NARRATOR: So the cherub is a
complete power package-a combination of man, and three
animal kings. The lion is considered king of
the beasts, its mane a royal crown. Weighing up to 500 pounds,
these powerful cats are at the top of the food chain. And there have been many
instances of man falling prey to this animal king. The ox is nothing less than
the king of the domestic beasts - the bearer
of great burdens, giving itself willingly to
sacrifice. And the eagle-well the eagle
in the cherub actually isn't an eagle. The original Hebrew points to
different bird. For centuries now, a
mistranslation has plucked great symbolic power from the
head of the cherub. SLIFKIN: In the Bible, the
king of birds is the nesher. Nesher is usually... SLIFKIN: ...translated as
eagle but if we look at the various descriptions of
the nesher given throughout scripture we see
that it can't be the eagle. First of all the nesher is
described as being bald. Now eagles are not bald. Even the American Bald eagle
is not actually bald. It has white feathers on its
head and it was originally called the Baldy
Headed Eagle. In old English baldy meant
white, so it was the White Headed Eagle. Eventually that name, Baldy
Headed Eagle became shortened to Bald Eagle, but
it's not bald. In addition, the nesher is
described in scripture as feeding on carrion, and eagles
usually take live prey. So which bird is bald and
feeds on carrion? It's this bird behind me-the
griffon vulture, largest and most magnificent
bird of prey in the Middle East. This is the nesher of
scripture; this is the bald bird that feeds on
carrion. And those facts are actually
connected. Being bald means that it can
insert its head into the carcasses of the animals
that it's eating without getting blood and guts
caught up in the feathers of its head. It's also the lord of the air,
the highest flying bird. In fact the altitude record
for a bird is held by a griffon vulture, one of
which once collided with an airplane at an amazing
37,000 feet! They even have special lungs
which enable them to breathe at that altitude. The question is if the nesher
is actually the griffon vulture, why does
everybody think it's the eagle? The answer is that these
translations took place in Europe. Now in Europe there aren't so
many griffon vultures but there are a lot of very
large and prominent eagles. That's the bird that Rome
portrayed on its banners. However in the land of the
Bible, it's not the eagle which is the king of birds,
it's the griffon vulture. NARRATOR: The correct
translation for "nesher" puts powerful meaning, lost
for centuries, back into the cherub. The griffon vulture is the
highest-flying bird in the world, which fits well with
the cherub's soaring and divine purpose. But a vulture signifies death. In the earthly realm - the
natural world - it feeds on the dead. We can say that these two
extreme natures of the "nesher", mirror man's
potential for virtue or for sin. The two extreme natures of the
vulture also fit perfectly inside the cherub's
divine double-function. [♪ ] BEAL: Cherubim always function
as a kind of in-between figure. They are mediators between the
divine and the human, between these two realms. One of the roots of the word
"keruvim" in Hebrew goes back to an Acadian
meaning of "gatekeeper". You think about what a
gatekeeper does. A gatekeeper prevents access
through a gate, but a gatekeeper also provides
access through a gate. And I think that cherubim
serve in this same double way. On the one hand they may serve
as guardians to prevent entrance. On the other hand, they may
serve as access points, as entry points. NARRATOR: In Ezekiel's vision,
the cherubim do open the gates to the divine
and carry Ezekiel through the night skies to
God. And later references to this
angel suggest that in the End of Days the cherubim
will once again open the gates to paradise,
and let humankind back into the
garden. And so, we are back where we
started, in the garden of Eden with the serpent. Along the way, we've
deciphered the secrets, solved the mysteries and
discovered that there is truth behind the beasts. But how does the serpent's
story end? According the bible, it was
banished from the garden, which is under the
ever-watchful eyes of the cherubim. It's their job to make sure
this beast never enters paradise again [♪ ]
