C
charles cure
Guest
sniffy said:
good question. as far as most people know, it isn't even fully catalogued, and access to it for research purposes or anything is extrememly extremely restricted. your guess is as good as anyone's.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
is'nt it about time you read your bible
- Thread starter geeser
- Start date
good question. as far as most people know, it isn't even fully catalogued, and access to it for research purposes or anything is extrememly extremely restricted. your guess is as good as anyone's.
they would have come across the only depictions of an extinct animal called rimu/re'em - an ox with one horn, or a "monoceros" (compare that with "rhinoceros") - that for all they knew once existed. You didn't think they thought it was a horse, did you?
Unicorns, (one horned horses), have been written about for millennia - and it's pertinent to state that biblical translators also know the difference between a "unicorn" and a cow. If it translates as monoceros, say monoceros.. Why, Pliny the Elder did, (and indeed agrees in part that it's horse):
"...An exceedingly wild beast called the Monoceros, which has a stag's head, elephant's feet, and a boar's tail, the rest of its body being like that of a horse. It makes a deep lowing noise, and one black horn two cubits long projects from the middle of its forehead. This animal, they say, cannot be taken alive."
They're not talking about an ox, stupid as they might have been, they did know what an ox looked like. Physiologus goes on to explain that the only way to catch a unicorn is to get a virgin woman and take her to it, and then it will put its head in her lap and go to sleep - clearly not talking about your every day average ox. This animal was clearly 'magical' in it's nature, and even went on to represent jesus. So, to ask the other posters question once more: Do you believe in unicorns?
But Pliny did not translate the Septuagint. It only supports the case that whatever people thought a "monoceros" looked like, they didn't share our conviction that it was mythical, and any reference to it was as good as any for an extinct animal they supposed they had the horn of. That the Deutoronomy text in Hebrew refers to a re'em (singular) with horns (plural) should have persuaded them to rethink their assumptions, but maybe they were as adamant that unicorns were real as you are now that they don't exist, and that determined their interpretation of the text. People going on about unicorns are repeating their mistake by trying to overcorrect it.
To teach the mighty Word of God, the Seventy assembled,
And finding no translation found the one it most resembled!
In 300BC on the isle of Pharos met the Septuagint: seventy Jewish scholars, assembled to translate the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek, a feat they reputedly managed in seventy two days. Finding an obscure reference to a beast called the Re'em, the Seventy were unable to identify the beast. They had a description however:
"Fleet, fierce, indomitable and especially distinguished by the armour of its brow."
It seemed to these learned men that no beast quite fit this description so well as the Unicorn, and thus it made its way into the Bible. From here, the Unicorn made rapid advancement: obviously if his name was mentioned in such a weighty Book, his existence could not be denied!
The History of the Unicorn
A mythical creature, for sure, we would have found some freaking evidence by now if it ever existed.
Godless
And finding no translation found the one it most resembled!
In 300BC on the isle of Pharos met the Septuagint: seventy Jewish scholars, assembled to translate the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek, a feat they reputedly managed in seventy two days. Finding an obscure reference to a beast called the Re'em, the Seventy were unable to identify the beast. They had a description however:
"Fleet, fierce, indomitable and especially distinguished by the armour of its brow."
It seemed to these learned men that no beast quite fit this description so well as the Unicorn, and thus it made its way into the Bible. From here, the Unicorn made rapid advancement: obviously if his name was mentioned in such a weighty Book, his existence could not be denied!
The History of the Unicorn
A mythical creature, for sure, we would have found some freaking evidence by now if it ever existed.
Godless