The Unicorn of the Bible

Theology
1

“But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.” – Psalms 92:10 (KJV)

Wait wait wait… What?!

Yeah, I know – Poor translation. Gotchya! But let’s look at this anyways shall we.

Other Translations

With Unicorn:

“But my horn shalt Thou exalt like the horn of a unicorn; I shall be anointed with fresh oil.” – Psalms 92:10 (KJ21)

“But thou shalt exalt mine horn, like the unicorns, and I shall be anointed with fresh oil.” – Psalms 92:10 (GNV)

“But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of a unicorn; I shall be anointed with fresh oil.” – Psalms 92:10 (JUB)

“But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.” – Psalms 92:10 (BRG)

*Four other Bible versions with a uniform translation. Easy to see that there is not much change between them.

Without Unicorn:

“But you’ve made me strong as a charging bison, you’ve honored me with a festive parade.” – Psalms 92:10 (MSG)

"But my horn shalt thou exalt like a buffalo’ I shall be anointed with fresh oil.’ – Psalms 92:10 (DARBY)

'But you make me as strong as a wild bull, and soothing lotion is poured on me." – Psalms 92:10 (GW)

“But my horn [my emblem of strength and power] You have exalted like that of a wild ox; I am anointed with fresh oil [for Your service].” – Psalms 92:10 (AMP)

“But my keren shalt Thou exalt like the keren of a re’eim wild ox; I shall be anointed with fresh shemen.” – Psalms 92:10 (OJB)

“And Thou exaltest as a reem my horn, I have been anointed with fresh oil.” – Psalms 92:10 (YLT)

*Six translations that instead of Unicorn, they have a small zoo of animals proffered. A Charging Bison, Buffalo, Wild Bull, Wild Ox, Re’ eim Wild Ox, and a Reem. Not to mention the fresh oil keeps changing from Parade, to Fresh Oil, to Soothing Lotion, back to Fresh Oil, on to Shemen, then BACK to Fresh Oil. Enough to make a pious rabbi declare “Oy Vey!”

Anyone have any insights on this contested verse?

(Then we can discuss that Geneva verse about the ‘‘breeches’’.)

3 Likes
2

In Deuteronomy 33:17, Moses blessed Joseph, whom he described as “a firstborn bull — he has majesty, and his horns are the horns of a wild ox” (ESV, KJV uses unicorn).

Job 39:9 in the KJV translations tells the reader that God asked Job, “Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”

So what does this mean @d-o.o-b ? Unicorns are real?

3

Whether there was ever such a thing as a unicorn, this beast — named in Numbers 23:22, Job 39:9, and Isaiah 24:8 is probably a “wild ox.” Biblical scholars point to the traits of this beast, which include its untamable nature, strength, and ferocity. “The reem is spoken of as a two-horned animal well known and often seen by the Jews, fit for sacrificial purposes, frequently associated with bulls and oxen.”

Re’em is featured in the Old Testament during events that took place more than two millennia ago. Ancient carvings and writings suggest features that are like that of an ox or an antelope.There is one description gives us “an extinct, long-horned ancestor of the domestic cattle, Bos primigenius bojanus.”

The KJV stands out as the most well-known translation to feature the word “unicorn,” and the reason is simple: “In 1611, when the KJV was produced, the translators didn’t know what the original Hebrew word meant. It is the English that critics complain about, not the original Hebrew text.”

Translators are not trying to avoid mythological associations; they are trying to be faithful to the text. Later scholars explored the context of God’s Word to decipher re’em, and came up with the better-known, more widely acknowledged translation. Scripture does not feature every species of animal by name, so however one should translate re’em, you can be sure there is a reason for its presence in God’s Word.

4

We don’t know, exactly, what re’em means. But it’s often though to probably be the now extinct aurochs, or wild cattle. The aurochs is the wild ancestor of domesticated cattle, the last living specimen died in Poland a few hundred years ago, but used to be plentiful throughout Europe and the Near East. The meaning of re’em does seem to mean “horn(ed)”; so while the aurochs is the most common interpretation, other interpretations do include the rhinocerous.

Unicorns, such as they are, don’t exist. But when the KJV and other early English translations were made, the unicorn was still viewed as a possibly real animal–we know today that unicorns have never been real.

As a fun aside: In the ancient Epistle of St. Clement, Clement of Rome uses the example of the phoenix (which he viewed as a real animal that lived somewhere in India based on hearsay and rumors) as an analogy for Christ’s resurrection. Let’s not try to hold people in previous generations to our modern standards when, often, they only could know what they could know.

5

And here I thought an auroch was just something from an Isaac Asmiov novel…
:confused:

Were these auroch also not much larger than moden cattle? Its use would make sense in that case.

One translation I found says ‘oryx’ which is a large antelope
with pale fur and long horns. Three species of oryx are known to be native to the arid regions of Africa, and the fourth inhabits Arabia. So while not large, the ‘unicorn’ could also have been something like this as well due to its horn configuration. From some angles it appears to only be one (1) horn. Admittedly though, most translations do say an ox of some sort.

I’m not so sure as to (1) the origins and time period of the unicorn myth itself, and (2) when the translations in questions took place (with the exception of the Geneva Bible and King James Bibles).

In the OP, I divided up the four (4) translations that I found to contain ‘unicorn’ from the six (6) varrious alternative translations, with both unicorn and oil being translated seemingly at the fancy of the translator, as quoted here…

What are your thoughts on why the vast flip-flopping for no-unicorn translations occured, while the ones containing the word unicorn are all almost uniform in wording?