Pesharim

Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell replies to my previous post “Unicorns in the Bible”. Her reply is as follows:

Thank you for reading the articles on our web site.

“Wild ox,” “rhinoceros,” and “unicorn” have all been used over the years by reputable, intelligent translators. The King James translators and Martin Luther felt the best translation for the Hebrew word which we transliterate as re’em was “unicorn.” I am well aware that the modern translators have chosen to translate the word as “wild ox,” but there is no reason to assume that earlier translators were encumbered by a belief in mystical creatures. There is also no reason to impose modern fairy-tale identifications on the Bible’s unicorn. Nor should the inclusion of the word unicorn cause readers of the KJV to lose confidence in the Bible. The article simply states that the Bible, whichever version you choose to use, based on context, is referring to a real creature which has certain characteristics and possesses either one or two horns.

There was no need to discuss the modern versions, since the “offending word” (unicorn) doesn’t appear in them. But in view of the proportion of the English-speaking world that has used and still uses the KJV, this article is offered to help those readers to provide a reasonable answer to those who would mock God’s Word for containing this word.

The previous article on our web site did take a position favoring the two-horned animal. With further research, I conclude that the Bible cannot be dogmatically read to specify the number of horns. But as the previous article stated, the Bible does clearly indicate this creature, whatever it was, was real. The two articles express two different opinions on a subpoint, but the point of both articles is the same: Context indicates that the Bible is not referring to fantasy animals. And the goal of both articles is the same: to encourage trust in the entire Bible and therefore in its Author, the Savior Jesus Christ.

Blessings,

Elizabeth Mitchell, M.D.