Unicorns In The Bible?
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 06. 2023
- Why does the KJV mention unicorns? Isn't that a mythical animal?
Presentation by Dr. Douglas Levesque
Information in this video read from an article by Nathan Hoffman
Be sure to check out the full presentation,
“Unicorns & Satyrs in the KJV”
• Unicorns & Satyrs in t...
Subscribe for more videos!
Visit kjbrc.org for more information - Krátké a kreslené filmy
It seems like God knew what he was talking about. It also appears he has preserved his word as he promised. It’s almost as though the people who don’t want to believe are the ones trying to believe in a fairy tale. “Nothing created everything.” 🤔
Right? It’s almost like God knew exactly what He was doing!
There are atheists who want to ridicule Christianity, and the King James translation gives them ammunition. Then there are Christians who simply understand that there are errors in the KJV and would thus prefer a better translation. We don't need to defend unicorns and satyrs. That just makes us look stupid to the people we are trying to convert. The language of the KJV is a major hindrance. Why insist on the KJV unless you really don't want new converts?
@@brianmoore581 because the KJV is the perfect, inspired, preserved word of God. The “modern bibles” are full of contradictions and make you work for your salvation. They deny the divinity of Christ. They make people think that Jesus is the cap stone instead of the cornerstone. They remove the name Lucifer for a title that Jesus has. They are Catholic influenced and tell you to beat yourself. They say things like people should castrate themselves when the KJV says they should be kicked out of church. They say that nothing is required to be baptized you don’t need to be saved.
Some people might say they they just remove the “these and thou and ye and your” but the truth is that they indicate whether the Bible is referring to an individual or a group of people. The reason why people can’t understand the KJV is because of the intentional dumbing down of America. My children understand the king James just fine. Then again I don’t send them to a public indoctrination center for their education. The Bible says “study to show thyself approved”. If you have a desire to study this out read a few bibles at a time along with the KJV. You’ll see a dramatic difference and they can’t all be right. One final question to ask yourself, if the Bible has one error or one contradiction then it cannot be the word of God and we cannot trust anything it says. I can prove all modern bibles contradict themselves in the first verse.
@@brianmoore581 there’s also a website called Bible hub. That is a great resource for comparing many different bibles at once.
@@EvoS76 so what was the perfect, inspired, preserved word of God in 1610? And if the King James is the perfect, inspired, preserved word of God, why is your 1769 KJV different from the 1611 KJV? Which KJV is the correct KJV?
Did you know that King James, the man, the King of England, forbid the use of certain words in the King James Bible so as to proclaim the divine right of kings to rule, so as to Biblically prevent revolutions? The word "tyrant" isn't used in the KJV because we shouldn't refer to our God-given government negatively. King James had his hands all in your favorite translation. If we obeyed the KJV, there would be no USA today.
If the US government made a translation for you today and demanded you use it, would you? That's what you are doing! You are using an official government translation. It is skewed to the purposes of the King of England. Perhaps a modern government translation would tell you to pay your taxes, don't question authority, wear your mask, take your vaccines, honor all pronouns, pretend that men can be pregnant, and cheer as men beat women in women's sports. You don't know what you are reading because it's old. But it's not as old as the Bible, not nearly. There is no perfect Bible in the English language. The Bible wasn't written in English. English didn't even exist when the Bible was written.
A unicorn is a one horned rhinocerus.
I know you’re mainly just quoting the article that I wrote. But gosh I really love this presentation. Bravo! And thanks for using my material!
Thank you so much for writing it! If we’d have known how to contact you we’d have asked permission first before making this video. As it is we tried to credit you as best we could both at the beginning of the video and in the description.
Your research on the article was truly marvelous! We’d love to see you at one of our conferences sometime to thank you in person!
Oh, you don’t need to credit me. It’s all God’s truth. Mary didn’t credit Gabriel, she credited God. Ain’t no copyright on God’s truth. The Messenger doesn’t own it.
@@kjbrc
I love how you ultimately concluded at the end that it’s the wild ox that is the mythical creature, not the unicorn.
I was trying to think of another example. It’s like saying a carnivorous herbivore. Like, a herbivore means it eats plants only, but carnivorous means it eats meat. So a carnivorous herbivore would be another oxy-moron. Same with wild ox. Oh another example: a male daughter. Yea, oxy-moron. Or how about a spotted zebra? Yea, if it’s spotted, it’s just a horse, not a zebra. Anyway, I could think of hundreds of examples.
You know, the early church used the Septuagint which said unicorn (monoceros actually) and the later Catholic Church used the Latin Vulgate which said unicornis/rhinoceros. Wild Ox was never used in the history of the church up until the 1900’s. How obnoxiously arrogant do modern translators have to be to completely disregard all of church history and think our modern translations are better? So arrogant.
I don’t care if people “give me credit” For stuff. I just love it when the points that I wanted to make get out there. I really appreciate that. I want us to have accurate translations. But these modern translations and departure from church history make me sick.
Well we certainly appreciate your research. We hope that by making it into a video we’ve enabled thousands more to be convinced by it!
@@kjbrc
You’d be surprised what I’ve been finding out about the Apocrypha
I studied that last year and came to the same conclusion. Thanks for putting this on. I shared it.
Excellent information! Thank you for the diligent research and response.
Thank you so much for watching!
Thank you for sharing this short clip. It was short but it was chocked full of very valuable information. Proving that some parts of Scripture need to be thoroughly chewed and considered to get the full meat of the meaning, that is why it says we are to love God with all our mind - all our thinking, considering, and examining powers.
Thank you for watching!
The Wooly Rhino or Siberian Unicorn is the Unicorn mentioned in the Bible
not really, there no rhinos found in the land of Uz aka Jordan.
@@randomguyodst46there's no fossils of it in Uz. That's not the same. If it was considered mystical, it would of been hunted. The lack of people in Siberia is probably why we find it there.
@@Mule-chezedek well in Saudi Al-Okhdood there’s a wall carving of a horse that has a horn in its head but it has a lion body.
@@randomguyodst46Israel had rhinos in the Miocene era, over 20 million years ago. Wild ox aka auroch is the proper translation of the Hebrew root word. Hebrews didn't have any unicorn myth, but Greco-Roman culture did as did Christian culture, which was mostly Greco-Roman influenced.
@@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr according to primordial soup mythology.
Loved this! Thank you 🕊️
Called white and black rhino. One has one horn , the other two horns
Still existing in South Africa
VERY GOOD VIDEO - BRAVO!!!!!!!!
A unicorn is like a four-legged Abrams Tank that can flip a full grown water buffalo like it's nothing. Good luck trying to ride a real unicorn, people. Although I think some rodeo cowboys would like to try.
"unicorn" = One horned rhinoceros Another misunderstanding has to do with the word "corn." Corn was not know in the old world until the discovery of it in the new world in the 1500's. "Corn" in the KJB refers to the clusters of wheat seed.
Thanks
*When was the Unicorn (mythical animal) first mentioned?*
"Rhinoceros horns are used in traditional medicines in parts of Asia, and for dagger handles in Yemen and Oman.
Esmond Bradley Martin has reported on the trade for dagger handles in Yemen.
In Europe, it was historically believed that rhino horns could purify water and could detect poisoned liquids, and likely believed to be an aphrodisiac and an antidote to poison.
It is a common misconception that rhinoceros horn in powdered form is used as an aphrodisiac, or a cure for cancer in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) as Cornu Rhinoceri Asiatici (犀角, xījiǎo, "rhinoceros horn"); no TCM text in history has ever mentioned such prescriptions."
They really existed,a single horned Male goat.
The high-capacity, assault unicorn!
More so than a horse for sure!
I've seen one at a zoo. Ii is also known as a single horn rinocerous.
👍 👍 👍
The real question is from where did the idea of the flying mythical unicorn come. I’m guessing the opponents of God invented the idea to discredit the Bible.
No unicorns were a fairytail creature then the idea got inserted into the Bible via mandela effect check
Well, a flying horse is one creature and a unicorn is another creature. Both appear in tales of Greek and Roman theology of gods and goddesses. Artists and story tellers set it in the minds of folks for generations. Cartoon makers and novelists probably combined the two into one for the best in marketing, story telling, and appeal. I often wonder if the stories told in oral tradition for entertainment surpassed and intertwined with oral stories of history until they become one in the minds of generations not bothering to make the distinction between fact and fiction.
psalms 29:6 could you really imagine a rhino or a oz skip like calf i couldn't
The text states, "like a young unicorn." And yes, go watch a video or three of a young rhino running, my first two I watched looked like they were skipping.
Ox imoron ha ha
It's a Rhino.
Psalm 29:6 KJV - He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.
Rhino young are known for their skipping and jumping movements.
czcams.com/video/0bL02GyIsKw/video.htmlsi=iEmqjYUrv7bSZHVb
My gosh he interpretated that verse wrong it was not talking about a unicorn with two horns it was referring to more than one unicorn as in plural.😅
He actually does address that specifically in the longer version of this video. Be sure to check out, “Unicorns and Satyrs” from a few years ago on our channel.
The Hebrew is a singular animal with plural horns. The Geneva Bible has it as a singular animal, but the KJV changes it to plural animals with no legitimate grammatical justification.
Besides, The context is talking about Joseph, a singular person, as having two horns, and those horns are Ephraim and Manasseh. And of course Ephraim is blessed with the greater blessing, which Moses later confirms is a larger tribe. Thus, it fits the picture of the larger and smaller horn on the rhino. And the black two-horned Rhino (Rhinoceros bicornis) used to be native to Egypt and Ethiopia, two lands which Moses is familiar with.
It’s just like in Daniel 8 where it uses the ram with one horn higher than the other because the Persians were larger than the Medes.
Im personally convinced it
Its a rino many animels
listed in the bible
Become extinct
Long ago
...if the Bible was translated into English...why are Churches referred to as Synagogues...?
Because the original text came from the Jewish culture, which is what they call their assembly of people that worship and teach about God.
That is the name they used for their assembly.
Christian church borrows a lot from it's parent religion.
English Bible translators use English terms, so English people can understand Jewish thinking and phrases.
Sometimes the translators do not get the full idea across in English.
Same issue with "God", "Lord", Yahweh.
When "LORD" is in small caps in English versions, it's supposed to signify the Personal Name of The Holy One of Israel.
The Hebrew writers thought it was too familiar and disrespectful to use His Name so freely, so substituted The Name for a lesser word of The LORD.
It's like saying Mr President, instead of Mr Obama/Biden/Trump.
LORD is a Title, not a name.
Synagogue is a Jewish term. Church is an English term, trying to convey the same meaning.
Hope this helps.
Where in the bible is a church referred to as a synagogue?
@@chrisking6874
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synagogue#:~:text=5th%20century%20CE-,Christianity,(James%202%3A2).
It took 3 seconds to look it up sir.
The same time it took you to post it here.
@@chrisking6874
Google the exact same question.
You'll find good answers.
Another embarrassment for the modern critical text onlyists...where they at?? I wanna see them refute this.
No one can refute the truth. God ALONE intelligently designed and authored the King James Bible. Therefore, it's testimony is true. The irrefutable undeniable evidence...czcams.com/video/OB2P0lJCt3o/video.html
Only God is right
And that will lead us to the fact that Jesus was black
Does that rreally matter though? Black or white he was probably dark skin based on where he was raised but still. Jesus died for our sins not for our colors ;) God Bless ;)
"I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls." Job 30:29 KJB
A dragon is a snake. The King James Bible teaches us this
Better yet, you just utilize the best manuscripts and scholarship, and translate into 21st century English.
All of the modern translations are incorrect on this point, as clearly shown in the video.
21st Century English cannot accurately translate. The elimination of "ye" and "thou" makes the translation inaccurate and less precise.
Since we already have the translation of the Scriptures in English (1611), it would be redundant to translate them again. One cannot expect God's sanction on such an endeavour, since it would imply that man is fixing imperfections in God's Word.
@@kjbrcaccording to your video rhinoceros would be the correct interpretation of the original text in modern english, and unicorn KJV are english. If so, why do all the modern translations prefer "wild ox"? Even if their reasoning is wrong, what is their reason?
@@vincentwood7036 what was the perfect English translation in 1560, and who dared to change it?
When a translation differs from the Greek or Hebrew, what is the authority?
Since the Roman Catholic monk Erasmus used the Latin Vulgate to produce part of Revelation when creating the Textus Receptus ,what is superior...the Latin or earlier Greek manuscripts?
Since there were changes in each edition of the Textus Receptus, which is authentic?
Since there were multiple revisions to the King James translation from 1611 through the 19th century...and most in circulation are the 1769 revision...which should be used, and why?
Since the actual translators in 1611 acknowledged their own limitations and fully expected future revisions to be made, why are some people in disagreement with the original committee?
in my opinion its not a rhino, i believe its an actual horse with a horn because of job 39:9-10 (Kjb).
Translators try to reflect their translation within a system of their own reality. Just as the Bible reads that Earth is not a globe with a firmament covering it as written in Genesis.
Yeah pretty sure it's an actual horse with a powerful ability horn. I don't see why that's crazy.
Job says the animal can’t be tamed or used for plowing. You can do both with a horse.
...if there was no "J" sound in the Biblical past...was his name really Jacob...was it pronounced Jerusalem...were they Ge(n)tiles...was His name Jesus...or Hay-SOOS...?
Nearly all names in our English Bible are transliterations of the original Hebrew and Greek names. Even Ιησους (Jesus) is a Greek transliteration of the name Yeshua.
Only in the KJV. NKJV, NET, ESV is "ox". Your deceived
Whatever this animal was apparently a lot of scholars had reason to believe it had one horn. According to the Bible where this animal is described it COULD NOT be used as a farm animal. It is clear that the one-horned horse commonly thought up in fairy tales and mythology is not what it is either. He proves above in the video that the unicorn was defined centuries ago as a Rhinoceros with one horn which DID EXIST and I believe still does exist. If this was a one-horned animal neither ox nor a "wild bull" fits the bill, but I'm sure you know more than dozens upon dozens of Hebrew scholars since you've learned Hebrew from the time you were a child and are such a renowned scholar right? You know it all so who's gonna teach you anything. Do one-horned rhinos exist? You can be the judge of that. I would think someone who goes by RhinoOtt would like this.
www.worldwildlife.org/species/greater-one-horned-rhino
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rhinoceros
Classic example of "Bible says this, time to look for stuff that can say that it is true"
If Science worked like this, anything could be true.
There is a big problem with the Webster's 1828 dictionary as evidence. Shakespeare, writing precisely at the time of the 1611 KJV translators, mentions unicorns in his works, unicorns as in a magical horse with a horn. Unicorns appear in medieval art and coats of arms - unicorns, not the rhinoceros. So this is fallacious to point to Webster's dictionary as if the rhinoceros was ever the primary definition of unicorn. It wasn't. Unicorn is just a bad translation, one of many bad translations in the KJV. It is probably the most historically significant translation of the Bible into English, but it's not a perfect translation. It was purposefully archaic in its own time. It's hopelessly archaic in our time. Just admit there are errors in the KJV. Quit trying to save it. This is 2024.
Atheist much?
@@Ivan_1411 idolize the King James, idolater?
@@Ivan_1411 idolize the KJV? There are better translations.
@@brianmoore581 I am not a Baptist. Thank you very much. I am Lutheran who is interested in orthodoxy. Specifically Eastern orthodoxy
That's because it's not the Catholic (first and only) Bible. You should research King James.
We aren’t sure what you are trying to say with this comment. What are you responding to?
Unicorn is just one of many words in the KJV that should be updated.
Given that scientists today use the term to refer to a real animal we would consider the word unicorn to be current. Should the scientific community update the term as well?
@@kjbrc what scientists and what real animal?
@@davidbrock4104 I don't know which scientists, but I watched the video in the description and the animal they are referring to is still the rhino
@@KenyonBowers The Strongs says that it is a wild bull, the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon says essentially the same thing. I believe the word should be updated.
@@davidbrock4104 yes. The dictionaries are corrupt
A unicorn was born in Rome in 2008 at the Center of Natural Sciences. The bible is all true. Don't try to force it, just except it as is no matter what.
Based on the research it seems obvious that the Unicorn of the Bible was a Rhinoceros
2008?
@@kjbrc No. That's just you trying to fit the bible into modern science.
@@bobbyadkins6983 yes. Google it.
Dragons, unicorns and giants are all real and there is evidence of them.
@renegadescienceteacher