Numbers 23:22
God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.

Numbers 24:8
God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.

Deuteronomy 33:17
His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Job 39:9
Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?

Job 39:10
Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?

Psalm 22:21
Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

Psalm 29:6
He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.

Psalm 92:10
But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.

Isaiah 34:7
And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.

( All Verses taken from the KJV Bible )

I don't understand how KJVO groups can claim that this can be good for a new believer. If I were to read this and not understand that it meant Ox I would really wonder if Christians were believing in fairy tales, and if that was true what else could be wrong.

Wheres Ed I want his thoughts?

You mean there weren't any unicorns?

They were fluffy pink unicorns.

I just figured that they goofed off while Noah built the ark, just like the dragon and the gryphon. Tsk tsk.

Kelco hums quietly,
"There were green aligators and-long necked geese.......You're never gonna see a unicorn.

That's why it was so helpful that AiG explained the original Hebrew in The Unicorn: The Bible does not refer to fantasy animals. This has already proven most helpful -- see Appreciates information about the ‘Unicorn’ . But I bet KJVOs would have hated this article even though it was affirming biblical inerrancy.

The Hebrew word there has no meaning of 'unicorn' whatsoever.

10-17-2003 @ 06:03 PM post located here
NSMinistries:

Numbers 23:22
God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.

Numbers 24:8
God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.

Deuteronomy 33:17
His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Job 39:9
Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?

Job 39:10
Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?

Psalm 22:21
Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

Psalm 29:6
He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.

Psalm 92:10
But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.

Isaiah 34:7
And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.

( All Verses taken from the KJV Bible )

I don't understand how KJVO groups can claim that this can be good for a new believer. If I were to read this and not understand that it meant Ox I would really wonder if Christians were believing in fairy tales, and if that was true what else could be wrong.

TCapp:
I just figured that they goofed off while Noah built the ark, just like the dragon and the gryphon. Tsk tsk.

And other mythical creatures, too... like virgins, and 4-pt. Calvinists.

RightIdea:

And other mythical creatures, too... like virgins, and 4-pt. Calvinists.

Check-MATE!

Could have been a mistranslation, but then again there are actual unicorns. I don't remember where they're from or what the animal is, but in one of the Arabic countries they take an animal in its youth and tie the horns so they grow together into a single horn.

Although I doubt that practice would have been going on in the days of Moses and Job.

Today @ 11:59 AM post located here
dwmitch:

Could have been a mistranslation, but then again there are actual unicorns. I don't remember where they're from or what the animal is, but in one of the Arabic countries they take an animal in its youth and tie the horns so they grow together into a single horn.

Although I doubt that practice would have been going on in the days of Moses and Job.

Even so that would not really change what kind of animal it was.

In every age and in every generation there have been those unstable, uneducated and unwilling elements of society that choose to reject the Bible as the objective rule and practice of life and worship. Among the hackneyed retorts of these irreligious zealots is the claim that the Bible contains error. If their claim were true, the Bible would then be an unreliable record and certainly not the plenary, verbally inspired will of Almighty God. Though the Bible contains irrefutable proof of its own attestation by demonstrating that the writers of the Bible wrote from a source beyond themselves in such instances as referring to the "circle of the earth" when the rest of the world thought mankind rested on the back of a tortoise shell (Isa. 40:22); in citing the biological truism that "life is in the blood" (Lev. 17:11); by referring to the hydrological cycle in Ecclesiastes 1:6-7; in declaring hygiene laws and knowledge of the human body that ancient man simply did not have access to (Gen. 17:12; Num. 19:17-19); there are still some who will not accept the Scripture regardless of the evidence.

One particular argument leveled against the Scripture is the King James reference to the "unicorn." There are eight references in the Old Testament to the beast that the Hebrew text refers to as reem. Because the KJV translators chose the word "unicorn" to translate the Hebrew reem, some of those who sift ever so carefully through the Bible hoping to find inconsistency think they have found one. After all, is not the unicorn a mythological horselike animal with wings and a single horn? "Surely," they say, "this is an instance of error." Yet if one will check Mr. Noah Webster he will find twelve references to the unicorn, seven of which are references to different animals. The third definition given by Webster says, "In the Bible, a two horned ox-like animal called reem in Hebrew." The KJV translators in 1611 found difficulty in determining the exact nature of the beast that was referred to as reem. This reem was described as an animal of great ferocity and strength (Num. 23:22). It was also considered untamable (Job 39:9). Some have supposed the reem was a buffalo and others a white antelope. Most probably, it was the bos primigenius or "primitive ox," which is now extinct. The ultimate reason that the translators chose the word "unicorn" was because of the Septuagint rendering monokeruz which refers to a one-horned beast. The Septuagint translators were convinced the huge reem in Hebrew was a rhinoceros. Yet in Deuteronomy 33:17, the "horns of the unicorns" are compared to the "horns of a bullock." The animal referred to had prominent horns and was primarily known for its horns. For this reason the Septuagint translators thought the animal was the rhinoceros which then led to the KJV translation of "unicorn." Yet never is there any intimation in the Bible that the "unicorn" was a flying horse-like animal with a single horn protruding out of its forehead.

The Hebrew reference to reem is a reference to an animal now extinct. Just as dinosaurs (another type of beast the Bible mentions in Job 40:15-24) no longer roam the earth, so there have been other animals that lived and are no longer in existence. The skeptics argument is nothing but casuistry that is held to by those who will not investigate and make only decisions warranted by proper evidence.

Throughout the ages the Bible has been ridiculed and sneered at, jilted and spit upon, rejected and scorned by those who would not heed the message of love and truth. Yet for thousands of years its power has not been diminished, its resilience has not been out-lasted and its message has not been defeated. The Bible is still shining and burning in the hearts of all those that humble themselves before the divine throne of God and accept its testimony as the absolute Truth of God. May all learn as the Thessalonians did when they, "received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God" (I Thess. 2:13).

(Holger W. Neubauer; Bulletin - Northeast Church of Christ, Cookeville, TN; 5/16/99)

EdJones,

Your religion is Christian - your religion is not Jewish. Why are you using the maggen david as your faith identifier??
.

Today @ 11:34 AM post located here
EdJones:

In every age and in every generation there have been those unstable, uneducated and unwilling elements of society that choose to reject the Bible as the objective rule and practice of life and worship. Among the hackneyed retorts of these irreligious zealots is the claim that the Bible contains error. If their claim were true, the Bible would then be an unreliable record and certainly not the plenary, verbally inspired will of Almighty God. Though the Bible contains irrefutable proof of its own attestation by demonstrating that the writers of the Bible wrote from a source beyond themselves in such instances as referring to the "circle of the earth" when the rest of the world thought mankind rested on the back of a tortoise shell (Isa. 40:22); in citing the biological truism that "life is in the blood" (Lev. 17:11); by referring to the hydrological cycle in Ecclesiastes 1:6-7; in declaring hygiene laws and knowledge of the human body that ancient man simply did not have access to (Gen. 17:12; Num. 19:17-19); there are still some who will not accept the Scripture regardless of the evidence.

One particular argument leveled against the Scripture is the King James reference to the "unicorn." There are eight references in the Old Testament to the beast that the Hebrew text refers to as reem. Because the KJV translators chose the word "unicorn" to translate the Hebrew reem, some of those who sift ever so carefully through the Bible hoping to find inconsistency think they have found one. After all, is not the unicorn a mythological horselike animal with wings and a single horn? "Surely," they say, "this is an instance of error." Yet if one will check Mr. Noah Webster he will find twelve references to the unicorn, seven of which are references to different animals. The third definition given by Webster says, "In the Bible, a two horned ox-like animal called reem in Hebrew." The KJV translators in 1611 found difficulty in determining the exact nature of the beast that was referred to as reem. This reem was described as an animal of great ferocity and strength (Num. 23:22). It was also considered untamable (Job 39:9). Some have supposed the reem was a buffalo and others a white antelope. Most probably, it was the bos primigenius or "primitive ox," which is now extinct. The ultimate reason that the translators chose the word "unicorn" was because of the Septuagint rendering monokeruz which refers to a one-horned beast. The Septuagint translators were convinced the huge reem in Hebrew was a rhinoceros. Yet in Deuteronomy 33:17, the "horns of the unicorns" are compared to the "horns of a bullock." The animal referred to had prominent horns and was primarily known for its horns. For this reason the Septuagint translators thought the animal was the rhinoceros which then led to the KJV translation of "unicorn." Yet never is there any intimation in the Bible that the "unicorn" was a flying horse-like animal with a single horn protruding out of its forehead.

The Hebrew reference to reem is a reference to an animal now extinct. Just as dinosaurs (another type of beast the Bible mentions in Job 40:15-24) no longer roam the earth, so there have been other animals that lived and are no longer in existence. The skeptics argument is nothing but casuistry that is held to by those who will not investigate and make only decisions warranted by proper evidence.

Throughout the ages the Bible has been ridiculed and sneered at, jilted and spit upon, rejected and scorned by those who would not heed the message of love and truth. Yet for thousands of years its power has not been diminished, its resilience has not been out-lasted and its message has not been defeated. The Bible is still shining and burning in the hearts of all those that humble themselves before the divine throne of God and accept its testimony as the absolute Truth of God. May all learn as the Thessalonians did when they, "received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God" (I Thess. 2:13).

(Holger W. Neubauer; Bulletin - Northeast Church of Christ, Cookeville, TN; 5/16/99)

you still really have not answered the question:

I don't understand how KJVO groups can claim that this can be good for a new believer. If I were to read this and not understand that it meant Ox I would really wonder if Christians were believing in fairy tales, and if that was true what else could be wrong.

Wouldn't you think using a word that todays new believers might understand help with their faith.