“The Old Testament talks about unicorns in many places. Since this is a mythological animal, doesn’t its mention support the atheist claim that the Bible is nothing but a collection of myths?”

“Unicorn” is a  King James mistranslation of the Hebrew word Reem. The word  more correctly translates as “Wild Ox.”

Compare the two verses below, first from King James, and then from the NIV translation:

Deut 33:17

His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns:
Deut 33:17
17 In majesty he is like a firstborn bull;
his horns are the horns of a wild ox.

Notice that in both versions, horns are described in the plural, so we cannot possibly be talking about a one horned unicorn.

Having said that, even if the translations were disputed, supposing a creature with only one horn was described in the Bible?  There is nothing particularly unusual about that. The rhinoceros, after all, has only one horn. Could there have once been unicorns which existed in Biblical days and are now extinct?  Of course. How exactly would this prove the Bible to be mythology?  An extinct animal is not the same as an imaginary animal.Would we dismiss literature which mentioned the Dodo Bird just because the creature no longer exists?

In any event, with or without unicorns, the bigger reason atheists assume the Bible to be mythology would be the numerous miracle accounts.  For that subject, I refer you to one of my other articles.

Also by Bob Siegel:

Are miracles unscientific?

Share this on