Wait, is the OP serious? I thought he was having a lark.
No, there's no reason to believe in these fantastical animals.
No, there's no reason to believe in these fantastical animals.
Did fantastical beasts like the unicorn and phoenix use to exist?
Now, Jesus wouldn't go talking about stuff that didn't exist, would he?
Unicorn and bicorn thank you very muchIt's latin.
If it were greek it would be monoceros and diceros(?)
The problem still is in which genus this creature comes from. It will never be of the horse family which most people place the unicorn. It is the mythological artistic renderings that are wrong, not any translation errors from antiquity. Graphical renditions tend to stick in the memory banks and harder to correct than the written word.
No, there's no reason to believe in these fantastical animals.
It was probably like a horse standing in front of a rhino or a narwhal and some guy was drunk, ran back to his village, and they believed him because he's the high priest.
Now, Jesus wouldn't go talking about stuff that didn't exist, would he? He's definitely no daydreamer or espouser of men's overactive imaginations.
Unicorn.
![]()
Well, Diceros bicornis, I know. But cut a myth some slack!
By the time some traveller gets back from Africa, a tale gets taller.
Jesus rode a unicorn.
Why bring Africa or its Bicorns into this?
It is not at all clear that the the creatures whose Hebrew name is translated as Unicorn only has one horn anyway.
How many horns does it have? If it's two, I'm sticking with the Twihornus Africanus.