The problem with the argument mentioned in the video is that the word
unicorn was used to describe horned horses long before it was described in Webster's dictionary.
The particular species of rhinoceros wasn't referred to as "unicorn" until 1758 by Carolus Linnaeus. The Bible was translated to English in the 1300s. However, the word "unicorn" was well established by that time.
So the image at 2:46 in the video is quite misleading. It suggests the word "unicorn" wasn't even used to describe horned horses until after 1828. This is untrue. It also assumes the word "unicorn" was used to describe rhinos back in 1611, which ignores the fact that rhinos weren't referred to as unicorns until 1758.
Psalm 29:6 -
He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.
When did a rhino skip like a calf?
Job 39:10 -
Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
Although it's hard to imagine unicorns being used to plow fields, it's even more ridiculous to suggest they used rhinos.
The Bible was translated using the word "unicorn" before the species of rhino was referred to as unicorns. Clearly, the word "unicorn" in the Bible isn't referring to a rhinoceros. Does this mean the original texts were referring to horned horses? Not necessarily. It could be poor translation. But to suggest the English version of the Bible is referring to rhinos is just ridiculous.
---- Now, for some more nitpicking----
* The video argues that the word unicornis in original Latin is also used in the rhino species' name, therefore the original must be referring to rhinos and not horses. This argument is absurd for numerous reasons:
1. The Latin word unicornis was created
before it was used to describe a species of rhino. How scientists use the word unicornis today doesn't change the original meaning. Therefore, one can't conclude that the original use of the word referred to rhinos just because that's how scientists use the word today.
2. Unicorn is Latin for "one horn". Though the word is most often used to describe horned horses, it was quite fitting to differentiate species of rhino using this literal translation of the word. The name "unicornis" wasn't applied to the species of rhino because that was the original meaning of the word, but because the literal translation of the word described one of the rhino's traits, which was quite convenient considering how species names are Latin.
* The video also points out that the word rhinoceros was used in the original Latin translation. He sources Latin Vulgate. After doing some research, I found out that Latin Vulgate refers to "Common Bible" and can refer to numerous different translations. Some translations of Latin Vulgate stem from the 1500s whereas newer translations are as new as 1979!
Bible translations into Latin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I am having trouble finding the earliest Latin translation of Job online. The Latin translation which includes the word rhinoceros must be older than 1758. I can't find an Old Latin translation of the Bible online, nor can I find a Latin Vulgate version of the Bible online which hasn't been edited since 1758.
In short, just because it's written in Latin doesn't mean it's the original translation. This is why we need to source the date of the translation.
*The video points out that the word "Unicorns" was used in a book published in 2003. This doesn't prove that the original meaning of the word "unicorn" referred to rhinos. This book is referring to the species of rhino by calling them unicorns, but unless you can actually prove this is the way the word unicorn was used in the original English translation (or even Latin if it exists before the English translation), it's a moot point.
I then skipped the bit of the video where he continues to make the flawed argument in which he suggests the usage of a word today proves/disproves the usage of the word in the past.
We now use the word "Mustang" to refer to a brand of car. But the word mustang has been used for hundreds of years! Does this mean people were referring to cars in the 1800s instead of wild horses? Of course not. The same is true for the word "unicorn". Using the word unicorn to describe a species of rhinos today doesn't mean the word was always used to describe rhinos.
* The video then points out that Deuteronomy 33:17, in Latin, uses the word rhinocerotis. Refer to my prior point in which I explained that this is most likely the result of a recent Latin translation, and not the original.
(I will concede that, if he's correct about the Hebrew, he made a good point in that the original context clearly isn't referring to a horned horse. But it still doesn't prove what kind of animal was being described.)