If you recently attended a Christmas pageant or saw a depiction of the Christmas story on TV or in a movie you probably saw some animals, like sheep, cattle and camels. The funny thing is that none of these animals are mentioned in the Matthew and Luke stories of Jesus’ birth, although Luke mentions shepherds and says Jesus was laid in a manger, a feeding trough for animals. So, you can’t fault people for making assumptions.
However, there are many animals mentioned in the Bible, including some very unusual ones. In one of the earliest stories in the Bible we meet an unusual animal in the Garden of Eden: a talking serpent. Now, the word “serpent” is the same one used later when Moses confronts Pharaoh and his staff becomes a serpent and swallows up the serpents produced by Pharaoh’s magicians. So it is pretty clear that it refers to a snake. But the serpent in the Garden of Eden did not start out that way. First, it could talk and snakes can’t talk. Also, it apparently had legs or could walk in some way. Recall its curse for misleading Adam and Eve: ”On your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life.” (Gen. 3:14) So, prior to this the “serpent” was upright. I really don’t know how the ancient story tellers envisioned this serpent. Was he like a talking lizard, whose legs were taken away? Or some other creature that was then turned into a snake? I guess we’ll never know since the original “serpent” was not described to us. But you’ll notice that in many paintings of the temptation scene it is usually depicted as a legless snake, which does not seem accurate. Michelangelo may have a better idea:
Fall and expulsion of Adam and Eve,
by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel, ca. 1509-1510
Note that the serpent seems to be humanoid being transformed into a snake.
There was another talking animal in the Bible. There was a pagan prophet named Balaam; his story is detailed in post #50. According to the story (Numbers 22) God allowed Balaam’s donkey to talk back to him, as they were about to run into an angry angel, which the donkey could see, but Balaam could not. (It’s a strange story; read post 50!) So, it was not just a talking donkey, but a perceptive and wise donkey.
Balaam and the Ass
Rembrandt, 1626
The King James Translation, still revered by many conservative Christians, mentions a number of strange creatures. There is the cockatrice, mentioned three times in the book of Isaiah, such as: “Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent’s root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent [seraph].” (Isaiah 14:29) A cockatrice is a legendary, fearsome mythical creature, often depicted as a two-legged dragon or serpent with a rooster’s head and wings, hatched from a rooster’s egg by a serpent or toad, and known for its deadly glance, poisonous breath, and association with evil. Some modern translations use the word “viper” instead, probably because they know the cockatrice is not a real animal. But it nonetheless says his fruit will be a flying fiery serpent. What do we call a flying fiery serpent? A dragon! Did the prophet Isaiah and the King James translators believe that such creatures were real? Perhaps. But I suppose one could argue that as a prophet Isaiah is using metaphorical, symbolic language; not that he necessarily believed in such creatures.
Speaking of dragons, the KJV refers to that creature a number of times in the Old Testament, and the last book of the New Testament, Revelation, uses the image of a dragon repeatedly. Like the cockatrice it may be that prophets and poets used the idea of “dragons” in a symbolic, metaphorical way. But I find its use in this passage interesting: “For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone. Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.” (Psalm 91:11-13) The lion and adder are real; why include “dragon” if it is not real? And do you recognize the passage? It is quoted by the devil in the three temptations of Jesus described in Matthew 4, except that it leaves off the verse about the lion, adder and dragon. Too bad: Jesus versus a dragon would have made a good story!
St. George and the Dragon
Raphael, 1503
People believed in dragons into medieval times.
Related to dragons, the Hebrew word “seraph” [pl: seraphim] refers to fiery serpents. I would refer you back to Bible post #64 about angels. People today think of seraphim as a type of angel but that post explains the Bible description of seraphim as flying fiery serpents; in other words, dragons.
The KJV mentions the unicorn a number of times: Numbers 23:22, 24:8, Job 39:9, 10, and Psalm 29:6, 91:10. Modern translations tend to translate this as “wild ox.” Some scholars think it may refer to the auruchs, a now-extinct species of cattle. The Septuagint was an early translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek in the 2nd Century BCE and it translated the Hebrew term as “monokeros,” which literally means “one-horned.” The Latin Bible called the Vulgate picked up on that word, and later it was incorporated into the KJV as “unicorn.” So it may not be that the Bible authors really meant the mythical unicorn, but the KJV translators made the mistake of using that word based on earlier translations into Greek and Latin. Yes, it is possible that, like “cockatrice,” the KJV translators made another mistake in using “unicorn.” The KJV, for that matter, no translation is perfect, no matter how revered it is. Or maybe there’s another explanation for why there are no unicorns today:
The leviathan seems to be some sort of fearsome sea creature mentioned a number of times in the Old Testament: Job 3:8; 41:1, Psalms 74:13; 74:14; 104:25, Isaiah 27:1. It is thought to represent some sort of sea-dwelling version of a serpent or dragon. However, there are any number of large sea creatures that could inspire such a word. There are whale species in the Mediterranean Sea as well as sharks. Another likely candidate is the crocodile, which lives in the Nile River, grows to 20 feet, and is quite fearsome. Or perhaps they really did think of some sort of sea-dragon. But maybe they knew it was just folk lore and used the image as a metaphor. I don’t think we can know what the authors really thought when they used such words.
Isaiah prophesies the destruction of the Leviathan.
Engraving by Gustave Dore (1832 – 1883).
A powerful land creature is mentioned in Job, the Behemoth:
“Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox. Behold now, his strength in his loins and his power in the muscles of his belly. He bends his tail like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are tubes of bronze; his limbs are like bars of iron.” Job 40:15-18
Seems to me that he might be describing a hippopotamus or an elephant or a rhinoceros, maybe even a water buffalo. Some speculate he is describing a dinosaur, but that seems rather far-fetched. Or maybe it is another mythological beast. Job is a rather poetic book, so using mythological references would not be surprising.
Behemoth and Leviathan, by William Blake
from his Illustrations of the Book of Job, 1826.
Cherubim are now thought of as cute little angels, but refer back to post #64 about angels. Cherubim are actually described as guardian-warrior beasts with both animal and human qualities. Recall the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden: a cherub is placed there to guard the entrance. But these are heavenly creatures, so I suppose anything goes when you are talking about non-earthly beings.
In Revelation 9 you can read of special locusts that could sting like scorpions: “The appearance of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle; and on their heads appeared to be crowns like gold, and their faces were like the faces of men. They had hair like the hair of women, and their teeth were like the teeth of lions. They had breastplates like breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots, of many horses rushing to battle. They have tails like scorpions, and stings; and in their tails is their power to hurt men for five months.” (Rev. 9:7-10) However, Revelation is full of strange, intense apocalyptic imagery and I think its readers were meant to see these images as symbolic, not as literal creatures on earth.
So, you can see that there are some strange creatures mentioned in the Bible. Perhaps some of the words are just the result of poor translation (like “unicorn” for “wild ox”?). Perhaps some of the creatures are meant to be metaphorical or symbolic, not to be taken literally. But even into the Middle Ages many people believed they represented real creatures, so the ancients who told and wrote these stories may have believed so as well. What do you think? Was Shakespeare right when he had Hamlet say: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” (Act 1, Scene 5) Or were the Bible story tellers simply using mythical images to make a point? Or were they speaking of real animals but the translators got it wrong? Does it influence how you think of the Bible stories or of the translators of those stories?
(Be sure to leave your comments and questions below.)
Thinking exercises:
1. Does it matter to you if the Bible authors thought these strange creatures were real? Would it change the intent of their writings? Would it change how you think of their writings?
2. Some people believe the Bible is “inerrant,” containing no errors whatsoever. Does inerrancy make sense when words can have multiple meanings that significantly change how one interprets them? Like, a word can mean a mythical creature or a real one depending on how you translate it. Is it an error to use the word “cockatrice” when the author meant a real creature (perhaps a viper) instead of a mythical one? Or “unicorn” (mythical) instead of “aurochs (real)?”
Leave a Reply