Mythological Animals In The Bible,

[hereticzero]

I've had many Christians tell me their King James Version Bible is true and without error with no error of translation. And it is from THIS translation and no other translation all REAL Christians should quote from! Praise the Lard! Modern Christianity will fight about creation vs evolution because it is GOD against SCIENCE! At the same time, Christians rewrite the texts of their bibles to exclude mythological creatures from the bible. If they are a myth then why does the bible have them in the first place? My reasoning is that the bible was a mythological story written for entertainment around the camp fire before the Nintendo. You will need old bibles (before 1960s or older) to find most if not all these words. My newer translations do not have the words. A King James Verson with Strong's Numbers may show the original translation to you.

 

See how many you can find.

 

For example:

 

The word 'unicorn' appears in the King James Version (for all these examples, unless otherwise noted) several times: Numbers 23:22 and 24:8, Deuteronomy 33:17, Job 39:9-10, Psalms 22:21, 29:6, 92:10, and Isaiah 34:7.

 

Don't forget the fiery serpents that killed some of the Hebrews while they were being led by the nose by Moses through the wilderness for 40 years.

Look at Numbers 21:6. Have you seen any? I haven't.

 

The satyr is a half-man and half-goat with horns and is similar in appearance as the god, Pan. In Greek and Roman mythology this being was in the company of the god of wine and partying and orgy, and the word is found more than 50 times in the OT, providing the text you are using hasn't been changed. I have noticed that modern translations of all kinds are written to show the new words for known animals. You need a Hebrew and Greek lexicon to look up words and hopefully the lexicons have not been a money whore too. Some examples are Leviticus Chapter 16, Isaiah 13:21 and 34:14, Leviticus 17:7; 2 Chronicles 11:15. Some of these verses refer directly to the being while others describe it. Christians have all kinds of explanations for the words' meanings but if the writing is true and without error, then there should be no need for people explaining the words actually mean something other than what is written.

 

This is back to my long standing talking snake argument--Genesis 3--how can a person disbelieve Genesis and preach the NT as true? The story of Jesus is the result of this fictional tale about Adam and Eve.

 

The King James Version shows 'cockatrice' in Isaiah 11:8 and 59:5, and Jeremiah 8:17.

 

There be dragons here: Deuteronomy 32:33; Job 30:29; Psalms 44:19; 74:13; 91:13; 148:7; Isaiah 13:22; 27:1; 34:13; 35:7; 43:20; 51:9; Jeremiah 9:11; 10:22; 14:6; 49:33; 51:34, 37; Ezekiel 29:3; Micah 1:8; Malachi 1:3.

 

Fauns (not fawns)--Jeremiah 50:39 (this has been changed to 'jackals'.)

 

In my opinion, the Bible was written as mythology. If ancient people wrote the Bible filled with mythological animals or if the bible was translated and in that translation wrote mythological animals in error, then the Bible is still not true and without error and it does not show the understanding or knowledge that a supreme god would impart upon the person who wrote these words. We can take someone from the Amazon jungle and teach them the names of all of our animals and show him how to drive a car or play an xbox within one week and Moses had more than 40 days and nights to write ten lousy commandments, TWICE! And he still could not get a plausible explanation from god concerning our creation? Give me a break! You would think that something god told him would coincide with truth somewhere along the way. There is still much debate about who actually wrote the first five books of the bible. It is doubtful Moses actually wrote them, considering the stories are about him and not from him (3rd person teller and not 1st person).

 

God brought the animals to Adam for him to name, so what else could he name a 'unicorn' but a 'unicorn', if that is what he saw? Adam named then all so all the animal names in the bible must be names for real animals, right?

 

I want to see a satyr, preferably female but hey, it has been several thousand years so I guess I'll take what I can get.

[R. S. Martin]

Thanks for this post, Heretic. I'll have to look some of this up another day. It's rather late tonight.

[Amanda]

Heretic Zero... great post!

 

I find these references very interesting too. I did do some research into these words, and hope maybe some people can elaborate or correct me. I know MWC and Mythra have lots of knowledge on the mythologies of those days.

 

Modern Christianity will fight about creation vs evolution because it is GOD against SCIENCE! At the same time, Christians rewrite the texts of their bibles to exclude mythological creatures from the bible. If they are a myth then why does the bible have them in the first place? My reasoning is that the bible was a mythological story written for entertainment around the camp fire before the Nintendo.

I agree with you to a great degree... although there may be scattered some attributes to some truths throughout it too. What is interesting, IMO, is that there does seem to be some references in Genesis about evolution being very valid and obvious to those back then!

 

The word 'unicorn' appears in the King James Version (for all these examples, unless otherwise noted) several times: Numbers 23:22 and 24:8, Deuteronomy 33:17, Job 39:9-10, Psalms 22:21, 29:6, 92:10, and Isaiah 34:7.

 

Well, the hijacked version does say that, but if we research it to the manuscript from which the KJV was taken, it says this here:

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew...amp;version=kjv

 

The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 07214 Browse Lexicon

Original Word Word Origin

~ar from (07213)

Transliterated Word TDNT Entry

R@'em TWOT - 2096a

Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech

reh-ame'  Noun Masculine

Definition

probably the great aurochs or wild bulls which are now extinct. The exact meaning is not known.

 

And this is what it says about Aurochs here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs

 

The wild-ox called re'em (Strong's # 07214) in the Bible (Numbers 23:22 and 24:8, Deuteronomy 33:17, Job 39:9-10, Psalms 22:21, 29:6, 92:10 and Isaiah 34:7) is occasionally associated with the aurochs and has incorrectly been translated as 'unicorn' in the past (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Entry for 'Wild Ox', Copyright, 1939, by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.).

 

 

Don't forget the fiery serpents that killed some of the Hebrews while they were being led by the nose by Moses through the wilderness for 40 years.

Look at Numbers 21:6. Have you seen any? I haven't.

 

I found this info below:

 

Fiery Serpent

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew...amp;version=kjv

 

The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 08314 Browse Lexicon

Original Word Word Origin

@rX from (08313)

Transliterated Word TDNT Entry

Saraph TWOT - 2292a,2292b

Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech

saw-rawf'  Noun Masculine

Definition

serpent, fiery serpent

poisonous serpent (fiery from burning effect of poison)

seraph, seraphim

majestic beings with 6 wings, human hands or voices in attendance upon God

 

I think this is probably to be a metaphor, an allegory... and comes from other mythologies of those days. Serpents/snakes seem to have been very popular for metaphorical meanings back then.

 

The satyr is a half-man and half-goat with horns and is similar in appearance as the god, Pan. In Greek and Roman mythology this being was in the company of the god of wine and partying and orgy, and the word is found more than 50 times in the OT, providing the text you are using hasn't been changed.

 

You're right, the lexicons show that is what it means...

 

Half Goat, Half man

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew...amp;version=kjv

 

The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 08163 Browse Lexicon

Original Word Word Origin

ry[X from (08175)

Transliterated Word TDNT Entry

Sa`iyr TWOT - 2274c,2274e

Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech

saw-eer' 

Definition

adj

hairy n m

he-goat, buck

as sacrificial animal

satyr, may refer to a demon possessed goat like the swine of Gadara (Mt. 8:30-

 

However, the Satyr is to be an allegory or metaphor, IMO, for a type of person, as in Mt. 8:30... for those who have an ear, will hear the metaphorical meanings instead of literal. People who live like swines, or people as goats that "mentally eat" anything.

 

This is back to my long standing talking snake argument--Genesis 3--how can a person disbelieve Genesis and preach the NT as true? The story of Jesus is the result of this fictional tale about Adam and Eve.

 

Exactly... that is why it says this, IMO...

 

Titus

1:13

This witness is true. Wherefore * * * rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

1:14

Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

 

In my opinion, the Bible was written as mythology. God brought the animals to Adam for him to name, so what else could he name a 'unicorn' but a 'unicorn', if that is what he saw? Adam named then all so all the animal names in the bible must be names for real animals, right?

It seems evident that these stories are myths/fables/allegories that were to have a purpose and valid intention for those times. Yet, these stories seem to have been hijacked through time and twisted to meet the agendas of greedy/narcisisstic people. Evolution does seem to be a premise they believed then.

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBibl...rrentChapter=32

 

Genesis 1:21

And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

 

These whales are of the same word as dragon, and are thought to be the intensive form of this word below. (It is also amazing how this part of Genesis seems to clearly speak of the evolution of all animals out of the oceans. This could have been a considerably progressive perspective for a civilization that was barely into written history.)

 

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew...amp;version=kjv

 

The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 08565 Browse Lexicon

Original Word Word Origin

!t from an unused root probably meaning to elongate

Transliterated Word TDNT Entry

Tan TWOT - 2528a

Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech

tan  Noun Masculine

Definition

dragon, maybe the extinct dinosaur the plesiosaurus, whale

</TD

 

King James Word Usage - Total: 1

whale 1

 

 

I want to see a satyr, preferably female but hey, it has been several thousand years so I guess I'll take what I can get.

 

 

 

 

 

Good one!

[hereticzero]

I've read many posts by christians on many websites that claim the unicorn was some kind of cow or bull of whatever kind of cow or bull they want to make a metaphor out of. Even if I were an ignorant peasant sheep herder and could only count to ten, because i have ten fingers and most cultures can count on two hands, I could certainly tell the difference immediately between a unicorn (a one-horned animal) and a two horned animal. At no time could I ever mistake a unicorn for a water buffalo or some other normal beast. The mythological animals were not written to convey strange animals to English peasants, these animals were written directly into the story as mythological animals. Even in the Dark Ages, anyone would know a cow or strange four legged animal as not mythological. Only creatures whose appearance would suggest the supernatural could be portrayed only as supernatural. Besides, the stories were not written for English.

[Amanda]

I've read many posts by christians on many websites that claim the unicorn was some kind of cow or bull of whatever kind of cow or bull they want to make a metaphor out of. Even if I were an ignorant peasant sheep herder and could only count to ten, because i have ten fingers and most cultures can count on two hands, I could certainly tell the difference immediately between a unicorn (a one-horned animal) and a two horned animal. At no time could I ever mistake a unicorn for a water buffalo or some other normal beast. The mythological animals were not written to convey strange animals to English peasants, these animals were written directly into the story as mythological animals. Even in the Dark Ages, anyone would know a cow or strange four legged animal as not mythological. Only creatures whose appearance would suggest the supernatural could be portrayed only as supernatural. Besides, the stories were not written for English.

 

Heretic Zero, I think your reasoning is quite valid. However, it is not the "eye witness" to be questioned here... but the translator, no?

 

Further, just because there may be a few translation errors, this is to be separated from any form of substantiating the fundamentalist mentality.... please! I'm just in search of the "truth," that's all.

 

I was never a dedicated Fundamentalist, because I've never had that much discipline. This site has opened my eyes to sooooo much that was accepted as the presuppositions we've all been subjected... however, I always thought that reason must play some role of consideration to an "all knowing God".

 

What I've found here is why these stories may have had validation in their day, and why we must have a much more critical analysis in this day. Contrary to what many on here may think, I don't suspect the bible to be all bad... nor is it all good. I'm just trying to figure out what happened... that's all.

[R. S. Martin]

I've read many posts by christians on many websites that claim the unicorn was some kind of cow or bull of whatever kind of cow or bull they want to make a metaphor out of. Even if I were an ignorant peasant sheep herder and could only count to ten, because i have ten fingers and most cultures can count on two hands, I could certainly tell the difference immediately between a unicorn (a one-horned animal) and a two horned animal. At no time could I ever mistake a unicorn for a water buffalo or some other normal beast. The mythological animals were not written to convey strange animals to English peasants, these animals were written directly into the story as mythological animals. Even in the Dark Ages, anyone would know a cow or strange four legged animal as not mythological. Only creatures whose appearance would suggest the supernatural could be portrayed only as supernatural. Besides, the stories were not written for English.

 

Heretic Zero, I think your reasoning is quite valid. However, it is not the "eye witness" to be questioned here... but the translator, no?

 

I checked Martin Luther's German Bible for unicorn. He translates it in German words that mean "one horn."

 

Amanda, if you have access to a library that carries copies of the Bible translated before the twentieth century, why not check some of these references in some of them? The Darby Bible would be one. I'd have to do some research to know what versions to look for but the info should be available online.

 

HZ, I think you have a strong argument. For my OT class the NRSV was used and it translates unicorn as wild bull or some kind of normal cattle. I always got the shivers when reading about unicorn in the Bible when I was a child because my mother had taught me 1: That unicorns in my school Reader were strictly fairy tale, and 2: That everything in the Bible was strictly true. When I pointed out about the unicorn she pretended not to see.

 

There were so many things like that. It made me doubt my own perceptions. I still suffer lack of confidence because she did this for so many of the things I saw in life that she didn't want me to see--not only in the bible but in her own everyday life example. It was a huge relief when my OT teacher acknowledged most of the inconsistencies that I had seen in the Bible as a child. And here on exC people keep affirming other inconsistencies. This is just one more. People keep coming up with items I hadn't noticed--both in the Bible and in religion itself.

 

These things affirm that I am a real person with accurate perceptions. Not just a batch of imaginative figments.

[Amanda]

I checked Martin Luther's German Bible for unicorn. He translates it in German words that mean "one horn."

Ruby Sera, do you know of internet access to some kind of lexicon that is associated with the Luther Bible? Does Luther translate it to mean one horn or could that be a discription used at the time because of the close position of both horns? I believe the "mark" given to Cain was to have a horn on his head also. Considering that writing only began in 3000BC, cuneiform, initially for inventory purposes... I suspect it very rudimentary, at best. However, Luther predates the KJV, although both of them supposedly translated from the Hebrew Tanakh and the Texus Receptus of the Greek Text. Luther is from the German culture and KJV is from the English. It would be interesting to compare each culture's interpretations.

 

Amanda, if you have access to a library that carries copies of the Bible translated before the twentieth century, why not check some of these references in some of them? The Darby Bible would be one. I'd have to do some research to know what versions to look for but the info should be available online.

What I can't find, are any lexicons associated with any Bible, but the KJV and one other version found on Crosswalk.com. If you have any other web references, I'd love to see it.

 

There were so many things like that. It made me doubt my own perceptions. I still suffer lack of confidence because she did this for so many of the things I saw in life that she didn't want me to see--not only in the bible but in her own everyday life example.

You were not alone. My Agnostic/Atheist parents did their share of dysfunction onto my life. Of course, their childhood was much worse, so I hope it was/is less with my children. We all operate out of a blind spot, to some degree, and I find it hard to believe that someone actually had "perfect" parents. *sigh*

[Kenny]

Fantastic post! Very interesting reading tonight, folks. Thank you. I'm very interested to see what else is going to come up with this one.

 

Well done, HZ!

[R. S. Martin]

Amanda, I did a google search for "English-German Lexicon" and here are my search results: http://www.google.ca/search?q=%22English-G...lient=firefox-a.

Maybe you can find something in there that helps you. I'm not sure what you're looking for. It might be worth checking BibleGateway.com to see what all they have on their website. They have the Bible in many different languages, including Luther's German Bible. I don't know about lexicons.

 

I read the rest of your post, too. You may have to actually go into a library and get books. The best information is not available for free online. Commentaries, Bible Dictionaries, books with the the Greek words and their English equivilents, and books with the Hebrew words and English equivilents for word studies (I don't know what these books are called but Heretic would probably know)--all these are sources I was taught to use when doing word studies.

 

The German word for unicorn is Einhorn. That comes out of Cassell's German-English Dictionary, 1978, a book off my shelf.

 

ein (rhymes with nine)=one

 

If you are determined to do so there is probably nothing to keep you from believing that a unicorn has two horns in one, but that is not the ordinary meaning of the word. I've seen goats with horns almost touching at the base, or perhaps even grown into each other, but the tips pointed away from each other so that there was no mistaking it for two horns. The animal would never have been mistaken for a unicorn, or one-horned beast.

[Sophronia]

There's also the self styled wizard Otter Zell, aka Oberon, who with his wife Morning Glory claims to have bred Real Live Unicorns!!

 

This is the same fellow who started the "Church of All Worlds", inspired by a fictional novel by Robert Heinlein. I think all this stuff is very silly, personally.

[Ouroboros]

The Rhino got only one horn. I think the unicorn myth only exists in the western civilization, and I suspect it started in the medieval times. (But I haven't done research, so I'm just guessing.) But if it's so, it's very possible that the idea of unicorns started by some traveler that went to Africa and came back to tell everyone about this fascinating creature that looked like a horse, and had only one horn on its head. Well, from that description, the rhino would become a unicorn. So maybe when they translated the Bible to English they took this creature they've heard about from the mysterious places of Earth and used it when they couldn't come up with any better translation? The unicorn reference only proves that humans guess when they don't know, and the Bible is full of these guesses. But it also proves that the KJV of the Bible is not to be trusted.

[R. S. Martin]

Hans, have you read the entire thread, esp. the parts about unicorn? What you post disagrees with the research on unicorn that has been posted so far on this thread. I would be interested to know how your post fits in with the research posted thus far. Also, the KJV is not the only Bible that translates it into unicorn. Martin Luther's German Bible, which was translated earlier than the KJV, has the same concept, as posted in an earlier post. So I'm not sure why you say the KJV was guessing. I don't read Hebrew, so I can't check it in the original language.

[redadare]

Moses had more than 40 days and nights to write ten lousy commandments, TWICE!

 

God wrote both sets. First set - Exodus 31:18

 

Second - Exodus 34:1

 

I believe/feel that the King James is special. Perfect? Nothing in life is perfect. I also like the NIV but there are a few new paraphrased versions out there not true translations. I steer well clear from them.

 

King James was written in 1611 - approx 400 years ago. Word meanings change. Its the bane of Lexicographers.

 

I wonder if someone from that time was asked to describe a unicorn, whether he would say that it had one horn? Dunno.

[Grandpa Harley]

Pretty much, since UNI- prefix means single, one, etc... and has done since the dawn of the Greek language...

 

Soooo.... the Hebrew word had an implication of a single horn... I do loath people who make special pleadings on the basis of ignorance

 

anyhoo... ר×× - reh·Äm' best strong can do is GUESS what the hell the animal was... it's maybe an extinct wild ox, but the Greek was pretty clear on unicorn...

[hereticzero]

Moses had more than 40 days and nights to write ten lousy commandments, TWICE!

 

God wrote both sets. First set - Exodus 31:18

 

Second - Exodus 34:1

Then the Mormon hat trick is true after all! Joseph Smith undoubtably got the gold tablets just like he said he did. If I remember correctly, he also had to get the story a second time, cuz he misplaced it the first time. Think of Moses coming down the mountain and he had only six or nine commandments until he saw the orgy around the golden calf. He says, 'I knew I fogot a commandment,' he said when he saw the cow, and threw the stones down on the ground and went back up and pounded out two or three more laws. The commandments were written on stones you could fit in the palm of one hand. Did it take Moses another 40 days and nights to get the second set? Talk about Jesus not being proven, who ever proved Moses was a real person? I haven't seen anything outside the babble with stories about Moses. Egypt does not even mention hiim. Just by coincidence, the ark of the covenant, which heled a few momentos supposedly from Moses, was hauled off when Jerusalem got sacked way back when in something something BCE or CE. If Moses can pull tablets off a mountain then Smith can pull them out of a hat. Two sets of fables competing to take over christianity. How does all this fit into mystical animals? Christianity relies upon the OT and NT to be true and Mormonism depends on Christianity to be true. Any religion based on christianity is chasing the same mythological animals and stories.

[redadare]

Unicorns in the King James

 

The word ‘unicorn’ is used in 7 different places. The Hebrew word used is ‘reem’ which has been translated in various languages as “monoceros, unicornis, unicorn, einhorn and eenhornâ€, all of which mean ‘one horn’.

 

But the word ‘reem’ is not known to have such a meaning. Many Jewish translations left it untranslated because they were unsure which creature was being referred to.

 

Archaeology has given a clue. Mesopotamian reliefs have been excavated which show King Assurnasirpal hunting oxen with one horn. Associated text show that this animal was called a ‘rimu’. This then is highly likely to be the ‘reem’ of the Bible, a wild ox.

 

The article goes on to say that the Assyrian relief of one horn was an artistic way of expressing the beauty of the fact that these horns on the ‘rimu/reem’ were very symmetrical, such that only one could be seen if the animal was viewed from one side.

 

The article was written by Dr Carl Wieland M.B., B.S.

[mwc]

The word 'unicorn' appears in the King James Version (for all these examples, unless otherwise noted) several times: Numbers 23:22 and 24:8, Deuteronomy 33:17, Job 39:9-10, Psalms 22:21, 29:6, 92:10, and Isaiah 34:7.

In Numbers 23:22 the Latin Vulgate uses "rinocerotis." The LXX uses the equivalent for "with but one horn."

In Numbers 24:8 the Latin Vulgate uses "rinocerotis." The LXX uses the equivalent for "with but one horn."

 

In Deuteronomy 33:17 the Latin Vulgate uses "rinocerotis." The LXX uses the equivalent for "with but one horn."

 

In Job 39:9 the Latin Vulgate uses "rinoceros." The LXX uses the equivalent for "with but one horn."

In Job 39:10 the Latin Vulgate uses "rinocerota." I couldn't tell what the LXX used. It might have just referred to 39:9.

 

In Psalm 22:21 the Latin Vulgate uses "unicornium." The LXX uses the equivalent for "with but one horn."

In Psalm 29:6 the Latin Vulgate uses "unicornium." The LXX uses the equivalent for "with but one horn."

In Psalm 92:10 the Latin Vulgate uses "unicornis." The LXX uses the equivalent for "with but one horn."

 

In Isaiah 34:7 the Latin Vulgate uses "unicornes." I couldn't tell what the LXX used. It looked like "ram."

 

 

Anyhow, I only looked at the "unicorn" issue (and my ability to even begin to read these other languages really sucks but I used Bibleworks 7 to help me out so I should be in the ballpark). So the Latin word is basically "nose horn" I would think and they speak of a powerful animal. A unicorn is not really thought to be that powerful since it's just basically a horned horse to my knowledge so a rhino sounds plausible (and maybe even magical to people who really never saw one in person). Plus, many people knew of things like hippos so a rhino can be imagined like a horned hippo. A horned horse wouldn't be a stretch nor would a one horned ox (meaning there are animals around your area that have no horns or two horns and in some far away land there are similar animals with one horn and vice-versa and so on).

 

mwc

[hereticzero]

I try to stick with Greek or Hebrew words as Latin rewrote a lot of the babble to suit the Vatican. I don't consider Latin an accurate source to prove Greek and Hebrew translations of anything. The Latin mistranslated OT works of Moses crossing the Red Sea and the same error in translation carries over to this day in English and every other babble that has been written. Moses crossed the Sea of Reeds, not the Red Sea. I really don't enjoy seeing people trying to prove the babble writings using works translated from Latin and bragging about the single most error-riddled work of a translation, KJV babble. KJV is a terrible translation. If you want to prove what a word means, go back and explore the original language. Don't rely on translations from other languages as they may be in error. The original writers wrote what they wrote to convey a message that was important to them at the time. Modernizing texts into modern language often muddies the original meaning of the writings.

 

A cockatrice is a cockatrice, a mythological animal as are the talking snakes, talking donkeys and unicorns. The babble is a yarn suitable only for those who believe yarns about Santa, and Elvis--although I'd sooner believe Elvis was still alive.

[mwc]

I showed the Latin and the LXX really as a result of the discussion between Ruby and Hans as opposed to the KJV issue.

 

But I suppose I could use the KJV to argue the originals were an ancient "Nintendo" if I were so inclined.

 

mwc

[florduh]

Why do people feel obliged to make sense out of the Bible? Must there be some hidden truth in it because the book itself says it's true? Why MUST the Bible make sense on some level? If it says there were unicorns, and that bats are birds, why work so hard to twist those obvious fictions to somehow be true? I don't get it. If there is an actual, real spiritual realm, the Bible is probably the most ridiculous and unreliable collection of tales on the subject. We should quit trying to make sense out of nonsense.

 

- Chris