An artists interpretation of the mythological cockatrice
Isaiah 11:8, "And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den."
Isaiah 14:29, "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."
Isaiah 59:5, "They hatch cockatrice’ eggs, and weave the spider’s web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper."
Jer. 8:17, "For, behold, I will send serpents, cockatrices, among you, which will not be charmed, and they shall bite you, saith the LORD."
Prov. 23:32, "At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder [same Hebrew word as all other verses translated as 'adder' here]."
In 1611, when the KJV was produced, the translators used "cockatrice" in part of their translations from the Hebrew. A cockatrice is a mythical creature that does not exist. It was supposedly a serpent produced from a c**k's egg. So why would they use that word? They did so because they didn't know what the original Hebrew word meant, and not having a sufficient knowledge of biology they used an English word that wasn't appropriate. Today we have a much better understanding of the Hebrew, as well as biology. This is why modern translations use the words "viper" and "adder" and "poisonous snake" to translate the original Hebrew word, "tsepha".
צֶפַע tsepha (861c); from an unused word; a serpent:—viper(1).1
צֶפַע (ṣě∙p̄ǎʿ): n.masc.; ≡ Str 6848; TWOT 1954a, 1954b—LN 4.51–4.57 viper, serpent, reptile snake, i.e., a poisonous snake (Isa 14:29+), see also 7626; note: KB, Holladay identify specifically as the Aegean viper Vipera xanthina, though other sources make other identifications.2
ע, צִפְעֹנִי , tsepha Five occurrences; AV translates as “cockatrice” four times, and “adder” once. 1 poisonous serpent. 1A a viper snake or adder.3
So, we see that the English rendition in the KJV is inappropriate, and the modern ones are appropriate.
1. Thomas, R. L. (1998.). New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek dictionaries : Updated edition. Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc.
2. Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
3. Strong, J. (1996). The exhaustive concordance of the Bible : Showing every word of the text of the common English version of the canonical books, and every occurrence of each word in regular order. (electronic ed.). Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship.
Satyr - mosaic 3rd century AD from Via Flaminia in Rome - Archaeological Museum Palazzo Massimo in Rome
But what about the satyr? In Greek and Roman mythology, Satyr was a half-man/half-beast god and frequent companion of Bacchus, the Graeco-Roman religion’s god of fruitfulness and vegetation (known more popularly as the god of wine and ecstasy). In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word sa‘ir occurs some fifty-two times. It is related to the term se‘ar (hair), and generally means “a hairy one.” It is used, for example, to speak of the male goat that was employed as the Israelites’ solemn, collective sin offering on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16).
In two cases, however, the King James Version renders sa‘ir as “satyr” (Isaiah 13:21 and 34:14). But the specific context of both passages makes it quite clear that the term is being used to refer to the wild goats that frequently inhabited the ruins of both ancient Babylon and Edom. On two different occasions in the KJV, the word is translated “demon” (Leviticus 17:7; 2 Chronicles 11:15), where it denotes a pagan god in goat form (cf. the New International Version). In regard to 2 Chronicles 11:15, respected Old Testament scholar J. Barton Payne wrote:
Far from being mythological “satyrs,” as claimed by “liberal” criticism, the sirim appear to have been simply goat idols, used in conjunction with the golden calves (1969, p. 400).
It is evident once again that the Bible does not lower itself to superstitious mythology. “Satyr” is merely a translation error, not a case of “mistaken identity” wherein a mythological creature was thought by the inspired writers to be a living, breathing animal.
