I believe Satan has brain washed most Christians/people.

[JayJayDee]

And of course your on the right track lol.

If I thought otherwise, I'd be some kind of idiot, wouldn't I? Do you feel like you are on the right track? We all have the freedom to choose our path....that is free will. No one is forced to serve the true God who has no desire to do so.

 

[psychoslice]

If I thought otherwise, I'd be some kind of idiot, wouldn't I? Do you feel like you are on the right track? We all have the freedom to choose our path....that is free will. No one is forced to serve the true God who has no desire to do so.

Ye s I am on the only track, but I feel there is arrogance behind your words, as if your religion is the only true religion, that is sick.

 

[InChrist]

I happen to disagree with your god that punishment fit the crime.
Being as I am not a Christian, I am not bound by your gods lacking moral system.
Nor do I give your god, or any other god, a free pass.

one wonders why the Bible goes to such lengths to teach how to correctly judge, but then makes god an exception to the judgement?
Seems to me that your god is the biggest hypocrite there is.so you think that a group of children being mauled by a bear for insulting a bald priest is a "spiritual battle?

Wow.
Just wow.....
I am most appreciative your god has left the building.

Why do you not reply to the fact you are adding to your scriptures?
Isn't there a punishment for that?

I understand that you are not a Christian and so I don't expect you to agree with my perspective or feel that you are bound to accept God's judgment in the accounts of the Bible unless you choose to. I don't think the Bible goes to such lengths to make God an exception to judgment, it just starts with the premise that God is the Judge and so as Judge and Creator His judgments are always based on perfect wisdom and appropriate justice. Again, I understand you don't see it that way.

As for me adding to the scriptures, I am not saying that my views are scripture or God's Word, they are just my views and I think they at least are reasonable thoughts as to why the event took place as it did. You don't have to agree and I don't expect to to just because I have expressed my perspective, but that's all I'm doing. I enjoy conversing with you whether we agree or not, but maybe we've exhausted this topic.

 

[Ingledsva]

Read the account again and do a little research. It is highly unlikely that innocent little children were wandering unsupervised around the countryside harmlessly teasing a bald man, but more accurately the "children" were a roving gang of youth causing trouble and disrespectfully mocking and threatening a prophet of God.

It specifically says LITTLE boys in the Hebrew. Look it up.


And he went up from there to Bethel. And he was going up in the highway. And little boys came out from the city and mocked him, and said to him, Go up, bald head! Go up, bald head!

That is horrible for an adult whom also appears to be a sorcerer - to do to little boys.

*

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If you will notice in the account, 42 of them were mauled by the bears, so there were more than 42, if some were mot mauled. This was no small group of children, but most likely a large group of lawless young men who were taunting, possibly threatening Elisha

These are unsubstantiated and unprovable claims. What we have is the account provided to us in 2 Kings. It does not say young men (and back then people were considered full grown adults, very typically, once they hit puberty; and they certainly did not have a concept of "young adult."), it does not say they were threatening him, it doesn't even indicate they were lawless. Taunting Elisha, yes, more than 42 present, perhaps, but is "get out of here, baldie" really worth such a gruesome death sentence?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It specifically says LITTLE boys in the Hebrew. Look it up.


And he went up from there to Bethel. And he was going up in the highway. And little boys came out from the city and mocked him, and said to him, Go up, bald head! Go up, bald head!

That is horrible for an adult whom also appears to be a sorcerer - to do to little boys.

*

Mine, the King James, specifically says little children.

 

[InChrist]

It specifically says LITTLE boys in the Hebrew. Look it up.


And he went up from there to Bethel. And he was going up in the highway. And little boys came out from the city and mocked him, and said to him, Go up, bald head! Go up, bald head!

That is horrible for an adult whom also appears to be a sorcerer - to do to little boys.

*

I have looked it up and the Hebrew word does not always designate little boys;

“Young lads.” The KJV has “little children” which really misses the meaning here. These were not children, but young men. The word “lads” is the Hebrew naar and was used of servants, of soldiers and of Isaac when he was 28 years old. This was a crowd of young men, perhaps students of the false prophets, who were here as antagonists to Elisha’s prophetic ministry and authority."
4. Elisha and the Two Bears (2 Kings 2:23-25) | Bible.org

"1. First of all, they weren't "little kids"!

"'Little children' is an unfortunate translation. The Hebrew expression neurim qetannim is best rendered 'young lads' or 'young men.' From numerous examples where ages are specified in the Old Testament, we know that these were boys from twelve to thirty years old. One of these words described Isaac at his sacrifice in Genesis 22:12, when he was easily in his early twenties. It described Joseph in Genesis 37:2 when he was seventeen years old. In fact, the same word described army men in 1 Kings 20:14-15...these are young men ages between twelve and thirty."
Mean, mean Elisha!

 

[McBell]

There was a perfectly good explanation given to you, but look how you responded. Typical.....all negativity.
I don't think you would know a reasonable explanation if you fell over one. If it doesn't agree with what you want to believe, it is automatically rubbish.

Believe whatever you like.....we can actually all do that ya know.....

It will ultimately be revealed who is on the right track and who is not.....I am not the judge and neither are you.....thankfully.

Your transference is duly noted.

 

[InChrist]

These are unsubstantiated and unprovable claims. What we have is the account provided to us in 2 Kings. It does not say young men (and back then people were considered full grown adults, very typically, once they hit puberty; and they certainly did not have a concept of "young adult."), it does not say they were threatening him, it doesn't even indicate they were lawless. Taunting Elisha, yes, more than 42 present, perhaps, but is "get out of here, baldie" really worth such a gruesome death sentence?

In the culture of that day, just the fact that they were out in a large gang rather than constructively helping out with family work or activities and then showing contempt for an elder and prophet of God I think demonstrates they were lawless.

 

[McBell]

I enjoy conversing with you whether we agree or not, but maybe we've exhausted this topic.

Agreed.
On both counts.

 

[Ingledsva]

Mine, the King James, specifically says little children.

Yes it can also mean children.

I meant that the words used, specifically have to apply to youth under the age of 12, thus little.

And not the older gang he is trying to make them out to be.


*

 

[InChrist]

Agreed.
On both counts.

Okay and thanks for the conversation. I appreciate it and it stretches me to have my views challenged.and helps me think things through more carefully and deeply.

 

[Ingledsva]

In the culture of that day, just the fact that they were out in a large gang rather than constructively helping out with family work or activities and then showing contempt for an elder and prophet of God I think demonstrates they were lawless.

WOW! Children under 12 playing in groups - outside - are lawless criminals - someone notify the police!

*

 

[InChrist]

WOW! Children under 12 playing in groups - outside - are lawless criminals - someone notify the police!

*

You must have missed this...
I have looked it up and the Hebrew word does not always designate little boys;

“Young lads.” The KJV has “little children” which really misses the meaning here. These were not children, but young men. The word “lads” is the Hebrew naar and was used of servants, of soldiers and of Isaac when he was 28 years old. This was a crowd of young men, perhaps students of the false prophets, who were here as antagonists to Elisha’s prophetic ministry and authority."
4. Elisha and the Two Bears (2 Kings 2:23-25) | Bible.org

"1. First of all, they weren't "little kids"!

"'Little children' is an unfortunate translation. The Hebrew expression neurim qetannim is best rendered 'young lads' or 'young men.' From numerous examples where ages are specified in the Old Testament, we know that these were boys from twelve to thirty years old. One of these words described Isaac at his sacrifice in Genesis 22:12, when he was easily in his early twenties. It described Joseph in Genesis 37:2 when he was seventeen years old. In fact, the same word described army men in 1 Kings 20:14-15...these are young men ages between twelve and thirty."
Mean, mean Elisha!

 

[Ingledsva]

I have looked it up and the Hebrew word does not always designate little boys;

“Young lads.” The KJV has “little children” which really misses the meaning here. These were not children, but young men. The word “lads” is the Hebrew naar and was used of servants, of soldiers and of Isaac when he was 28 years old. This was a crowd of young men, perhaps students of the false prophets, who were here as antagonists to Elisha’s prophetic ministry and authority."
4. Elisha and the Two Bears (2 Kings 2:23-25) | Bible.org

"1. First of all, they weren't "little kids"!

"'Little children' is an unfortunate translation. The Hebrew expression neurim qetannim is best rendered 'young lads' or 'young men.' From numerous examples where ages are specified in the Old Testament, we know that these were boys from twelve to thirty years old. One of these words described Isaac at his sacrifice in Genesis 22:12, when he was easily in his early twenties. It described Joseph in Genesis 37:2 when he was seventeen years old. In fact, the same word described army men in 1 Kings 20:14-15...these are young men ages between twelve and thirty."
Mean, mean Elisha!

I suggest you look up the specific words again and go to a Jewish page for a study.

The word used means UNDER 12 - under the age of accountability, not accountable for some reason.


*

 

[JayJayDee]

Strongs shows how the same word is used in other verses of 2 Kings.

Hebrew Lexicon :: H5288 (NASB)

It doesn't mean little children. It can mean young men....or children who of an age to know what respect is. It shows the level of parental training and neglect in Israel at the time. No disrespect was permitted even of parents, let alone a prophet of God.

 

[psychoslice]

Little children mean those who are knew to God's word, its nothing to do with just little children, its any age.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In the culture of that day, just the fact that they were out in a large gang rather than constructively helping out with family work or activities and then showing contempt for an elder and prophet of God I think demonstrates they were lawless.

That is an assumption based on groundless speculation. We don't even know why that group had gathered.
As I said, what we have is the account provided to us in 2 Kings.
And even if they were teens, or young adults, does "get out of here, baldie," deserve such a gruesome punishment?

 

[psychoslice]

Hebrews 5
9 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,
10 called by God as High Priest "according to the order of Melchizedek,"
11 of whom we have much to say, and hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.
13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe.
14 But solid food belongs to those who are of full age*, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

*Full of age means, Perfection.

 

[McBell]

That is an assumption based on groundless speculation. We don't even know why that group had gathered.
As I said, what we have is the account provided to us in 2 Kings.
And even if they were teens, or young adults, does "get out of here, baldie," deserve such a gruesome punishment?

It is interesting how my point is being completely sidestepped in order to concentrate on the age of the victims.

i do not care if they were full grown adults, the punishment does not fit the crime.