Was God justified for sending bears to kill 42 children?

[AgnosticBoy]

In 2 Kings 2:23-24, there is a story about the prophet Elisha wanting God to send bears to attack some 42 children.

23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

One site interprets this passage to say that the kids were killed,

He sent bears to kill 42 little boys for making fun of Elisha's bald head.

- Skeptics Annotated Bible

An alternative view would be that the kids weren't killed. Being mauled does not necessarily mean killed. But is being mauled also excessive, especially when the offense is just making fun of someone's bald head? Let's discuss.

For Debate:
1. Did the kids in the above passages die or were they just injured?
2. Even if the kids were injured, was God justified in sending bears to attack them? Is just injuring them or punishing them excessive?

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

No.

It was not justified. And at this point, the Bible basically becomes camp fire stories, not even legend.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Here's an explanation from one of my go to sites, GotQuestions:

It seems unbelievable that God would cause two bears to maul a group of children for making fun of a man for being bald.

First, the King James Version has done us a disservice by translated the term as “children.” The Hebrew word can refer to children, but rather more specifically means "young men." The NIV, quoted here, uses the word “youths.” Second, the fact that the bears mauled 42 of the youths indicates that there were more than 42 youths involved. This was not a small group of children making fun of a bald man.
Rather, it was a large demonstration of young men who assembled for the purpose of mocking a prophet of God.
Third, the mocking of “go on up, you baldhead,” is more than making fun of baldness. The baldness of Elisha referred to here may be: 1) natural loss of hair; 2) a shaved head denoting his separation to the prophetic office; or more likely, 3) an epithet of scorn and contempt, Elisha not being literally bald. The phrase “go up” likely was a reference to Elijah, Elisha’s mentor, being taken up to Heaven earlier in 2 Kings chapter 2:11-12. These youths were sarcastically taunting and insulting the Lord’s prophet by telling him to repeat Elijah’s translation.

In summary, 2 Kings 2:23-24 is not an account of God mauling young children for making fun of a bald man. Rather, it is a record of an insulting demonstration against God’s prophet by a large group of young men. Because these young people of about 20 years of age or older (the same term is used of Solomon in 1 Kings 3:7) so despised the prophet of the Lord, Elisha called upon the Lord to deal with the rebels as He saw fit. The Lord’s punishment was the mauling of 42 of them by two female bears. The penalty was clearly justified, for to ridicule Elisha was to ridicule the Lord Himself. The seriousness of the crime was indicated by the seriousness of the punishment. The appalling judgment was God’s warning to all who would scorn the prophets of the Lord.

So basically, I take this explanation to mean that it's not just kids poking fun at someone's baldness, but rather it is a group of guys who are purposely mocking God or one of his representatives. This explanation raises the seriousness of what this group did to Elisha. The group also knew what they were doing so it was intentional. I question what if this a group of kids who didn't understand what they were doing?

Here are some things I'd want to know before accepting this explanation:
1. Does Hebrew word used for "boys" in 2 Kings 2:23-24 refers to men or at least someone old enough to understand their actions?
2. Were these group of guys knowingly mocking God? Or did they just think it was funny how someone looks when bald irrespective of the function or role (shaving your hair to be a dedicated prophet) it served?
3. Even if the group were at an age to understand what they were doing, and intentionally mocked God, did their punishment fit the crime? Did they deserve to be mauled?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

It's all based on how serious you consider the crime. Should they have gotten nothing? Or a slap on the wrist? How do we decide?

Here are some things I'd want to know before accepting this explanation:
1. Does Hebrew word used for "boys" in 2 Kings 2:23-24 refers to men or at least someone old enough to understand their actions?

I did find out that the Hebrew word used for "boy" is 'naʿar' (Strong's #H5288). And yes, it can mean "boy" and also translated as "young man":

The KJV translates Strong's H5288 in the following manner: young man (76x), servant (54x), child (44x), lad (33x), young (15x), children (7x), youth (6x), babe (1x), boys (1x), young (1x).

[emphasis added].

The same word is used in reference to Ishmael, the son of Hagar and Abraham. And Ishmael was older than thirteen at that point. Read further to see my reasoning on that.

At the point of Genesis 21:14, Ishmael is referred to as a "boy", but three chapters before, he is said to be thirteen years old:

14 Early the next morning Abraham took some food and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. He set them on her shoulders and then sent her off with the boy. She went on her way and wandered in the Desert of Beersheba.

The key thing here is that 3 chapters before, in Genesis 17:25, it says was 13 years old:

"And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin." ESV

I think all of this is information above is enough to show that it's possible that the "boys" in 2 King 2:23 were really ranging in age from teenager to young men.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

2. Were these group of guys knowingly mocking God? Or did they just think it was funny how someone looks when bald irrespective of the function or role (shaving your hair to be a dedicated prophet) it served?

Were these group of boys or teens just focused on teasing a guy's bald head, or were they also mocking God? Perhaps they were doing so unknowingly, but even that still is an offense of mocking God.

The response from GotQuestions is this...

Third, the mocking of “go on up, you baldhead,” is more than making fun of baldness. The baldness of Elisha referred to here may be: 1) natural loss of hair; 2) a shaved head denoting his separation to the prophetic office; or more likely, 3) an epithet of scorn and contempt, Elisha not being literally bald. The phrase “go up” likely was a reference to Elijah, Elisha’s mentor, being taken up to Heaven earlier in 2 Kings chapter 2:11-12. These youths were sarcastically taunting and insulting the Lord’s prophet by telling him to repeat Elijah’s translation.

[emphasis added]

Interestingly, only the KJV mentions the group of guys saying to "go up". The NIV, NASB, and some other modern English translations don't mention that. So I'm not sold on the connection to Elijah. Buy shaving your head was a requirement for dedicating yourself to God. I'm more inclined to believe the #2 option as there is some precedent for shaving the head being a sign of dedication:
Numbers 6:18-19

18 “‘Then at the entrance to the tent of meeting, the Nazirite must shave off the hair that symbolizes their dedication. They are to take the hair and put it in the fire that is under the sacrifice of the fellowship offering.

19 “‘After the Nazirite has shaved off the hair that symbolizes their dedication,

So my conclusion here is that this wasn't just simple teasing, but also mocking of the dedication to God (being bald and/or a prophet).

 

[AgnosticBoy]

3. Even if the group were at an age to understand what they were doing, and intentionally mocked God, did their punishment fit the crime? Did they deserve to be mauled?

A lot of people today would see the punishment as going too far. But then I would ask them what should be the punishment. Should it be a slap on the wrist? I wouldn't say so seeing you're dealing with a sacred matter, and in the context a theistic society, I'd say that's an important matter. Respect for God and his representatives is crucial.

We can at least agree that this would be looked at as wrong. But I remain agnostic on if the punishment went too far since it would be speculation either way. I'd lean more towards a punishment that is moderately strong but not including death, but that's my opinion.

 

[Data]

In 2 Kings 2:23-24, there is a story about the prophet Elisha wanting God to send bears to attack some 42 children.

23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

One site interprets this passage to say that the kids were killed,

He sent bears to kill 42 little boys for making fun of Elisha's bald head.

- Skeptics Annotated Bible

An alternative view would be that the kids weren't killed. Being mauled does not necessarily mean killed. But is being mauled also excessive, especially when the offense is just making fun of someone's bald head? Let's discuss.

For Debate:
1. Did the kids in the above passages die or were they just injured?
2. Even if the kids were injured, was God justified in sending bears to attack them? Is just injuring them or punishing them excessive?

Skeptics tend to look at a verse and without any reference judge it from a human perspective. When a Bible student such as myself criticizes that approach, they accuse me of being biased, trying to justify the verse. I want the truth, and sometimes that doesn't make God look good from a human perspective of judgment, but that's fine with me because humanity doesn't have the merit to judge their creator, especially from the unfair human perspective.

First question: The young men or boys were torn to pieces. That could but doesn't necessarily mean killed. I think more likely than not, a fair number was killed. Of 42 probably a fair number was able to escape 2 bears, but they could seriously injure a number of them.

Second question: You're taking the human approach. God doesn't care about those children. He doesn't have specific empathy for them like we might. They were old enough to be out there by themselves and do what they did, that means they were disciplined (or not) in a way that had already formed them as adults. They were influenced by their parents who, in that area, had a deep-seated hatred and disrespect for God's representatives (prophets) and the message they were charged with relaying.

ETA: I meant to mention that to us blasphemy means something like "the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk." (Dictionary) but to the writers of the Bible it meant to insult anyone, especially an authority.

God has said we are like grasshoppers to him, in a figurative sense that's having to do with our size. He's saying that's what we look like to him. Like grasshoppers do to us. (Isaiah 40:22) We aren't overly concerned with the youth of grasshoppers when the swarms are consuming our crops and wreaking havoc on our own creation. That should put things into perspective from a human point of view.

That doesn't mean he is without love for us, his own creation, but that love is like a shepherd for his flock. If the behavior or disease of part of the flock threatens the other part, necessary action, regrettably, has to be put into place for their survival and protection.

Elisha, operating with Jehovah God's holy spirit, didn't have the bears attack the group of children because they insulted his bald head. It was because, in an area where prophets were in danger of being killed, these children disrespected and possibly hindered God's message which was delivered with the intent of the discipline and protection of God's creation.