• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why did God slaughter these children?

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It's generally a good to practice to look at many versions and compare their word choices.
None of the versions are wrong here, even though they differ. The translators had to make a choice.

2 Kings 2:23

1) "little children"

English text comparison:

"little children" (AV, JPS1917),
"young lads" (ASV, NASB),
"small boys" (ESV, HCSB, NRSV),
"young boys" (NET),
"some boys" (NIV),
"some youths" (NIV84, NKJV)

The Hebrew consists of two words – both quite common
a) qutan – young, small
b) naar – young man with a semantic range that includes young children to men [in plural form it may include unmarried women].

2) Maul

English definition: ■ verb
1 (of an animal) wound by scratching and tearing.
▶ handle or treat savagely or roughly.
Concise Oxford English Dictionary (11th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. (2004).

English Text Comparison:
tore (tare) (AV, ASV, NASB, ESV)
mauled (NRSV, NKJV, HCSB, NIV, NLT)
ripped (NET)


Hebrew word meaning:

בקע: basic meaning to split, …
qal: pf. בָּקַע, בָּֽקְעָה, בָּקַעְתָּ; impf. וַיִּבְקַע, וַיִּבְקְעוּ, וַיִּבְקָעוּהָ; impv. בְּקָעֵהוּ; inf. בִּקְעָם (BL 343b); pt. בֹּ(וֹ)קֵעַ: —1. to split, cleave: wood Qoh 109, bones Ju 1519, hand (rd. כַּף) Ezk 297, rock Is 4821, sea Ex 1416 Ps 7813 Neh 911, water Is 6312; to break open (spring) Ps 7415; to rip open (pregnant mothers) Am 113; —2. to hatch (eggs) :): דגר brood) Is 3415 1QHod ii 27f, → nif. 3; —3. to force a breach, open up a country with military force, with acc. 2C 2117, with בְּ 2S 2316 1C 1118; בָּ׳ עָרִים אֵלָיו to acquire by conquering 2C 321 (→ nif. 1); —Ps 1417 rd. וּבָקִעַ, alt. יְבַקַּע. †

pi: pf. בִּקֵּעַ, בִּקֵּֽעוּ, בִּקַּעְתִּי; impf. תְּבַקַּע/קֵֽעַ, תְּבַקְּעֵם; וַיְבַקְּעוּ, וַתְּבַקַּעְנָה; —1. to split: wood Gn 223 1S 614, rocks Ps 7815; with two acc., to divide (the earth with streams) Hab 39; to rip up 2K 812 1516; —2. to make (a storm) break out Ezk 1313; —3. to tear to pieces 2K 224 Hos 138; —4. to hatch Is 595; —5. technological term בִּ׳ יְאֹרִים to excavate tunnels Jb 2810; —Ezk 1311 rd. תִּבָּקַע. †

Koehler, L., Baumgartner, W., Richardson, M. E. J., & Stamm, J. J. (1999). The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (electronic ed., pp. 149-150). Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill.

Rob

How did you do this? Did you use Bible software or was this done using books?
 

Rebel

Active Member
2 Kings 2:23-25. I read it in the NIV, ESV, and KJV. NIV says youth, ESV says boys, and KJV Little children, so with the translations I am confused if the crowd that was jeering Elisha was boys, little children, or youth. Elisha then calls on a curse and two bears (perhaps female) came out of the woods and mauled 42 of the youths/children/little boys. I am at a loss as to why God allowed this, but since I believe in His sovereignty I trust He did the best thing, for without the instant deaths, all of the youths would have grown up and gone to hell when they died, so the mauling was an act of grace.

What is your take on this account? This is not a passage that you hear much if at all in churches these days. But its a lesson to be learned on God's Holiness and his sovereignty over everything.

You don't want to know my take on it.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How did you do this? Did you use Bible software or was this done using books?
She's right, basic word studies.
Much of it can be done using on-line available sources.

HALOT though, is a upper-level lexicon available only 'for purchase' on various software platforms.

You can make similar observations without it and find much of its information with a bit of hard work. Using Strong's concordance and the KJV as "home base", you can compare the many good English translations and develop a feel for the range of various words meanings.

Rob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Fifth, the Ethics of the Miracle
The passage before us is one which infidels have been quick to seize upon, and lamentable indeed have been many of the answers
returned to them. But the Word has survived every opposition of its enemies and all the puerile apologies of its weak-kneed friends. Nor are the Scriptures in any danger whatever in this skeptical and blatant age.

Being the Word of God, they contain nothing which His servants have any need to be ashamed of, nothing which requires
any explaining away. It is not our province to sit in judgment upon Holy Writ: our part is to tremble before it (Isa. 66:2) knowing that
one day we shall be judged by it (John 12:48). As Jehovah was ableto look after the sacred ark without the help of any of His creatures
(2 Sam. 6:6-7), so His truth is in need of no carnal assistance from us. It is to be received without question and believed in with all our hearts. It is to be preached and proclaimed in its entirety without hesitation or reservation.

Certain so-called Christian apologists have replied to the taunts of infidels by a process of what is termed "toning down" the
passage, arguing that it was not little children but young men who were cursed by the prophet and torn to pieces by the bears: but such an effeminate explanation is as senseless as it is needless. We quite agree with Thomas Scott when he says,

Some learned men have endeavored to prove that these offenders were not young children but grown-up persons, and no
doubt the word rendered "children" is often used in that sense. The addition, however of the word "little" seems to clearly evince they
were not men, but young boys who had been brought up in idolatry and taught to despise the prophets of the Lord.
Others roundly condemn Elisha, saying he should have meekly endured their taunts in silence and that he sinned grievously
in cursing them. It is sufficient to point out that his Master deemed otherwise. Instead of rebuking His servant, He sent the bears to
fulfill his curse, and there is no appeal against His decision.

Some Bible teachers have asserted mistakenly that this drastic punishment was necessary because the Old Testament period
was governed by the law, but that under New Testament grace, this would not warrant immediate judgment. Let such teachers remember that Ananias and Sapphira fell dead as soon as they sinned against the Holy Spirit (Acts 5).

God is even now giving the most awe-inspiring and widereaching proof of His wrath against those who flout His Law,
visiting the earth with sorer judgments than any He has sent since the days of Noah! The New Testament equally with the Old teaches
"it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them
that trouble you" (2 Thess. 1:6). In the incident before us, God was righteously visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children, as He
was by the death of their children also smiting the parents in their tenderest parts. At almost the end of the Old Testament era we read
that Israel "mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against his people, till there was no remedy" (2 Chron. 36:16).
Here at Bethel God was giving a warning, a sample of His coming wrath, unless they reformed their ways and treated His servants better.
Sixth, the Meaning of the Miracle
At first glance it certainly appears that there can be no parallel between the above action of Elisha and that which should
characterize the servants of Christ, and many are likely to conclude that it can only be by a wide stretch of imagination or a flagrant
wresting of this incident that it can be made to yield anything
pertinent for this age. But it must be remembered that we are not looking for a literal counterpart but rather a spiritual application.
Viewing it thus, our type is solemnly accurate. Ministers of the gospel are "unto God a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved,
and in them that perish: To the one we are the savor of death unto death; and to the other the savor of life unto life" (2 Cor. 2:14-15).
Certainly the evangelist has no warrant to anathamatize any who
oppose him, but he can point out that they are accursed of God who love not Christ and who obey not His law (1 Cor. 16:22; Galatians
3:10).

http://grace-ebooks.com/library/Art...a_ His Life and Miracles - Arthur W. Pink.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rebel

Active Member
Now I'm just curious.

I thought about commenting, but after I just read his response to me, I decided against it. I don't feel like throwing raw meat to a dog. Some people really don't want to debate anyway. Thinking makes them uncomfortable.
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I thought about commenting, but after I just read his response to me, I decided against it. I don't feel like throwing raw meat to a dog. Some people really don't want to debate anyway. Thinking makes them uncomfortable.
Fair enough
 

Don

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I thought about commenting, but after I just read his response to me, I decided against it. I don't feel like throwing raw meat to a dog. Some people really don't want to debate anyway. Thinking makes them uncomfortable.
However, there are others asking, not him. I, too, am curious.
 

Rebel

Active Member
However, there are others asking, not him. I, too, am curious.

I appreciate that. And I do believe that some of us could have fruitful discussion about this. But I'm not sure I want to open this up. I don't really enjoy conflict. I don't mind strong disagreement. I think we often learn by such, but some people are just waiting to throw out false charges, attacks, etc. That would make anything I post counterproductive.

Let me at least pose this question, to you and anyone else who might wish to respond: Are you quite certain that those verses describe an actual, literal, historical occurrence?
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
But I'm not sure I want to open this up. I don't really enjoy conflict.
What an astounding and hypocritical statement. Entire posts and one entire thread have been removed due to your vile posting habits. You revel in conflict mr.rebel.
some people are just waiting to throw out false charges, attacks, etc.
That would be YOU as it has been plain to see.
Are you quite certain that those verses describe an actual, literal, historical occurrence?
Of course. But that's because I believe in the plenary inspiration of the Scripture.

Romans 15:4 tells us :"For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope."(NIV)

Hebrews 11 gives an account of many holy people of the Old Testament, not not each and every hero of the faith.

Jesus didn't cite every single hero of the O.T. either. Neither did the authors of the New Testament.

From the way you couch your questions you may doubt many of the miracles in the Scripture as well. That's not a good place for you to be.
 

Rebel

Active Member
What an astounding and hypocritical statement. Entire posts and one entire thread have been removed due to your vile posting habits. You revel in conflict mr.rebel.

That would be YOU as it has been plain to see.


Of course. But that's because I believe in the plenary inspiration of the Scripture.

Romans 15:4 tells us :"For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope."(NIV)

Hebrews 11 gives an account of many holy people of the Old Testament, not not each and every hero of the faith.

Jesus didn't cite every single hero of the O.T. either. Neither did the authors of the New Testament.

From the way you couch your questions you may doubt many of the miracles in the Scripture as well. That's not a good place for you to be.

You know nothing about me, and yet every one of your responses to me is full of attacks, false charges, name calling, provoking, and lies. You gleefully seize every opportunity to say these things, even when I have not addressed you first. You have absolutely no fruits of the spirit. You'd better examine yourself instead of always trying to confront me and stir up strife. You are the most evil person I've ever encountered on a Christian forum. You constantly lie and bear false witness against me. You'd better repent while God is still giving you a chance.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Let me at least pose this question, to you and anyone else who might wish to respond: Are you quite certain that those verses describe an actual, literal, historical occurrence?
The suggesting leaves me wondering...

Laying aside the question of "historical occurance", we observe structure and repitition within the larger picture of context that signifies the text was written with a purpose.

It's not just a story but a structured story.

Surely we don't see the whole picture; we only read what the author wanted us to know...those parts that were important to tell his story... and his story was what God inspired after all.

It leads us back to the Evangelist's first question: "What is your take on this account?"

What was the author trying to tell us?

So what's your take? I'm interested too!

Rob
 

Don

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I appreciate that. And I do believe that some of us could have fruitful discussion about this. But I'm not sure I want to open this up. I don't really enjoy conflict. I don't mind strong disagreement. I think we often learn by such, but some people are just waiting to throw out false charges, attacks, etc. That would make anything I post counterproductive.

Let me at least pose this question, to you and anyone else who might wish to respond: Are you quite certain that those verses describe an actual, literal, historical occurrence?

Yes. Why would you not?
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You know nothing about me,
Yes, I do Michael Wrenn. I base everything about your character upon what you have posted --even the posts that have been deleted by mods. You are simply vile. You have lied about me on a regular basis and about John Calvin with names too disgusting to repeat.
every one of your responses to me is full of attacks, false charges, name calling, provoking, and lies.
That describes you to a T.

Would you have been one of those boys that the she-bears mauled --calling the prophet names?
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I thought about commenting, but after I just read his response to me, I decided against it. I don't feel like throwing raw meat to a dog. Some people really don't want to debate anyway. Thinking makes them uncomfortable.


A dog? Excuse me??????????
 
Top