Jane H

Although I’ve chosen to defend a different reading of the story, this has only been because GD has been doing such a good job in pointing out that even the ‘nasty’ reading of the story doesn’t present a problem for Christians. Otherwise I’d certainly have been using that argument as well.

Part of the problem over that argument in this thread is that a lot of the debate has been because different sides are working with the OT as truth in different ways. Is it moral to kill children for rudeness? Is it moral to tell a story about children being killed for rudeness? Different questions.

Because as a story, no children were hurt in the making of the story. Children get hurt in fictional stories all the time. No-one batted an eyelid at the killing of the children in the Midwich Cuckoos. Kenny was killed so many times in South Park that this was dropped out of boredom. Hansel and Gretel arrived after the deaths of several other children. And the Pied Piper...still part of our culture that we tell as a kind of cautionary tale.

No-one gets upset at these stories. No-one got outraged at Walt when the kids were turned into donkeys for the mine in Pinocchio. It was seen as a morality tale aimed at bad behaviour. Let’s not get outraged when the Bible does the same thing.

Toto

I seem to have missed GDon's argument that the 'nasty' reading is not a problem for Christians, but then I've never seen him admit that anything is a problem for Christians.

I've always assumed that we were talking about a story, but a story that involved a moral lesson. That's where the problem is - this is no moral story, this is terrorism. If the story had involved the 42 kids being struck dumb for two hours, that would be an appropriate lesson. But a story about children eaten by bears as punishment for mere mockery has got to the the product of a sick mind.

spamandham

Again, they did not tell him to join his departed friend. You're making that up, and it isn't at all a reasonable interpretation.

Elisha is also walking. That's how commoners got around in those days. There's no implication that Elisha had already arrived at Bethel. The story explicitly states this happened as he was on his way there:

From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up, you baldhead!" they said. "Go on up, you baldhead!" 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 youths. And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria.

Elisha had made no notice of them until they jeered him. Once they jeered him, his response was to turn around, look at them, and then curse them. These are not the actions of someone who feels threatened, but they are the actions of someone who feels insulted.

(as an odd asside, if he's walking toward the town and they are coming from the town toward him, why does he turn around? Was he walking backwards?)

The jeering is focused on his baldness. Jane if this book is so obscure that "go on up you baldie" is properly interpreted as "die scum die!", then the book has no discernible meaning at all. By the way, the part I bolded is a completely irrational read.

If 'go away' is a better translation (and the NRSV is closer to a scholarly translation than most, so I it probably is), then will you admit you made up the whole business about 'go on up' being a horribly contrived death threat?

Uhm, if he isn't defending himself, then why does he send bears to shred them apart?

We're getting closer to the message a straightfoward read implies - "don't ridicule God's prophets, or else!"

I don't understand your reluctance to accept the straightforward read. This is hardly the only story of dictatorial style brutality in the OT.

thedistillers

Most Christians think the Bible is a Holy Book, a moral and spiritual guide, so if it contains sordid stories, people are rightfully going to be offended and ask what the hell are we supposed to understand of those stories.

You're taking a detached attitude and treating the Bible like if it was a Holywood movie, and then ask: OMG, you're offended by this fictional story!!!.

I'm afraid your attitude does not correspond to the Christian reality I observe. I do not know one Christian who thinks the Bible is a sort of Hollywood movie, and that the main interest of reading the Bible is trying to understand what the original writers meant when they made up stories.

You're trying to paint atheists as a mirror image of fundamentalists, but they take exactly the Bible as the average Christian take it, not just fundamentalists. You don't seem to realize your liberal Christianity is at the extreme fringe and very few Christians approach the Bible the same way you do.

You don't think the Bible is a moral guide. You think it is mostly fiction. But you never tell us why you care about the Bible, instead of caring about the Quran or the Bhagavad Gita.

GakuseiDon

:notworthy: Touche!

GakuseiDon

Sure, that's fair enough.

Pretty much, though why not call the Bible what it is? A wonderful piece of ancient literature?

Not even on IIDB? May I suggest, then, that you need to get out a little more?

I think there are a lot of liberal Christians who take the Bible the same way I do. Heck, I see threads on atheist and fundy theist boards all the time from people complaining about "liberal Christians this" and "liberal Christians that". I thought we were everywhere!

The Bible is intertwined with Western history, besides being a fascinating work in itself. I apologise if those aren't good reasons for you. :blush:

GakuseiDon

I've always been partial to the "die scum die" interpretation as well, strangely enough.

2Ki 2:1 And it came to pass, when the LORD would take up (alah) Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal.
...
2Ki 2:11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, [there appeared] a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up (alah) by a whirlwind into heaven.
...
2Ki 2:23 And he went up (alah) from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up (alah) by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up (alah), thou bald head; go up (alah), thou bald head.

Why mock him with "go up, baldy, go up"? Why not just "hey, baldy"? "Go up" where, exactly? It's either:
1. "Go up to Bethel, Baldy!" or may be "get up and out of here, Baldy!"
2. "Go up to heaven, Baldy!"

If shaving off hair was a common cultural response to mourning, then the second interpretation would seem to make more sense in the context. Even more so, since Elisha appears to have been a young man at the time, and there is nothing else to suggest he was bald.

Disclaimer! I will note here that I am not claiming in any way, shape or form that this makes the passage a reasonable moral story, and that I urge all Christians to restrain their bears while in the presence of either prophets or children.

spamandham

"Moses went up (`alah) out of Egypt"

'alah has many meanings depending on context, so my lexicon says. However, I don't read Greek.

GakuseiDon

No, neither do I. So I'd hesitate to ask anyone to take my word for it. But it seems to work well (IMH and Ignorant O) within the whole passage, which talks about Elijah disappearing upwards, and people being sent out to look for him and not finding him.

FWIW, here are what I think are the key passages:

2And it came to pass, when the Lord was about to take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal...
3 Now the sons of the prophets who were at Bethel came out to Elisha, and said to him, "Do you know that the Lord will take away your master from over you today?"
And he said, "Yes, I know; keep silent!"...
5 Now the sons of the prophets who were at Jericho came to Elisha and said to him, "Do you know that the Lord will take away your master from over you today?"
So he answered, "Yes, I know; keep silent!"

Notice how the sons of the prophets at Bethel and Jericho tell Elisha that God was planning to take Elijah away, and twice Elisha tells them to "keep silent!" It suggests sensitivity on his part, and I speculate it provides background to his reaction to the mocking later.

11 Then it happened, as they continued on and talked, that suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire, and separated the two of them; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
12 And Elisha saw it, and he cried out, "My father, my father, the chariot of Israel and its horsemen!" So he saw him no more. And he took hold of his own clothes and tore them into two pieces...

Elisha appears to go into mourning here.

23 Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up the road, some youths came from the city and mocked him, and said to him, "Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!"

IF Elisha had shaved his head as part of a mourning ritual, then it seems reasonable to me that the mocking was related to Elijah disappearing, and the "go up" was an invitation for Elisha to do the same thing. That Elisha told the sons of the prophet to "keep quiet" TWICE about Elijah being taken up, only to be confronted with mocking children who do not keep quiet, seems to me to be related. If not, it is a curious coincidence.

Again, my disclaimer! It doesn't make it a moral story!!!

thedistillers

If by "a lot" you mean the majority of Christians, no. The average Christian does not read the Bible the way you do. You accuse atheists to read the Bible in a fundamentalist manner, but it's not true. They read the Bible just like the average Christian read the Bible.

That doesn't tell me why you're a "liberal" Christian instead of being a Muslim. You think the Bible is an entertaining book so you call yourself a Christian? Have you ever read the Quran? Did you think it was an interesting book? If so, why aren't you calling yourself a liberal Muslim as well?