This one is more abstract and one that I'd readily point to when I was an atheist and it is a good point to fixate upon because it really does come out of nowhere and with very little context. It is almost unanimously agreed upon that this passage pertains to the authority Elisha represented - granted, I believe this reaches deeper into a context that is recurring within the old testament where younger generations grow resentful and contest this authority and are very often cursed having done so, going back to the curse of Ham - respect of one's elders and of culture is of particular emphasis. I believe Judges details some of this progressive trend towards resentment aswell. Worse things than bears have come to devour those who hated tradition and law, especially in those times.
God within the old testament is very intermeshed with worldly circumstance, nation, heritage, and the transcendental sublime; Jesus' appearance shifted the occulus to the latter.
it really does come out of nowhere and with very little context.
This is the key to the passage.
It's easily understandable if you realize it does NOT come out of nowhere, which requires understanding the context.
I'll respect your choice to remain ignorant because if you wanted to know, this is easily knowable. For a processed atheist it's simply unimportant. OP is off his rocker to even try to address this.
I'll respect your choice to remain ignorant because if you wanted to know, this is easily knowable.
You dastardly agent of synchronicity, I have been lazy and wanton. Back through the old testament I go, though to my "processed atheist" eyes, it seemed like a precarious thing to include among everything Elisha would go on to do. As I saw it, it was a transfer of authority and an illustration of exactly that and the general unfaithfulness among the kings and the people throughout. What were the two kingdoms of israel and judah if not children before bears?
Although the age is determined by language and can't be discovered in English.
Which translation do you recommend?
Their taunting phrase was saying if Elisha was really a Prophet, he would have already ascended into heaven in a chariot of fire like Elijah did.
Admittedly I have set the old testament down for a long time, and I realize combing over this that I was reading the NIV iteration - which makes no mention of this but instead illustrates them as saying "Get out of here baldy!". Upon checking NASB, I saw your case and point.
I don't feel I veered off too far from this in later posts, since this does recurr in its various ways, but this is a detail that is still important and I am shocked that it doesn't make its way in some other translations.
This one is more abstract and one that I'd readily point to when I was an atheist and it is a good point to fixate upon because it really does come out of nowhere and with very little context. It is almost unanimously agreed upon that this passage pertains to the authority Elisha represented - granted, I believe this reaches deeper into a context that is recurring within the old testament where younger generations grow resentful and contest this authority and are very often cursed having done so, going back to the curse of Ham - respect of one's elders and of culture is of particular emphasis. I believe Judges details some of this progressive trend towards resentment aswell. Worse things than bears have come to devour those who hated tradition and law, especially in those times.
God within the old testament is very intermeshed with worldly circumstance, nation, heritage, and the transcendental sublime; Jesus' appearance shifted the occulus to the latter.
This is the key to the passage.
It's easily understandable if you realize it does NOT come out of nowhere, which requires understanding the context.
I'll respect your choice to remain ignorant because if you wanted to know, this is easily knowable. For a processed atheist it's simply unimportant. OP is off his rocker to even try to address this.
You dastardly agent of synchronicity, I have been lazy and wanton. Back through the old testament I go, though to my "processed atheist" eyes, it seemed like a precarious thing to include among everything Elisha would go on to do. As I saw it, it was a transfer of authority and an illustration of exactly that and the general unfaithfulness among the kings and the people throughout. What were the two kingdoms of israel and judah if not children before bears?
It's really much simpler than that.
Elisha had nothing to do with it.
The "children" involved were at least 13 years old, and maybe as old as 32.
Their taunting phrase was saying if Elisha was really a Prophet, he would have already ascended into heaven in a chariot of fire like Elijah did.
God said we'll see about that ...
Read through it to get context and see if you get anything different. Although the age is determined by language and can't be discovered in English.
Which translation do you recommend?
Admittedly I have set the old testament down for a long time, and I realize combing over this that I was reading the NIV iteration - which makes no mention of this but instead illustrates them as saying "Get out of here baldy!". Upon checking NASB, I saw your case and point.
I don't feel I veered off too far from this in later posts, since this does recurr in its various ways, but this is a detail that is still important and I am shocked that it doesn't make its way in some other translations.