Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**Scorpio** · (This post was last modified: 02-09-2012 04:56 PM by Scorpio.)

(02-09-2012 04:47 PM)Jeremy Wrote: There really isn't a whole lot of context for the she-bears passage, 2 Kings 2:23-25. The whole chapter is a series of unconnected events surrounding the death of Elijah. Elisha walks into town, children make fun of his baldness, he curses them "in the name of the Lord," and the she-bears maul 42 kids. So I'm kind of curious as to what the "correct" interpretation of this passage is, if not "don't @#$% with the man of God."

I don't think there is an issue with the context of the verses. Pretty straight forward as you say. It's just a story. The issue is with people who throw it at you because you may disagree with the pastor and something terrible will happen to you. If that were true, the she-bears got lost trying to find me.

Jeremy · 02-09-2012, 04:57 PM

(02-09-2012 04:55 PM)Scorpio Wrote: I don't think there is an issue with the context of the verses. Pretty straight forward as you say. It's just a story. The issue is with people who throw it at you because you may disagree with the pastor and something terrible will happen to you. If that were true, the she-bears got lost trying to find me.

Totally agree it's just a story. Problem is, it's in the Bible.

**Sharon** · 02-09-2012, 04:59 PM

When I was a student at Fundy U, I volunteered in Children's Church for the 4 year olds, mostly staff kids. I helped them line up, sing, stuff like that. The teacher was a staff lady--who scared the ever-living shit out of those kids with the She-bears. Then--the same Sunday--one of the other teachers had an object lesson on "faith"--she brought in a suitcase, and told the kids she had a bear in it.

Panic. pure, terrified panic in their little faces. (bless their little baby hearts)

GraceThruFaith · (This post was last modified: 02-09-2012 05:17 PM by GraceThruFaith.)

(02-09-2012 04:55 PM)Scorpio Wrote:
(02-09-2012 04:47 PM)Jeremy Wrote: There really isn't a whole lot of context for the she-bears passage, 2 Kings 2:23-25. The whole chapter is a series of unconnected events surrounding the death of Elijah. Elisha walks into town, children make fun of his baldness, he curses them "in the name of the Lord," and the she-bears maul 42 kids. So I'm kind of curious as to what the "correct" interpretation of this passage is, if not "don't @#$% with the man of God."

I don't think there is an issue with the context of the verses. Pretty straight forward as you say. It's just a story. The issue is with people who throw it at you because you may disagree with the pastor and something terrible will happen to you. If that were true, the she-bears got lost trying to find me.

The problem, for me, with this verse is not the story itself, but the interpretation of it from Fundies. Fundies look for super deep meanings in the stories. Okay, so the children made fun of Elijah and they died, WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH NEW TESTAMENT PASTORS? ELIJAH WAS NOT A PASTOR, HE WAS A PROPHET!!!! HE WAS A MAN OF GOD? WELL I'M A MAN OF GOD, DON'T MAKE FUN OF ME! I'M NOT ORDAINED LIKE THE PASTOR? UH, NEITHER WAS ANYONE ELSE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT! THERE WAS NO MINISTRY ORDINATION IN THE OLD TESTMANET, IDIOT!

The Hulk is coming out a little bit.

**exOBCstudent** · 02-09-2012, 05:20 PM

(02-09-2012 05:15 PM)GraceThruFaith Wrote:
(02-09-2012 04:55 PM)Scorpio Wrote: I don't think there is an issue with the context of the verses. Pretty straight forward as you say. It's just a story. The issue is with people who throw it at you because you may disagree with the pastor and something terrible will happen to you. If that were true, the she-bears got lost trying to find me.

The problem, for me, with this verse is not the story itself, but the interpretation of it from Fundies. Fundies look for super deep meanings in the stories. Okay, so the children made fun of Elijah and they died, WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH NEW TESTAMENT PASTORS? ELIJAH WAS NOT A PASTOR, HE WAS A PROPHET!!!! HE WAS A MAN OF GOD? WELL I'M A MAN OF GOD, DON'T MAKE FUN OF ME! I'M NOT ORDAINED LIKE THE PASTOR? UH, NEITHER WAS ANYONE ELSE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT! THERE WAS NO MINISTRY ORDINATION IN THE OLD TESTMANET, IDIOT!

The Hulk is coming out a little bit.

I could see it coming with the emergence of all caps. Big Grin

Templewoman · 02-09-2012, 06:57 PM

Ahhh, I call this "the golden age of she-bears." Old Testament, where God's people killed their enemies. Don't think we're supposed to do that anymore, although the thought has crossed my mind.
I actually posted this today on my facebook page, because I have to undo so much conditioning received in fundyland. For what it's worth, here it is: (The Hyles reference is for the fundies, not because I care what he thought. I don't.)

Touch not the Lord's anointed?
In 1Samuel 24:8-15 David yells out to Saul and confesses that it would not be right of him to physically harm Saul, because he is God’s choice for king.
Yet, according to Jack Hyles (http://www.fbbc.com/messages/hyles_psalms.htm), David published Psalm 35, written about Saul, where it says "let destruction come upon him at unawares" (when he does not know it).
I agree, let's not "touch" the Lord's anointed, but David SPOKE.

Miriam and Aaron got in trouble for challenging Moses' authority. God spoke to Moses face to face (Numbers 12). To other prophets God revealed himself in visions and dreams. Are 'ya reading your Bible or talking face to face? Been on Mt. Sinai lately?

2 Corinthians 1:21-22 "Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, AND HATH ANOINTED US, is God" (saints are the anointed of the New Testament?)

"But the ANOINTING which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth" (1 John 2:20,27.)

I realize it's inconvenient, but, like, hello?

GraceThruFaith · (This post was last modified: 02-09-2012 08:05 PM by GraceThruFaith.)

Templewoman, you have been +1'ed because that is the prime example of a great response on the SFL forums.

**redbeardiam** · 02-09-2012, 08:29 PM

(02-09-2012 03:53 PM)Jeremy Wrote:
(02-09-2012 12:52 PM)GraceThruFaith Wrote: In fact, I've heard this several times when it came to people who spoke against any pastor. If you disagree with the pastor strongly enough on any issue, even something like private property rights of the church, someone will say something about "touch not the Lord's anointed" or "watch out for she-bears, buddy".

This makes me Hulk rage so fast because the logic behind it shows me the ignorance of the speaker, yet despite my telling them their faulty logic, they come back with some random rebuttal that I've never heard before and so I'm standing there, all dumbfounded by their lack of intelligence. It's as if any leader in the Old Testament was a pastor/preacher equivalent of those times, and I hate it.

So: you're more bothered by people who believe the Bible and try to apply it than you are by the passage itself, which establishes that a man got mildly annoyed by innocent children, invoked his god against them, and then his god brutally murdered the children via she-bear? Your "hulk rage" is a little misplaced.

I am not sure what to call this. If it was from a Christian perspective, it would be a 'Jesus juke.' What's it called when it's done from the other side of the aisle, so to speak?

Jeremy · 02-09-2012, 09:40 PM

(02-09-2012 08:29 PM)redbeardiam Wrote:
(02-09-2012 03:53 PM)Jeremy Wrote: So: you're more bothered by people who believe the Bible and try to apply it than you are by the passage itself, which establishes that a man got mildly annoyed by innocent children, invoked his god against them, and then his god brutally murdered the children via she-bear? Your "hulk rage" is a little misplaced.

I am not sure what to call this. If it was from a Christian perspective, it would be a 'Jesus juke.' What's it called when it's done from the other side of the aisle, so to speak?

We wouldn't be having this conversation if anybody would actually say what the proper context of that verse is and how it's different from the way the fundies use it, which is all I want to know. Why is that so hard?

**Presbygirl** · 02-09-2012, 10:00 PM

(02-09-2012 09:40 PM)Jeremy Wrote:
(02-09-2012 08:29 PM)redbeardiam Wrote: I am not sure what to call this. If it was from a Christian perspective, it would be a 'Jesus juke.' What's it called when it's done from the other side of the aisle, so to speak?

We wouldn't be having this conversation if anybody would actually say what the proper context of that verse is and how it's different from the way the fundies use it, which is all I want to know. Why is that so hard?

My understanding of this passage is that one, the boys were really youths and so there being 40 of them or so actually put Elisha in danger. Their mocking was more like taunting with intent to harm. Two, whenever God executes or wipes out others He is always protecting His own. In this case, His prophet.