Against Marcion Part III

Two she-bears kill innocent children, or do they?

Marcionites love to make use of 2 Kings 2:23-25 because at first glance, this event may seem to support their assertions due to appearing cruel or harsh, especially since it involves children. However, a deeper contextual and linguistic analysis helps us understand why this event is not meant to portray Yehovah as cruel, nor is it an arbitrary act of punishment.

Geography and Setting: The Road to Bethel

In 2 Kings 2:23, the account specifies that Elisha was traveling "up to Bethel" when he encountered the youths. Bethel was a significant location in Israel's history, and its background is important for understanding the story.

• Bethel’s Religious History: Bethel was one of the two main centers of idolatrous worship established by Jeroboam in the northern kingdom of Israel (1 Kings 12:28-29). Jeroboam had set up a golden calf there to prevent the people from going to Jerusalem to worship Jehovah. As a result, Bethel became a center of false worship and rebellion against the true God, and it was often associated with apostasy throughout Israel's history. Prophets frequently condemned Bethel because it represented the people's unfaithfulness to Yehovah's covenant.

  Elisha’s journey to Bethel thus carries a symbolic meaning: he was traveling to a place that had long been spiritually rebellious. The fact that he was mocked by youths along this route can be seen as a reflection of the spiritual condition of the people living there.

General Meaning of נַעַר (na‘ar)

The Hebrew word נַעַר (na‘ar), which appears in the story in 2 Kings 2:23, is often translated as “children,” “youths” or “boys,” but the term carries a range of meanings depending on the context. A detailed analysis of this word helps clarify the identity, age, and behaviour of those involved in taunting Elisha.

נַעַר (na‘ar) is a masculine noun in Hebrew, and it generally refers to a "young person" or "youth." However, the exact age range that this term covers can vary significantly. It can refer to:

• Children: In some contexts, na‘ar refers to very young boys, as in Exodus 2:6, where Moses is described as a "na‘ar" when he is found as an infant.

• Adolescents: It can also refer to teenagers or older youths, as in Genesis 37:2, where Joseph, at the age of 17, is called a "na‘ar."

• Young men: In certain cases, na‘ar refers to young men who are even old enough to serve in a military capacity or carry out significant tasks. For example, in 1 Samuel 16:11, David is referred to as a "na‘ar" even though he was old enough to be anointed as king and later fight Goliath.

Age and Responsibility

While na‘ar can apply to a range of ages, it is important to note that in biblical Hebrew culture, youths were often considered responsible for their actions by their early teenage years. Adolescents were expected to know the religious and social customs of their community. For example, in the Mosaic Law, children at the age of 12 or 13 began to assume moral and legal responsibilities. By this standard, even if the youths in 2 Kings 2:23 were younger than adults, they were still old enough to understand the severity of their mockery.

This is especially important in the context of the story with Elisha. The na'arim (plural of na‘ar) in this passage likely refers to a group of adolescents or young men, not small children. Their actions—gathering in a large group to mock a prophet—indicates a level of collective behaviour that suggests a premeditated and rebellious attitude rather than innocent childish mischief.

Social Role of the Na‘ar

In ancient Israel, the term na‘ar did not carry the same connotations of immaturity or helplessness that the modern word "child" might. Young men in their teens could play significant roles in society:

• Military roles: Young men (na‘arim) were often part of Israel's army. For example, in 1 Samuel 14:1, Jonathan's armor-bearer is called a na‘ar, though he is clearly old enough to carry heavy weapons and fight.

• Servants: A na‘ar could also serve as a personal assistant or attendant to an adult, suggesting that they were considered capable of performing adult-like duties (cf. 1 Samuel 9:3).

In the story of Elisha, the fact that the na‘arim gathered in such large numbers (42 youths) suggests that they were a rowdy group, possibly even dangerous. They likely had enough physical strength and social freedom to cause harm or riotous behavior, making their public mockery of Elisha a serious event, this was a mob of young men, not an innocent group of mischievous children.

Behavioural Expectations of a Na‘ar

While the word na‘ar could be used for individuals as young as infants (e.g., the infant Moses), it could also apply to young men on the cusp of adulthood. This distinction is important because it suggests that the na‘arim in this passage were old enough to be held accountable for their actions. In biblical times, moral and legal responsibility typically began at adolescence, and those in this age group were expected to respect their elders, especially religious figures like prophets.

Mocking Elisha, a prophet of Yehovah, was not only a sign of disrespect but also of moral and spiritual defiance. These youths should have known better than to ridicule a representative of Yehovah, particularly in a public manner.

Collective Rebellion and Group Dynamics

The story implies that the na‘arim were acting together as a group, which is significant from both a social and psychological perspective. In the Bible, groups of young men sometimes gather to engage in rebellious or violent behaviour, particularly against religious or political authorities. For example, the "worthless men" (often translated from na‘arim) in Judges 19:22 exhibit similar group defiance and are capable of committing acts of extreme violence.

Given that the prophet was going “up to Bethel” the prophet was on a road in the countryside. One can scarcely imagine that 42 small children would be on the road famous for highwaymen and bandits. This demonstrates further that this was a dangerous group of young men, not small children. In ancient times, groups of unruly youths could easily become aggressive, particularly in areas away from towns or cities where law enforcement from soldiers was scarce. This adds another dimension to the story—Elisha was not just being mocked; he was likely in a precarious position, surrounded by a large group in a remote location, which could have quickly escalated into violence against him.

Theological Implication of the Na‘arim’s Behavior

In biblical theology, the actions of the na‘arim are viewed through a lens of covenantal faithfulness. In ancient Israel, disrespect toward a prophet was not just a personal insult but an offense against Yehovah’s appointed representative. By mocking Elisha, the na‘arim were essentially rejecting the authority and message of Yehovah. This has deeper theological implications because it reflects the broader issue of Israel's rebellion against Jehovah’s covenant. Let us take a closer look now at the nature of the insult.

"Go up" – עֲלֵ֣ה (ʿă·lêh)

The Hebrew word עֲלֵ֣ה (ʿă·lêh) is the imperative form of the verb עלה (ʿālâ), which generally means "to go up," "to ascend," or "to rise." This verb is often used in a literal sense for physical elevation, such as going up a hill or mountain, or it can refer to a person rising or ascending in status.

In the immediate context, ʿālâ can be understood as a taunt related to Elijah's recent ascension into heaven, which is described in 2 Kings 2:11. Elijah had just been miraculously "taken up" (using the same verb עלה) into heaven in a whirlwind. The youths may have been mocking Elisha by challenging him to perform the same miraculous feat, knowing that he had just inherited Elijah's prophetic mantle. The expression could be interpreted as, "Why don’t you ascend like your master Elijah?"—a derisive way of questioning Elisha's legitimacy or authority as a prophet.

In a figurative sense, this can also imply something like, "Get out of here!" or "Why don't you leave us?" which further shows the disrespect and contempt they had for him. The underlying tone of the taunt reflects a challenge to Elisha's prophetic authority, essentially ridiculing the idea that he could follow in Elijah's steps.

"Baldhead" – קֵרֵ֥חַ (qē·rê·aḥ)

The Hebrew word קֵרֵ֥חַ (qē·rê·aḥ) means "bald" or "baldhead." It refers to someone who is hairless or has a bald scalp. In ancient Israelite culture, baldness, especially premature baldness, was often associated with shame or a lack of dignity. It was sometimes seen as a physical defect, and in many Near Eastern cultures, it could be used as an insult.

Here, the term qē·rê·aḥ was meant to be derogatory. The young men were insulting Elisha’s appearance, which might not have been literally baldness but a way to demean him. Baldness might have symbolized weakness, inferiority, or the idea that Elisha was "old" and incapable of doing anything significant, particularly in comparison to the recently ascended Elijah, who left the scene in a glorious and powerful manner.

In biblical times, outward appearance could reflect one's social and religious status. Calling someone "baldhead" might have been a way to suggest that Elisha was out of favor with God or had lost the power that Elijah had. In a broader context, physical insults like these were used to undermine a person's honour or position, which, in Elisha's case, was closely tied to his role as a prophet.

Combined Meaning: A Loaded Insult

Taken together, the phrase "Go up, you baldhead!" is more than just a taunt about Elisha’s physical appearance. It conveys a layered insult:

• "Go up" challenges Elisha's authority and legitimacy as a prophet, mocking the supernatural ascension of Elijah and questioning Elisha’s ability to live up to his predecessor.

• "Baldhead" attacks Elisha personally, insulting his appearance, and possibly suggesting that he is weak, dishonourable, or cursed by God.

The Symbolism of Bears in Biblical Literature

The mention of two female bears emerging to maul the youths in 2 Kings 2:24 carries deep symbolism and significance in the biblical narrative. Throughout the Bible and ancient Near Eastern literature, certain animals carry symbolic weight, and bears are often associated with ferocity and danger. While bears are not as frequently mentioned as other animals like lions or serpents, they still hold a distinct place in biblical imagery.

• Ferocity of Bears: Bears are depicted as powerful and dangerous animals, particularly when they are provoked or defending their young. In the book of Hosea 13:8, Jehovah compares his wrath against rebellious Israel to that of a bear robbed of her cubs: "I will meet them like a bear robbed of her cubs, and I will tear open their chests." This imagery reflects the intense and unstoppable anger of a protective force. The ferocity and protectiveness of female bears serve as apt metaphors for divine judgment against those who attack Yehovah’s servants.

• Bears as Instruments of Judgment: The use of wild animals as instruments of divine retribution is not unique to this account. For example, in Leviticus 26:22, Jehovah warns that disobedience to His covenant will result in wild beasts attacking the people. The appearance of these bears to punish the youths demonstrates that animals in biblical literature are not random agents but often represent Jehovah's control over nature as a way of executing justice.

The Importance of the Bears Being Female

The fact that the two bears are described as female (Hebrew: נְקֵבֹת, neqevot) is not a minor detail. Female bears are especially aggressive when they feel that their young are threatened. This taps into the symbolism of protectiveness, which is relevant to the situation of Elisha, Jehovah’s newly appointed prophet.

• Jehovah’s Protective Nature: By using female bears, the narrative might be drawing a parallel between the protectiveness of a mother bear and Yehovah’s own protective nature over His prophets,His word and His servants as a whole. Just as a mother bear will fiercely defend her cubs, Yehovah will fiercely defend His representatives, particularly in the early stages of their ministry when their authority is being established.

• Intensity of Judgment: The detail of the bears being female intensifies the sense of danger. It suggests that the offense committed by the youths was so severe that the response needed to reflect a heightened level of divine anger and protection. The bears’ ferocity could be seen as reflecting the intensity of Yehovah's response to the direct mockery of His prophet, symbolizing that the rejection of Elisha was not a trivial matter but an affront that demanded serious consequences.

The Marcionites' use of 2 Kings 2:23-25 to portray Jehovah as cruel stems from a superficial reading that ignores the deeper context. They fail to recognize that the taunting youths were not innocent children but rebellious young men in a spiritually defiant region. By misunderstanding the term נַעַר (na‘ar) and missing the symbolism of the bears as agents of divine judgment, they overlook the clear biblical truth: Yehovah’s actions were not arbitrary cruelty but a justified defense of His prophet and His authority. This lack of understanding reveals their inability to grasp basic biblical truths about justice and covenant faithfulness.