MudSkipperOK, so here's my hardest question:
Why does God maul children with bears?
For example, why did God kill 42 children for saying to Elisha to "Go on up baldhead"?
He could have just spanked them, but mauling them with bears was somehow necessary.
So tell me, why does God kill children like that?
If you can somehow convince me that mauling children with bears is justified, then I will become a Christian, I give you my word.
Read the story here:
2 Kings 2:23-25 (KJV)
23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
25 And he went from thence to mount Carmel, and from thence he returned to Samaria.
First off, a few things to consider about this verse:
1. The word translated “children” (נַעַר) would more accurately be deemed “young men.”
2. The fact that an incredible 42 were killed suggests that this was more than simply a small group of individuals making fun of a man’s baldness. This was organized and possibly premeditated.
3. The term “bald head” (קֵרֵחַ) was most likely a reference to leprosy (Leviticus 13:40-44), not merely a comment on physical appearance.
4. The phrase “go up” (עָלָה) is likely a reference to Elijah having been caught up to Heaven (2 Kings 2:11-12), thus we see here that this was specifically a case of religious persecution, not simple ridicule.
In conclusion, they were most likely not “children” in the sense your question suggests, they were not simply mocking Elisha’s physical appearance, and it was organized religious persecution, not coincidental ridicule. Furthermore…
You specifically challenged to me prove that this action was “justified.” Justifying it is in fact the simplest part of your inquiry. You see, the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). It is not that the children were very unfortunate, but rather that we are extremely fortunate that we haven’t been mauled by bears ourselves. We should praise God for having the mercy to withhold His wrath from us for a season, and, for those who embrace the Gospel of Jesus Christ, for eternity.
I’m sure you’ll find several things to disagree with here, but I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that your key complaint will be that you don’t agree with God’s standards. That, of course, is your opinion and you are free to feel that way, but surely you know that if there is a God then He has every right to be the one who sets the standards.
In Christ’s Love,
Matthew
Why does God maul children with bears?
For example, why did God kill 42 children for saying to Elisha to "Go on up baldhead"?
He could have just spanked them, but mauling them with bears was somehow necessary.
So tell me, why does God kill children like that?
If you can somehow convince me that mauling children with bears is justified, then I will become a Christian, I give you my word.
Read the story here:
2 Kings 2:23-25 (KJV)
23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
25 And he went from thence to mount Carmel, and from thence he returned to Samaria.
First off, a few things to consider about this verse:
1. The word translated “children” (נַעַר) would more accurately be deemed “young men.”
2. The fact that an incredible 42 were killed suggests that this was more than simply a small group of individuals making fun of a man’s baldness. This was organized and possibly premeditated.
3. The term “bald head” (קֵרֵחַ) was most likely a reference to leprosy (Leviticus 13:40-44), not merely a comment on physical appearance.
4. The phrase “go up” (עָלָה) is likely a reference to Elijah having been caught up to Heaven (2 Kings 2:11-12), thus we see here that this was specifically a case of religious persecution, not simple ridicule.
In conclusion, they were most likely not “children” in the sense your question suggests, they were not simply mocking Elisha’s physical appearance, and it was organized religious persecution, not coincidental ridicule. Furthermore…
You specifically challenged to me prove that this action was “justified.” Justifying it is in fact the simplest part of your inquiry. You see, the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). It is not that the children were very unfortunate, but rather that we are extremely fortunate that we haven’t been mauled by bears ourselves. We should praise God for having the mercy to withhold His wrath from us for a season, and, for those who embrace the Gospel of Jesus Christ, for eternity.
I’m sure you’ll find several things to disagree with here, but I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that your key complaint will be that you don’t agree with God’s standards. That, of course, is your opinion and you are free to feel that way, but surely you know that if there is a God then He has every right to be the one who sets the standards.
In Christ’s Love,
Matthew
P.S. - For the rest of my readers, Steve didn't post this part on my blog but he put it on his. You might find it interesting: I'm going to do like Jesus said, sell all my possessions and follow Him if mauling children is justified. I'm waiting, with anticipation of the answer to this question...
All the more reason why I'm sure this answer won't be good enough for him... he's staked too much on this issue.
38 comments:
By the way, if by chance you are ready to convert (doubtful, but not entirely impossible), you can e-mail me your address and I'll send you a Bible (and maybe even that "Intelligent Design vs. Evolution Game" you wanted Ray to send you).
Hey Matt,
Thanks for answering my question. I really enjoyed the fact that you translated from Hebrew. And THANKS for the prize, that is all I ever wanted.
1. The word translated “children” (נַעַר) would more accurately be deemed “young men.”
Pointless. Men, children.
2. The fact that an incredible 42 were killed suggests that this was more than simply a small group of individuals making fun of a man’s baldness. This was organized and possibly premeditated.
What happened to turn the other cheek? Send bears any time someone challenges you.
3. The term “bald head” (קֵרֵחַ) was most likely a reference to leprosy (Leviticus 13:40-44), not merely a comment on physical appearance.
Pointless. Insults warrant killing someone else. Great.
"4. The phrase “go up” (עָלָה) is likely a reference to Elijah having been caught up to Heaven (2 Kings 2:11-12), thus we see here that this was specifically a case of religious persecution, not simple ridicule."
So religious persecution warrants killing people. Strange. What happened to peace, love and turn the other cheek?
So the moral of the story is;
Someone insults you, Kill them. Kill them all.
That's God's standard, not mine. You want to get closer to God's standard with the Ten Commandments, so why don't you ask God to send bears to kill your classmates who make fun of you. That ought to make the news.
Oh,
I didn't stake too much in my PS message.
I'm growing my beard like Jesus, getting RAMBO'd up and buying a gun tomorrow. Anyone makes fun of me, I'll put a .357 round in between their eyes, God said I could.
"So religious persecution warrants killing people."
No. Sin merits death. I'm surprised you didn't know that, it's all over Ray's blog (not to mention the Bible).
"What happened to turn the other cheek?"
No contradiction there, Steve. That's what PEOPLE are supposed to do because vengeance belongs to the Lord.
"I'm growing my beard like Jesus, getting RAMBO'd up and buying a gun tomorrow. Anyone makes fun of me, I'll put a .357 round in between their eyes, God said I could."
That's possibly the most eisegetical interpretation of Scripture I've ever heard.
OK, let me try and straighten this out.
1) Religious persecution is sin.
2) Sin warrants death.
3) So people who commit religious persecution should be put to death.
So killing people is OK as long as they have sinned. Great.
Can I quote you on that?
That's like Hitler saying its ok to kill people as long as they're Jews.
No, you can't quote me on that. I never said religious persecution was sin. Romans 3:23 says that ALL have sinned, I never said that religious persecution specifically was sin. You put that in my mouth. Also, you've again missed the point when you said "So people who commit religious persecution should be put to death... So killing people is OK as long as they have sinned." Perhaps you should read the passage again. Elisha didn't kill ANYONE... GOD did. God has the right to punish sinners because He is their Creator and has never sinned Himself. Murder is still wrong because if a person kills another person because of their sins then they are a hypocrite (they've sinned themselves).
So unless you're suggesting that all 42 of the young men were without sin (which would be unbiblical), God is more than justified to kill anyone He wants to and we should be grateful that He hasn't rendered to us what we deserve yet. You may not like the sound of it, but I'm just telling it like it is.
Happy July 4th Matt!
I'm gonna be in PDX so I wont be able to reply.
God doesn't exist BTW.
in PDX getting drunk and having sex, like atheists are wont to do.
Happy 4th to you, too!
"God doesn't exist BTW."
(Checking over shoulder in fear) Are YOU gonna tell Him that?
"You may not like the sound of it, but I'm just telling it like it is."
That pretty much sums it up.
Your God is not merciful. He kills people on a whim for no particular reason (it usually stems from his own inflated Ego). People have done far worse than insult other people, they walk away unharmed, but people who poke fun at some prophet get mauled. Great story.
Everything is God's whim.
If I kill 42 young men, its a heinous crime, a sin, worthy of being put in a nut house; but when God does it, it's perfectly fine (Noble in fact)!
Great story.
Well Matthew. I hate to say this, but you have failed my hardest question. I don't want a God who is not merciful or just. Yours is a coward and a tyrant. It all makes sense if you consider the historical context in which he was invented (or should I say borrowed). At any rate, you have failed. You are defending murder, cruelty and just plain lunacy instead of being honest and simply admitting that killing people for childish insults (call it sin if you want) is wrong. Sin does not justify sin.
You're trying awfully hard...
This whole line of thought skirts the fact that God is the one that created sin in the first place. The Bible (and I paraphrase here)says that God created us and it was good. There is no mention of puppets or freewill or any other made up reasonings mentioned. Just that it was good. But then God goes to the extra step of creating a tree who's sole purpose is to tempt us. All Knowing God knew full well what choice Eve would make and what horrible sin would ensue.
In the news just recently are reports of an 8 year old boy shooting his parents. God knew that by making this tree, it would cause this to happen. It's but one of many atrocities that I would blame god for if I were to believe any of the lunacy in the bible such as this bears mauling children story. It is absolutely immoral and anyone writing off these horrific acts as "well god knows better than I" is frightening.
"Anonymous",
Allow me to make a distinction. You suggest that it was the tree which had the power to bring sin into the world. I disagree. I propose that the tree may in fact have not possessed any special attributes whatsoever. The threat which was introduced into the Garden wasn't the tree, it was disobedience. God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree. Adam and Eve DID eat from the tree. Their disobedience caused necessitated their removal from the Garden of Eden. Their removal from the Garden of Eden (which contained the Tree of Life) meant that death would surely follow.
The Lord did not force Adam to eat from the tree, Eve did not force Adam to eat from the tree, and the serpent did not force Adam to eat from the tree. The Lord created the world, the Garden, and the angels. Lucifer (a.k.a. Satan) chose to rebel against the Lord. Lucifer (in the form of a serpent) suggested to Eve that she do the same. She did. Eve then suggested to Adam that he do the same. He did. The Lord did not force Lucifer into rebellion, Lucifer did not force Eve into rebellion, and Eve did not force Adam into rebellion. These were all choices that they each made. The Lord gave them free will to make such choices or to be obedient to Him instead. In fact, He even warned of the consequences beforehand. To blame the Lord for man's abuse of the freedom the Lord gave him is ludicrous - yet, oddly, it's the oldest excuse in the book (literally - think about it, Adam made the same argument as you have when the Lord confronted him with his sin [see Genesis 3:12])
In Christ,
Matthew
I think God has gotten a bum rap over this passage.
Let's look at what this passage actually tells us.
A group of youths (my dictionary translates נַעַר as 'youth, adolescent, youngster or in law a minor') harrasses a religious elder who curses them in the name of God.
Then two bears come out and maul 42of them.
Does it say that God sent the bears or is that an assumption we make by 'putting two and two together' ? We do not read of Elisha specifically requesting bears.
Is there any confirmation by Elisha that the maulings were the result of the curse? No, he just travels on.
If we are to believe that God sent the bears, then we must acknowledge that it took Elisha calling on Him by name to inform God that His authority (incarnate in the body of His prophet) was being flouted.
An omniscient God, aware of the persecution of His prophet, could have sent the expression of His anger. Instead, Elisha curses them. If we accept the maulings as an act of God, the curse becomes a command to action. If we accept the maulings as an act of God, then we accept that a mortal man can command God to action.
I view this tale as anecdotal. Events of coincidence in temporal proximity which, to the undiscerning, take on the trappings of divine vengeance.
Don't go for the 'God created the nature of bears ahead of time just for this job' either.
Dont blame God. Blame bears!
Matthew said...
"The Lord did not force Adam to eat from the tree"
I disagree. God created all things and knows the future. We cannot choose to do anything but that which he has already foreseen. We may feel as though we are making choices but every moment of existence is preordained, even the feeling we get when we think we're "choosing" something.
@ Anonymous
"Does it say that God sent the bears or is that an assumption we make by 'putting two and two together' ? We do not read of Elisha specifically requesting bears."
While you make a fair point, I concede, to the contrary, that the passage does seem to suggest that the coming of the bears was a result of Elisha's "curse."
@ Ian
"We cannot choose to do anything but that which he has already foreseen. We may feel as though we are making choices but every moment of existence is preordained, even the feeling we get when we think we're "choosing" something."
Yes, it is true that God knew all that would take place in this world before He laid its foundations, however to draw from this the conclusion that we are not responsible for our own actions is unfounded. While God knows the choices we will make, this does not mean that He chooses for us.
In Christ,
Matthew
This is another reason why God doesn't exist because the Bible is full of silly stories that make no sense. No one seemed to notice or ask what were the other 40 children doing while the bears were killing the first two children, so the rest of them just stood there watching and waiting for their turn? figure how long it would take to kill one child then times that by 42, and you only have 2 bears, none of the chidren thought to run while the bears were killing the first 2? 2 vs. 42 and none could get away, makes no sense.
Right because odd things like that NEVER happen anymore... you must be hard up for evidence against God if you think this story counts. Don't you think you're reaching just a bit?
Here's a couple more, a talking snake, a virgin having a baby....It's more like odd things like that "never happened", and if you believe it did, i have a bridge for sale, it's located in brooklyn. If you want to talk about evidence, you have no evidence God exists. You've been brainwashed into believing this book that has no supporting evidence of truth, yet your too afraid or too naive to question it. someone hands you a book and says here, everything in this is true and you go right along with it. so if this is the book you hold to be true and and it has stories in it you think don't count then that pretty much ruins the credibility of the book. You think i'm reaching? you should be asking what were they reaching for when they put that silly, impossible story in there among others.
No evidence? If you truly believe half of what you just said, you must only read very biased literature. By the way, I question far more often than you know. You've simply made the false assumption that there are no answers to such questioning.
I haven't seen you anwser them...
You haven't asked any questions, you've only made accusations. In the mean time, here's my question: Honestly, if you hate Christianity so much, then why would you go to the trouble of searching out a Christian's blog and checking back several times a day to see if he's responded to your attacks on his beliefs? There must be a motive, but I can't see what it would be. This has always puzzled me.
Attacks, funny way of putting it. Are you really that dramatic? If you didn't see my questions then your not paying attention to what you read. Don't put words in my mouth, i never said i hate christianity, I don't believe in it. Religion is man made. i can't see why you would be puzzled, i think this is good place to go for trying to get proof of God existing, I mean i'm sure you would know. Can you proof God exists? What proof do you have?
The all time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims "religion".
You're not here to find out if God exists, you've made it abundantly clear that you think you already know He doesn't. And no, I can't prove to you that God exists. If you don't want to believe in Him, there's nothing I can do to make you. I know you think I'm a fool, but don't think that I can't recognize a stubborn mind and a hard heart when I see it. You didn't come here looking for answers, and you will never find them. Lucky for you, though I'm sure you don't appreciate it right now, I serve an awesome God and He is the only One loud enough to be heard through your closed ears. In the future, when you're genuinely wanting answers, go to Him - not that you'll have to, He usually initiates dialog in His own good timing.
you give the same answers as the rest of them. that was a very good cop out excuse for not answering. the only one your fooling is yourself. you don't have the answer any more than i do, so you make one up, and choose to believe in an imaginery friend up in the sky, which you can't prove exists, not even to yourself. your doing a lot of typing but your not saying anything.
It is impossible for two she bears, (and why do they have to mention that they're female? what does their gender have to do with it?) to maul 42 children or young men and they just stand there watching the first 2 being mauled and don't bother to run away, so they just stand there and wait there turn. so the 40th person actually had time to eat lunch, while waiting for the bears to finish up the 39 people before him. makes a lot of sense.
let's say it takes the bears 1 minute to maul each person to death, even though everyone won't die at the same time, but for sake of arguement, we'll say one minute for each one. It would take them 41 minutes to get to the last person, so for 41 minutes he stood there and watched all the others get mauled and waited for his turn. I get a 30 minute lunch break at work, so he had enough time to eat lunch and watch 11 of his friends get mauled. wow, that does make sense.
It's amazing and scary that grown people believe this stuff.
First off, I'm not entirely sure you read my "About Me" because if you had, you most likely wouldn't have referred to me as a "full grown person" - most atheists look too far down their noses at me to do that unless they don't realize my age. Second, if you want to accuse me of being predictable, you pause to consider how every time I get a notification that you've returned to my blog, I know almost exactly what your response was long before I scroll down the page far enough to read it (admittedly, it takes a long time to scroll down such a long page on my cellphone, however, so I guess that gives me a long time to think).
The only outright question you've asked is if I can prove to you that God exists, and I answered that. I said "no." And, though you clearly think it does, that doesn't bother me. I've always known that I couldn't prove His existence to anyone. No one ever had to prove His existence to me, either. God tends to do His own talking whenever He decides the time is right. Not a cop-out, just an honest answer. I know all the usual arguments for God's existence, as well as a few unusual ones that I found on my own, and some of them are quite good. But most atheists are too close-minded to listen to anything other than undeniable proof; which, if we were to be quite honest with ourselves, we don't have for any of the millions of things that everyone does know exists. The level of evidence required by most atheists is much higher than what we possess for the existence of anything, so when speaking in terms of the purest sense of the word "prove," I have no problem with saying that I can't prove God exists. Stop acting like I'm trying to hide that, because I came right out and said it in my last comment.
1. First of all, they weren't "little kids"!
"Little children' is an unfortunate translation. The Hebrew expression neurim qetannim is best rendered 'young lads' or 'young men.' From numerous examples where ages are specified in the Old Testament, we know that these were boys from twelve to thirty years old. One of these words described Isaac at his sacrifice in Genesis 22:12, when he was easily in his early twenties. It described Joseph in Genesis 37:2 when he was seventeen years old. In fact, the same word described army men in 1 Kings 20:14-15...these are young men ages between twelve and thirty."
So why would 42 "little children" just happen to be running the streets and then "ridicule God's prophets"? That doesn't make any sense.
2. Elisha wasn't even bald or old.
In 1 Kings 19:19, Elisha was the same age as those young adults. When he was called upon he was still living with his parents and plowing the fields with the oxen.
When Elijah anointed him to be his successor, he kissed his parents goodbye. That’s pretty unusual if he was an old man that was balding. He was certainly a young adult. The epithet baldhead may allude to lepers who had to shave their heads and were considered detestable outcasts. Also in that culture, it was custom for men to covers their heads so it would be hard to tell if Elisha was bald or not.
3. The Warning:
In Leviticus 26:21-22, God warned anyone that was hostile to Him, infliction would be done to them 7 times more and wild animals would take their children. So that would imply that those young adults weren't simply just teasing as you think they were but were meaning hostility towards God! But just because they were young, does NOT mean that they were innocent.
4. Looking at 1 Kings 19, Elijah was weary, scared for his life, and so hopeless that he wanted to die because some of the evil Israelites wouldn't listen and were trying to kill him. So God knew it was too much for Elijah to take on so he sent him to Elisha to be his successor to fulfill the rest of the job. Now when the responsibility was shifted to Elisha, do you think that the Israelites and Baal worshippers were going to forget and just be nice and respectful to Elisha? Of course not!! Who knows what the agenda of that of 42 young men were going to be next!! Elisha, could've been endangered!
3. Look at the Setting:
The setting took place around Bethel. Bethel at that time was the most anti-Jehovah place out there was the a major Baal worship site at one point. Baal worshippers would sacrifice their own children by throwing them into the fire while having orgies.
Those were detestable in God's eyes. In 1 Kings, Jeroboam attempted to make Bethel the capital of idolatry worship and blasphemed God. He even instituted an idolatrous feast in correspondence to the Feast of the Tabernacles and set up idol images.
Bethel thereafter became increasingly associated with heathen worship—hence the denunciations by Amos and by Hosea, who called it "Beth-aven" [house of wickedness] So that pretty much tells you the nature of the people that lived there.
Also, Elisha just finished performing a miracle by restoring the water supply there since the land was under an age old curse and was unproductive! Elijah was just seen being carried way from God. An awesome event took place in front of the eyes of the people, showing the Baal worshippers the true God and His
powers. The insults were obviously made towards God and his prophets, not just some petty insult. Think about it: WHY WOULD SOMEONE PLACE AN INSULT OR RIDICULE SOMEONE AFTER THEY JUST WITNESS GOD'S POWER AND HAVING THEIR WATER SUPPLY FINALLY RESTORED AFTER MANY YEARS? In my opinion, if that event took place in front of me, I would be thankful and then convert!
That itself only reveals 2 things:
1. They didn't worship God nor wanted to
2. They purposely wanted to blaspheme God.
All of this would've made sense if someone actually looked for the answers and spent a few more minutes investigating it then just saying "Aha, I found a verse were God is bad." Atheist use that "cherry picking" tactic so much they make an atheist cherry pie!
Hi Matt,
i am still struggling to graspt (sp?) this concept of God killing 42 "young men". I have been a Christian all my life and i am only a teen, but I still dont get it. I love God, but this whole situation seem "a little" harsh. Do you have any thoughts on this that will help me understand?
Yes, at first glance (and even second) this does seem more than a little harsh. In regards to the harshness, there isn't a whole lot that can be said -- and very little of it is the encouraging, uplifting stuff most are used to hearing out of the pulpit all the time.
First of all, sometimes God is harsh - never unjust, mind you; but sometimes harsh. These men were disrespecting God and His prophet (blasphemy), and even if they hadn't the Bible says that all have sinned. The punishment for sin has always been death, and blasphemy is a serious sin indeed.
Also, God is the giver of life, so He has the right to take it away. It is not like a man killing another man - that is murder, for one to take the life of another who has no right to it. Also, death is inevitable and unavoidable - only the time and place are in question.
Furthermore, the text doesn't indicate that these mens' eternal destinations were affected by this event -- if their relationship with God was right (which, admittedly, seems doubtful) then they went to Heaven when this happened.
Like I said, not real encouraging I'm sure. I think one of the purposes of this story is to remind us of the seriousness of sin; I think we often take it too lightly. The truth is we all deserve to be struck down like this when we sin - this episode, then, wasn't unjust or unfair, but rather each instance in which God allows men to LIVE in their sins is a show of His mercy to give us the time to repent, though many don't.
I hope I haven't terribly depressed you, this isn't a very exciting story. ;-)
Hi Matt,
I am most impressed by not only your Biblical acumen, but your wisdom at your age. You are a motivating, encouraging blogger and I appreciate the steady, Christlike way you handle yourself.
In Jesus,
mike b.
One thing I have such a hard time comprehending and can't quite get my mind around in the doctrine of the Free Will Of God.
I was raised in a God-Fearing Christian home and all I ever heard throughout my entire life and upbringing is that God loves us so much that he gave us a free will to choose whether or not to serve him.
First of all, if you truly give free will, then you don't punish the person for exercising the free will you gave them. If you do, then it truly isn't free will. The punishment would then be for going against what you are trying to force them to do.
Let's consider dictators throughout our history. A few of the most famous of these would be Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Sadam Husein, and the list goes on and on.
It would be like one of these dictators saying they give their people free will and saying you can choose whether or not to serve us. However, if the person chooses not to serve then they would be tortured and murdered for not conforming and serving the regime.
Christianity says God gives us free will because he loves us and will not force us to serve him. However, if we exercise that free will and choose not to serve him, then we are condemned to an eternity in hell. That doesn't sound much like free will to me.
So most, if not all, Christians choose to serve God out of fear of spending eternity in hell. That makes it a forced servitude and not a free will servitude.
I believe in God's existence. I just don't believe in free will.
Hm... I think you're taking a leap to conclude that our actions are compelled merely because they have consequences. The dictator example you offered doesn't really compare, as dictators can't offer you free will in the first place - only consequences for how you utilize that free will.
Whether God holds out consequences for the choices we make or not, they are still choices - you can debate the term 'free will' but the concept is correct. We are not automatons or puppets whose actions are directly controlled by another - consequences are a form of indirect control or, more accurately, factors to be taken into account when we weigh our options.
The mere fact that God punishes sin does not mean we lack free will - we are still free to sin, but just as with many choices we make, there are consequences.
If you do choose to sin, God has even provided an escape route from those consequences with his Son Jesus Christ, just as throughout history God has always provided ways for sinners to be reconciled to Him, so I think it is safe to say that we do, in fact, have free will and choose whether or not to honor God with our lives.
I found this site And specifically this story because I was on Twitter and a very popular account by the name of Uberfacts posted a fact tweet that said "In the bible, God sent two bear to murder 42 children because they had mocked a bald man." this is a verified account with about 4.5 million followers, many of which I'm sure take the short tweets at face value. I decided to go online because as a Christian, very new in my walk by the way, felt like the story, in his context didn't add up. And upon finding this blog, just further confirms my initial reaction.
So just a few things. One is I'm so very glad to have stumbled upon this blog, your distinct in knowledge and remain calm regardless of people ridiculing God, which is a hard thing for me to deal with at times. God is doing to do amazing works through you. It am admittedly a follower of Uberfacts on Twitter as I usually in the past have found his fact tweets interesting and usually on point so in the same sense it worries me that this guy is reaching 4.5 million people with certain "facts" that are skewed and not the whole truth as you cleared up in commentary above. I am happy I google this story and I look forward to coming back in the case I need anything else clarified. I usually read and internalize My thoughts without usually leaving comment as I'm sure many do in Internet land, but I couldn't close without at least telling you that this is much appreciated and thank you and God bless.
In Him,
Cyndy
Ps- I apologize for any grammatical error, I'm on my way to sleep so my sentences may not be well said.
Post a Comment