Know the Text
☰
⌕
SeekQuestion

Reading as Question: the text, translations, history and evidence, plainly. Read as Seek →

← Stories·2 Kings

⚠ Fact-checked, not yet reviewed by a person.

Elisha, the jeering boys and the two bears

2 Kings 2:19–25

Fact-checked · Version 2 · Revised · How this page was madedrafting: Version 2, written from a research ledger of 79 sourced claims (content/work/elisha-and-the-bears), each checked by a second AI from a different vendor before writing (56 verified, 22 corrected, 1 dropped as wrong); every fact-bearing item cites the claims it relies onreview: An editor from a different AI vendor than the writer reviewed the draft against its claims, rebuilt the hard questions on the jeerers' ages and on who sent the bears so that each case states the challenge and the defences answer it, strengthened the severity case (Gray, Snaith, Cohn, Marcus, Foote and Ball) and its answers (Keil, Millar, Whiteford, and the Talmud's own unease), added evidence rows on the deaths and the spring's reception, the Greek and Aramaic versions with the Lucianic reading only as West reports it, background on Joshua's curse, the baldness taunt and bears in the land, and the Augustine, Orthodox, Jehovah's Witness, freethought and Qur'anic readings; a code check compares every item with its cited claims; owner sign-off pending

Elisha curses young jeerers in the LORD's name; two bears maul forty-two. How old were they, did they die, and who's responsible?5 sources5 sources1. 2 Kings 2:20–212. 2 Kings 2:233. 2 Kings 2:244. Clarke 18435. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 47a (Sefaria, William Davidson edition)

At Jericho, Elisha throws salt into a harmful spring and announces that the LORD has healed it. As he goes up to Bethel, young people from the city jeer at him, saying "Go up, baldhead". He curses them in the LORD's name, two she-bears maul forty-two, and he travels on to Carmel and Samaria. Critics call the attack a moral scandal, defenders appeal to God's honour or a covenant warning, and the TalmudTalmudA collection of rabbinic teachings and discussions framed as commentary on the Mishnah. Sara Ronis explains that the name usually means the Babylonian Talmud, produced from the third to seventh centuries CE.From: Ronis; RonisAll terms → records unease about Elisha: who should answer for what happened?

The passage gives no ages, does not say whether the forty-two died, and does not name anyone as sending the bears. The scholars cited here disagree about the story's purpose. Whether the punishment was just is a moral and theological judgment that evidence cannot settle.

At a glance

The evidence

Claims about the text

Claims others made

Theological claims

The central debate

Who, where, when
Who
ElishaElijah
Where
BethelJerichoSamariaMount Carmel
When set
After Elijah is taken up, Elisha travels from Jericho up to Bethel.
When written
The narrator says the spring remains healed "to this day", meaning his own time, but gives no calendar date. West reads the story as part of a post-exilic Deuteronomistic History.6 sources6 sources6. 2 Kings 2:117. this site's data8. 2 Kings 2:18–192. 2 Kings 2:239. 2 Kings 2:2210. West 2013
Reading time
1 min · 188 BSB words in the main passage
How to read this page
Text what the text saysTradition later interpretationEvidence what has been foundScholarship inference; scholars differ1 numbered source

What the text actually says

Text

A faithful retelling, step by step. Nothing added, nothing smoothed over.

  1. 2 Kings 2:19

    The men of Jericho tell Elisha that the city is in a good location, but its water is bad and the land causes miscarriage or barrenness.

    Read it in context

    19Then the men of the city said to Elisha, “Please note, our lord, that the city’s location is good, as you can see. But the water is bad and the land is unfruitful.”

  2. 2 Kings 2:20–22

    Elisha asks for a new bowl containing salt. He throws the salt into the spring and announces in the LORD's name that the water is healed. The narrator says it has remained healed to his own day.

    Read it in context

    2:20“Bring me a new bowl,” he replied, “and put some salt in it.” So they brought it to him, 21and Elisha went out to the spring, cast the salt into it, and said, “This is what the LORD says: ‘I have healed this water. No longer will it cause death or unfruitfulness.’” 22And the waters there have been healthy to this day, according to the word spoken by Elisha.

  3. 2 Kings 2:23

    As Elisha goes up to Bethel, a group comes out of the city and mocks him, twice calling out 'Go up, baldhead'. The Hebrew calls them ne'arim qetannim; English translations range from 'little children' to 'youths'.

    Read it in context

    23From there, Elisha went up to Bethel, and as he was walking up the road, a group of boys came out of the city and jeered at him, chanting, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!”

  4. 2 Kings 2:24

    Elisha turns back, looks at them and curses them in the LORD's name. Two she-bears come out of the woods and tear forty-two of them.

    Read it in context

    24Then he turned around, looked at them, and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Suddenly two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

Continue the retelling (1 more paragraphs)

  1. 2 Kings 2:25

    Elisha travels on to Mount Carmel, then returns to Samaria. The passage tells us nothing more about the forty-two.

    Read it in context

    25And Elisha went on to Mount Carmel, and from there he returned to Samaria.

The evidence

Evidence

Each historical claim judged on its own, never a verdict on the whole story.

  • Open

    The jeerers were grown youths rather than young children.

    The words allow both.

    Why this verdict

    Claims about the text

    Confidence: high

    The words allow both. Na'ar qatan is used of a boy running errands and of Solomon as king; yeladim is used of Rehoboam's grown companions. The cited readers divide, and the text states no ages.7 sources7 sources11. this site's data12. 1 Kings 3:713. this site's data14. 1 Kings 12:815. Satterthwaite 199816. Millar 202317. Steinsaltz

    Contested · Satterthwaite and Radak favour young boys; Millar and Clarke favour youths or young men; Steinsaltz allows small lads or adults behaving like children. (as of 2026-11-09)

  • Open

    The forty-two were killed.

    The verb's other uses in Kings are of ripping open pregnant women, from which Satterthwaite argues the boys were probably killed; but the text gives no count of the dead and, in Irwin's words, offers no formal postmortem.

    Why this verdict

    Claims about the text

    Confidence: high

    The verb's other uses in Kings are of ripping open pregnant women, from which Satterthwaite argues the boys were probably killed; but the text gives no count of the dead and, in Irwin's words, offers no formal postmortem.7 sources7 sources3. 2 Kings 2:2418. this site's data19. 2 Kings 8:1220. 2 Kings 15:1615. Satterthwaite 199821. Irwin 201622. 2 Kings 2:25

    Contested · Satterthwaite judges them probably killed; Irwin says severely injured if not killed; Brichto, as reported by Satterthwaite, proposed that the bears only scatter the group. (as of 2026-11-09)

  • Open

    The episode was told to uphold prophetic authority.

    The cited scholars give competing accounts of the story's purpose.

    Why this verdict

    Claims about the text

    Confidence: high

    The cited scholars give competing accounts of the story's purpose. Montgomery and the NABRE note propose a warning to the young; Gray and Jones find no clear point. No field survey was consulted.23 10

    Contested · Irwin reads a covenant warning and the NABRE note a probable warning to children; West proposes a critique of the prophetic office. (as of 2026-11-09)

  • Supported

    By the first century AD a Jericho spring was linked to Elisha's healing.

    JosephusJosephusA Jewish historian (37–after 100 CE), according to Steve Mason and the Jewish Encyclopedia. Mason explains that his Antiquities, completed in 93/94 CE, retells Judean history from creation to the eve of the war against Rome.From: Mason; Mason; Gottheil; Mason; MasonAll terms →'s Jewish War attests the tradition.

    Why this verdict

    Claims others made

    Confidence: high

    Josephus's Jewish War attests the tradition. His 'The report is' does not identify local informants or establish an independent chain of testimony to the miracle.24

    Cross-community agreement · Josephus's Jewish War reports it; later, Keil (1872) identifies the spring as Ain es-Sultan and Tristram (1898) describes 'Elisha's fountain'. Not a survey. (as of 2026-11-09)

  • Outside what evidence can settle

    The mauling was a just divine judgment.

    Outside what evidence can settle.

    Why this verdict

    Theological claims

    Confidence: high

    Outside what evidence can settle. The checked materials do not independently establish divine causation of the mauling; whether the punishment was just is a theological and moral judgment.4 5

What people get wrong

Text

Things people commonly believe the text says, checked against it.

  • A common belief among believers

    Myth The Hebrew settles that these were grown men.

    Actually It does not. Millar argues for youths, but Satterthwaite judges them probably young boys and Radak reads the added qetannim as 'small'. The words cover both, and no ages are given.5 sources5 sources16. Millar 202315. Satterthwaite 199825. Kimhi)13. this site's data14. 1 Kings 12:8

  • A common belief among skeptics

    Myth The Hebrew says they were toddlers.

    Actually The words do not fix their ages. KJV and JPS 1917 say 'little children' and WEB 'youths'; na'ar followed by qatan is used elsewhere of a boy running errands and of Solomon as king. Satterthwaite argues from the Kings uses that they were probably young boys; Millar, that they were in all likelihood hostile youths.7 sources7 sources26. this site's data11. this site's data12. 1 Kings 3:713. this site's data14. 1 Kings 12:815. Satterthwaite 199816. Millar 2023

  • A common belief among skeptics

    Myth The passage counts forty-two dead.

    Actually It counts forty-two torn. Satterthwaite judges them probably killed; Irwin says severely injured if not killed, and notes the text offers no formal postmortem.3 15 21

Show 3 more misconceptions

  • A common belief among believers

    Myth The bears only scattered the boys.

    Actually That is Brichto's proposal, known through Satterthwaite, who rejects it. Irwin reads the verb as likely severe injury if not death.15 21

  • A common belief among believers

    Myth The text says God sent the bears.

    Actually It reports Elisha's curse in the LORD's name and then the bears, without saying who sent them. Clarke, Keil and Irwin infer God's act; the Talmud speaks of Elisha inciting them.3 5

  • A common belief among skeptics

    Myth Religious interpreters have always defended Elisha.

    Actually A baraita in Sotah 47a says Elisha fell ill once for inciting the bears, and Radak says the sages found it hard that he caused their death for this.5 27

Hard questions

The strongest case, the strongest responses, then a plain assessment of where the logic holds.

Can bears mauling forty-two for a taunt be justified?

The defences enlarge the offense or read the curse as a covenant warning, and the Talmud itself records unease; whether the punishment was just is a moral and theological judgment evidence cannot settle.

See the argument

The strongest case

John Gray, quoted by Brian Irwin, calls the episode 'in every respect a puerile tale' and says the idea that Elisha invoked Yahweh's name to curse the boys borders on blasphemy. Snaith, also quoted by Irwin, says it does not stand examination from any moral point of view. Robert Cohn, quoted by Jim West, says the taunt hardly seems severe enough to warrant the curse, and David Marcus, as West reports him, calls it an 'atrociously severe curse for a seemingly mild offense'. The freethought Bible Handbook of Foote and Ball lists it among 'Bible Atrocities'.16 sources16 sources2. 2 Kings 2:233. 2 Kings 2:2428. Irwin 201629. Irwin 201630. West 201331. West 201332. Foote 195333. Hazlitt) 187234. Martin) 187216. Millar 202335. (Gersonides)23. Irwin 201636. Whiteford5. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 47a (Sefaria, William Davidson edition)27. Kimhi)4. Clarke 1843

  1. P1. The narrated offense is a taunt; Elisha curses the jeerers in the LORD's name, and two she-bears tear forty-two of them.2 3No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. No taunt can warrant a curse with that outcome.

→ Conclusion. The punishment cannot be justified.

Strongest responses

Protestant: Lutheran challenges P2

An insult to God. LutherMartin LutherA German religious reformer (1483–1546), according to the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Henry Ganss’s Catholic Encyclopedia article reports that Luther translated the New Testament into German while at Wartburg.From: Lindsay; Lindsay; GanssAll terms →'s Table Talk says Elisha dealt uprightly, since they mocked not him but his God. Keil reasons that if the boys knew Elisha and insulted the LORD's prophet in his person, the curse avenged the LORD's honour.33 34

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

A hostile mob. Millar argues that in all likelihood this was a mob of hostile youths, not a few unruly children, and that the jeer denied Elisha as Elijah's successor.16

Jewish: medieval commentator challenges the conclusion

Deeds known by prophecy. Ralbag says Elisha did not curse them until he saw them and knew by prophecy that they deserved a curse for their evil deeds. This rests on prophetic knowledge the text does not report.35

Jewish: rabbinic challenges the framing

Blame on both sides. Sotah 46b says that had the people of Jericho escorted Elisha, he would not have incited the bears, and reads the jeerers as 'shaken empty' of the commandments. Sotah 47a counts one of Elisha's three illnesses for inciting them, and Radak says the sages found it hard that he caused their death for this.37 5 27

Academic (critical) challenges the framing

A covenant curse. Irwin argues the curse is a covenant curse based on Leviticus 26:22, meant to warn Israel of what lies in store if it disregards the prophetic word, and that it is Yahweh who brings the curse to pass.23 38

Orthodox challenges the framing

The curses of the Covenant. Whiteford notes that Elisha is not said to have called for the bears to attack, only to curse them, and that it may well be that he was pronouncing the curses of the Covenant.36

Plain assessment

The objection takes the taunt as the whole offense. Luther, Keil and Millar enlarge it (an insult to God, a hostile mob), Ralbag adds evil deeds known by prophecy that the text does not report, and Irwin and Whiteford read a covenant warning; Keil's argument is conditional on the boys knowing Elisha. The Talmud registers the problem itself: a baraita counts an illness against Elisha for inciting the bears, and Radak says the sages found it hard.

What would change this assessment: Nothing evidential could settle the moral question; evidence of who the jeerers were and what they intended would change the offense being judged.

Assessment uses: 2Kgs.2.23 · 2Kgs.2.24 · Protestant: Lutheran · Protestant: evangelical · Jewish: medieval commentator · Jewish: rabbinic · Academic (critical) · Orthodox · Academic (critical) · The mauling was a just divine judgment.

Were they small children or young men?

The vocabulary fits small boys and young men alike; Satterthwaite and Radak argue for boys, Millar and Clarke for youths, and the text states no ages.

See the argument

The strongest case

Satterthwaite judges that they probably are young boys: the other uses of na'ar qatan in Kings seem to mean a young child. Radak grants that grown people can be called ne'arim but reads the added qetannim as saying these were small. The Talmud calls the victims tinoqot, 'children', and KJV and JPS 1917 have 'little children'.11 sources11 sources15. Satterthwaite 199825. Kimhi)37. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 46b (Sefaria, William Davidson edition)26. this site's data11. this site's data12. 1 Kings 3:713. this site's data14. 1 Kings 12:839. 1 Kings 14:2116. Millar 202340. Clarke 1843

  1. P1. The Hebrew adds qetannim ('small') to ne'arim, and the other uses of na'ar qatan in Kings seem to mean a young child.2 15 25
  2. P2. So the jeerers were small children.

→ Conclusion. Forty-two small children were mauled for a taunt.

Strongest responses

Protestant: evangelical challenges P2

Youths, not children. Millar argues the word for 'small boys' can equally mean 'youth', so in all likelihood this was a mob of hostile youths.16

Protestant: Methodist challenges P2

Possibly young men. Clarke argues ne'arim qetannim may mean young men, citing Isaac and Joseph as adults called na'ar, and concludes the mockers were accountable.40

Academic (critical) challenges P1

Small in standing. Irwin notes that qetannim can refer to size or age, or to status or importance.41

Jewish: rabbinic challenges P2

Of age, but childish. A teaching in Sotah 46b says they were ne'arim but behaved wastefully like little ones. It states no age; the 'already of age' in the Sefaria English is the translator's expansion.37

Jewish: modern challenges the framing

Either. Steinsaltz glosses them as small lads, or adults who behaved like children by seeking to provoke Elisha, and leaves both open.17

Plain assessment

The words stretch both ways. Na'ar qatan is used of a boy running errands and a captive girl, but also of Solomon as king (1 Kings 3:7), so Satterthwaite's 'seem' matters. Yeladim, the word for the forty-two in verse 24, is used of the men who grew up with Rehoboam, who was forty-one when he began to reign. English translations divide the same way, and the text states no ages.

What would change this assessment: An ancient witness that fixes the group's ages; the Greek and AramaicAramaicA Semitic language closely related to Hebrew. The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary notes that parts of Ezra, Daniel and Jeremiah and a phrase in Genesis are written in Aramaic; Jesus probably spoke a Western Aramaic dialect.From: Daniel 2:4; Powell; Perrin; PowellAll terms → versions also use words for children and do not settle it.

Assessment uses: little children / youths · the Greek and Aramaic versions · Protestant: evangelical · Protestant: Methodist · Jewish: rabbinic · The jeerers were grown youths rather than young children.

Were the forty-two killed?

Death is a strong reading of the verb, assumed by readers from Radak to Foote and Ball, but the passage reports forty-two torn and says nothing of their fate.

See the argument

The strongest case

Satterthwaite judges that they probably are killed, 'mauled to death': the other Piel uses of baqa' in Kings describe ripping open pregnant women. Radak and Abarbanel read the forty-two as dead, as do the Jehovah's Witnesses' book 'All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial' and Foote and Ball's freethought handbook.12 sources12 sources3. 2 Kings 2:2422. 2 Kings 2:2518. this site's data19. 2 Kings 8:1220. 2 Kings 15:1615. Satterthwaite 199821. Irwin 201627. Kimhi)42. Abarbanel43. Bible44. Bible32. Foote 1953

  1. P1. The bears tear forty-two, and the same verb form is used elsewhere in Kings of ripping open pregnant women.4 sources4 sources3. 2 Kings 2:2418. this site's data19. 2 Kings 8:1220. 2 Kings 15:16No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. Those uses make death the meaning here too.

→ Conclusion. The forty-two died.

Strongest responses

Academic (critical) challenges P2

Severe injury, perhaps death. Irwin says the Piel likely indicates the boys were severely injured if not killed, and that the text offers no formal postmortem.21

Academic (critical) challenges P2

Scattered, not killed. Brichto, as reported by Satterthwaite, suggested the bears only scatter or break up the group. Satterthwaite rejects that reading.15

Plain assessment

Satterthwaite and Irwin agree the verb points to grave violence and differ on how far it goes: 'probably killed' against 'severely injured if not killed'. The passage moves straight on to Carmel and Samaria and says nothing more about the forty-two. Brichto's scattering proposal is known here only through Satterthwaite, who rejects it.

What would change this assessment: A report of what became of the forty-two.

Assessment uses: tore / mauled · 2Kgs.2.24 · 2Kgs.2.25 · The forty-two were killed. · Skeptic/secular · Jehovah's Witnesses

Did Elisha set the bears on them, or did God send them?

The verse names Elisha's curse but no sender; Clarke, Keil and Irwin infer God's act, and the Talmud keeps both a miracle and Elisha's accountability.

See the argument

The strongest case

The bears come straight after Elisha's curse. The Talmud itself says Elisha incited the bears against the children and fell ill for it; Aphrahat says the children Elisha cursed were devoured by bears; and Robert Cohn, quoted by West, calls the power at Elisha's disposal 'raw and amoral'.8 sources8 sources3. 2 Kings 2:2437. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 46b (Sefaria, William Davidson edition)5. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 47a (Sefaria, William Davidson edition)45. Aphrahat30. West 20134. Clarke 184334. Martin) 187238. Irwin 2016

  1. P1. Elisha curses them in the LORD's name and the bears come out of the woods; the verse does not say who sent them.3No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. The curse is what brought the bears, so the mauling was Elisha's act.

→ Conclusion. Elisha is responsible for the mauling.

Strongest responses

Protestant: Methodist challenges P2

God, if anyone. Clarke says Elisha lacked power to bring the bears: the mauling was either accidental or a divine judgment, and if a judgment, God is its sole author and the curse only declared what God would do.4

Protestant: Lutheran challenges P2

The charge falls on God. Keil answers Thenius, who cited 'the immorality of cursing' against the story, that any such charge 'would fall back upon the Lord God', who fulfilled the curse.34

Academic (critical) challenges P2

Yahweh fulfils the curse. Irwin writes that, in Elisha's curse as in the curses of the prophetic books, it is Yahweh who brings the curse to pass.38

Jewish: rabbinic challenges the framing

A miracle, and still accountable. Sotah treats the bears' coming as a miracle, and so as God's act, yet still counts an illness against Elisha for inciting them. Within that tradition divine agency and the prophet's accountability are compatible.5 4

Plain assessment

The verse sets the curse and the bears side by side and names no sender. Clarke, Keil and Irwin infer God's act from the curse in the LORD's name and the sequence; Clarke's conclusion holds only if it was a judgment. The Talmud holds both a miracle and an illness for the prophet who incited it. Which agent acted, and whether justly, is outside what evidence can settle.

What would change this assessment: Evidence cannot decide divine agency; a text that named the bears' sender would change how the verse itself is read.

Assessment uses: 2Kgs.2.24 · Protestant: Methodist · Protestant: Lutheran · Jewish: rabbinic · Early church: Syriac · Academic (critical) · The mauling was a just divine judgment.

Does the story criticize Elisha rather than vindicate him?

The cited readings divide between a warning to respect the prophetic word and a critique of prophetic power; no field survey shows which is more widely held.

See the argument

The strongest case

Jim West, tentatively ('I think'), reads the story as showing Elisha 'quite villainous', painted darkly by a redactor in order to criticize the prophetic office. He reports David Marcus's reading of it as anti-prophetic satire, faulting an 'atrociously severe curse for a seemingly mild offense'.7 sources7 sources10. West 201331. West 201346. Irwin 201629. Irwin 201647. Doctrine 201130. West 201323. Irwin 2016

  1. P1. The healing of Jericho's spring is followed by a taunt, Elisha's curse and the mauling of forty-two.4 sources4 sources8. 2 Kings 2:18–191. 2 Kings 2:20–212. 2 Kings 2:233. 2 Kings 2:24No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. A portrayal this dark is meant to criticize the prophet and his office.

→ Conclusion. The story is a critique of prophetic power.

Strongest responses

Academic (critical) challenges P2

A paired warning. Irwin reads the two episodes as a pair built on Leviticus 26:22: obedience to the prophet ends bereavement at Jericho, and disrespect causes bereavement at Bethel. Satterthwaite similarly sees faithful and unfaithful Israel in miniature.46

Academic (critical) challenges P2

A lesson for the young. Montgomery, as reported by Irwin, suggested the story was originally meant to frighten youngsters into obeying their elders; Snaith called it a premoral exhortation, while judging that it fails moral examination.29

Catholic challenges P2

Respect for prophets. The NABRE note says the story probably was told to warn children of the importance of respect for prophets.47

Plain assessment

West offers his reading tentatively, and Marcus is known here only through West. Irwin, Montgomery and the NABRE note read a warning to respect the prophetic word. Cohn, quoted by West, holds both: the power is 'raw and amoral', yet the tale engenders a healthy respect for the authority of Elijah's successor; Irwin calls him 'conflicted'.

What would change this assessment: A sourced date and setting for the story's composition, or a survey of how scholars now read it.

Assessment uses: Academic (critical) · Academic (critical) · Catholic · The episode was told to uphold prophetic authority. · 2Kgs.2.20-2Kgs.2.22 · 2Kgs.2.24

Background

The harmful spring Tradition

The complaint in 2:19 can mean the land caused miscarriage or barrenness. Irwin prefers miscarriages among Jericho's women; he lists Snaith, Gray, Fritz and Hobbs for agricultural barrenness. RashiRashiA French commentator on the Bible and Talmud (1040–1105), also named Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac, who was born and died at Troyes, according to the Jewish Encyclopedia.From: JacobsAll terms → notes that salt spoils water and calls the healing 'a miracle within a miracle', and Radak compares Moses at Marah. Keil (1872) identifies the spring as Ain es-Sultan.4 sources4 sources8. 2 Kings 2:18–1948. Irwin 201649. Rashi50. Martin) 1872

Jericho under Joshua's curse Tradition

Joshua 6:26 records Joshua's curse on whoever rebuilds Jericho, and 1 Kings 16:34 says Hiel of Bethel rebuilt it at the cost of his firstborn and youngest sons. Radak reports a midrashMidrashBoth a body of literature and a form of rabbinic biblical interpretation. Rachel Mikva distinguishes it from peshat, the contextual meaning, and describes its interest in the richness of what scripture can teach.From: Mikva; Mikva; MikvaAll terms → linking Jericho's condition to Joshua's curse; Abarbanel suggests the land seems to have deteriorated from that time, and Irwin calls a miscarriage connection 'tempting to wonder'. Kings does not explicitly connect the bad water to the curse.51 52

Bethel's calf shrine Tradition

1 Kings 12 says Jeroboam set one of his two golden calves in Bethel. Keil calls Bethel 'the chief seat of the idolatrous calf-worship', and Malbim says that because it was the place of the calves, the youths' fathers had taught them to mock the LORD's prophets. 2 Kings 2 itself does not tie the jeerers to the shrine.53 54 34

Show 3 more background topics ("Baldhead"; Bears in the land; Josephus retells the spring)

"Baldhead" Tradition

Elijah was known as a hairy man (2 Kings 1:8), and Metzudat David and Steinsaltz read the jeer as contrasting the bald successor with his hairy master. Keil argues Elisha cannot have been bald from age and prefers a natural defect; Irwin suggests the baldness may show mourning for his mentor. Sotah 46b hears a wordplay instead, 'you have made the place bald for us', which Rashi explains as the resentment of men who had been paid to carry sweet water to Jericho.8 sources8 sources55. 2 Kings 1:856. David17. Steinsaltz57. Martin) 187250. Martin) 187258. Irwin 201637. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 46b (Sefaria, William Davidson edition)59. Rashi

Bears in the land Evidence

The naturalist H. B. Tristram (1898) wrote that the bear, by then comparatively rare in Palestine, appears to have been common there in former times, with traces in Central Palestine as late as the Crusades. Part of his evidence is the biblical texts themselves, so this shows bears were plausible there, not that the event happened. He notes the bear rarely seeks an encounter with man unprovoked.60 61

Josephus retells the spring Evidence

Josephus's Jewish War (1st century AD) reports that a fountain by Jericho once blighted the land and childbirth and was made wholesome by the prophet Elisha, adding a prayer and a drink-offering not in Kings. He introduces it with 'The report is'. His Antiquities moves from Elijah's disappearance straight to Joram's campaign against Moab, telling neither the spring nor the bears; the sources do not say why.24 62 63

Where translations differ

Text

Where the wording in different Bibles diverges, and why.

2 Kings 2:23 · 2 Kings 2:24 · “little children / youths” ne'arim qetannim; yeladim

KJV and JPS 1917 have 'little children', ASV 'young lads', BSB 'boys' and WEB 'youths'. Irwin notes that qetannim can refer to size or age, or to status or importance. Verse 24 calls the forty-two yeladim, the word 1 Kings 12:8 uses of the men who grew up with Rehoboam, who was forty-one when he began to reign. Neither word fixes this group's age.5 sources5 sources26. this site's data41. Irwin 201613. this site's data14. 1 Kings 12:839. 1 Kings 14:21

Compare the versions
2 Kings 2:23

KJV¶ And he went up from thence unto Beth-el: 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.

WEBHe went up from there to Bethel. As he was going up by the way, some youths came out of the city and mocked him, and said to him, “Go up, you baldy! Go up, you baldy!”

Show all 4 versions of 2 verses
2 Kings 2:23

KJV¶ And he went up from thence unto Beth-el: 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.

JPSAnd he went up from thence unto Beth-el; 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 baldhead; go up, thou baldhead.'

BSBFrom there, Elisha went up to Bethel, and as he was walking up the road, a group of boys came out of the city and jeered at him, chanting, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!”

WEBHe went up from there to Bethel. As he was going up by the way, some youths came out of the city and mocked him, and said to him, “Go up, you baldy! Go up, you baldy!”

2 Kings 2:24

KJVAnd 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.

JPSAnd he looked behind him and saw them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she-bears out of the wood, and tore forty and two children of them.

BSBThen he turned around, looked at them, and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Suddenly two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

WEBHe looked behind him and saw them, and cursed them in Yahweh’s name. Then two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of those youths.

Open in compare →

2 Kings 2:23 · “go up, baldhead” qereach ('bald')

'Go up' is the verb used of Elijah going up by a whirlwind in 2:11. Irwin says the point of the taunt is not entirely clear: it may mean 'keep moving' or mock Elijah's ascension, and given the 'going up' language of 2 Kings 1-2 the latter would seem most likely. The word for 'bald' occurs elsewhere only in Leviticus 13:40, where it carries no disgrace. Steinsaltz says it is unknown whether Elisha was really bald.6 sources6 sources6. 2 Kings 2:117. this site's data21. Irwin 201664. this site's data65. Leviticus 13:4017. Steinsaltz

Open in compare →

2 Kings 2:24 · “tore / mauled” baqa'

The verb (baqa' in the Piel) occurs in Kings only here and in 2 Kings 8:12 and 15:16, both of ripping open pregnant women. Irwin says it likely indicates the boys were severely injured if not killed; Satterthwaite judges them probably killed and rejects Brichto's proposal that the bears only scatter the group. The verse gives no count of the dead.6 sources6 sources18. this site's data19. 2 Kings 8:1220. 2 Kings 15:1621. Irwin 201615. Satterthwaite 19983. 2 Kings 2:24

Open in compare →

Show 1 more translation notes (“the Greek and Aramaic versions”)

2 Kings 2:23 · 2 Kings 2:24 · “the Greek and Aramaic versions” paidaria mikra; yanqin ze'irin

Brenton's SeptuagintSeptuagintAn ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, also including books Christians call Apocrypha or deuterocanonical books, according to Jannes Smith.From: Smith; SmithAll terms → has paidaria mikra, 'little boys', in 2:23 and paidas in 2:24. Targum Jonathan has yanqin ze'irin, then yanqin again where the Hebrew changes nouns. West reports that the Lucianic Greek text expands the passage, and that Marcus suggests its 'they stoned him' may reflect a metathesis of Hebrew qalas ('mock') into saqal ('stone'); no Lucianic edition was checked for this page. West also states that the Qumran manuscripts do not contain this passage.4 sources4 sources66. this site's data67. Targum Jonathan on II Kings 2 (Sefaria, Mikraot Gedolot text)68. Targum Jonathan on II Kings 2 (Sefaria, Mikraot Gedolot text)69. West 2013

2 Kings 2:23

BSBFrom there, Elisha went up to Bethel, and as he was walking up the road, a group of boys came out of the city and jeered at him, chanting, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!”

KJV¶ And he went up from thence unto Beth-el: 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.

2 Kings 2:24

BSBThen he turned around, looked at them, and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Suddenly two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

KJVAnd 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.

Open in compare →

How it has been interpreted

Tradition

How different traditions have read the story, in their own terms.

Jewish: rabbinic · A miracle, and an accountable prophet

In Sotah 47a Rav and Shmuel disagree whether the bears were one miracle or a miracle within a miracle; both treat their coming as God's act. A baraita there says Elisha fell ill three times, once for inciting the bears against the children. Radak and Abarbanel read this as the sages censuring Elisha.5

Jewish: rabbinic · Who the jeerers were

In Sotah 46b Rabbi Elazar reads ne'arim as 'shaken empty' of the commandments and qetannim as 'of little faith'. Another teaching there says they were ne'arim but behaved wastefully like little ones.37

Jewish: medieval commentator · Ralbag's defence

Ralbag (Gersonides) says Elisha did not curse them until he saw them and knew by prophecy that they deserved a curse for their evil deeds. The passage itself reports no such knowledge.35

Show 12 more interpretations (Protestant: Lutheran, Protestant: Methodist, Protestant: evangelical…)

Protestant: Lutheran · God's honour

Luther's Table Talk, compiled by others from his conversation, says Elisha dealt uprightly, since the children mocked not him but his God. Keil holds that the LORD fulfilled the curse to punish in the children the sins of the parents.33 34

Protestant: Methodist · Conditional divine authorship

Adam Clarke says Elisha lacked power to bring the bears: the mauling was either accidental or a divine judgment, and if a judgment, God is its sole author and the curse only declared what God would do.4

Protestant: evangelical · A hostile mob

J. Gary Millar argues that in all likelihood this was a mob of hostile youths, not a few unruly children, and that the 'baldhead' jeer denied Elisha as Elijah's successor.16

Catholic · Respect for prophets

The NABRE note (2011) says the story probably was told to warn children of the importance of respect for prophets. The Catholic Encyclopedia (1909) calls them 'forty-two little boys, probably encouraged to mock the Prophet', and says Elisha struck 'salutary fear' into the calf-worshippers of Bethel.47 70

Orthodox · The curses of the Covenant

John Whiteford, a priest of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, says the impression that these were toddlers is false. Elisha is not said to have called for the bears, he notes, and may well have been pronouncing the curses of the Covenant (Lev 26:21-22).36 71

Early church: Latin · A figure of Calvary

AugustineAugustineA North African theologian (354–430), born at Tagaste, who served as bishop of Hippo from 396 until his death, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia.From: Portalié; PortaliéAll terms → reads the episode as a type: the children who mocked Elisha as 'Baldhead' are devoured by beasts, as those who scoff at Christ crucified on Calvary (calvaria, the bald skull) are destroyed by devils. It is typologyTypologyReading a scriptural person or thing as prefiguring a future person or thing. A. J. Maas’s 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia article argues that such connections are probably intended by God, who foresees and arranges history.From: Romans 5:14; MaasAll terms →, not a defence of the punishment.72

Early church: Syriac · Christ and the children

Aphrahat (4th century) contrasts the two: Elisha cursed the children and they were devoured by bears, but Christ blessed the children. The point is that Christ is greater than the prophets, not that Elisha did wrong.45

Jehovah's Witnesses · A bald man in Elijah's garment

The Watchtower (2005) says the main reason for the mocking appears to be that a bald man was wearing Elijah's official garment, and that the children evidently reflected their parents' antagonism. Another Witness book says the bears kill forty-two of these 'juvenile delinquents'.73 43 44

Academic (critical) · Irwin's covenant warning

Brian Irwin reads the curse as a covenant curse based on Leviticus 26:22, warning Israel of what lies in store if it disregards the prophetic word: obedience to the prophet ends bereavement at Jericho, and disrespect causes it at Bethel.23 46

Academic (critical) · West's criticism of prophetic power

Jim West argues, tentatively ('I think'), that a redactor paints Elisha as 'quite villainous' in order to criticize the prophetic office, and reports David Marcus's reading of the story as anti-prophetic satire.10 31

Skeptic/secular · A Bible atrocity

The freethought Bible Handbook of G. W. Foote and W. P. Ball lists the episode among 'Bible Atrocities' under the heading 'Forty-two children killed by bears for annoying Elisha'. 'Killed' interprets the injury as fatal, which the verse does not state.32 3

Islamic · Elisha in the Qur'an

The Qur'an names Elisha (al-Yasa') among the prophets God 'preferred over the worlds' (6:86) and again in 38:48, but tells neither the spring nor the bears. No tafsir was consulted for this page.74

Where it fits

  • 2 Kings 2:21 — Elisha presents the healing as the LORD's word rather than an act of his own power.1
  • 2 Kings 2:23 — The Hebrew calls the jeerers ne'arim qetannim, raising the question of their age. Their taunt, 'Go up', uses the same verb as Elijah's ascent.2 6 7
  • 2 Kings 2:24 — Elisha curses the jeerers before the bears attack. The verse leaves open who sent the bears.3

Where else the Bible mentions it

Text

Test your understanding

In whose name does Elisha announce that the water is healed?

In the LORD's name; the healing is presented as the LORD's word, not Elisha's own power.1

2 Kings 2:21

What does Elisha do just before the bears come out?

He turns back, looks at them and curses them in the LORD's name.3

2 Kings 2:24

What does the number forty-two count?

The ones the bears tore; the passage does not say whether they died.3 22

2 Kings 2:24

The full text

Text
2 Kings 2:19–25

2:19Then the men of the city said to Elisha, “Please note, our lord, that the city’s location is good, as you can see. But the water is bad and the land is unfruitful.” 20“Bring me a new bowl,” he replied, “and put some salt in it.” So they brought it to him, 21and Elisha went out to the spring, cast the salt into it, and said, “This is what the LORD says: ‘I have healed this water. No longer will it cause death or unfruitfulness.’” 22And the waters there have been healthy to this day, according to the word spoken by Elisha. 23From there, Elisha went up to Bethel, and as he was walking up the road, a group of boys came out of the city and jeered at him, chanting, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” 24Then he turned around, looked at them, and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Suddenly two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. 25And Elisha went on to Mount Carmel, and from there he returned to Samaria.

Read it in the chapter reader →Compare translations and the original words →

Keep going

Elijah's ascent Coming

The jeer's 'go up' is the verb of Elijah's going up; Irwin thinks mockery of that ascension the most likely sense of the taunt.6 7 21

2 Kings 2:11
Cite this page

Plain citation

Elisha, the jeering boys and the two bears. Know the Text. Question lens, version 2, revised 2026-11-09, Fact-checked. https://knowthetext.com/question/stories/elisha-and-the-bears/

Chicago-style note

Know the Text, “Elisha, the jeering boys and the two bears,” Question lens, version 2, revised 2026-11-09, Fact-checked, https://knowthetext.com/question/stories/elisha-and-the-bears/.

BibTeX

@misc{knowthetext-elisha-and-the-bears,
  author = {{Know the Text}},
  title = {Elisha, the jeering boys and the two bears},
  howpublished = {Know the Text, Question lens},
  url = {https://knowthetext.com/question/stories/elisha-and-the-bears/},
  year = {2026},
  note = {Version 2; revised 2026-11-09; Fact-checked}
}

Sources

74 sources from 57 works

Report a problem

Found something wrong, unsourced or unfair? Tell us; every report is read. Please don’t include personal information.

↑