CNN's "UnGodly Discipline" broadcast
Forum category
Did anyone else catch CNN’s UnGodly Discipline broadcast last night? Part of it can be viewed at the http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com: Anderson Cooper 360 blog — perhaps all of it could be pieced together.
A quick review…
The opening was disappointing, and I thought to myself “A hatchet job”. The reason is that Anderson Cooper made some weighted statements about the IFB and child discipline. There are among us, apparently, those who still believe in spanking — even to the point of causing pain to children! Gasp! And a child has died! I was angry enough that I almost turned it off. After all, the muddle he created in the opening moments of the broadcast was patently unfair. Is it a spanking if no pain is caused? Can he not recognize the difference between a pat on the behind to correct a child and beating a child to death?
The show, however, improved greatly as the hour progressed.
After sharing the story of a family that killed their child by beating her to death under the label of “spanking”, they transitioned to an interview with the much reviled Michael & Debi Pearl, who are at the outer extreme of viewpoints that favor spanking. Their book, “To Train up a Child”, was found in the home of the couple who beat their child to death. And the prosecutor feels confident that if the family had never read the Pearl’s book, the tragedy of the daughter would never have happened.
The interview with the Pearls however was not a hatchet job. They sounded extreme (and many of us, myself included, would agree), but not crazed, and in the climax of the section dealing with them, actually “spanked” a reporter using a switch on his leg after he rolled up his pants. “That hurt”, observed the reporter. “But it didn’t leave a mark”, observed Michael Pearl. All in all, the report seemed fair to the Pearl’s, except for one sarcastic observation by Cooper. Pearl says “We’re not punishing them. We just need to get their attention.” Returning to Cooper in the studio, we hear Cooper say “Well, the death of a little girl got our attention.”
In the next section, Jocelyn Zichterman was asked to weigh in on the topic. She DOES make a sort of distinction between spanking and abuse, and especially between spanking and beating a child to death. But she goes on to characterize the spanking as taught among many IFB’s (including her own father) as abusive on a different level. Because of the teaching that the will of the child must be broken, many IFB’s will hold their children down until all reaction to the spanking ceases — until they are passively submissive to the whole event — even if it takes hours. She herself was a victim of this kind of spanking, and she characterizes it as inherently abusive. I presume by this she means that it is emotionally abusive to put a child through this even if the spankings themselves are not legally characterized as child abuse. Cooper transitions quickly, and this important question is left un-analyzed.
The next section tells about the abuse allegations against Hephzibah House. In a balanced approach, the piece interviews two alumni of the home, one who shares stories of abuse, and one who defends the home and puts the stories in a different context, softening them. The piece left me thinking that something is wrong there (40 years of similar complaints), but not certain if it happens as often as represented. The attempted interview with the current leader of the home was pointless, and should have simply been cut.
In the final section, Bruce Feiler (author of “Walking the Bible”) and CNN legal consultant Jeffrey Toobin are asked about the interface between faith and law in this matter. What do we do when faith says one thing, and the law another? Cooper observes that spanking is legal in many states, to one degree or another. Feiler gives a somewhat skewed view of the debate within Christianity, but makes the perfectly valid assertion that telling Christians they can’t follow the Bible because of the law is pointless. The debate for a Christian must center on the Bible itself. He then describes the debate between Evangelical and Mainstream denominations on this topic. Toobin’s remarks were unremarkable.
______
I was left with a few thoughts and questions at the end of the show.
1). I find the Pearl’s appalling. They seem to cloak their work in Scripture, but it is all KJV quotes out of context. I believe in spanking, but not their kind or degree of it. I believe an analysis of the “rod” passages in the original languages and cultural context and a comparison with the entire body of Scriptural truth on the subject of child-raising produces a much more nuanced view of spanking than they provide. Yet even the Pearl’s clearly would not nearly approach beating a child to death. I suspect the problem is in the people who beat children to death, not the church or book from which they glean their child-rearing instructions. A normal parent would be appalled at themselves long before they reached the point of lethal force, regardless of what they were told was the proper way to discipline.
2). Jocelyn Zichterman’s point seemed reasonable to me. Clearly, if you’re waiting for a child to stop retreating, flinching, or crying at a spanking as your mark of “submission” and a “broken will”, you are licensing yourself to cross lines that should not be crossed. Many children will never hit that point until unconsciousness. I was left looking for a Scripture verse on which to hang the “broken will” concept, and couldn’t find one. “Molding a will” seems like a more appropriate expression.
3). The Hephzibah House section didn’t ask the most important questions from a Biblical or Psychological perspective. Only the Penning woman, the graduate who defended them, hinted at the point that the backgrounds of the girls will heavily influence how they react to and interpret the discipline there. I know from our foster care experiences that a child who has been seriously abused would interpret a spanking far differently than a child from a Christian home where discipline was used. So, beyond the question of their methods, I suspect that their discipline is self-defeating for some of these girls. At no point would AC360 ask the important Biblical question: Does a spanking from a stranger mean the same thing or accomplish the same purpose as a spanking from the parent? I would argue we have no Biblical warrant for spanking someone else’s children. Even the Lord doesn’t spank the Devil’s children (Heb. 12). Hephzibah House does come across, as Cooper implied, as obsessed with order and discipline.
4). I was also struck with Fieler’s comment about using the Bible in the debate about spanking. I think Fundamentalists need to do much more research in this area. While preaching on this topic recently in a series at our church, I myself was struck by how different the Bible’s emphasis was from what I had always heard growing up in the IFB movement. I do not preach against spanking, but, as a friend of mine observed after the show, we pay the price of reacting to the anti-spanking crowd over the past 40 years. Many of us have emphasized our traditions without carefully exegeting these passages, and we have not been careful in sharply delineating how to spank and how not to spank. The tendency has been for those few who are most careful to delineate these things to be the element within the IFB that is most out of balance on the issue.
*A few of my quotes may be word or two off. I did not review the piece to get them 100% accurate. My apologies. I believe I have accurately rendered them.
A quick review…
The opening was disappointing, and I thought to myself “A hatchet job”. The reason is that Anderson Cooper made some weighted statements about the IFB and child discipline. There are among us, apparently, those who still believe in spanking — even to the point of causing pain to children! Gasp! And a child has died! I was angry enough that I almost turned it off. After all, the muddle he created in the opening moments of the broadcast was patently unfair. Is it a spanking if no pain is caused? Can he not recognize the difference between a pat on the behind to correct a child and beating a child to death?
The show, however, improved greatly as the hour progressed.
After sharing the story of a family that killed their child by beating her to death under the label of “spanking”, they transitioned to an interview with the much reviled Michael & Debi Pearl, who are at the outer extreme of viewpoints that favor spanking. Their book, “To Train up a Child”, was found in the home of the couple who beat their child to death. And the prosecutor feels confident that if the family had never read the Pearl’s book, the tragedy of the daughter would never have happened.
The interview with the Pearls however was not a hatchet job. They sounded extreme (and many of us, myself included, would agree), but not crazed, and in the climax of the section dealing with them, actually “spanked” a reporter using a switch on his leg after he rolled up his pants. “That hurt”, observed the reporter. “But it didn’t leave a mark”, observed Michael Pearl. All in all, the report seemed fair to the Pearl’s, except for one sarcastic observation by Cooper. Pearl says “We’re not punishing them. We just need to get their attention.” Returning to Cooper in the studio, we hear Cooper say “Well, the death of a little girl got our attention.”
In the next section, Jocelyn Zichterman was asked to weigh in on the topic. She DOES make a sort of distinction between spanking and abuse, and especially between spanking and beating a child to death. But she goes on to characterize the spanking as taught among many IFB’s (including her own father) as abusive on a different level. Because of the teaching that the will of the child must be broken, many IFB’s will hold their children down until all reaction to the spanking ceases — until they are passively submissive to the whole event — even if it takes hours. She herself was a victim of this kind of spanking, and she characterizes it as inherently abusive. I presume by this she means that it is emotionally abusive to put a child through this even if the spankings themselves are not legally characterized as child abuse. Cooper transitions quickly, and this important question is left un-analyzed.
The next section tells about the abuse allegations against Hephzibah House. In a balanced approach, the piece interviews two alumni of the home, one who shares stories of abuse, and one who defends the home and puts the stories in a different context, softening them. The piece left me thinking that something is wrong there (40 years of similar complaints), but not certain if it happens as often as represented. The attempted interview with the current leader of the home was pointless, and should have simply been cut.
In the final section, Bruce Feiler (author of “Walking the Bible”) and CNN legal consultant Jeffrey Toobin are asked about the interface between faith and law in this matter. What do we do when faith says one thing, and the law another? Cooper observes that spanking is legal in many states, to one degree or another. Feiler gives a somewhat skewed view of the debate within Christianity, but makes the perfectly valid assertion that telling Christians they can’t follow the Bible because of the law is pointless. The debate for a Christian must center on the Bible itself. He then describes the debate between Evangelical and Mainstream denominations on this topic. Toobin’s remarks were unremarkable.
______
I was left with a few thoughts and questions at the end of the show.
1). I find the Pearl’s appalling. They seem to cloak their work in Scripture, but it is all KJV quotes out of context. I believe in spanking, but not their kind or degree of it. I believe an analysis of the “rod” passages in the original languages and cultural context and a comparison with the entire body of Scriptural truth on the subject of child-raising produces a much more nuanced view of spanking than they provide. Yet even the Pearl’s clearly would not nearly approach beating a child to death. I suspect the problem is in the people who beat children to death, not the church or book from which they glean their child-rearing instructions. A normal parent would be appalled at themselves long before they reached the point of lethal force, regardless of what they were told was the proper way to discipline.
2). Jocelyn Zichterman’s point seemed reasonable to me. Clearly, if you’re waiting for a child to stop retreating, flinching, or crying at a spanking as your mark of “submission” and a “broken will”, you are licensing yourself to cross lines that should not be crossed. Many children will never hit that point until unconsciousness. I was left looking for a Scripture verse on which to hang the “broken will” concept, and couldn’t find one. “Molding a will” seems like a more appropriate expression.
3). The Hephzibah House section didn’t ask the most important questions from a Biblical or Psychological perspective. Only the Penning woman, the graduate who defended them, hinted at the point that the backgrounds of the girls will heavily influence how they react to and interpret the discipline there. I know from our foster care experiences that a child who has been seriously abused would interpret a spanking far differently than a child from a Christian home where discipline was used. So, beyond the question of their methods, I suspect that their discipline is self-defeating for some of these girls. At no point would AC360 ask the important Biblical question: Does a spanking from a stranger mean the same thing or accomplish the same purpose as a spanking from the parent? I would argue we have no Biblical warrant for spanking someone else’s children. Even the Lord doesn’t spank the Devil’s children (Heb. 12). Hephzibah House does come across, as Cooper implied, as obsessed with order and discipline.
4). I was also struck with Fieler’s comment about using the Bible in the debate about spanking. I think Fundamentalists need to do much more research in this area. While preaching on this topic recently in a series at our church, I myself was struck by how different the Bible’s emphasis was from what I had always heard growing up in the IFB movement. I do not preach against spanking, but, as a friend of mine observed after the show, we pay the price of reacting to the anti-spanking crowd over the past 40 years. Many of us have emphasized our traditions without carefully exegeting these passages, and we have not been careful in sharply delineating how to spank and how not to spank. The tendency has been for those few who are most careful to delineate these things to be the element within the IFB that is most out of balance on the issue.
*A few of my quotes may be word or two off. I did not review the piece to get them 100% accurate. My apologies. I believe I have accurately rendered them.
- 97 views
I appreciate the review of this show. It raises some very good questions (your review much more than the show).
I think the Pearls are WAY too far to the behavior modification end of the parenting spectrum. On the other hand, no one in their right mind would kill their child after reading TTUAC. And no one with an ounce of sense would beat their child into paralytic submission regardless of who told them to do it.
On the topic of ‘homes’ for boys and girls- I question the veracity of their existence, period- much less how they discipline. I’ve said before that I can understand if a child is a danger to themselves and others, or involved in criminal activity, that a Christian ‘halfway house’ would be preferable to juvenile jail or a mental ward- but do any of the people who staff these homes have medical training and/or qualifications in Biblical counseling? I’ve met some of the staff over the years of Hepzibah House and Jack Patterson’s homes, and while a few of them were wonderful people with a sweet spirit and seemed to be well-grounded in Scripture, there were others I wouldn’t let take care of my parakeet. And I don’t even have a parakeet. I never saw evidence of abuse, however, but my interactions with the homes were somewhat limited.
I remember a message I heard about the root issue of abuse and neglect being our view of children, even that of the church. When a large family can walk into a church and be subject to regular mocking (some of it rather off color), and children are corrected using humiliation, are viewed an nuisances to be gotten rid of, and mothers are singing to the tune of “I Can’t Wait for School to Start Because My Kids Are Driving Me Crazy”, then we need to truly examine whether any of our teachings about parenting are valid.
In general, anything having to do with children is a hot button issue- education, discipline, nutrition, entertainment… there’s no shortage of patella subluxation when discussing such topics.
I think the Pearls are WAY too far to the behavior modification end of the parenting spectrum. On the other hand, no one in their right mind would kill their child after reading TTUAC. And no one with an ounce of sense would beat their child into paralytic submission regardless of who told them to do it.
On the topic of ‘homes’ for boys and girls- I question the veracity of their existence, period- much less how they discipline. I’ve said before that I can understand if a child is a danger to themselves and others, or involved in criminal activity, that a Christian ‘halfway house’ would be preferable to juvenile jail or a mental ward- but do any of the people who staff these homes have medical training and/or qualifications in Biblical counseling? I’ve met some of the staff over the years of Hepzibah House and Jack Patterson’s homes, and while a few of them were wonderful people with a sweet spirit and seemed to be well-grounded in Scripture, there were others I wouldn’t let take care of my parakeet. And I don’t even have a parakeet. I never saw evidence of abuse, however, but my interactions with the homes were somewhat limited.
I remember a message I heard about the root issue of abuse and neglect being our view of children, even that of the church. When a large family can walk into a church and be subject to regular mocking (some of it rather off color), and children are corrected using humiliation, are viewed an nuisances to be gotten rid of, and mothers are singing to the tune of “I Can’t Wait for School to Start Because My Kids Are Driving Me Crazy”, then we need to truly examine whether any of our teachings about parenting are valid.
In general, anything having to do with children is a hot button issue- education, discipline, nutrition, entertainment… there’s no shortage of patella subluxation when discussing such topics.
[Susan R] I think the Pearls are WAY too far to the behavior modification end of the parenting spectrum.Dead right, Susan. They sound like Behaviorists in their thinking, and all children are Pavlov’s dogs. Of course, all of this authorized by various Proverbs.
To a degree, I’m a bit of a ‘behaviorist’ when kids are little, because they can’t reason out WHY they shouldn’t do something stupid, illegal, or dangerous. So they learn to behave by cause-and-effect. Sometimes this can be allowing them to reap what they sow- touch something hot, and get an ouchie. Or in cases where you can’t let them experience the consequences of their actions, you create a painful consequence with a swat on the behind.
The one discipline measure that I also taught them that was preventative instead of punitive was to respond to my voice- if I called them and they didn’t stop, look at me and answer immediately, it’s boogie-woogie time.
But this should, IMO, be enhanced asap by dealing with the heart issues of WHY it seems attractive to run out into the parking lot, or reach for something I’ve told them is dangerous or painful, or ignore me when I’ve called their name. The nature of obedience isn’t just to pacify an authority so that they will get off your back, but to recognize that boundaries keep good things in and bad things out, and is rooted in love and concern, not a desire for power and control over another person.
That is what creeps me out (there I go with that technical jargon again) about some parenting methods, like the Pearls and the extremes of patriarchy. There is something tyrannical about it that ignores the ‘authority of the individual’.
The one discipline measure that I also taught them that was preventative instead of punitive was to respond to my voice- if I called them and they didn’t stop, look at me and answer immediately, it’s boogie-woogie time.
But this should, IMO, be enhanced asap by dealing with the heart issues of WHY it seems attractive to run out into the parking lot, or reach for something I’ve told them is dangerous or painful, or ignore me when I’ve called their name. The nature of obedience isn’t just to pacify an authority so that they will get off your back, but to recognize that boundaries keep good things in and bad things out, and is rooted in love and concern, not a desire for power and control over another person.
That is what creeps me out (there I go with that technical jargon again) about some parenting methods, like the Pearls and the extremes of patriarchy. There is something tyrannical about it that ignores the ‘authority of the individual’.
[Mike Durning]…we pay the price of reacting to the anti-spanking crowd over the past 40 years. Many of us have emphasized our traditions without carefully exegeting these passages, and we have not been careful in sharply delineating how to spank and how not to spank.When two ‘sides’ are merely reacting to each other, nothing productive ever seems to take place. The anti-spanking crowd is too quick to cry “Abuse!” and the spanking-for-every-infraction crowd doesn’t consider that God used many and varied circumstances in the lives of His saints to guide and chastise.
i have several thoughts here. I watched online the Pearls/Zichterman part, I guess i didn’t get the whole thing.
I think, generally, one of the overall weaknesses/blindspots of the IFB world the way we see our children. With one exception (and assuming Prov is geared toward young adults), all passages of the bible concerning children are positive and illustrate protection, joy, and praise. The only exception I’ve noted is the boys who teased Elijah or Elisha and were cursed and eaten by the bear. Other than that, it’s all positive stuff. and we harp and harp of the “children obey your parents” passage as a license to do … unfortunate things to our kids.
In the most popular parenting books in IFB, there is very poor-to-none deliniation between the sin nature and the ages/stages kids go through. Some “defiance” is actually a process of maturing, of breaking away from attachment—like around the ages of 2 and 6. So while we do still consistently teach obedience, we do need to make allowances for periods like this where maybe we need be lovingly authoritative and accomodating.
Also, God’s dealing with the children of Israel is not our example as parents—like we see His “harshness” of sending htem to slavery, punishing etc. It was a major lightbulb for me when I realized that they were, at those times, unbelievers, not His spiritual children. And we know in Romans that God says He very mercifully passed over so many sins at that time.
also, i htink we need to remember what we always say about discipleship at church: it’s all about relationship. We get so google-eyed at obedience that we forget that the main frame for parenting is building relationships. It casts a whole new light on the ways we teach obedience.
for anyone who has kids left at home, i would say too, that giving up spanking has been the biggest way I have seen my own desperate need for God in my parenting. It’s hard to explain how spanking becomes a crutch or a personal blindspot when I have that way to assert my authority, but when i stopped letting myself spank, it opened up a whole world of sin that was covered up in my heart, and I realized how controlling, impatient, ungentle I am, and how much I need Christ every moment to live with my children and truly love them. maybe I could’vbe seen it before I gave up spanking, but i didn’t, and I’m not the first one who has testified of this.
Another reason to give up spanking is b/c of its s~xual nature. I have heard now more than one woman say how her childhood spankings resulted in effecting her s~xual experience later in life. I don’t think it happens to everyone, but you, as a parent, will probably never, ever know if this is happening. B/c the child can’t interpret it as such until he/she is an adult with s~xual experience. Also if you google “spanking,” you will quickly see that it is a means of s~xual foreplay. At the very least, spank your kids with their clothes on.
After saying all that, i will say, that I think parents are free in the Lord to spank. God doesn’t directly say one way or the other. But we need to be so very, very careful about doing that.
I think, generally, one of the overall weaknesses/blindspots of the IFB world the way we see our children. With one exception (and assuming Prov is geared toward young adults), all passages of the bible concerning children are positive and illustrate protection, joy, and praise. The only exception I’ve noted is the boys who teased Elijah or Elisha and were cursed and eaten by the bear. Other than that, it’s all positive stuff. and we harp and harp of the “children obey your parents” passage as a license to do … unfortunate things to our kids.
In the most popular parenting books in IFB, there is very poor-to-none deliniation between the sin nature and the ages/stages kids go through. Some “defiance” is actually a process of maturing, of breaking away from attachment—like around the ages of 2 and 6. So while we do still consistently teach obedience, we do need to make allowances for periods like this where maybe we need be lovingly authoritative and accomodating.
Also, God’s dealing with the children of Israel is not our example as parents—like we see His “harshness” of sending htem to slavery, punishing etc. It was a major lightbulb for me when I realized that they were, at those times, unbelievers, not His spiritual children. And we know in Romans that God says He very mercifully passed over so many sins at that time.
also, i htink we need to remember what we always say about discipleship at church: it’s all about relationship. We get so google-eyed at obedience that we forget that the main frame for parenting is building relationships. It casts a whole new light on the ways we teach obedience.
for anyone who has kids left at home, i would say too, that giving up spanking has been the biggest way I have seen my own desperate need for God in my parenting. It’s hard to explain how spanking becomes a crutch or a personal blindspot when I have that way to assert my authority, but when i stopped letting myself spank, it opened up a whole world of sin that was covered up in my heart, and I realized how controlling, impatient, ungentle I am, and how much I need Christ every moment to live with my children and truly love them. maybe I could’vbe seen it before I gave up spanking, but i didn’t, and I’m not the first one who has testified of this.
Another reason to give up spanking is b/c of its s~xual nature. I have heard now more than one woman say how her childhood spankings resulted in effecting her s~xual experience later in life. I don’t think it happens to everyone, but you, as a parent, will probably never, ever know if this is happening. B/c the child can’t interpret it as such until he/she is an adult with s~xual experience. Also if you google “spanking,” you will quickly see that it is a means of s~xual foreplay. At the very least, spank your kids with their clothes on.
After saying all that, i will say, that I think parents are free in the Lord to spank. God doesn’t directly say one way or the other. But we need to be so very, very careful about doing that.
Another reason to give up spanking is b/c of its s~xual nature. I have heard now more than one woman say how her childhood spankings resulted in effecting her s~xual experience later in life. I don’t think it happens to everyone, but you, as a parent, will probably never, ever know if this is happening. B/c the child can’t interpret it as such until he/she is an adult with s~xual experience. Also if you google “spanking,” you will quickly see that it is a means of s~xual foreplay. At the very least, spank your kids with their clothes on.I can’t even begin to express my http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-shocked003.gif except to say that much of what is sexual perversion is a good thing twisted. Just because there are wackjobs out there who have perverted a God-given means of parental correction, this should never be a deterrent to spank if it is needed. I agree that removing a child’s clothing is unnecessary- this is IMO a humiliation that has nothing to do with correction.
I am not free to not spank- using spanking is one way the Lord keeps me humble with my kids. I can’t ask of them what I don’t ask of myself, and I certainly can’t spank them for what I am also guilty of. Spanking brings me to my knees more than just about anything else in my life as a parent. However, as time goes on and we can discuss issues in depth, spanking becomes obsolete. I can’t imagine spanking a teenager.
There does seem to be a broad-ranging perception that IFBism is very negative- addressing the don’ts more than the do’s, berating more than encouraging. This would definitely affect how one deals with their children.
http://dulcefamily.blogspot.com/2011/06/another-letter-to-another-pasto… Here’s a blog about that very issue. I would highly recommend that everyone read it.
And I will say, parents are free in the Lord not to spank. Spanking is not commanded in the Bible.
And I will say, parents are free in the Lord not to spank. Spanking is not commanded in the Bible.
I read the blog post, Anne, but it’s just a personal anecdote. There is nothing there that substantively addresses the issues at hand- no research, no Scripture. And if you read some of her other posts, she is WAY off doctrinally in several areas. From the evidence on her blog, she’s not someone whose writings anyone should take seriously on such an important issue.
It’s not the blogger writing it all, it’s someone else’s letter she is posting.
[anonymous in a letter to her pastor who used spanking in his sermon as an example of how God deals with us] Ever since I was a young child I can remember having sexual thoughts related to corporal punishment. The asexual child is a common myth in our society, but it is simply not true. Children are fully capable of experiencing sexual feelings and can even experience sexual arousal. When I was a child I used to experience sexual feelings whenever I read a scene of corporal punishment in a children’s book; or when I saw a scene of corporal punishment in a film; I used to think about being spanked when I would play with myself as a child, and as an adolescent masturbation was always accompanied by thoughts about spanking. I never really questioned any of this until I started college. I realized that it seemed really strange that my sexual thoughts would revolve around something that was so painful and frightening as a child; I mean, sex is supposed to be focused on something beautiful, not on being inflicted with pain. I did some research and I found some answers to explain this. I discovered that there was both a biological and psychological component to the sexualization of corporal punishment; and I also discovered that there were many other people who suffered sexual side effects from childhood corporal punishment.I don’t think people ever talk or think much about this aspect of it, mostly b/c it’s children who can’t communicate it. So I’m bringing it up here as something that Christians at least ought to consider in forming their methodology of spanking.
The biological factor revolves around the fact that the buttocks is an erogenous, or sexual, zone of the human body. The buttocks are in close proximity to the sex organs, and the nerves and blood vessels in the buttocks are also connected to the male and female genitalia. Therefore, striking a child’s bottom as a form of punishment can stimulate the nerves connected to the genitalia causing sexual arousal. When a child’s bottom is hit it also causes blood to rush to the blood vessels of the buttocks (causing redness), and since those blood vessels of the buttocks are connected to a person’s genitalia, the blood can also rush to the sex organs which of course causes sexual arousal.
Anne,
I was spanked as a child/adolescent. I can absolutely testify I never experienced sexual arousal associated with corporeal punishment, nor did fantasies of corporal punishment ever become part of my sexual make up. This is pure Freudian balderdash.
I was spanked as a child/adolescent. I can absolutely testify I never experienced sexual arousal associated with corporeal punishment, nor did fantasies of corporal punishment ever become part of my sexual make up. This is pure Freudian balderdash.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
OK- so that particular post wasn’t by the blogger herself, but I read several posts authored by her on her blog, and her method of connect-the-dots is totally bizarre. That post about children not being able to remember the details of spankings because they were traumatized and ‘blocked’ them out…
Do you remember the details of all of your birthday parties as a child? I don’t remember mine, so this must be proof that I was traumatized by birthday parties, ergo no child should ever have to experience the trauma of a birthday party. Puhlease.
Have you read her post on homosexuality? Apparently the Bible isn’t saying what we think it is saying about that either. How far do we plan to take that train of thought? Sodomy isn’t really sodomy and perversion isn’t really perversion unless it isn’t perversion which in that case it really is perversion. And why? Because she said so.
I was spanked as a child when I did something I KNEW was wrong. I received very few spankings, due IMO to the fact that I knew my parents would be swift and consistent in dealing with misbehavior. I never doubted my parents loved me, and I never experienced any trauma or warping, sexual or otherwise, neither did my brother, or a host of my friends who were also spanked as children.
The standard for child nurturing and training is Scripture, and there we find many tools at our disposal to teach character, principles, and virtue to children. The rod is never, ever associated Scripturally with sexual deviancy. People have made that association, just as they have with many other aspects of sexuality.
Do you remember the details of all of your birthday parties as a child? I don’t remember mine, so this must be proof that I was traumatized by birthday parties, ergo no child should ever have to experience the trauma of a birthday party. Puhlease.
Have you read her post on homosexuality? Apparently the Bible isn’t saying what we think it is saying about that either. How far do we plan to take that train of thought? Sodomy isn’t really sodomy and perversion isn’t really perversion unless it isn’t perversion which in that case it really is perversion. And why? Because she said so.
I was spanked as a child when I did something I KNEW was wrong. I received very few spankings, due IMO to the fact that I knew my parents would be swift and consistent in dealing with misbehavior. I never doubted my parents loved me, and I never experienced any trauma or warping, sexual or otherwise, neither did my brother, or a host of my friends who were also spanked as children.
The standard for child nurturing and training is Scripture, and there we find many tools at our disposal to teach character, principles, and virtue to children. The rod is never, ever associated Scripturally with sexual deviancy. People have made that association, just as they have with many other aspects of sexuality.
Google “children spanking sexuality”
go ahead, write it off …
;)
go ahead, write it off …
;)
And it still proves nothing because 1) Scripture never associates spanking with sexual deviancy 2) there are SO many factors here, not just the use of spanking as a tool of discipline.
For instance- the first Google result was a USAToday article: Study: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-02-27-spanking_N.htm Spanking may lead to sexual problems later
Some quotes from the article-
And then they allow that the connection is tenuous at best-
This is just ridiculous. Scripture would not advocate to any degree a method of discipline that would lead a person into sexual deviancy.
What would the results be, I wonder, if you did the same study with college aged people who were not spanked?
For instance- the first Google result was a USAToday article: Study: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-02-27-spanking_N.htm Spanking may lead to sexual problems later
Some quotes from the article-
The analysis of four studies … suggests that children whose parents spanked, slapped, hit or threw objects at them may have a greater chance of physically or verbally coercing a sexual partner, engaging in risky sexual behavior or engaging in masochistic sex, including sexual arousal by spanking.Look at the behaviors that are linked- spanking, slapping, and throwing objects. What else were these parents doing to ‘discipline’ their kids? Were these parents Christians, using Scripture as their guide?
And then they allow that the connection is tenuous at best-
But linking sexual problems with spanking is a “big leap,” says human-sexuality researcher John DeLamater of the University of Wisconsin. “It’s probably one of many elements that might contribute to sex problems or risky sex, but it’s a long leap.”
Most children who are spanked escape from long-term harm, says Straus… who says he occasionally spanked his own children but later became a staunch critic of spanking.
“Like any discipline tactic, it depends on how it’s used,” he (Robert Larzelere of Oklahoma State University) says.
The two most recent studies examine sexual coercion and risky practices among 14,252 college students between 2001 and 2006. The third study, of 440 high school students from New Hampshire, examined risky sex, such as premarital sex without a condom. The fourth study, of 207 students from the Northeast, focused on masochistic sex.And what other factors were accounted for in this study? How parents taught their children about sexuality? What kind of sexual content they were exposed to? HOW did the parents spank, and for what offenses?
In each case, Straus found that those who had experienced corporal punishment had increased probability of coercing sex, risky sex or masochistic sex.
This is just ridiculous. Scripture would not advocate to any degree a method of discipline that would lead a person into sexual deviancy.
What would the results be, I wonder, if you did the same study with college aged people who were not spanked?
March 4, 2008More information can be found at the following link:
Press Release
Contact: Tom Benton, MD, President
American College of Pediatricians
Phone: 888-376-1877
mail@ACPeds.org
American College of Pediatricians Questions the Validity of Spanking Study
The American College of Pediatricians challenges the results of a negatively biased report on the effects of spanking released by Murray Straus, a leading opponent of the use of disciplinary spanking. His claim that spanking is linked to sexual problems in teens and adults is premature and unfounded. In fact, the study did not limit its investigation to the common use of ordinary spanking by loving parents with preschool children, but once again included the irresponsible use of abusive forms of corporal punishment with “children 13 years and older.” As a practice, Straus discovers detrimental results by including in his research unreasonable practices of physical punishment by irrational parents used with children at inappropriately older ages.
The American College of Pediatricians challenges anti-spanking researchers, such as Murray Straus, to produce responsible work that carefully defines the method and context of spanking being studied, that excludes abusive forms physical punishment, and that avoids focusing on teenaged children, where such punishment should never be used.
In its review of the spanking research, the American College of Pediatricians found that discipline spanking by parents, when properly used, can be an effective component in an overall discipline plan for children.
http://www.acpeds.org/Corporal-Punishment-A-Scientific-Review-of-Its-Us…
I would think the issue of sexual arousal and spanking must (at least among we believers) follow logically behind the issue of whether, how, and to what extent Scripture commands spanking.
It is difficult to imagine the Lord commanding a disciplinary measure that aroused inappropriate sexual thinking under any normal circumstances. So if we’re going to do this, let’s do the Bible discussion first, I would suggest.
Any takers?
It is difficult to imagine the Lord commanding a disciplinary measure that aroused inappropriate sexual thinking under any normal circumstances. So if we’re going to do this, let’s do the Bible discussion first, I would suggest.
Any takers?
First, I think the Bible is silent on the issue of spanking as we are discussing it here. It is really not what the proverbs are addressing.
i think, Biblically, we need to come to our understanding of God’s ideas of discipline and child-rearing in more round-about ways.
So I have a few rambling thoughts, mostly about our idea of inflicting pain on small kids. because this is a huge deal here.
I’m not sure if this is necessarily Biblical or not, but it really has to do with the way we view God as our Father, the way we view Him teaching us. That is probably the bigger issue.
Like, look at the way we insist on the infliction of pain. That is an interesting idea.
We have these unfortunate assumptions because of all the Proverbs-applied-to-small-children—that *discipline’s* teaching tool is, primarily, inflicting pain. I think this is a mistake… . do we see God as *spanking* us all day long as we sin? … Some people do.
Now, it is true that as a Christian, my faith is taught through reading, pondering, etc, then “tested” usually in a painful fire experience. This is how I think God uses pain in our lives. He doesn’t (to my knowledge) go like this: Oh, Anne, I TOLD you not to be a glutton. You ate that whole carton of ice cream? … Let’s go to the bedroom” … whack, whack. Or, Anne, how could you have gotten upset at that man who was driving so crazy? You are to love!” whack whack. (And assume the pain of getting the whack whack deter me from these wrong actions in the future.)
Rather, I have seen that God does certain other things: first, while He never ignores my sin, he doesn’t always deal with it by inserting an immediate, painful response. I may feel the conviction of the Spirit; He may just see that it is not the time in my life to deal with that particular sin but another sin. He may need to teach me some foundational truths about Himself, my faith, etc. I may have consequenes of getting cancer or heart disease from the way I eat or being fat. And there are sins where there can be immediate and painful consequences, I suppose, but then interpreting that as God spanking us is .… an interpretation. I think God uses consequences, but he is not trying to inflict pain on us as a teaching tool. He even bears the pain of our consequences with us. That is a huge difference.
The pain God causes in my life is a purifying pain—it’s not the whack whack so you associate bad-with-pain. It’s a miscarriage perhaps. Or an unfulfilled desire. And I have to wrestle with what I will really believe about God and how I continue my faith-walk.
Ok, so we look at little kids and we say, no way. You have to cause pain in order to teach them… . I think this is a mistaken assumption. Yes, pain can cause fear (of experiencing the pain again), pain can seem like a quick way to make a point. But I dont think we need to approach little kids like lab rats—if they do this action and I cause pain, they will stop doing this action.
They can be taught or directed not to do the action in many ways that are not pain-inflicting.
The act of becoming a disciplined person is, in itself, painful to our sin-natures. Do I hate brushing my teeth? yes, it’s painful in that sense. But I do it.
Is it hard to forgive when I’m offended? Yes, it’s sometimes painfully hard until the Spirit does that work of grateful humility in my heart, but am I disciplining myself to forgive with His help even though it’s generally painful? Yes. Thank you, God.
I think this is a big issue that needs to be addressed when we talk about child discipline and the Bible.
i think, Biblically, we need to come to our understanding of God’s ideas of discipline and child-rearing in more round-about ways.
So I have a few rambling thoughts, mostly about our idea of inflicting pain on small kids. because this is a huge deal here.
I’m not sure if this is necessarily Biblical or not, but it really has to do with the way we view God as our Father, the way we view Him teaching us. That is probably the bigger issue.
Like, look at the way we insist on the infliction of pain. That is an interesting idea.
We have these unfortunate assumptions because of all the Proverbs-applied-to-small-children—that *discipline’s* teaching tool is, primarily, inflicting pain. I think this is a mistake… . do we see God as *spanking* us all day long as we sin? … Some people do.
Now, it is true that as a Christian, my faith is taught through reading, pondering, etc, then “tested” usually in a painful fire experience. This is how I think God uses pain in our lives. He doesn’t (to my knowledge) go like this: Oh, Anne, I TOLD you not to be a glutton. You ate that whole carton of ice cream? … Let’s go to the bedroom” … whack, whack. Or, Anne, how could you have gotten upset at that man who was driving so crazy? You are to love!” whack whack. (And assume the pain of getting the whack whack deter me from these wrong actions in the future.)
Rather, I have seen that God does certain other things: first, while He never ignores my sin, he doesn’t always deal with it by inserting an immediate, painful response. I may feel the conviction of the Spirit; He may just see that it is not the time in my life to deal with that particular sin but another sin. He may need to teach me some foundational truths about Himself, my faith, etc. I may have consequenes of getting cancer or heart disease from the way I eat or being fat. And there are sins where there can be immediate and painful consequences, I suppose, but then interpreting that as God spanking us is .… an interpretation. I think God uses consequences, but he is not trying to inflict pain on us as a teaching tool. He even bears the pain of our consequences with us. That is a huge difference.
The pain God causes in my life is a purifying pain—it’s not the whack whack so you associate bad-with-pain. It’s a miscarriage perhaps. Or an unfulfilled desire. And I have to wrestle with what I will really believe about God and how I continue my faith-walk.
Ok, so we look at little kids and we say, no way. You have to cause pain in order to teach them… . I think this is a mistaken assumption. Yes, pain can cause fear (of experiencing the pain again), pain can seem like a quick way to make a point. But I dont think we need to approach little kids like lab rats—if they do this action and I cause pain, they will stop doing this action.
They can be taught or directed not to do the action in many ways that are not pain-inflicting.
The act of becoming a disciplined person is, in itself, painful to our sin-natures. Do I hate brushing my teeth? yes, it’s painful in that sense. But I do it.
Is it hard to forgive when I’m offended? Yes, it’s sometimes painfully hard until the Spirit does that work of grateful humility in my heart, but am I disciplining myself to forgive with His help even though it’s generally painful? Yes. Thank you, God.
I think this is a big issue that needs to be addressed when we talk about child discipline and the Bible.
I think another thing that makes it hard for us to see straight about spanking is the idea of spanking the *right way.* If I spank the right way, it’s OK.
But if you really think about it, there are a lot of variables in that. clothes on? clothes off?(like Tripp says is the Biblical method). angry, not angry. for a *worthy* offense. or for a mistake.
As long as I do it *right,* then it’s OK.
That’s tricky, not impossible, but tricky. Because parents are sinners, too. But I don’t know. I think it’s possible God could lead a parent to spank in a certain situation, but we are so far into listening to others define what right spanking is, I dont think we even listen for His voice. A right spanking would have to come out of love, joy, peace, gentlness, patience, kindness, faithfulness, self-control, humility… . Im conceding it’s possible. I’m not sure the act of spanking tends to lead us as parents into these things, but I’m conceding it could for some.
But if you really think about it, there are a lot of variables in that. clothes on? clothes off?(like Tripp says is the Biblical method). angry, not angry. for a *worthy* offense. or for a mistake.
As long as I do it *right,* then it’s OK.
That’s tricky, not impossible, but tricky. Because parents are sinners, too. But I don’t know. I think it’s possible God could lead a parent to spank in a certain situation, but we are so far into listening to others define what right spanking is, I dont think we even listen for His voice. A right spanking would have to come out of love, joy, peace, gentlness, patience, kindness, faithfulness, self-control, humility… . Im conceding it’s possible. I’m not sure the act of spanking tends to lead us as parents into these things, but I’m conceding it could for some.
[Anne Sokol] First, I think the Bible is silent on the issue of spanking as we are discussing it here. It is really not what the proverbs are addressing.I think this is where the discussion needs to begin.
Spanking is clearly taught in Proverbs (13:24, 22:15, 23:13-14, 29:15) so we can’t honestly say the Bible doesn’t teach it or that spanking is unbiblical.
However, verbal instruction (reproof) is also a very important part of loving my child, just as it is when God disciplines me - Prov 3:11-12. Numerous times in Proverbs the wise son is told to accept his parents instructions and teachings. That obviously if they to listen it means we are to be instructing and teaching them. I need to be instructing my children all the time, not just formally, but informally. When we are at home or out walking, morning and evening. I need to be ready to teach them about God. (Deut 6:6-9).
Spanking is a God given tool in the toolbox to be used when necessary; however, it isn’t always necessary. But just because something has been abused and misused doesn’t mean we throw it out.
As for the Pearls, I wouldn’t listen to a thing that man says about the Bible. Check out this page and see an example of his interpretive skils - http://askmikepearl.com/
However, verbal instruction (reproof) is also a very important part of loving my child, just as it is when God disciplines me - Prov 3:11-12. Numerous times in Proverbs the wise son is told to accept his parents instructions and teachings. That obviously if they to listen it means we are to be instructing and teaching them. I need to be instructing my children all the time, not just formally, but informally. When we are at home or out walking, morning and evening. I need to be ready to teach them about God. (Deut 6:6-9).
Spanking is a God given tool in the toolbox to be used when necessary; however, it isn’t always necessary. But just because something has been abused and misused doesn’t mean we throw it out.
As for the Pearls, I wouldn’t listen to a thing that man says about the Bible. Check out this page and see an example of his interpretive skils - http://askmikepearl.com/
Let’s see if I get this right- there are three ‘kinds’ of rods and/or staffs in Scripture:
Maqqel, which refers the branch of a tree,
Matteh is a branch or stick,
Shevet, also a word that refers to a staff or stick.
These ‘sticks’ are used to direct animals (like a riding crop), as weapons (javelin), as a shepherd’s staff, to beat out grain… and symbolically refers to authority and dominion.
The use of the rod is balanced with verbal instruction (as in “the rod and reproof give wisdom” Prov. 29:15) and is also seen in Rev. 3:19 and Eph. 6:4. Obviously, Eph. 6:4 and Col. 3:21 negate the idea that cruelty, brutality, or actual physical/mental damage is ever excused or excusable. It is clear that there are many commands for parents to love, train, rebuke, admonish, nurture, correct, and chastise their children.
To attempt to render the Proverbs passages as figuratively/metaphorically speaking of authority and not a literal rod causes interpretive problems with other verses, such as Ex. 21:20, Num. 22:27, Gen. 30:37, Deut 25:3. Or one could simply dismiss the entire thing as a cultural practice of a rather violent people who also believed in slavery, polygamy, etc… and therefore all passages relating to corporal punishment should be ignored.
Last random thought- I think we should be very careful of the idea that discomfort and pain are somehow worse than sin.
Maqqel, which refers the branch of a tree,
Matteh is a branch or stick,
Shevet, also a word that refers to a staff or stick.
These ‘sticks’ are used to direct animals (like a riding crop), as weapons (javelin), as a shepherd’s staff, to beat out grain… and symbolically refers to authority and dominion.
The use of the rod is balanced with verbal instruction (as in “the rod and reproof give wisdom” Prov. 29:15) and is also seen in Rev. 3:19 and Eph. 6:4. Obviously, Eph. 6:4 and Col. 3:21 negate the idea that cruelty, brutality, or actual physical/mental damage is ever excused or excusable. It is clear that there are many commands for parents to love, train, rebuke, admonish, nurture, correct, and chastise their children.
To attempt to render the Proverbs passages as figuratively/metaphorically speaking of authority and not a literal rod causes interpretive problems with other verses, such as Ex. 21:20, Num. 22:27, Gen. 30:37, Deut 25:3. Or one could simply dismiss the entire thing as a cultural practice of a rather violent people who also believed in slavery, polygamy, etc… and therefore all passages relating to corporal punishment should be ignored.
Last random thought- I think we should be very careful of the idea that discomfort and pain are somehow worse than sin.
I went though about 3 weeks of torment on this topic as I studied through the relevant passages in preparation for a sermon. The research is too lengthy to share here, but the sermon can be read http://www.mpbchurch.com/home/369/369/docs/Family%209.doc?sec_id=369] here .
The first week and a half of my research phase I was deeply angered by how misled I had been on this topic. If ever a topic has been OVEREMPHASIZED in reaction to our culture, it is this one. But in so doing some have gone far beyond Scripture’s authority.
The first week and a half of my research phase I was deeply angered by how misled I had been on this topic. If ever a topic has been OVEREMPHASIZED in reaction to our culture, it is this one. But in so doing some have gone far beyond Scripture’s authority.
I hope God will give you a voice in many places where people need to be freed from this.
I have so many things to say, I don’t know where to start.
In fact, I will just leave this for a while… . I’m babysitting a wild little boy for the moment ;)
I have so many things to say, I don’t know where to start.
In fact, I will just leave this for a while… . I’m babysitting a wild little boy for the moment ;)
I sense an underlying problem here, and that is the abdication of personal responsibility for studying to show oneself approved and rightly dividing the Word. At what point does a person forget that pastors, teachers, and authors put their pants on one leg at a time? That we will stand as individuals before God to answer for our own actions? That comparing ourselves among ourselves is not wise?
I’m always a bit taken aback by parents who’ve read a dozen parenting books, and will call Aunt Franny and Grandma Ethel and 12 of their best friends for advice, and have yet to read the Bible from cover to cover one time. Don’t read books about a Book you don’t read! Oy vey!
Time to realize that lots of what passes for theology is just huckster marketing. “Use our amazing Scripture-based methods, and we guarantee a sweet, obedient child! Only $19.95 plus shipping and handling! Buy two and get one free!” They forget to mention that “Scripture based” means 3 verses taken out of context, and that children are little sinners who grow up to be persons of free will.
I’m always a bit taken aback by parents who’ve read a dozen parenting books, and will call Aunt Franny and Grandma Ethel and 12 of their best friends for advice, and have yet to read the Bible from cover to cover one time. Don’t read books about a Book you don’t read! Oy vey!
Time to realize that lots of what passes for theology is just huckster marketing. “Use our amazing Scripture-based methods, and we guarantee a sweet, obedient child! Only $19.95 plus shipping and handling! Buy two and get one free!” They forget to mention that “Scripture based” means 3 verses taken out of context, and that children are little sinners who grow up to be persons of free will.
I’m not sure when spanking became a sacred cow of fundamentalism, maybe in response to the hippi, peace movement who let kids do whatever. Dobson, Tripp, people like that seem to come at parenting in response to that era—The huge emphasis on authority, spanking, the sin nature of a child, etc.
I wasn’t old enough to remember that whole mileu, and I, for example, have never, ever thought that my child didn’t have a sin nature. This is a major, major deciding factor in Ezzo’s parenting methods, for example, and other books. And interestingly, they have such an odd view of God, that the main answer for the sin nature is spanking and pain-inflicting stuff like that. It’s so opposite of what God does for us.
Someone should write a book called Parents Have A Sin Nature. It would probably help me a lot more than the going on and on about my children’s sin nature. But I will just excuse it as the pendulum swing of an era in response the error of that era. But I think it needs to swing back to a Biblical emphasis, that parents and kids have sin natures. Parents are actually the ones who need to hold ourselves more responsible for un-sinful, obedient-to-God behavior because we are the ones who are adults and have yrs of walking with the Lord behind us, usually. These children-are-sinners-emphasis books sort of turn the parent-child relationship on its head and expect more adult behavior from kids than adults.
Another idea that we need to examine theologically is the idea of pain-infliction and punishment.
I wasn’t old enough to remember that whole mileu, and I, for example, have never, ever thought that my child didn’t have a sin nature. This is a major, major deciding factor in Ezzo’s parenting methods, for example, and other books. And interestingly, they have such an odd view of God, that the main answer for the sin nature is spanking and pain-inflicting stuff like that. It’s so opposite of what God does for us.
Someone should write a book called Parents Have A Sin Nature. It would probably help me a lot more than the going on and on about my children’s sin nature. But I will just excuse it as the pendulum swing of an era in response the error of that era. But I think it needs to swing back to a Biblical emphasis, that parents and kids have sin natures. Parents are actually the ones who need to hold ourselves more responsible for un-sinful, obedient-to-God behavior because we are the ones who are adults and have yrs of walking with the Lord behind us, usually. These children-are-sinners-emphasis books sort of turn the parent-child relationship on its head and expect more adult behavior from kids than adults.
Another idea that we need to examine theologically is the idea of pain-infliction and punishment.
Isaiah 53:5-11 But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth. By oppression and judgment He was taken away; And as for His generation, who considered That He was cut off out of the land of the living For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due? His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was there any deceit in His mouth. But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand. As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities.I will say, too, looking honestly at the Bible, I don’t see a case for corporeal punishment. I don’t spank my kids. This has been a very long journey for me—I started parenting with spanking as my only parentin skill. Now, I discipline them, and God has helped me add more wisdom and skills, it’s a lot of work. I still have lots to learn. But I am thankful. It has made me want to become more of an adult in my relationship with God b/c I see how hard it is to bear with children, and how much I have been childish in my relationship with Him, and how He has borne with me so faithfully.
Another idea that we need to examine theologically is the idea of pain-infliction and punishment.Anne, I wonder what you make of the numerous references to pain and punishment in Scripture, including those used by God himself. If I recall correctly, they appear in virtually every genre and historical period in the Bible. How do you fit those into your ideas?
I think it needs to swing back to a Biblical emphasis, that parents and kids have sin natures. Parents are actually the ones who need to hold ourselves more responsible for un-sinful, obedient-to-God behavior because we are the ones who are adults and have yrs of walking with the Lord behind us, usually. These children-are-sinners-emphasis books sort of turn the parent-child relationship on its head and expect more adult behavior from kids than adults.I completely agree- it’s a reason why I constantly emphasize modeling the behavior we expect. We should also differentiate between what is typical, immature behavior- for instance, having the wigglies and knocking over a glass of milk, repeating a profanity or obscenity they overheard, picking their noses- and what is actual rebellion.
I don’t spank my kids. This has been a very long journey for me—I started parenting with spanking as my only parentin skill.That IS a problem when the only parenting skill being taught and emphasized is spanking. It’s patently ludicrous IMO to use spanking for every single situation. There are so many opportunities for the parent to teach the concept of sowing and reaping by making consequences fitting and related to the infraction.
There are spanking parents who are lazy at discipline because all they do is spank, and there are non-spanking parents who are lazy because all they do is talk and ‘reason’ and say inane things like “You have 4 fouls and 2 strikes- one more and you have to go sit on the bench in your room until you get control of yourself”. Meanwhile the kid has set fire to the dog and is streaking through the front yard butt nekkid… http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-happy093.gif
[Larry] Anne, I wonder what you make of the numerous references to pain and punishment in Scripture, including those used by God himself. If I recall correctly, they appear in virtually every genre and historical period in the Bible. How do you fit those into your ideas?It is something I would like to talk about. I don’t have all the answers yet. I am still searching.
This is what I know: Jesus bore all the punishment my sins deserve.
Where I have questions about this from the Bible:
1) David’s sin with Bathsheeba and God giving him three painful choices to suffer… . But I dont apply this one to my kids b/c D was the king—I’m guessing a lot of people knew what he did—and it was a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
2) Ananias and Saphira. I’m not sure the significance of “lying to the Holy Spirit,” but God killed them apparently for this. I do think they went to Him, but it is still a serious consequence or punishment, whatever it was.
3) The people who are sick and sleep (I Cor 11:29-34) b/c they partake unworthily.
I’m just not sure that these examples should be applied to infer that we should act specifically to cause our children to feel physical or emotional pain when we are disciplining/teaching them. I think the act of doing right is very often a struggle and painful in itself, and I dont see from Scripture that I need to use physical pain in motivating or teaching them to do right. I really, really try to use relationship (not emotional manipulation). I do use consequences, too, but I dont think it is the goal to be motivated by consequences. I am still searching this out b/c I myself sin so much in relationships that it is a struggle teaching my kids to do the right things ;)
But that is where I am in this question. Jesus bore all the punishment for my sins, of this I am sure. How God deals with me now, I really dont see/feel a lot of punishment/pain infliction. I just see so much patience, instruction, suffering-to-test-my-faith, giving me thankfulness and humility, my complete dependence on the Spirit for growth, giving me the desires to learn of His love, etc… .
Pondering this a little more, I would like to describe how I understand the use of discipline and pain. Maybe someone has a better analysis than this.
I kind of define discipine as a *hemming in until a purpose is achieved.*
Example with a child: When Skyla was 5, I notice that she was somewhat careless about getting enough out of the way for cars that were passing us on the little roads around our apt building. So one day, when it was not an issue, I said to her, “Skyla, you need to be more afraid of the cars. One of them could hit you and hurt you or kill you. They don’t want to do that, but you need to get out of the way more.” It was said nicely, and I htink it could be categorized as a reproof. And so she started running off to the side completely, and it was no longer an issue.
But if she had ignored the reproof, I would up to discipline. I would say, “Skyla, because you wont get out of the way enough, you’ll have to hold my hand outside now.” I’m not inflicting pain on her, but it will be unpleasant as she wants to run around. I woud hem her in until she was ready/willing to get out of the way herself.
I can see my marriage and children as God’s discipline for me. He has hemmed me into these intense relationships and responsibilities, and it is painful for my flesh and He reproves me often—just seeing all my sins. But it’s also leading me into much greater maturity and the freedom, plus the blessings of understanding and knowing God’s love more through these relationships, and learning to allow Him to be in me in all the temptations that come with these relationships. It’s naturally painful and uncomfortable, but rewarding in the end.
So, I think that’s how I look at a major aspect of discipline and pain. Not sure it’s complete, but it’s what I’ve seen so far.
I kind of define discipine as a *hemming in until a purpose is achieved.*
Example with a child: When Skyla was 5, I notice that she was somewhat careless about getting enough out of the way for cars that were passing us on the little roads around our apt building. So one day, when it was not an issue, I said to her, “Skyla, you need to be more afraid of the cars. One of them could hit you and hurt you or kill you. They don’t want to do that, but you need to get out of the way more.” It was said nicely, and I htink it could be categorized as a reproof. And so she started running off to the side completely, and it was no longer an issue.
But if she had ignored the reproof, I would up to discipline. I would say, “Skyla, because you wont get out of the way enough, you’ll have to hold my hand outside now.” I’m not inflicting pain on her, but it will be unpleasant as she wants to run around. I woud hem her in until she was ready/willing to get out of the way herself.
I can see my marriage and children as God’s discipline for me. He has hemmed me into these intense relationships and responsibilities, and it is painful for my flesh and He reproves me often—just seeing all my sins. But it’s also leading me into much greater maturity and the freedom, plus the blessings of understanding and knowing God’s love more through these relationships, and learning to allow Him to be in me in all the temptations that come with these relationships. It’s naturally painful and uncomfortable, but rewarding in the end.
So, I think that’s how I look at a major aspect of discipline and pain. Not sure it’s complete, but it’s what I’ve seen so far.
Anne,
Don’t shoot at me, because I do think the spanking thing has been over or mis-emphasized by many. But the wording of Hebrews 12 suggests to me a few things:
1). We cannot separate “chastening” (spanking/discipline/correction) from pain. It is presumed to be inherently painful. Now, I cannot state unequivocally that the only form that pain can take is physical pain, but it is clearly what is in the mind of Paul (the author of Hebrews — debate me about it on another thread. The evidence is extensive).
2). Since God chastens His children DESPITE their forgiven status as believers, we must presume that the purpose of chastening is not punishment, but correction. The fact that God has forgiven us does not prohibit corrective chastening. The way the author of Hebrews (Paul ;) ) compares the earthly discipline and heavenly discipline sets them equal in purpose in this regard.
Mike
Don’t shoot at me, because I do think the spanking thing has been over or mis-emphasized by many. But the wording of Hebrews 12 suggests to me a few things:
1). We cannot separate “chastening” (spanking/discipline/correction) from pain. It is presumed to be inherently painful. Now, I cannot state unequivocally that the only form that pain can take is physical pain, but it is clearly what is in the mind of Paul (the author of Hebrews — debate me about it on another thread. The evidence is extensive).
2). Since God chastens His children DESPITE their forgiven status as believers, we must presume that the purpose of chastening is not punishment, but correction. The fact that God has forgiven us does not prohibit corrective chastening. The way the author of Hebrews (Paul ;) ) compares the earthly discipline and heavenly discipline sets them equal in purpose in this regard.
Mike
[Mike Durning] Anne,If physical pain has special power as a corrective, then why doesn’t God inflict physical pain on us when we need correction?
Don’t shoot at me, because I do think the spanking thing has been over or mis-emphasized by many. But the wording of Hebrews 12 suggests to me a few things:
1). We cannot separate “chastening” (spanking/discipline/correction) from pain. It is presumed to be inherently painful. Now, I cannot state unequivocally that the only form that pain can take is physical pain, but it is clearly what is in the mind of Paul (the author of Hebrews — debate me about it on another thread. The evidence is extensive).
2). Since God chastens His children DESPITE their forgiven status as believers, we must presume that the purpose of chastening is not punishment, but correction. The fact that God has forgiven us does not prohibit corrective chastening. The way the author of Hebrews (Paul ;) ) compares the earthly discipline and heavenly discipline sets them equal in purpose in this regard.
Mike
When I am impatient and unkind to my children, why doesn’t God make my buttocks feel as if I’m being spanked with a rod in an effort to prompt me to change my behavior?
Mike, I think we should have this discussion. I was looking at Heb 13 too yesterday, and how it quotes (misquotes? adds ideas to?) Proverbs 3 (around vs 10).
the idea of chastening—if it is pain infliction necessarily or the application of consequences. how is Jesus our example of this, suffering at the hands of sinnners. I don’t have all the answers. i will dig out Clarkson’s book and tell you what he says about it when i get my computer/internet working again normally.
and we need to add I john to the discussion—perfect love casts out fear b/c fear involves punishment.
rachel, laughing, i have thought the same thing many many times. i need more spankings than my kids, sad to say.
the idea of chastening—if it is pain infliction necessarily or the application of consequences. how is Jesus our example of this, suffering at the hands of sinnners. I don’t have all the answers. i will dig out Clarkson’s book and tell you what he says about it when i get my computer/internet working again normally.
and we need to add I john to the discussion—perfect love casts out fear b/c fear involves punishment.
rachel, laughing, i have thought the same thing many many times. i need more spankings than my kids, sad to say.
[Rachel L.] If physical pain has special power as a corrective, then why doesn’t God inflict physical pain on us when we need correction?Rebuke, correction, and punishment had many physical manifestations in Scripture- everything from being stoned to death, swallowed alive into the pit, being slaughtered by heathens, fire from heaven, experiencing a serious illness that leads to death (misusing the Lord’s Supper), being struck blind (Paul on a bad hair day?)… are you saying (I am not sure I understand, that’s why I’m asking) because someone’s behind was not literally struck by God that parents shouldn’t spank their kids?
When I am impatient and unkind to my children, why doesn’t God make my buttocks feel as if I’m being spanked with a rod in an effort to prompt me to change my behavior?
What about Job, who was a righteous man subjected to every kind of pain imaginable as a wager between God and Satan? We know that in all that happened he learned a lesson about himself and gave glory to God. Should parents try to mimic any of these circumstances or consequences?
I’m also curious as to why some think that emotional pain completely divorced from physical pain. For instance, I’ve experienced grief was as physically painful as it is emotionally painful. Maybe my behind didn’t hurt, but I felt like someone was ripping out my liver through my esophagus.
Spanking can teach a child that their actions can bring about physical consequences that are indeed painful without exposing them to real danger.
The problem is when people try to make spanking the ONLY recourse. It isn’t the ONLY tool in the parental toolbox, or even the default tool. Individual children should be treated as individuals that will respond differently to varied forms of correction, and as they mature, correction can and should take different forms.
I’d like to apologize for using the quote-response-quote-response format. It often comes across as nit-picky, but it ended up being the only way I could make my thoughts clear and have them relate to what I was responding to.
To clarify my original statement as quoted: If physical pain is so effective as a corrective (I was responding to Mike’s statement about it being corrective in nature rather than punishing in nature), then why doesn’t God in His infinite wisdom use it on us?
For one thing, God’s purpose was not to punish or correct Job. So why is it brought up as part of this discussion? To me, it is irrelevant to the conversation, but I may be missing what you were driving at. Now, if God routinely inflicted such physically painful punishment/consequences/correctives on us, His children, I think we’d have an argument that He uses them and then perhaps we should consider using physical pain in our parenting. (I say “perhaps” because I would be an imperfect sinner imposing punishment on another sinner, whereas God is all-knowing and is therefore much better qualified for this task. I don’t expect to have all of the power that God has.)
[Susan R]And I guess I would ask, “Are you saying that we should be stoning people to death and throwing them into pits because it happened in the Bible?” Why throw out these methods of rebuke/correction/punishment and hold onto beating with a rod? For that matter, why change “beating with a rod” into spanking as it is understood today? We read “beat with a rod” and our brains substitute a mental picture of “spanking.” The “spanking rules” you hear preached from pulpits (calmly explain to the child why you are spanking, use an implement rather than your hands, never spank in anger, pray and hug your child afterward) about spanking are not Biblical. They are Christian Culture.[Rachel L.] If physical pain has special power as a corrective, then why doesn’t God inflict physical pain on us when we need correction?Rebuke, correction, and punishment had many physical manifestations in Scripture- everything from being stoned to death, swallowed alive into the pit, being slaughtered by heathens, fire from heaven, experiencing a serious illness that leads to death (misusing the Lord’s Supper), being struck blind (Paul on a bad hair day?)… are you saying (I am not sure I understand, that’s why I’m asking) because someone’s behind was not literally struck by God that parents shouldn’t spank their kids?
When I am impatient and unkind to my children, why doesn’t God make my buttocks feel as if I’m being spanked with a rod in an effort to prompt me to change my behavior?
To clarify my original statement as quoted: If physical pain is so effective as a corrective (I was responding to Mike’s statement about it being corrective in nature rather than punishing in nature), then why doesn’t God in His infinite wisdom use it on us?
What about Job, who was a righteous man subjected to every kind of pain imaginable as a wager between God and Satan? We know that in all that happened he learned a lesson about himself and gave glory to God. Should parents try to mimic any of these circumstances or consequences?Exactly my point. Should we mimic any of these circumstances of consequences? No.
For one thing, God’s purpose was not to punish or correct Job. So why is it brought up as part of this discussion? To me, it is irrelevant to the conversation, but I may be missing what you were driving at. Now, if God routinely inflicted such physically painful punishment/consequences/correctives on us, His children, I think we’d have an argument that He uses them and then perhaps we should consider using physical pain in our parenting. (I say “perhaps” because I would be an imperfect sinner imposing punishment on another sinner, whereas God is all-knowing and is therefore much better qualified for this task. I don’t expect to have all of the power that God has.)
I’m also curious as to why some think that emotional pain completely divorced from physical pain. For instance, I’ve experienced grief was as physically painful as it is emotionally painful. Maybe my behind didn’t hurt, but I felt like someone was ripping out my liver through my esophagus.I, too, have experienced physical pain during times of great emotional pain. I agree that they are not divorced from one another. However, the application you are using appears backwards to me. We are talking about inflicting PHYSICAL pain as a corrective, not about inflicting EMOTIONAL pain in the hopes that it will be so intense that it is felt physically. If anything, your example (emotional distress so great that there are physical manifestations) would seem to bolster the idea of Hebrews 12:11 “For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.” The discipline SEEMS painful as opposed to actually BEING painful. So the physical isn’t leading to emotional pain, but rather the emotional pain (of being rebuked, denied a desire, faced with my sinfulness) is leading to seeming physical pain.
Spanking can teach a child that their actions can bring about physical consequences that are indeed painful without exposing them to real danger.But any consequence can teach this same thing. There is nothing particularly special about spanking’s ability to teach a child cause-and-effect or consequences. And while I know that many will disagree with me, I believe that using spanking actually introduces an element of danger (as opposed to shielding a child from “real danger”) that is not present if a family embraces disciplinary practices that are hitting-free. A pastor would never have to stress “never spank in anger” if it was understood that children shouldn’t be hit. (And, honestly, never spanking in anger is actually not the guarantor of abuse-free spanking that we like to reassure ourselves that it is.)
The problem is when people try to make spanking the ONLY recourse. It isn’t the ONLY tool in the parental toolbox, or even the default tool. Individual children should be treated as individuals that will respond differently to varied forms of correction, and as they mature, correction can and should take different forms.I absolutely agree that when spanking is the only (or even the primary) method of correction/punishment that a parent is not discipling or disciplining his/her child they way s/he ought. In my household, I embrace your idea that “as they mature, correction can and should take different forms” by having my discipline take different forms from birth. I figure that if the goal is to reach a point of not spanking, then I can embrace that paradigm from the beginning.
I looked over Clarkson’s Heartfelt Discipline again on this Heb passage. His basic conclusion is that it is not applicable to promoting the idea of spanking children. He says that it quotes a Proverb (teen/older, at least), and that he adds “scourging” to show the idea that, as we saw in chapter 11, yes, God can use suffering and persecution to discipline us (adults) as His children.
His main take on the issue of spanking overall is that 1) the Bible doesn’t address spanking (or any pain-causing/punitive discipline) of children. 2) God does use this at times with adults (I need to check the wording). 3) From how children are portrayed in the Bible, his personal conclusion is that intentional pain-infliction in discipine is not expressing God’s nature to them (my wording of his ideas). However, 4) parents are free in the Lord to use spanking if they feel so led, just use it with the Spirit’s leading, not tied to some forumula. He also writes a lot of theology of discipine—encouragement, sympathy, corrective, etc.
(That’s my basic take of his section there. One would get a lot more out of reading it.)
he also mentions several places where rod/discipline and gentleness are coupled. And he mentions I Cor 4:21 “What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod or with love and a spirit of gentleness?” and mentions how Paul really could’ve come to them with a rod, they certainly seemed to deserve it, but he wanted to come to them with gentleness, even as adults.
His main take on the issue of spanking overall is that 1) the Bible doesn’t address spanking (or any pain-causing/punitive discipline) of children. 2) God does use this at times with adults (I need to check the wording). 3) From how children are portrayed in the Bible, his personal conclusion is that intentional pain-infliction in discipine is not expressing God’s nature to them (my wording of his ideas). However, 4) parents are free in the Lord to use spanking if they feel so led, just use it with the Spirit’s leading, not tied to some forumula. He also writes a lot of theology of discipine—encouragement, sympathy, corrective, etc.
(That’s my basic take of his section there. One would get a lot more out of reading it.)
he also mentions several places where rod/discipline and gentleness are coupled. And he mentions I Cor 4:21 “What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod or with love and a spirit of gentleness?” and mentions how Paul really could’ve come to them with a rod, they certainly seemed to deserve it, but he wanted to come to them with gentleness, even as adults.
[Rachel L.] If physical pain has special power as a corrective, then why doesn’t God inflict physical pain on us when we need correction?Ah ha! Thanks for pointing out how badly worded my post was. Paul uses the physical pain imposed by chastising human parents on their human children as a metaphor for the painful circumstances he brings into our life as chastisement. That’s what I should have said.
When I am impatient and unkind to my children, why doesn’t God make my buttocks feel as if I’m being spanked with a rod in an effort to prompt me to change my behavior?
[Anne Sokol] I looked over Clarkson’s Heartfelt Discipline again …Anne, if you read my sermon up above (no, I’m not shamelessly self-promoting my church or my preaching — though services tomorrow start at 9:45 AM and 11 AM :) ) you know I feel that most of the Proverbs passages on the “rod” use a word that implies young adults rather than what we would call children. Their point is not spanking a small child for correction, but literally caning a young adult son, presumably to correct him before he is stoned to death by the village elders for his increasingly rebellious tendencies. If that were the end of the matter, I could side with this point by Clarkson. But there are just a few of the Proverbs passages that use a more general word for child. Therein lies my principle problem with accepting the above point. Even the “rod” itself, in these passages, is presumably both literal and representative of the entire range of parental disciplinary authority up to and including the rod itself, just as the sword in Romans 13 represents not only the death penalty, but all penalties up to and including it. Limiting the rod passages to spanking alone would miss part of the point of the rod passages — just as limiting Romans 13 by saying the government can ONLY exert the death penalty would miss the point. But limiting them so as to not include the rod would also miss part of their point.
His main take on the issue of spanking overall is that 1) the Bible doesn’t address spanking (or any pain-causing/punitive discipline) of children.
In the end, then, I would agree that a parent has liberty to NOT spank, but never the liberty not to discipline at all. But an outright condemnation of all spanking would fly in the face of some verses that commend physical discipline to us. And abhorring spanking would be abhorring something that the Word commends (at least) as an option. On the other hand, most of us in Fundamentalism and Conservative Evangelicalism ought to be spending far more time condemning abusive discipline and abusive parenting or neglectful parenting than we spend on attacking the growing anti-spanking contingent in churches today. After all, we should preach to our own congregations, not other people’s.
I’ve been mullling your post over for a while. Yes, I did read your sermon—it was insightful on several levels.
I would like to know which Proverbs or Bible passages you see as promoting spanking and physical discipline of children. I think it would give me more understanding of where your thinking is drawn from. I would like to understand it.
It’s unfortunate, the common fundamentalist view of childrearing, I have realized. It’s so sad how we’ve let such ungodly ideas be promoted as godly. It’s almost eerie. I wish books that promoted more understanding of children were more promoted among our churches, like Ross Campbell and Jean Fleming and Sally Clarkson. If I had a magic wand to wave …
I think the theology of this goes much deeper than just spanking/punishment and childrearing. These things project out of the way we see God somehow, and there are serious theological flaws or misunderstandings of the nature of God towards us that become obvious in the way we treat our children.
I would like to know which Proverbs or Bible passages you see as promoting spanking and physical discipline of children. I think it would give me more understanding of where your thinking is drawn from. I would like to understand it.
It’s unfortunate, the common fundamentalist view of childrearing, I have realized. It’s so sad how we’ve let such ungodly ideas be promoted as godly. It’s almost eerie. I wish books that promoted more understanding of children were more promoted among our churches, like Ross Campbell and Jean Fleming and Sally Clarkson. If I had a magic wand to wave …
I think the theology of this goes much deeper than just spanking/punishment and childrearing. These things project out of the way we see God somehow, and there are serious theological flaws or misunderstandings of the nature of God towards us that become obvious in the way we treat our children.
[Anne Sokol] I’ve been mullling your post over for a while. Yes, I did read your sermon—it was insightful on several levels.Anne, I will try to post in a day or two with some more details from my study note. Meanwhile, I have placed some of the authors you have mentioned on my book ordering list.
I would like to know which Proverbs or Bible passages you see as promoting spanking and physical discipline of children. I think it would give me more understanding of where your thinking is drawn from. I would like to understand it.
It’s unfortunate, the common fundamentalist view of childrearing, I have realized. It’s so sad how we’ve let such ungodly ideas be promoted as godly. It’s almost eerie. I wish books that promoted more understanding of children were more promoted among our churches, like Ross Campbell and Jean Fleming and Sally Clarkson. If I had a magic wand to wave …
I think the theology of this goes much deeper than just spanking/punishment and childrearing. These things project out of the way we see God somehow, and there are serious theological flaws or misunderstandings of the nature of God towards us that become obvious in the way we treat our children.
Ross Campbell—I found Relational Parenting the best.
Sally Clarkson—The Mission of Motherhood—the most I-want-intimacy-with-my-kids inspiring book
Jean Fleming—A Mother’s Heart.
Fleming and Campbell do allow for spanking, and they do it in a really brief, nice way. Oh, I have not read, but I have hear that Danny Silk’s Loving Our Kids on Purpose is also excellent.
If people need how-to books, esp with little kids, I would recommend Elizabeth Pantley, maybe Wm and Martha Sears (they have lots of ideas b/c they promote discipline w/o spanking, but they’re generally a little over-the-top with attachment parenting for most people), and the http://www.gesellinstitute.org/ Gesell Institute of Child Development ‘s books about child development for each age. Those have given me tons of help when I didn’t understand what was a development issue and what was a discipline issue. The books are called “Your 2-Yr-Old,” “Your-3-Yr-Old,” etc.
The only reason I know all these things is b/c my gentle-discipline acquaintance listened to my plea for help with my then 2-yr-old, and she packed up a box of these amazing books that helped me get out of the punitive parenting mindset—I think I am still coming out of it actually. It’s a long process.
Sally Clarkson—The Mission of Motherhood—the most I-want-intimacy-with-my-kids inspiring book
Jean Fleming—A Mother’s Heart.
Fleming and Campbell do allow for spanking, and they do it in a really brief, nice way. Oh, I have not read, but I have hear that Danny Silk’s Loving Our Kids on Purpose is also excellent.
If people need how-to books, esp with little kids, I would recommend Elizabeth Pantley, maybe Wm and Martha Sears (they have lots of ideas b/c they promote discipline w/o spanking, but they’re generally a little over-the-top with attachment parenting for most people), and the http://www.gesellinstitute.org/ Gesell Institute of Child Development ‘s books about child development for each age. Those have given me tons of help when I didn’t understand what was a development issue and what was a discipline issue. The books are called “Your 2-Yr-Old,” “Your-3-Yr-Old,” etc.
The only reason I know all these things is b/c my gentle-discipline acquaintance listened to my plea for help with my then 2-yr-old, and she packed up a box of these amazing books that helped me get out of the punitive parenting mindset—I think I am still coming out of it actually. It’s a long process.
Physically, I can see how there very well could be a link (for some people) between being spanked on the rear end and sexual arousal. The comment was made that God wouldn’t give us instructions to do something that would cause a wrong response (VERY poor paraphrasing).
But, where in Scripture does it tell us to beat/spank on the bottom?? Pregnancy brain here, so maybe I am forgetting something obvious, but does Scripture give us a specific part of the body to spank??
But, where in Scripture does it tell us to beat/spank on the bottom?? Pregnancy brain here, so maybe I am forgetting something obvious, but does Scripture give us a specific part of the body to spank??
Just saw the videos at CNN for the first time. I’m told there’s to be a follow up show Thursday night on another IFB abuse scandal (this time my alma mater)….
I too was alarmed by the Hephzibah House segment, particularly. I came across a five part audio documentary of the Hephzibah House problem with 8 past students who share their stories. It is chilling but very well produced, and utterly believable. You can watch it http://www.jeriwho.net/tlohh.html here . The editor brings up some interesting points about spanking in Proverbs and how half the time it is an adolescent son in view clearly not an infant.
Anyway, good thread. I’m going to read your sermon, Mike. Thanks for sharing….
I too was alarmed by the Hephzibah House segment, particularly. I came across a five part audio documentary of the Hephzibah House problem with 8 past students who share their stories. It is chilling but very well produced, and utterly believable. You can watch it http://www.jeriwho.net/tlohh.html here . The editor brings up some interesting points about spanking in Proverbs and how half the time it is an adolescent son in view clearly not an infant.
Anyway, good thread. I’m going to read your sermon, Mike. Thanks for sharing….
Striving for the unity of the faith, for the glory of God ~ Eph. 4:3, 13; Rom. 15:5-7 I blog at Fundamentally Reformed. Follow me on Twitter.
Discussion