Do you hate your children?
In the land of fruits and nuts, a California law maker has proposed a law that would make spanking a child illegal. Currently the state has a law making it illegal for anyone but a parent to spank a child and this law would go one step further, preventing even parents from spaking their own children.
Parents who spank could be convicted of misdemeanor child abuse and would face up to a $1,000 fine and a year in jail. Supporters of the law say that spanking a child teaches them to be violent, and that you can hit other people as long as you are bigger than them.
The Bible, of course, also has a lot to say about disciplining a child, and even corporal punishment specifically. A few examples:
Whoever spares the rod hates his son,
but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him. - Proverbs 13:24Discipline your son, for there is hope;
do not set your heart on putting him to death. - Proverbs 19:18Folly is bound up in the heart of a child,
but the rod of discipline drives it far from him. - Proverbs 22:15
Does the Bible say that spanking (i.e. using "the rod") is harmful to children? Does it say that disciplining your child will make them into corrupt, violent people? Hardly. If anything, it teaches us that are children *are* corrupt, violent people, and the only way to cure them of their sinfulness is discipline, even discipline with "the rod."
To understand the anti-spanking crowd, you have to start by understanding the mindset that leads to such a position. It all starts with a belief that children are basically good. Sure, they might act up from time to time, but all they really need is love, understanding, and a coach/parent/friend/village who can help them to build a healthy self-esteem. Everything is driven by the belief that children just need to learn to love themselves and to love others. If we can just find a way to teach children to love themselves, then we're halfway there on the road to parenting success. The secular-humanist belief system is at the foundation of such a philosophy.
Again, the Bible gives us a different picture. It tells us that foolishness is "bound up in the heart of a child." It tells us that we are fundamentally flawed by the sin we inherit from birth. If you don't believe me, ask any stay-at-home mom who deals with a toddler all day. What is the cure that the Bible prescribes? Discipline. Specifically, discipline with the rod.
At our house, we actually use a "rod." It is a quarter-inch dowel that is about 12-15 inches long. When our children are willfully disobedient, we apply the rod to their backsides. We don't first cound to three (or five, or ten). We don't plead and beg and threaten them. We don't try every other means of goading them into compliance, until finally we snap and wail on them with a stick. We expect obedience, and when our children do not obey us we follow the same procedure nearly every time.
We start by making sure that they understood what was demanded of them, and that it was reasonable to expect them to comply with this demand. For instance, I would never spank Elsie (our 15 month old) for not obeying my command to take her cereal bowl over to the sink when she was done with it. But, I would expect Pete (our three year old) to be able to follow this command, and if he disobeys this request he is a good candidate for the application of the rod. I do expect Elsie to listen and obey when I ask her to "Come here" because she is able to understand what I am asking her to do, and she is able to accomplish what I am asking of her. When she disobeys this command, I will spank her each and every time, and with a clear conscience.
Let me pause for a moment to say that I think part of the problem anti-spanking activists have is that the only example of spanking they have ever seen is that of an exhasperated parent, having tried every other approach (counting, begging, bribing, ignoring, "time outs," and so on), finally getting to the point that they finally lose control and beath their child out of anger, embarrasment, or desparation. This is not healthy. This does not work. This is not how we discipline our children either, and I would vehemently oppose this sort of abuse as well.
Once we have determined that our child understands what is being asked of them and is willfully disobeying, we immediately take action. Typically, this means removing the child from the situation, taking them up on our laps, and explaining what they have done wrong and why we can not and will not tolerate it. Next, we turn them around and lay them across our laps and apply three or four swats with the rod. The swats are always forceful enough to sting and leave a slight red mark, but never so severe as to leave a welt or a bruise. Once we have applied the rod, we turn them back around, hug them, and reassure them that we love them.
I would love it if I didn't have to spank my children. I don't enjoy it any more than they do. The easy thing to do would be to just put up with their bad behavior, finding ways to manage it so it isn't such an inconvenience. But, I believe the Bible when it says to withhold discipline would be a sure sign that I hate my child. I believe it when it says that to do so would make me an accomplice to my child's death. I believe it when it says that the rod is the only hope of driving foolishness out of his heart. If there were any other way, I would gladly adopt it. But, that's not what the Bible teaches.
If a similar law were ever passed in Nebraska (heaven forbid!), I would have to make some tough choices. But, when faced with a decision between spending a year in jail or watching my son's sinfulness bring about his own destruction, I think it's an easy choice. I also think it's clear to see that parents who don't face such a law have absolutely no excuse to neglect the biblical charge that they discipline their children, teaching them to fear the Lord.
RSS 2.0
Have you ever looked up the specific Hebrew words for "child," and "son?"
When I did, I was really taken aback. I'd totally believed Pearl (and others) in regards to their interpretation of the Scripture, but it would appear these Scriptures are emphatically *not* talking about babies and young children.
I'm a former Pearl fan who has done an about face, 100%. Not because I've bought into humanism, but because of God's word.
Among the many things I had to think through, the way God parents me was one of the highest. I thought about my life as a Christian, and considered my Father (who surely is the best example of a Parent, right?) and how He has dealt with my disobediences.
Only very rarely can I say I've felt his "rod." Most of the time, when I stumble, I look up and find an outstretched hand, there to help me do it right the next time. His grace overwhelms me.
And then I considered my own parenting (ala Pearl). Was I there to respond with grace, or was I there with the switch, demanding instant obedience out of toddlers when Yahweh doesn't even do that for ME!
It really gave me pause for thought. A lot of thought. And I've seriously revised much of what I formerly believed (and openly taught) to be true. Not because I decided to stop reading the Bible, but specifically *because* of the Bible.
My sins were worthy of death, but Jesus took my punishment on Himself. How do I represent His nature to my children when I am an exacting judge, demanding payment (via switchings) for their disobedience?
There are ways to firmly and kindly teach obedience, which I believe is part of good parenting, without an ever-present switch. Yahweh does that with me, that's for sure, and I am seeking to learn how to model His parenting style with my own children.
Warmly,
Molly
Molly, thanks for stopping by.
I haven't looked into the Hebrew for "child" and "son." Fill me in. What am I missing?
I would check your facts on whether or not Yahweh expects instant and perfect obedience from you. It seems pretty clear to me that perfection is the standard of righteousness as set forth in the Bible (Be holy, for I am holy, and so on.). You will also find, in both the Old and New Testaments, that God is, in fact, "an exacting judge, demanding payment… for their disobedience."
The message of the Bible isn't just free grace for everyone because God looks the other way. When you look at the cross, you see that Christ paid a steep and extreme penalty for our disobedience. This grace may be free to all who would receive it, but it was very costly when it was purchased.
What does this have to do with children, even babies? In order for them to learn to love grace, they must first learn to hate their sin and understand the justice of the Law. The law cannot save, but it is not useless, either. It is a taskmaster that drives us first to our point of need, and then into the arms of our Savior.
There is room for grace in parenting, and we give our children opportunities to see that. However, unless they understand that Daddy's "No" always means "No," they will never understand fully that God's "Thou shalt not" always means "Thou shalt not." My children will not be prepared to understand the gospel if they are not also taught to understand their own sinfulness, even as ugly and dangerous as it may be.
When grace is defined as merely looking the other way when a person engages in sinful behavior, it becomes cheap, selfish grace. A parent who does not deal directly and intentionally with their child's sinfulness and foolishness is not doing anybody a favor, and more accurately (Prov. 19:18) is participating in the eventual death and destruction of that child.
In fairness, I'm not quite sure what alternatives you have employed as you have re-modelled your parenting. I'd be curious to hear how you would suggest we handle instances of direct, willful disobedience, both with our 3 year old and our 1 year old.
Again, thanks for your comments.
Well, the ages are the main thing. Most verses refering to the rod are speaking about a teenage boy. There are very specific words for each stage of childhood, and the only verses about the "young/baby/toddler" age are all related to nurturing, dandling on the knees, and other very tender images.
(I have this all researched out somewhere, but it's not nearby at the moment so I can't give you the sources, but it's NOT something someone made up, but something Hebrew lexicons will agree with).
Keeping in mind that I was a Pearl die-hard, so it took me awhile to process this…but the more I studied, the more I came away thinking maybe Pearl was well-intentioned but seriously off-track in his Bible application.
And that's not to say that I think spanking is wrong, or that a toddler doesn't need a swat now and then, either, because I think sometimes he really does. But as for the rod being the "main" method…I am 100% certain (now) that Scripture does not support that, not at all.
As for Yahweh expecting instant obedience, I think we can see His parenting style from Scripture. And there we have a very very very very patient and longsuffering Father.
It takes a loooong time for Him to react in powerful force. Even Ninevah recieved a warning and a second chance—and they were downright BAD. Before God brought "physical chastisement" on Israel, He warned them and warned them and warned them… He talks about Israel being a son…about stooping down to his level instead of expecting him to come up to His level (Hosea), etc… It takes Him a long time to bring out the rod, and it's for things that are MAJOR.
This is the exact opposite of what Pearl teaches, which, like I said, took me a while to process because I was so positive that Pearl was preaching the straight word of God in these areas.
What Pearl teaches, for example, is that repeating a request more than once (if we're sure they heard us) is sin on our part—that we need to teach and expect instant obedience, that the rod needs to meet their backside if they don't obey instantly, the first time, without hesitation. Yet our Heavenly Parent doesn't do what Pearl says. So…I had to ask myself, who's right—Mike Pearl or God?
Speaking of toddlers, though, I've got to get. Mine is smelling very…interesting.
Grace is not looking the other way, I agree. But grace is coming alongside to help, to give aid to someone who doesn't deserve it and/or can't do it on their own. Meaning, we are still teaching our (5) children to obey, but we are not quick to strike. Grace comes alongside and helps. Grace goes to the toddler and says, "Mommy told you to come. I need you to come." And gives him another chance—firmly and gently (the child WILL come, period—I'm not advocating wimpy parenting by any means).
I've got this in print somewhere, which is frustrating me because I can't find it…lol…
The word, quickly, usually used for a child in the verses about a rod (or maybe always used, I can't remember) is na'ar. It means a young male lion just starting to grow his mane. A teenager, young adult, sort of thing. And this is a culture (and a world) where instead of going to jail, a criminal gets beaten with a rod, so it really makes sense—a father can give his wayward son a beating so as to save him from the kind he will get from the government if he continues down his wayward path. I'm not sure if we would say it's a "command" of God to give all wayward teenagers a beating (on the back, not on the rear end, if we're going to be literal about this), but it would certainly make sense to the people it was written to, and I think it can make sense to us today—a "tough love" approach to the wayward teenager, if you will (though we might not actually beat, the principle is still the same: we are not going to stand by and watch you destroy yourself).
But in in no way is referring to the kind of spankings that Pearl is teaching it is—the switching of young children for each and every offense.
Another thought, related (in that you brought this up in your post): If the rod could purify us, literally, then God shouldn't have sent Jesus. He should have just made us all suffer under His hand. It would have cleansed us.
If it's a divine principle that the rod can cleanse us from sin, then the Cross would have never been needful. Our heavenly Parent should have just disciplined us until we finally learned obedience, right?
Long story short, I think Pearl is a well-intentioned man, and it's obvious he loves the Lord. But…I'm going with God before I go with the voice of man. God doesn't parent the way that Mike Pearl advocates. So…I'm not going to either.
Warmly (and please know, I am SO not trying to attack or anything close. I just found your note on Rocks in my Dryer, and followed the link and saw this post, and, being a former Pearl fan, felt compelled to share why I have, for Biblical reasons, left his teachings),
Molly
Thank you for your perspective, Mr. Wittman. I have thought much on what God requires of us, and what we, in turn, ask of our children.
It matters how we parent. Our children see us as God with skin on. I have been thinking more of grace… and how His love for me changed me.
I appreciate your heart of care, Mr. Wittman, for your children. God be with you.
Mike,
Thanks for your post. I agree with you, between raisng our 2 songs, I am going to do what the Bible says. We use a switch for spanking, I have never spanked out of a anger. It is done talking to our sons about their behavior, then a switch is used to sting their bottom to teach them they are to obey mom and dad. Time outs are far worse than God's appointed means of spanking.