Proverbs 13: 24
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. (KJV)
He that spareth his rod hateth his son, but he that loveth him chasteneth him in good season. (KJ21)
He who fails to use a stick hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him. (CEB)
If you love your children, you will correct them; if you don’t love them, you won’t correct them. (CEV)
Whoever refuses to spank his son hates him, but whoever loves his son disciplines him from early on. (GW)
All translations from Bible Gateway.
I was spanked as a child. I have made the decision not to spank my child.
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. (KJV)
He that spareth his rod hateth his son, but he that loveth him chasteneth him in good season. (KJ21)
He who fails to use a stick hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him. (CEB)
If you love your children, you will correct them; if you don’t love them, you won’t correct them. (CEV)
Whoever refuses to spank his son hates him, but whoever loves his son disciplines him from early on. (GW)
All translations from Bible Gateway.
I was spanked as a child. I have made the decision not to spank my child.
My decision not to spank has been a point of contention between my mother and me. "He's going to embarrass you in public," she barked, insinuating that one day my child will behave like a normal toddler and have a meltdown when we're at the grocery store or at a restaurant. If I don't address said meltdowns with a swift smack across his bottom, she says I will be embarrassed by his actions.
Personally, I find it more embarrassing that instead of being patient and peaceful, I am expected to default to violence. I find it embarrassing when I see adults towering over children, wailing on their little asses because they talked back or wouldn't do something they were asked to do. You wouldn't treat an adult that way, why treat a child that way?
So, what gives with those Bible verses? For me it's proof that as Christians we need to have the ability and knowledge to decide things for ourselves instead of just taking the black text from our Bibles at face value. One translation tells us to use a rod, another a stick, a third simply informs us to correct them. No weapon is mentioned.
Personally, this is the choice I believe most adheres with my interpretation of God and my relationship with Him. He's my daddy (Abba Father) and when I do wrong He doesn't reach down from the heavens to whop me on the butt. If my relationship with Him as a Father/child is meant to emulate my relationship with my own child, I need to do what He does. When I mess up, He shows abundant, ceaseless, perfect Grace. He loves me, yes, but He doesn't show it by leaving bruises on me body. Or on my spirit.
He disciplines me through love. And according to Him: Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast. It is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. I Corinthians 13: 4-8
When it comes to discipline, I ask myself if my type of punishment and correction align with God's definition of love:
Hitting your child (or anyone, for that matter) isn't showing patience and it certainly isn't kind. The very act boasts of self-importance and pride. It is dishonoring to the person being hit and it seeks to lift the person doing the hitting to a position of authority built on a foundation of intimidation and fear. The person doing the hitting hits because they are envious of people who are obeyed without question and they want to emulate that. For them, that is the ultimate in parenthood: to be obeyed simply because they are the parent.
Hitting as a means of punishments is a result of keeping a record of every occurrence of wrong doing. Especially if you adopt a three strikes you're out approach. Hitting is wrong; parents preach this all day long. They're quick to get upset when one sibling hits another and would brand the behavior as being evil and wrong. Yet the tables are turned when the parent is doing the hitting. This double standard does not allow for rejoicing in truth. It's a tit-for-tat, do as I say, not as I do mentality that delights in the evil of an eye for an eye.
Hitting does not protect the child nor does it protect the person doing the hitting from becoming bitter, resentful and spiteful. No one trusts anyone who hits them and children are no different. Hitting your child doesn't give them a reason to trust you. It also doesn't give them anything to be hopeful about. It has been proven that children who are spanked develop more slowly. Take less risks. They are damaged. They do not persevere as emphatically as they perhaps could have done if they are disciplined without being hit.
Growing up in the Bible Belt, in a Christian home with parents who were firm believers of spanking and who actively practiced it, I've heard every excuse in the book of why parents should spank. I've heard the precautions that parents should calm down before they hit their children and only hit them out of love, not in the heat of the moment. I've heard the "tips on hitting" that Christians spew: only hit with an open hand; don't hit hard enough to leave a mark. (Although idiots in Kansas are working to legalize abusing your child to the point where you leave a bruise.)
I propose that once you've calmed down, you won't want to hit your child at all. If you have to curb your actions so that you don't hastily do something you'll regret by getting carried away, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place?
I just have trouble comprehending that we are meant to tower over our children and raise our hands to them. If we were, wouldn't there be a precedent for it? Wouldn't God treat us this way since we are afterall, children of the King?
But He doesn't. So why should we?
Personally, I find it more embarrassing that instead of being patient and peaceful, I am expected to default to violence. I find it embarrassing when I see adults towering over children, wailing on their little asses because they talked back or wouldn't do something they were asked to do. You wouldn't treat an adult that way, why treat a child that way?
So, what gives with those Bible verses? For me it's proof that as Christians we need to have the ability and knowledge to decide things for ourselves instead of just taking the black text from our Bibles at face value. One translation tells us to use a rod, another a stick, a third simply informs us to correct them. No weapon is mentioned.
Personally, this is the choice I believe most adheres with my interpretation of God and my relationship with Him. He's my daddy (Abba Father) and when I do wrong He doesn't reach down from the heavens to whop me on the butt. If my relationship with Him as a Father/child is meant to emulate my relationship with my own child, I need to do what He does. When I mess up, He shows abundant, ceaseless, perfect Grace. He loves me, yes, but He doesn't show it by leaving bruises on me body. Or on my spirit.
He disciplines me through love. And according to Him: Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast. It is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. I Corinthians 13: 4-8
When it comes to discipline, I ask myself if my type of punishment and correction align with God's definition of love:
Hitting your child (or anyone, for that matter) isn't showing patience and it certainly isn't kind. The very act boasts of self-importance and pride. It is dishonoring to the person being hit and it seeks to lift the person doing the hitting to a position of authority built on a foundation of intimidation and fear. The person doing the hitting hits because they are envious of people who are obeyed without question and they want to emulate that. For them, that is the ultimate in parenthood: to be obeyed simply because they are the parent.
Hitting as a means of punishments is a result of keeping a record of every occurrence of wrong doing. Especially if you adopt a three strikes you're out approach. Hitting is wrong; parents preach this all day long. They're quick to get upset when one sibling hits another and would brand the behavior as being evil and wrong. Yet the tables are turned when the parent is doing the hitting. This double standard does not allow for rejoicing in truth. It's a tit-for-tat, do as I say, not as I do mentality that delights in the evil of an eye for an eye.
Hitting does not protect the child nor does it protect the person doing the hitting from becoming bitter, resentful and spiteful. No one trusts anyone who hits them and children are no different. Hitting your child doesn't give them a reason to trust you. It also doesn't give them anything to be hopeful about. It has been proven that children who are spanked develop more slowly. Take less risks. They are damaged. They do not persevere as emphatically as they perhaps could have done if they are disciplined without being hit.
Growing up in the Bible Belt, in a Christian home with parents who were firm believers of spanking and who actively practiced it, I've heard every excuse in the book of why parents should spank. I've heard the precautions that parents should calm down before they hit their children and only hit them out of love, not in the heat of the moment. I've heard the "tips on hitting" that Christians spew: only hit with an open hand; don't hit hard enough to leave a mark. (Although idiots in Kansas are working to legalize abusing your child to the point where you leave a bruise.)
I propose that once you've calmed down, you won't want to hit your child at all. If you have to curb your actions so that you don't hastily do something you'll regret by getting carried away, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place?
I just have trouble comprehending that we are meant to tower over our children and raise our hands to them. If we were, wouldn't there be a precedent for it? Wouldn't God treat us this way since we are afterall, children of the King?
But He doesn't. So why should we?