First, science has a very clear answer: spanking doesn't work. Of course, it is also possible to find studies that say the opposite. But studies also show that prayer doesn't work, so do I go with the studies or do I go with the Word of God?
I, of course, would need to respond from a biblical worldview. What does the Bible tell me is true? If it's God's Word and God is always right, I have to go with that, regardless of your friendly studies. What does God say about it? First, what the Bible does not say: "Spare the rod; spoil the child." An ever popular but non-existent biblical quote. What does it say?
Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him. (Prov 13:24)The Bible is not silent on the topic. Nor does God's Word subscribe to current science's certainty of the negative effects of spanking. Instead, the Bible argues that a failure to spank is hate while spanking is love, that spanking helps remove childish foolishness, that spanking has a saving effect, that spanking even produces wisdom. Odd. None of these appear to be negative.
Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him. (Prov 22:15)
Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol. (Prov 23:13-14)
The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother. (Prov 29:15)
It is argued by some who call themselves Christians that the Bible is wrong on these counts, but others argue that it isn't so much wrong, but that taking them as they are written is wrong. It's cultural, or it's old, or it's misunderstood. We know better now. This sounds very intelligent and even compassionate, but you really run into a problem when you see the Bible claiming that God Himself disciplines with corporal punishment. In the Old Testament God affirmed that if Israel chose to go contrary to God's commands, "I Myself will discipline you sevenfold for your sins." (Lev 26:28). That word, translated in the ESV as "discipline", is yâsar, which means literally to chastise with blows. In the New Testament we are assured, "For the Lord disciplines the one He loves, and chastises every son whom He receives." (Heb 12:6). The first word, "disciplines", means to train up a child -- benign enough -- but the second is μαστιγόω -- mastigoō -- meaning "to flog". Sorry. Can't get around that. Both Old and New Testaments tell us that God Himself uses painful methods to train those whom He loves.
"So, then, you'd favor child abuse?" You see, that's where it always goes. "When it is okay to beat your kids?" I'd say "Never." I'd suggest, in fact, that this is the problem with science's studies. There is no differentiation between loving discipline and beating your kids. Here, let's look at the easiest place to see the problem. In the famous "Love chapter" from Paul's first epistle to the church at Corinth we read, "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal." (1 Cor 13:1). "Umm, Stan ... there's nothing there about spanking." Yes, I know but think about it. What defines "good things" in this text? "Speaking in tongues", "prophesy", "wisdom", "knowledge", "generosity" -- all of these are "good things", but Paul says that without love they are completely useless ... at best. And that's where studies (and even many proponents of corporal punishment) fail. The key ingredient to effective discipline is love.
Look at that first text up there from Proverbs. Notice the cause and effect. "He who loves" a child ... disciplines. The rod of Proverbs is described as the product of love. How it is, then, that so many well-meaning parents use it without love? And why would anyone (professing Christian, genuine Christian, or your average pro-spanking parent) think that training kids without love would be effective?
I would argue, then, that we can actually glean a little more from Scripture on the subject of spanking:
1. Always in love (1 Cor 13:1-3). If you are going to spank your child because you're angry or "I'm gonna teach that boy a lesson!" or anything except a genuine concern for his or her best interests, don't do it.
2. Never too much (Eph 6:4). We read, "Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord." It's a balance between too much -- provoking your children -- and not enough -- failing to bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.
3. Limited use (Prov 22:15). I draw this from the texts above. Nothing in the texts suggests corporal punishment for ignorance or stupidity. They didn't hear. They forgot. A beating to remind them isn't in view here. "Folly" -- that's in view. Direct disobedience. Willful. Foolishness is knowing what is right and refusing to do it. The word is most literally translated "perverse" -- showing a deliberate and obstinate desire to behave in a way that is unreasonable or unacceptable. That's the idea.
4. Always in love. Yeah, I know, I said that, but it can't be stressed enough.
I'm quite certain that the world's version of "spanking" and the Bible's version are not the same. The world's version is "a beating". I'd agree with the studies that beating kids is not helpful. But I also believe that the Bible is abundantly clear that parents who love their kids will use corporal punishment as part of the training of their kids. I believe it is equally clear that love must be at the core of this process. Care needs to be exercised in this. Training is in view. Parents must impose limits on themselves. But if we are to accept God's Word as the Word of God, a parent who loves his or her child will, of a necessity, find it necessary at some point or another (preferably very early on) to train with the use of non-abusive, lovingly administered, carefully applied pain. God does it. I don't suppose we're better parents than He is.
8 comments:
This is a really great post, Stan. I'm going to have to find a way to get it onto a social site of some kind. (If I link to it from a post at my blog, it'll show up on Facebook). In fact, I'll drop this in the suggestion box (the one without the hole in the bottom hanging just over the wastebasket): see if you can put a "Share" button on your posts. I often think of how great it would be to pass on your stuff.
Anyway, I've never sided with those who believe that spankings are useless and a sign of deficiency in the parents. With the many reports of mob violence, what was briefly referred to as "wilding", it seems some could have used some routine corporal punishment. I even have my reservations about the prohibitions against all corporal punishments in schools. Aside from a nervous tick, it never hurt me (just kidding about the tick).
When I was a kid, I received a number of beatings that today would have resulted in a visit from Child Services at the least. It was rather commonplace in my suburban neighborhood (given how commonplace the misbehavior of my friends and myself). No one was ever bloodied to my knowledge, nor did anyone suffer and broken bones. Lasting welts and discolorations in the shape of Dad's hand were the worst of it. Oh yeah, and memories. We remembered, if not the actual crime committed that brought about our punishment, we remembered who was in charge, and just what was expected of us lest we face more retribution. Despite the anger evident in Dad's face leading up to the pain, I never got the sense that he was not doing it for the right reasons. Ever. He loved us and that was easily as discernible regardless of whether or not we were misbehaving, as his disappointment when we were.
As a father, I never felt the need to spank, aside from the occasional attention getting swat on the ass. I often felt the desire, but if I wasn't certain of the need, I would restrain the desire. The latter indicates it's all about me, and while that's certainly true (;D), the point was dealing with misbehavior and it never rose to the level where spanking was appropriate.
Some kids just need it, while others don't. Those that do suffer from the lack of such corrective measures. They do not get the idea about consequences for one's actions. A scolding doesn't cut it for serious issues. In my case, I wasn't so much malicious as much as a tragic accident about to happen. I did dangerous stuff, simply because that's where my curiosity took me. Many of my beatings were to drive home the seriousness of the situation and I don't believe I ever did the same stupid thing twice.
Another point regarding your post is the notion that God deals harshly with those who insist on sinning. When trying to resolve this to some (one guy in particular---I won't name him), it is suggested that such a God isn't worth worship, isn't really the loving, kumbaya, flower-child God preferred. Justice and love go hand in hand. Justice without love is just a beating.
Why Jesus wants you to stop spanking your kids:
Studies on spanking kids reveal that Jesus was right– the use of violence only creates a cycle of more violence.
So, Naum, I went and read the article. Wouldn't want to blow off any good information on a topic like this. As it turns out, the author never offers a reference to Jesus on the topic. I mean, he is quite sure "I can’t imagine Jesus ever whipping off his belt ...", but the way in which "Jesus was right" was that his Jesus was molded in his image of him.
Pitting Jesus (you know, the one who said that not one jot or tittle would pass) against all of the Scriptures that include the use of corporal punishment as a valid tool for training children isn't helpful, especially when one does so without the use of Scripture.
Thankfully, we can give up all that falderol of "God's Word" as long as we have "studies on spanking" that countermands God's Word.
But you know me; I'm stuck with a biblical worldview. So please don't tell me "Jesus wants you to stop spanking your kids" without a reference to something He said that supports it. Of course, that reference will also need to be integrated with all the rest of the Scriptures I offered (and the others that I didn't).
@Stan, the main Bible passage oft cited to support spanking is dealt with in this link (referenced in the article).
And, it is Jesus that gives the scriptures meaning (for Jesus followers) in the first place.
"Whoever, then, thinks that [they] understand the Holy Scriptures, or any part of them, but puts such an interpretation upon them as does not tend to build up this twofold love of God and our neighbor, does not yet understand them as [they] ought." ~St. Augustine
@Naum, good thing the "rod" passage wasn't the only text I used, isn't it? isn't this circular? The Rachel Boldwyn article doesn't address, for instance, the clear biblical fact that God disciplines. And a completely non-violent Jesus doesn't fit the Scriptures when the Scriptures list Him going twice into the Temple with whips.
Isn't the statement about Jesus and the Scripture circular? Jesus gives the Scriptures meaning. The Scriptures tell us about Jesus. Which one is it? Worse, as it turns out, the popular move today is to say, "Jesus to me is ..." and then read that back into the Scriptures because "Jesus gives the Scriptures meaning."
Re: Jesus and the Temple and the whip…
While Jesus’ behavior was certainly aggressive, there’s no indication whatsoever that it involved violence. True, Jesus turned tables over. But this was to put an immediate stop to the corrupt commerce that was taking place as well as perhaps to free the caged animals. There’s no mention of any person or animal getting hurt in the process.
And yes, Jesus made a whip. But there’s no mention of him using it to strike any animal, let alone human. Cracking a loud whip has always been the most effective means of controlling the movement of large groups of animals. Jesus wanted to create a stampede of animals out of the temple, and there’s no reason to conclude he used the whip for any other purpose than this.
When we read this passage in context, we can see that, while Jesus was aggressive when he drove out the animals, we cannot use this passage as justification for violence.
Clearly off topic ("Did Jesus justify violence?" vs "Is corporal punishment biblical?"), I mention the Temple incidents (plural) to simply show that Jesus was not the meek person many try to paint Him as. Trying to suggest that Jesus only advocated nonviolence is difficult when He used it and even told His disciples, "Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one." (Luke 22:36). Strict nonviolence doesn't work in the biblical accounts.
Having said all that, I find nothing at all in any of the biblical accounts of Christ that would suggest "Jesus wants you to stop spanking your kids", and the bare-faced assertion that He does doesn't make it so.
Something I want to make abundantly clear. I am not defending Adrian Peterson. While I believe that the proper use of corporal punishment is biblical, I think that "the proper use" forbids abuse, excess, and the like. From the pictures shown of the damage done to the child, I suspect that Peterson's may have been excessive and abusive. It is the principle of corporal punishment I am defending, not the person who misuses it.
Post a Comment