fc156f No.757430
What is the view on spanking here? I see many reports that spanking is bad for kids but the bible says otherwise.
52d74e No.757433
>>757430
He who spares the rod hates his son.
b99b66 No.757472
>>757430
Not negating that it is indeed better to properly educate your kids, but where exactly in the bible does it state plainly that you should hit children?
262baf No.757473
>>757430
>I see many reports that spanking is bad for kids
9abb0d No.757483
>>757472
Like Paul said, “Your children will not die if you spank them.”
796449 No.757514
>>757430
Spanking is 100% unneeded.
>>757433
Not a command.
2913b8 No.757519
>>757514
It's a proverb with the authority of being God's word. "Whoever believes in him shall have eternal life" isn't a command either, but it's the truth
796449 No.757520
>>757519
The proverbs aren't commands in any sense of the word. They're words of wisdom, to be sure; but they're little more than fortune cookies from Solomon. Spanking children is absolutely not necessary. I was never spanked and I don't spank.
8f3c69 No.757522
>>757514
Christians are commanded to love their neighbor, which includes your children. Sparing the rod is hatred against your child.
8f3c69 No.757523
>>757520
Yeah you were never spanked and look at how you turned out. You're obviously full of pride.
2913b8 No.757527
>>757520
If you don't, you're demonstrating hatred for the child in the sense that you're not giving them what's best. How can you read the proverb any other way?
c76873 No.757530
>>757430
Discipline is more important. This has been my opinion on the situation from both the Bible and life experience. You can spank the winnie the pooh out of a child and teach them nothing, or you can spare your hand from violence and have very well adjusted children.
Punishments that educate, have some prolonged effect, and possibly involve forcing the child to take positive steps to humbly right the wrong they have committed, are much more painful than simply getting your ass tanned, as are remembered for longer as a result. For instance, my dad always relates the story that when he kept on crying for chocolate when he was 4, his mom went and bought unsweetened baker's chocolate and made him eat it all. To this day he hates chocolate, also there was less complaining thereafter.
Also a way to inculcate good behaviour is to tell them before you go to a store that they aren't getting candy or a new toy, or a pet dog or whatever, and that if they try to make a scene then you're going to take them home immediately. Make them manage expectations in other words, also keep them away from technology until they are older, and limit it. Make them always come to dinner rather than eating some random place with no social element.
796449 No.757533
>>757522
1 Corinthians 13:4-8
Tell me again how love means "beating your child with a stick".
400122 No.757535
>>757430
Should be avoided, but if the child won't listen then hitting them wont kill them.
Of course it should be done in discipline and love for the child, not out of anger, do not give Satan a foothold.
796449 No.757536
>>757530
>Discipline is more important.
Bingo.
c76873 No.757538
>>757433
Also, yes "He who spares the rod hates his son, but he that loves him disciplines him diligently." It doesn't say "therefore use the rod frequently" but rather diligent discipline. See >>757530
796449 No.757540
>>757523
>and look at how you turned out. You're obviously full of pride.
Speaking from experience is not speaking with pride. How many children do you have?
2913b8 No.757542
>>757540
Answer: do you think the proverb is just wrong?
796449 No.757545
>>757542
Answer: how many children do you have?
Is the proverb wrong? Not for the time it was written, no. It was important to maintain strong discipline in a household that needed farmers and warriors. There is a time for everything and that time has passed.
536421 No.757546
>>757523
The irony. You literally don't even get it either.
2913b8 No.757547
>>757545
I'm not the guy who called you prideful, but I don't have any children
I gather that you don't think the proverb is a timeless truth. how do you justify that in light of 2 Tim 3:16?
>2 Timothy 3:16-17 KJV — All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
719d57 No.757548
>>757520
>The Inspired Word of God.
>Nothing more than fortune cookie level advice.
Are you serious? Explain.
c76873 No.757550
>>757545
No I disagree; despite being on your side, you could actually make an argument from scripture because the phrase "he who spares the rod hates his son" is only half the proverb. But what you did implies something that is false, that the "times have changed" which is a modernist myth.
Proverbs 13:24
>Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is DILIGENT to DISCIPLINE him.
Emphasis mine
796449 No.757551
>>757547
Inspiration of God doesn't mean commandment. The Proverbs aren't commandments. Never have been, never will be.
796449 No.757553
>>757550
It's not modernism. We live in different time, surely you can see that? It's why we don't have to worry about mixing fabrics anymore. Times change. If I'm allowed to wear poly/cotton blends and not circumcise my sons, then why would it be "modernist" to say I don't have to poke them with sticks?
719d57 No.757555
>>757553
Your're making the classic modernist/Liberal mistake of confusing Ceremonial Law with Moral Law. Yes, we can eat pork and shellfish and such, but that doesn't change morality. And the fact that you just referred to Proverbs as just "fortune cookie" advice, makes me think more and more that you are from r/christianity.
796449 No.757556
>>757548
Think about it.
"He that blesseth his friend with a loud voice, rising early in the morning, it shall be counted a curse to him." Proverbs 27:14
So, do you wait until afternoon to say "God bless you" to a friend?
796449 No.757557
>>757555
"Beat your child with a stick or you hate him" is not ceremonial OR moral law.
c76873 No.757558
>>757553
No, the reason you don't keep kosher is because Christians have a new covenant with God that supersedes the old one. It was revealed to St Paul that kosher laws didn't have a role to play in the new covenant and that's the only reason the controversy got settled. It has nothing to do with times changing.
Besides, the times never change, everything is in the same spiritual condition it always was. Surely you can see that?
2913b8 No.757559
>>757551
Bad hermeneutics
The Bible is God's word, and remains profitable. If you spare the rod, you hate your child.
719d57 No.757560
>>757556
>with a loud voice,
Yes, I would love you to say "God Bless you" to me in an obnoxiously loud voice early in the morning. /sarcasm
>>757557
The Rod as a symbol of discipline is also utilized in Psalm 22 (or 23 if you're not Orthodox): "Thy rod and they staff, they comfort me." It's a reference to God utilizing both stern reproof/discipline (the rod) and gentle guidance when necessary (the staff.)
8f3c69 No.757561
>>757540
>>757546
Denigrating a prophet of God is the clearest evidence of pride.
>>757551
I already gave you the argument for why it is a part of the command to love your neighbor.
>>757553
This is a false equivalency because it has been explicitly stated in scripture that those things have been done away with. There have been no such statements against spanking.
796449 No.757562
>>757558
Give me one good spiritual reason to beat my sons.
>>757559
Since you have no children, I will rightfully disregard anything you say when it comes to raising children.
8f3c69 No.757563
>>757562
>Give me one good spiritual reason to beat my sons
If you don't they'll end up fools like you.
796449 No.757564
>>757563
Do you have something that doesn't involve insulting me?
c76873 No.757566
>>757562
>Give me one good spiritual reason to beat my sons.
Please don't insult me when I said already that the most important part of the proverb is to discipline with diligence. Whether you do it with a stick, your open hand, or forcing them to eat soap for saying foul things, or if you get creative like I suggested in >>757530 just ISN'T my buisness.
796449 No.757567
>>757566
If that's the most important part of the proverb, then why is this whole thread (and the parenting thread before it) focused solely on the part that says "if you don't beat your kid, you hate them"?
cf0a13 No.757568
c76873 No.757569
>>757567
God has not seen fit to bless all with an equal intelligence. And >>757568
8f3c69 No.757570
>>757564
Yeah lets ignore the issue at hand and address the damage done to your massive ego.
2913b8 No.757571
>>757562
Do you only visit oncologists who have had cancer themselves?
c76873 No.757572
>>757571
I wasn't prepared for that
796449 No.757574
>>757571
No, but at least I know an oncologist has studied cancer and been to medical school. Are you a teacher or child care professional or pediatrician?
2913b8 No.757575
>>757574
I'm a seminarian. My life atm is centered around learning the Bible.
796449 No.757577
>>757575 (nice digits)
That is a noble pursuit! But does it make you more qualified when it comes to children than, say, a parent of 6? Also, why are you leaving out the 2nd part of that Proverb - as >>757567 pointed out?
796449 No.757578
c76873 No.757580
>>757574
You want advice from those people? God forbid I let service industry workers tell me how to parent.
>>757575
I'd like to actually hear what you have to say then about this proverb because I've been advancing the argument thus >>757566
796449 No.757581
>>757580
I'd take someone who has been around 1000 children and studied them carefully before I'd take the advice of someone who has never seen a child in real life. Just sayin'.
c76873 No.757583
>>757581
Yeah, but I've known enough teachers and child care professionals (but not pediatricians, I'd take their health advice) to know that teachers and child care professionals are really great with their own children. Yours? Not so much
c76873 No.757584
>>757583
>>757581
**And even then it's debatable whether they make actually good parents
2913b8 No.757587
>>757577
>>757580
The question of how to interpret the scripture is unrelated to your status as a parent. If I were making a claim about parenthood on my own authority you'd be right.
The whole chapter is a series of parallelisms
Proverbs
13:22-25 KJV — A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children: and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just.
Much food is in the tillage of the poor: but there is that is destroyed for want of judgment.
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
The righteous eateth to the satisfying of his soul: but the belly of the wicked shall want.
The bad example comes first
>Hating his son
How does he demonstrate hatred?
>Sparing the rod
Thats contrasted with the good example
>loving the son
How does he demonstrate that?
>Chastening (disciplining) him
I actually find the anti-spanking argument pretty persuasive from a libertarian NAP point of view, but it just doesn't reconcile with what the Bible says
796449 No.757588
>>757587
Good stuff and thank you. I still won't spank my kids, but that's good stuff.
2913b8 No.757591
>>757588
Let me point you to another proverb
Proverbs 15:5 KJV — A fool despiseth his father's instruction: but he that regardeth reproof is prudent.
c76873 No.757592
>>757587
I'm actually not anti-spanking, I have just been personally witness to parenting which I would say is "disinterested." Yes, the kid gets spanked, or worse, just given a time out, but it is perfunctory rather than diligent.
That's why I advised stuff like forcing a child who is demanding chocolate to eat baker's chocolate, i.e. stuff where if you do it, it means that one is being diligent with chastening.
At any rate, I think the most important thing is just to remember that every time they shirk discipline, it is a sign of childishness that must be got rid of somehow or other.
2913b8 No.757594
>>757592
Agreed that discipline is not always a switch, and after a certain age it should never be
2913b8 No.757601
>>757597
Why do you say that, because they're boy spanking enthusiasts?
c76873 No.757607
>>757601
Holy shit, anon, what denom are you and are they all as funny as you at your church? This is twice that you've pulled out excellent bants
2913b8 No.757610
>>757607
Southern Baptist B^)
Most everybody at my church is old, not so funny but very cozy
11880a No.757620
>>757610
Come join the New IFB.
2913b8 No.757625
>>757620
I'm not on board with some of the doctrine and my convention isn't too far gone yet
0908d6 No.757633
d273f0 No.757638
>>757633
No it isn't. If you think its sexual its because your screwed up porn made it seem so.
0908d6 No.757639
>>757638
Porn is born out of sexual thoughts. Spanking fetish was born because people found sexual excitement in spanking.
2913b8 No.757640
>>757639
How do you feel about pooping?
d273f0 No.757641
>>757639
Correct but you need background information.
>If you can find sexual excitement in something its sexual
Mate you can find sexual excitement in anything. Some people report sexual excitement in feet(>inb4 feet are sexual). Some people will find menial tasks lewd if they associate it with sex somehow.
fc156f No.757642
Does anyone have proof spanking is good? I'm in favour of it btw.
0908d6 No.757643
>>757641
Still, touching butt is universally accepted as more sexual than touching feet. Also, why would you risk bleeding your son's ass when even screaming at them is traumatizing enough. Unless your children are absolute punks I wouldn't recommend harming them physically. Not every kid is born to be drug dealers and cop killers.
d273f0 No.757645
>>757643
>touching butt is universally accepted as more sexual than touching feet
>universally accepted
Breasts are universally accepted to be "sexual" even though that's wrong.
>why would you risk bleeding your son's ass when even screaming at them is traumatizing enough
At that point you're running to another argument, I don't want to follow into it.
0908d6 No.757646
>>757645
>Breasts are universally accepted to be "sexual" even though that's wrong.
But breasts really are sexual. Female nipples are sensitive. Next you're going to say that the crotch isn't sexual. Are you a nudist or something?
>At that point you're running to another argument, I don't want to follow into it.
It's just a side note, not an argument for you specifically, and I'm just pointing out that physical abuse can cause harm psychologically and physiologically. The point is, treat your kids as you should. Not every kid is the same, not everyone has the same emotional capacity to withstand high trauma and not everyone can be too spoiled. Every child is born with different conditions. I don't doubt that some kids need some whooping but not all of them do.
34c52d No.757650
94d984 No.757812
>but the bible says otherwise
It also says we shouldn't wear clothes made of mixed fabrics, but we do and they are plenty useful.
0e1aa1 No.757823
>>757812
I can't believe you just unironically tried to use one of the fulfilled ceremonial laws to justify ignoring the moral law. You have to go back, or at least lurk several months before posting again.
94d984 No.757828
>>757823
What do you even mean by this?
PLease explain.
6b19dd No.759087
>>757828
There were rules for ceremonies relating to sacrifice in the old covenant and life under it.
These are now all obsolete with the New Covenant of Jesus. However, the moral law, such as the Ten Commandments, still applies.
8f3c69 No.759110
>>757633
>having such a depraved mind
Breastfeeding, giving birth and bathing your children are all far too sexual. We must abolish all physical contact between parent and child!
dbbd2e No.759256
>>757433 (checked)
>first reply is always best reply
1228ea No.759462
>>757430
If you truly love your wife, you have to spank here from time to time, even if it's illegal.
f74adc No.759465
c76873 No.759510
>>759462
Can do, and no it's really only illegal in theory, and hardly even so then. You want to know what's actually illegal? BDSM. Yep BDSM is felony assault and where I am people have gone to jail for grievous bodily harm and malicious wounding that they inflicted upon one another in an orgy. Yep, the unrighteous have cause to fear.
Not advocating it, and I don't want to mods to ban me for promoting scandal. But let's just say I've read some really messed up stuff in the case law, so you're hardly going to be named scoundrel of the year for smacking your wife's ass.