How should parents dicipline their children ?

[Lewis]

As a child, my father beat us black-n-blue. We were punched, kicked, beat with metal bars, pieces of wood, ... from abuse? That was abuse not love, the Word of God does not say to abuse I our children, when I was coming up I got beat on my behind with a belt, by my pop, or I had ...

Metal bars, now that is bad. I got beat up by my pop, but I was a grown out of control drunken drug addict man, who was making my first wife's and the kids life a living hell. And somebody had to get my attention, so my mother inlaw called my dad on one of my drunks, and my dad had to give me a beat down, right in front of my wife, but I was like 27 years old. And a few times when I was like 18 and around 20 he had to punch me, reason, I was out of control. But he never used metal bars man, but you were in another culture, so what can I say.

 

[Relic]

.

God doesn't seperate cultural upbringings. God expects all of those that are His to obey and follow His principles and precepts.

When man refuses to follow the ways of the Holy Spirit, they end up beating each other black and blue. And yes, drunkeness will be of a good vehicle for the devil to use another person to inflict a beating upon the drunk. The devil uses those who are out of line with the Good Will of Holy Spirit. God comes to the rescue, He redeems us FROM Sin. He doesn't lead us into Sin. Satan is the one who does all the evil in this world. Jesus came to save us FROM the things of the ungodly. He is our redeemer. We are to forgive those who have done us harm, not defend the ungodly action they have done to us.

.

.

 

[Relic]

.

The Rod of Guidance
by Sue Hille

A phrase often bantered about as though it were sacred is "spare the rod and spoil the child. " That is not a quotation from the Bible, but is based on Proverbs 13:24, "He that spareth his rod hateth his son, but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." (K.J.V.) There are people who use this verse as a mandate for corporal punishment of
their children. Is that what the Bible really teaches?
Scripture is often quoted, misquoted, or applied in a manner contrary to its intent because the words and/or the context of their use are not understood. Portions of the Bible taken out of context have been used to substantiate both sides of a given argument. Poor scholarship may be the culprit.One of the most popular portions of the Bible is Psalm 23. Verse four of that Psalm states: "Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me." The assurance of comfort is not easily reconciled with corporal punishment.

The Hebrew word for rod used in both the Psalms and Proverbs passages is "shabat." A shabat is specifically the rod used by a shepherd in caring for sheep. The shabat has five common practical uses: 1) it is the symbol of the shepherd's guardianship of the sheep; 2) it can be thrown with great accuracy just beyond the wandering sheep to
send the animal scurrying back to the flock; 3) the shabat can be used to ward off an intruder and protect the sheep from any animals which may attack; 4) the sheep are counted as they "pass under the rod;" 5) it is used to part the wool in order to examine the sheep for disease, wounds or defects which may be treated. There is no evidence that the rod is ever used to physically strike the sheep.
Professor E. Johnson, a Biblical scholar and prestigious writer, states, "The rod may stand as a figure for all correction, firm yet kindly discipline and instruction." (John, E.; Funk and Wagnalls' Pulpit Commentary, Volume 9, page 263.) We could interpolate the five uses of the shepherd's shabat into parental guidelines thus: 1) Security--the
child knows he/she is loved, cared for, accepted; 2) Guidanceâ€â€the loving parent will teach the child and keep him/her from going astray; 3) Protection--the parent will not let outsiders hurt the child; 4) Evaluation--the child will be "counted" and progress will be monitored; 5) Diagnosisâ€â€the parent will look for signs of anxiety or pain in the
child and seek out treatment and healing.

The rod is a comfort to the sheep. Loving, firm discipline can be a comfort to the child. In the second half of Proverbs 13:24, the Hebrew word given as "chasteneth" in the KJV, "yasar," is more accurately translated "disciplines.†Yasar has both a positive and negative connotation, each equally balanced. It does mean "to chasten, correct, punish," but it also means "to admonish, exhort (build up), instruct." T'he use of yasar in the verse injects a thought of love and a thought of appropriateness.

W. Clarkson speaks to the well-moderated correction of love which should be: 1) carefully related to the offense; 2) never administered in the heat of temper, rather in the calmness of conviction; 3) free from physical violence possibly a look of reproach, a scolding, or a wisely chosen exclusion from some appreciated privilege; 4) fair, always leaning over in consideration of the child, for he states that one unjust infliction will do more harm than many just ones will do good; 5) occasional and of brief duration, since nothing defeats its own purpose more certainly than perpetual fault-finding, constantly repeated punishment, or penalty that is too severe.

W. Clarkson is not a child psychologist, educator, or counselor as his writing might indicate. He is a Bible scholar.
The preceding paragraph was taken from his commentary on Proverbs 23:14.

Let those who are eager to follow Biblical principle not forget the words addressed to fathers in Colossians 3:21, "Do not provoke your children to anger lest they be discouraged." The original Greek word which is translated "discouraged" implies a broken spirit. This has been called "the plague of youth." Discipline must always be balanced with encouragement. That is a good principle of child psychology. That is a good principle of Judeo-Christian teaching.

That is a good principle.



(Special thanks to the following reference sources: Dr. Howard Bedmond, Whitworth College; The New Layman's
Parallel Bible,- The Funk and Wagnalls Pulpit Commentary; The Barclay Study Bible Series, Phillip Keller's A Shepherd
Looks at Psalm 23.)

Reprinted with permission from SCAN Advocate, Spring, 1985.
http://www.faithtrustinstitute.org/down ... idance.pdf

.

 

[Carol Lowery]

Well God's Word is clear not to beat your child to the point that they loath you. Proverb's is full of instructions to raise and discipline your child in love. But I believe that Gabriels dad took it to the extreme when God's Word says that it's better to beat your child than for them to burn in hell. I understand his pain....I experienced such sufferings as a youth by my [source of concievement], not my daddy (Lord bless him) that just passed away. Wounds that heal in Jesus name, but leave scars that remind us of those sufferings.

 

[Gabe]

God doesn't seperate cultural upbringings. God expects all of those that are His to obey and follow His principles and precepts.

When man refuses to follow the ways of the Holy Spirit, they end up beating each other black and blue. And yes, drunkeness will be of a good vehicle for the devil to use another person to inflict a beating upon the drunk. The devil uses those who are out of line with the Good Will of Holy Spirit. God comes to the rescue, He redeems us FROM Sin. He doesn't lead us into Sin. Satan is the one who does all the evil in this world. Jesus came to save us FROM the things of the ungodly. He is our redeemer. We are to forgive those who have done us harm, not defend the ungodly action they have done to us.

Who's defending ungodly actions? The OP is asking how parents should dicipline their children and I'm sharing my view (formed from past experiences) which is that there is no definitive way to seperate physically discipling your children and abusing them, so my advice would be to not physically punish children.

This is just one definition of “Abuse†that I found:

Abuse is a pattern of behaviour in which physical violence and/or emotional coercion is used to gain or maintain power or control in a relationship.

And here is just one definition of “Child abuse†that I found:

"Child abuse" can be defined as causing or permitting any harmful or offensive contact on a child's body; and, any communication or transaction of any kind which humiliates, shames, or frightens the child. Some child development experts go a bit further, and define child abuse as any act or omission, which fails to nurture or in the upbringing of the children.

How does spanking a child not fit into any one of those two definitions of abuse?

Spanking may be allowed in the states; but the line between corporal punishment and what constitutes abuse varies by state and is not always clear-cut. This in itself will tell you that your opinion on what is defined as “discipline†is subjective. Most of Europe and even Israel consider spanking a form of child abuse and this only reaffirms my previous statement:

I don't see a clear line between physically disciplining your children and child abuse. What constitutes child abuse differs between religions and cultures. What is discipline for one child is abuse to another, therefore if I ever have children in the future I would not discipline them physically.

If you think punching a child is abusive, then the same can be said of spanking a child. The article you yourself quoted states "There is no evidence that the rod is ever used to physically strike the sheep." so what leads you to believe that spanking is not abuse, other than the culture you have been brought-up in?

 

[Kelli]

Sorry to change the subject, but as I am reading through these post, I fall in love with Jesus all over again. Gabriel, Carol, Lewis, and me, have all come out of abusive homes, and it sounds like at least Lewis, and I, were wrecks because of it. But look what Jesus has done with our lives! I could never imagine my life being like this when I was in the debts. Because of Jesus, I am the woman I always wanted to be.

 

[Gabe]

Sorry to change the subject, but as I am reading through these post, I fall in love with Jesus all over again. Gabriel, Carol, Lewis, and me, have all come out of abusive homes, and it sounds like at least Lewis, and I, were wrecks because of it. But look what Jesus has done with our lives! I could never imagine my life being like this when I was in the debts. Because of Jesus, I am the woman I always wanted to be.

Amen to that. I remember growing up, we were scared of our father but never hated him for how he treated us. The only time we ever felt anger towards him was when he would beat our mother. When he passed away, I cried for months on end. It was only as the years passed by that I started to hate him a little for some of the things he did to us, but when I found Christ that hate disappeared.

 

[Relic]

My "opinion" is not to make anyone "assume" that I am in opposition to theirs. Many times I write from a general perspective.

Gabriel Ali , I never did say you were defending your fathers actions, nor did I ever say anyone was defending ungodly actions. I made a generalized statements through most of the body of the previous postings I made. What I did address to you, Gabriel Ali , was clear in regard to black and blue bruising being abusive treatment, that's it, nothing more was stated to you directly. Gabriel Ali, I do not disagree with you in terms of what defines abusive behavior.


Now, generally speaking to everyone, and not specifically to Gabriel Ali....
I personally, had to never spank my children. They never did anything so bad that I felt they should be spanked. However, I am not against spanking, but my definition of spanking is no more than two or three swats on the behind of a fully clothed padded behind, never to "physically" or "emotionally" harm the child . And I would never shame a child to the point of ridicule or humiliation. The spirit of a child is delicate as is their bodies, and I would never harm either one.


IMO, The definition of what constitutes a spanking might just be one or two swats on the behind to some people and maybe four or five swats on the behind to others, while to others it might be that they think a spanking is a five minute ordeal.

IMO, Shaming a child is also subject to broader terms of definition. However, there is a shame that must be instilled in all of us, so as to allow the Holy Spirit to bring about a conviction of spirit and bring us to the place of repentance. That type of shame is not abusive. Without shame there is no abiltiy to recognize sin.
On the other hand, to shame a child to the point of condemnation and ridicule is NOT a biblical means of discipline should never be used as a means of discipline.

This IS my opinion and we are all allowed to have them, thank you ;) .

 

[Gabe]

My "opinion" is not to make anyone "assume" that I am in opposition to theirs. Many times I write from a general perspective.

Oh really? What would you call this:

As a child, my father beat us black-n-blue. We were punched, kicked, beat with metal bars, pieces of wood, whipped with curtain wire, he also had a habit of lifting us up above his head and throwing us against walls. I know it was done out of love, so how do you separate discipline from abuse?

Bruising (causing internal or external bleeding) is abusive. If you don't think causing someone to bleed isn't abusive then you truly need to re-evaluate the definition of abuse.

Gabriel Ali , I never did say you were defending your fathers actions, nor did I ever say anyone was defending ungodly actions. I made a generalized statements through most of the body of the previous postings I made. What I did address to you, Gabriel Ali , was clear in regard to black and blue bruising being abusive treatment, that's it, nothing more was stated to you directly. Gabriel Ali, I do not disagree with you in terms of what defines abusive behavior.

Maybe in the future you could be a little clearer as to to whom your comments are aimed at, because this:

We are to forgive those who have done us harm, not defend the ungodly action they have done to us.

...(considering my previous posts in this thread and your confrontational reply to them) seems to be aimed at me, and if its aimed at me I will address it.

and yes, of course we are all entitled to our opinions.

Thank you.

 

[Relic]

My "opinion" is not to make anyone "assume" that I am in opposition to theirs. Many times I write from a general perspective.

Oh really? What would you call this:`

[quote="Gabriel Ali":3pt5yx9v]As a child, my father beat us black-n-blue. We were punched, kicked, beat with metal bars, pieces of wood, whipped with curtain wire, he also had a habit of lifting us up above his head and throwing us against walls. I know it was done out of love, so how do you separate discipline from abuse?

Bruising (causing internal or external bleeding) is abusive. If you don't think causing someone to bleed isn't abusive then you truly need to re-evaluate the definition of abuse.

[/quote:3pt5yx9v]

"IF" and "THEN" interjections in a statement makes all the difference in how one should interpret the sentence. I was stating to you that "IF" you think causing someone to bleed "isn't" abusive, THEN .... etc.
It was not meant for you to take offense. You made it clear what "your" definition of abuse was and was not; You stated it was subjective to the cultural definition.

Too many people take offense where there is none meant. (generalized statement)

Gabriel Ali , I never did say you were defending your fathers actions, nor did I ever say anyone was defending ungodly actions. I made a generalized statements through most of the body of the previous postings I made. What I did address to you, Gabriel Ali , was clear in regard to black and blue bruising being abusive treatment, that's it, nothing more was stated to you directly. Gabriel Ali, I do not disagree with you in terms of what defines abusive behavior.

Maybe in the future you could be a little clearer as to to whom your comments are aimed at, because this:

We are to forgive those who have done us harm, not defend the ungodly action they have done to us.

...(considering my previous posts in this thread and your confrontational reply to them) seems to be aimed at me, and if its aimed at me I will address it.

and yes, of course we are all entitled to our opinions.

Thank you.

[/quote]


"WE" is a general term, not specifically referring to one person but to a general audience.

Not intending to be offensively confrontational towards you. Nope, no offense intended.


.


Gabriel, when I speak in terms of using the phrase "back in the day" that is also a generalized statement which can even mean as far back and many many years ago OR, it can mean as being a few months or even week ago. There is no difinitive time frame specified in that phrase, it is a general term many times used loosely. No offense meant to anyone.

.... LINGO.... Go figure...
All too easily misunderstood. ( Cultural differences, perhaps? )


Using IF and THEN examples are not personal attacks. They are statements used to exemplify that IF one thing is believed THEN another is obvious. It was/is obvious that Gabriel Ali IS against abusive behavior. Where did I ever say she was not?
Also, to make the statement " "we" should never defend the abuser"... is not a personal attack on Gabriel Ali. " "we" is a word meaning; people in general, not personal.

 

[LostSoul]

Bruising (causing internal or external bleeding) is abusive. If you don't think causing someone to bleed isn't abusive then you truly need to re-evaluate the definition of abuse.

Relic,

I am sorry, but I can see how some could or may find this offensive. For more or less, it does seem to imply that anyone having this point of view is wrong. Not that I do not necessarily agree that abuse in any shape is not something to be tolerated, but let us not bash one another on account of differences in views.


Everyone,

Let us please totopic ....

When we do...please let us also keep it clean.

Thank You

 

[Relic]

Bruising (causing internal or external bleeding) is abusive. If you don't think causing someone to bleed isn't abusive then you truly need to re-evaluate the definition of abuse.

Relic,

I am sorry, but I can see how some could or may find this offensive. For more or less, it does seem to imply that anyone having this point of view is wrong. Not that I do not necessarily agree that abuse in any shape is not something to be tolerated, but let us not bash one another on account of differences in views.


Everyone,

Let us please totopic ....

When we do...please let us also keep it clean.

Thank You

Guess us old folks need to learn how to communitcate better, and with more sensitivity to those who would take something too personally, We need to learn how to walk on thin ice, aye? Did you know that people who have been abused, and people who are abusers, are those with whome others have to walk on ice because of them being too sensitive? I lived with a drunken abusive husband, been through plenty of abusive stituations in which the victim had to walk on ice in order to NOT upset the abuser. The victims then become too sensitive also and then people tell others to shut their traps and be more sensitive towards them. So, in those cases whose to be counseled and whose to be the counselor? I'll tell ya, No one. There is no room for any good counsel or opinions from anyone.


Forums such as these are the most notorious for bickering . And it's usually the younger kids who at trying to tell the elders to walk on ice to not hurt anyone's feelings. Go figure. Maybe it would be best just let the two people involved in the misunderstanding to settle the matter. I dont' see things getting out of hand anywhere. No name calling at all. So then....

Gabriel Ali, I meant no offense towards you. If you will see in the last posting I made to you that I tried to clear that up with you.


Now, "generally speaking", I wonder, can you see how I would find any replies toward me as being personally offensive? I'm not taking anything personally and am not offended at all here. But truth be told, I'm not bashing anyone. And no offense is meant anywhere. I was sticking to the topic of abuse, I was not personally attacking anyone.

Generally speaking.... Too much sensitivity going on with the younger generation these days, I can see how writing on the "subject" of abuse would then be turned into an offense (personally taken), as if writing ones own opinions were an attack and an abusive means of communicating to others. scheech. :help :ohwell . (THAT was a general statment )

.
.

 

[Gabe]

As a child, my father beat us black-n-blue. We were punched, kicked, beat with metal bars, pieces of wood, whipped with curtain wire, he also had a habit of lifting us up above his head and throwing us against walls. I know it was done out of love, so how do you separate discipline from abuse?

Bruising (causing internal or external bleeding) is abusive. If you don't think causing someone to bleed isn't abusive then you truly need to re-evaluate the definition of abuse.

"IF" and "THEN" interjections in a statement makes all the difference in how one should interpret the sentence. I was stating to you that "IF" you think causing someone to bleed "isn't" abusive, THEN .... etc.
It was not meant for you to take offense. You made it clear what "your" definition of abuse was and was not; You stated it was subjective to the cultural definition.

Too many people take offense where there is none meant. (generalized statement).....

Maybe in the future you could be a little clearer as to to whom your comments are aimed at, because this:

We are to forgive those who have done us harm, not defend the ungodly action they have done to us.

...(considering my previous posts in this thread and your confrontational reply to them) seems to be aimed at me, and if its aimed at me I will address it.

"WE" is a general term, not specifically referring to one person but to a general audience.

Not intending to be offensively confrontational towards you. Nope, no offense intended.

Personally, I think that's absolute rubbish. I'm quite capable of understanding written English and I'm sure most will see what I see when reading those quotes. I could make the following statement after quoting another member on this board, saying:

"If you can't see how those comments are obviously aimed at me, then you truly must be a (insert any word or phrase you like here)"

The "If" placed in front of my sentence does not alter the fact that I am being confrontational.

"Generally speaking", I was not offended by your replies, I was simply addressing them, but I think out conversation has run its course.

 

[Relic]

Personally, I think that's absolute rubbish. I'm quite capable of understanding written English and I'm sure most will see what I see when reading those quotes. I could make the following statement after quoting another member on this board, saying:

"If you can't see how those comments are obviously aimed at me, then you truly must be a (insert any word or phrase you like here)"

The "If" placed in front of my sentence does not alter the fact that I am being confrontational.

"Generally speaking", I was not offended by your replies, I was simply addressing them, but I think out conversation has run its course.

Gabriel Ali, You can assume all you want about what I wrote, and think what I wrote is rubbish if you want. I did not accuse you of supporting the abuser or of supporting abusive behavior. To say someone actually does so is a far cry from using the word If in a phrase. The word if is a conjunction... meaning; in the event of. I used the word ifas being a basis upon a condition as being so or not, and did not use it as a means to accuse you of anything, nor was I implying it as being a factual statement of what your actual thoughts were. Using the word IF does not conclude anything in regard to the inquiry until the person being addressed responds with yea or nay regarding the matter.

You can accuse me of not seeing what I wrote if you want but... Hello, I wrote it and I know what I wrote.
You are the one who has misinterpreted it and have accused me of things I did not imply or intent for you to take the wrong way. And I did in no way intent to be confrontational towards you.

So yes, I will agree it's true, our conversation has run its course. Sorry you took it the wrong way, I am glad you were not offended, but I am saddened that we had such a miscommunication.

.

 

[LostSoul]

Guess us old folks need to learn how to communitcate better, and with more sensitivity to those who would take something too personally, We need to learn how to walk on thin ice, aye? Did you know that people who have been abused, and people who are abusers, are those with whome others have to walk on ice because of them being too sensitive? I lived with a drunken abusive husband, been through plenty of abusive stituations in which the victim had to walk on ice in order to NOT upset the abuser. The victims then become too sensitive also and then people tell others to shut their traps and be more sensitive towards them. So, in those cases whose to be counseled and whose to be the counselor? I'll tell ya, No one. There is no room for any good counsel or opinions from anyone.


Forums such as these are the most notorious for bickering . And it's usually the younger kids who at trying to tell the elders to walk on ice to not hurt anyone's feelings. Go figure. Maybe it would be best just let the two people involved in the misunderstanding to settle the matter. I dont' see things getting out of hand anywhere. No name calling at all. So then....

Now, "generally speaking", I wonder, can you see how I would find any replies toward me as being personally offensive? I'm not taking anything personally and am not offended at all here. But truth be told, I'm not bashing anyone. And no offense is meant anywhere. I was sticking to the topic of abuse, I was not personally attacking anyone.

Generally speaking.... Too much sensitivity going on with the younger generation these days, I can see how writing on the "subject" of abuse would then be turned into an offense (personally taken), as if writing ones own opinions were an attack and an abusive means of communicating to others. scheech. :help :ohwell . (THAT was a general statment ) .

My apologies. Never thought that finding a generalization offensive or the probability of it becoming so could cause so much trouble. Sorry again, it appears somehow I was out of line.....
Seeing as I have expressed my views on this thread a page or two ago...I will not speak any more on this matter.

May God Bless You

Danielle

 

[Gabe]

Gabriel Ali, You can assume all you want about what I wrote, and think what I wrote is rubbish if you want. I did not accuse you of supporting the abuser or of supporting abusive behavior. To say someone actually does so is a far cry from using the word If in a phrase. The word if is a conjunction... meaning; in the event of. I used the word ifas being a basis upon a condition as being so or not, and did not use it as a means to accuse you of anything, nor was I implying it as being a factual statement of what your actual thoughts were. Using the word IF does not conclude anything in regard to the inquiry until the person being addressed responds with yea or nay regarding the matter.

You can accuse me of not seeing what I wrote if you want but... Hello, I wrote it and I know what I wrote.
You are the one who has misinterpreted it and have accused me of things I did not imply or intent for you to take the wrong way. And I did in no way intent to be confrontational towards you.

So yes, I will agree it's true, our conversation has run its course. Sorry you took it the wrong way, I am glad you were not offended, but I am saddened that we had such a miscommunication.

.

LOL. To avoid going around in circles I will just say "Okay".

God bless,
Gabriel

 

[Kelli]

Reading through these post, it has become clear to me just how wonderful it is to be in this family of Christ. Gabriel, your opinion was formed out of your love for (and for lack of a better word) a loving but (by western cultures) abusive father, a father who lived in a (I have to interject here) "erroneous" culture, where the harder you beat your child the more you would prove your love... your father must have loved you very much.

I don't know how I came to this conclusion and I didn't want to Gabriel, because it is so far from what I believe in how we should raise the beautiful gifts God gave us, and you are a beautiful gift from God to your father. I know he must have loved you very much because Having to discipline your little ones is the hardest thing about being a parent, and I, like Relic, never had to spank my girls more than a little tap on the behind once or twice throughout their growing years, and that killed me!

Relics opinion was not only formed by our western culture, it was proven to her by having to endure being abused and tormented by a spouse. I understand her point of view, because I have the same opinion I do, and I think she, like me, was concerned for the little boy Gabriel Ali. Her trying to change your point of view, was her concern for the man Gabriel Ali, whom we have grown to love.

I was so glad to read that you don't think of God as a hard task master. He never laid a hand on anyone.

I loved how in the end, you both made up! It's so cool to see God work in these posts!!!

Love, Kelli

 

[Power^verwellming]

Wow im simply amazed!, I really love hearing other peoples opinion on the subject I really do. The type of dicipline that might be inflicted on others of course will be different for others. Different diciplines end up working out for many children. That's why, what might seem very abusive to others will not be abusive to others. If the type of dicipline that's being implimented on the child and as he grows up makes him into a good person ,and helps him\her stay away from, any bad habits. Eg. drugs, alcohol, etc...in my opinion the parents are and have done their job. Of course im against abuse!! I wouldn't allow it as I know many people would agree. Once again everyone I appreciate your post im learning soo much! God bless you all !!