Spare the Rod?

[Music4Him]

I don't have children, but I wanted to know everyone's views on this.  Last spring I did a paper explaining the two methods:To spank or not to spank.  Proverbs 13:24 says "He who spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes."  I think according to God, discipline is something that needs to be done in certain situations, and there are ways for parents to discipline in love.  I know the child doesn't like it, and parents probably hate having to do it, but in the long run won't it be for the best?  I was spanked as a kid, but there are only a few times I can remember my parents having to spank me.  Now that I look back on it I won't say I liked it, but I know my parents did it because they loved me.  Does anyone else have views on this topic they want to share?  

[Kristi Ann]

I have never had children either..  

Here are some Verses for ya though..



Proverbs  22:6

6   Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.



Ephesians 6:4

4   And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
   

Blessings,   \o/

KristiAnn

[Music4Him]

I have never had children either..  

Here are some Verses for ya though..



Proverbs  22:6

6   Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.



Ephesians 6:4

4   And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
   

Blessings,   \o/

KristiAnn

Thanks for sharing those verses with me!   Those are really good!

[Kristi Ann]

You're Very welcome!

God's Living Word is Wonderful!!!! YaY  


Blessings,   \o/

KristiAnn

[Shylynne]

Oft I think its the parents that should not be spared the rod, and a little more love and patience and a little less neglect given to the children. Parents are fairly quick to smack, spank, beat and leave their children to bear the marks of broken homes, our very religious hypocrisy, and ungodly lives, and all sorts of innumberable ADULT baggage little backs are too small to bear the weight of. God help the children!

[Music4Him]

Oft I think its the parents that should not be spared the rod, and a little more love and patience and a little less neglect given to the children. Parents are fairly quick to smack, spank, beat and leave their children to bear the marks of broken homes, our very religious hypocrisy, and ungodly lives, and all sorts of innumberable ADULT baggage little backs are too small to bear the weight of. God help the children!

Yes, I can definitely see how some adults need to be taught a lesson or two.  Because I have seen some adults that act horribly.  However, I think crime and punishment can be a learning experience for kids.  I'm not talking abuse and neglect.  That's an experience no child should have to go through, and parents should be the ones to be punished if that happens.  I can defnitely see your point of view from that aspect.  But even though I'm not a parent just yet, I have worked with kids, and I know they know the difference between right and wrong, and they know the rules.  I know if a parent gives a child a soft spank on the rear or puts them in time out for a few mins, it won't kill the child.  I think if a parent does this in love that a child will learn from it, and in the end it will be a good experience.  I can definitely see your point of view though, ShyLynne.  Thank you for expressing your opinion.  

[sincereheart]

Since you asked for thoughts, I'll ramble for a moment.  

Discipline is important. No doubt about it! However, I do wonder about the whole 'rod' issue. So many take it to mean that you must discipline your children by hitting them with a 'stick'. Of course, if an adult comes after me with a stick to hit me; it's assault with a deadly weapon and I will defend myself. But as long as we just do it to our children, it's discipline.  

But how does a shepherd use a rod? Does he use it to beat his sheep? Or does he use it to guide his sheep and protect them from attack?

There is no 'one size fits all' method to discipline a child. A parent has to know their children and know which method works best. But speaking generally, those children who are hit are the children who, when frustrated or angry, tend to lash out physically. They repeat what they're taught. It's harder to find other methods of discipline but our kids are worth the effort!

Here's an example: When one of my children was about a year old, we lived in a townhouse that was 10-15 feet from the parking lot. We had a lot of young drivers that lived near us. They'd pull in faster than was safe. So I didn't want my child to dart out and get hit. We would sit out on the curb and she wasn't allowed to step in the parking lot. She'd test that frequently. I would tell her 'no no' and pick her back up. If she did it again, I'd simply tell her 'no no' and put her inside the house. I was just a few feet away from her (with the door open but the screen door shut) and she would cry because she wanted to come back out. It would break my heart but I would make her stay inside for an eternity (about five minutes). Then we'd try it again. I'd hold her and tell her 'no no, you might get an owie'. She picked up on not stepping into that parking lot and I didn't hit her. My own sister thought I was nuts until she went to visit a friend and watched her friend's children dart out into a parking lot. There was a close call....

I remember sitting in a Burger King and watching a woman smack a baby's hand every time the baby reached for the salt shaker. She was 'teaching' the baby to leave things alone, I suppose. Or maybe she was trying to break the baby of a potential salt addiction. Either way, this went on for quite a few rounds of hand smacking. Personally, I just thought she should move the salt shaker out of reach....

Ok, I'm done rambling now. And I DO realize that most will disagree with me!

[Music4Him]

Haha,  I feel like maybe I should've put this in the debate area.  I'm glad to hear your view on this though.  It's nice to see this subject from a different angle.  As for the whole "rod" issue, I don't think discipline should be hitting a child with a stick.  My mom always just used her hand the few times she had to spank my sister or me, and she never spanked hard.  However, after she spanked us, we always knew that "Woah, we shouldn't do that again."  Now, you're right, the spanking method may not work for every child, and if it doesn't, you certainly should find a form of discipline that does work whether it's time outs or not letting a child play with a certain toy.  However, I think if you don't get a form of discipline, whatever it is, kids will begin to realize that if they do something bad, mom or dad isn't going to punish them for it.  Therefore, which one of you is really in control in your household? Disciplining babies is definitely something that I think is wrong.  I agree with you fully.  Babies are too young to know right and wrong.  And you're right, the woman in Burger King should've just taken away the salt shaker instead of slappng the baby's hand, but I know after a certain age they do start knowing the rules, and that's when you gotta have the discipline.  Well, thanks again for sharing your opinion!

[grommie]

I was spanked as a child.  I am 43 years old now.  WOW  lol cant believe it either.  =)

Anyway, i have two children, my daughter is 17 and my son is 13. Now, in the past i tried that spanking thing, but it did not do them any good, it just made them angry'ER  lol.

So, it really depends on the child. While i believe in Spare the Rod, Spoil the Child...the Rod does not necessarily mean the hand, belt, switch etc...grounding them depending upon their age works, but you have to be firm and never sway from your first, well if you say,  "Do that again and i will send you to your room" or whatever,  you have to stand firm in that, because kids are smarter than we give them credit, and they will try your patience to ITS extreme.  =)

[Allinall]

Since you asked for thoughts, I'll ramble for a moment.  

Discipline is important. No doubt about it! However, I do wonder about the whole 'rod' issue. So many take it to mean that you must discipline your children by hitting them with a 'stick'. Of course, if an adult comes after me with a stick to hit me; it's assault with a deadly weapon and I will defend myself. But as long as we just do it to our children, it's discipline.  

But how does a shepherd use a rod? Does he use it to beat his sheep? Or does he use it to guide his sheep and protect them from attack?

There is no 'one size fits all' method to discipline a child. A parent has to know their children and know which method works best. But speaking generally, those children who are hit are the children who, when frustrated or angry, tend to lash out physically. They repeat what they're taught. It's harder to find other methods of discipline but our kids are worth the effort!

Here's an example: When one of my children was about a year old, we lived in a townhouse that was 10-15 feet from the parking lot. We had a lot of young drivers that lived near us. They'd pull in faster than was safe. So I didn't want my child to dart out and get hit. We would sit out on the curb and she wasn't allowed to step in the parking lot. She'd test that frequently. I would tell her 'no no' and pick her back up. If she did it again, I'd simply tell her 'no no' and put her inside the house. I was just a few feet away from her (with the door open but the screen door shut) and she would cry because she wanted to come back out. It would break my heart but I would make her stay inside for an eternity (about five minutes). Then we'd try it again. I'd hold her and tell her 'no no, you might get an owie'. She picked up on not stepping into that parking lot and I didn't hit her. My own sister thought I was nuts until she went to visit a friend and watched her friend's children dart out into a parking lot. There was a close call....

I remember sitting in a Burger King and watching a woman smack a baby's hand every time the baby reached for the salt shaker. She was 'teaching' the baby to leave things alone, I suppose. Or maybe she was trying to break the baby of a potential salt addiction. Either way, this went on for quite a few rounds of hand smacking. Personally, I just thought she should move the salt shaker out of reach....

Ok, I'm done rambling now. And I DO realize that most will disagree with me!

In an age where abuse is prevelant, the disciplining of a child is often mistaken.  If someone uses a paddle on their child to spank them, then that would be considered abuse in most cases.  But the Bible does say "rod."  It's when we try marry politcal correctness with biblical truth that we have a problem.

I do understand, believe me, the idea that hitting produces a hitting child.  But I contend, if God says to discipline, is God going to allow that truth to backfire?  Especially when He says that by doing so, you will save the child? (BTW, I believe this is refers to temporal safety rather than eternal security)

I will say this, however.  Each child is different.  My oldest daughter fears spankings like the plague.  When I spank, it's 3 whacks on the bottom, usually with an open hand.  My hand has never hurt after, or been red, so I question the force I've used.  With her, it's the fact that she's done wrong, and must be chastened physically by her daddy.  That said, I rarely have to spank her.

My youngest, on the other hand, I've often thought was actually demon possessed!    I'm kidding.  But she is far more strong willed than her sister.  She doesn't like spankings, but to be honest, if the only discipline she received was a spanking, she'd have been beaten to death a long time ago!  No.  I've never beaten her.  Same process, differing results.  The difference is that the threat of impending spankage has little affect on her.  We have to discipline her in other ways as well to teach her the truth of obedience (i.e. loss privileges, treats, sitting on her bed, etc.).

She hits.  My oldest doesn't.  So where'd she learn this?  I love how we attribute sin to the parents obedience to God's direction.  No.  It didn't come from her mother and I, anymore than her lying was something she learned from us.  I've never had to teach my daughter to sin.    She picked that one up all on her own.  Granted, she got that nature from me...

Our kids are sinners, just like us.  And while we will unintentionally teach them to sin in ways we never intended, we are given the responsibility of putting them in the bow, and shooting them straight as we can, so when they get closer to the target, they don't depart from it.  

BTW, the Shepherd used the rod to defend his sheep, and the hook to bring them back.  If the lamb failed to respond to his commands, and kept running off, he broke it's leg.  He then carried the lamb until it healed, and had a bond with the animal he never had before.  By the time he was done, though it hurt, the lamb learned it's lesson, and had a trust for it's shepherd it never had before.  

[sincereheart]

But the Bible does say "rod."

Yup. Which is why I asked:
"But how does a shepherd use a rod? Does he use it to beat his sheep? Or does he use it to guide his sheep and protect them from attack?"

And you answered:
"BTW, the Shepherd used the rod to defend his sheep, and the hook to bring them back.  If the lamb failed to respond to his commands, and kept running off, he broke it's leg.  He then carried the lamb until it healed, and had a bond with the animal he never had before.  By the time he was done, though it hurt, the lamb learned it's lesson, and had a trust for it's shepherd it never had before."

Which was my point!   The Bible does say 'rod' - but it doesn't say 'hit'. I would definitely agree that discipline IS important! I just might disagree on what constitutes 'discipline'.

It's when we try marry politcal correctness with biblical truth that we have a problem.

I realize you don't know me so I'll just come right out and say that I don't follow 'polictical correctness'! I had read the discipline Scriptures and tearfully and prayerfully studied it. I did not want to go against Scripture. But I could not hit my child.   So I considered how the 'rod' was used by the shepherd and realized that it wasn't to hit. Of course, they have been times when my kids would much rather have been spanked!  

I love how we attribute sin to the parents obedience to God's direction.

ROFL! No, I, personally, attribute it to having worked with kids for over 20 years!   Taking it a step further.... not all abused kids grow up to abuse their own. However, a LARGE majority do. "The sins of the fathers passed on to the next generation..."

We have five kids. Ranging in age from 8 to 25. They all have different personalities and different temperments. So I don't dispute entirely what you're saying. However; statistically- kids that are hit tend to be the ones who lash out by hitting. I would never say it's a case of 100%....

But for those who do spank, I would suggest that it be used as a last resort - or in case of an emergency only.

[grommie]

[note-i use he as a general]

I would say between the stages of NO and puberty, this is the best time to teach your child in the way that he should go.  I would not result to spanking as the only means of punishment as so many have stated above....but as a last resort, and if you do spank, do it out of love as someone mentioned.  

Dont just send him to his room to 'think about what he has done'....roflol  we all know he wont be thinking that, he will be thinking what he can do to keep from getting spanked again!  lol


What i remember as a child when i was spanked, is they did not talk to me.  They just spanked and it was over.  Sheesh and i got a lot of them too.  Now, dont get me wrong, my parents were brought up in that spanking era, but they never beat me or anything of that nature.

about the sins of the fathers are visited upon the generations....so true!   I found out that members of my family from generations before my parents  and before their parents well there is much sin there and though it did pass some generations, like skipping a generation etc, it hit other generations.  I have had bouts of anger where i could have thrown any one of my children out of the window.  (no children were harmed)  But i felt that anger...and that is scarey in it self.  I was raised to love thy neighbor as thyself...so i know God kept and is still keeping me from such outbursts of anger towards my children.

There is what psychologist call Nature vs Nurture.  My daughter has been nurtured to no end, but her true nature is that of her dad and myself.  No matter how much i try to do for her, her true nature is the 'I dont care about anyone but me' attitude...and while i understand it is a phase that she is going through, I have noticed something that really works...that is Prayer.  Confessing what the Word says about her. Man that prayer thing really works when we implement it. Hosea 4:6 states, "My People suffer for Lack of Knowledge;..."

We need to learn as much of the bible as we can so that we too can speak to the mountains in our lives like Jesus did when he was tempted.

[Allinall]

But the Bible does say "rod."

Yup. Which is why I asked:
"But how does a shepherd use a rod? Does he use it to beat his sheep? Or does he use it to guide his sheep and protect them from attack?"

And you answered:
"BTW, the Shepherd used the rod to defend his sheep, and the hook to bring them back.  If the lamb failed to respond to his commands, and kept running off, he broke it's leg.  He then carried the lamb until it healed, and had a bond with the animal he never had before.  By the time he was done, though it hurt, the lamb learned it's lesson, and had a trust for it's shepherd it never had before."

Which was my point!   The Bible does say 'rod' - but it doesn't say 'hit'.  I would definitely agree that discipline IS important! I just might disagree on what constitutes 'discipline'.

I think you're stretching the scriptures to fit your belief.  I don't mean that condescendingly or even piously.  I do it all the time in areas I know better.  But I think we tend to go with the "feeling" over the word.  It says, he that spares the rod hates his son.  The same word is used of the shepherds rod, but is also used of the word in Provers 10:13...

On the lips of him who has understanding, wisdom is found, but a rod is for the back of him who lacks sense.

I know you can't take this to support that it means to hit your child, but you can take this usage of the word, and with simple grammatical interpretation see that it's saying if you don't use the rod on your child, you hate him.  Now, if you don't hit your child with a rod, are you actually hating them?  I would say no.  I believe the emphasis in this passage is on the discipline, rather than the mode.  If a parent doesn't discipline their child, they simply don't love them.  However they chose to discipline them is the parents decision and based upon each child's learning from that discipline.  As I said, spanking works for my oldest, but doesn't for my youngest.  I obey and spank when I say I'm going to, but as a loving father, I want my child to learn obedience, not fear.  Although fear is not always entirely a bad thing...

It's when we try marry politcal correctness with biblical truth that we have a problem.

I realize you don't know me so I'll just come right out and say that I don't follow 'polictical correctness'! I had read the discipline Scriptures and tearfully and prayerfully studied it. I did not want to go against Scripture. But I could not hit my child.   So I considered how the 'rod' was used by the shepherd and realized that it wasn't to hit. Of course, they have been times when my kids would much rather have been spanked!  

I wasn't referring to anyone specifically in that statement and apologize if I seemed to be referring to you.  I am saying, that in our culture and day and age, we tend to interpret the word of God based upon our culture and day and age, rather than taking it for face value and obeying it accordingly.  I see this in many areas of life.  It just struck me as being the case here as well.    But I know you well enough to know that you follow God's word to the best of your understanding and want to understand more.  That's evident.

I love how we attribute sin to the parents obedience to God's direction.

ROFL! No, I, personally, attribute it to having worked with kids for over 20 years!   Taking it a step further.... not all abused kids grow up to abuse their own. However, a LARGE majority do. "The sins of the fathers passed on to the next generation..."

Ok, now that one was directed at you!    Lemme splain.  No, lemme summarize  : a hitting child knows how to hit from birth.  My youngest was hitting her sister before she ever got her first spanking at the tender age of 1 and 3/4 years old.  I don't hit my wife, dog, or worst enemy and neither does my wife.  So where'd she learn that one?  And every time I spank one of my girls, it's not in the presence of the other.  My point being that children do know how to sin, and most certainly do sin without the training of a parent.  I'm not denying that an abusive situation teaches a child to be abusive.  I'm denying that following a scriptural principle of using the "rod" of discipline on your child will produce a sinful response in the child.  It doesn't match up with scripture.    

We have five kids. Ranging in age from 8 to 25. They all have different personalities and different temperments. So I don't dispute entirely what you're saying. However; statistically- kids that are hit tend to be the ones who lash out by hitting. I would never say it's a case of 100%....

WOW!!!  That means you're ol...ole lot better at dealing with youngins than I am!  

But for those who do spank, I would suggest that it be used as a last resort - or in case of an emergency only.

Usually is at my house.  Usually.  I like to give "whoopin's" and for some odd reason, my girls like them...Is that cause I'm just playin' with 'em and they end up tickled, or are they warped?  

[sincereheart]

I think you're stretching the scriptures to fit your belief.  I don't mean that condescendingly or even piously.  I do it all the time in areas I know better.  But I think we tend to go with the "feeling" over the word.  It says, he that spares the rod hates his son.  The same word is used of the shepherds rod, but is also used of the word in Provers 10:13...

Could be. I thought about that, too. No really! I wasn't trying to fool myself or finangle around Scripture!   But in my case, I was also in the classroom and wasn't allowed to hit children there so I had to find other alternatives for discipline. It was a natural off-shoot from there. I didn't want to hit mine. They were so tiny! Which leads me to the question..... Why do we only hit them when they're little? There comes that point when parents say "Oh, they're too big to be spanked." So that strikes me as odd. Wallop 'em when they're little and defenseless but when they're bigger THEN find alternative methods of discipline?
 

On the lips of him who has understanding, wisdom is found, but a rod is for the back of him who lacks sense.

Thankfully, mine seem to be brimming with understanding!   No need for a wallop, yet!     *note the word: "yet"*


I believe the emphasis in this passage is on the discipline, rather than the mode.

I agree! I just don't accept the mode of hitting a child.  


I am saying, that in our culture and day and age, we tend to interpret the word of God based upon our culture and day and age, rather than taking it for face value and obeying it accordingly.

True enough.   But I have also seen too many parents that take it as a literal rod that they feel they must hit their child with! And too often I have heard that it's because God says to!  

I'm denying that following a scriptural principle of using the "rod" of discipline on your child will produce a sinful response in the child.  It doesn't match up with scripture.    


I'm denying that "Spare the rod, spoil the child" has to mean that you have to hit them with it!
Why do we have to equate 'discipline' as 'hitting'?

WOW!!!  That means you're ol...ole lot better at dealing with youngins than I am!

*ahem* That, dear sir, was actually amusing! But I'm really trying to be grumpy about it!   And for the record, I have claimed OLD - just not mature!  


Is that cause I'm just playin' with 'em and they end up tickled, or are they warped?

Can I choose the third option?  

[Allinall]

Could be. I thought about that, too. No really! I wasn't trying to fool myself or finangle around Scripture!   But in my case, I was also in the classroom and wasn't allowed to hit children there so I had to find other alternatives for discipline. It was a natural off-shoot from there. I didn't want to hit mine. They were so tiny! Which leads me to the question..... Why do we only hit them when they're little? There comes that point when parents say "Oh, they're too big to be spanked." So that strikes me as odd. Wallop 'em when they're little and defenseless but when they're bigger THEN find alternative methods of discipline?

Very interesting.  I understand how the classroom could have an affect on your home life.  But if I work with a bunch of guys that cuss the whole day long, am I to cuss out my family because of their influence?  Same principle.  Different application.  But what I find interesting is the whoop 'em while their too little to defend themselves idea.  Who says I'm putting them into a position in which they need defense, rather than defending them?  For example: we're working on our youngest in the basic area of obedience.  Why?  To make our lives simpler?  Well, there is that nice side benefit, but no.  I firmly believe that when the call of Christ through the Holy Spirit comes into the life of a person to accept Jesus as their Savior, it is a call to be obeyed.  Once saved, the life of the believer is obedience.  I'm not teaching my children to obey because it makes my life easier.  I'm teaching them to obey so as one day their lives can be saved.  My oldest, has already benefitted from this.  She's saved!  My youngest hasn't.  She's 3.  Go figure.    My oldest is learning to obey God as she learns to obey me.  I believe that's most important.  Her view of God will come from how she views me.  If she sees me as a pushover that gives her what she wants, then God becomes Aladdin's genie.  If she sees me as overbearing and cruel, then God is served for fear of what He might do to her.  But if I bring her up, in the nurture and admonition of the Lord who chastens those He loves, then she will learn that as I love her in how I discipline her and why, so does God when He does the same.  Moreover, I save her from a potentially harsher chastening from our Heavenly Father someday.  I don't believe God is mean and is looking for someone to whoop.  But I know God will deal with a disobedient child, and don't want my child to be that one.  

And another interesting point.  As a father, when do I need to stop disciplining my child?  When they're "too big?"  Hmmmm..."For this cause a man will leave his father and mother, and cling to his wife..."  My guess, I stop when they leave to marry.  Until then, I'm still the "mighty man" with the bow.  They're still my arrow, and they've not been shot out yet.  

Thankfully, mine seem to be brimming with understanding!   No need for a wallop, yet!    *note the word: "yet"*

hehehee  

I believe the emphasis in this passage is on the discipline, rather than the mode.

I agree! I just don't accept the mode of hitting a child.

Not hitting.  Spanking.  Large difference.  

True enough.   But I have also seen too many parents that take it as a literal rod that they feel they must hit their child with! And too often I have heard that it's because God says to!  

Well that's think about that one.  God says that the man who spares using the rod on his son hates his son.  He doesn't say go ahead and do it, but He definetly tells you what He thinks of you if you don't (keeping in mind the discipline vs. mode understanding of the passage)!  They take it literally.  If they're in obedience, and not taking out their problems on their child, then that is between them and God.  If they're being cruel and using God as an excuse, then that is between them and God, and we know whose side God's on there, don't we?  Verses about millstones come to mind...  

Ya know, in my day, my dad used a yardstick.  He didn't do so with every discipining moment, nor did he relish in doing so.  Yet I never once questioned my dad's love.  In fact, in retrospect, it is the fact that he took the time to correct me that meant more than if he'd let me do "my thing."  He cared enough to teach me, and that goes along way.  No.  I have no plans to use yardsticks.  

I'm denying that "Spare the rod, spoil the child" has to mean that you have to hit them with it!
Why do we have to equate 'discipline' as 'hitting'?

Because God has.  Why put the rod in the verse if He never intended for it to be used?  Why not use the time out chair instead?  Or the no supper rule?  Or the grounding?  Or the no TV rule?  Or the...see my point?  It's there.  If not for making a point, then why?  I believe the main point is that discipline is an uncomfortable thing.  No one likes to be disciplined.  As a child, I loved being grounded!  Why?  "Go to your room and stay there until I let you come out."  Whoohooo!!!!  All my stuff was there!  It was like being punished with toys!  

*ahem* That, dear sir, was actually amusing! But I'm really trying to be grumpy about it!   And for the record, I have claimed OLD - just not mature!  

hehee!

Can I choose the third option?

Yup!  It's my personal persuasion.  They take after their mother.