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.
Nope. But if the same cussing guys went home and then tried NOT to cuss, that would be similiar! Though I do like the way you compare cussin' to whoopin'!
Yup. You're
definitely missin' my point...
I'm teaching them to obey so as one day their lives can be saved. My oldest, has already benefitted from this.
So you whoop 'em to teach them to accept salvation? K, that's a reeeeeeal stretch! Or do you mean that you discipline them for them to learn obedience? Cause I think we agree on the need for discipline. I just think there might be other WAYS of discipline.
In so many words, yes. But the point I was making was that at the heart of salvation is being obedient to the call of the Holy Spirit to repentance and acceptance of Christ as Savior. If I can ever teach my child anything in life, it's to obey. They come to Him through obedience, and are conformed into His image through obedience. It's the most important lesson (to me) that I'll ever be able to teach them. And if a spanking helps show them the level of that importance, then I will lovingly use spankings.
As a father, when do I need to stop disciplining my child?
Pretty sly! I believe the question should be: As a father when do you quit spanking them and go to other forms of discipline. Again, I believe we agree on the need for discipline; we just don't agree on the method!
Boy! You're all over missing my points aren'tcha?
I know, you're making your own. Again, however, my point wasn't about the whooping. It was about the responsibility.
Not hitting. Spanking. Large difference.
"spank: to strike especially on the buttocks with the open hand"
What does 'to strike' mean?
No comment needed...
Quote:
"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!
Hmmmmm..... God intended for children to be hit as discipline? Or was the emphasis on the fact that they need to be disciplined?
The emphasis is discipline. The importance of and the extreme of that discipline is the rod. God intends for children to obey. And my spankings hurt far less than His.
I agree that discipline will be uncomfortable. I never suggested that sending a child to a room full of toys is punishment. Of course, God never mandated that they have all those toys either.
Yes He did. Check Proverbs 32:15.
When our children hit their pre-teens and started getting mouthy, my husband was noted for this line:
"I see your lips moving and all I hear is 'More chores!'" That would stop them everytime.... after an initial run through with having completed a set of chores! Of course, it WOULD have been quicker to (being PC here~ ) "strike" them.
You have uncommon children!
Actually, you have well disciplined children, however you chose to do it, it worked. I have the blessing of similiar circumstance with my oldest. A word most always works. My youngest requires reinforced words, coupled with loss of privilege...and a
whole lot of prayer!
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?
Maybe to make a point about the need for discipline knowing that the Bible would be around even when TV wasn't?
And I also don't follow the 'no supper' rule! I won't deprive a child of sustenance.
Ahem. Illustration? Ever heard of em?
My children have rarely been disciplined by the no "TV" rule. In our house, it's more like, no videos. Regardless, my oldest reads more than she watches, and my youngest is usually to busy getting into things she's not supposed to, to ever watch TV.
I don't use the no supper rule much anymore. Only have once with each child, but seeing as how neither of them eat much anyway, it's a useless discipline. My youngest won't eat. Can't figure that one out. She only eats a couple of bites of every meal. She's healthy. Just awfully little. Somewhat worriesome to me. The oldest eats well. She's just picky about what she eats. Gets that from her mother.
But I do agree that not every method will work for every child. That includes 'striking' them. Might make the parents job a little more difficult in trying hard to make sure the punitive measures match the infraction. Shouldn't it teach them NOT to repeat the infraction? Is striking them a 'fix it everytime' method?
*I wonder if I should call all mine together and just line 'em up and strike them to catch up on all those missed years?*
Yup. Have to discipline the child according to the child. And yes, it is to teach them not to repeat. I think the best thing a parent can do, and this is a shame to me, is to
model biblical obedience in the home. We take too much time doing the "do as I say and not as I do" mentallity. Never said this, but I'm sure I've acted this way.
And yes, you should whoop 'em for all the missed years. I plan on whooping my daily for just such a reason. Yup. I jest.
When my oldest daughter was about 11, she wasn't real great about picking up in her room. Now I know I probably should have whooped her for it, but I wanted her to learn that she needed to do it for a variety of reasons that would carry with her through life. And not one of the life reasons had to do with being whooped if you didn't. So I charged her a fee for each item that I picked up. A quarter an item. She lost $1.25 in one day and made an extreme effort to keep things picked up. We also discussed the fact that she had choices in life and one of those was the choice to hire a maid if she simply couldn't be bothered to pick up after herself. But a maid wouldn't do it for free. So she might as well learn early that she would need to be prepared to pay for services rendered. Now, years later, she'll pick up her room without even being asked!
Wouldn't work with my kids. They already freely give their money away. You know, offerings, family needs, that sorta thing...
Yup! It's my personal persuasion. They take after their mother.
ROFL! And here I thought it was always the man's fault!
Typical woman's thinking...
