If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SPANKING.
New Testament. The first passage from the N.T. we shall discuss is Hebrews 12:6-11. "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening. God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. He says, "...we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us....". In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) so in this "correction" spanking is included this is obvious when he says: "and scourgeth every son" the word which is used here in Greek is "mastigi" means "spanks with a strap (whip)". The Greek words used here for "chastise", "correct", etc. is "pedia" and "pedeuo" "pedia"includes the meanings "teach, bring up, correct" and "pedeuo", "teach, bring up, chastise, correct" the word used for "chastise" in the meaning of "pedeuo" is "sofronizo" which includes corporal punishment..That spanking is included is also obvious by the insistence of the writer to say, "no chastening for the moment seemeth to be joyous, but grievous", as we know a spanking brings tears to the child and sometimes to the caring parent who spanks too. If the N.T. was against corporal punishment it would not have it as an example of God's parenting. Also it would grap the chance to tell us here. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Paul is saying to Christian parents not to provoke their children to anger. He is saying to respect our children and not call them names, insult them, etc. he is also warning not to punish them without real reason. Children get angry if they are unjustly punished. But if the child knows the "laws" before hand or is in the wrong then he/she accepts punishment and doesn't get angry if the parents otherwise show a lot of love and understanding, and spend time with them. Again the word here is "pedia" and includes spanking also Paul says to follow the admonition of the Lord referring of course to the O.T. parenting verses. He does not "correct" the "rod" O.T. verses. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Parents when act in a unjust way or ignore their children make them angry. It also means we must allow our children in a respectful way to express themselves.Of course he is not referring to discipline because discipline is meant to discourage a child from doing evil. Again Paul doesn't correct the "rod" O.T. verses. [ Meanings of N.T. Greek words from: Lexicon of Ancient Greek (includes N.T. Greek), by John Stamatakos, Professor University of Athens, p.p.728,529, 966, 659, 388]. In Christ the Lord, Papaioannou |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
The parts of your post to which I am responding are in italics.
It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. It is a huge and inappropriate leap to take Hebrews 12:6-11 as justification for spanking. In no way was this passage meant as advice on parenting. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Exactly. And you don't think being hit and hurt by someone two, three and four times your size is perceived as unjust and provokes wrath? Especially when that individual is a person you want to trust, and upon who you depend for your very survival. Of course it does, Papaioannou. This is a great NT passage that supports *not* spanking children. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Right again. Being hit and hurt by someone much larger and more powerful, by someone who supposedly loves you and whom you trust and depend upon not only provokes anger, but can also lead to a profound sense of grief and discouragement. The NT truly doesn't support spanking. I had asked you for the words of Jesus. Matthew 18:3-6 is a great example of the utmost regard Jesus had for little children. "Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." These hardly sound like words which advocate hitting and hurting children in the name of discipline. Matthew 18:6: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." This are Jesus' words. I can find few words that better describe what how Jesus regards those who offend little children. And hitting and hurting a little child is indeed offensive behavior. In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) I'm well aware of this passage in Proverbs. I'm also well aware of Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother...Then shall his father and his mother lay hold of him, and bring him unto the elders of his city...And they shall say to the elders of this city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will no obey our voice, he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die...." Do you suggest that stubborn and rebellious children who eat and drink too much be stoned to death? Maybe you do, I don't know. But I do know that you can't simply pick and choose what portions of the Bible you want to apply literally. If you believe Proverbs justifies spanking, that you must also believe that Deuteronomy justifies stoning to death stubborn and rebellious children. And among other things, you must also believe that anyone who commits adultery should be put to death (Deuteronomy 23:22). Jesus himself had a hard time with this whole idea of stoning anyone to death. Jesus' disciples came upon a prostitute at the well, and fell back into OT thinking. "Jesus," they said, "let's stone this woman for she is a sinner." Jesus looked at them and responded ""He among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." And no one did. Jesus then blessed the woman and told her to "go and sin no more." Jesus afforded children the utmost respect and admonished parents to respect children and honor children. Jesus did not advocate discipline that involved hitting and hurting children, and attempting to link Christianity to spanking little children is a sham. LaVonne LaVonne Papaioannou wrote: THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SPANKING. New Testament. The first passage from the N.T. we shall discuss is Hebrews 12:6-11. "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening. God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. He says, "...we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us....". In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) so in this "correction" spanking is included this is obvious when he says: "and scourgeth every son" the word which is used here in Greek is "mastigi" means "spanks with a strap (whip)". The Greek words used here for "chastise", "correct", etc. is "pedia" and "pedeuo" "pedia"includes the meanings "teach, bring up, correct" and "pedeuo", "teach, bring up, chastise, correct" the word used for "chastise" in the meaning of "pedeuo" is "sofronizo" which includes corporal punishment..That spanking is included is also obvious by the insistence of the writer to say, "no chastening for the moment seemeth to be joyous, but grievous", as we know a spanking brings tears to the child and sometimes to the caring parent who spanks too. If the N.T. was against corporal punishment it would not have it as an example of God's parenting. Also it would grap the chance to tell us here. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Paul is saying to Christian parents not to provoke their children to anger. He is saying to respect our children and not call them names, insult them, etc. he is also warning not to punish them without real reason. Children get angry if they are unjustly punished. But if the child knows the "laws" before hand or is in the wrong then he/she accepts punishment and doesn't get angry if the parents otherwise show a lot of love and understanding, and spend time with them. Again the word here is "pedia" and includes spanking also Paul says to follow the admonition of the Lord referring of course to the O.T. parenting verses. He does not "correct" the "rod" O.T. verses. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Parents when act in a unjust way or ignore their children make them angry. It also means we must allow our children in a respectful way to express themselves.Of course he is not referring to discipline because discipline is meant to discourage a child from doing evil. Again Paul doesn't correct the "rod" O.T. verses. [ Meanings of N.T. Greek words from: Lexicon of Ancient Greek (includes N.T. Greek), by John Stamatakos, Professor University of Athens, p.p.728,529, 966, 659, 388]. In Christ the Lord, Papaioannou |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
LaVonne is now a Bible "expert"! ;-)
Doan On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote: The parts of your post to which I am responding are in italics. It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. It is a huge and inappropriate leap to take Hebrews 12:6-11 as justification for spanking. In no way was this passage meant as advice on parenting. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Exactly. And you don't think being hit and hurt by someone two, three and four times your size is perceived as unjust and provokes wrath? Especially when that individual is a person you want to trust, and upon who you depend for your very survival. Of course it does, Papaioannou. This is a great NT passage that supports *not* spanking children. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Right again. Being hit and hurt by someone much larger and more powerful, by someone who supposedly loves you and whom you trust and depend upon not only provokes anger, but can also lead to a profound sense of grief and discouragement. The NT truly doesn't support spanking. I had asked you for the words of Jesus. Matthew 18:3-6 is a great example of the utmost regard Jesus had for little children. "Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." These hardly sound like words which advocate hitting and hurting children in the name of discipline. Matthew 18:6: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." This are Jesus' words. I can find few words that better describe what how Jesus regards those who offend little children. And hitting and hurting a little child is indeed offensive behavior. In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) I'm well aware of this passage in Proverbs. I'm also well aware of Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother...Then shall his father and his mother lay hold of him, and bring him unto the elders of his city...And they shall say to the elders of this city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will no obey our voice, he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die...." Do you suggest that stubborn and rebellious children who eat and drink too much be stoned to death? Maybe you do, I don't know. But I do know that you can't simply pick and choose what portions of the Bible you want to apply literally. If you believe Proverbs justifies spanking, that you must also believe that Deuteronomy justifies stoning to death stubborn and rebellious children. And among other things, you must also believe that anyone who commits adultery should be put to death (Deuteronomy 23:22). Jesus himself had a hard time with this whole idea of stoning anyone to death. Jesus' disciples came upon a prostitute at the well, and fell back into OT thinking. "Jesus," they said, "let's stone this woman for she is a sinner." Jesus looked at them and responded ""He among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." And no one did. Jesus then blessed the woman and told her to "go and sin no more." Jesus afforded children the utmost respect and admonished parents to respect children and honor children. Jesus did not advocate discipline that involved hitting and hurting children, and attempting to link Christianity to spanking little children is a sham. LaVonne LaVonne Papaioannou wrote: THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SPANKING. New Testament. The first passage from the N.T. we shall discuss is Hebrews 12:6-11. "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening. God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. He says, "...we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us....". In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) so in this "correction" spanking is included this is obvious when he says: "and scourgeth every son" the word which is used here in Greek is "mastigi" means "spanks with a strap (whip)". The Greek words used here for "chastise", "correct", etc. is "pedia" and "pedeuo" "pedia"includes the meanings "teach, bring up, correct" and "pedeuo", "teach, bring up, chastise, correct" the word used for "chastise" in the meaning of "pedeuo" is "sofronizo" which includes corporal punishment..That spanking is included is also obvious by the insistence of the writer to say, "no chastening for the moment seemeth to be joyous, but grievous", as we know a spanking brings tears to the child and sometimes to the caring parent who spanks too. If the N.T. was against corporal punishment it would not have it as an example of God's parenting. Also it would grap the chance to tell us here. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Paul is saying to Christian parents not to provoke their children to anger. He is saying to respect our children and not call them names, insult them, etc. he is also warning not to punish them without real reason. Children get angry if they are unjustly punished. But if the child knows the "laws" before hand or is in the wrong then he/she accepts punishment and doesn't get angry if the parents otherwise show a lot of love and understanding, and spend time with them. Again the word here is "pedia" and includes spanking also Paul says to follow the admonition of the Lord referring of course to the O.T. parenting verses. He does not "correct" the "rod" O.T. verses. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Parents when act in a unjust way or ignore their children make them angry. It also means we must allow our children in a respectful way to express themselves.Of course he is not referring to discipline because discipline is meant to discourage a child from doing evil. Again Paul doesn't correct the "rod" O.T. verses. [ Meanings of N.T. Greek words from: Lexicon of Ancient Greek (includes N.T. Greek), by John Stamatakos, Professor University of Athens, p.p.728,529, 966, 659, 388]. In Christ the Lord, Papaioannou |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
I see that thee ignores the clear instructions in Hebrews and Ephesians.
Jesus Christ where he keeps silent accepts the teachings of the Old Testament because they are the teachings of His Father. Christ never said NOT to use the "rod". Furthermore thy comment on stoning children is silly. The parents could not stone a rebellious teen in their own will but only after bringing him to the elders, this was a state law within the general law which then accepted the death penalty. But unlike with the case of spanking Christ showed the full will of God which was to STOP the death penalty (Remember the story of Christ and the adulteress woman?). Thou has a flaw in thy thinking were Scripture keeps silence it agrees with itself, were it brings something as an example of life without saying it must change it agrees with it and were in the New Testament is mentioned "The instructions of the Lord" the Old Testament is meant (that was the Bible of the day). I know that thee doesn't agree with spanking, and of course it is thy right, but please don't twist the meaning of Scripture for that is not anyone's right. Spanking is not ...hitting.... But for one to understand this they should have been disciplined properly themselves as children if they were beaten up then, I can't blame them, if they ignorantly think that all spanking is beating up children. But they are wrong. God Bless! ? "LaVonne Carlson" ?????? ??? ?????? ... The parts of your post to which I am responding are in italics. It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. It is a huge and inappropriate leap to take Hebrews 12:6-11 as justification for spanking. In no way was this passage meant as advice on parenting. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Exactly. And you don't think being hit and hurt by someone two, three and four times your size is perceived as unjust and provokes wrath? Especially when that individual is a person you want to trust, and upon who you depend for your very survival. Of course it does, Papaioannou. This is a great NT passage that supports *not* spanking children. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Right again. Being hit and hurt by someone much larger and more powerful, by someone who supposedly loves you and whom you trust and depend upon not only provokes anger, but can also lead to a profound sense of grief and discouragement. The NT truly doesn't support spanking. I had asked you for the words of Jesus. Matthew 18:3-6 is a great example of the utmost regard Jesus had for little children. "Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." These hardly sound like words which advocate hitting and hurting children in the name of discipline. Matthew 18:6: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." This are Jesus' words. I can find few words that better describe what how Jesus regards those who offend little children. And hitting and hurting a little child is indeed offensive behavior. In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) I'm well aware of this passage in Proverbs. I'm also well aware of Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother...Then shall his father and his mother lay hold of him, and bring him unto the elders of his city...And they shall say to the elders of this city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will no obey our voice, he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die...." Do you suggest that stubborn and rebellious children who eat and drink too much be stoned to death? Maybe you do, I don't know. But I do know that you can't simply pick and choose what portions of the Bible you want to apply literally. If you believe Proverbs justifies spanking, that you must also believe that Deuteronomy justifies stoning to death stubborn and rebellious children. And among other things, you must also believe that anyone who commits adultery should be put to death (Deuteronomy 23:22). Jesus himself had a hard time with this whole idea of stoning anyone to death. Jesus' disciples came upon a prostitute at the well, and fell back into OT thinking. "Jesus," they said, "let's stone this woman for she is a sinner." Jesus looked at them and responded ""He among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." And no one did. Jesus then blessed the woman and told her to "go and sin no more." Jesus afforded children the utmost respect and admonished parents to respect children and honor children. Jesus did not advocate discipline that involved hitting and hurting children, and attempting to link Christianity to spanking little children is a sham. LaVonne LaVonne Papaioannou wrote: THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SPANKING. New Testament. The first passage from the N.T. we shall discuss is Hebrews 12:6-11. "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening. God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. He says, "...we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us....". In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) so in this "correction" spanking is included this is obvious when he says: "and scourgeth every son" the word which is used here in Greek is "mastigi" means "spanks with a strap (whip)". The Greek words used here for "chastise", "correct", etc. is "pedia" and "pedeuo" "pedia"includes the meanings "teach, bring up, correct" and "pedeuo", "teach, bring up, chastise, correct" the word used for "chastise" in the meaning of "pedeuo" is "sofronizo" which includes corporal punishment..That spanking is included is also obvious by the insistence of the writer to say, "no chastening for the moment seemeth to be joyous, but grievous", as we know a spanking brings tears to the child and sometimes to the caring parent who spanks too. If the N.T. was against corporal punishment it would not have it as an example of God's parenting. Also it would grap the chance to tell us here. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Paul is saying to Christian parents not to provoke their children to anger. He is saying to respect our children and not call them names, insult them, etc. he is also warning not to punish them without real reason. Children get angry if they are unjustly punished. But if the child knows the "laws" before hand or is in the wrong then he/she accepts punishment and doesn't get angry if the parents otherwise show a lot of love and understanding, and spend time with them. Again the word here is "pedia" and includes spanking also Paul says to follow the admonition of the Lord referring of course to the O.T. parenting verses. He does not "correct" the "rod" O.T. verses. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Parents when act in a unjust way or ignore their children make them angry. It also means we must allow our children in a respectful way to express themselves.Of course he is not referring to discipline because discipline is meant to discourage a child from doing evil. Again Paul doesn't correct the "rod" O.T. verses. [ Meanings of N.T. Greek words from: Lexicon of Ancient Greek (includes N.T. Greek), by John Stamatakos, Professor University of Athens, p.p.728,529, 966, 659, 388]. In Christ the Lord, Papaioannou |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
Just wondering why you're using old, out-of-date and pompous words
such as "thee", "thy" and "thou" in your messages. The bible has been translated many times and in many languages, and those words are no longer used except by people who need them to try to stengthen weak arguements and simple minds. PS. Another effect this translation and dilution has is that you cannot take any single word literally, so your entire agrument has no logical foundation. I thank ye. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
Doan wrote:
LaVonne is now a Bible "expert"! ;-) I have three years at a Bible college prior to going on for my Masters with a double major in Child Development and Early Childhood Education/Special Education and a Ph.D. in Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Special Education. LaVonne Doan On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote: The parts of your post to which I am responding are in italics. It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. It is a huge and inappropriate leap to take Hebrews 12:6-11 as justification for spanking. In no way was this passage meant as advice on parenting. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Exactly. And you don't think being hit and hurt by someone two, three and four times your size is perceived as unjust and provokes wrath? Especially when that individual is a person you want to trust, and upon who you depend for your very survival. Of course it does, Papaioannou. This is a great NT passage that supports *not* spanking children. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Right again. Being hit and hurt by someone much larger and more powerful, by someone who supposedly loves you and whom you trust and depend upon not only provokes anger, but can also lead to a profound sense of grief and discouragement. The NT truly doesn't support spanking. I had asked you for the words of Jesus. Matthew 18:3-6 is a great example of the utmost regard Jesus had for little children. "Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." These hardly sound like words which advocate hitting and hurting children in the name of discipline. Matthew 18:6: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." This are Jesus' words. I can find few words that better describe what how Jesus regards those who offend little children. And hitting and hurting a little child is indeed offensive behavior. In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) I'm well aware of this passage in Proverbs. I'm also well aware of Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother...Then shall his father and his mother lay hold of him, and bring him unto the elders of his city...And they shall say to the elders of this city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will no obey our voice, he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die...." Do you suggest that stubborn and rebellious children who eat and drink too much be stoned to death? Maybe you do, I don't know. But I do know that you can't simply pick and choose what portions of the Bible you want to apply literally. If you believe Proverbs justifies spanking, that you must also believe that Deuteronomy justifies stoning to death stubborn and rebellious children. And among other things, you must also believe that anyone who commits adultery should be put to death (Deuteronomy 23:22). Jesus himself had a hard time with this whole idea of stoning anyone to death. Jesus' disciples came upon a prostitute at the well, and fell back into OT thinking. "Jesus," they said, "let's stone this woman for she is a sinner." Jesus looked at them and responded ""He among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." And no one did. Jesus then blessed the woman and told her to "go and sin no more." Jesus afforded children the utmost respect and admonished parents to respect children and honor children. Jesus did not advocate discipline that involved hitting and hurting children, and attempting to link Christianity to spanking little children is a sham. LaVonne LaVonne Papaioannou wrote: THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SPANKING. New Testament. The first passage from the N.T. we shall discuss is Hebrews 12:6-11. "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening. God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. He says, "...we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us....". In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) so in this "correction" spanking is included this is obvious when he says: "and scourgeth every son" the word which is used here in Greek is "mastigi" means "spanks with a strap (whip)". The Greek words used here for "chastise", "correct", etc. is "pedia" and "pedeuo" "pedia"includes the meanings "teach, bring up, correct" and "pedeuo", "teach, bring up, chastise, correct" the word used for "chastise" in the meaning of "pedeuo" is "sofronizo" which includes corporal punishment..That spanking is included is also obvious by the insistence of the writer to say, "no chastening for the moment seemeth to be joyous, but grievous", as we know a spanking brings tears to the child and sometimes to the caring parent who spanks too. If the N.T. was against corporal punishment it would not have it as an example of God's parenting. Also it would grap the chance to tell us here. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Paul is saying to Christian parents not to provoke their children to anger. He is saying to respect our children and not call them names, insult them, etc. he is also warning not to punish them without real reason. Children get angry if they are unjustly punished. But if the child knows the "laws" before hand or is in the wrong then he/she accepts punishment and doesn't get angry if the parents otherwise show a lot of love and understanding, and spend time with them. Again the word here is "pedia" and includes spanking also Paul says to follow the admonition of the Lord referring of course to the O.T. parenting verses. He does not "correct" the "rod" O.T. verses. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Parents when act in a unjust way or ignore their children make them angry. It also means we must allow our children in a respectful way to express themselves.Of course he is not referring to discipline because discipline is meant to discourage a child from doing evil. Again Paul doesn't correct the "rod" O.T. verses. [ Meanings of N.T. Greek words from: Lexicon of Ancient Greek (includes N.T. Greek), by John Stamatakos, Professor University of Athens, p.p.728,529, 966, 659, 388]. In Christ the Lord, Papaioannou |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
Papaioannou wrote: I see that thee ignores the clear instructions in Hebrews and Ephesians. Jesus Christ where he keeps silent accepts the teachings of the Old Testament because they are the teachings of His Father. Christ never said NOT to use the "rod". Nor did Jesus ever say to use the rod, and nothing in his teaching by word or example would allow one to reasonably conclude that under the NT, spanking can be Biblically justified. Furthermore thy comment on stoning children is silly. The parents could not stone a rebellious teen in their own will but only after bringing him to the elders, this was a state law within the general law which then accepted the death penalty. Exactly. So do you believe stoning children is acceptable? This was state law at the time, but you do not defend the practice today. Yet you use Proverbs to defend the practice of hitting children. This was also state law at the time, and unfortunately remains legal in far too many countries. I know that thee doesn't agree with spanking, and of course it is thy right, but please don't twist the meaning of Scripture for that is not anyone's right. No, it isn't anyone's right, if one attempts to live by scripture. This is what makes me so upset when I hear you twist scripture to justify hurting children. Spanking is not ...hitting.... Of course spanking is hitting. How else would you spank a child without raising your hand, with or without an implement, and hitting the body of the child? You can hit without spanking, but you cannot spank without hitting. It's impossible. But for one to understand this they should have been disciplined properly themselves as children if they were beaten up then, I can't blame them, if they ignorantly think that all spanking is beating up children. But they are wrong. I didn't say all spanking is beating up children. Please do not twist my words. I said all spanking is hitting. In many countries, including the US, hitting an adult for any reason other than self-protection is legally considered physical assault. In countries that legally permit spanking children are continually subjected to the exact same treatment that would be illegal if the child was of legal age. Why do we protect adults from the very acts that we legally permit if the victim is a child? And yes, children who are hit and hurt in the name of discipline are assault victims. God Bless! God Bless you as well. LaVonne ? "LaVonne Carlson" ?????? ??? ?????? ... The parts of your post to which I am responding are in italics. It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. It is a huge and inappropriate leap to take Hebrews 12:6-11 as justification for spanking. In no way was this passage meant as advice on parenting. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Exactly. And you don't think being hit and hurt by someone two, three and four times your size is perceived as unjust and provokes wrath? Especially when that individual is a person you want to trust, and upon who you depend for your very survival. Of course it does, Papaioannou. This is a great NT passage that supports *not* spanking children. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Right again. Being hit and hurt by someone much larger and more powerful, by someone who supposedly loves you and whom you trust and depend upon not only provokes anger, but can also lead to a profound sense of grief and discouragement. The NT truly doesn't support spanking. I had asked you for the words of Jesus. Matthew 18:3-6 is a great example of the utmost regard Jesus had for little children. "Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." These hardly sound like words which advocate hitting and hurting children in the name of discipline. Matthew 18:6: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." This are Jesus' words. I can find few words that better describe what how Jesus regards those who offend little children. And hitting and hurting a little child is indeed offensive behavior. In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) I'm well aware of this passage in Proverbs. I'm also well aware of Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother...Then shall his father and his mother lay hold of him, and bring him unto the elders of his city...And they shall say to the elders of this city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will no obey our voice, he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die...." Do you suggest that stubborn and rebellious children who eat and drink too much be stoned to death? Maybe you do, I don't know. But I do know that you can't simply pick and choose what portions of the Bible you want to apply literally. If you believe Proverbs justifies spanking, that you must also believe that Deuteronomy justifies stoning to death stubborn and rebellious children. And among other things, you must also believe that anyone who commits adultery should be put to death (Deuteronomy 23:22). Jesus himself had a hard time with this whole idea of stoning anyone to death. Jesus' disciples came upon a prostitute at the well, and fell back into OT thinking. "Jesus," they said, "let's stone this woman for she is a sinner." Jesus looked at them and responded ""He among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." And no one did. Jesus then blessed the woman and told her to "go and sin no more." Jesus afforded children the utmost respect and admonished parents to respect children and honor children. Jesus did not advocate discipline that involved hitting and hurting children, and attempting to link Christianity to spanking little children is a sham. LaVonne LaVonne Papaioannou wrote: THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SPANKING. New Testament. The first passage from the N.T. we shall discuss is Hebrews 12:6-11. "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening. God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. He says, "...we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us....". In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) so in this "correction" spanking is included this is obvious when he says: "and scourgeth every son" the word which is used here in Greek is "mastigi" means "spanks with a strap (whip)". The Greek words used here for "chastise", "correct", etc. is "pedia" and "pedeuo" "pedia"includes the meanings "teach, bring up, correct" and "pedeuo", "teach, bring up, chastise, correct" the word used for "chastise" in the meaning of "pedeuo" is "sofronizo" which includes corporal punishment..That spanking is included is also obvious by the insistence of the writer to say, "no chastening for the moment seemeth to be joyous, but grievous", as we know a spanking brings tears to the child and sometimes to the caring parent who spanks too. If the N.T. was against corporal punishment it would not have it as an example of God's parenting. Also it would grap the chance to tell us here. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Paul is saying to Christian parents not to provoke their children to anger. He is saying to respect our children and not call them names, insult them, etc. he is also warning not to punish them without real reason. Children get angry if they are unjustly punished. But if the child knows the "laws" before hand or is in the wrong then he/she accepts punishment and doesn't get angry if the parents otherwise show a lot of love and understanding, and spend time with them. Again the word here is "pedia" and includes spanking also Paul says to follow the admonition of the Lord referring of course to the O.T. parenting verses. He does not "correct" the "rod" O.T. verses. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Parents when act in a unjust way or ignore their children make them angry. It also means we must allow our children in a respectful way to express themselves.Of course he is not referring to discipline because discipline is meant to discourage a child from doing evil. Again Paul doesn't correct the "rod" O.T. verses. [ Meanings of N.T. Greek words from: Lexicon of Ancient Greek (includes N.T. Greek), by John Stamatakos, Professor University of Athens, p.p.728,529, 966, 659, 388]. In Christ the Lord, Papaioannou |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The New Testament on Spanking
I have no more to say on this. I pray that God opens thy eyes one day!
God Bless! ? "LaVonne Carlson" ?????? ??? ?????? ... Papaioannou wrote: I see that thee ignores the clear instructions in Hebrews and Ephesians. Jesus Christ where he keeps silent accepts the teachings of the Old Testament because they are the teachings of His Father. Christ never said NOT to use the "rod". Nor did Jesus ever say to use the rod, and nothing in his teaching by word or example would allow one to reasonably conclude that under the NT, spanking can be Biblically justified. Furthermore thy comment on stoning children is silly. The parents could not stone a rebellious teen in their own will but only after bringing him to the elders, this was a state law within the general law which then accepted the death penalty. Exactly. So do you believe stoning children is acceptable? This was state law at the time, but you do not defend the practice today. Yet you use Proverbs to defend the practice of hitting children. This was also state law at the time, and unfortunately remains legal in far too many countries. I know that thee doesn't agree with spanking, and of course it is thy right, but please don't twist the meaning of Scripture for that is not anyone's right. No, it isn't anyone's right, if one attempts to live by scripture. This is what makes me so upset when I hear you twist scripture to justify hurting children. Spanking is not ...hitting.... Of course spanking is hitting. How else would you spank a child without raising your hand, with or without an implement, and hitting the body of the child? You can hit without spanking, but you cannot spank without hitting. It's impossible. But for one to understand this they should have been disciplined properly themselves as children if they were beaten up then, I can't blame them, if they ignorantly think that all spanking is beating up children. But they are wrong. I didn't say all spanking is beating up children. Please do not twist my words. I said all spanking is hitting. In many countries, including the US, hitting an adult for any reason other than self-protection is legally considered physical assault. In countries that legally permit spanking children are continually subjected to the exact same treatment that would be illegal if the child was of legal age. Why do we protect adults from the very acts that we legally permit if the victim is a child? And yes, children who are hit and hurt in the name of discipline are assault victims. God Bless! God Bless you as well. LaVonne ? "LaVonne Carlson" ?????? ??? ?????? ... The parts of your post to which I am responding are in italics. It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. It is a huge and inappropriate leap to take Hebrews 12:6-11 as justification for spanking. In no way was this passage meant as advice on parenting. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Exactly. And you don't think being hit and hurt by someone two, three and four times your size is perceived as unjust and provokes wrath? Especially when that individual is a person you want to trust, and upon who you depend for your very survival. Of course it does, Papaioannou. This is a great NT passage that supports *not* spanking children. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Right again. Being hit and hurt by someone much larger and more powerful, by someone who supposedly loves you and whom you trust and depend upon not only provokes anger, but can also lead to a profound sense of grief and discouragement. The NT truly doesn't support spanking. I had asked you for the words of Jesus. Matthew 18:3-6 is a great example of the utmost regard Jesus had for little children. "Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." These hardly sound like words which advocate hitting and hurting children in the name of discipline. Matthew 18:6: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." This are Jesus' words. I can find few words that better describe what how Jesus regards those who offend little children. And hitting and hurting a little child is indeed offensive behavior. In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) I'm well aware of this passage in Proverbs. I'm also well aware of Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother...Then shall his father and his mother lay hold of him, and bring him unto the elders of his city...And they shall say to the elders of this city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will no obey our voice, he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die...." Do you suggest that stubborn and rebellious children who eat and drink too much be stoned to death? Maybe you do, I don't know. But I do know that you can't simply pick and choose what portions of the Bible you want to apply literally. If you believe Proverbs justifies spanking, that you must also believe that Deuteronomy justifies stoning to death stubborn and rebellious children. And among other things, you must also believe that anyone who commits adultery should be put to death (Deuteronomy 23:22). Jesus himself had a hard time with this whole idea of stoning anyone to death. Jesus' disciples came upon a prostitute at the well, and fell back into OT thinking. "Jesus," they said, "let's stone this woman for she is a sinner." Jesus looked at them and responded ""He among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." And no one did. Jesus then blessed the woman and told her to "go and sin no more." Jesus afforded children the utmost respect and admonished parents to respect children and honor children. Jesus did not advocate discipline that involved hitting and hurting children, and attempting to link Christianity to spanking little children is a sham. LaVonne LaVonne Papaioannou wrote: THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SPANKING. New Testament. The first passage from the N.T. we shall discuss is Hebrews 12:6-11. "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening. God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." It is obvious in the above verse that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Paul ?) is using an example of everyday life to explain the way God the Father deals with His children. He says, "...we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us....". In the O.T. God clearly told parents to use spanking as an option (see: Proverbs or ever Sirach, etc.) so in this "correction" spanking is included this is obvious when he says: "and scourgeth every son" the word which is used here in Greek is "mastigi" means "spanks with a strap (whip)". The Greek words used here for "chastise", "correct", etc. is "pedia" and "pedeuo" "pedia"includes the meanings "teach, bring up, correct" and "pedeuo", "teach, bring up, chastise, correct" the word used for "chastise" in the meaning of "pedeuo" is "sofronizo" which includes corporal punishment..That spanking is included is also obvious by the insistence of the writer to say, "no chastening for the moment seemeth to be joyous, but grievous", as we know a spanking brings tears to the child and sometimes to the caring parent who spanks too. If the N.T. was against corporal punishment it would not have it as an example of God's parenting. Also it would grap the chance to tell us here. "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph.6:4). Paul is saying to Christian parents not to provoke their children to anger. He is saying to respect our children and not call them names, insult them, etc. he is also warning not to punish them without real reason. Children get angry if they are unjustly punished. But if the child knows the "laws" before hand or is in the wrong then he/she accepts punishment and doesn't get angry if the parents otherwise show a lot of love and understanding, and spend time with them. Again the word here is "pedia" and includes spanking also Paul says to follow the admonition of the Lord referring of course to the O.T. parenting verses. He does not "correct" the "rod" O.T. verses. "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged" (Col.3:21). Parents when act in a unjust way or ignore their children make them angry. It also means we must allow our children in a respectful way to express themselves.Of course he is not referring to discipline because discipline is meant to discourage a child from doing evil. Again Paul doesn't correct the "rod" O.T. verses. [ Meanings of N.T. Greek words from: Lexicon of Ancient Greek (includes N.T. Greek), by John Stamatakos, Professor University of Athens, p.p.728,529, 966, 659, 388]. In Christ the Lord, Papaioannou |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Debate on spanking | Doan | General | 0 | June 12th 04 08:30 PM |
A great article on spanking | Doan | General | 0 | February 28th 04 11:27 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
| Kids should work... | Kane | General | 1 | December 6th 03 08:11 PM |