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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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