Spanking and the Bible
Now, to the Bible. In preparation for writing my most recent book, Parenting by The Book, I did considerable scholarship into the meaning of the word "rod" as used in scripture in passages referring to the discipline of children. The word "rod" is used throughout the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). It is used both as a metaphor and in reference to concrete objects. There is no mystery as to when it is metaphor and when it refers to an object. The difference is readily distinguishable. Every use of the term "rod" in the context of the discipline of children is a metaphor alluding to authority, leadership, consistency, reliability, and the like. This does not disallow spanking, but it certainly does not command it. The problem is that most of the people who interpret the Bible to fundamentalist audiences are not Biblical scholars. They read "rod" and they think a stick. So, they believe, with good intention, that God commands spanking with hard objects. They say things that are as ridiculous as things said by the No Spankers. For example, "Spanking with the hand causes the child confusion as to whether a parent's hand encourages and expresses affection or causes pain." No it doesn't. I spanked my kids with my hand. They did not shrink away in fear when I went to embrace them. There’s no research on this, but I’ve asked lots of people who spank with their hands if their kids clearly know the difference between when they are about to receive a pop on the rear and when they are about to receive an embrace or a pat on the back. Do I need to tell you what they’ve all told me? I didn’t think so.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
Leviticus 11:9-12 & Deuteronomy 14:9-10
Abusive bible thumpers pushing only the parts of the bible they want to, and ignore the rest.
People who hit children perpetuate violence in society.
People used to think it was necessary to "spank" adult members of the community, military trainees, and prisoners. In some countries they still do. In our country, it is considered sexual battery if a person over the age of 18 is "spanked", but only if over the age of 18.
For one thing, because the buttocks are so close to the sex organs and so multiply linked to sexual nerve centers, striking them can trigger powerful and involuntary sexual stimulus in some people. There are numerous physiological ways in which it can be sexually abusive, but I won't list them all here. One can use the resources I've posted if they want to learn more. All materials listed may be accessed at the website of Parents and Teachers Against Violence In Education at www.nospank.net .
Child buttock-battering vs. DISCIPLINE:
Child buttock-battering (euphemistically labeled " spanking ","swatting","switching","smacking", "paddling",or other cute-sounding names) for the purpose of gaining compliance is nothing more than an inherited bad habit.
Its a good idea for people to take a look at what they are doing, and learn how to DISCIPLINE instead of hit.
I think the reason why television shows like "Supernanny" and "Dr. Phil" are so popular is because that is precisely what many (not all) people are trying to do.
There are several reasons why child bottom-slapping isn't a good idea. Here are some good, quick reads recommended by professionals:
Plain Talk About Spanking
by Jordan Riak,
The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children
by Tom Johnson,
NO VITAL ORGANS THERE, So They Say
by Lesli Taylor M.D. and Adah Maurer Ph.D.
Most compelling of all reasons to abandon this worst of all bad habits is the fact that buttock-battering can be unintentional or intentional sexual abuse for some children . There is an abundance of educational resources, testimony, documentation, etc available on the subject that can easily be found by doing a little research with the recommended reads-visit the website of Parents and Teachers Against Violence In Education at www.nospank.net .
Just a handful of those helping to raise awareness of why child bottom-slapping isn't a good idea:
American Academy of Pediatrics,
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
American Psychological Association,
Center For Effective Discipline,
Churches' Network For Non-Violence,
Nobel Peace Prize recipient Archbishop Desmond Tutu,
Parenting In Jesus' Footsteps,
Global Initiative To End All Corporal Punishment of Children,
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In 26 countries, child corporal punishment is prohibited by law (with more in process). In fact, the US was the only UN member that did not ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The Christian Bible encourages killing those who do not believe the same thing you do, women as property, racism , slavery, homophobia, ignorance - this is just like justifying Spanking with the Koran or George Orwell's 1984.
Would you assault a disabled person on the street if they did something that is legal , does not hurt you but you do not like anyways. We need to rise above the temptation to assault others.
I'm going to throw rocks at him outside the front gates.
Blasphemy.
I agree. . . people don't need to take things so literally. In fact, there are many metaphors that were used in the Bible. Where could metaphors begin but in the book that talks about all beginnings? A world, generations of people, many languages, figurative language used in languages, and yes, metaphors.
I believe the bible to be literal, but you are right some use it in the wrong way. I do not think spanking is a bad thing as long as it is used when you are not angry. To not spank is O.K. as well but there are times when maybe it should be instituted.
I think people who are spanked once in a while grow up to be better people.
The Old Testament is full of laws and traditions not practiced by modern Christians. Why are defenders of spanking zeroing in on this one portion? Why do you pick and choose which sections of the Bible are mandatory and which ones aren't? Christ said he has a better way than an eye for an eye. Why don't you believe Him?
The Bible is not a valid arguement for striking a child.
If you say that and I quote "The Bible is not a valid argument for striking a child." Then that leads me to conclude that you do not believe that God has a valid argument and should not be respected as much as a human being as far as opinions are concerned. Therefore I'm not sure how much respect I can have for your opinions if you don't have any respect for my Creator's. However, I am not one to pick and choose I follow simply the new testament and the portions of the old testament mentioned in the New Testament as still valid. I do this because of the book of Hebrews where it talks of the old covenant being done away with and the new one taking its place.
John Rosemond says that the rod in the Bible is symbolic rather than literal. I agree with him on that.If that is the case then why does he even think about hitting children when there is no Scriptural justification for it. He is following tradition rather than the Bible and tradition is not reliable.
So if it's symbolic.....what is it symbolizing?
In answer to your question, the Rod as described in the Book of Proverbs stands for authority, not hitting. The word discipline comes from the same word disciple and means teaching. As a result, using the Rod means teaching as in pointing to lessons on a wall much like a teacher in a classroom. We must remember that the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, not English originally. Unlike the English Language, the Hebrew Language uses a lot of symbols, metaphors and figures of speech to describe things and therefore it must not always be taken literally in the same way as the English Language. When we try to interpret things in the way English does, we often arrive at the wrong conclusions. This is something we must remember if we want to gain a proper understanding of the Bible.
That's interesting because I know Hebrew. And the word is literally "tree branch" which is mentioned almost 200 times in most texts (with different synonyms, like "tribe" or "group" of course). Only a handful of times is it mentioned metaphorically (i.e. Ge 49.10 mentions it as a position of authority). But in context, in whatever language, "sparing the stick" doesn't metaphorically translate well "sparing the authority". Or whatever other word you can think of. It's obviously talking about something physical.
Pr 23.14 makes it pretty clear:
"You shall beat him with the rod, and shall deliver his soul from sheol."
You're right, Hebrew definitely has some expressionist metaphors, hebrewism, etc. but this is not one of those times.
The interpretation that the Rod refers to pointing to lessons on the wall was obtained by me from a quote by a Jewish Rabbi from Pennsylvania by the name of Larry Kaplan. Being a Rabbi, I'm quite sure that he would be familiar with OT Hebrew and customs. Also, to beat doesn't necessarily mean to hit. When the sun is beating down on a roof, is it striking it with a rod? No, it is shining down on it. In the same way, beating with a rod means coming across to your children in such a way that they will have no trouble paying attention to you and understanding what you have to say. By the way, were you aware that in Israel where the Sabbath is still faithfully observed, all corporal punishment of children is against the law?
Let's look at the verse in context:
Proverbs 23:13
"Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die."
How many parents would be concerned with their children DYING from being talked to or given a time out? Obviously, this is talking about physical beating if he is discussing the physical outcome. Notice, however, that the child will NOT die from being beaten with a rod. The purpose of these verses is to tell parents that causing a child physical pain early on in life is a small price if it makes him a better person and saves his soul.
That is completely correct. Sometimes people take issues what out of porportion. They need to realize that many arguments are not literal - if fact the Bible has tons of parables, metaphors, and similies. There are actually quite a few examples in Luke 6 and 7.
Yes "beating" can mean different things in English but as you mentioned before....the OT was written in Hebrew....and the word "beating" in English is the translation of a Hebrew word that COULD NOT be used with "the sun was beating down". Seriously. In other English translations, it's translated as "smite", "strike", etc. In my two different Spanish Bible translations, it's "castigarás con vara" and "herirás con vara" which is unmistakable. The Hebrew word is clear (so are all the other translations, frankly).
I'm not familiar with this rabbi but would question him on it (especially depending on what type of rabbi he is). Many of the rabbis I know don't believe the Old Testament holds any authoritative value to them and thus their interpretations are severely slanted (and usually have an agenda).
I'm glad you quoted a rabbi though. :-) It's more scholarly than what some of these people on this site have been doing..
Also, I didn't know that about Israel, thanks for pointing that out. Interesting.
"Do I need to tell you what they’ve all told me? I didn’t think so." Um, actually, some evidence would be helpful.
Oh dear. Arguing from the Bible is an immediate sign to me that there will be little evidence and much dogma in your position. The Bible also promotes stoning children to death for cursing their parents, amongst other savoury practices.
The Bible does not PROMOTE stoning children. Try again.
The classic reference which seems to be interpreted by some as promoting the stoning of children, is not completely clear about the age of the "son" mentioned. In all versions it specifically mentions the "son" eating too much and being a drunk. I will leave it to others to decide on this verses meaning.
Deuteronomy 21:18-21
18 If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.
Actually Deuteronomy is a mine field of stoning sons and daughters to death but again does not seem to relate the age of these people.