Christian arguments against the Pearls' teachings.
Stephanie just started a new blog called The Shepherd’s Apprentice.
In her first post, she explains about the sin nature of babies and children and how we should respond to it.
She then posts about Selfish Babies or rather, if there is such a thing.
She ties it up with a look at Sin, How To Get What You Want.
Not bad for her first day. 
I have been thinking a lot about defiance lately. Is it real when it comes to young children? Most parents would emphatically answer, “Yes” to this question. I am not so sure though. According to dictionary.com, defiance is defined as “A daring or bold resistance to authority or to any opposing force.” To me, this means being able to stand up for what we believe is right. This is usually a good thing. Yet, when people discuss children as being “defiant,” it is always viewed as a very negative thing. In fact, most Christian pro-spankers tell parents to spank/hit children mainly for “defiance.”
Are young children truly being “defiant” when they refuse to do something we want or say, “No!” to us? I tend not to think so. Why? Because defiance is very subjective. What one person views as “defiance,” another person views as developmentally appropriate behavior or an indicator that something much deeper is going on within the child. See, to judge whether or not children are being “defiant,” we must look into their hearts. Only God can do this. [Read more...]
Samuel Martin has the following to say about his essay, O Wretched Child that I am.
This text may be the most important New Testament scripture for those parents who have small children – I Corinthians 2:11. “For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him?” – Why? Read why here!
He also said this about the same post:
“At one year of age, man is a king, fondled and doted upon by all. At two and three he is a pig, groping in the garbage. At ten he prances around like a kid. At twenty he is a horse, preening himself in search of a wife.” – This post covers a lot of ground surrounding Paul’s view of himself and how we can especially relate that issue to how we view our children.
He also has an interesting look at child rearing in Biblical times:
One day we won’t have to keep them so close, but until then: Hang on tight – Part One
One day we won’t have to keep them so close, but until then: Hang on tight – Part Two
(Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 4)
As I draw this series to a close, I want to take a look at using all of these positive discipline strategies that I have discussed throughout this series with “strong-willed children.” All of the strategies from mindful modeling, setting up the environment, setting limits, and using natural and logical consequences, etc. all work with all children. Some children may require a bit of creativity, but since all of these strategies are biblically based, they will work even with a “strong-willed” child. In this brief conclusion to this series, I want to focus on using positive, grace filled, firm discipline with “strong-willed” children.
“Strong-Willed” Children—“Positive discipline doesn’t work for my children!”
As we know from Part 1 of “The Christian History of Spanking,” breaking children’s wills has been a theme throughout history of Christian pro-spankers even though there is no biblical support for parents to break their children’s wills. Yet, even today, most Christian pro-spankers advocate the need to break children’s wills. And having a “strong-willed” child is seen as a negative as that child’s parents must work even harder to break his or her will. What these Christian pro-spankers fail to understand is that using physical punishment with “strong-willed” children actually makes these children even more angry and defiant. Sadly, as we’ve seen throughout all my series, some of these children have died because the multiple spankings broke their bodies before their wills.
I believe that there is no difference between our wills and our spirits. They are one and the same just as the Holy Spirit, Jesus, and God are one and the same. God creates us with a will. If God creates wills, then why would He want us to break the wills of children when they are discovering who they are and Who God is? [Read more...]
Latebloomer was raised in Reb Bradley’s church, Hope Chapel, and is one of the Sheltered, Controlled Homeschoolers who “didn’t ‘turn out right,’ yet another disappointment to the former parents and leadership of Hope Chapel.” She shares some important insights about this in “Biblical” Parenting, Introduction. (By the way, I was surprised to see Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz mentioned in this post.)
This post is the introduction to series of posts reviewing Reb Bradley’s book “Child Training Tips”. In this series of posts she looks at how this kind of parenting is “damaging to individuals and relationships because it sacrifices all other virtues for the sake of authority and submission.”
Each Post in her series focuses on one criticism.
Criticism #1: A Parent Who Assumes The Worst in which we see the concept of adversarial relationships taken to new levels.
Criticism #2: Parents are urged to exercise an extreme level of control of their child’s mind and body, which prevents the child from preparing for adulthood in which we learn how his teaching grooms perfect victims for child predators by breaking the child’s will, removing their sense of bodily ownership and teaching them that they must respect and obey anyone older than themselves.
Criticism #3: A Parent Who Tries to Change Minds and Hearts through Spanking in which we learn about his teachings on spanking which take abuse to new levels as well as his “severe misunderstanding of the Bible and serious scholarly negligence.”
Criticism #4: A Parent Who Isolates In Order to Control in which we learn that he teaches parents to isolate their children from the world and the results of such isolation.
In the last piece we saw how to set flexible yet solid boundaries and limits by which young children can abide. We also learned why using affirmations and encouragement with children is better than praises and rewards. And finally we saw that using natural and logical consequences with children helps them to be able to take responsibility for their actions. Again, it is important for us to remember that all the discipline strategies in this series are biblically supported, and are effective when used consistently and in conjunction with each other. In this piece we are going to discuss how to figure out the need behind unwanted behavior in order to help our children fulfill that need. We will also discuss regression in children and how to deal with it in a positive manner.
Fulfilling Needs—“Why is my child behaving this way?”
Many Christians, as we have seen throughout all of my series, believe that most of children’s unwanted behaviors are due to their sinful natures. They place so much emphasis on keeping children’s sinful nature in check that they forget, ignore, or deny the fact that God created children to develop the ways that they do, and that young children do not set out to sin. They are learning about their worlds. The more we understand child development and how God designed children, the easier it will be for us to guide and discipline (teach) our children.
From infancy, children have needs that must be met in order for children to thrive. Since young children have zero to limited vocabulary in the first few years of life, they cry and find other ways of trying to communicate their needs to us. As I’ve discussed in many of my series, an infant’s crying is not manipulative. Infants’ brains do not allow them to be able to manipulate us. A toddler will test limits, but will also try to communicate their needs by acting out as they still lack vocabulary and are just beginning to learn how to appropriately express themselves. [Read more...]
Throughout this series we are discussing ways of disciplining children that are more in line with what God had in mind. All of the discipline strategies in this series are very effective when used consistently and in conjunction with each other. They are all biblically supported and sound. And none of these methods, when used properly and respectfully, will ever cause any harm to children. In this piece, we will look at how to set appropriate limits and boundaries for our children by which they can abide. We will see that allowing children simple choices and giving appropriate alternatives for inappropriate behaviors also help children comply with our limits and boundaries. Next, we will see why using encouragement with our children is better than using rewards and praise. Finally, we will discuss using natural and logical consequences with children. Consequences are not the same as punishment. And discipline should not be equated with punishment.
Setting Limits and Boundaries—“Three Basic Rules for Life.”
We all need limits and boundaries in our lives for without them life would be very chaotic. This is especially true for children as this world is too overwhelming for them to handle on their own. Children feel most secure when they know what the limits and boundaries are. In fact, young children will test limits and boundaries to make sure that the adults in their lives will enforce them. “Children need secure, loving boundaries in order to feel safe, just as adults need a house with strong walls and a roof to feel protected from the weather. [Read more...]
The following was originally posted in thread on Gentle Christian Mothers called, “…And I’m the Strict One!“and is a follow up to my previous post, Teach Your Children Well.
At 4 months, what you want to be doing is starting the phase of ‘discipline’ that I call “show and tell” — it’s not a phase where you expect the baby to *do* anything at all. I mean that! And I know it doesn’t make sense to say “start discipline” and “the baby doesn’t do anything” when you are coming from a punitive mindset.
What “show and tell” means is that you are building the vocabulary for whatever you want him/her to be able to do without thinking twice once s/he is a toddler. You build vocabulary by saying a word and simultaneously doing that thing to the baby.
For example, when you say “Up” as you pick a baby up, that’s ‘show and tell’ — but of course, “Up” is not an instruction you want your toddler to follow later, so it’s not a good example of how ‘show and tell’ is a good start to good discipline. It’s just an example of the way that people naturally know that ‘show and tell’ is how you teach stuff to babies. It’s how they learn. That’s why it’s the method you choose when you teach everything, including when you teach the vocabulary you want them to grasp for following instructions. It’s a game. It’s no big deal.
At this stage you have TONS of time. Start by thinking and trying out what words you plan to use as your primary ‘words of instruction’. Once you’ve got them figured out, you need to *stop* using them as ordinary parts of chit-chat and *only* use them when you are going to be ‘show and tell’-ing. Your instruction words should be short and sweet. When possible, they should say what ‘is happening / what to do’ instead of ‘what not to do’. Try not to start with more than 6 to 10 instruction words. Select them carefully and always use them identically. (Many of these instruction words are going to sound like dog commands or military drill commands. That’s OK… it’s basically the same idea.)
This is training for you in pre-GOYB parenting. If you are not going to *do* anything, it’s best not to *say* an instruction at all — otherwise you confuse the child about the instructions that sometimes ‘happens’ and sometimes nothing happens. It waters down your ability to assert authority by spoken words. You are trying to build the bedrock of discipline which is Mommy’s instructions always come true. Emphasis on the *ALWAYS* part — you are trying to make them accept that ‘fact’ as a functional part of their scientific model of their universe. It can be hard to backtrack and make that happen for an older child, but it’s easy when you start with a baby, beginning with ‘show and tell’ teaching.
AND I MEAN teaching not training, not ‘expecting’ — no consiquences, nothing to interrupt the flow of your loving days of fun with baby. Nothing like that. Just like saying “Up!” when you pick him/her up, try things like…
Saying “Still.” (or) “Be still.” — while gently and briefly holding the baby still.
Saying “Hands off.” (or) “Open hand.” (or) “Release.” — while gently prying little hands off of things, or while hovering little hands where they can’t quite reach a thing they would like to grasp.
Saying “Give.” (or) “Give to Mama.” — while taking or trading with toys.
Saying “Careful.” (or) “Careful <relevant body part>.” — while using the child’s body parts in gentle, slow or careful ways.
– when mobile / crawling –
Saying “Back Away” (or) “Come Away” (or) “Redirect” — while pulling the baby back from their destination of interest.
{{{Note: if you have a place/location/object where the baby consistently isn’t going to be allowed, define that place/location/object clearly, give it a name, then add that to the instruction word, such as, “Come away; fish tank.” This is called adding a specifier (which should be consistent) to a known instruction word. You can also use specifiers with above instruction words for example, “Hands off; laptop.” Pause after the instruction word so that the baby gets it clearly, the extra word(s) are just for clarity, to help the child assemble the idea that some places/objects/locations are just not worth trying again. Adding which ‘body part’ to the instruction ‘careful’ is also a specifier, and so is ‘to Mama’ or ‘to someone else’. The ‘instruction word’ is the core of what you say.}}}
Saying “Stay with me.” — while physically keeping a baby right near you, lifting them back when they take a single scooch away.
Saying “Stop.” — while physically halting their motion-to-somewhere.
Saying “Come.” — while standing in one place, then going to get the toddler and bringing him/her to the place where you had been standing.
—
I want to be super clear: your baby will *NOT* follow your instructions. Don’t expect it. If you can’t do this without expecting it, don’t do it at all.
This is very simple. Nobody is following instructions but you. You are saying the ‘instruction’ for the baby’s *information* while using the baby’s body to demonstrate what the instruction means in bodily-physics. Both you and the baby are simply getting used to the terms and vocabulary. Nothing is expected of the baby. The parent does both the “telling” and the “showing” for the entirety of this very long phase (probably a year). It’s an at of kindness, a very long introduction to the theory that ‘in this universe Mama’s instructions always actually happen’. In my experience, sinking that concept in deeply matters a lot for long-term GBD.
So, pick your favorite ‘words of instruction’ and start by choosing not to use them in everyday language. Instead, if you are going to do something, just say to the baby what it is you are showing them how to do.
Dulce de Leche continues her 10 Commandments for Parents series with Thou Shalt Not Kill. In this post she discusses how parents often kill pieces of their children’s individuality.
Also, take note of this post by Sara Mae which looks at The Nature of A Child and why we should respond to their tantrums with grace.
In the last piece we looked at how Proverbs 22:6 means to discipline children in a way that works with them instead of against them. God is not an adversarial Parent to us, therefore, we should not be adversarial parents with our children as we are also sinners and actually sin more than our children do. The purpose of this series is to learn how to discipline our children in a manner that will lead them to God instead of away from Him. We must provide gentle yet firm discipline to our children. In this piece we will look at how to validate feelings, deal with temper tantrums, and why we shouldn’t use time-out as punishment but instead use something known as “time-IN” to help children calm down in a helpful way.
Validating Feelings—“It’s My Party and I’ll Cry if I Want to!”
Many people fail to realize just how much of an emotional life infants have right from birth. The young infant feels happy, sad, angry, and scared. But because crying is the only way of communicating their feelings, many infants do not get the validation that they require. Tragically, some infants are ignored and/or punished for crying. It is very important to understand that infants’ emotions are also their needs, and those needs must always be responded to in a sensitive and respectful manner. “It seems wise for caregivers to make the assumption that infants of all ages have feelings, since it helps us to understand their needs. The interventions we make that are consonant with our interpretations of infant emotions often seem to have the intended effect. We pick up a crying baby to soothe what we believe to be the child’s pain or discomfort as much as to stop the crying, and the subsequent relaxation of the infant confirms our belief about his or her feelings” (Fogel, 2011, p. 280). [Read more...]
Claire continues her Myth Busting series with Myth Busting 9: Right Away, All the Way, With a Happy Heart – or it’s Rebellion!
In this series we will be looking at how to biblically discipline our children without inflicting pain on them or harming them in any way. Some of the discipline strategies that we will be discussing throughout this series are modeling, child-proofing, validating feelings, fulfilling the child’s physical and emotional needs, setting realistic limits and boundaries, helping children comply, giving choices, and using natural and logical consequences with children. The Bible says that we are to encourage each other (2 Corinthians 13:11). All of the discipline strategies in this series do exactly that with our children. In this first piece, we will be discussing authoritative parenting versus permissive parenting. We will also discuss how to child-proof, modeling, and introducing God to our children.
Authoritative versus Permissive Parenting—Not Spanking does NOT Mean Wild, Rebellious Children
Pro-spankers often accuse or claim that parents who do not spank or use any type of punishment with their children of having wild and rebellious children. This simply is not the case for parents that use the authoritative parenting style. There seems to be much confusion over the three types of parenting styles. We discussed the authoritarian parenting style in great detail in Part 6 of my series, “The Effects of Spanking.” As we begin to focus on how to gently but firmly discipline children, we need to examine the other two parenting styles: authoritative parenting and permissive parenting. [Read more...]
Southern Methodist University (SMU) in Dallas has uploaded a video from FOX News in which “SMU Psychology Professor George Holden, who specializes in child-parent relationships and positive child rearing, talks critically about Michael and Debi Pearl’s book “To Train Up A Child,” which advocates spanking.” More information about Professor Holden here.
Fox 13 News Salt Lake City reports on the Pearls with a repeat of the Fox Video I shared on Feb 22, but with a new video which I will embed here. This video features Child Psychologist, Douglas Goldsmith PH.D., who refutes the Pearls’ teachings and recommends instead that parents follow How to Talk So Kids Will Listen & Listen So Kids Will Talk by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish.
The Hippie Housewife asks if our goal for our children should be Obedience or something else.
On a similar note, Created To Be His muses on the idea that Sons of Hell Can Be Rather Impressive.
Meanwhile, Pearl in Oyster (PIO) continues her 52 Tool Cards series with 52 Tool Cards Double Feature: Act Without Words and One Word.
(Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 4) (Part 5)
In the last part of this series we saw how teaching children to equate love with pain can cause them to become sadomasochistic. We also saw how spanking children, even when done “lovingly” and the “right way,” causes many children to struggle with depression, guilt, and shame as having pain intentionally inflicted on them by their parents never makes them feel positive about themselves. In this concluding piece of this series, we will see how spanking keeps the vicious cycle of abuse and authoritarian parenting going for generations unless one fights against it. New research shows that children that are physically punished/abused can develop a form of Stockholm Syndrome as they deny and repress their pain. Also, I will be showing that intentionally inflicting pain on children causes brain damage as the brain gets rewired due to experiencing pain and trauma throughout childhood. Many parents do not realize how vulnerable the young, developing brain is. Finally, I will be explaining the Scientific Method of conducting research in order to disprove the claim of a great deal of pro-spankers that all the research proving spanking is harmful is somehow biased. I hope this series further proves that spanking did not come from God otherwise none of these harmful effects would ever occur.
The Cycle of Abuse and Authoritarian Parenting—“My parents spanked me and I survived and so will my children!”
[Read more...]
I would like to draw your attention to some more interesting posts from Under Much Grace.
What It’s Like to Experience Only the Right Side of the Brain in the Way that Children Do (A Neuroscientist Experiences a Stroke on the Left, Analytical Side of the Brain) which debunks the Pearls’ claim that very young children exercise their diabolical wills to dominate their parents.
More from Janet Heimlich on Problematic and Abusive Corporal Punishment within Evangelical Christianity which debunks the common belief that spanking is non-optional for Christians.
And speaking of the science of children’s brains, you might be interested in How Stress Affects Your Child’s Brain.
Cindy of Under Much Grace explains the scientific evidence that shows the damage done to children who suffer harsh punishment from a young age. Parents who follow Pearls’ advice to punish toddlers for age appropriate behaviors may end up with seemingly happy and compliant children, but at what price?
Cindy of Under Much Grace takes informative and very technical looks at abusive behavior, analyzing both the victims and the abusers.
She has a new series about brainwashing. I want to make special note of part 7 in which she ties the information to the Pearls’ teachings. Here is a short summary which she wrote for me:
I think of it in terms of developmental milestones and such, and most all learning is experiential for a child for the first 36 months and is primarily all on the right side of the brain, entirely self-centered and oriented toward felt sense.
Children under the age of two only make Delta waves on EEG, the same brainwave that an adult makes while they sleep. From two to six, they make only theta waves which is what an adult generates just before falling asleep, basically. The plotting that Pearl talks about is a fast brainwave that doesn’t manifest in a child until they approach age twelve.
I would also like to draw your attention to the posts after part X which are about how the mindset of many families prime children for victimization.
Now, on the the entire series:
Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast: Understanding Doctrine Over Person Part I
A Sychophant for a Sociopath Does Damage Control: Understanding Doctrine Over Person Part II
Another Example of Transformed Memory in Response to Psychological Stress and Interpersonal Pressure in a POW Camp: Understanding Doctrine Over Person, Part III
Lifton on Reaffirming the Myth and How Adults and Children Respond: Understanding Doctrine Over Person Part IV
The Effects of Trauma and Abuse at Hephzibah House: Understanding Doctrine Over Person, Part X of X
She follows up this series with a related series about Understanding the Role of Childhood Emotional Development in Spiritual Abuse.
(Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 4)
In the previous piece we discovered that fear is the main effect of corporal punishment that all children experience despite the Bible clearly stating that fear is not from God. We also saw in the previous piece that “loving, godly” spankings are indeed harmful to children despite what many pro-spankers continue to claim. The research and numerous anecdotes (personal stories) show that hitting “in love,” and in the Name of God often has damaging effects on children even if they deny and repress these effects. In this piece we will be discussing an effect of “lovingly” spanking that has only recently come to my attention. Many people are unaware of the fact that “love” spankings causes sexual problems for children and adults as they seek to turn something painful and out of their control into something pleasant and somewhat controllable. This brief discussion may cause discomfort. We will also discuss how physical punishment often leads to depression, shame, and guilt as spanking never makes one feel good about oneself.
“Love” Spankings Continued—“Children are not sexual beings.”
Many people, in general, believe the above statement to be true. While children do not understand sexuality in the way that adults do, they have the ability at birth to become somewhat aroused and to feel pleasure. This is why young children very innocently explore their bodies during diaper changes and baths. This is a very normal and healthy part of the young child’s development. By the age of two, most young children are beginning to notice the differences between males and females and will ask questions out of pure curiosity. Simple, honest answers are all that young children want and need. While a child’s budding sexuality should be respected, their innocence and purity must be protected. [Read more...]
In this interview in the National Post, Pearl is quoted as saying:
But, I have said many times, when a spanking is not working, stop doing it. There are times when children become so emotionally torn that they have ceased all cognitive activity. Spanking is then counterproductive.
Frankly, I don’t recall him every saying that. If he has published this sentiment, I would like to know where because this quote needs much exposure. His followers need to be aware that he says this because this could really make a difference in the life of some children and maybe even save a life. Although, it is still rather vague, it is a step in the right direction.
Edited to add: Apparently Pearl was referring to this article where he said
You should not spank beyond your fellowship with the child. If you feel that your spanking is excessive, it is because it is not working. If it is not working to produce happy, creative kids, then you are missing one of the other elements we discussed. You have probably forgotten how to relax and enjoy your children. Or perhaps you have failed to train. The bottom line is that if other things are equal, and you give a child a spanking every time he needs it, the time will soon come when he will not need to be spanked so often, and eventually not at all.
More doublespeak. In the next breath he accuses them of failing to train properly and promises that if you are consistent things will get better. He have seen him accuse people of deliberately misunderstanding his meaning, but I really feel that he is vague and expecting people to make mental leaps which not all people are able to make.
Also, if anyone knows where he got these statistics which he quotes, I’d be interested. Was it from the research study or somewhere else?
Research has shown that the properly trained, nurtured and spanked child scores higher on all positive measures both as a child and as an adult. Spanking as part — a small part — of a comprehensive nurturing process instills self control and disciplined in a child, rendering him more emotionally stable and balanced as an adult. Every child was spanked up until Dr. Spock. Now only about 75% are spanked with no malice aforethought, and another 20% are occasionally spanked or hit by angry out of control parents that profess not to believe in it…
In his interview on AC360 Mr. Pearl mentioned the same research on spanking and Anderson Cooper delves deeper into that in another segment. Before linking I want to warn you that it opens with the very upsetting video of Judge William Adams beating his daughter. After that it recaps prior interviews with Michael Pearl and then moves on to Dr. Drew Pinsky and Po Bronson talking to Anderson Cooper about the science behind physically disciplining children. In The Science of Spanking, Anderson Cooper asks Dr. Drew Pinsky and Po Bronson what they think of the Pearl method and it should come as no surprise that they did not find it healthy in any way, shape or form.
The only problem with this interview is that they make a big point of discussing how spanking in anger is even more damaging. This will probably cause Pearl and most of his followers to argue that spanking without anger will cause no damage at all. They are so very wrong. But then of course, Pearl and his followers tend to discount science except for when it supports their beliefs so it’s probably a moot point.
MamaPsalmist discusses a post from Positive Parenting which explains why Nonpunitive Discipline ≠ Lazy Parenting in Positive Parenting: Toddlers and Beyond: Nonpunitive Discipline ≠ Lazy Parenting.
On a similar note, Elizabeth (from Virginia Is For Mothers) shares some very helpful insight about giving grace and understanding to Child Size Problems.
And Pearl In Oyster (PIO) shares about validating and working through a three year old’s nighttime fears in Dealing with Tears & Fears at Bedtime.
Carissa Robinson explains the concept of Disequilibrium and what it looks like for her 3 yr old who is Swiftly Approaching Disequilibrium. This concept is from a series of books by Louise Bates Ames & Frances L. Ilg about what age appropriate behavior you can expect from children at each age. Learning about this is very valuable as it allows her to make a game plan which she helpfully shares with us.
In the last piece I discussed one of the major effects of spanking, which is denial. We also looked at repression and the continuum of violence against children. If a swat or light slap on a child’s hand or bottom is intended to cause pain to the child, then it is a form of violence against the child just as it is for adults. Children are not sub-humans, and do not deserve to have pain inflicted upon them because they are unable to behave like adults. As we’ve seen in my last two series, “Spanking is NOT God’s Will,” and “The Christian History of Spanking,” God never intended us to spank our children. This series further proves this as it is showing the very harmful effects of spanking children—even if it’s done “lovingly” and by Christian parents. In this piece, I will be discussing how spanking effects empathy, anger, and aggression in children and adults.
Empathy—“That Child Needs a Good Spanking!”
We hear the above statement, “That child needs a good spanking,” by many advocates of spanking as if they have no empathy for what the child is actually experiencing or the pain a “good spanking” will cause the child both physically and emotionally. As we saw in Part 2 of this series, many pro-spankers were spanked/abused as children themselves but have repressed their pain and are now in denial that hitting children does in fact cause harm. This denial can often, and does indeed, lead to a lack of empathy when it comes to children as well as other adults. [Read more...]
Pearl in Oyster (PIO) shares some really helpful advice which is sure to help avoid frustration in your household. This post is from her 52 Tool Cards series and is called, Eye to Eye.
She mentions a child’s brain development in her post which brings me to an excerpt from Samuel Martin’s newest book in which he shares why it does not make sense to punish young children for sins before they are even old enough to understand sinning.
The Hippie Housewife discusses how we should reflect the character of God for our children. She looks at how attachment parenting looks a lot like how God cares for us and warns us about 3 heresies which are cropping up in many Christian teachings.
Along the same lines, Pearl In Oyster (PIO) explains that we should imitate how God disciplines His children. She uses her testimony of how God treated her when she was out of His will as an example.
( Part 1 ) ( Part 2 ) ( Part 3) (Part 4) (Part 5)
This will be the conclusion of this series in which we have explored and discovered some of the origins of spanking children within Christianity. It was my goal to show that spanking is from man and not God, as so many well-meaning Christians have believed throughout the ages. In this paper, I will show how the idea of controlling children dates back to the early church in the ancient world, look at how Catholicism has advocated and used physical punishment with children, show the likely origin of the “Christian rules of how to spank children,” and will conclude with explaining Behaviorism and how physical punishment falls under that very old and outdated branch of Psychology.
The Origins of the Christian Need to Control Children
Many Christian advocates of spanking as well as the parents who follow these advocates are often quite concerned with controlling their children’s behavior, and really, one could say controlling their children. Advocates such as James Dobson, the Ezzos, the Pearls, and others teach parents that they must be in control of their children from birth. They claim that newborn infants must be taught that their parents are the bosses, not them. If this sounds familiar, it is because control and breaking children’s wills go hand and hand. We’ve seen how breaking the child’s will has been advocated for and done by Christians throughout history despite there being no biblical grounds for doing such a thing (See Parts 1, 2, & 3 for more info on breaking children’s wills). This need for adults to control their children dates back to New Testament times. In fact, certain verses of the New Testament are used to try and justify controlling one’s children. [Read more...]
Greenegem at Dare to Disciple looks at Understanding Consequences as a developmental ability in “Inconceivable.”
( Part 1 ) ( Part 2 ) ( Part 3) (Part 4)
This should, and will in my book, preface Part 7 of “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” where I discuss how children were treated during New Testament times, and how Christ radically changed how people are to view them. Back in New Testament times, children were, in general, loved but viewed as animals that needed to be trained (Strange, 2004). In this piece, I would like to explore more of the cultural context in which the Gospel was written as Jesus’ childhood was left out of the Gospels except for His birth in Matthew and Luke as well as a single brief story of Jesus at age 12 in Luke 2:41-52. While it is obvious that God felt that we do not need to know much about Christ’s childhood in order to truly know Who He is, I am merely interested in portraying what people thought of childhood as another reason why the Gospel writers left out much of Jesus’ childhood. Please note that I am in no way putting the Gospel writers down as they were wholly inspired by God to include what they did in the Gospels.
People in the first century definitely had an interest in children, but when it came to childhood, it was not looked upon by the people as an important, valuable time of growth and development within one’s lifespan. Unlike today, childhood was not seen as an important part of who a person would eventually become. “But while people in the ancient world were interested in children, they were not so interested in childhood… Modern people have been taught to see childhood as a time of formation and growth, a time when a person passes through certain crucial stages of development. The ancient world was simply not so reflective about childhood and did not see human personality in the same developmental way” (Strange, 2004, p. 40). People in the ancient world did understand that there were certain skills that children needed to be taught in order to be productive adults. But they did not understand the different developmental stages children went through that would allow them to learn these skills. Needless to say, education of children could often be brutal and very unimaginative during the first century due to this lack of knowledge and interest in childhood (Strange, 2004). [Read more...]
Twitter
Facebook
email
Print
Tumblr
Digg
del.icio.us
StumbleUpon
Add to favorites
Reddit
Recent Comments