Abortion: Why it is bad for women (and benefits men)

Many adults on the left support it. Many adults on the right support it. Abortion is a hot-button topic where the pro-choice lobby avoids their maternal intuition in supporting what is a trap for women. Most women know not to get abortions themselves, but leave the option open for other women "if they need it". However, abortion is a rare procedure that ultimately benefits men and is bad for women.

The Sixth Commandment states in Exodus 20:13 KJV:

Thou shalt not kill.

The Greek root word denoting murder in the New Testament is φονος (Latin: phonos) and refers here to any human death apart from natural death. Only God can take a life. An unborn child then was considered a human life, and the taking of that life in and of itself was seen as child murder. Abortion was a rare procedure in the Early Church, much like it being rare today, with most abortions leaving behind a trauma. This is because an abortion is a medically-induced miscarriage. The baby comes out on his/her due date, but comes out stillborn. Abortifacients are a class of drug being used to induce the miscarriage, and came in the form of an herbal tea in the Early Church that was seen as contraband. The doctor does not reach in and remove the baby.. as that would be a D&C and not an abortion. A D&C is sometimes necessary to preserve the life of the mother when her baby's dead body is rotting in the womb.

Abortion is bad for women. Most women who get abortions develop what is called abortion trauma. The baby always comes out stillborn, and that alone reminds most women of what they missed out on. One can be sensitive to abortion trauma by keeping down the topic. as if you side with  it at all, they are afraid of going to the abortion clinic again. Most women know intuitively to stay away from abortion, apart from the women who are cold on the nurturing side.

Men benefit from abortions. Most men who support pro-choice causes support it for themselves - meaning he wants out of paternal responsibilities. Most abortions involve a man urging a woman to get an abortion because he does not want to take care of a child. This is due to toxic masculinity and male insecurity. Most men are afraid of parenthood at some level, and when that happens, he ushers his wife to the abortion clinic.

I myself as a man can do my part to avoid women getting abortions. That involved keeping it in my pants, and saving myself for marriage. Married sex is the safest sex that there is. If I don't want a woman to be pregnant. I should abstain from sexual relations as a man, and make my partner wait until marriage to have sex with her  A compelling argument for abortion is the case of a pregnancy abuser, in which case the man can easily be charged with rape. Even where there is no marital rape statute, the generic rape statute applies. Here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, rape is a strict liability offense. Abortion is a band-aid fix, when we know already how rape happens and how to prevent it, especially us at anti-rape feminists.

Most women in the Early Church never got an abortion. Some women did get abortions and even defended it, and they were seen as cold on the nurturing side. Most women who are in touch with their maternal intuition in full actually feel comfortable being pregnant. Most women in the Early Church refused to be swayed by entitled men into getting an abortion. Women then were submissive, but outspoken in their submissive role. A woman stood up for herself then by many warnings of a divorce, if she did not like the way the man of the house treated her. If he showed the slightest of male entitlement, he could be gone just for that. But, she waited until the warnings weren't enough, and then she evicted a man. I as a man support a woman's right to send her husband out on the street - and then she can raise the children on her own. Jesus of Nazareth was the first feminist, and made a change that allowed for women to be empowered and divorce her husband, when beforehand, the man of the house could send his whole family out on the street. I myself as a man am not allowed divorce from a wife, as that most always comes from hardness of heart, but my wife can issue me just one warning and then I get the point. The most law a woman would have to keep in relation to me is attachment parenting, which she should ideally should support when marrying me. If she is already my gentle parenting bride, I will give her free reign while being her caregiver spouse. A man takes responsibility so that a woman doesn't have to. But, if she does want a job, she can have a job, but she doesn't have to have one. A woman in the Early Church usually refused to get an abortion, as God's Law was above the law of men. Husbands could issue law, but only within the ambit of God's Law, and never could insist on anything personally in return for providing for his wife, meaning he could not insist on praise and recognition from anyone in relation to his wife. Most women are hardwired by nature to submit to their husband, so why not let her make that decision, and focus on giving her tender loving care. Most women will submit if the man is enough of a refuge to rest under. Wifely submission is a choice between a woman and God, with support from a reliable husband. I do have a domestic abuse problem - I would be co-dependent with a woman, and she would end up being the caregiver instead of me, with this due to my autism.

Abortion was not invented as a means of women's "empowerment". Abortion was invented as a form of "birth control" intended as a means of eugenics. Most of us with autism oppose a cure because of what it might entail - a woman being given grim news and imposing abortion on her. Margaret Sanger was not the ideal feminist, yet she basically invented the abortion industry. Most of the Early Feminists were pro-life to the core, and warned women of the dangers of abortion. Abortion was seen by the Early Feminists as snake oil. Abortion was intended as a form of enforcing genetic purity on individuals with disabilities. 

I am opposed to abortion in all cases, including even the life of the mother. A man is perfectly capable of nurturing. We as men have nipples for a reason - we could actually mother a child ourselves if the mother wasn't around. The only thing stopping a man from nurturing up close is male insecurity. The idea of men being cold on the nurturing is a modern concept. In the Early Church, a man knew exactly how to respond to a crying baby, if he ever needed to. Usually, the mother did survive childbirth, and took over the nurturing, but men could do it too if they got the chance. 

The depraved and entitled mothers who murder their children in the womb, and all those who aid and abet, will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them be cast forever into the abyss which is the Hell of fire and torment, suffering God's Wrath day and night forever and ever! Repent!

Defiance: Why never to punish your child for defiance

Many parents think that children who defy the limits of parents are deserving of punishment. This is a common attitude amongst American parents. Most American parents punish their children for defiance, with some parents only punishing their children for clear defiance. However, defiance does not consist of a child out to "undermine parents". Children are defiant because they simply cannot accept a set limit.

God's Law on dealing with defiance is spelled out in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers here to offenses or damages, namely the slightest of personal offense perceived by a child, stemming from entitlement. It is one thing to stop spanking your child, including for defiance. However, it is not enough to stop spanking your child, or even stop punishing your child altogether for that matter. You need to avoid offense in children. Avoiding offense in children is the same as avoiding offense in other adults. If you hurt someone else's feelings, you need to apologize. Dealing with children works the same way. One way that children's feelings are hurt is when they cannot accept a set limit. One way that children show their displeasure for set limits is by defiance. Children aren't out to get you. They simply cannot accept a set limit, with this due to children lacking self-control, with things that adults find simply disappointing instead being earth-shattering for children. Thus, in order to avoid offense in children, you need to apologize to children for hurting their feelings with your limits, ideally in the face of their defiance. In many cases, all that is necessary is a reassurance of good intent coming from parents, in the form of an informal apology, whenever you hurt your child's feelings with limits not set out of anger, such as "I'm sorry, but I had to set X limit for Y reasons". However, if you ever lose your cool with your child as a parent, including while setting limits, you definitely need to give a formal apology for hurting their feelings with your anger, such as "I apologize for hurting your feelings with my temper", and then commit never to lose your cool with your child ever again, as any parent anger directed towards children is entitlement, and was seen as entitlement in the Early Church. This commandment cross-references the Eighth and the Tenth Commandments, with the Apostle Paul here convicting a group of Greek Christian parents who brought into the church their pagan custom of patrias potestas, which is a Latin term roughly translating to "power to the parent", namely the power to impose punitive sanctions on children, such as spanking or other forms of punishment of children. Paul, contrary to popular legend, was anti-spanking, and opposed any and all punitive parenting in his secular writings. Attachment parenting was banned under Roman law, but the Early Christians did it anyway, obeying God over men.

Children are not out to undermine you when they are defiant. They simply lack the self-control to accept limits from parents. What is a normal disappointment for adults is earth-shattering for young children. The idea is to reassure your child that you mean well in your limits. In almost all instances, children can forgive an apology from parents when parents apologize for hurting their child's feelings. When children refuse to forgive you, you most likely have traumatized them. But, like with adults, children forgive the little disagreements, with children instead refusing to forgive clear abuse.

Children growing up in the Early Church were the type of child to be compliant in a way that pleased parents, especially after the first 6 years of childhood. Mutual submission in parenting then came in the form of mutual askance, meaning parents could ask things of children from the bottom of their heart, with children asking things of parents. See the word υπακουο in Col. 3:20 and Eph. 6:1. Children rested in the refuge of their parents, especially when children were under age 6. 

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger through punitive parenting will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them be cast forever into the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices! Let them descend into the abyss which is the ever-burning Hell of fire and torment, suffering God's Wrath day and night forever and ever! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Child abuse definitions: Why the Bible calls for expanding child abuse definitions

Many parents think that the Bible has no concept of child abuse apart from obeying the law of the land. Most American parents support the present-day definitions of child abuse under state and federal law. However, God's Law is above the law of the land. The Bible has its own definition of child abuse - whatever the child victim perceives as abuse.

The Greek root word denoting parental entitlement is πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and is defined as, officially speaking, wanting things from children, to the point of imposition. Unofficially speaking, parental entitlement consists of a parent being sorely disappointed when they don't get the well-behaved child that they feel that they deserve. Parents are deserving of absolutely nothing in relation to children just for being parents. Even any parent anger directed towards a child is parental entitlement, and was seen as entitlement in the Early Church. Whenever this sense of entitlement then in parents was perceived by a child as offensive or damaging, it was deemed child abuse. See also Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers here to offenses or damages, namely the slightest of personal offense perceived by a child, stemming from entitlement. Child abuse in the Bible, as a legal concept, consists of entitlement in parents, leading to offense in children. The key to not abusing your child is to avoid offense in children. Avoiding offense in children is the same as avoiding offense in other adults. Whenever you hurt someone else's feelings, you need to apologize. It works the same way when dealing with children. Thus, in order to avoid offense in children, you need to be willing to apologize for hurting your child's feelings. In many cases, all that is necessary is a reassurance of good intent coming from parents, in the form of an informal apology, whenever you hurt your child's feelings with limits not set out of anger, such as "I'm sorry, but I had to set X limit for Y reasons". However, if you ever lose your cool with your child as a parent, including while setting limits, you definitely need to give a formal apology for hurting your child's feelings with your anger, such as "I apologize for hurting your feelings with my temper", and then commit never to lose your cool with your child ever again, as any parent anger directed towards a child alone is entitlement, and was seen as entitlement in the Early Church. This commandment cross-references the Eighth and the Tenth Commandments, with the Apostle Paul here convicting a group of Greek Christian parents who brought into the church their pagan custom of patrias potestas, which is a Latin term roughly translated to "power to the parent", namely the power to impose punitive sanctions on children, such as spanking or other forms of punishment of children. But, this commandment was ultimately received by the parish at Colossae as prohibiting causing offenses in children as perceived by a child, at minimum. Paul, contrary to popular legend, was anti-spanking, and opposed any and all punitive parenting in his secular writings. Attachment parenting was banned under Roman law, but the Early Christians did it anyway, obeying God over men.

The Greek root word translated "they be discouraged" is αθυμέω (Latin: athumeo) and refers here to long-term damages, namely childhood trauma. The ancients in the Bible had a basic understanding of childhood trauma. Whenever a child grew up to be atheist, shame fell onto the parents for being too harsh on their child. An atheist in the Early Church was seen as an abused child, not a "lost soul" to be "won over".

The ancients in the Bible also had a concept of child sexual abuse. The Greek root word translated "fornication" is πορνεία (Latin: porneia) and refers in this context to any sexual relations outside of a Christian marriage between one adult man and one adult woman, with this marriage needing to be equal in terms of chronological age. The groom in a marriage was only allowed a bride his age or up to 4 years older. Intergenerational marriage was banned in the Early Church. Most child sexual abuse then came in the form of father-child incest, with the usual victims being daughters. Fathers instead usually masturbated to sexual thoughts of children, including his daughter. Whenever an adult sexually abused a child in the Early Church, it was a huge moral outrage. Adult attraction to children then existed on the surface, with fathers being open about their sexual fantasies of their children. Thus, children knew exactly what was going on when being sexually abused, and then self-reported the abuse that they suffered.

It is a myth that the Early Christians were well-integrated into Greco-Roman society. Instead, the Early Christians shunned the outside Greco-Roman world, and the world at large, living in urban enclaves in major Greco-Roman cities. Christians then even had their own court system that was binding until the end of the 1st Century.

Child abuse in the Early Church was prosecuted by way of internal church investigation. This investigation usually started with a child confiding into a clergyperson about their home life. From there, the parents were summoned to appear before a council of 3 elders, who would preside over the investigation. If the parents at all were defensive of their "rights", they were swiftly excommunicated from the Early Christian Churches of God for their entitlement, as was all witnesses that testified on behalf of the entitled parents.

The Bible is an anti-spanking document. All 88 books of the Bible - from Genesis to Revelation - were written by anti-spanking Jews, with striking a minor child being prohibited under Jewish law. All of the biblical writers also wrote parenting manuals that advocated attachment parenting. Even King Solomon issued an attachment parenting manual, with the rod in Proverbs instead referring to the 40 minus 1 lashes. It just so happens that the attachment parenting manuals were not translated into English until the 1960s. Before then, this level of biblical knowledge was known only to the Jewish world.

The Bible is America's book. America is a Christian nation founded on Judeo-Christian values. We as a society glean from the Bible and its context to know how to live and treat each other with respect. Even our legal codes, under the English common law, are based off of biblical teaching. However, the criminal defense of "reasonable chastisement" comes from dated biblical teaching. It is about time that the "reasonable chastisement" defense being repealed, with the child abuse definitions under state and federal law being expanded to include anything perceived by the child victim as abuse. 

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke your children to anger through punitive parenting will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them be cast forever into the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices! Let them descend into the abyss which is the ever-burning Hell of fire and torrents, suffering God's Wrath day and night forever and ever! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

"Benign" deprivation: Why children do not need to hear the word "no" from parents "frequent and often"

Many parents buy into the doctrine of "benign" deprivation. This parenting doctrine consists of parents saying "no" to children "frequent and often". The idea is that children need to hear the word "no" from parents "frequent and often" to "prepare them for the real world". However, children aren't ready for the real world. They are only children.

God's Law on "benign" deprivation is spelled out in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers here to offenses or damages, namely the slightest of personal offense perceived by a child, stemming from entitlement. The key here is to avoid offense in children. Avoiding offense in children is the same as avoiding offense in other adults. Whenever you hurt someone's feelings, you need to apologize. It works the same way with children when dealing with them. One thing that hurts children's feelings perhaps more than anything is being told "no" for most everything that they ask for.  The idea is to only tell children "no" when absolutely necessary, namely for safety's sake. If children are playing ball in the house, say "no" to that behavior. Same if they are about to touch a hot stove or run into a busy street. A child might also ask for something unsafe, in which case the word "no" is in order. Whenever you have to say "no" to a child, you should back up the word "no" with an apology if the child cannot accept the word "no". Many times, all that is necessary is a reassurance of good intent, in the form of an informal apology, whenever you hurt your child's feelings with limits not set out of anger, such as "I'm sorry, but I had to set X limit for Y reason". However, if you ever lose your cool with your child as a parent, including while telling a child "no", you definitely need to give a formal apology for hurting your child's feelings with your anger, such as "I apologize for hurting your feelings with my temper", and the commit never to never lose your cool with your child ever again, as any parent anger directed towards children alone is entitlement, and was seen as entitlement in the Early Church. This commandment cross-references the Eighth and the Tenth Commandments, with the Apostle Paul here convicting a group of Greek Christian parents who brought into the church their pagan parenting customs, which were punitive in nature. Paul, contrary to popular legend, was anti-spanking, and opposed any and all punitive parenting in his secular writings. Attachment parenting was banned under Roman law, but the Early Christians did it anyway, obeying God over men.

Your child need to hear your "yes" far more often than your "no". Children should only be told "no" when they are behaving in a manner that is a danger to themselves or others. The word "no" should only be used seldom, meaning only when absolutely necessary. Whenever your "no" hurts a child's feelings, you need to apologize for hurt feelings.

One place of contention in parenting is in the store. Usually, the child wants a candy bar off of the shelf, and usually, the parent says "put that back", and then the fight starts from there. In the Early Church, all of the children wanted licorice. When a child got licorice off of the shelf, the mother simply asked the child to hand over the candy in order for it to be paid for. Then, the child was allowed to enjoy their licorice. Most of the time, children aren't asking for much in the store. If they want something expensive, simply save money and buy it later once you have enough money. That means YOU work for the money, instead of forcing child labor onto children. 

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger through punitive parenting will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them be cast forever into the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices! Let them descend into the abyss which is the ever-burning Hell of fire and torment, suffering God's Wrath day and night forever and ever! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

"Biblical spanking": Why the rod verses in the book of Proverbs are repealed verses

Many parents think that it is acceptable to spank a child. This is a common attitude amongst American parents. Most American parents find a religious excuse for spanking a child, namely 5 verses in the book of Proverbs. However, the rod in Proverbs refers to a sentence for a crime, not a domestic punishment in a home setting.

There are exactly 6 passages in the book of Proverbs that mention the rod. One common rod verse cited to argue for a "biblical spanking" is Proverbs 13:24 KJV:

He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

The Hebrew root word translated "son" is ben and refers to a mature adult son. The Hebrew root word translated as "rod" in Proverbs is shebet and refers to in the book of Proverbs to the rod of correction, namely a switch. The rod verses in Proverbs ultimately refer to the 40 minus 1 lashes, applied to the bare back, in a courtroom setting, as a sentence for a crime. Under Jewish law, it was unlawful to strike a fellow Jew outside of the context of a courtroom. Striking a minor child was prohibited then in all settings. The reason for this commandment is that, otherwise, fathers would refuse to whip their adult children when they run afoul of the law.

Christ died and Rose on the the Third Day in order to abolish the harsh punishments of the Old Testament. Christ abolished all corporal punishment by enduring it unjustly before being nailed to the cross. The Early Christians did not use corporal punishment as a form of church discipline, with the church instead excommunicating scofflaw members. 

The teaching of a "biblical spanking" is a man-made teaching. Nowhere in the Bible is spanking legitimately condoned or commanded, with the passage in Hebrews 12:5-6 referring to trials and tribulations from God to His children. The book of Proverbs does not mention any parenting of minor children. However, the Bible does touch on the spanking issue, and then some. See also Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged. 

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers here to offenses or damages, namely the slightest of personal offense perceived by a child, stemming from entitlement. It is one thing to stop spanking your child. However, it is not enough to stop spanking your child, or even stop punishing them altogether for that matter. You need to avoid offense in children. Avoiding offense in children is the same as avoiding offense in other adults. If you hurt someone else's feelings, you need to apologize. It works the same way with children when dealing with them. Thus, in order to avoid offense in children, you need to be willing to apologize for hurt feelings in children. In many cases, all that is necessary is a reassurance of good intent coming from parents, in the form of an informal apology whenever you hurt your child's feelings with limits not set out of anger, such as "I'm sorry, but I had to set X limit for Y reasons". However, if you ever lose your cool with a child, including while setting limits, you definitely need to give a formal apology whenever you hurt your child's feelings with your anger, such as "I apologize for hurting your feelings with my temper", and then commit never to lose your cool with your child ever again, as any parent anger directed towards children is entitlement, and was seen as entitlement in the Early Church. This commandment cross-references the Eighth and the Tenth Commandments, with the Apostle Paul here convicting a group of Greek Christian parents who brought into the church their pagan custom of patrias potestas, which is a Latin phrase roughly translating to "power to the parent", namely the power to impose punitive sanctions on children, such as spanking or other forms of punishment of children. But, this commandment was ultimately received by the parish at Colossae as prohibiting causing any offenses in a child as was perceived by a child, at minimum. Paul, contrary to popular legend, was anti-spanking, and opposed any and all punitive parenting in his secular writings. Attachment parenting was banned under Roman law, but the Early Christians did it anyway, obeying God over men.

Pro-spanking parents were seen in the Early Church as church infiltrators, with Greek Christian parents sticking to their pagan parenting customs. The Apostle Paul would have none of it, and sent an epistle to the parishes at Colossae and Ephesus. These pro-spanking parents even misused the book of Proverbs to justify their punitive parenting. 

The rod verses in the book of Proverbs are repealed verses. Nowhere is the rod of correction cross-referenced legitimately in the New Testament. The book of Hebrews does mention a rod, but not the rod of correction, with the whipping in Heb. 12:5-6 being a metaphor for enduring hardship. 

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger through punitive parenting will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them be case forever into the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices! Let them descend into the abyss which is the ever-burning Hell of fire and torment, suffering God's Wrath day and night forever and ever! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Hebrews 12:5-6: Why this passage is not a pro-spanking passage

Many parents think that the Bible supports, or even commands, the corporal punishment of a child. This is a common attitude amongst American parents. Most American parents cite a few passages in the book of Proverbs, as well as a passage in Hebrews, as their "proof" that spanking is biblical. However, the arguments in the New Testament in Heb. 12:5-6 sit on shaky ground. The Bible in Heb. 12:5-6 instead refers to trials and tribulations sent the way of the believer.

And ye have forgotten the exhortation that speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.

This passage, when understood correctly, can be comforting to me. The Greek root word translated "scourgeth" is μαστιγόω (Latin: mastigoó) and can have a figurative meaning to it, as is the case here. The rod in Hebrews was a metaphor for enduring hardship. If a Christian then had a long day at work, they instead said "God whipped me hard today". God obviously does not come down from the Heavens and whip His children. However, God does punish His children, as only He can, sending trials and tribulations the way of the children that He loves the most. However, God only punishes His children when it does not harm them, whereas earthly parents only punish their children when it does, in fact, harm them. The Apostle Paul here was reassuring the Hebrew Christians in their persecution from Rome.

The teaching of "biblical spanking" is a man-made teaching. The Bible nowhere legitimately endorses or commands punishing a child. God does not want His Parenting methods to be used by earthly parents, lest they get it wrong. However, the Bible does touch on the spanking issue, and then some. See Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers here to offenses or damages, namely the slightest of personal offense perceived by a child, stemming from entitlement. It is one thing to stop spanking your child. However, it is not enough to stop spanking your child, or even stop punishing them altogether for that matter. You need to avoid offense in children. Avoiding offense in children is the same as avoiding offense in other adults. Whenever you hurt someone's feelings, you need to apologize. It works the same way with children when dealing with them. Thus, in order to avoid offense in children, you need to be willing to apologize whenever you hurt their feelings. In many cases, all that is necessary is a reassurance of good intent coming from parents, in the form of an informal apology, whenever your child cannot accept limits not set out of anger, such as "I'm sorry, but I had to set X limit for Y reasons. However, if you ever lose your cool with your child as a parent, including while setting limits, you need to give a formal apology for hurting your child's feelings with your anger, such as "I apologize for hurting your feelings with my temper", and then commit never to lose your cool with your child ever again, as any parent anger directed towards a child alone is entitlement, and was seen as entitlement in the Early Church. This commandment cross-references the Eighth and the Tenth Commandments, with the Apostle Paul here convicting a group of Greek Christian parents who brought into the church their pagan custom of patrias potestas, which is a Latin term roughly translating to "power to the parent", namely the power to impose punitive sanctions on children, such as spanking or other forms of punishment of children. But, this commandment was ultimately received by the parish at Colossae as prohibiting causing any offenses in a child as perceived by a child. Paul, contrary to popular legend, was anti-spanking, adn opposed any and all punitive parenting in his secular writings. Attachment parenting was banned under Roman law, but the Early Christians did it anyway, obeying God over men.

The staple punishment for children in the broader Greco-Roman world consisted of a spanking to a bare bottom with an open hand. However, the Early Christians shunned the outside world, and shunned all corporal punishment of children - or at all - as of this world. The Early Christians were not well-integrated into Rome, contrary to popular legend.

Punitive parents were seen in the Early Church were seen and treated as church infiltrators. Paul would have none of this punitive parenting tainting the holy waters of the church. He issued a convicting commandment on the punishment issue to the parishes at Colossae and Ephesus.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger through punitive parenting will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them be cast forever into the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices! Let them descend into the abyss which is the ever-burning Hell of fire and torment, suffering God's Wrath day and night forever and ever! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Temper tantrums: Why not to use punitive measures on children when they tantrum

Many parents have been there. A child throwing a massive temper tantrum. This is a common and normal behavior in children. Most parents either ignore a crying child, or else punish them for it. Temper tantrums are a common reason for children being punished or ignored. 

The Bible prohibits all punitive measures in parenting, including ignoring or punishing temper tantrums. See Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers here to offenses or damages, namely the slightest of personal offense perceived by a child, stemming from entitlement. It is one thing to stop spanking your child for temper tantrums. However, it is not enough to stop spanking your child, or even stop punishing them altogether for that matter. You need to avoid offense in a crying child. If you ignore a crying child, you hurt their feelings, and offend them by omission. However, whenever you lose your cool with your child, including while ignoring or punishing their cries, you definitely need to apologize for hurting your child's feelings with your anger, such as "I apologize for losing my cool with you", and then commit never to losing your cool with your child ever again, as any parent anger directed towards a child alone is entitlement, and was seen as entitlement in the Early Church. This commandment cross-references the Eighth and the Tenth Commandments, with the Apostle Paul convicting a group of Greek Christian parents who brought into the church their pagan custom of patirias potestas, which is a Latin term roughly translated to "power to the parent", namely the power to impose punitive sanctions on children, such as spanking or other forms of punishment of children. But, this commandment was ultimately received by the parish at Colossae as prohibiting causing offenses in children as perceived by a child, at minimum. Paul, contrary to popular legend, was anti-spanking, and opposed any and all punishment of a child in his secular writings. Attachment parenting was banned under Roman law, but the Early Christians did it anyway, obeying God over men.

Offense by omission is whenever you offend a child by way of refusing to care for their needs, including by way of having them "cry it out". Any time you refuse to meet the needs of a ward as a caregiver, you offend them by omission. 

Temper tantrums were not seen by Christian parents in the Early Church as bad behavior. Instead, childhood temper tantrums were tended to with tender loving care. For the first 6 years of childhood, children were in close proximity to mothers, meaning wherever the mother went, so did her child. Whenever a child cried, mothers swooped in to troubleshoot as to what the issue is. Usually, all the child needed was mom, including possibly her milk as well. 

The purpose of a child crying is not to undermine you. Instead, the goal is to break you down, and break you down some more, until you find out what the child is crying about. It is their only way of petitioning for their needs before the age of 6. 

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger by way of punitive parenting will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them be cast forever into the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices! Let them descend  into the abyss which is the ever-burning Hell of fire and torment, suffering God's Wrath day and night forever and ever! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!