Why pro-spanking pastors are heretics (and popular ones nonetheless)

I am a heretic, by the official church designation. A defiled anti-spanker. Oh well, if I'm defiled because of that, so be it. I laugh at the other side on the spanking issue, in my lounge chair. I only pretend to get angry these days, even with my lawful trauma from corporal punishment.

It seems my pages were blacklisted for "rewriting the Bible" by the law enforcement agencies (LEAs) here in Berks County. The job of the police is to enforce laws. There was a valid crime leading to trumped up charges of another crime, rape. To hell with pro-spanking parents and rapists, since I lump them in the same category. "Rewriting the Bible" is code for "you are a heretic" in the conservative Christian churches. Sometimes, the accusers of alleged heretics are the biggest heretics of all. Biblical spanking is anything but, the more you study how the ancients raised their children, which is nothing like conventional parenting today...It was attachment parenting country there, and the way recommended by our parent coaches today, but in the form most closest to the mother due to the fact that natural hazards existed everywhere. Snakes. Scorpions. Many natural threats to children, and mother was the biggest protector against all natural threats, including those within the father.

Not all attachment parenting, when understood in history, is acceptable under God's Law. The Canaanites sexually bonded with their children, as did several other neighboring cultures to the Israelites. Sex was long a method of communication in families, and the Ten Commandments and the Law were laid down by God in order to prohibit sexualized attachment parenting. Attachment parenting should not be sexualized at all, except perhaps a low level connotation, and even that ideally should not be the case.

Attachment parenting in ancient Hebrew society was based on the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) which is submission to the every need of a child as their enemy, seeking to be their friend, knowing one is guilty for their capacity to sin and abuse against a child, and that they will never again know what it is like to be a child, serving them as their trusted servant, expecting absolutely nothing in return from children. Mothers especially gave children everything they needed, and much of what they wanted as well.

There is no evidence that spanking children existed then, and if it did, it would have been perceived by others as a sexual offense, as it is done conventionally here in the United States. The rod of correction has layers of contextual meaning, some applicable to parenting today and some not. In the Old Testament Hebrew culture, it was literally rarely a instrument of judicial correction, meaning when an adult son was first given many warnings of where they were headed, and they denied it and/or defended their ways. The offender was then sentenced to 40 minus 1 lashes with the rod of correction, in the courtroom and not the family home. Children under the age of majority were never punished for anything, as the law only provided punishment for adults, and most adults heeded warning from witnesses. For any offense of this calibur, there had to be two witnesses at the scene of the crime, meaning they had to literally witness it and not hear about it through hearsay, and the offender had to be an adult.

In the Early Church, punishment was practical in application, and involved excommunication and shunning, and only towards adults. Fathers were disciplined by the parish for spanking and punishing children, meaning at the very least being divorced by their wives, and at the most an automatic ban and excommunication from the church. So, there were actually laws against any sort of assault and battery towards children, including any kind of corporal punishment.

Given this evidence, there is no reason to believe the parents in the Bible ever punished their children at all. Thus, pro-spanking as an entity is a complete farce. I actually laugh at those pro-spanking parents over there in passing, how simplistic that they understand thing.

"Rewriting the Bible"...nope, not doing that. The Bible is meant as it was meant to the Jewish legal context in the First Century, as applied today in a way that fits in to a modern regimen. The whole reason these pastors deny the biblical context is that it could lead to "normalizing pedophilia", when the context doesn't even condone pedophilia, meaning it was simply a struggle some fathers had. Simply choosing to rearrange words and contexts when God ordained no such choice, for political gain, is rewriting the Bible, and is heresy. 

We live in a world of lies, including lies about what is in the best interests of children. God said it clearly, do not provoke a child to anger, and ban striking a child as a way to solve problems.