Assault and battery laws comparison: the Bible vs. English common law

Most parents believe in spanking, but do not understand where the laws that defend their abusive choice comes from. Physical battery is the legal statute in question, known as either harassment or disorderly conduct in its specific context (physical and verbal battery are both decriminalized in Pennsylvania). Usually, the law of the land is in sync with God's Law, but in the case of spanking here in Pennsylvania.

It says in Colossians 3:20-21 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in all things, as is well-pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to providing custody, meaning rest in the providence of parents, meaning supplying the demands of children, with parents taking the brunt of the demands of their child, owing absolutely nothing in return to children, yet nonetheless showing gratitude by listening to the voice and example of parents, in a reassured state that gives thanksgiving for the charity and kindness of parents, and for parents making the choice not to punish a child. Providing custody is a form of custody where a child can expect to be provided for, with a parent being a selfless caregiver, deserving nothing in return from their child who is in the position of ward. Children did not need to give anything in return to parents, but could if they wanted to, and usually did if the parents were good parents. Love for a child was basically righteous enslavement, meaning it was seen as a selfless, thankless job that didn't pay a dime, yet you did it anyway because you loved your child. Child custody in the English common law is similar, except that in some states, namely in the Bible Belt, parents can get a legal order for their child to obey their parents, which has no basis in the Bible as applicable to today. There was one in the Old Testament, but it was dropped for gentle Christians, with Jewish-Christians merely seeing it as a compelling reason to obey parents as an adult, in a symbolic fashion. Gentile Christians are only to follow the Ten Commandments by default, or else all laws uplifted by the Greek lettering.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and literally refers to "stirring up" anger in children, meaning "stirring the pot" in terms of your child's emotions and upset, and literally literally refers to the offenses in the legal context of the Bible, which consisted of the torts and damages laid down by the Eighth Commandment. This includes assault and battery, with battery meaning the slightest of unwanted touch perceived by the child under the Law. The only difference is that there is no "reasonable chastisement" defense under the Law of Moses, as such is a Roman legal concept that was transported to the English common law, and thus to the United States, where we use the English common law as a basis for codified law.

The "reasonable chastisement" defense does not come from the Bible itself, but from a case in the High Court of England, R. vs. Hopley. This refers to the Eastbourne manslaughter, meaning where a student was beaten to death in the course of physical punishment. The High Court basically gave any former dependency of England, as well as all of the UK, the right to punish children physically. Keep in mind this regression in the status of children didn't happen until the 1800s, in which before then it would have been seen as Roman tradition, which many European countries held onto. This was due to the Roman Catholic Church appealing to the traditions of the European societies that they proselytized to, using "shamrock" gaslighting. Think the Roman Catholic Saint Patrick in Ireland explaining the trinity using shamrocks. This also meant allowing European cultures to keep some of their idolatrous, pagan traditions, and that included whipping or spanking disobedient children. Even today, every European country has their own unspoken tradition in terms of punishment, but with the tradition then stated as "no more", meaning "we don't allow that anymore here".

The Law of Moses never allowed it, and in the Old Testament, it was seen as an offense to the level of literal uncleanliness. In the Early Christian context, parents weren't literally unclean, but the Old Testament context was seen as punitive nostalgia that parents better not offend their child. Anything that was offensive to the person, including the child, could be perceived as an offense, meaning theft. Usually, this resulted in the divorce of the parents, and the children going with the non-abusive parent.

The United Kingdom is beholden to Anglo-Saxon values, where children were, in fact, treated harshly and disciplined with physical punishment. American culture has only one layer of values - Judeaeo-Christian values, meaning America's main law book in the Bible, with God's Law being above any secular laws here. But, the Bible does not speak of corporal punishment, in context, as an option, except as judicial corporal punishment that announced a condemnation to death. The rod of correction represented symbolically then living on the edge, meaning when you lived on the edge, and wore out your warnings as a young man, you were whipped, meaning it never happened because every single parent recanted - it was embarrassing, and showed that THEY were the abuser for raising a criminal. Then, criminality was thought to come from a harsh upbringing where zealotry was what was modeled.

America can change in this regard, once we as a country redeem our true values. We are perfecting our values each time we accept new information like the anti-spanking teachings in the Bible into the biblical teachings we traditionally go by as Americans.

The depraved and entitled parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them rot and burn in the lake of fire and brimstone, which is the second death prepared for the evil one and his accomplices! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!