Tuesday, February 22, 2022

Pro-social permissiveness: Why children don't need discipline

Many parents think that children need discipline. This is a common mistake made by parents in the United States. Pro-social permissiveness involves no rules or discipline, but in a way that children make their own rules and discipline, based on an example imparted by a parent.

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your children in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, for this is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to a specific standard of Christian discipline that is entitled to nothing, and is grateful for everything, especially in relation to children. Children owe nothing to parents, and parents owe everything to children, expecting absolutely nothing in return from children or others, with this forming a good Christian example for children to follow, backed up by instruction to children as a righteous test, meaning setting a limit with a child to see if they can follow instructions from parents, and if children do not heed instruction, it is assumed that the child cannot learn due to age and development, with this righteous test being denoted by the Greek root word νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia). Instructions should only be laid down when a child's wants are unattainable and/or unsafe. This is weighed by the Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" is παροριγίζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to damages, or the slightest of personal offense perceived by the child, including the slightest of offensive touch or speech perceived by the child. This includes striking or punishing a child in any way, as anger is to be saved for the exchange, and children cannot stand trial in court under the Law. The Apostle Paul, here, was lifting up the Law on punishing children. In ancient Israel and the Early Church alike, punishing a child carried severe penalties, and incurred bloodlust in both jurisdictions. Christian law forbade the death penalty, but Jewish law did not, and punitive parents were put to death by bloodletting (hanging up parents like poultry). The rod verses in Proverbs as repealed verses as they depict a specific, dated form of judicial corporal punishment - the 40 minus 1 lashes with the rod of correction, as a final warning before putting to death an errant ADULT son. Adult children of Hebrew parents were never executed for mere rebellion alone.

How do you get a child to follow their parents' example? Christian love is the answer. Love is putting your child first, and you as the parent last, to the point of submission to children and their every vulnerable need, expecting absolutely nothing in return, leading to rest of children in the love of grace of parents. This rest and trust is denoted by the English word "obey", and the corresponding Greek root word υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to rest in the love and grace of parents. Children in biblical times trusted parents enough to be naked in their loving arms or else their supervisory line of sight, with the nudity of children bringing down the level of attachment to full equality between parents and children. Children should rest and trust in parents enough to tell them anything and everything that is on their mind, expecting no punishment or reprisal in return.

Children were naturally mischevious in ancient Israelite culture and adjoining churches, meaning children in the Early Christian churches caused mischief, usually in the form of property destruction such as spilling things or causing messes, and the parents just laughed when a child spilled and broke a vase. Children were expected to cause some mischief as per their rebellious nature, and parents had to appease their rebellion and keep them happy - that was the expectation then, and the Bible lifts up that customary law to today.

Children don't need rules or discipline. Most behaviors that children are punished for are developmentally appropriate behaviors. So a child screams in the store? Let behaviors like that go, as well as whining when they are older, and sulking when they are teenagers. That's just how children communicate, as they cannot communicate any other way due to their age and development. If a child's development truly is stuck, that may be due to a developmental disability or other mental illness in the child.

Children naturally absorb the moral lessons and other facts about the world, and don't need constant prompting. If they don't get a certain concept, that is most likely because their brain won't allow it, meaning they are too developmentally immature to understand that certain behaviors are disruptive, that throwing tantrums won't get you far in life, or anything relating to adult life. They aren't ready for "life", but they are learning about life - at their own pace.

Co-regulation is a form of attachment parenting where setting rules and boundaries isn't part of the equation. The idea is to be a good role model and set a good example for children, for them to want to emulate and thus take up the vocation of disciplining themselves and taking up religious instruction on their own, which children will do if you let them.

Parents in biblical times were so lenient and permissive in a pro-social manner that they allowed children to go in the nude - wherever they went - as public indecency laws picked up by the Greek root word πορνεία (Latin: porneia) allowed for a loophole for children to be naked (which doesn't apply today due to the civil laws on the subject - see Rom. 13:1-4). Children were prevented from copulating, but they were allowed to play games of a sexualized nature, with the most high-risk of games being "marriage", where parents were at the edge of their seat as children embraced. If the parents could tell that the boy was about to penetrate, the two children were separated and supervised apart from each other, but by the same adult. The purpose of child nudity, for parents, was to feel closer and more intimate with children in terms of closeness. Child nudity in a home ensures an equal level of attachment, as constant child nudity or partial nudity even brings down the attachment levels to the child's level. Parents in biblical times did not relate to their children on the physically aggressive level, but the sexualizing level, with fathers being the ones to consciously be aware of attractions to children, usually meaning simple connotational attraction and not driven attraction, like "sun tan oil" on the child's body. Mothers were driven by the sexual instinct, but at a very low level that didn't motivate any sexual relations with children - they simply saw children as equals in an idealistic way. Parents then had no physically aggressive instinct to control a child. Sex with children was not the norm in biblical times, to be very clear, but the instincts of parents of both sexes could be colored by sexuality towards their children, at some level - sexually abusing a child, meaning the child perceiving sexual entitlement from an adult towards them, was seen as evil and wicked even then, and deserving of death. Fathers usually dealt with their attraction to their children through solo masturbation to fantasies about their child, as was recommended by the clergy of the Early Church, and this re-channeled the sexual thoughts into a box to be opened regularly so that it stays in a box. Some of this context might be dated to the modern parent, but most of it has value in terms of application, at least in some way, maybe with some tweaking.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke children to anger will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them burn in 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 everlasting Hell of fire and torment, suffering God's Wrath forever and ever! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Any comment that
1. Endorses child abuse (including pornography of such)
2. Imposes want to the point of imposition, meaning entitlement.
3. Contains self-entitled parent rhetoric, to the point of self-victimization

will not be published. Flexible application. Debate is allowed, but only civil arguments that presume the best of intentions in their opponent, on both sides.

Righteous co-sleeping: Why God wants parents to sleep next to their children

Many parents think that co-sleeping is the irresponsible choice for a parent to make. This is a common attitude from American parents. Most ...