Many parents think that the Bible supports the child abuse definitions that we have today. This is a common belief amongst American parents. Most American parents support the idea of not ever changing the child abuse definitions. However, the Bible actually calls for expanding child abuse definitions.
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 is an adult throwing a temper tantrum just for not getting what they feel that they deserve from children. All adult anger, including parent anger, was seen as parental entitlement in biblical times. When this temper tantrum was perceived by the child as offensive or damaging, it became child abuse. 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 to damages or offenses, namely the slightest of personal offense perceived by a child, including, but not limited to, the slightest of offensive touch or speech perceived by a child, stemming from entitlement. This commandment was intended by the Apostle Paul, and was understood in its original context, as a moral statute prohibiting all forms of punitive parents, including, but not limited to, any punishments, reprimands, or other controlling demeanor towards children. In the Old Testament, punitive parents were put to death by way of bloodletting, after punishing their children one last time. The parents who punished their children were charged with kidnapping, with "kidnapping" being defined under the Law as the slightest of damages or offenses stemming from hostage-taking - child punishment was seen in biblical times as holding your child hostage merely for things that they did wrong, thereby treating your child as a quartered slave. Paul here was lifting up the Law in order to convict a group of Greek Christian parents who brought their pagan custom of spanking and punishing children into the church. Paul, contrary to popular legend, was anti-spanking, and opposed any and all punishment in his secular writings. Paul may not have gotten along with the women of the church, but he sure loved children, and even took in a few orphaned children during his time as a deacon.
Sweden was the first society in modern times to ban all punitive parenting. However, several ancient societies banned all forms of punitive parenting long before Sweden ever enacted a punishment ban. One of those societies was Ancient Jewish society, including the Early Church. This ban in the Early Church meant that whatever the child perceived as abuse objectively was such, when that abuse stemmed from entitlement.
Modern Israel also has a ban on punitive parenting that dates back to 2000. However, Israel never had a legal defense for "reasonable chastisement". The problem was that family courts were sectarian in nature, with Christian and Muslim courts excusing the punitive parents under their rule. However, the Supreme Court of Israel changed the application of the law so that the secular courts could hear child abuse cases. But, your average Jewish Israeli already understood punitive parenting as illegal long before 2000.
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!
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.