Why discipline is for parents, not children

What is discipline? What is parenting? Many believe that, in parenting, children are to be disciplined. However, what about parents? Biblical law stresses that parents be disciplined in parent-child relationships.

It says in Hebrews 12:11 KJV:

Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterwards it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

The Greek root word translated "chastening" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to self-discipline and self-control, in the form of punishment or reward of oneself, punishing oneself for transgressing against their child. Basically, this refers to teaching moments as a parent, where you avoid any sort of abuse or harm towards your child, even to the level of speech, and parents center themselves around the core self-interest they must refrain from - aggression, either physical, verbal, or sexual in nature. The Greek root word translated "lupe" is λυπέ (Latin: lupe) and refers to the pain that comes from restraint, grieving that striking a child - what you want to do - is wrong, so don't do it.

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, your obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother; for this is the first commandment with promise; That is may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to secure, vulnerable rest in the love and grace of parents, being able to talk to parents about anything, including things that most people wouldn't understand, owing nothing in return to parents, nonetheless being convicted to listen to parents out of trust and not punishment. The Fifth Commandment only applies if you have parents to respect, meaning non-abusive parents, as most Israelites did when the Ten Commandments were handed down, or else shortly afterwards when the law was laid down in that regard by the authorities. 

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is the same as in Heb. 12:11, παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and referring to a specific form of chastening of the Lord in parents, known as co-regulation, meaning parents centering themselves in relation so not to lash out verbally, physically, or sexually, and listening to the child's upset instead in a validating manner, like a sounding board, giving the child the necessary attachment supports to be a well-manner, controlled, and orderly member of society. Children learn discipline by trusting disciplined parents. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to the admonition of the Lord, meaning in terms of encouragement or reproof, with encouragement being more dominant, and reproof, usually with the word "no" or its various variants, being more rare. Setting boundaries and limits should be a rare occurrence, as children either learn by example not to abuse children, or else many times are too immature to understand the boundaries being set. This is weighed by the Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" which is πραρογίζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to the offenses, meaning torts and damages under the Mosaic Law, which included torts against assault and battery even including children, and summed up by the slightest of personal slights perceived by the child, viscerally and through sensory gaslighting, when said moral crime stems from entitlement. Entitlement is denoted by the Greek root word πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers to not only wanting things from children, but wanting things to the point of seeking to impose said want onto a child.

Attachment parenting was the norm then, with children staying very close to their mother, with co-sleeping being the norm, as is carrying the child in a papoose bag on her back or her front. Punishment was illegal except as a sentence for a crime, and only when an adult committed a crime. Children were seen as still learning, and thus were exempt from divine prosecution. Parents were expected to be in control by controlling themselves, not their child. Then, once parents were disciplined, then children could understand what discipline was, and apply it to themselves. Strictness was modeled, not enforced.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke children to anger will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them burn, and let them be tormented in the lake of fire and brimstone, suffering the second death intended for Satan and his accomplices. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Understanding the rod of correction - a non-abusive understanding of the concept

 Many parents punish their children, meaning most all parents. 94% of parents physically batter their children as punishment. Support for spanking and punishment comes in a mosaic of parents who abuse their children through punitive means. Most abusers in our modern day are authoritative parents. The rod of correction is the centerpiece of the pro-spanking zealotry and false doctrine. There are different meanings to that concept, that rod, and some are pretty scary. However, it has one meaning to Christians today.

It says in Hebrews 12:5-8 KJV:

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh to you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him. For whomever the Lord loveth, he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as sons, for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

The Greek root word translated "scourgeth" is μαστιγόω (Latin: mastigoó) and refers to a literal scourge, here the Roman scourge, meaning cat o' nine tails, but is meant figuratively, as this corporal punishment was used in the legal environment around the Hebrew Christians, and was merely a figurative symbol of authority in this tense. Put it in a literal tense to the Hebrew Christians, and the scourge might be a symbol of their oppression within Greco-Roman legal jurisdiction, where it was illegal to be a Christian, and Christians met for mass in secret, in caves dug underneath the mountainsides. Being a Christian was a reason to be arrested, and were the lowest of the low, and one of the complaints was actually Christian parents being too "soft" on their children. This rod is intended for parents, to chasten themselves up. The Greek word translated "chasten up" and "chastisement" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to discipline from hard lessons in life, and refers to spiritual growth in parents especially, as modeled to children. The rod of correction is a symbol of accountability, with God holding all parents accountable. It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord for this is right; Honor thy father and mother, as this is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live 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 "provoke...to anger" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to secure, vulnerable rest in the love and grace of parents, being able to share anything with parents, and tell parents everything, owing nothing to parents, but nonetheless listening to parents and trusting them as older, mature friends. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to the admonition of the Lord, which is understood in the Hebraic context as the rod of correction, in figurative format. The rod is divided into two uneven prongs of non-binding judgment, with the longer prong being encouragement towards children, such as spending time together, going on walks in the neighborhood, or otherwise meeting attachment needs. The other prong is shorter, and reflects setting limits and boundaries with a child, preferrably only on rare occasions, using the word "no" or its various variants. Children are given room to play and move freely for the most part, with the occasional verbal limit set, and that's it. This is balanced out by the Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" and refers to παροργιζο (Latin: parorgizo) and is one of the Greek words to refer to the offenses under the Mosaic Law, which can include assault and battery torts even for children, and was summed up in the New Testament as the slightest of personal slights. The Greek root word denoting co-regulation is "nurture" and is referred to by the Greek root word παιδεία (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to self-discipline and self-control in a way that invites a child to confide in parents, and show all their emotions to parents, listening to and validating the big feelings of children, like a sounding board, leading to self-control and self-discipline later in life, when they've had all their attachment needs met.

Ancient Hebrew culture was attachment parenting country, meaning children remained close to parents, especially mothers, and rarely left her side, ranging and playing with siblings next to mother, with co-sleeping being the norm, as were other attachment-based techniques such as carrying a child on his/her mother's back or front, in what is called a papoose bag. Punishment was only legal as a sentence for a crime, for an adult. In the Early Christian context, the relevant context today, abusive parents were investigated collectively by the church, excommunicated and shunned. In the Old Testament, spanking a child was kidnapping, and punishable by 40 minus 1 lashes upon conviction, and death by hanging leading to blood-letting (chenek). Those death sentences don't apply literally today, but applied to the nation of Israel then, and are a testament to how God feels about holding children hostage with punishment, control, and other punitive parenting techniques.

The depraved and entitled parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God. They will languish and be tormented in the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death prepared for Satan and his angels. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Useless advice - Why the Bible opposes it

Many people here know that I am a Christian conservative. There are two main camps of consent, pro-social ignorance/rebellion and pro-social submission/authority. My conservative theology is a little bit of both, meaning I submit to the world, but am to question everything in this world, and encourage others to think critically.

Useless advice can be abuse when directed towards a child, and comes from parental entitlement. Parental entitlement is referred to by the Greek root word πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers to wanting to give advice when not warranted, to the point of seeking to impose said "advice" upon a child, leading to theft/abuse. It says in Colossians 3:20-21 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in all things, as this 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 secure, vulnerable rest in the love and grace of parents, being able to tell them anything, or confide into them about anything, with children owing nothing to parents, but listening to parents anyway not out of fear, but out of trust for parents, trusting warmly that parents know what is best for you, and following their lead accordingly, with parents other times following the child's lead, meaning children give advice to parents directly about what they need, and parents provide. 

Giving advice to children, ideally, should only be when children ask for advice from parents, and otherwise, if a child needs to admit something sensitive, the environment should be set up so that they feel safe admitting any problem on their own. The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to the offenses in the Bible, meaning torts and damages under the Mosaic Law, such as assault and battery, which extended to children in terms of scope. In the New Testament, the offenses are summed up as the slightest of personal slight perceived by a child, meaning whatever is offensive to the child, in relation to guilty intent to control, punish, or harass a child, or recklessly do the same. Useless advice is often offensive to children, such as when someone is picking on them at school, they say "you said those things to upset them" that were normal things to say, but were taken in an abnormal manner. The idea is for a good parent to give no advice to a child by default, unless they ask for help. A baby asks for help by crying, as does a toddler in a very similar way (that most parents today don't get). 

I, as a parent, would not give any advice to my children, by default. If they needed help, I'd stand by for assistance. Think customer service desk, meaning walk up and be treated warmly. Think therapist, meaning the humanistic, listening type. That's how I see help in relation to a child. Step in help would be handing out pamphlets and flyers on how to assert themselves. I am not one to give advice to others, like many here seem to stereotype us conservatives. I am a quiet conservative, and one to assume that I know nothing about my neighbor apart from what my neighbor presents about themselves. I know nothing about a child I might run into in the store apart from she's there, she's dressed a certain way, and apart from that I know nothing about her, so I stay away, because of common courtesy to not talk to strangers. I may have had trouble with that in the past, but now I am better...I prefer children solve their own problems, including report their own abuser, and me be there to stand by and back them up. Think victim advocate, but for children. Pro-social promote.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke children to anger will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them BURN in everlasting Hell-fire! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

 

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.

ANNOUNCEMENT/CLARIFICATION: Who this page is pointed at

This blog is not intended to harass anyone at children's rights, and if it appears that way, I apologize. I wish to be helpful to survivors, in a way that is non-threatening in a subtle way.

These pages are set up very differently than what you were told. A blog post is made, then put on the queue on Facebook for it to have more visibility. That's why most people here put posts out - for people to see them.

Even if I did set a rule, I wouldn't be able to enforce it, since I am not "God" and cannot tell who is reading, but only that only one person read the last post.

This page is not set up as holy writing, as that is perceived as deification by me, as I am not God. God is God, and God hates what is happening here.

I engage in pro-social harassment of parents who abuse their children with spanking, meaning these pages, if they don't convict you on that subject, chase you out. Anyone who is offended by what I write can simply not read it.

Others simply are not reading my posts, and I am troubleshooting for a reason why, hence the various arguments over the airwaves because others are told to not be specific. This is all set up to do the impossible - get me to attack survivors, whereas I respect this community and do not seek to attack it. They are using YOU as survivors to break me down so that I leave. They will not get their way, and I'm determined at that. I've made it this far. I see light at the end of the tunnel, with me inching closer to the end...Others, in various camps, seem to be trying to "get him" to change my views. No, that only works with me if you have enough data to back it up, and I want to have that discussion. Please stop imposing your leftist beliefs on me, while I simply state my conservative views, take a thumbs down from everyone, and move on with my life. So my views make me the oddball here? So be it. That's how I want my views to be seen.

What original sin means in practice in parenting

The teaching of original sin is the most misunderstood of all Christian teachings, despite being the backbone of Christianity. All Christians believe in original sin to some degree, in some form. Many talk about breaking a child's will, and that seems to be the normative tactic here in America, at least in the moment. Original sin instead, in parenting, is about allowing yourself to be broken down.

You, as an individual parent, like all adults, were born with a depraved and wicked sin nature deserving of punishment merely for existing in relation to children. Many will be called to be parents, but few are treating their children with respect, thus being saved. The answer to chastening up one's sin nature is Christian love, as denoted by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao).

Christian love for one's child is submission to their every vulnerable need as their enemy, seeking to be their friend, knowing you will not ever more know what it is like to be a child, and knowing that you, like every adult, is capable of child abuse, and culpable as such, leading to bondservice and good works for children. It is sacrificing for one's child just as Christ sacrificed Himself for His children, giving Himself up for them, and not asking anything in return. It then 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 secure, vulnerable rest in the love and grace of parents, with children being able to confide into or tell parents anything, and not fear punishment, owing absolutely nothing to parents, yet being convicted to listen to parents once they get older by the kindness and grace of parents. The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to the offenses as laid down by God in the biblical context, under the Eighth Commandment. This, after Christ, was summed up as the slightest of personal slights perceived by a child, including physical slights, as the Law then provided for assault and battery torts. The word ερεθιζο is a "lift-up" word, meaning it lifts up all the offenses and damages under the Law to a context that explicitly states that abusing a child is sin, and abuse is whatever the child perceives as such.

Parents are to be the focus of original sin, alongside all adults. That is the core of child hatred - seeing children as sinners simply for existing. God has cut children a break, meaning they are in fact exempt from Divine Prosecution. Yet, our conventional parenting culture acts as if it is the opposite, meaning that children are inherently bad and need to be made good. My view is that children are capable of a lot, if you look at ancient history, but children aren't self-aware enough to make an informed decision to sin or do wrong, even if a 7-year-old kills her father after picking up a gun - 7 is the age of criminal responsibility in Pennsylvania. Maybe the child wanted to kill the parent out of anger, but we don't blame the child in terms of guilty intent because we assume the child didn't understand the gravity of their actions in some way. Children cannot form the intent to do anything wrong, therefore since there is no intent, there is no crime. The age of infancy did exist under Jewish law in biblical times, and it was at the age of majority, as children - sons in this context - were not learned in the Law until age 13, and until then, were deemed incompetent in terms of criminal responsibility, and could not stand trial or be charged with a crime.

Let the entitled parents BURN! Let them suffer and languish in the lake of fire and brimstone, suffering the second death for all eternity! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Meterstick: The link between social skills deficits and pedophilic sexual abuse

Many people think that abuser pedophiles cannot be treated at all, so just kill them all, and put "but a bullet in his brain". When a child is abused in any way, I share that anger, as their advocate and representative. However, I am indeed a flawed advocate, due to the evil nature in which my advocacy is conflated with. It is called meterstick. That's what every predatory pedophile like that needs.

There are two types of abuser, narcissistic and sympathetic. Sympathetic abusers are the most common form of abusive adult, and make up the majority of the 94% of parents who punish their children physically. Abusers can have empathy, and that can be the victim's downfall, in the form of trauma bonding leading to ANGER at all parents everywhere. Everywhere except here, for me.

Social skills deficits, meaning here ability to talk to and relate to children, are the number one cause of child abuse. Most adults take a high plane, narcissistic attitude towards children, meaning they are above the children in a way that children reach up for, then get knocked down. A pedophile is permissive in nature, in a co-dependent way, meaning they have poor skills in relating to children, and thus commit abuse because they can't "read the cues", projecting "she loves me" onto the child, not knowing his size.

A pedophilic sexual abuser is a low-high level abuser, meaning lawful level. Think following a female student home from school, then showing up at her house in entitled distemper. The problem is not knowing appropriate distance from the child and when.

Yes, I do believe in Hell, and that's a good thing, because I know where I'm headed if I make the willful choice to abuse a child, and defend it my entire life. That's not hard to avoid at all, yet so many adults refuse to avoid it in relation to adults. I also believe in not visiting a child at their home just to be around them. The idea is to follow a cursor other than sexual/romantic. Maybe that cursor is colored by sexual attraction, but you have a practical reason for being at her house, which I can't think of for any child I have met.

The Tenth Commandment denotes the moral crime of entitlement, and is cross-referenced by the Greek root word πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers not simply to wanting children, but wanting to the point of seeking to impose said want onto the child, leading to theft/abuse. It says in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged,

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and is one of the Greek words that refers to the offenses, meaning torts and damages under the Mosaic Law linked to the Eighth Commandment, with the New Testament summing the offenses up as the slightest of personal slights perceived by the child. Under the authority of 1 Thess. 5:22, meaning the commandment to avoid wherever the opportunity to commit sin, in combination with this commandment, I must avoid all interaction with children, including antisocial "leer", meaning looking at a young girl out of lust, to the point where she perceives said lust. Looking respectfully, in fact, is okay, as long as "respectfully" means don't go up and approach the child. Wait for children to speak to you, and presume they never will, because you are undeserving of a gentle parenting friendship of a child.

The meterstick, in real life, isn't a stick I hold, but a shamefaced, reverent respect for a child next to me in public, leading to looking down ashamedly, with my hands twiddled behind my back. Afraid? No. Respect? Yes, absolutely. I'm happy to be their friend, but they most always want to live a life aside of mine. Oh well.

I surrender to children, turning myself into their authority. I am grounded in my place by respecting their cries for help and support, meaning personal space in this case.