tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.comments2024-03-06T04:31:53.093+11:00Just in CASETrevor Cairneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10743409298855125040noreply@blogger.comBlogger741125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-19355386923542140162016-07-14T23:41:39.779+10:002016-07-14T23:41:39.779+10:00The most important question that needs to be asked...The most important question that needs to be asked is not what worked or didn't work in any individual case, but rather, what is the will of God. Tripp and others who hold the same view on spanking have the Scripture on their side and that is all that matters. It is possible to raise good children without spanking them, and it is also possible to raise Criminals by spanking them. There are many factors to raising children, neither Tripp nor I are suggesting that spanking is a quick fix and all that is needed. As you know, Tripp emphasizes communication which is sounds like you did a lot of. The grace of God was with you in raising your children, praise God, but that does not authorize you or anyone else to advocate casting off the commands of Scripture. God graciously blesses us all at times even though we are not following all of Scripture's commands, that doesn't excuse disobedience to the commands. Jesus said, whoever disobeys one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. Your friend who regrets spanking her child needs to examine other aspects of her childrearing, and how she spanked, but should not blame the principle of spanking for the poor results in her children's lives. As for following your heart, beware for the Scripture warns that the heart is deceitful above all else and desperately wicked, who can know it?<br />The Bible never commands us to follow our heart, but rather to submit our hearts and all that we are to the Scripture and the authority of God. Following our hearts is a feel good worldly philosophy that will surely lead us into error. SteveLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04282645239847089458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-30505665755781433822016-07-14T19:11:38.517+10:002016-07-14T19:11:38.517+10:00In everything I have read about spanking young chi...In everything I have read about spanking young children as Tripp advices. I do not understand the need to pull down the child's pants and spank on a bare bottom. What happens if you have a daughter and the father is the one doing the spanking, does the father still spank his daughter when she is 7, 10, 13 on a bare bottom? I feel that would not only be humiliating to the female child, but also crossing a line. How does a new parent know how hard is too hard to spank? I know of parents who are surprised to see bruising on their child's bottom ( which has the most fat then any other part of the body, therefore making it harder to bruise) from all the spanking that took place on a bad day of a typical 2 year old, but still continue spanking in the same matter. How does that make sense? I am a 55 year old Christian woman, who has raised 2 grown sons, 4 of their early years as a single mom. Both always loved the Lord from when they were little, both are now God loving successful men (one a Doctor) and loving husband's to Christian women. Both went through 12 years of Christian schooling, so what they were being taught at home and church was reiterated at school. Both received full ride scholarships to our States University. They never smoked, tried drugs, or drank in their teenage years. They were respectful and well liked not only by their teachers but also by their peers. Guess what? I NEVER EVER spanked my sons as Tripp recommends. Yes I did spank, but for big things, like running into the street,when I told them to stay by me, and I spanked with an open palm of my hand over their pants. I don't think I spanks them more then 4 times each in their childhood. I used time outs, I took the time to talk to them and explain why their behavior was not appropriate. I used appropriate consequences for bad behavior, like, taking their drinking cup away after I explained to them the first time why you don't throw a cup at the dinner table. I didn't spank them for being disobedient and throwing the cup again, they were 2 years old and learning how to eat at a table and it was my job as their Mother to take the TIME to teach them. Which a lot of the time takes longer then spanking them for being disobedient . I'm sorry I just don't see the need to inflict pain on a child, and that is what I feel Tripp is teaching . I know one Mom personally who followed Tripp's advice on spanking with her first child, but not on her last two children. To this day, this mom who is now 50 regrets that she followed the spanking part of Tripp's book on her first child, and she can't undo what she did and her memories of those days. I am not trying to brag about my sons or my parenting style. I was not a perfect Mom and I made mistakes along the way. I am just trying to make a point that you can raise obedient children that turn into great teenagers and then into wonderful men WITHOUT causing them physical pain. I feel Tripp has that part wrong in his book. I feel sorry for young new parents, who don't have the confidence in themselves to just follow their heart and gut and develop their own parenting skills that work best for not only their child but for them. I feel they need to do less spanking and more praying for their child.Christinenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-18303783203801363912015-03-03T01:27:51.119+11:002015-03-03T01:27:51.119+11:00Dear Anonymous,
You beg us not to try to "...Dear Anonymous,<br /> You beg us not to try to "interprete the word of God" but then go ahead and do just that by insisting that the rod does not mean to hit or spank in this context. That is your interpretation, and a very flawed one. You only need to read the Proverbs to see that it is flawed. On of the main discipline verses there says, something like, "If you hit him, though he cry out, it will not kill him but will save his sol from hell." Clear as a bell to anyone honestly ready to accept the plain words of Scripture. Unfortunately, you are allowing the culture of 21st century America, which all of those writing on this blog would have to agree has wandered far from it's roots in the Bible, you are letting that culture dictate to you what is decent, normal and right. You need to really read the<br />Bible if you think that God just hugs us when we sin and tells us He isn't happy. I do hope that Trevor, who started this blog will correct you on this point to, studying the Bible as he does. Start by reading Hebrews 12. Let God's word instruct you. <br /> <br />Now Mrs Seigneur,<br /> We are all glad our children have wills, interests, joy and fun.We all like adventure. Have you noticed that the joy and fun and adventure is often interrupted by your children's sin? Before you urge us to take Tripp's book off all church shelves, please read and study and let the Bible instruct you as to the sin nature and the relationship of God with His people. If the Bible doesn't get first place in your thinking soon, your children are in trouble and the hope of joy and adventure will be a crumbling dream. Please read the Bible and submit to it's wonderful truth, that is the best adventure there is. <br />SteveLSteveLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04282645239847089458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-23282807171916677312014-11-08T21:11:45.522+11:002014-11-08T21:11:45.522+11:00Thanks for pointing out the flaws in this book. So...Thanks for pointing out the flaws in this book. So sad that people today, young precious moms and dads who want to do right and who want to raise their children in the Lord, are still looking to this book. Get it off bookshelves of church libraries on homes right away. Enjoy your beautiful children. Be glad they have a will and interests and joy and fun! Adventure with your kids, don't beat them into submissionCornelia Becker Seigneurhttp://www.corneliaseigneur.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-44758794442829246152014-06-22T17:41:58.384+10:002014-06-22T17:41:58.384+10:00I believe that you are all wrong with trying to in...I believe that you are all wrong with trying to interpret the Word of God. Rod in this context is NOT to hit, spank or do physical harm. What it means is to speak and tell the child what he is doing is wrong and open the word of God and explain to him, pray with him and discipline by taking off some privileges or give extra chores and make sure he understand why. Just keep talking and talking and also warn him of his ending if he continue to rebel for he/she is not rebelling against you but God and God will judge him if he will not repent. However, if you hit the child you are teaching the child that it is ok to hit another human being. It does also said in the Word of God that love covers every sin. If they are naughty hug them and tell them that you are not happy about it and God is not happy too. When the Prodigol son came back the Father full of compassion ran and hug him. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-30232930258711654272014-01-24T20:39:06.864+11:002014-01-24T20:39:06.864+11:00You are right that our children have been entruste...You are right that our children have been entrusted to us by God, thus the desperate need to listen to God when He instructs us on how to train and teach them. Let's hear what God says by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit. Proverbs 13:24 "He who withholds his rod, hates his son, but he who loves him, disciplines him diligently." God, not Steve, instructs us to use the rod because we love our children. God uses the rod on us, because he loves us. God defines what a decent person is. In this verse he says that the decent man, who loves his son will discipline him. The man who refuses to use the rod, hates his son, though he may not realize it. That isn't decent. God's word matters, not our "understanding". Prov 3:5-6, "lean not on your own understanding." God has put parents in charge of their children, if they do not have control over these children, they are not going to be able to fulfill God's role for them. Eph. 6 says that Children are to obey their parents. Submission to authority is an absolute must. I invite you to look around at our society and see if submission to authority is not a problem for us. Could this have started in childhood, when these people's parents failed to establish and teach submission to authority. You do need to be in control in your home. If you are not, then you can't be the parent that God expects you to be. You children need your firm authority, as well as gentleness, and the softer virtues of course. Tripp, advocates a balance of all these things. Read his book if you haven't, you will find that it is different than the impression left by many of the comments on this blog. <br />Steve L SteveLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04282645239847089458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-27766413245507555262014-01-24T08:29:24.407+11:002014-01-24T08:29:24.407+11:00Steve - I believe God would never spank a child. ...Steve - I believe God would never spank a child. You are hurting a small, defenseless human being that was entrusted to you by God.<br /><br />Are you sure that you are not just satisfying your own need to be in control?<br /><br />It just does not fit my or most decent people's understanding of loving parenting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-73486722648583654512014-01-23T20:40:36.318+11:002014-01-23T20:40:36.318+11:00No one here has advocated beating children dear an...No one here has advocated beating children dear anonymous. Spanking is not beating. You are falling into the trap of the secular media, who have tried to redefine the word by deceptive coverage. <br />Keep to the Word of God. <br />Steve L SteveLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04282645239847089458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-40858812179126122602014-01-23T09:44:22.679+11:002014-01-23T09:44:22.679+11:00I rather doubt that you are "glorifying"...I rather doubt that you are "glorifying" anyone while beating a child.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-26063836209381208702013-10-16T11:19:41.039+11:002013-10-16T11:19:41.039+11:00Sure are lots of "I" responses in these ...Sure are lots of "I" responses in these comments. When when we learn that it does not matter what you and I think, it matters what God thinks/directs. Spanking IS BIBLICAL when done with a pure heart for God to be glorified.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-83824457143896109732013-07-11T13:23:00.248+10:002013-07-11T13:23:00.248+10:00God uses isolation doesn't He? I don't kno...God uses isolation doesn't He? I don't know what else we would call the separation from God because of sin. So really a time out is very biblical because it is a miniature version of what continuing in a sin-life will lead to. <br />Even in the Hebrews 12 passage used as an example by Trevor above we are given another example of The Lord's discipline; that He allows us to endure hardships. This comes in many different forms depending on what God wants to teach us as individuals; through loss of wealth, possessions, relationships, etc. As parents we may discipline by allowing our children to endure hardships either natural or imposed such as extra housework, yard-work, etc. <br /><br />These are all biblical examples of discipline that while not spelled out with as specific words as physical punishment is in scripture, should be familiar concepts to anyone who has been growing in Christ and the knowledge of scripture for some time. <br /><br />Grace to all; MellissaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-33362769166242604422013-06-12T07:05:12.205+10:002013-06-12T07:05:12.205+10:00I just came across your blog, and great article.
A...I just came across your blog, and great article.<br />As for Abraham, I once hear someone say that Abraham did not know that God would not require child sacrifice, as it was a practice among pagan religions, and the command to sacrifice his son Issac was taken by Abraham as a God ordained means to worship God, and of course in faith, he did what God commanded him - and of course knowing that he waited 100 years to have his own promised child, it is really a remarkable story of faith and trust in God Almighty.<br />So the comment about what would you do today, well is moot because God HAS made himself know, and to know God is to follow Christ, and know/abide in Him. (John 15, et. al.) So the question is really what do we do with what/how God has revealed Himself to us today... it becomes a simple parallel the hypothetical of what would we do if we only had the knowledge of God provided to Abraham.. would we be faithful? and follow? or seek our own way.<br />thanks for the comment box.<br /><br />(another) TimTimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-15007640714224919012013-06-11T20:16:03.832+10:002013-06-11T20:16:03.832+10:00I work for the navy. My main concern about boat pe...I work for the navy. My main concern about boat people is the risk these people put themselves at to get here. I dont care about people immagrating to australia. I never want to have to wrap someone in a body bag ever again, there needs to be measures put in place to stop people travelling to australia by boat. Its to dangerousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-13566947466493510412013-05-18T17:33:50.057+10:002013-05-18T17:33:50.057+10:00Steve, I'm perplexed by your comment. Did you ...Steve, I'm perplexed by your comment. Did you actually read my post? Without wishing to sound like your 3rd grade teacher, please read it again. If you do, you will find reference to many things, including other methods. Am I to assume from your comments that you believe that there is only one method, physical punishment? You seem to have missed my point. TrevorTrevor Cairneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10743409298855125040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-21172359690085335532013-05-18T01:39:19.418+10:002013-05-18T01:39:19.418+10:00I want to make these comments in love for those of...I want to make these comments in love for those of you who keep saying that the Bible leaves the door open for us to choose which method of discipline we use. Could you please list some of the other method's that the Bible recommends? How easy it is to sit there and take pot shots at Tedd Tripp's book. If you have problems with corporal punishment, then please give us an expose including chapters and verses from Scripture that show us the alternatives. Are there any? The methods that many people use today were invented by human wisdom, many suggested by godless psychologists who reject even the existence of God. Freud and the vast majority of the psychology community that has followed him are heavily given toward atheism. So, are you really going to trust what they say? Compare their source of authority with Ted Tripp and you should see the obvious. <br /> The passage in Hebrews 12, clearly teaches that God hurts us with His discipline because He loves us, so those of you who say you could never "hurt" your children, need to familiarize yourselves with the love of God. If physical discipline goes against every fiber of your being, then you need to let God change your being, because that is a very un-Godlike characteristic. The prophets are full of texts that reveal to an open hearted reader, how God inflicts pain for the good of men and nations. Please, read the Bible and save yourselves from the mire of secular opinion that has captured so many of you. <br /><br />Steve LSteveLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04282645239847089458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-25209050658360582992013-03-11T14:51:13.523+11:002013-03-11T14:51:13.523+11:00Greg,
The doctor analogy is an interesting one, a...Greg,<br /><br />The doctor analogy is an interesting one, although I think it slightly misses the point - although it highlights that suffering can sometimes be 'good', it doesn't explain why the child was sick in the first place. :-)<br /><br />TimTimaahyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16079998226655350113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-2372036453198793472013-03-09T08:15:39.000+11:002013-03-09T08:15:39.000+11:00Hi Tim,
Thanks for the clarification.
As to Epicur...Hi Tim,<br />Thanks for the clarification.<br />As to Epicurus’ famous dictum, and his question “Why call him God?”: I think it rather depends on the character of God’s sovereign will i.e. the outworkings of his ultimate purposes, which for his own reasons, he does not make completely clear to us. The analogy has been used of a parent taking a young child to the doctor, where they undergo some form of unpleasant treatment. The suffering involved is utterly incomprehensible to the child, but is ultimately for her/his own good. Of course, such a counter argument is not indisputably flawless – but neither is Epicurus’ dictum. <br />For me it comes down to assessing whether the way God is depicted in the bible, and way he has acted in history (esp. in Jesus) is believably consistent with the notion of his being omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent (see also my initial post). Especially given that the bible affirms that our knowledge of God and his purposes - this side of eternity, at least - is incomplete (see 2 Corinthians 5:7; 1 Corinthians 13:12, for instance), then yes, I think the proposition is believable. Hence I “call him God”. <br /><br />Greg<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-41591256818183646352013-03-07T12:56:13.875+11:002013-03-07T12:56:13.875+11:00Hi Greg,
Right you are - I did not mean that ther...Hi Greg,<br /><br />Right you are - I did not mean that there were no counter arguments, just none that I, or any atheist for that matter, find particularly compelling.<br /><br />And yes, world hunger could be prevented by mankind. But that's not the point. The point is that it could also be prevented by god (with a lot less effort, I might add :-).<br /><br />Epicurus, of course, said it best:<br /><br />"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent.<br />Is he able, but not willing?<br />Then he is malevolent.<br />Is he both able and willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able nor willing?<br />Then why call him God?"<br /><br />TimTimaahyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16079998226655350113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-91334485143651541112013-03-06T17:34:15.948+11:002013-03-06T17:34:15.948+11:00Hi Tim,
Firstly I would like to suggest, re your i...Hi Tim,<br />Firstly I would like to suggest, re your initial comment, that it is not true that there is no Christian “counter argument” to the problem of evil. Many articles and books have been written on the subject by Christians (some, naturally, better argued than others). The fact that not everyone finds any of the arguments clinching is not the same as saying that there are no arguments.<br />Of course, the problem of evil is a huge and many-faceted topic, and there is no space here to touch even briefly on many of its aspects. Just a couple of thoughts. If we are talking of human evil (there are other notions of evil that would need to be tackled in a full discussion), the simplest definition, as I understand the bible, seems to be: “anything which is not in accordance with God’s revealed will” i.e. as revealed in Scripture. You mention the photo which triggered the original blog post. What is depicted clearly corresponds to your definition of “unnecessary or preventable suffering”, since world hunger, as I suggested in an earlier comment, is actually preventable (humanly speaking) - and I therefore regard its existence (original and continuing) as a manifestation of human evil, in the sense mentioned above. <br />GregAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-79844071073483509422013-03-05T18:15:46.831+11:002013-03-05T18:15:46.831+11:00Hi Greg,
I guess for the purposes of the photo in...Hi Greg,<br /><br />I guess for the purposes of the photo in question, and the Problem of Evil in general, I would define 'evil' as unnecessary or preventable suffering.<br /><br />TimTimaahyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16079998226655350113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-7442814369198927452013-02-28T21:33:02.646+11:002013-02-28T21:33:02.646+11:00I think these images are just making the point tha...I think these images are just making the point that Dives did precisely nothing to help Lazarus, for all that he and his brothers had "the Law and the prophets". (Luke 16:1931)<br /><br />A politically minded person might be moved to suggest a causal connection between the affluence of some and the destitution of others.<br /><br />All I feel is deep, deep shame...<br />Deirdrenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-32258820860403258902013-02-28T10:28:54.354+11:002013-02-28T10:28:54.354+11:00Hi Tim,
Before giving a Christian response to the...Hi Tim,<br /><br />Before giving a Christian response to the problem of evil, I would need to know how you define "evil", since there is no one definition that satisfies everyone.<br /><br />GregAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-45564047630491067942013-02-25T20:29:00.939+11:002013-02-25T20:29:00.939+11:00“Cutting to the chase”, the image seems to be ridi...“Cutting to the chase”, the image seems to be ridiculing the notion that a loving God would answer prayers on trivial matters, while letting children starve. Of course it’s silly to think that there are “pat” answers to such huge questions, but it’s useful to have some kind of ready response, based on what the bible says. I think if I were confronted by someone with such a view, my (initial, brief) response would be along the lines of the following three points: 1) God’s “fulfilled” Kingdom will contain no such suffering – the earth is not our ultimate home, and human suffering is finite: there will come a “time” when God will “wipe away every tear”; 2) God’s will, while in one sense ultimately unknowable, in another sense makes perfectly clear that it is the responsibility of humans (i.e. us) to alleviate suffering where possible: and world hunger is, actually, a solvable problem, as (atheist!) ethicist Peter Singer pointed out in research a few years ago; and 3) God’s Son: the God of the Bible is not a remote, “hands-off” deity, but rather does – and has – involve himself in human suffering, specifically by entering the world in the shape of his Son Jesus, and suffering, dying and rising from the dead in order give us the hope of life beyond death. It is Jesus, in the final analysis, who makes sense of an otherwise often apparently senseless world.<br />Greg<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-78820464556525760652013-02-25T15:01:26.964+11:002013-02-25T15:01:26.964+11:00I think the photo is more about the single biggest...I think the photo is more about the single biggest challenge to the truth of Christianity - the Problem of Evil.<br /><br />And, given that it <i>is</i> the biggest challenge, and Christianity is yet to put forward a convincing counter-argument, I don't think it can be answered by simply hiding as "apologetic people in apologetic communities".<br /><br />It's the one argument against Christianity that absolutely must be answered with reason, but hasn't been.<br /><br />Perhaps that's why you were struggling to come up with a response.Timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6160916.post-21914769775272809222013-02-25T11:49:16.006+11:002013-02-25T11:49:16.006+11:00Thanks for the comment, I agree that the image was...Thanks for the comment, I agree that the image wasn't offensive. <br />And I do lament that often Christians do appear to pray about 'petty' things in lieu of more important issues. <br />My loss for words, was the frustration I hoped to convey in my post - rather than the image itself. <br />Thanks for the suggestions <br />Edwina <br /> EdwinaHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17814837610782417640noreply@blogger.com