Spanking

Posted on by
Reply

It seems like spanking used to be a pretty common form of punishment. Watch Little House on the Prarie, or some such show, and you’ll see parents and/or teachers using a switch as an instrument of correction. However, in recent times, many people have begun to see spanking as cruel, abusive, and unnecessary. Even some Christians hold this view, which is surprising to me.

Orginally posted 9/29/04 on bibleforums.org:

In my family, spanking was the main form of punishment. Occasionally if my brother or I were fighting or complaining, my mom would make us eat a dried out piece of bread because “Better a dry crust with peace and quiet than a house full of feasting, with strife” (Prov 17:1). There were a few times we got our mouths washed out with soap, a few times I had to stand in the corner for a while, at least once when my bike was taken away for a while. Most of the time, though, if we disobeyed or did something that we knew was wrong, we got spanked. I don’t think I was ever grounded or sent to my room. My best friend got grounded a lot, and I thought it was unfair because his punishment affected me too since we couldn’t go out and play.

With few exceptions, the implement of spanking was always THE PADDLE. THE PADDLE was half of an old yardstick. Not the flimsy ones we have today, but one that was 1/4″ thick and didn’t have any flex to it. THE PADDLE was hung on a nail in the hallway beside the basement door. Sometimes we would have to “go get THE PADDLE” ourselves and bring it to Mom or Dad so we could get our spanking. Other times we would have to sit and wait while they went to retrieve THE PADDLE; you could always hear it rattle against the wall when they lifted it off the nail. Most spankings took place either in our bedroom or Mom and Dad’s bedroom. They would make sure we realized what we did was wrong and why they were spanking us–you know, the ol’ “this hurts me more than it hurts you” line, then we would have to bend over and put our hands on the bed while they delivered a handful of swift smacks to the rear, the force being pretty consistent but the quantity varying with the level of wrongdoing or how rebellious we were.

I don’t remember how old I was when I got my last spanking, but probably a little older than when most parents stopped spanking their kids. I’m guessing I was in junior high. By that time, I could put up with the sting without crying, so I think it lost its effectiveness and even made me a little resentful of the punishment.

With one possible exception, I never felt that my spankings were abusive or uncalled for. The punishment was never delayed; if Dad wasn’t home, Mom spanked us; she didn’t say “wait until your father gets home.” It wasn’t done on the spur of the moment or for accidents. It wasn’t done in anger. My parents didn’t yell at us or threaten us. But if we disobeyed them, there was a good chance that we would get a spanking.

My parents may not have had the perfect strategy when it came to discipline, but I can truthfully say that I am glad I was spanked. My brother says the same thing, and his kids get spanked too if they disobey. If I have kids someday, they will get spanked too.

Obviously (hopefully) you shouldn’t spank a baby. The child has to be old enough to understand a command and willfully disobey; most toddlers can comprehend this. Some people thing spanking is wrong, but I’m sure they would agree that parents should discipline their children. I’m curious how you discipline a toddler or small child. You can’t reason with them. Telling them “no, don’t do that” isn’t effective; they’ll just keep doing it and you’ll end up either caving or pulling your hair out. Inconveniencing them doesn’t teach correction; they’re not old enough to understand why their parents are depriving them of something they want; but they are old enough to connect a spanking with whatever they just did.

Okay, I’m tired, and I’ve probably written more than anyone wants to read anyway. If you think spanking is wrong, please read Proverbs 13:24, 22:15, 23:13-14, and Hebrews 12:5-11, then explain your position again as to why God wouldn’t want anyone to spank their children. And please don’t confuse proper spanking with improper spanking. A proper spanking is not physical abuse, just like a stern lecture is not verbal abuse.

"Once Saved Always Saved"

Posted on by
Reply

Eternal Security of the believer, or “once saved, always saved” (OSAS) is a hotly debated topic among some Christians. Is it possible to lose your salvation? One of the tenets of Calvinism is “Perseverance of the saints:” the belief that a true Christian will never completely turn their back on God. This goes hand-in-hand with the debate about predestination vs. free-will. If we chose God, it would make sense that we could change our minds. If God chose us, then He is not likely to let us go.

Originally posted 9/22/04 at bibleforums.org:

Q: Is it necessary to be “right” on the OSAS issue in order to be saved? In other words, can you truly be saved if your understanding of salvation is wrong?

This is not an attempt to determine which side is right, but to put the debate in perspective, and determine how significant of an issue it is.

A: I do not believe it’s necessary to fully understand how salvation works in order to be saved. If I’m drowning and someone offers to pull me out of the water, it’s not that important to me to understand how the rope is constructed and what kind of footing they have; I’m just going to grab onto the rope and let them pull me in. I think staunch OSAS believers and people who are strongly opposed to OSAS can both be saved.

I believe in OSAS. I believe the majority of Biblical evidence supports this doctrine. I think it’s worth exploring the issue because it reveals something about God’s character and how He operates. However, in some sense, I think the whole debate misses the point. The point is not WHEN you got saved, be it the first time you accepted Jesus as Savior or the most recent time you asked for forgiveness; the important thing is that you are following Jesus. Our goal shouldn’t be to cross the starting line; our goal is to cross the finish line, and that requires making steady progress towards the finish line by following Jesus. Some people can’t nail their salvation down to a specific point in time; it may have been a long process that got them started running the race. At some point in time, they “crossed the starting line” and God knows when that was, but it’s not really that important to us. The important thing to us is that we continue to run the race.

Originally posted 12/12/2004 on bibleforums.org:

I believe that once we respond to God’s call, our Good Shepherd keeps us in His flock. I see value in debating eternal security as a study of God’s character, but very little value in the debate over how it affects us. As far as we are concerned, the question of whether we were “really saved in the first place” or need to “get saved again” is not worth discussing. The only question that matters is “are you following Jesus?” If not, you need to start following Him. Whether you turn and walk His way for the 1st time or 50th time is insignificant.

Allah

Posted on by
Reply

Is it heresy to say the Muslims worship the same God that Christians worship?

Many respectable Christians have different viewpoints on this. To me, it’s more important to discuss the character, actions, and expectations of the Creator and Supreme Being of the Universe than to debate what He should be called. Jews do not believe that Jesus was God’s son; does that mean the Jehovah they serve is not the same God we serve? I don’t think many people would say the Jews believe in a different god; however, they don’t believe the right things about God. Some people believe the same principle applies to Muslims.

Does believing the wrong thing about God mean that you believe in a false god? Many people have taken offense at President Bush and others who have said something to the effect that Muslims worship the same God that we do. I have a problem with such a statement if it implies that Islam is an equally valid route to God, but I’m not so sure that it’s necessary to separate “God” and “Allah.” According to the Wikipedia entry on Allah, “The word Allah is not specific to Islam; Arab Christians and Arab Jews also use it to refer to the monotheist deity. Arabic translations of the Bible also employ it.” “Allah” is simply the Arabic word for “God.” Judaism rejects Jesus as the Messiah and therefore believes the wrong things about God, but we wouldn’t say they worship a false god. I know a couple of missionaries to Muslims who don’t try to get Muslims to stop worshipping Allah. Rather, they try to get Muslims to understand that Jesus IS Allah, and the things they have been taught about Allah all their lives are wrong. When Paul was in Athens, he didn’t tell them to stop worshipping the “unknown god” and worship the “true God” instead; he told them “you know this god you worship…let me tell you what He’s really like.” I wonder if that’s how we ought to approach the God vs. Allah debate.

Here are a couple of interesting links on the subject:
http://www.equip.org/free/DI220.htm
http://www.answering-islam.org/God/same.html

Evolution

Posted on by
Reply

One of the debates between Creationists and Evolutionists is the age of the earth. Those who take the Bible literally believe the earth to be 6,000-10,000 years old, while evolutionists say the earth is billions of years old. My intent here is not to debate whether God literally created the earth in 7 days, but to address the discrepancy between the Biblical timeline and the claims of science.

Orginally posted 8/13/04 at bibleforums.org:

First, let me assume that we all believe in some form of Creation, and God created Adam and Eve as fully developed humans.

If Adam and Eve were created as fully developed humans, then they would have appeared to be 20-30 years old, when in reality they were only 1 day old. I think the same is true of the stars, various rock formations, etc. When God created the stars, they were immediately visible, despite the fact that they are many light years away. So scientists today may look at a star and say, “that star is a billion light years away, so it must have existed for billions of years in order for us to see the light.” Or they may look at a rock formation and say, “it takes billions of years for this sort of thing to form; therefore the earth must be billions of year old.” However, if God created the earth with “built-in” age, I see no problem accepting a young earth despite the fact that it may look older than it really is.

Heaven

Posted on by
Reply

What will heaven be like? Will we “start over” with new bodies, new interests, new personalities, etc.?

Orginally posted 8/13/04 at bibleforums.org:

I’m fairly certain that life in heaven is not a “new existence.” We get new bodies, and our imperfections are eliminated, but we’re still the same people with the same spirits. It’s a continuation of our life, so I think to a large extent, our memories, personalities, etc., will survive.

There will be some differences; there is no marriage in heaven, so does that mean your relationship with your (former) wife will be the same as your relationship with your sister or any other woman, or is there still a unique bond? There is no more pain, so does that mean painful memories are wiped out, or just that we may remember the event, but it is no longer painful?

Orginally posted 3/9/2005 on bibleforums.org:

Our “soul” is not “another person inside of us,” it’s simply who we are. Our body is just the package. Our mind is how we think. Our soul encompasses our thoughts and emotions; it’s the “real us.”

When we get to heaven, we will not begin a “second existence.” Heaven will be a continuation of our lives here, except with the imperfections removed. Some conventions from our life on earth will no longer exist, such as marriage and family, but we’ll still be the same people. I think we will retain our memories and our personalities. Bad memories will no longer haunt us, and personality flaws will be gone, but the things that make us “who we are” will remain. We won’t all be converted into clones.