Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Subscribe to the Podcast: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | iHeartRadio | Podchaser | Email | TuneIn | Deezer | RSS | More
Last week, Gary Thomas posted an article on his substack on the topic of discipline vs. punishment—not taking a stance but rather offering it up as a controversial conversation starter. Reading it made me curious about something—does your view of hell change your parenting approach? After all, if God is our example, and you believe that hell is eternal punishment, does that then lend to a more heavy-handed approach to parenting versus someone who believes that hell is an act of mercy?
I posted that question in our forum, and it then led to a discussion on using physical punishment on children. I spent a fair bit of time in the last week or two writing on that thread, and so I thought I’d repurpose it here for those who might be curious about how we raised our children.
We, Christina and I, don’t believe hell is eternal torture. We don’t believe such a view is in keeping with the Bible. We grew up in a denomination that taught it was, and it was one of the reasons we left because the doctrine couldn’t stand up to either biblical scrutiny or logic as we saw it. If you want to know why and/or argue that stance, I fully welcome you to read the post What happens when you die? That’s not the point of this post.
The point of this post is to share why we don’t spank our children, and now that my children are growing up into adults, what the outcome of such a choice has been.
Our view of hell informs our view of love
I think hell is one of the greatest showcases of God’s character. When I was growing up, I was raised in a denomination that taught that:
- You are either predestined for heaven or hell and free will was an illusion.
- Hell is eternal torture.
- Very few people will go to heaven, relatively speaking
And so, I grew up being taught that God created everyone, randomly picked a very select few to go to heaven, and the rest he would torture for eternity for a choice they didn’t make. It also made evangelism a farce, but that’s a topic for another day.
This set of beliefs does not depict a loving God. Rather, it shows an entity that gets closest to deserving eternal torment than any other being I’ve ever met or heard of – and even then, I think the punishment is overkill. I mean, this depicts an evil worse than any of history’s largest villains. It is the equivalent of having children, choosing one at random to treat like a king, and then torturing the rest, while simultaneously keeping them alive. Except in this case, it’s trillions of children, and they are alive for ever.
Even if you believe in different variations of this, for example, perhaps you believe in free will, then you’re still left with a father raising children that he fully intends to torture the vast majority of beyond their natural lifespan. In this case, an infinite lifespan.
And if this is the view of God you hold to, and you somehow have managed to hold on to the cognitive dissonance that it is loving, then I completely understand why one could be deceived into thinking that beating your children is a loving act. It’s because your view of love is distorted.
When I grew up, started studying it for myself and learned more about God and hell, then I realized that:
- God picks all of us.
- We don’t all pick God.
- If we pick God, our works are the evidence of that choice, but it is the choice that keeps our name in the book of life. If we do not choose Him, then our names are blotted out.
- Eventually God will destroy sin, and if we choose to stand with sin, then we will be destroyed along with it.
God is not keeping sin around and not keeping us in the box with sin for eternity just to be tortured by it. If He did, that would make him an evil God.
And again, I’m going through this quickly because my intent is not to debate hell – I did that in the other post.
But this paints a very different picture picture of God, and, subsequently, love. God is not a cruel person who created the majority of mankind only to see them tortured for eternity (an eternity He manufactures). Rather, God created us to be free, in the hopes that we would see sin for what it is, and choose life with Him. If we do not – then we go back to where we came from – nothingness. No harm, no foul, in the grand scheme of things.
In this situation, death is a mercy. It’s a final loving act. It’s the acknowledgement that a child has grown up and chose to disown his father, and so all support is removed at their request. In this case, it just so happens that their very existence comes from the Father, and so when you remove that inheritance, the only possible outcome is death. Not because you were killed, but because you rejected life and it was removed from you.
It is God saying, “I wish you had chosen differently, but I will respect your wishes.” If we choose death and destruction, then we get death and destruction.
And with this view of God and love, the idea of hell being torture is – well, it makes no sense. This God, this love, is focused on grace, on mercy, on relationship. What utility does hell have? It teaches nothing – because you cannot come back from it. It doesn’t build a relationship, because you are cut off. It doesn’t build discipline, because you cannot grow anymore. And it doesn’t bring hope, because there is no hope in hell. It doesn’t even teach anyone else, because Judgement Day is the same day for everyone – after Christ returns.
The very idea of eternal hell by a God that is loving is nonsense.
Our view of love informs our actions
In the same way, claiming to love your child, using this view of God and His love, by beating them is nonsense. And you know that if you take a second to think about it because the hypocrisy jumps out pretty quickly.
If your child hits another child, and in response, you tell them not to hit people, and then you hit the child – what do they learn? They learn their parent is a hypocrite. But of course, if they point that out to you, you will become enraged, and you’ll likely hit them again. What part of that is loving?
We taught our children that it’s not okay to hit other people. Now, there are some exceptions. They know they can defend themselves, and they understand when violence is allowed – such as during martial arts training. But in day-to-day life – violence is not okay. That rule goes for children as well as adults. I have hit my kids when we’re training – but I’m using 1% or less of my power generally, and they’ve got pads on. Outside of that – I have never had to, because the only other acceptable use would be if my life was threatened, and I have never had my life threatened by my children. So, I don’t get to hit them.
I would rather draw my children to me than have them run from me
Many people have told me over the years that children should have a healthy fear of their parents. To me, this teaches your children to run from you, rather than towards you when there is trouble. You build better liars and deceivers, not better people.
My parents raised me this way, and to this day, I would not go to them for advice if I was in trouble. I would run from them and to somewhere safe. I wanted better for my own children.
When my children make a mistake – they come to me. They ask for help. They ask for forgiveness, knowing that it will be given.
We don’t punish them for mistakes. There may be consequences, but that is not the same thing. Often we negotiate the consequences with them because, ultimately, they need to learn how to set their own consequences to bad decisions and make their own rules. And honestly, sometimes they choose harsher punishments than I do. My kids will call me out for not holding them accountable for their punishments.
Do they sometimes still try to hide and deceive? Yeah, especially when they are younger. Adam and Eve did the same thing, even with a perfect Father. But as they get older, they come to us easily, asking for help before problems arise, and if there is a problem, their parents are the first people they turn to.
I wanted that relationship with them, and I’m glad to say it’s working out that way.
Theology should line up with reality
And if our theology is correct, we should see evidence of that in real life. This is one of the reasons I like running surveys. I like seeing the intersection between theology and practical application.
So, this week, I did some searching for large meta-studies—that is, studies collecting data from multiple other studies.
Here are the two studies for anyone interested in them:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3768154
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7992110
And a good summary:
https://www.apa.org/act/resources/webinars/corporal-punishment-gershoff.pdf
Here are some statistics I found:
- Somewhere between 70-90% of parents spank their children
- Corporal punishment from parents led to higher aggression rates in their children. It becomes a cycle of the child being more aggressive, the parents ramping up their aggression to match it and the child then responding with more aggression, bringing more physical punishment.
- Spanking doesn’t make children more compliant in the short term
- Spanking is not linked with long-term compliance or internalization of morals
- Spanking is not linked with reductions in aggression or antisocial behaviour
- Spanking is linked with worse, not better, behaviour in children.
- Spanking is associated with significantly more aggression and antisocial behaviour problems
- Not one of the studies showed a link between spanking and better behaviour.
So, if spanking children worked – we should see evidence of it. Instead, statistically, we see the opposite while all the wished-for behaviours I hear from parents who spank their children, my children seem to have picked up without the need to, such as internalization of morals, less aggressive, better behaviour, and a good relationship between parents and kids as well as with their siblings.
But that’s not all.
- 75% of abuse cases against children in Canada start as physical punishment that gets carried away
- Children who are spanked are 7x more likely to be severely assaulted by their parents
- Infants who are spanked are 2.3x more likely to require medical attention due to an injury inflicted by a parent
In fact, what they found in the meta-analysis is that spanking has the same outcomes as physical abuse – only with 2/3rds strength of correlation. I would say that means it is abuse – it’s merely a question of how severe.
And, this one I found really interesting:
Kids who have been spanked are more likely to develop anxiety and depression disorders, have more difficulties in school and with the skills of regulation. There is also a correlation between physical punishment and decreased brain grey matter in areas associated with performance on intelligence tests. Studies show spanking a child from age 2-4 shows, on average, a 5-point drop in IQ. Between ages 5-9, a 2.8-point drop. And the correlation gets stronger the older they are when you stop spanking them. Countries where spanking is more prevalent tend to have a lower national average IQ. So, you’re literally taking away their intelligence by spanking them.
So, in summary, kids who are spanked
- have higher aggression
- have lower conflict-resolution skills
- have a higher chance of depression, anxiety and other mental disorders
- increased struggle with self-regulation
These all set them up to struggle more in their marriages when they grow up as well. And yet, kids who are spanked tend to have a more positive view of physical punishment, and so are more likely to use it on their own children. To me, this sounds like a generational curse if ever there was one.
Doesn’t the Bible tell us to beat our children?
There are some confusing bible verses that get brought up when this topic is discussed. Probably the strongest one that is brought up is
Proverbs 23:13-14: Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die You shall beat him with a rod, And deliver his soul from hell.
The problem with this verse is that Proverbs is often poetic instead of literal, and you may think that’s a cop-out until you read this verse:
Exodus 21:20 – And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
So, the problem here is that the Bible says that if you beat a grown man or woman with a rod, you may very well kill him. And that makes sense because a rod is not a small stick. It is a club, a wooden equivalent of a mace. In fact, David used a rod to kill lions and bears.
As for what the Proverb means, there is some debate and I’m not entirely sure myself, but it certainly cannot mean what a plain reading is, because both logic and the Bible tell us that you can very well kill a child by hitting them with a rod.
For myself, I don’t build doctrines out of verses that contradict the rest of the Bible. I would rather set that one verse aside for a time until I grow in understanding rather than set aside the rest of the Bible in favour of the one verse. Because nothing about beating a child with a club seems to line up with the rest of scripture.
Lastly, the most common verse I hear is:
Proverbs 13:24 – He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly.
And the problem with this verse is that people no longer know what a rod was used for. A shepherd’s rod is a short, club-like stick. It is a symbol of authority (Kings and Pharaohs had rods), and it’s used to guide sheep and count them (as a pointer), but the only time it is used to hit someone or something is when you’re hitting an enemy – like a bear, lion, or someone trying to steal your sheep.
So, I believe, in light of the context of the culture, this is not talking about physical violence, but rather authority and guidance. Discipline comes in many ways, and violence is the lazy, and I’d argue evil, route.
In summary
For us, we’re glad we chose not to spank our children from the beginning. Is it harder? Absolutely. You have to use your brain, patience, gentleness, kindness, self-control and other fruit of the spirit in place of violence. No one ever said it was easy. But, it has been worth the effort for us, and statistically it seems it’s not a fluke.
Now, if you disagree, want to debate, have questions, want to share your experiences, etc, feel free to post them in the comments.
Firstly, I’m sure nothing I say will change ones mind. On this topic, people seem to pick and stick. Having said that, I think your views on hell are reasonable and agreeable.
Linking eternal hell or any model of hell to disciplining children is quite frankly ridiculous. Utter garbage.
Throughout the article you perform outstanding acts of theological gymnastics to come to and justify the decision you’ve already made. You’re human. We all do it to some extent. You’re not approaching the Bible with a view to learning. You’re approaching it with your decision already made and you’re looking for evidence to support that choice. And ignoring evidence that points in a different direction.
And using the terrible argument that Christians do when it suits them, that this verse or that verse, or this book or that book are “poetic” and so – here’s why it actually means the opposite of what God’s word actually says. It’s amazing isn’t it the the “poetic” argument always suits ones worldview argument!
And then you quote studies and statistics. Please. “Lies, damn likes and statistics” I believe the saying goes. I’m not going to delve deeply into the background of the studies, other than to say like all research studies, they tend to be polluted by our pre-conceived views and coerced into getting the results that we want to see.
The stat on 70-90% of parents spank is a complete joke. Along with rest of it, but that one is just complete rubbish. The western world has clearly deteriorated in all forms of discipline from the family, to the community, to the governments. in all forms from monetary, budgetary, spiritual and marital. And on and on it goes.
Spanking has been out of favour since the 70’s at least and have a look around you mate. Do you see a better world? Happier kids? Brighter children? Responsible adults? Less debt?
The “spanking doesn’t and is not linked” to arguments are complete rubbish and easy to state but impossible to prove or disprove.
So, if not spanking children worked – we should see evidence of it. Less depression, less functionally retarded adults, more successful marriages, more children leaving home to start families, less suicide rates, less pharmaceutical drug dependence, less narcotic drug use, less pornography etc. Where’s that happening in the West? Discipline and spanking is at record low rates compared to prior generations, so where’s the improvement.
Or what does that pesky Bible say again?…He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly. Oh but hang-on was that just conveniently “poetic”? Or, are we going to throw the verse away because we site one word in it being “rod” to write off the verse entirely to fit with our non-spanking worldview?
Yes, the thought of taking a rod used on animal discipline and using it on a child is appalling. But simply keeping the principle and considering a small, breakable or bendable rod of light wood (aka. wooden spoon) or woven reeds and delivered calmly and with discipline from the father is more in line with the verse above?
I can only tell you that from my life, I have never come across a Christian or non-christian family that refuses spanking that doesn’t raise absolute turds of kids, that no one else except other similarly minded people can stand to be around. They generally get into drugs, crime, unemployment and jail pretty quickly and they have all been non-disciplined spoilt brat kids that re absolutely obnoxious for most other folks to be around. On the flip side, every single family I’ve ever encountered with delightful, polite, bright and engaging children have been disciplined children from their fathers.
Do we always get it right? No way. Can we be too angry or annoyed when delivering discipline? yes, it happens. We are all fallible. But forgiveness and repentance is the model Christ gave us and we should use it.
Anyway, enough rants from me! Prove me wrong and raise a wonderful family. I’ll probably claim your the exception to prove the rule if you do…haha. But I think you’re way off on this topic.
Brotherly love in Christ
I grew up believing spanking was right decision – I changed based on my theology shifting, so you never know. Plus, if I can get to someone before they start – maybe I can break a generational curse.
This is an oversimplification. Your view of hell changes you view of God and of love. God is our example, so if you’re view of God changes, then by extension you view of love and ultimately parenting should as well.
Empty claim – examples?
You got this backwards. My view of spanking changed when my view of God changed based on what I read in the Bible. Not the other way around.
I agree, if it is an unjustified stance, then it’s a terrible argument. however, if you take a literal read of the verse, then are you saying you believe Christians should beat their children with a club? That is the plain reading. I was quite clear that I don’t quite know what the meaning is – but it’s also clear what he meaning is not because if the meaning is that you should beat them with a club – then we have a problem, because it’s lying to you that they will not die – as per the verse in Exodus.
So, do you believe we should beat children with a club or no? If not, how do you justify your stance?
So, just to be clear: You don’t care to figure out who did the study, why, or look at the data yourself, but I should just believe your opinion over it because you don’t trust it. You would think with literally dozens of studies to look at on the topic, that I could find at least one to support your view. I can’t. If you can – please, let me know.
This is a single cause fallacy. We have many reasons for struggling children. Media (social and otherwise), lockdowns, economic struggles, ideology and politics being pushed on them, and more. However, studies will control for these other factors.
This is the same single-cause fallacy. Given all the other factors involved, we see children who were not spanked doing better than children who were. Does it mean children now are doing better than children in the past? No. It means perhaps we should not add to all the new struggles by continuing a bad practice that does not help them.
You’re mistaking my stance. I’m not against discipline – quite the opposite. I’m against violence against children. I 100% agree that one should discipline children. I don’t think you have to beat them to do so. Rods are used to guide sheep, not hit them. I discipline my children and guide them – not hit them. You are reading into the text something that is not there.
Now you’re changing the meaning of the word. A rod is not bendable. It is not small. It is not easily breakable. It is not a wooden spoon. It is a weapon with the capability of killing a bear or lion. For example, Numbers 24:17 uses the same word – in “And a Scepter (rod) shall rise out of Israel and shall smite the corners of Moab and destroy all the children of Sheth”. And you’re not even picking and choosing from a potential meaning (which you falsely accused me of) – you’re just making up new definitions because it suits your viewpoint.
I’d be willing to bet that the cause of this is a removal of discipline – not spanking.
You know, except for the physical abuse…
That should not happen. I’m sad you take your anger out on your children. I hope they don’t grow up to do the same to theirs.
Except for children, right? They should be beaten into submission. This is the hypocrisy I mentioned.
I am. And I know you won’t – you already said you don’t trust facts – only anecdotes.
I’m not saying don’t trust the Bible – I’m saying you have to read the entire Bible and don’t use a single verse to build a doctrine out of.
Because it doesn’t exist.
This is a category error. One would not find a study on any of those things, because studies are about observations of society. Not a single thing you mentioned is observable today.
Sure – so, do you believe it is ill-advised to dig a well according to Proverbs 26:27, because you will fall into it if you do? I personally think that’s more likely a metaphor.
This is a red herring – it has nothing to do with the verse in question. I don’t think anyone would have any issue with any of the scenarios you put forward – but also they don’t have anything to do with the discussion.
This is not true. In fact, my entire argument is that there must be an alternative meaning to the entire verse – it must be metaphorical. You are holding to the literal reading by saying it says you must beat your children – but you want to skip by the rod part, or make just that word metaphorical. You’re picking a choosing parts of a verse to interpret literally and others not to. It’s inconsistent.
You wrote this:
So, I am arguing for an alternate reading than a literal translation, and you are arguing for a literal translation. I’m saying don’t beat your children with a club. You are saying beat your children with a club. Or, you’ve gone wishy-washy on your interpretation, taking some of it as literal and some as not – why? Where’s your line? What’s your reason? Don’t you trust the Bible as it’s written?
I’m saying the entire thing is likely symbolic – that’s a consistent argument.
With me? Nope. You’d have to try a lot harder.
Had already forgotten them. It’s pretty hard to offend me. But, I do wish you’d take some thought as to what exactly you believe. Do you take this verse literally, or not? If you take some parts as literal and others as metaphorical – why? You seem to be back and forth on that, and that makes it hard to figure out what exactly you’re arguing for.