Bible and Spanking Children

[dimossi]

I received an e-mail reply from an individual, named John, with whom I had sent a link to an article regarding an analysis of the effects of spanking. This is the article I sent:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020625/hl_nm/kids_spanking_1

John's reply basically had the illogical reasoning of:

A: The bible says to spank children
B: Everything the bible says must be true
C: Thus A + B = Spanking children is right

Here is my reply to John's reply. Any constructive criticism of my response would be appreciated.

------------

Did this article line up more on your belief?

Did you read the article? First of all, this article is about an analysis of 88 different studies on spanking and smacking, not just one new study. You seem to be implying that this article is against spanking and that my "belief" against spanking is mirrored in the article. The second paragraph of the article reads:

"Spanking has become controversial in recent years, but in the United States, especially, remains a widely used form of discipline. Many studies on the effects of spanking have been done, but the findings vary."

This statement as well as the rest of the article is unbiased toward a particular "belief". The article is about scientific results, not some dogmatic statement. If you had said that the article's conclusion was in agreement with my logical conclusion that spanking is harmful, then you would have been correct.

The article admits that spanking is strongly linked with immediate compliance but also with 10 negative behaviors such as aggression. So it isn't like the article is saying that spanking doesn't have any positive results. I admit that continuing research is definitely needed, but I think that if you can have two forms of punishment that work equally well, the less violent approach would always be the one to use. In my opinion, non-spanking methods of punishment are the most reasonable, humane, compassionate ways of disciplining children.

Seems like every year the research says something different.

This is true and their are many variables that can be involved in how a child reacts to corporal punishment. The best we can do is continue to have more critical research done and analyses of the results. Since the research this article is referring to is an analysis of 88 different studies I would conclude that the results should be considered accurate and of value.

For myself I would rather go with something thats has been tried and proven.

What do you think research does? Don't these studies involve analyzing methods of punishment that have been "tried"? What does it take for something to be "proven" by your standards? Anecdotal evidence from a few family members and friends is not a scientific study that "proves" anything. Stating that oneself was spanked and still turned out OK, is not a logical means by which to spank one's own children either. There are many children throughout this world and history that were beaten, abused, molested, enslaved, and tortured, yet they turned out OK as well. I wouldn't expect any thinking person to use this reasoning to justify the continued use of these violent actions. Would you?

Obviously, this is a personal decision that each parent must make and be responsible for.

In this country it is currently a personal decision. As further evidence shows us the negative results of corporal punishment, this will probably change in the near future.

I think everyone will agree, that they want the best for their children.

I would hope so. But the "best for their children" is subjective. For example, about a month ago there was a story in the news about a child, named Samuel, who's parents belonged to a religious sect that, after having a bizarre prophecy, deprived Samuel, who was almost a year old, of solid food. These parents felt they were doing the "best for their child", because they felt that "God commanded it". Samuel died of starvation. Read the whole story here: http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/157/metro/Witness_opens_windows_on_sect_life+.shtml

This is just one example. There are numerous stories like this where the parents believe they are doing the "best for their children" based on dogmatic revelation, but instead they were torturing and/or killing innocent children.

I would hope that you would agree then that to decide what form of punishment is the most effective and humane involves using reason, critical thinking, and the scientific method; not superstition.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Does the Bible Say About Spanking Children?

You are contradicting yourself here. Did you completely read what you cut-n-pasted in to this e-mail? Regarding spanking you said, "For myself I would rather go with something thats has been tried and proven." Then you cut-n-paste this bible-thumping bunk about what the bible says about spanking children. How is this "tried and proven"? The last thing the bible does is prove anything. Plus the bible can be used to justify just about anything (slavery, denying medicine, torture, killing, not eating certain foods, etc.) It is all subject to interpretation. Let's look at some examples:

Lu 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

Does this verse justify hating your family?

Lu 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

Does this mean that marrying someone that has been divorced is committing adultery?

Lu 12:47 And that servant [slave], which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes."

Jesus encouraged the beating of slaves. Does this justify slavery and the beating of slaves? Speaking of slavery, I challenge you to show me ONE piece of scripture that states that slavery is wrong.

Lev. 11:10-12 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you. They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Does this justify that clams, oysters, crabs, shrimp and lobsters are an abomination to eat?

According to Jehovah's Witnesses (JW), God forbids blood transfusions. Many JWs have needlessly died because the governing body considers blood transfusions to be "eating blood." Of course, their view on this has recently changed to allow some use of blood. But the governing body is careful not to explain its new, complicated rules on blood to its followers. The JWs justify this warped thinking using: Gen.9:3-4; Lev.17:10, 13-16; Acts 15:19-20, 28-29

What makes their use of scripture to justify forbidding blood transfusions any different than your use of scripture justifying spanking of children?

Ex.21:17 "he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death." Lev.20:9 "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him." Pr.30:17 "The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it." Mt.15:4 " God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."

Great examples of "The Bible's guide to Punishing Children". Are you sure that you really base your beliefs regarding child discipline on a literal reading of the bible? Scary.

Proverbs 13:24(KJV): "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes."

Proverbs 13:24(AMP): "He who spares his rod (of discipline) hates his son, but he who loves him diligently disciplines and punishes him early."

Well isn't that nice. If you don't spank your child then you must hate him. This seems to contradict your statement, "I think everyone will agree, that they want the best for their children." There must be an awful lot of children that are "hated" by their parents in Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Austria, and other countries where spanking is illegal. My wife and her siblings were never spanked. I guess it is a "miracle" that they managed to make it to adulthood and are compassionate and ethical people. Don't you find it odd that Sweden, Denmark and Norway contain relatively low percentages of "Christians" and have laws against spanking, yet their human rights records, their generosity, their average education levels, their quality of life, lengthy life spans, low crime rates, and low poverty rates, put the rest of the world to shame, including the far more "Christian" United States. Scandinavians also have the lowest rates of unplanned pregnancies in the world. They instituted comprehensive teaching in birth control in their schools, and it worked.

The practical wisdom found in these verses in the book of Proverbs covers the subject of child rearing and corporal punishment. Children who are not properly disciplined, are among the most miserable of children.

You got to be kidding. What is the source of this statistic? Obviously, it is just made up.

Unruly and spoiled children are not the blessings that the Bible says they should be to parents.

Parents that abuse their children are not a blessing to those children.

When a child is given no boundaries, they feel lost. If they have been given boundaries, yet those boundaries are not maintained, it causes great harm to a child, as they will not only be in dangerous territory, they will also lose respect for authority. This is where we find so many of the children and youth of today.

Holy crap, a statement that is actually right. I agree here. Notice it doesn't say anything about needing to discipline a child physically, only that consistency is needed. Please inform me where might I find this stated in that bible of yours.

They are rebels, who not only disrespect authority, but openly defy all authority figures such as teachers, policemen, clergy, and their own parents. The blame rests upon the parents of these children, if they have not heeded the advice given in this and other verses found in Proverbs.

Like this advice from Proverbs:

Pr.30:17 "The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it."

This brings us to the subject of how we should discipline a child who disobeys the rules. There has been much debate on the subject of corporal punishment (the spanking of a child). Corporal punishment simply means bodily punishment while the definition of spank in Webster's Dictionary is: 1.) to strike with something flat, as the open hand, especially on the buttocks, as in punishment. 2.) to move along swiftly or smartly, a smack given in spanking. This is what the Bible says about spanking:

Proverbs 22:15: "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him."

Proverbs 23:13-14: "Withold not discipline from the child, for if you strike and punish him with the (reed-like) rod, he will not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell."

Physical punishment gives the message that "might makes right," that it is okay to hurt someone smaller and less powerful than you are. The child then feels it is appropriate to mistreat younger or smaller children, and when he becomes an adult, feels little compassion for those less fortunate or powerful than he is, and fears those who are more so. Thus it is difficult for him to find meaningful friendships.

Spanking can be physically damaging. Blows to the lower end of the spinal column send shock waves the length of the column, and may cause subdural hematoma. The prevalence of lower back pain among adults may have its origins in early corporal punishment. Paralysis has occurred through nerve damage, and children have died after relatively mild paddlings, due to undiagnosed medical problems. Many parents are unaware of alternative approaches to try, so that when punishment doesn't accomplish the parent's goals, it escalates, easily crossing the line into child abuse.

First of all, discipline of children should begin at an early age, whenever a child begins to defy the parent. Remember the old saying, "He who spares the rod, spoils the child." Notice that the Bible says that all children have foolishness in their hearts. The Bible definition of a fool means one who is a rebel, so this is saying that all children have rebellion in them and when it surfaces, it is our duty as parents to drive it out of them.

Amazing how in this age of science we still have people that take the bible literally and think we can "drive out certain behaviors" out of children using physical abuse like driving "demons" out of accused witches by burning them at the stake.

We are to do this by punishing them with a whack on the buttocks with a small reed-like rod. This rod could be a switch from a fruit tree branch or a willow tree branch or a small wooden spoon. It is not to be a large heavy rod or anything that would cause permanent physical damage.

Why not a heavy rod? Where in the bible does it give the specs for the rod to use when spanking?

While you are answering that question how about answering these as well:

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed posses slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27 How should they die?

The purpose of a spanking is not to cause any lasting bodily harm, but to cause spiritual correction.

Humor me and define "spiritual correction" for me please.

A spanking should be swift and cause short lived pain that makes a point. That point is that the small pain they feel now will prevent them from feeling great pain by the act they are committing, which could cause them loss of their lives in some cases. (For instance, if a child tries to run across the street, they could be run over and killed.)

This is a great example of the slippery slope fallacy. There is no evidence that spanking would prevent the loss of life. On the other hand there is plenty of evidence that spanking is harmful.

Perhaps the most important problem with corporal punishment is that it distracts the child from the problem at hand, as he becomes preoccupied with feelings of anger and revenge. In this way the child is deprived of the best opportunities for learning creative problem-solving, and the parent is deprived of the best opportunities for letting the child learn moral values as they relate to real situations. Thus corporal punishment teaches a child nothing about how to handle similar situations in the future. Loving support is the only way to learn true moral behavior based on strong inner values rather than superficially good behavior based only on fear. Strong inner values can only grow in freedom, never under fear.

Some people say that all spanking is child abuse, but this is totally wrong. The real abuse to the child is not to spank them when they need correction. Of course, some parents, who themselves are out of control, can abuse their children by beating them in angry rages. This is child abuse, however, it does not justify doing away with spanking children if it is done properly, and for the right reasons.

What is there to worry about? According to your bible the child won't die.

Proverbs 23:13-14: "Withold not discipline from the child, for if you strike and punish him with the rod, he will not die.

Won't this omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, omnibenevolent deity of yours protect the child?

Parents who beat their children, need help themselves. They are sinful people and they not only will abuse their children by beating them, but will hurt them in other ways as well.

Physical punishment gives the message that hitting is an appropriate way to express one's feelings and to solve problems. If the child rarely sees the parent handle anger and solve problems in a creative and positive way, he can never learn how to do that himself. Thus inadequate parenting continues into the next generation.

Many times, these same children are left to go hungry and uncared for.

Speaking of hunger, read this again: http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/157/metro/Witness_opens_windows_on_sect_life+.shtml

They have no love. These kind of homes need the love of Christ so that the whole family can be healed.

I could write a book full refuting this statement. I would say that the evidence lately has been clear that the "love of Christ" hasn't had much "healing effect" on physical and sexual abuse. Look at a newspaper instead of the bible once in a while and you'll see what I mean. The only "healing effect" the abused are getting, is the settlement they receive in the secular courts from the "Christ loving" abusers.

We are not to spank our children with uncontrolled anger, and thus hand out unjust punishment.

Anger which cannot be safely expressed becomes stored inside. Anger that has accumulated for many years can come as a shock to parents whose child now feels strong enough to express this rage. Thus corporal punishment may produce "good" (more like obedient) behavior in the early years, but at a high price, paid by the parent and society, during adolescence and adulthood.

Proverbs 19:18(AMP): "Discipline your son while there is hope, but do not (indulge your angry resentments by undue chastisements and) set yourself to his ruin."

By the way how did King Solomon's methods work on his own son, Prince Rehoboam?

Proverbs 22:6: "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."

Godly discipline will keep children from being dysfunctional later in life.

This couldn't be farther from the truth. Come on, use some common sense....whoops....I forgot...your bible doesn't like wisdom. 1 Cor.1:19 "For I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

We are told as Christian parents to train our children in the ways of the Lord and when he grows up, he will not depart from that training.

Ways of the Lord? Well, they can learn that genocide and other atrocities are acceptable if you are powerful enough, based on the Old Testament. And let's see what they can learn from Jesus:

* If you do something wrong with your eye or hand, cut/pluck it off (Matthew 5:29-30, in a sexual context).
* Marrying a divorced woman is adultery. (Matthew 5:32)
* Don't plan for the future. (Matthew 6:34)
* Don't save money. (Matthew 6:19-20)
* Don't become wealthy. (Mark 10:21-25)
* Sell everything and give it to the poor. (Luke 12:33)
* Don't work to obtain food. (John 6:27)
* Don't have sexual urges. (Matthew 5:28)
* Make people want to persecute you. (Matthew 5:11)
* Let everyone know you are better than the rest. (Matthew 5:13-16)
* Take money from those who have no savings and give it to rich investors. (Luke 19:23-26)
* If someone steals from you, don't try to get it back. (Luke 6:30)
* If someone hits you, invite them to do it again. (Matthew 5:39)
* If you lose a lawsuit, give more than the judgment. (Matthew 5:40)
* If someone forces you to walk a mile, walk two miles. (Matthew 5:41)
* If anyone asks you for anything, give it to them without question. (Matthew 5:42)

Is this wise? Is this what you would teach your children?

Notice it says "train" not "teach." Many parents teach their children right from wrong, but have failed to "train" them to obey. Spanking is part of the training.

Training and spanking do not need to be involved in order for children to obey. Training can be thought of as specialized instruction without reason while teaching is to provide knowledge of and condition to a certain action or frame of mind. But if you want to "train" your children like they are pets then that is your obligation, but I pity your children.

Many parents yell and threaten their children, but never follow through with the proper punishment and therefore their children get their own way. A disciplined child will bring great delight to parents, while the child left alone will bring shame to the home.

Proverbs 29:15 &17(AMP):

15 The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left undisciplined brings his mother to shame. 17 Correct your son, and he will give you rest; yes, he will give delight to your heart.

Ephesians 6:1-4:

1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. 2 Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; 3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. 4 And, ye fathers, provoke

More scripture.....you got it:

Jg.11:29-39 "Then the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah.... And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.... And the LORD delivered them into his hands.... And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances.... And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed."

Jg.19:24 "Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you."

Of course, as you'd expect I base my beliefs on the Bible.

That is both scary and sad.

I have a feeling it is more accurate to state that you base your beliefs on selective interpretations of selective verses from a selected version of the bible from a selected sect of a selected religion.

So it might be different from yours.

You think? ...........I mean........"you faith"....."I think".


"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion." [Steven Weinberg]

"The Bible is such a gargantuan collection of conflicting values that anyone can prove anything from it." [Robert Heinlein]

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." [Benjamin Franklin]

"Science together with critical thinking is the antidote to the poison of fanaticism and superstition." [Dimossi]

 

[PotatoStew]

My opinion is that you should have stuck more to the facts and arguments relating directly to spanking, and left out all the unrelated parts where you imply that the bible in general has lots of silly stuff in it. Those items water down your argument and distract from the main point being debated. Especially since some of your "questions" were irrelevant/way off base, such as the ones about owning Mexicans or Canadians and about killing your neighbor who works on the sabbath. Those laws applied to the ancient Jews under their covenant with God at the time. Unless you and your neighbors are ancient Jews, they don't apply to you. But again, that's neither here nor there with regard to spanking.

 

[Paradox]

My opinion is that you should have stuck more to the facts and arguments relating directly to spanking, and left out all the unrelated parts where you imply that the bible in general has lots of silly stuff in it. Those items water down your argument and distract from the main point being debated. Especially since some of your "questions" were irrelevant/way off base, such as the ones about owning Mexicans or Canadians and about killing your neighbor who works on the sabbath. Those laws applied to the ancient Jews under their covenant with God at the time. Unless you and your neighbors are ancient Jews, they don't apply to you. But again, that's neither here nor there with regard to spanking.

True. Although when the person's arguments boil down to:

A: The bible says to spank children
B: Everything the bible says must be true
C: Thus A + B = Spanking children is right

...you come to realize the only way to counter said belief is to demonstrate where the bible falters in other aspects (iow, demonstrate source of morality for said issue to be faulty). Even if there were thousands of studies done which showed, for instance, that spanking was directly linked to homocidal behavior, it appears this person would not flinch, so long as it was still supported by biblical verse.

 

[Stig]

Hitting your kids......

Hi folks,

I just came across this discussion and thought I would like to contribute. I have a daughter who will be three in October. She has never been punished physicly for anything she has done, bar the time that she pinched my face, just below my eye once (ouch!) and I pinched her back on the arm to show her it hurt.
The answer for me is simple. I know how I would feel if somebody hit me every time I did something wrong, in fact I would be devastated, and that is how kids must feel when they are "spanked". I don't particularly like the word "spanked" much either, it is just another word for hitting someone.
For this reason my daughter and future children won't ever be punished with violence.

I also was never hit as a child and I have no problems with dicipline or anything else to do with morality.

Stig

Edited for spelling correction............

 

[PotatoStew]

you come to realize the only way to counter said belief is to demonstrate where the bible falters in other aspects (iow, demonstrate source of morality for said issue to be faulty).

I disagree, Paradox. You can also try to show how the person may be misapplying or misunderstanding the point of scripture in question. At any rate, the scattershot, mocking, carpet-bombing approach that was taken is only likely to make the other person get defensive and tune the poster out, or turn the discussion into a wide-ranging debate on every topic except for spanking.

 

[Martin]

Dimossi - you might want to pay closer attention to your sig. Thomas Paine was a smart guy

 

[PotatoStew]

Dimossi - you might want to pay closer attention to your sig.

But not the Steven Weinberg quote above it, which makes no sense.

 

[Paradox]

I disagree, Paradox. You can also try to show how the person may be misapplying or misunderstanding the point of scripture in question.

Out of curiousity (this is a serious query), have you actually ever gotten into a debate with another christian about the 'proper interpretation' of a particular verse and ended up convincing said person that their original interpretation was misapplied?

At any rate, the scattershot, mocking, carpet-bombing approach that was taken is only likely to make the other person get defensive and tune the poster out, or turn the discussion into a wide-ranging debate on every topic except for spanking.

Probably, yes....if only because trying to rattle the foundation is much more dangerous to them than shaking a branch.

 

[juryjone]

I disagree, Paradox. You can also try to show how the person may be misapplying or misunderstanding the point of scripture in question. At any rate, the scattershot, mocking, carpet-bombing approach that was taken is only likely to make the other person get defensive and tune the poster out, or turn the discussion into a wide-ranging debate on every topic except for spanking.

PS,
You are obviously more well-versed in scripture than many of us. Tell me, what would you think if I told you you were misapplying or misunderstanding scripture? I'm sure that would not make you get defensive - having someone that has not studied a subject nearly as thoroughly as you have tell you that you "just don't understand".

How am I to prove that a person misunderstands scripture by NOT looking at the big picture, the entirety of scripture - by only looking at the verses in question? Do you interpret the validity of verses based on the verses themselves, or by your belief in the whole of the Bible?

Believers defend themselves using the whole of the Bible, why shouldn't I be able to argue against them using the whole of the Bible?

 

[dimossi]

Dimossi - you might want to pay closer attention to your sig. Thomas Paine was a smart guy

LoL..... nice point.

 

[dimossi]

I agree with Paradox when he said:

you come to realize the only way to counter said belief is to demonstrate where the bible falters in other aspects (iow, demonstrate source of morality for said issue to be faulty). Even if there were thousands of studies done which showed, for instance, that spanking was directly linked to homocidal behavior, it appears this person would not flinch, so long as it was still supported by biblical verse

As for what PotatoStew posted:

... At any rate, the scattershot, mocking, carpet-bombing approach that was taken is only likely to make the other person get defensive and tune the poster out, or turn the discussion into a wide-ranging debate on every topic except for spanking.

I admit I may have been a bit aggressive and deviated from the subject, but as you can see from John's reply, he didn't get defensive and actually seems inquisitive about my views.

Here is his reply:

Wow you could have been an investigative reporter. Very, Thorough and detailed. Regarding what I sent you. I did cut and paste the article.

You seem to know a lot of scripture. However when you read the Bible and not pick or go to verses, don't you see it in another context?

I'm not able to interpret all aspects of the bible and continue to study and read it on a regular basis. I do try to apply it to all areas of my life. Although sometimes it is scary

Have you researched the validity of the bible?

I did some research on whether or not the New Testament can be considered reliable, and it was amazing how much evidence there is out there to support it as a factual piece of history.

Here is the million dollar question,

If you don't believe in the bible and Jesus's message, what do you believe will happen when you die?

John

 

[Martin]

Here is the million dollar question,

If you don't believe in the bible and Jesus's message, what do you believe will happen when you die?

John

And why is that the million dollar question? Because John, I suspect, cannot accept the possiblility that there is nothing beyond death. Hence his need for religion. Either that or he's going to switch to the 'why live morally if there is no judgement?' line.

 

[Paradox]

And why is that the million dollar question? Because John, I suspect, cannot accept the possiblility that there is nothing beyond death. Hence his need for religion. Either that or he's going to switch to the 'why live morally if there is no judgement?' line.

The catch is most of the times these folks don't realize the inherent fallacies in their arguments. If you've already grown up your whole life believing that rabbits live in top hats, having a magician pull one out at a demonstration doesn't provide anything you feel the need to scrutinize.

 

[PotatoStew]

Out of curiousity (this is a serious query), have you actually ever gotten into a debate with another christian about the 'proper interpretation' of a particular verse and ended up convincing said person that their original interpretation was misapplied?

Hm... not that I recall. One of the main reasons is probably that I don't currently hang out with many people who would generally claim to follow scripture or who actually talk about scripture. Most of my discussions about religion and scripture these days are on this board, with non-Christians.

juryone:

Tell me, what would you think if I told you you were misapplying or misunderstanding scripture?

If you had a coherent argument, rather than "hey that stuff's just plain silly" I would be inclined to listen and consider if you could be right.

I'm sure that would not make you get defensive - having someone that has not studied a subject nearly as thoroughly as you have tell you that you "just don't understand".

(assuming you were being ironic here) True, I may get defensive, but not nearly as much as if you began willy-nilly attacking everything you could think of to attack.

How am I to prove that a person misunderstands scripture by NOT looking at the big picture, the entirety of scripture - by only looking at the verses in question?

You can certainly refer to other scripture, but it should be related to the subject. You can also look at the context of the culture that it came out of... what would the original recipients of the text have understood by it?

To be sure, dimossi's tactics are "allowed" ...he's basically turning it from a discussion about spanking to a discussion about the validity of the bible, which I suppose is fine. It's just my opinion that his argument was stronger and more convincing when he actually stuck to the topic of spanking. Of course, if the person he was writing to doesn't understand the fallacy of some of his arguments (such as the point I mentioned about the misapplication of Jewish law) then he may indeed be overwhelmed by dimossi's apparent knowledge of scripture, and may be convinced to ditch the whole thing.

 

[Paradox]

Hm... not that I recall. One of the main reasons is probably that I don't currently hang out with many people who would generally claim to follow scripture or who actually talk about scripture. Most of my discussions about religion and scripture these days are on this board, with non-Christians.

Was just curious. In my experience, it's never happened, although i'll admit I was never arguing from the position of a theist in the first place. The pointlessness of it, to me, is that when you start arguing interpretations, it's no more than discussing opinions. Like two people debating over whether Poem A is meant to be interpreted in manner Y, or manner Z. In the case of a poem, however, if we're lucky, the author is still alive to refer to...or the author has left notes mentioning what the theme of said poem was. With neither of these two aspects available for scriptural passages, there is no way to discern which interpretation is closest to that which was originally envisioned. With that in mind, I find people will usually not change their 'opinions' about something when the only opposition is another's 'opinion'.

Come on!...Try and convince me purple's not the coolest color!

 

[Martin]

I rest my case.

 

[dimossi]

To be sure, dimossi's tactics are "allowed" ...he's basically turning it from a discussion about spanking to a discussion about the validity of the bible, which I suppose is fine. It's just my opinion that his argument was stronger and more convincing when he actually stuck to the topic of spanking. Of course, if the person he was writing to doesn't understand the fallacy of some of his arguments (such as the point I mentioned about the misapplication of Jewish law) then he may indeed be overwhelmed by dimossi's apparent knowledge of scripture, and may be convinced to ditch the whole thing.

Due to the fact that 99% of John's belief that spanking was "right becasue the bible said so"; gave me the inclination toward attacking the supposed "infallible" bible.

If John's conclusion that spanking was a correct method of punishment, was based on scientific studies and analysis then the debate would have stuck to the subject of spanking.

 

[Paradox]

I rest my case.

AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH HHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHH HHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!
sacrilege...that aberration is most definitely PINK, not purple. Damn you...i'm gonna be seeing that horrid thing for the rest of the day...

Edited by DARAT: 

Edited formatting issue.

 

[Stig]

Life after death

I've just been taking part in another thread on the "souls" and have a reason for not believing in the possibility of soemething "more than the sum of my parts". To save me typing it again I'll paste it in here to read, if anyone is interested in my thoughts...........

There are many reasons why a person may stop breathing. There is always a physical cause for this happening i.e. cancer cells multiplying out of control and damaging processes and functions vital for the survival of the brain. You might stop breathing because cancer cells have displaced vital nerves telling your heart to beat or diaphram to move. Even if people die of "natural causes" or old age, or even poisoning, then something physical has gone wrong with the body and the bodies chemistry or physical strucure is in some way damaged beyond its normal function and it can no longer support the brain. I understand that you may have a different view of the working of the "mind" and "soul" to my own but I respect your view. I am coming from the viewpoint that the body is like an incredibly complex machine, in the sense that it has different systems and physical structures that all work together to provide the right conditions for the brain to survive. The brain is where it's all happening as far as the soul is concerned. The brain is everything. Stop its functioning by physical means, and that includes diseases and injury and the brain dies and the flame that is consciousness, goes out.

Stig

 

[juryjone]

You can certainly refer to other scripture, but it should be related to the subject. You can also look at the context of the culture that it came out of... what would the original recipients of the text have understood by it?

So I'm "allowed" (sorry, I know you're not the final arbiter af what's allowed in these arguments; it's just the word we've been using) to use the premise that scripture was only valid for the culture in which it was written, but may not be valid for today's culture? I don't know - I've never been able to get very far with that argument. Believers, especially in this part of the world, seem to think that the "inspired word of God" means the same thing now that it did then.