NOTE: This post is from an explicitly Christian perspective and presumes that its readers are Bible-believing Christians, as well. If that’s not you, you’re welcome to stick around, but you might prefer to skip this post as not applicable.
The False Dichotomy of “Gentle Parenting”
I dislike the term “gentle parenting,” particularly in Christian circles, because it inherently implies something about those who do things differently — that we are not gentle. It’s an expression of superiority more than it is a description of personal choices, and it has far-reaching theological implications.
To Spank or Not to Spank…is That Really the Question?
In the interest of full disclosure, I do believe that spanking is intended by Scripture to be a normative part of a Christian parent’s toolbox. However, regardless of whether you believe the “rod” in Proverbs to be literal or purely figurative, my real concern is over something deeper — the theological implications of the typical Christian anti-spanking arguments.
Whether or not a given family ultimately chooses this particular mode of discipline, the spiritual truths involved still matter. And far too many Christian families undermine, misunderstand, and/or misrepresent the theology of the Bible in their reasoning against spanking.
Misrepresenting God
Christian opponents of spanking often claim that spanking “represents God’s wrath, rather than His love.” This emotionally-driven argument baldly contradicts what the Bible teaches, so these parents (‘though well-intentioned) are lying about God.
We, as His children, are, indeed, free from His wrath.
“Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.” (Romans 5:9)
“For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Thessalonians 5:9)
Discipline, however, is not an outpouring of wrath, but of love!
“‘My son, do not despise the chastening of the LORD, nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him; for whom the LORD loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives.’ If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness. Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.” (Hebrews 12:5b-11)
Breaking it Down
There is a lot we could pull out of the passage above with regard to discipline and how to model our parenting after God’s, but there are two points in particular I want to address for our purposes here. 1) God does “spank” His children, and 2) He does it as an act of love.
The passage not only states that God “chastens” His sons, which may be more broadly interpreted as a variety of forms of discipline or correction, but also specifically that He “scourges” us. To “scourge” is, literally, to whip — it carries precisely the connotation and denotation of a spanking: whoopin’, switching, etc. This is the description the Bible provides us as parallel to God’s chastening of His children.
An essential follow-up is why. “For whom the Lord loves.” “God deals with you as sons.” “For our profit.” “It yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness.” These are hardly phrases to indicate wrath or hatred.
In fact, the absence of such chastening is presented as undesirable — indicative of being illegitimate, posers, rather than actual sons of God. The chastening — by both rebuke and scourging — is for the benefit of His beloved children.
This description mirrors what earthly parents are told in Proverbs: “He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly.” (Proverbs 13:24). Contrary to what our emotions might tell us, physical discipline done properly is an act of love, not hatred.
A False Contrast
This brings us back around to the phrase from the start of the post — “gentle parenting.” According to the Bible, God “spanks” His children. According to the Bible, God is also gentle. This is not an either/or. All parenting should be gentle parenting, whether it includes spanking or not.
[Tweet “All parenting should be gentle parenting, whether it includes spanking or not.”]
We need to avoid misrepresenting God by leaning into either extreme. It paints a false picture of God to claim that what He says He does from love, portrays hatred or wrath. It paints a false picture of God to pit His self-described attributes against each other.
However, it also paints a false picture of God to use spanking for selfish reasons — like coercing outward obedience to make yourself look good as a parent. It paints a false picture of God to use spanking (or anything, for that matter!) as a means to drive out a child’s innate curiosity. (It is not gentle to discipline because a child’s actions are messy or inconvenient — not sinful). It paints a false picture of God if spanking is used to the exclusion of, or out of balance with, rebuke, training, guidance, and overall nurture of the young image-bearers God has placed in our care.
A False God
When we choose to set aside what the Bible teaches us about God’s Fatherhood, in favor of our own preferences, the alternative is an idolatrous image of a God who is always “nice.”
Now, don’t confuse “nice” with “kind” or “gentle” (both character traits the Bible does ascribe to God). “Nice” means “pleasant, agreeable, and satisfactory” — in other words, the kind of “warm, fuzzy” entity that we can just “like” all the time because He’s always “agreeable” to us. But that isn’t the God of the Bible!
The God the Bible describes is willing to cause us temporary hurt because He loves us enough to want to prevent our permanent harm.
What kind of God are you arguing for?
Are you arguing for a god who is a permissive parent?
Are you arguing for a god who is deterred by His own discomfort from doing what’s best for you because it hurts in the short term?
Are you arguing for a god who is always “pleasant and agreeable”?
Are you arguing for a god who is authoritarian and harsh?
Or are you arguing for the God described in Scripture, Who lovingly does whatever is necessary to bring about the fruit of righteousness in His children?
I used to be fine with spanking, until I read that studies show it causes brain damage. I don’t think it’s God’s will for us to give our children brain damage, however well-intentioned.
You could argue it might be worth it in order to teach them the lifelong skill of self-control. But the very part of the brain that is damaged is the prefrontal cortex, which is the part you need to learn self-control. So you’re actually damaging the child’s ability to develop that character.
You could speculate that it only has that effect if you’re spanking too hard or too frequently. But the study was on “regular” spanking, defined as at least once a month for at least three years, which was pretty normal when I was a kid. Personally, I don’t trust myself to identify the sweet spot of “hard enough to be alarming, yet not as hard as whatever the average is that was found problematic in the study.” Nor do I feel that I’d have a need for spanking less frequently than once a month that couldn’t be met by what I would use the rest of the month. Nor would I be confident enough that I was different enough from the study cases to be certain I wasn’t damaging my children. Better to be safe, in my opinion, at least for my own family.
I seem to have had some comments falling into a black pit of non-notifications for a while; sorry!
The modern research on spanking has a lot of methodological flaws and plain old methodological limitations. (For instance, measuring the frequency of “spanking” does nothing to tell you which parents actually spanked their children — by any traditionalist definition — and which ones beat them silly.) Virtually every bit of it is conducted by people who were biased against spanking from the start.
Simple common sense tells us this is a highly improbable “fact,” since spanking has been very widely — almost universally, in Western cultures — practiced for centuries, and brain damage was not widespread. How many people do you know from your own childhood when it “was pretty normal” who were brain-damaged as a result? Statistics do not show that we have societies full of healthier, happier kids since the decline of spanking.
This article really helped me articulate what I know to be true. I agree- the non spanking research is very biased and in a sense propaganda to raise an entire generation with even less discipline than what we’re currently enduring ? thank you!
Brain-damage is a bit of an alarmist way of stating that spanking activates a state of fight or flight in child that inhibits rather than aids their ability to learn. The brain is like a muscle and needs to experience stress to grow. However, too much stress can put a child in a place where they are unable to learn as their limbic system is much too fired up.
While the decline in spanking is commendable, replacing it with screaming or premissivness is just as harmful. In the end, our culture still focuses on observable behavior with little care to understand they “why” behind each child’s behavior. As long as that’s the main focus, we’ll just be chasing quick fixes in the end.
Hi there, thanks for seeking to raise children who love and obey God. And thanks for offering your perspective on parenting matters with balance.
First, I would like to genuinely posit that one can wrestle with the (potentially) wrongful depiction of God’s wrath in spanking without “lying about God.” That conclusion feels slightly reductionist or, at best, dramatic.
Second, passages like Proverbs 13:24 do not require or mandate physical discipline specifically. Just that discipline be prompt.
Third, the usage of the word “scourge” in Hebrews 12 can be cross-referenced in John 19:1, Matthew 20:19, and other passages depicting Jesus’ crucifixion. I don’t think you’re suggesting this kind of bloody disciplinary replication with our children, nor do I think we are being called to recreate this exact picture in our parenting. It might be fair to conclude then, that “scourge” is a simply that–a picture (which we can agree Scripture is replete with) of how painful discipline **feels** sometimes–and not meant to be a command to treat our children with similar physical pain.
I would also like to encourage any parent reading this article to carefully consider your scriptural and personal bents when making decisions about whether or not to spank. We all come to God’s Word with cultural and denominational predispositions. Every family has to do the work of seeking the Lord in these matters and ultimately (as Paul says) “be convinced in their own mind,” and the topic of spanking is one that requires as much thoughtfulness and humility as we can muster.
And while the studies previously mentioned by another commenter might be flawed, it’s not improbable or illogical to wonder if there might be some longterm effects of being spanked by one’s parent. “Brain damage” isn’t reduced to lack of function or learning disabilities or stunted growth. Brain damage can also be chronic anxiety, depression, an inability to emotionally regulate, speech impediments, social anxiety, etc. So if your commenter was to answer your rhetorical (and borderline passive) question, she might be able to name a few people affected by brain damage after all.
I was raised in a family culture of spanking, and my experience (and the experiences of my siblings) is one of shame and condemnation. And before you chastise my parents for not spanking “correctly,” they were actually quite committed to all of the typical Christian principles surrounding this tactic (i.e., taking time to cool down/pray first, explaining the child’s wrongdoing thoroughly, making time for reconciliation and prayer together, never spanking in anger or leaving marks, never using their own hands, etc. etc.). And yet, I still battle an inner narrative of shame and self-hate due (in large part) to the authoritative, condemning parenting culture championed in the 20th century.
I say all this to say: there are other ways to produce obedient, God-honoring children who love Jesus, love you, and have a healthy view of self. Please consider diving into this article I found from another mama who is seeking to raise children biblically: https://www.easygentleparenting.com/wp-content/cache/wp-rocket/www.themovingmama.com/hebrew-explanation-of-the-rod-verses-about-spanking-children/index-https.html. Her challenge and encouragement to consider how we may be misinterpreting those “rod” verses is worth reading. Spoiler: it turns out we may be off on what the original text meant by “child,” too (it certainly isn’t to be toddlers or littles receiving the rod).
In Christ,
A like-minded Mama Bear
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I don’t want to enter into a debate, but I would like to clarify/comment on two points you raised.
1) I certainly don’t intend to imply that all parents who refrain from spanking are lying about God. However, the arguments most commonly heard DO, in fact, lie about God, and that’s a big deal, so we need to be careful that in our attempts to be loving parents, we don’t redefine love like the world does.
2) The word “child” is, in fact, used across a wide range of ages — including in reference to obvious infants, like baby Moses in the basket of reeds. (Note: I am NOT saying we should spank infants. I am saying that, contrary to what some folks have been teaching in recent years, the word does not specifically refer to youth/teens.)
I just wanted to comment on the second point in your last comment. You said, “The word “child” is, in fact, used across a wide range of ages — including in reference to obvious infants, like baby Moses in the basket of reeds.” I’m assuming by “child” you meant the Hebrew word na’ar. You failed to mention that in the same verse that na’ar is used for Moses the word “yeled” is also used for him. “And when she opend it, she saw the child (yeled) and behold, the baby (na’ar) wept. So she had compassion on him, and said, “This is one of the Hebrews’ children (yeled).” Exodus 2:6. Just food for thought that there is more than one word used in the Hebrew to describe a “child”. You should probably study the various words used. But back to the point you were making about na’ar being used for Moses (who was obviously an infant). You said that you are NOT saying that we should spank infants. But na’ar is the word used in the “rod” scriptures in Proverbs. If you believe that those scriptures are referring to spanking, and it speaks of spanking a na’ar, and na’ar can be used for infant (the word na’ar is also used of Samson before he was born and of Samuel as an infant), it logically follows that the Bible is teaching to spank infants. That is where Michael and Debbie Pearl get their teaching of spanking as young as six months old. If you are not saying that we should spank infants what is your biblical basis for saying that?
Your logic is invalid. The fact that a word has a broad range of applications does not prove that every individual use of it intends the full breadth of them. To make this a little clearer, if the verse told us to “discipline your son,” that wouldn’t, in itself, tell us when. Would this demonstrate that you should discipline your 50-year-old, married son, because he’s still your son? Or would you use context (textual and/or cultural) to determine which range of the potential applications is in view?
The only thing I’m pointing out with regard to that in this post is that the word is not limited to teens, so it’s false to argue that the word refers only to teens and that consequently so does the instruction. The word is simply not that specific — much like “son” is not age-specific.
Yes, I understand that you are saying it’s not limited to teens. I was asking you why you would say it does not apply to infants. Strongs defines the word na’ar as a boy from infancy to adolescence. You didn’t answer my question. You went back to your original premise of it not being limited to teens which isn’t what I was asking. What context in Proverbs are you using to say that it doesn’t apply to infants?
And your example of a 50 year old married son doesn’t fit the argument. Son is relational and does not refer to a developmental age. Your son will always be your son but he will not always be your infant or teenage son. Na’ar is referring to an age range of development. Na’ar is used of both Moses and Joseph. We know that Moses was an infant and not a teenager because of the context: several verses before it tells us he was 3 months old. Joseph was called a na’ar and we know he’s not an infant because we are told in the Scriptures that he was 17 years old. We are not given an age range in Proverbs so you would have to include infancy to adolescence. I am not saying na’ar in Proverbs is limited to teenagers or limited to infants. I am saying that if the context doesn’t tell us the age then we have to include the whole age range that is given in the definition.
“I am saying that if the context doesn’t tell us the age then we have to include the whole age range that is given in the definition.”
No, we don’t. That’s the entire point I was attempting to make in my previous comment. When a word has a whole range of applications, we do not “have to include the whole…range.” That isn’t how language or logic work.
I really am not interested in having a debate in the comments thread, and I’m not certain whether your questions are really in good faith, but I’ll try to write a post soon that addresses the reason I don’t believe spanking infants is logically or scripturally warranted.
The fact that you would even ask whether my questions are in good faith or not is a reflection on yourself and the entire premise of your article. You seem to put bad motives on those that don’t see eye to eye with you. I’m not interested in debating with you either. I sincerely wondered how you could honestly say that the Hebrew word na’ar cannot be limited to teenagers but can definitely exclude infants when you specifically mentioned the infant Moses in your statement. I’ll just leave you with a comment out of the NET Bible regarding Proverbs 22:6 (Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old he will not depart from it): “The term נַעַר (naʿar) is traditionally translated “child” here (so almost all English versions), but might mean “youth.” The noun can refer to a broad range of ages (see BDB 654-55 s.v.; HALOT 707 s.v.): infant (Exod 2:6), weaned child (1 Sam 1:24), young child (Jer 1:6), lad (Gen 22:12), adolescent (Gen 37:2), or young man of marriageable age (Gen 34:19). The context focuses on the child’s young, formative years. The Talmud says this would be up to the age of twenty-four.”
Who gets to decide what ages to include or exclude? This is why there are so many conflicting opinions on this topic.
I questioned whether your questions are in good faith because you have repeatedly twisted my arguments and made fallacious ones of your own.
It seems that you understood the original objection entirely backward. My assertion was never that “spanking cannot be limited to teenagers because the word is not limited to teenagers.” My assertion was that there are people teaching that “spanking must be limited to teenagers because the word is limited to teenagers,” which is false.
Whether all, or only a portion, of the word’s range is intended in this passage is beyond the scope of this post, and I’m happy to address the question of little ones in a separate post so as not to get too far afield.
You responded to my original question with a fallacious argument by saying that my logic was invalid and then proceeded to prove that statement by changing the word that was being discussed: I used the word na’ar to ask my question and you used the word son (ben). But I didn’t point that out because I was trying to be generous to you. You have not actually addressed my question and are now declining to respond to it by stating that it is beyond the scope of this post. Thank you for responding to me even if it ended up being an unproductive conversation.
And, just so it’s clear, you don’t need to write a post to convince me that spanking infants is wrong and not scripturally warranted. People’s opinions on the age range of spanking vary quite a bit so I’m just trying to understand your Bible-based rationale for how to know what ages to begin and end spanking. Again, thank you for taking the time to read my comments.
Fantastic read. Thank you.