The Bible wasn't written in English.

What?! The Bible wasn't written in English directly to the Americans?! This is brand new information!!

All quotes are from the book "Thy Rod and Thy Staff They Comfort Me"(it was available to read online, but has been removed in the few days since I posted this, unfortunately... but def. worth buying). I left in the number reference markers, so you can find where it came from in the book since I didn't list chapters for the quotes. and apparently in Europe spanking is called smacking. I'm not preaching to the people that spank, if thats what you want to do... but it just irks me when people (and I used to be one of them) say all Christians who want godly children must spank because its the only way and its biblical (not that any of you said that). I just really liked the book... thoughts?

"Now if some Jewish scholars, who do not have the New Testament as their Holy Scripture, are pointing out that the Biblical, post-Biblical and historical sources are vague concerning specific information about children and how ancient Hebrew society looked at them, how is that Christian ministers or Bible teachers can come along now and explain what the texts of the Hebrew Bible mean relative to children when individuals whose expertise far outstrips those of us in the Christian world are saying that they don’t have the answers to these questions?This is one question that those in the Christian world who advocate smacking children need to answer."

In the Hebrew Old Testament there are 11 different words that refer to different stages of life.... 11! “yeled,” “yonek,” “olel,” “gamul,” “taph,” elem,” “na’ar,” “bthulah,” “bachur,” “ish” and “ben.” (see link above... in the first chapter for explanation of these terms)

"The word that we find used in three of the verses that advocate smacking in Proverbs is “na’ar.”65 The phase of life associated with the “na’ar” (which means the “one shook lose”) is that of young adulthood or the teenage years. This is significant. Based on this evidence, it is safe to say that all of these texts in the book of Proverbs have no application to anyone less than about ten to twelve years of age."

"The other two verses66 often quoted by smacking advocates when referring specifically to the recipient of the corporal punishment both refer to the word “son.” In Hebrew, the word used is “ben.” This word is used hundreds of times in the Bible and can refer to a son of any age. In light of the use of this word, “son,” it makes sense, considering especially that we have three others texts that all refer to the use of the “rod,” that we let these three texts, which use the Hebrew word “na’ar,” be our primary sources of authority to understand who was the recipient of such corporal punishment. Obviously, we cannot let the two texts, which use the word “son” let us interpret the three texts, which use the more specific term “young adult” or “teenager.” All who are fathers refer to their teenage boys as their “sons,” but not all fathers’, who have sons, are teenagers. We have to let the more precise term young adult or teenager, which in Hebrew is “na’ar,” be our guide when applying these texts to individuals."

"It is not referring to “children” in the non- specific way. We have to be very careful in handling the information that we do have from this book because this information is sparse and terse. We also need to be very careful not to read things into the texts that are not there on the basis of an English translation. We have to let the original Hebrew words and their meanings come through into our understandings or else we can lose the richness of meaning that is there for the interested party to investigate. This advice must be especially heeded when it comes to such issues of immense social importance as how we bring up the next generation. For their sakes, we need to be right and protect them from teachings that are not directed at them in the first place."

"The texts says: “My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him; For whom the Lord loveth he

chasteneth, and scourgeth every son who he receiveth.”233 The first thing to understand about this passage is that it refers to

punishment, but does it refer specifically to punishment with a rod or specifically with any other instrument? No! Does this verse in the book of Hebrews refer back to any of the texts advocating smacking in the book of Proverbs?234 No! Is the word rendered “scourging,” which does refer to bodily punishment (and is used in that fashion in the New Testament235), ever used to describe actions taken against children? Not once. When the New Testament mentions the word “scourging” and refers it back to the Old Testament book of Proverbs, does the word in Hebrews always mean bodily punishment or can it mean other things?236 Yes, it can mean other things. In fact, when we look specifically at the context in Proverbs 3:11, we do not find the concept of “scourging,” by means of a physical beating, in the text at all. What we do find is that the Hebrew word “musar” has a broad meaning and it does not only refer to physical punishment."

"So, in conclusion, what do the data show? In no instance does the New Testament quote from any of the texts that are used to demonstrate that smacking is valid for today. There is no instance in any of the New Testament’s 27 books that specifically refers to a child receiving any bodily punishment. The evidence shows that the New Testament writers were quite familiar with the whole of the book of Proverbs and quoted from numerous sections of it, but wholly avoided any passage mentioning the rod. Because of these facts, anyone who seeks to advocate for the idea that smacking is a New Testament teaching is standing on shaky theological and Scriptural ground. This is the plain information we find in the Bible itself."

"... Proverbs 19:18. Let us look at it once again. “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.” Once again, I

have italicised the word “crying” in the King James Version and it is this verse that, as I said previously, provides the justification for smacking proponents to strongly recommend that children who are spanked be brought to the state of crying with tears.

There is only one problem with this interpretation. It doesn’t hold up to even the most simple of examinations of the meaning of the Hebrew words. The translated “crying” in Proverbs 19:18 is the Hebrew word “mooth.” This word is used well over 500 times in the Hebrew Bible and is translated by about 40 different cognate words that all refer and are translated by words relating, without ambiguity or exception (except for this single verse we are here discussing) to the concept of death! Only in this verse did the King James Version translators render this word by the English word “crying.” This word has nothing even remotely related to crying that brings tears at all. What we have here is a very bad mistranslation.302 Modern Bible scholars recognize this fact almost universally.303 First, the Revised Standard Version, in reference to this verse says: “do not set your heart on his destruction.304 J. B Rotherman’s excellent translation renders it as follows: “Correct thy son, because there is hope, Yet not so as to slay him …”305 Finally, in the Interlinear Bible, we have the following: “Chasten your son while there is hope; and do not set your soul on making him die.”306 By correcting the translation, a whole different meaning to the verse arises. The feeling shifts away from harsh, legalistic judgment to one of moderation. It shows that there are actions that parents can and should take to correct

behaviour of a wayward child. [within the environment of the Law of Moses as pointed out before.] However, these actions should not be taken to extremes. This is clearly implied by the meaning of this verse. This verse could be argued to be against aggressive forms of punishment. When we look at this verse, the use of the word “hope” is most important. We get a strong indication that the latter portion of the

verse points to a situation where hope is now lost. This is certainly in evidence if an uncorrected life leads one down the path of crime, which in the Mosiac system could lead to the death penalty. This seems a much more clear interpretation based upon the context and it is this idea that most Christian authorities assign to this verse. Certainly, no parent would lose hope in a child due to his crying, but one certainly would find oneself in a hopeless situation if his or her child were moving down the path towards death.

Additionally, we find that while there are over 20 Hebrew words that relate to “crying out,” “crying aloud,” “to cry”, etc. not one of these words is found in the whole book of Proverbs

What we who are Christians today have to recognize is that we are no longer under the Law of Moses or any other law other than the Law of Christ. What is that Law of Christ? It is the Gospel of the grace of God. It is this grace, or unmerited favour, that is, a favour from God that we don’t deserve on the basis of our works, but He gives it to us through our attachment to and identification with Jesus Christ. Is it not this message that we, as Christians, wish to communicate to our children? The concept of the grace of God cannot be communicated to children accurately by administering a smacking. Smackings are given in environments of law, not grace. Let us look at an example of this in action in the life on one of the great Christian ministers of the last century.

Rev. Dwight Moody was one of the most famous of evangelists of the late 19th century. He was a Christian scholar who knew the difference between law and grace and he applied this difference in the way he raised his children. Rev. Moody grew up in a home dominated by law. “To these whippings (from his father) Mr. Moody always referred with great approval but with delightful inconsistency never adopted the same measure in the government of his own family. In his home grace was the ruling principal, not law, and the sorest punishment of a child was the sense that the father’s loving heart had been grieved by waywardness or folly.”338 Reverend Moody understood the simple difference between grace and law. He chose the clearly spelled out New Testament teaching that “you are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by law; you are fallen away from grace.”339

"the theological interpretation of a smacking is that it is a punishment for the violation of law. This law can be the law of the family, the law of

the city, the law of school or the law of the government. The Bible shows, however, that “you (who are Christians) are not under the law,” any law except that of the Spirit. What is the teaching or fruit of the Spirit? Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.342 What part of a smacking brings forth the principle of Love? of joy? of peace!? of longsuffering? of kindness? of

goodness? of faithfulness? of gentleness? or of self control? The truth is there is no part of a smacking that brings forth any of these things. On the contrary, smacking is more acclimated to those concepts found in Galatians 5:19-21. Against these fruits of the Spirit there is no law343 and in an environment where they are taught and practiced there is no need for a smacking.341