Comment by Jungle Pop

April 4, 2007 @ 12:16 pm

On first read, I thought, “Hey! That is a double standard!”

But reading closer, I think I can see the connection. It appears that in the first set, the rod is a means of discipline. In the second set, the rod is a means of punishment. It’s different. We’re encouraged to use the rod to discipline a child, but no one has to tell someone to use a rod on a fool. At least an Old Testament fool.

I think the second set is more a cause-effect statement of fact, rather than a hortatory text.

Maybe.

Comment by reon

April 4, 2007 @ 7:52 pm

Pardon my ignorance here, Brian, but I’m not completely sure I follow your point. Can you clarify a little on what you’re comparing? Thanks!

On a completely unrelated note, in 13 hours and 8 minutes, we’ll be home-own…mortgagers!!! Yee-haa!!

Comment by Brian

April 4, 2007 @ 10:51 pm

JP - Thanks for expanding my vocabulary. I actually had to look up “hortatory”. I think I see the difference you’re talking about but I need to look at it closer and get back with you.

Reon - To put it briefly - How come we spank children but don’t apply the rod to fools? It seems like we take one set of verses seriously and just kind of ignore the others.

Congrats on the house! May you have many happy mortgage payments for years to come!

Comment by reon

April 5, 2007 @ 8:27 am

So basically, why don’t we honor the practice of beating up on people who act like idiots in order to teach them a lesson? I don’t recall (and don’t have time to look it up right now), but does scripture clearly define what a fool is?

American Heritage Dictionary describes a fool as “one who is deficient in judgement, sense or understanding.” But that could be used to describe many people, including the mentally challenged and those of us who are simply ignorant to certain issues (like me!).

Could it have been an issue of social law in OT days? We do have established means of punishing those who break our social laws. I suppose we consider them fools; at least they make foolish decisions. Would you consider that the modern-day fulfillment of this concept (even though a “rod” is not always specifically what is used)?

Comment by Brian

April 5, 2007 @ 8:51 am

Proverbs is fairly descriptive on what a fool is. For example :

Pro 10:18 - The one who conceals hatred has lying lips, and whoever utters slander is a fool.

Pro 13:16 - In everything the prudent acts with knowledge, but a fool flaunts his folly.

Pro 14:16 - One who is wise is cautious and turns away from evil, but a fool is reckless and careless.

Pro 15:5 - A fool despises his father’s instruction, but whoever heeds reproof is prudent.

Psalm 14:1 - The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”

I’ll get back with some other thoughts when I have some more time.

Comment by Brian

April 5, 2007 @ 4:30 pm

JP & Reon - I’m gonna respond to several things at once. I think it will be clear but if you need me to clarify who/what I’m responding to just say so.

punishment/discipline - I can see that the purpose of striking a child with a rod and striking a fool with a rod served two different purposes - although with some overlap. For example, part of discipline would be punishment, but that would not be the whole of discipline.

hortatory/cause & effect - In the 2nd set of verses about the fool, I can see that the middle two are more cause & effect. But the first and last ones seem to be more direct instruction - saying what should be done to a fool rather than just noticing what the effect of foolishness is. And I think there are more verses I could have pulled. I was just trying to get a decent sampling to post.

Even given the differences noted, it seems clear that physical punishment was the expectation for (some) foolish behavior. So I would think there is still a double-standard there. Even if the punishment/discipline is applied in different ways for different reasons, how does the same interpretative standard allow for the verses regarding children to be followed but the verses regarding fools not to be.

OT Social issue - I’m not sure there is a direct correlation between the “foolish” behaviors mentioned in Proverbs, Psalms, etc. and the O.T. civil law. We no longer live under a theocracy but does that mean the church has no imperative to discipline/punish it’s members - especially when the state does not recognize the same things as “wrong” that we do?

Punishment sans rod - If we say it’s ok to substitute a fool’s beating with a rod with a sentence of 5-10 then I think we have to say it’s ok to substitute a child’s beating with time-out.

Phew! It’s taking a lot of work to respond to you guys.

Comment by reon

April 5, 2007 @ 9:20 pm

Punishment sans rod - If we say it’s ok to substitute a fool’s beating with a rod with a sentence of 5-10 then I think we have to say it’s ok to substitute a child’s beating with time-out.

I see your point here, and I do recognize the double-standard. At the same time, however, isn’t it safe to say that using the rod isn’t appropriate with every child, or in every disciplinary situation? (My brother could take a beating and beg for more before he’d learn from his mistake and submit to my parents’ will). Maybe I’m getting too much into the parenting aspect of this discussion, which I realize isn’t your point. But, even if the church were to reinstate the practice of using the rod on fools, I wonder how we would determine when such use would be appropriate. As I mentioned earlier, what about the consideration of the mentally-challenged?

And looking at this from a different angle, the pastor of my church would say that a rod is used because it’s thick enough to be used effectively, but if it’s used inappropriately (i.e., too harshly), the rod would break, rather than inflicting too much pain on a person. So was the point of the rod to inflict pain or merely bring them to humiliation and, hopefully, repentance?

I do find it interesting that Jesus didn’t mention using the rod when discussing the discipline of a brother acting in sin (Matthew 18: 15-17).

Good thoughts, Brian! I’ll be quiet now!

Comment by Lynn

April 7, 2007 @ 4:34 pm

Brian, the reason some parents spank young children and don’t beat teenage fools with a rod is because they are not allowed by law to do the latter, and the former, in my state, is only allowed in certain areas, and if there are any red marks, they need to be completely gone within such and such a time frame. This leaves out the rod, plastic dowel rods, etc..

If I were a judge and corrections officer, I still couldn’t sentence a juvenile delinquent to this type of punishment — it would be prison, or fines and community service, whatever. The death sentence is still in effect in the USA, and executions are still being carried out, but not by stoning, and not by hanging any more, either, but the end result is still the same.

But if the death sentence were illegal, we would not be allowed by law to punish in this manner, either. I don’t think it is a matter of hypocrisy, just a matter of people living in obedience to the laws of the land.

Comment by Jen

April 17, 2007 @ 8:38 am

Brian, I just found your website for the first time today, along with a thought-provoking article.

Since I like Lynn so much, I will take the opposite position from hers today! While we are certainly no longer under OT Law, I see some principles that we can learn from, and this would be one. Of what benefit is our current judicial system with various prison terms for nearly all offenses? Would there be any difference if there was a public beating rather than 5-10 years in the slammer? What if those public beatings were strictly enforced for the teenage/twenty-something crowd? Do you think our society would be any different than what it is now?

Do our prison sentences really change fools into productive citizens?

I remember that young 20-something American who received a caning in a foreign country (was it Singapore?) quite a few years ago, and most Americans were up in arms. I’ll wager a bet that that young fool learned a lesson for life from that.

I tend to think that these beatings/spankings should be reserved mostly for young (15-30 year old) fools, they should be public, and they should be swift. Considering the current state of our society, I can’t see anything but improvement by using this form of discipline.

And just think of all the expense we would save!

Comment by Brian

April 17, 2007 @ 2:35 pm

I’ve been negligent on responding but last week was a doozy at work and I’m just now recovering. Yeah, yeah, I know; lame excuse.

Reon, no need to be quite. I appreciate your comments. Let’s see if I can respond to some of what you said.

At the same time, however, isn’t it safe to say that using the rod isn’t appropriate with every child, or in every disciplinary situation?

Absolutely. I’d say that’s true of most disciplinary techniques in general. For the rod, though, the Christian has the added dilemma of having to decide whether they are commanded to use the rod or if it’s optional.

But, even if the church were to reinstate the practice of using the rod on fools, I wonder how we would determine when such use would be appropriate.

It would be hard, I think. But at least foolishness is talked about at length in Proverbs. Kinda like it’s a theme or something…. :). But if it would be hard to determine when to use a rod on fools, think about how much harder it is to determine when to use it on kids. The “how-tos” of spanking are very sparse.

So was the point of the rod to inflict pain or merely bring them to humiliation and, hopefully, repentance?

Both? I’d like to know what your pastor thinks is “too much” pain. It seems clear to me that taken literally, the rod was meant to cause some pretty severe pain. Stripes and bruising don’t just happen. And today we would call it abuse.

Interesting insight into Matt. 18. The New Testament is pretty silent on physical punishment/discipline, isn’t it?

Comment by Brian

April 17, 2007 @ 2:44 pm

Brian, the reason some parents spank young children and don’t beat teenage fools with a rod is because they are not allowed by law to do the latter, and the former, in my state, is only allowed in certain areas, …

I’m sure that has something to do with it. But I think the main impetus for Christian parents spanking is because they believe it’s commanded(or at least approved) by God. The question for me why don’t they think beating fools(including teenaged ones) is commanded as well. Because if it truly is commanded it doesn’t matter what the laws of the land say.

Comment by Brian

April 17, 2007 @ 2:47 pm

Jen - I can’t find my 10ft stick anywhere so I think I’m gonna stay away from responding to your comment. Maybe Lynn will take you up on it.

However, if we ever do start beating “fools” again I have a couple of candidates in mind….

Comment by Lynn

April 18, 2007 @ 8:22 am

“Ten foot stick” HA!

Jen, I don’t believe I was arguing the opposite of your point. I believe we can learn from Proverbs, and I am certainly not in agreement that the way crimes are punished in this country is always a good one.

I was just suggesting that the reason some parents may focus on in on verses which may apply to younger children, but leave out the older youth, is that by law they are not allowed to punish the older youth this way. I wasn’t saying that it is evil to punish with a rod, not at all.

Btw — we discussed that Singapore caning incident on the GDL off-topic list. Michael Faye was his name, and he was from Kettering, OH. I didn’t, and don’t yet feel a bit sorry for him, and especially so after his sentence was mitigated — iow — he got what was coming to him, according to their law, but it was not as severe as they would punish one of their own citizens. They also only punish males like this, and of a certain age only. And an MD has to observe the caning, and it is done under very controlled circumstances. But just because I don’t object to what happened to Faye, don’t get in your mind that I think every application of the caning law over there is just. Overall, I do think their system is way too severe.

Comment by Jen

April 18, 2007 @ 9:09 am

Lynn:
>

And I wonder what their crime rate is?

Comment by Lynn

April 18, 2007 @ 11:25 am

Jen, here is part of a conversation that took place on the GDL off-topic board:

I:
“From what I read in the 1990s, when this issue became national news, I do recall it being said multiple times that Singapore was a quite safe place to visit, that the crime rate was very low, with all ranges of opinion being expressed as to whether Fay or any other human being ought to be punished this way.

I just looked up Singapore crime stats and note that it has risen in recent years, which is being attributed to an economic slump, but that comparitively speaking, it still has a remarkably low rate of violent crime.”

Another woman:
“I still think caning is barbaric and just because it is working in Singapore, I honestly can’t see how, by that fact alone, anyone would consider it in the U.S. and hopefully, Christians would not consider
it fitting.

I also wonder, how many of those caned have indeed come to repentance, and whether caning does turn ‘hearts to God’. I’m sure many have come to ‘obedience’ of the law through caning, but does caning produce Christians?”

I replied:
“I don’t think that is the purpose of caning — converting people to Christianity. A penal code’s purpose is to motivate smart people to steer clear of trouble by obeying the law. Oftentimes in the OT it
is said, in relation to punishment by stoning, for example, that all Israel may learn to fear.

My problem with Singapore isn’t the way they administer caning per se, but that the crimes for which it is used are way too trivial and not nearly serious by a long shot to warrant such a severe punishment.

I wouldn’t mind at all if caning were used on rapists and pedophiles who are convicted beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt, for example.

That’s just my opinion, of course.

Lynn, who just heard of a man who repeatedly stabbed a baby in a stroller this AM”