Gentle Christian Mothers Community
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gentle Christian Mothers Community (http://www.gentlechristianmothers.com/community/index.php)
-   Unprepared for Parenting (Ezzos, Pearls, Etc.) *Public* (http://www.gentlechristianmothers.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=421)
-   -   more rod discussions (http://www.gentlechristianmothers.com/community/showthread.php?t=128428)

greenemama 08-02-2005 01:42 PM
more rod discussions
 
so this mother that we know has a blog on which she gave a glowing review of the pearls and their methods. so i sort of deconstructed her arguments and she was defensive and we really didn't get anywhere so i just dropped it, it was her blog, after all. i left her some links and she has a new post after looking into some of the links and here is some of what she had to say.
Quote:
I have to say, however, that I believe with my whole heart that physical punishment (call it consequences if you will) is absolutely part of the plan God has for training children; and I believe that it must begin early. This is even born out by one of the links that greenemama gave me ( http://www.fix.net/~rprewett/millstones.html --an article by Rebecca Prewett). I am revising my post to reflect what I have learned by this rebuke. I do not expect these women, however, to agree with me. It is paramount that my conscience be clear before God. I must please Him, not man.

On the side, it occurred to me that, even if "the rod" is symbolic of authority, as these ladies assert in their comments, it must represent something that is practiced in reality. Otherwise, it is null and void as a symbol. For example, water baptism is a symbol of Spirit baptism. Without the reality of Spirit baptism, the symbol of water baptism is useless. Consequently, without the reality of actual use of a rod on a child, the symbolism of it as a type of authority is useless.

This is the problem with authority across the board in our culture. The Bible puts a "sword" in the hand of civil government (capitol punishment), a "rod" in the hand of parents (corporal punishment), and deliverance unto Satan for "the destruction of the flesh" in the hand of church leaders (church discipline). Liberal thinkers of our day demand the removal of these means of restraining evil and, in so doing, charge God Himself with evil Who ordained their lawful use. Is this not calling good evil and evil good? What a sad day we live in. I say "liberal" thinkers because, as I followed the links given to me by greenemama, I found that they inevitably led to the Center for Progressive Christianity (ultra-liberal), women preachers (women who have a problem with biblical authority), psychiatrists and other God-despising secular sources, and professing mothers who twisted the Scriptures to find a conclusion that would agree with never using physical punishment in restraining their children. The only thing I could find that agreed with Scripture was the article by Rebecca Prewett mentioned above.
so, apart from her obvious dismissal of GBD because of women preachers (crystal!) promoting it and her inabliity to take the good and leave the bad("ultra-liberal"), what she had to say about the rod intrigued me. what does the rod represent in reality, as she says it must represent something? or is this a red herring? i doubt that i'll be responding to her at all, but for my own curiosity, what can you tell me? :grin

if you want to read the whole blog entry PM me and i'll tell you where to find it. i don't want to sic the dogs on her. really, i don't. ;)

ArmsOfLove 08-02-2005 01:47 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
:laughtears can I just say I find it so humorous when it's suggested that I have trouble with Biblical authority. It really cracks me up. This woman wouldn't know what to do with me if she met me in person :giggle All of her stereotypes would have to fly right out the window :P

hsgbdmama 08-02-2005 02:43 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Although it would be entertaining to see how she would confront you about your "problem." :laughtears

Titus2:5Catholic 08-02-2005 05:42 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
How silly! So because someone disagrees with you on women pastors the rest of what they say is useless? She must get her info from a very narrow world. Almost every denomination has women pastors nowadays.

And the rod is symbolic of something actual- authority. Authority not practiced is not authority. :shrug

Although I must say, I've had the same problem with the anti-spanking links, being someone who is much more conservative and patriarichal. It's REALLY hard to not begin to wonder if the argument against spanking isn't just coming from people who tend to interpret the Bible in a less literal/more liberal manner. I wish there were more sites that were oriented towards the people who the Pearls/etc. appeal to. However, evidence is evidence. The studies either show what they do or don't; the outcomes either are or aren't. And I'd hardly call Rebecca Prewitt's site a flaming liberal site.

ArmsOfLove 08-02-2005 05:48 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
yes, Sara, I've found the most convincing argument to be "prove me wrong" ;) As Clay Clarkson found when he actually dug into the Scriptures, it says what it says, not what we've always been taught it says ;)

TulipMama 08-02-2005 06:57 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
So because someone disagrees with you on women pastors the rest of what they say is useless? . . . Almost every denomination has women pastors nowadays.

Welllll. . . I don't agree with the ordination of women. There are very few people I can give Crystal's book to, without first "preparing" them for it quite a bit. And then because we have other doctrinal differences. . . To be honest, Crystal's book isn't the first that would jump off the shelf as a "reliable resource." Yet, many of the conclusions she comes to and the practical ideas I have found to be reliable.

However, knowing Crystal now, watching her interact with and minister to mothers through the years--I do appreciate and trust her counsel. I still disagree doctrinally on some points that are important to me--and yet at the same time, I've seen how we've come to similar conclusions about many things through very different paths of reasoning.

And what it boils down to is, do we take Scripture very seriously? We do. And do we evaluate our parenting and our discipline through the Gospel of Jesus Christ? We do. Do we rely upon the Holy Spirit to enable us and guide us as we apply the Gospel in our families? We do.


Sure, some people won't accept that. Yet. *grin* They may assume we're just psycho-babble, liberal lefties to don't rely upon the Scripture. But they're wrong.

Grace-based-discipline is Biblical. It's the outworking of the Gospel in our families.

Lois 08-02-2005 08:02 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TulipMama
Quote:
Grace-based-discipline is Biblical. It's the outworking of the Gospel in our families.
:amen

Titus2:5Catholic 08-02-2005 08:13 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TulipMama
Quote:
So because someone disagrees with you on women pastors the rest of what they say is useless? . . . Almost every denomination has women pastors nowadays.

Welllll. . . I don't agree with the ordination of women. There are very few people I can give Crystal's book to, without first "preparing" them for it quite a bit. And then because we have other doctrinal differences. . . To be honest, Crystal's book isn't the first that would jump off the shelf as a "reliable resource." Yet, many of the conclusions she comes to and the practical ideas I have found to be reliable.
I haven't read Crystal's book yet (too broke, unless I find it in a thrift store). And I also obviously don't agree with the ordination of women. But what I find funny is the Pearls' book is wacko off the wall theologically according to any branch of Protestantism that I know of (I admit my knowledge is limited to Pentacostal, Salvation Army, and a little bit of Reformed) and certainly according to Catholicism, and yet people seem to be able to "glean the good" from that.

I wish there was different resources out there. I'm facing the same thing from "my side"- Popack is the only AP Catholic author I've been able to find, and he is fairly liberal in some areas theologically, so he's not really a good resource for all the Pearl users at my church- they would see the bad stuff and automatically discount the rest.

Quote:
what it boils down to is, do we take Scripture very seriously? We do. And do we evaluate our parenting and our discipline through the Gospel of Jesus Christ? We do. Do we rely upon the Holy Spirit to enable us and guide us as we apply the Gospel in our families? We do.
Exactly. Now, I could see it if Crystal was a Unitarian pastor. ;)

MarynMunchkins 08-02-2005 08:24 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Um...isn't the rod a symbol of the shepherd and the king? :/ They are in authority - they don't have to prove it. They are. :) Just like God doesn't have to prove his authority - we can deny it all we want, and he's still in charge. :amen

Katherine 08-02-2005 09:00 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
it must represent something that is practiced in reality. Otherwise, it is null and void as a symbol.
Why must it represent something which is *practiced*? Why can't it simply represent something that simply was/is? (sceptre, shepherd's staff, etc.) or even one of the more conceptual meanings of the word shebet.. ?? She likened it to her understanding of baptism (a physical act/event representing a spiritual act/event) but she equates the rod to not only a physical item but her understanding of a specific way in which it ought to be used (a physical object representing an event--an entire methodology as it were). That's a pretty big jump if she's trying to be logical about it, isn't it? I think she's the one "twisting Scripture" to find a conclusion that will agree with the mindset she already holds.. :shrug

Quote:
For example, water baptism is a symbol of Spirit baptism. Without the reality of Spirit baptism, the symbol of water baptism is useless. Consequently, without the reality of actual use of a rod on a child, the symbolism of it as a type of authority is useless.
Didn't she switch this around... ? Shouldn't it have said "Without the reality of AUTHORITY, the symbol of the rod is useless?" :think Think of those fraction equations you used to do...

2/4 = 4/x If you don't maintain proper relationship between 2 and 4.. 4 and x... then your logic is flawed and you get the wrong answer.

The rod *IS* the symbol.. (sceptre, shepherd's rod, etc... ) the authority is the reality. That's the problem.. she is focusing on the rod as the necessary "reality." There are plenty of parents who use "the rod"incessantly who have little or no real authority in their homes, and plenty of authoritative parents who have never raised a hand *or a rod* to their child.


ArmsOfLove 08-02-2005 09:12 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
excellent points, Palil :clap

Heather Micaela 08-02-2005 09:30 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
The whole "women pastor" and "scripture twisting moms" is just an ad-hominim argument - made at the person not the issue.

There are plenty of people who I don't agree w/ 100% on views, yet gain much knowledge from. Dr. Laura is one. She is a jew - not a Christian and sometimes I think her views are legalistic. However I aprrecieate her no nonsense advice much of the time.

And me liberal and scripture twisting? Hardly!

Besides Dr. Sears is a man, a pediatrician, and a Christian - and he also belives one should spank. Maybe he is a more "relaible" source?

greenemama 08-03-2005 05:47 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
The rod *IS* the symbol.. (sceptre, shepherd's rod, etc... ) the authority is the reality. That's the problem.. she is focusing on the rod as the necessary "reality." There are plenty of parents who use "the rod" incessantly who have little or no real authority in their homes, and plenty of authoritative parents who have never raised a hand *or a rod* to their child.
aha! this is so good. :grin

Quote:
The whole "women pastor" and "scripture twisting moms" is just an ad-hominim argument - made at the person not the issue.

There are plenty of people who I don't agree w/ 100% on views, yet gain much knowledge from.
this is what i was thinking. i don't understand how anyone can function with other believers and be so narrow and so sure that their view is the only possible *right* view. certainly we all have our moments in which we are casting stones at one another, but to embrace this way of life is just puzzling to me. does she believe that those who do not spank are not christians? she has so many secondary reasons for negating our arguments that the logical conclusion one could reach is that we aren't believers at all! :eek :shrug i don't get it.

thanks for all of your input. :grin

Chris3jam 08-03-2005 06:18 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
On the side, it occurred to me that, even if "the rod" is symbolic of authority, as these ladies assert in their comments, it must represent something that is practiced in reality. Otherwise, it is null and void as a symbol. For example, water baptism is a symbol of Spirit baptism. Without the reality of Spirit baptism, the symbol of water baptism is useless. Consequently, without the reality of actual use of a rod on a child, the symbolism of it as a type of authority is useless.

This is the problem with authority across the board in our culture. The Bible puts a "sword" in the hand of civil government (capitol punishment), a "rod" in the hand of parents (corporal punishment), and deliverance unto Satan for "the destruction of the flesh" in the hand of church leaders (church discipline). Liberal thinkers of our day demand the removal of these means of restraining evil and, in so doing, charge God Himself with evil Who ordained their lawful use. Is this not calling good evil and evil good?
I think I understand what she is saying here. And it makes a difference when it is coming from a punitive mindset, from consequences and pain. I wonder what she would think of the fact that the behaviourist "training" people like the Pearls advocate is really steeped in worldly psychology, namely started by Watson and people like Pavlov. (Watson (I think) was the one who said, give me a child, and I will make him anything I want him to be just by controlling his environment.) She thinks that the authority must be proved, must be meted out by the person holding the rod. Like a boss, whose symbol of authority is his position, can fire an employee for stealing. However, this argument does not hold water. We are comparing apples to oranges. The rod was the symbol of God's authority. When Moses took the rod to Pharaoh, God is the one who worked the miracles through the rod. Not Moses. And look at the plagues that were rained down on the people. Every one corresponded to one of the false gods of the people. God was not "beating" the people -- He was tearing down their gods, and showing the people that their false gods had no power. When a king held the sceptre, it was a symbol of God's authority, not the man's. It was a symbol that God had ordained this person to be in this position, and that person is trusted to carry out God's instructions. But, it all comes back to God. It seems like she is coming from a very harsh, old-Testament God (I know, that's where I came from), who only sees the "punishment" part, but cannot see further. Also, she needs something tangible, like the Israelites needed a king in I Sam. God wasn't quite enough; the people needed something they could "touch".

In shepherd's terms, the rod was held up so the sheep could see it and know where the shepherd was, and it was used to protect the sheep -- to drive away the danger. We need to hold up God's Word to our children and let it work in their hearts. That is the extent of our responsibility, as I see it. As one of those books I'm reading (I'm not sure whether it's "Families where Grace is in Place" or "Grace-Based Discipline", or whatever) so succinctly puts it, we are to prepare the soil for the seed.

Ok, I've rambled enough. :blush (yes -- it's one of those mornings!)

hollybells 08-03-2005 08:00 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather Micaela
Besides Dr. Sears is a man, a pediatrician, and a Christian - and he also belives one should spank. Maybe he is a more "relaible" source?
Does he? Now I'm confused and I lent my copy of Christian Parenting to a friend so I can't double check. Does he "believe one should spank" or does he suggest it shouldn't be done, but if you're going to, here's how to do it? :shrug Maybe I have a different edition? I do like sharing that book with friends, though I really should get it back sometime ... :shifty

Holly

ArmsOfLove 08-03-2005 08:08 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
She meant that he teaches you "shouldn't" spank. Nothing but a typo :tu

hollybells 08-03-2005 08:25 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Thanks ~ I thought I was losing it! (which is possible ... :giggle) I just need more sleep.

Holly

cklewis 08-03-2005 08:34 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Titus2:5Catholic
But what I find funny is the Pearls' book is wacko off the wall theologically according to any branch of Protestantism that I know of (I admit my knowledge is limited to Pentacostal, Salvation Army, and a little bit of Reformed) and certainly according to Catholicism, and yet people seem to be able to "glean the good" from that.
You are SOOOOO right!! :mad I have nothing to add except agreement. What's WITH that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Titus2:5Catholic
I wish there was different resources out there. I'm facing the same thing from "my side"- Popack is the only AP Catholic author I've been able to find, and he is fairly liberal in some areas theologically, so he's not really a good resource for all the Pearl users at my church- they would see the bad stuff and automatically discount the rest.
Forgive me if I'm a complete lame brain. There are people in your CATHOLIC church that find resonance with Pearls?!??!?!???!??!?! :eek I'm stunned. I mean, they would immediately dismiss Popack because he's "way out there," but they accept the Pearls even though they are "way out there." :sa

I don't get it. Just between us? It sounds like they are just looking for justification to continue the things they are already doing. :(

C

Katherine 08-03-2005 10:20 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Camille.. you're pregnant!!!!! YEAH!!! :highfive :hug :heart I didn't know yet. :)


[returning the thread to it's original topic now :mrgreen ]

cklewis 08-03-2005 10:28 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by palil
Camille.. you're pregnant!!!!! YEAH!!! :highfive :hug :heart I didn't know yet. :)


[returning the thread to it's original topic now :mrgreen ]
:giggle :jump Yes!! :O :sick2

C

Heather Micaela 08-03-2005 10:54 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmsOfLove
She meant that he teaches you "shouldn't" spank. Nothing but a typo :tu
Yep!
thats what i get for responding when I'm tired!

hollybells 08-03-2005 11:56 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
And that's what I get for trying to think when I'm tired! :hug2

Holly

Lois 08-04-2005 09:00 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
:giggle...you girls are so funny

Titus2:5Catholic 08-04-2005 09:50 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cklewis


You are SOOOOO right!! :mad I have nothing to add except agreement. What's WITH that?
Like you said, I think they're just looking for support for what they agreed with already. Plus, he quotes Bible verses non-stop and I think for a lot of people quanity=quality, if YKWIM? It doesn't matter if they're actually RELATED, they're there, so therefore it must be Biblical. My in-laws are like that somewhat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Titus2:5Catholic

Forgive me if I'm a complete lame brain. There are people in your CATHOLIC church that find resonance with Pearls?!??!?!???!??!?! :eek I'm stunned. I mean, they would immediately dismiss Popack because he's "way out there," but they accept the Pearls even though they are "way out there." :sa

I don't get it. Just between us? It sounds like they are just looking for justification to continue the things they are already doing. :(
Popack is off in his Catholic theology which makes people suspect the parenting theology, whereas TTUAC doesn't claim to be Catholic, so I think it's easier in some ways for people to just toss aside the bad, if that makes sense. Most people I know read it for the technique NOT theology, already being convinced to spank. The pressure to get the kids to sit through Mass leads to TTUAC for a lot of people. There is also the fear. People tell you that it's the ONLY way you will be able to control a large family and most traditional Catholics barring infertility or pretty serious reasons to avoid are going to have large families. I think it's really due to a lack of mentoring. The young women, desperate for advice, go to the older women whose families were already raise and who were highly punative, and you throw in suspicion of anything sounding too "New-Agey" and you've got it.

hsgbdmama 08-04-2005 12:20 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Titus2:5Catholic
Quote:
Originally Posted by cklewis
Plus, he quotes Bible verses non-stop and I think for a lot of people quanity=quality, if YKWIM? It doesn't matter if they're actually RELATED, they're there, so therefore it must be Biblical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Titus2:5Catholic

Forgive me if I'm a complete lame brain. There are people in your CATHOLIC church that find resonance with Pearls?!??!?!???!??!?! :eek I'm stunned. I mean, they would immediately dismiss Popack because he's "way out there," but they accept the Pearls even though they are "way out there." :sa

I don't get it. Just between us? It sounds like they are just looking for justification to continue the things they are already doing. :(
Popack is off in his Catholic theology which makes people suspect the parenting theology, whereas TTUAC doesn't claim to be Catholic, so I think it's easier in some ways for people to just toss aside the bad, if that makes sense. Most people I know read it for the technique NOT theology, already being convinced to spank. The pressure to get the kids to sit through Mass leads to TTUAC for a lot of people. There is also the fear. People tell you that it's the ONLY way you will be able to control a large family and most traditional Catholics barring infertility or pretty serious reasons to avoid are going to have large families. I think it's really due to a lack of mentoring. The young women, desperate for advice, go to the older women whose families were already raise and who were highly punative, and you throw in suspicion of anything sounding too "New-Agey" and you've got it.
And one of the things that Mr. Pearl boasts upon (and Mrs. Pearl does so as well to support him) is that he not only refers to his KJV Bible, but also his THREE Greek Bibles! :rolleyes It does come off as arrogance when he kind of "trumps" people on interpreting Scripture, IMHO, and makes it fruitless to debate people like this. :sad2

ArmsOfLove 08-04-2005 01:30 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
And one of the things that Mr. Pearl boasts upon (and Mrs. Pearl does so as well to support him) is that he not only refers to his KJV Bible, but also his THREE Greek Bibles! It does come off as arrogance when he kind of "trumps" people on interpreting Scripture, IMHO, and makes it fruitless to debate people like this.
That explains so much. Did you know there's only one Greek word for Rod but in Hebrew there are at least 3 used in Scripture :hearts

hsgbdmama 08-04-2005 04:41 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmsOfLove
[That explains so much. Did you know there's only one Greek word for Rod but in Hebrew there are at least 3 used in Scripture :hearts
Innnnnnnteresssstinnnnnngggg... :think Would that be the reason why they interpret it the way that they do then? (I was able to read through only a very small portion of TTUAC before I :sick2 and had to stop.)

greenemama 08-04-2005 07:18 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
this is some great stuff, mamas!

that is sooooo interesting about the pearl's greek rod. :cup

fourbzboysmom 08-04-2005 10:02 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cklewis
:giggle :jump Yes!! :O :sick2

C
Camille!! I'm so happy for you!!!! :hug Will pray God's protection over this little one! :pray

chelsea 08-06-2005 08:34 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Popack is off in his Catholic theology which makes people suspect the parenting theology, whereas TTUAC doesn't claim to be Catholic, so I think it's easier in some ways for people to just toss aside the bad, if that makes sense.
That totally makes sense. I think it could be compared to how a lot of people hold Ezzo to a higher accountability because he calls himself a Christian and we seem to be a little more "soft" on people like Ferber who do not make those claims.
Quote:
that is sooooo interesting about the pearl's greek rod
Yes, VERY interesting! I never knew that, and it always confuses me how 10 people calling themselves "Bible scholars" can come up with 10 different versions of the truth! I guess that's why praying and asking God to reveal Himself is so important! Without that assurance, I would never know what to believe! Makes me want to learn Greek and Hebrew and study it myself...but alas, I do not have the time right now! :shrug
P.S. Congrats to you Camille! :hug2 And what a cute pic of your little guy!

ArmsOfLove 08-06-2005 03:51 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
1 Corinthians 4:21 "What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and [in] the spirit of meekness? "

"rod" Greek=rhabdos
Quote:
1) a staff, a walking stick, a twig, rod, branch

2) a rod with which one is beaten

3) a staff

a) as used on a journey, or to lean upon, or by shepherds

b) when applied to kings

1) with a rod of iron, indicates the severest, most rigorous rule

2) a royal sceptre
Proverbs 29:15 "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left [to himself] bringeth his mother to shame. "

rod Hebrew=shebet
Quote:
1) rod, staff, branch, offshoot, club, sceptre, tribe

a) rod, staff

b) shaft (of spear, dart)

c) club (of shepherd's implement)

d) truncheon, sceptre (mark of authority)

e) clan, tribe
Isaiah 10:26 "And the LORD of hosts shall stir up a scourge for him according to the slaughter of Midian at the rock of Oreb: and [as] his rod [was] upon the sea, so shall he lift it up after the manner of Egypt. "

matteh
Quote:
1) staff, branch, tribe

a) staff, rod, shaft

b) branch (of vine)

c) tribe

1) company led by chief with staff (originally)
"choter" is a third Hebrew word and I can't find the verse that uses it off hand but it's the one that means "twig".

heartofjoy 08-06-2005 05:35 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
rod Greek=shebet
I thought shebet was Hebrew. Is this a typo Crystal?

hsgbdmama 08-07-2005 10:23 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
FWIW, I just wanted to post where I received the information regarding Mr. Pearl. It is from Created To Be His Help Meet by Debi Pearl (No Greater Joy Ministries), and here is the reference:

Quote:
My husband started studying Greek forty years ago. (He daily uses three different Greek Bibles in order to correct the teachers who attempt to correct the Bible with the Greek.) When my husband, who is a Bible scholar and, for many years, also a student of Greek, wants to know what God says, he always opens his KJV Bible.
(Pearl, 53)

ArmsOfLove 08-07-2005 10:26 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartofjoy
Quote:
rod Greek=shebet
I thought shebet was Hebrew. Is this a typo Crystal?
Yes :doh I had fussy babies on me :P

ArmsOfLove 08-07-2005 10:28 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
I think someone should let Mr. Pearl know that the authors of the Bible are all Jewish (except for one who may have been a Gentile God-fearer but may actually have been Jewish after all) and that even when writing in Greek they were expressing a Hebraic mindset!

hsgbdmama 08-07-2005 10:59 AM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmsOfLove
I think someone should let Mr. Pearl know that the authors of the Bible are all Jewish (except for one who may have been a Gentile God-fearer but may actually have been Jewish after all) and that even when writing in Greek they were expressing a Hebraic mindset!
:shrug That's kind of what I thought ... wasn't the OT primarily written in Hebrew and the NT primarily in Greek (and Aramaic)? (At least this is what I remember from Bethel Bible. :think )

And why THREE Greek Bibles? Is there a difference in translations? Thanks for answering my questions. :mrgreen :hearts

ArmsOfLove 08-07-2005 05:44 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Well the Pentateuch was the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures and that is, if I am getting the order correctly, what the Latin Vulgate was translated from and that is what the KJV is from. So if he's KJV only he would probably consider the Pentateuch the most reliable because that's what the KJV comes from--but that is still a translation :shrug

hsgbdmama 08-07-2005 07:29 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
:think Huh. Interesting -- thanks, Crystal! :peace

mummy2boys 08-07-2005 07:46 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
Quote:
How silly! So because someone disagrees with you on women pastors the rest of what they say is useless? She must get her info from a very narrow world. Almost every denomination has women pastors nowadays.

Unfortunately this is what disturbs me most...that just because someone doesn't agree with women being ordained or preaching (sorry Crystal....but I have to be honest here :smile) and I don't, that you would dismiss what I think?????


Weird :shrug

greenemama 08-08-2005 05:18 PM
Re: more rod discussions
 
okay, so here's some more from the same blog in the OP. i am so horrified to be told that i HATE my children because i do not literally hit them with a rod. :cry i am so sad that people believe this junk! :sad2 :sick2 :sick2 :sick2

she's taking this from the matthew henry commentary.
Quote:
Pro 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
"Note, 1. To the education of children in that which is good there is necessary a due correction of them for what is amiss; every child of ours is a child of Adam, and therefore has that foolishness bound up in his heart which calls for rebuke, more or less, the rod and reproof which give wisdom. Observe, It is his rod that must be used, the rod of a parent, directed by wisdom and love, and designed for good, not the rod of a servant. 2. It is good to begin betimes (early) with the necessary restraints of children from that which is evil, before vicious habits are confirmed. The branch is easily bent when it is tender. 3. Those really hate their children, though they pretend to be fond of them, that do not keep them under a strict discipline, and by all proper methods, severe ones when gentle ones will not serve, make them sensible of their faults and afraid of offending. They abandon them to their worst enemy, to the most dangerous disease, and therefore hate them. Let this reconcile children to the correction their good parents give them; it is from love, and for their good, Heb. 12:7-9."

Please note:
1. M. Henry believed that foolishness was bound up in the heart even of children of believers and that correction of such included physical punishment.
2. It is to be administered by the parents, not a servant (teacher or principal?).
3. It is good to begin early in childhood, not wait until adolescence when the corruption is ingrained.
4. Those who refuse to use physical punishment when it is warranted, really hate their children, "though they pretend to be fond of them."
5. One of the purposes of strict discipline is to make the child "afraid of offending."
any comments here? i feel so depressed after reading it. i realize that this is a typical belief system and that my inlaws most likely believe this way. i'm forever gathering information and looking for places to study the thing so that if (when?) the subject comes up i can be prepared in case i run out of bean dip. :neutral


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:26 PM.
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

X vBulletin 3.8.3 Debug Information
  • Page Generation 0.14133 seconds
  • Memory Usage 7,109KB
  • Queries Executed 11 (?)
More Information
Template Usage:
  • (1)ad_footer_end
  • (1)ad_footer_start
  • (1)ad_header_end
  • (1)ad_header_logo
  • (1)ad_navbar_below
  • (37)bbcode_quote_printable
  • (1)cyb_flashimagebanners
  • (1)footer
  • (1)gobutton
  • (1)header
  • (1)headinclude
  • (19)option
  • (1)pagenav
  • (1)pagenav_curpage
  • (1)pagenav_pagelink
  • (1)post_groan_navbar_search
  • (1)post_thanks_navbar_search
  • (1)printthread
  • (40)printthreadbit
  • (1)spacer_close
  • (1)spacer_open 
Phrase Groups Available:
  • global
  • postbit
  • showthread
Included Files:
  • ./printthread.php
  • ./global.php
  • ./includes/init.php
  • ./includes/class_core.php
  • ./includes/config.php
  • ./includes/functions.php
  • ./includes/class_hook.php
  • ./includes/functions_notice.php
  • ./mobiquo/smartbanner.php
  • ./includes/class_bbcode_alt.php
  • ./includes/class_bbcode.php
  • ./includes/functions_bigthree.php 
Hooks Called:
  • init_startup
  • cache_permissions
  • fetch_threadinfo_query
  • fetch_threadinfo
  • fetch_foruminfo
  • style_fetch
  • cache_templates
  • global_start
  • parse_templates
  • fetch_musername
  • notices_check_start
  • global_setup_complete
  • printthread_start
  • pagenav_page
  • pagenav_complete
  • bbcode_fetch_tags
  • bbcode_create
  • bbcode_parse_start
  • bbcode_parse_complete_precache
  • bbcode_parse_complete
  • printthread_post
  • printthread_complete