[Hilary316]

Originally Posted by Zooey

I see a couple of problems:
1. Many, many people do not know how to discern what is good from what is bad, in books. Also, Tripp (like others) presents a a Biblical authority. But, you see, the only real Biblical authority is the God Who inspired the Bible. (Hence, the need for discernment).

2. There is always a mixture of good things & bad things in any parenting book. (Or any book about people--we aren't cookie cutters!). If the good "works", or somehow helps you in a particular situation, it is easy that, when you are tired, or sick, or just at wits' end, you turn to the book you liked before. Only this time, it is a different child. Or simply a different situation entirely. [Child #1 had a meltdown (when you were on day 2 of a killer migraine)over something Tripp addresses in particular; Child #2 has a meltdown when you have another migraine, but the child is different, & the situation is completely dissimilar....only, when your head is pounding, & you are seeing the whole world through a haze of flashing multicolour lights, you make the mistake of missing out on the differences.
(It isn't just Tripp, of course. It is that we all tend to backtrack to "what worked before".....and become frustrated when it doen't work this tiem).

3. And then, again, and I know I am repeating myslef somewhat---Tripp isn't the Bible. He may be less egregious in some ways,than some other books, but he is just another ordinary human like the rest of us.

I know others will say all this better, but I hope this helps.

I actually consider myself very good at discerning good from bad in Christian books, but mostly when it comes to theology and doctrine... I am working on the "parenting" part of books, though, because like you said, children are all different and not a one-size-fits-all. My DD is only 2 and Ive only been in the Gentle mindset for about a year now. I have a lot to learn.

And I know Tripp isn't the Bible. It just seems that ALL of the "Christian" parenting books out there say the EXACT same thing, or something very close to it.... When they misbehave, take them to a private place, spank them, tell them why you spanked them, and then give them a hug. Do it every time you believe they directly rebel against you. And it really does seem most of these kids turn out ok (I dont even know anyone who GBD their kids, and all the children at the churches Ive been too are all awesome). So I guess that is my struggle...

---------- Post added at 11:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:12 AM ----------

Originally Posted by MarynMunchkins

There was a lot of SACH that I really enjoyed. He does focus quite a bit on relationship and communication, and frankly I think those things make all the difference in any relationship.

That being said, I found a lot of his theology flawed and his insistence that spanking is COMMANDED disturbed me. Let me see if I can find the review I did for you...

Here it is!

http://www.gentlechristianmothers.co...highlight=SACH

This is only the first 10 chapters of the book. Life got in the way and I never finished it.

Hey, yes, I actually read your review a few weeks ago. And yeah, the whole command on spanking really made me iffy, too. And saying that practically every other discipline method is unbiblical disturbed me, too.

---------- Post added at 11:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:14 AM ----------

Originally Posted by erinee

Really? I thought it made PERFECT sense!

Hilary, we all believe we're to teach our children to love God and that they need him. But I think the way this is presented to a child, or to any new believer, is essential. I want them drawn to God out of love, not fear. While there may be truth in other components, I want the relationship to come first. The rest of it can come after they love and trust God. I do think children need to know they sin and need forgiveness -- I just don't want that to be the main focus that it is for so many evangelicals (I am an evangelical, but my thinking has changed in a lot of ways).

There are good things about the book -- I just think the good things can be found elsewhere, without having to read the part where he sends his daughter back up for another spanking because she's not "sweet" enough yet. That episode left me with such a bad taste in my mouth that it colored my view of the entire book. For a book that talks about the heart so much, it's odd to me that he spanks a child for not appearing the way he wants her to appear.

I totally understand what you're saying. I also feel kind of "weird" about pointing out every time Charlotte "sins"... It seems to me that doing so could encourage a person to believe that God only likes them when they are good and that they need to earn His love, kwim?

And yes, the "sweet enough" thing really makes me sick. Ugh.

---------- Post added at 11:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:16 AM ----------

Originally Posted by elcollins

.
Lets unpack this a little bit. First, the idea of connecting to your child and focusing on their 'heart' and not their behavior is a wonderful idea AND the reason this book is a little dangerous - it's hard to weed out the good ideas from the absolute hearsey.

I think the focus is backwards. Yes, we need to address negative behaviors, but by presenting a positive. We don't hit because we want to be kind and we want to have a good relationship with 'whomever'. Introducing the idea to a small child that they have the capacity to 'offend God' is pretty strong stuff. The idea of 'teach them the concept now so when they actually understand it' can totally backfire because childen interalize EVERYTHING - this becomes 'I am offensive to God'. Millions of Christians interalized from a young age the idea that they were offensive to God and struggle with the idea that at the same time God wants a relationship with them. It doesn't make sense to their hearts that accepted early on that they are offensive, so they shy away from His presence.

This plays into the 'spank them till they're sweet' problem. If a child fears they will be hit if they are not 'happy', then they will fake whatever they think the parent will accept (a false positive?). Tripp in essence presents this strange world where he advocates connecting to and molding a child's heart, but then creates situations where the child must present a false self - all resulting in false relationships where the parent can never really know their child's true thoughts or 'heart'.

So if you look at teaching your child from the positive, part of that positive is that our failure to live up to His glory is certain, but God has made a way to keep that relationship through the sacrifice of Jesus.

I would tell a two year old 'we want to be kind and treat each other gently'. Telling a small child they broke a command again is heavy stuff especially when the concept of 'honoring' is so very abstract. I think we teach a child to honor by our actions towards our own elders. I CAN see telling a little one 'lets honor grandma by cooking dinner for her' - keeping the concept firmly grounded in the positive and in relationship.

As they mature you can teach them the harder concepts, but I believe Tripp and others who advocate 'teach them how bad they are now' are putting obstacles between God and His children that are so incredibly hard to overcome in the future and rob so many of the joy of life in Christ.

Thank you so much!! I 100% agree, and I guess that was what I was getting at... Is there a book that talks about how to encourage the positive? I feel like I'm so lost on this Christian parenting journey sometimes!! (Which is why Im SO GLAD I found this site!)

It seems to me that Tripp and others like him preach a "new" message as relates to parenting. Am I wrong? How did Christian parents, like, 500 years ago teach their children? Mostly by example and Bible teaching, I would assume?