[greenemama]

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.

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?

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.