A spanking might not always be the first resort however there are times when it is not necessarily the last resort as the consequences were well defined for the 3 D’s which were Direct Disobedience, Disrespect or Dishonesty whereby after discussing the matter a spanking was administered with love, care and concern.

I really enjoy reading the Pulpit Magazine and too bad not a reading must within more Family Units in today’s world.

Lonny

http://www.fix.net/~rprewett/millstones.html

Seeing this is the case, in the realm of parenting, it would seem also appropriate to be angry when our children sin. It seems inappropriate certainly to be happy or joyful, at least. Since God is angry at sin, our anger at sin, would also seem appropriate, as long as we also obey, “Let not the sun go down upon our wrath.” I have found that directed wrath, not impulsive, at the sin of a child, helps the child, as long as the anger ends with correction.

Thanks again.

Good question.

As you correctly noted, we must be careful not to take verses out-of-context. The context here is in regards to those who are angered by the convicting power of the Word (specifically the epistle James is writing). In light of the convicting nature of the message, James is encouraging his readers to be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger (cf. v. 19).

He then underscores his point with a general principle: The anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God. While that principle is especially true in regards to hostility against Scripture, it is also a principle that can be applied to many areas of life.

James, then, seems to be taking a broad principle and applying it to one specific situation (using the broad principle of verse 20 to undergird the specific command of verse 19). In this article, Ralph is taking the same broad biblical principle, but giving it a different specific application.

Perhaps it would have been helpful if Ralph’s article would have explained more of the context in which James was writing. At the same time, I don’t think it was inappropriate for him to apply the general principle of James 1:20 (that sinful anger cannot achieve righteous ends) to the specific instance of parental discipline.

But your point is definitely well-taken. Thanks for your comment.
- NB

Ralph’s point is that parents must not spank out of sinful anger. This was clear from the verses he used to support his point.

Sinful anger is characterized by rash actions, harsh emotions, a vengeful spirit, excessive force, and hurt pride (in which the parent responds not because God was offended but because he or she was offended or embarrassed). That kind of anger is utterly inappropriate in parental discipline.

The fundamental motivation for parental discipline is love — in the same way that God’s motivation for disciplining His children is love (Heb. 12:5-6). The parent who disciplines without love is doing so in contradiction both to the teaching of Scripture and the example of God Himself.

Thanks for your comment.
- NB

James 1:20 says, “For the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.” The biblical injunction to spank does not mean that God gives parents the right to become angry in the process. Spanking should be done in love in order to restore. Ephesians 6:4 echoes this principle, “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.”

Wow, then who would ever punish sin? You need to be more balanced in you presentation for the word of God commands us to be angry, Ehesians 4.26. In fact without anger there is no motivation to discipline, no reason to punish. Love requires anger as when Jesus, humble (knowing who he was, being soberminded) made a whip of cords and drove the corruption from the temple to fulfill what was written, “My jealousy has consumed me.” It is writen, “My name is Jealous.” The term jealous or zealous, used in both the new and the old means a passionate love in defense of the “virginity” of innocence, Ephesians 5.27 ref 2 Cor 11.2-3. Ephesians 4 gives us a commandment to carry out our anger in love without letting it go, rendering judgement befor the opportunity for justice passes (do not let the sun go down on your wrath). Wrath is proper when it is “soberminded.” A parent who is not angry with their child and their sin considers them a “bastard,” and will not treat them as “sons,” Hebrews 12. But, Ephesians 6.4 will not be carried out if the child is frustrated by the parents refusal to carry out the “wrath of God being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men,” Rom 1.18. Anger against the perpetrator in wrathful love as a true Father, against the sin of the perpetrator if not expressed and truly felt, and communicated will result in the “fathers exasperating children.”
Let them know the anger and learn fear so that they will learn also to return, and call upon the Father for mercy. It is an interesting phenomenon, that when child learns fear from a parent’s wrathful, angry punishment, that they learn the first bit of wisdom that leads to a knowledge of God. For fear proceeds all things good, wisdom, knowledge, understanding and the first of these is the wisdom of the rightful fear of the Authority, that is God. The first thing that we do not learn is love, we learn love only when we first have learned to fear.

So, do give us the compromised “humanistic pap,” about discipline without anger. Just the truth of Scripture, please.