| Re: |
amrkelly wrote ////Brother I know when someone is seeking to manipulate me.////
My post addressed to you was not out of manipulation.
I posted it out of a desire to cut out any manipulation and malice that would have, and had ever so slightly began to poision my post, as tension was building up.
If that post had been out of manupulation I would not have been able to sleep last night.
I slept fine.
It was out of a desire to resolve the tension that was building, not because of your position but because of the slanderous, threatening and offensive statements that you have made and continue to make.
I would have prefered to have emailed you privetly but with the threats that you have made, (which is in a confusion of millinial and present day actions, and with no clear way of determing which is which.)
out of those threats you can understand why that was not an option!
My post was clear.
and rather than admitt any wrong on your own behalf, you have pressed in deeper.
amrkelly wrote and I quote ///: First of all you didn't write the article. Secondly the man who did is one of those COC fellows who wears a USA flag for a tie and preaches God Bless America.///
I did not write the artical but that does not excuse the slander and rudeness of your comments.
It does not matter If the man who wrote the artical whear's an american flag and preaches God bless America, and is a follower of Campbell, That does in no way council out the truths contained within the artical nor does this give you justification to post in a rude and disrespectful and threating way as you did and continue to do.
The fact is your attempt of justifying your actions by trying to find what you deem as fault in the author of the artical is very revealling.
amrkelly wrote and I quote///No brother I won't be manipulated by any man. It isn't necessary nor will it serve any good purpose.///
And neither will I! as threats or warnings have and continue to be made by you.
Did My post addressed to you consist of much more than coping and pasting some of the rude and threating comments made by you? and simply asking you to consider how you would feel to have been on the recieving end of them ?
No need to justify yourself by slandering the author of the artical! that is a useless rabbit trail but it does reveal much.
I see only two correct options when confronted with such, the
1.) one is that I and others have misunderstood your seeming rude,slanderous,threatning and manupulating comments ? Of which clarification is welcome.
you choose neither, you instead choose to cover yourself by justifing them on the bases of the author of the artical being an american flag wearing COC, which is an absoulute redundancy that caries no weight in underming the artical or justifying your actions.
| 2013/6/1 16:57||Profile|
| Re: Lordoitagain |
Lordoitagain, I am appalled by much of amrkellys comments on this thread but he is not WeirdLarry.
I have had discussions whith him, probably more than anyone else.
he is real and sincere, just very zealous and compassionate about many subjects such as I am, which often times leads to over reactions.
| 2013/6/1 17:29||Profile|
East TN (for now)
| Re: amrkelly|
The words here are written to fully grown men and women and it speaks about the discipline and the love of God regarding legitimacy. Next time an angel of God descends into your church with a wooden rod and beats you into submission, just let me know right!
I am in agreement! I applaud your trying but they do not have ears to hear (about this subject anyway). They seem to have a vested interest in beating and bruising toddlers and children.
| 2013/6/1 17:39||Profile|
| Re: |
///They seem to have a vested interest in beating and bruising toddlers and children.///
why must we speak evil like this about believers in and of the Lord Jesus Christ whom love their children more than their own life ?
| 2013/6/1 17:43||Profile|
| Re: |
I am about 3500 miles from Cornwall, otherwise I would very gladly avail myself of your hospitality.
I am also in favor of corporal punishment of adults - especially adults like ProudPapa and Lorddoitagain.
In fact, I am a descendant of the legendary Circuit Rider Muttonchops Mathers (known to the Indians as "Thunderlips"). The man used to wade through the congregation beating sinners with a cudgel. He would gallop along with his ivory-handled revolvers and shoot wine jugs out of the hands of drunken Calvinists. Like his hero Luther he was thunderously flatulent and one time while preaching a sermon titled "Calvinists in the Hands of an Angry God" at a brush arbor meeting, he broke such massive wind that it was ignited by a paraffin lamp and nearly burned the place down. After that word got around that when Muttonchops Mathers preached on hell you could almost see the flames and smell the burning sulphur.
So if you think a man of my lineage is here to joke around, think again, brethren! This business of reproving iniquity with our fists is no laughing matter!
| 2013/6/1 18:02|
| Re: Children and the Rod of Correction|
Before anyone even troubles to read this post I really wouldn't waste your time unless you are prepared to read the original post again. Especially the so-called linguistic data which David Miller PhD cites. So proudpappa this is my answer to the above article and the reason why I say it is a poor use of intellect.
If that amounts to an insult then let the content speak for itself to my detriment.
The Hebrew word which is generally used throughout the Old Testament and which corresponds in meaning to the symbolic, figurative and literal usage of the English words translated as staff, rod, branch and tribe is matteh. In all of these instances the word is intended to be either literal and figurative or literal or figurative. Literal as in "a staff" or figurative as in "tribe" or "branch". So the branch which is cut off, being Israel, is the same branch that will be brought back in. Benjamin was the first tribe [matteh] to be cut off, and the first tribe [matteh] to be brought back in after they were severely punished. This is the semantic as well as the morphological usage. The literal or linguistic usage is either a literal staff, or else a literal rod made of wood formed into a symbolic representation of authority. It is also reflective of literal authority with physical consequences, given by God to Israel or else exercised by God Himself indirectly in judging Israel with a variety of physical means.
Matteh (מַטֶּה, 4294), staff; rod; shaft; branch; tribe. This noun is a distinctively Hebrew word. It occurs 251 times; the first usage is in Gen. 38:18: And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. The word appears most frequently in Numbers and Joshua, generally with the meaning tribe in these books.
The basic meaning of matteh is staff. The use of the staff was in shepherding. Judah was a shepherd and gave his staff to his daughter-in-law, Tamar, as a pledge of sending her a kid of the flock (Gen. 38:17-18). Moses was a shepherd when he saw the vision of the burning bush and when the Lord turned his staff into a snake as a sign of His presence and power with Moses mission (Exod. 4:2ff.). His staff figured prominently throughout the wilderness journeys and was known as the staff of God because of the miraculous power connected with it: And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek: tomorrow I will stand on the top V 1, p 269 of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand (Exod. 17:9). The staff was also a token of authority. The Egyptian magicians had staffs as symbols of their authority over the magical realm by which they duplicated several miracles (Exod. 7:12). Aaron had a rod, which alone sprouted and put forth buds, whereas eleven rods from all their leaders according to their fathers household (Num. 17:2, nasb) did not put forth buds.
The staff further signifies authority or power over another nation: For thou hast broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the day of Midian (Isa. 9:4). God gave to Assyria His staff; they received His authority, divine permission, to wield the sword, to plunder, and to destroy: O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation. I will send him against a hypocritical nation, and against the people of my wrath will I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets (Isa. 10:5-6). The psalmist, in his expectation that the messianic rule included Gods authority and judgment over the Gentiles, views the messianic rule as a strong staff: The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies (Ps. 110:2). Similarly, the prophet Ezekiel said, Fire is gone out of a rod of her branches, which hath devoured her fruit, so that she hath no strong rod to be a sceptre to rule (Ezek. 19:14). The figurative usage of matteh occurs in the idiom matteh-lehem, staff of bread. This poetic idiom refers to the food supply, and it is found mainly in Ezekiel: Moreover he said unto me, Son of man, behold, I will break the staff of bread in Jerusalem: and they shall eat [rationed food in anxiety and drink rationed water in despair] (Ezek. 4:16; cf. 14:13).
A derived sense of matteh is tribe, which is used as many as 183 times. The tribes of Israel are each designated as matteh: And these are the countries which the children of Israel inherited in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for inheritance to them (Josh. 14:1). It is possible that the matteh (staff), as a symbol of authority, first applied to the tribal leader and thereafter by extension to the whole tribe.
The several meanings of matteh are reflected in the Septuagint: phule (tribe; nation; people) and rabdos (rod; staff; sceptre).
Specific usage regarding Proverbs in completion:
There are nine old testament references to the use of the rod in clear context of an individual being the object of discipline and they are all in Proverbs they are 10:13, 13:24, 14:3, 22:8, 22:15, 23:13, 23:14, 26:3 & 29:15.
Of those verses eight are the word shebet and just one is the word choter /kho·ter/] . There are two occurrences; translates as rod twice, but literally meaning a branch of a tree and a twig of a branch.
Of the other eight usages they are all shebet.
Shebet is the Hebrew word which is also translated tribe or rod but it is carried semantically in the sense of "an action of authority". This sometimes speaks of a literal object such as a shepherd rod as in the case of Jacob Leviticus 27:32.
shebet (שֵׁבֶט, 7626), tribe; rod. In modern Hebrew this word mainly denotes tribe as a technical term. In Akkadian the related verb shabatu signifies to smite, and the noun shabbitu means rod or sceptre. A synonym of the Hebrew shebet is matteh, also rod or tribe, and what is applicable to matteh is also relevant to shebet.
The rod as a tool is used by the shepherd (Lev. 27:32) and the teacher (2 Sam. 7:14). It is a symbol of authority in the hands of a ruler, whether it is the scepter (Amos 1:5, 8) or an instrument of warfare and oppression: Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potters vessel (Ps. 2:9; cf. Zech. 10:11). The symbolic element comes to expression in a description of the messianic rule: But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth
The word shebet is most frequently used (143 times) to denote a tribe, a division in a nation. It is the preferred term for the twelve tribes of Israel (Gen. 49:16; Exod. 28:21). Jeremiah referred to all of Israel as the tribe: The portion of Jacob is not like them; for he is the former of all things: and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: the Lord of hosts is his name (51:19).
The Septuagint translations are: phule (tribe; nation; people); rabdos (rod; staff); and skeptron (scepter; tribe).
The problem with looking at the Hebrew usage in this way ought to be clearly visible. Just once in the whole of the Old Testament is it possible to say with absolute certainty that the word rod actually means something used to hit a man "fool" on his back. Understanding what is really intended in the fullest sense by such scriptures as Proverbs 23:13-14 is that it is difficult to resist the conclusion that a literal rod is intended. Unfortunately there is no way to resolve this. For me personally it has to come down to ones own conscience and being led of the Holy Spirit. The deep thing which concerns me with the teachings that a literal rod or Switch must be used is that it may simply be a falsehood and will lead to unnecessary problems in the future with the clear direction child legislation is taking. The final thing which concerns me is what specific doctrine lies at the root of this teaching concerning the use of the rod, which gives sincere and godly men such as there are who believe this, the conviction to set about breaking their children's will power to disobey them from any age, but especially in the first year of their lives.
I can tell you that I know what the doctrine is and it has been debated and locked even in the last four weeks. It is as contentious as this topic is and so in the end it cannot be debated. Over the last year I have been looking into this and this itself was provoked by a posting which brother proupapa made regarding the subject of home schooling. In all of this, despite appearances, only one thing really flaws me. The language used to describe the technique of breaking a child's will is such that were it presented for legal opinion in the UK at least, it would be cited as child abuse. I believe we are leaving ourselves exposed to legal possibilities which will have enormous implications for us in the near future both in the UK and in the USA. I actually do not reject the reality and the responsibility of parents to smack their children on the legs, bottom, hands etc as an instrument of correction and the only reason I have not continued in it myself, beyond the single instance with each of my own children, was very genuinely because when I did smack their bottoms as little children that one time, they submitted without flinching, without tears and without argument or resistance. Afterwards I remembered the many times I was beaten and vividly remembered how my mother would insist on me standing still. It was impossible to stand still I was absolutely terrified. I realised in that instance that if my children were capable of submitting to being beaten without a loss of self control, they had already put their trust in me. What authority or necessity did I have to beat them in such an instance? Some how my children both fear me and love me, which I cannot fully comprehend, yet it has something to do with physical security and words of warning, limitation and encouragement which I have always presented to them from the day they were born.
I simply cannot comprehend why a child has to be broken. Beyond what I know of the doctrine which lies behind its stated necessity by those brothers who believe in this breaking of a child's will, there could be no plausible or righteous reason at all. Yet the idea just occasionally flits across the mind. If only my daughter had been more perfect, or my son more zealous. Then I read the words which I have been reading for nearly a year in respect of Michael Pearl and shrink back in concern. Yet this doctrine is so strong that those who believe it really do regard it as their absolute duty of obedience to undertake this task. How loving that is done is impossible to comprehend because the words used to describe its necessity are quiet simply too much to accept as true. Only the Lord knows. Please don't argue over my activities that is not my intention neither will it prove profitable.
| 2013/6/1 19:39|
| Re: refreshing post|
I am in disagreement with this last post of yours, and I will go into some detail as of why, if I have the time.
But I want to say I find it readable and noncontentious.
| 2013/6/1 22:08||Profile|
| Re: |
amrkelly wrote /// Understanding what is really intended in the fullest sense by such scriptures as Proverbs 23:13-14 is that it is difficult to resist the conclusion that a literal rod is intended. Unfortunately there is no way to resolve this. For me personally it has to come down to ones own conscience and being led of the Holy Spirit. ///
The same reason that you claim to come to the conclusion as you do, is the same reason I and a multitude of other bornagain Christians have come to the conclusion as we do on this topic.
So we should be able to agree to respect each others opinions on the subject, you raise your children the way that you feel convicted to, and we will raise our children the way that we feel convicted to. and as long as both are from a loving, careing non emotionaly motivated position than that should settle it.
but it does not. because those whom are opposed to proper usage of biblical chastisement are not content allowing others to raise their children as they feel led to. They are driven to fight tooth and nail to impose their position on us.
They always take the offending position.
It is those whom deffend the use of biblical chastisement, whom are always having to defend their position.
See it does not concern me if lysa or amrkelly withhold biblical chastisement from their children, that is their right, but that is not the case the other way around.
Never do we have to fear legislation forcing people to spank their children, but we continually must be concerned about legislation being passed that forces us to disobey our understanding of correct Biblical parenting.
I had planned to answer much more, but I am exhusted maybe some other time.
| 2013/6/1 23:01||Profile|
| Re: |
I cannot understand,how a person of your studying...reading,..to gain knowledge...(I can tell that by your writings) cannot understand this ,...one of the most plain-spoken subjects / truths of the Word.And to throw His
WAY / TRUTH / COUNSEL / WORDS to the ground,and KEEP your
words,...Do you know the cost in that ?...Elevating your word above
His Word / Counsel ?
2:Tim.3:16 ,.."ALL scripture is given by inspiration of God,and is profitable
for doctrine,for reproof,for correction,for instruction in righteousness,.."...
I ask you again,' Have you really considered the cost to ANYONE who
decides to throw out some of the Words in the Bible ?'
Well ! ..I know this is hard but,.....We lose something of great value,...our credibility.
1Sam.3:19,..( Samual,.. great and humbled man unto God,)"And Samual grew,and The Lord was with him,and he did let none of His Words fall to the ground."
Mt.18:3,..(Jesus speaking), "Verily I say unto you,Except ye be converted,
and become as little children,ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven."
A 'little' child is humble / bendable :
* real example of a true child of God: Mt.5:3-12,...'the beatitudes'
* Jn.3:12,...' But as many as recieve Him,to them gave He power
TO BECOME the CHILDREN of God.( He gives us Grace : "The Devine
enfflence upon our heart and it 's reflection in the Life.)Power..working through the Holy Spirit,...drawing us to His will.
* Lk.12:47-48,..' And that servant,..(which we really are a child,servant, (serveing the Lord) son's,etc,..who knows the will of the Father )...who knew his Lord's will and doeth it not,prepareth not himself,neither did His will,"shall be beaten "...? with many stripes."
Question: you mean,The Father would acually BEAT us?...where there are marks on our skin ?
Andrew,What these brethren patiently and lovingly were trying to help you to see,...Why would you scoff at ? And the Denny Kenaston artical,that Proud Papa brought forth,.....I believe was as good and Godly way,as I have ever heard,...you scoffed at.
I do believe this man studied the Words of this Godly instruction on
raising Godly children,and The Spirit of God taught this man the most perfect way,...not abuse but through patience,love,much work care and time,..to bring up his children in the way that they should go,..
And yet you scoofed at it.To me there is something to be feared here.,...because when we scoff at something The Lord has taught,..according to His Word and Spirit,..Then really ,..aren't we really scoofing at The Lord' work ?
And there is another important factor here,...children need not only the
guidance,correction, trained,switched when needed,but to learn the joy of work. Which is taboo,,,a crime, for them to labor these days.
As for 'the times that we live in'..?"The Lord is the same yesterday,today
and forever,...He changes not.His Word shall never pass away.
It is most unfortunate if a child does not have more than a near nothing to do,...where they can be tired when night comes,..and need their rest, and not be a late sleeper In the day as some,...getting into things,at night like the gangs etc...not just leting their children go to waste....having loving,patience,parents that care...that take the time,care and hard work,to raise,.teach,..correct,.with the rod when it is neccasary,....according to the Word.
And too,you mentioned the hand vs the switch,..
Did you not realize,..Hitting the child with the hand,jar's the child,it could
Be so light,as to do nothing,or hitting them with the hand could be so hard
That it could break their bones.where a little keen switch could apply topical
switch marks,and the hurt that is needed,and not damage them deep .
They will learn to fear the....ever so small keen switch,at an early age.
Eph.5:1,..(Paul teaching)..'Be ye followers of God,as dear children.'
* who is God ?But He who speaketh,He is the Spirit / Word
...also the inspired Word because it comes from Him.
It is with great care,that I write this to you,...as well as I know all the other
encouragements to you were.
| 2013/6/2 13:55||Profile|
| Re: |
It is with great care,that I write this to you,...as well as I know all the other
encouragements to you were.
And it is with great patience that I have waited these many months to reply.
| 2018/12/31 13:55|