Would Christ spank a child? No.
I think you're not thinking. I think you've equated spanking with child abuse and that's precisely
where you've stopped thinking.
What if spanking isn't necessarily child abuse? What if it's possible to spank a child
without being abusive? These verses should at least suggest to you that it's possible.
Prov 22:15: "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him."
Prov 23:13: "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die."
Prov 23:14: "Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell."
Prov 13:24: He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
Why would scripture encourage this otherwise? If it is not possible to spank without being abusive, then these verses all clearly support child abuse.
I think you need to go a step further than the claim that Christ would not spank a child and address whether He would deny these verses. As it stands, your response can only be read as a claim that He would.
I think many of the posts here have illustrated very well how exactly one would go about spanking a child as a means of correction without being abusive. I think you should consider them if you want to address this topic wisely. In all honesty, I see you closing your ears to everyone on the other side of this issue from you and just denying. That can't be wisdom and I would think wisdom something we should seek, don't you?
-----
That said, I think an aspect of this issue too many people miss is the "testing boundaries/developing independence" thing that was almost but not quite addressed earlier. Folk tend to get caught up in the question of whether or not spanking is abusive and lose this particular point.
Children
need, desperately, a sense of security. The prime source for this are the boundaries their parents, or whomever is caring for them, lay down around them. They need to know those who are protecting them are willing to protect them from themselves as well. Children are well aware that they aren't adults and that the world around them is designed for adults. Specifically that it's extremely dangerous and harsh for non-adults. They know they rely on the their parents for their very survival.
What they need then, before anything else, even their next meal, is to know that their parents have laid strict boundaries around them. Both to curtail their own behavior and to protect them from the world beyond those boundaries. Most of the troubled behavior by children, the vast majority of it, is merely testing those boundaries to reassure themselves they exist. Or pushing them where they are weak in the hopes of encouraging they be shored up. Or illustrating clearly that the boundaries don't exist (and why they should) so parents will get on the ball, do their job and lay them down.
It is no accident that children with clear, firm boundaries on their behavior "misbehave" far, far less than those with weak boundaries. And forget about those with none at all. For most children it is the lack of boundaries that provokes bad behavior, usually as a desperate cry for those boundaries to be put into place.
There is no firmer, clearer and more reassuring boundary than "cross this line and you will be harshly punished". What makes this unhealthy is for the child not to know where exactly this boundary lies. This is what you see in abusive environments, where punishment lurks in every corner and in areas where one
must tread.
When such boundaries are healthy and just, this is very good. When they are not, they are abusive. When you do this in love then, it is loving and good. When not, then not so much.
-----
My husband was always an advocate of corporal punishment and that caused a lot of problems when we first started talking about getting together. Even when I was convinced...I was still not at all comfortable with it. In fact, I'm still not. I resolved early on that I would simply have to have nothing to do with it and steer clear. I couldn't stomach even the idea of it.
Interestingly, since we've been together (just over 3 years now) there have been exactly zero spankings. And the kid's fourteen now. And, when I realize I wasn't exactly aware of when the last spanking was laid down, and asked about that, I found it was well over a year prior to our marrying.
Because it hasn't been necessary. My step-son has remained well aware of the boundaries on his behavior and had no cause to doubt them nor test them. So he hasn't. And, consequently, hasn't required a spanking. Considering his age I'm comfortable estimating he may never receive another.
That should not suggest he doesn't test the boundaries frequently. He does. But he's secure enough that little more than a look or, humorously I think, a grunt from the Big Guy to nip that in the bud. And when he does test those boundaries and receive that acknowledgement that they are still firmly in place, you can see the relief and pleasure it brings him to know that they're there. That's something my step-son needs. A safe, secure place to develop the independence and self-identity he'll need in order to one day go out and lay down his own boundaries in his own house.
This is not child abuse. This is parenting. And I've heard the arguments that there are other methods for laying down and enforcing those boundaries. But in light of this, I don't see how that's anything other that using methods utterly flaccid in comparison simply because one is too weak to utilize the most effective method. That's sacrificing the safety, security and comfort of one's child for one's own comfort. That's not parenting at all and certainly not loving.
