the home. The authority for this discipline comes from God, and the parents themselves are subject to it. Now let us examine briefly the consequences of the other direction of the concept that the final authority for the child is not the parents but God. What meaning does this have for the child? In the first place, this gives the child a more whole some attitude toward discipline. He comes to look at the disciplining process more as the outworking of God’s will for his life than as a series of spasmodic at tempts on the part of the parents to make the child conform to their momentary desires. Secondly, it should give the child a more wholesome attitude toward his parents. When he comes to see them as God’s representatives, the ones whom God has placed over him to guide and nurture him in the things of the Lord, he should hold them in higher honor. The first commandment of the second division of the Deca logue demands that a child honor his father and mother, and perhaps the lack of this honor in the present day may partially be due to a lack of understanding on the part of the child as to the actual role of the parent in the economy of God. In the Old Testament harsh judgment was pro nounced upon the person who failed to honor his parents. “He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death . . . and he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.” 17 Com mentators seem to agree that the concept displayed here is that the dishonoring of parents was equated with dishonoring God. A third consequence of the idea that final authority rests with God is that the child must see that indiffer ence toward or rebellion against the discipline of parents is a rejection not only of the authority of the parents but also the authority of God. Obedience demanded by the parents should be more than mere obedience to earthly parents; it should be obedience to principle, the source of which is God. The parents, who in their dis ciplinary procedures, insist that their children submit to their authority as received from God, actually are helping the child to the place where he will quite easily and normally submit his life to the authority of God. A fourth meaning which this concept may have for the child is in the area of emotional stability and security. Often it is a serious blow to a child when he discovers for the first time that his father does not know all the answers or that his mother is not perfect. If, however, the parents have been training the child in the con ceptual framework that ultimate authority and perfec tion are found only in God, then the child takes this discovery in stride, and perhaps, tends to identify him self more closely with his parents who, like himself, stand in need of complete redemption in Christ. Restating the principles set forth in this study it may be said that God has given to parents the responsibility of disciplining their children and it is impossible for the parents to shift that responsibility to the church or Sunday school. Recognition of the fact that parental authority is derived from God will have a wholesome effect upon parent and child, allowing both a greater possibility of developing life and personality according to the will of God. Discipline begins at home! 17. Exodus 21:15, 17.
any rate, the kernel of truth here is summed up nicely by Cohen when he says, “A man displays no love for a child by failing to correct him.” 11 This correction is more than a negative attitude; it is a constructive effort to guide the child in the direction of right. Consider another passage from the Old Testament which has great implications with relation to parental discipline: “ These words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart; and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.” 12 Here one sees God as the initiator passing down to parents the authority to instruct the children in the way of the Lord; yea, more than that, actually commanding them to do so. To what do the terms “ these words” refer? Among other things they refer to the Decalogue which furnished the general framework for conduct in relation to God and fellowmen. These words were for the disciplining of the children—the instruction and education of the chil dren so that they might know how they should act to ward God and toward man. Someone may raise the ob jection that this passage was for the Hebrews and can not be used in a Christian family. Even if this were a justified criticism, the underlying princple involved is still valid today. “The love of God is to be the central and absorbing interest in life.” 13 If it was important for the Hebrew fathers to relate to their children the stories of God’s commandments and statues and how He delivered them out of the bondage of Egypt, how much more important it is that Christian fathers tell their children of God’s love and commandments and how He has provided deliverance from the bondage of sin through His Son, Jesus Christ? If a Christian parent fails to talk of these things daily in the home, he is violating the trust which God has given him and in reality is teaching his child that the things of the Lord are not relevant for everyday living. This is an un balanced discipline. A New Testament passage contains perhaps a more direct command for the Christian parents wherein the Apostle Paul says, “ Ye fathers, provoke not your chil dren to wrath; but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.” 14 The Greek word paideia, here translated “ bring them up,” in classical Greek means “ education, the whole instruction and training of youth, including the training of the body.” 15 This passage “ con veys the idea of development by care and pains.” 16 Paul explicitly commands Christian fathers to use all avail able means for the development of their children in the ways of the Lord. This is true Christian discipline in 11. A. Cohen, Proverbs. London: Soncino Press, 1956. 12. Deuteronomy 6:6-7. 13. Henry H. Shires and Pierson Parker, The Book of Deuter onomy, (George A. Buttrich, Commentary editor, The Interpreter’ s B ible). New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1952. p. 374. 14. Ephesians 6:4. 15. S. D. F. Salmond, St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, (Vol. Ill, W . Robertson Nicoll, editor, The Expositor’s Greek Testament). Seventh Edition. London: Hodder and Strough- ton, 1914. p. 377. 16. H. C. G. Moule, The Epistle to Ephesians. (J. J. S. Perowne, General Editor, The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges.) Cambridge: University Press, 1914. p. 146.
48
THE KING'S BUSINESS
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker