Language Studies

Difficult Sayings

Spare the Rod and Spoil the child
Proverbs 13:24

"He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him promptly/early." (Proverbs 13:24 is probably the most familiar but it is one of five similar statements in the book all combining to discourage those that would withhold correction from a child:

"Chasten your son while there is hope, And do not set your heart on his destruction." (Proverbs 19:18)
"Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; The rod of correction will drive it far from him." (Proverbs 22:15)
"Do not withhold correction from a child, For if you beat him with a rod, he will not die. You shall beat him with a rod, And deliver his soul from hell." (Proverbs 23:13-14)
"The rod and rebuke give wisdom, But a child left to himself brings shame to his mother...Correct your son, and he will give you rest; Yes, he will give delight to your soul." (Proverbs 29:15,17)

Alternative viewpoints have been or could be taken with respect to Proverbs' injunction:

• The rod is symbolic of authority and just means setting boundaries and keeping discipline but not necessarily by physical means.
• The rod is literal and means using a cane or similar but non-sharp implement.
• The rod is typical and allows for varied forms of discipline.
• The rod is metaphorical like a shepherd’s staff and means to shepherd or parent.
• The rod means a measuring stick by which to evaluate your child.
• Proverbs is wisdom literature and includes human advice as well as divine wisdom. It is not part of Mosaic Law.

The 'promptly/early' phrase in Proverbs 13:24 could refer to discipline being close to the event so that it means something and is understood by the child:

"... the sages declared: One shall not threaten a child. He shall either punish him immediately, or he shall keep silence." (Talmud, Massekheth Semachoth 2.6)

Some Rabbis, such as Rashi, thought it meant "early in the morning", but this makes little sense. Equally, and quite true, it could mean that a child disciplined early in life will need less direction later.

"Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it." (Proverbs 22:6, NKJV)

The rod (Hebrew: שֵׁבֶט shebhet, Strong's #7626) in Proverbs is normally reserved for him who has "no understanding" (10:13) or the "fool" (26:3). It is the symbol of lawgiving as in its first instance it is paired with lawgiving in Hebrew parallelism (Genesis 49:10). In Numbers 24:17 the rod is used of smiting Moab and in Psalm 89:32 of punishment of sins by inflicting stripes. Only rarely is rod metaphorical and even when it is authority, discipline and punishment are paramount. For example in the messianic passage Isaiah 11:4 where it is paralleled with breath and used of the mouth but still in order to slay the wicked with words:

"But with righteousness He shall judge the poor, And decide with equity for the meek of the earth; He shall strike the earth with the rod of His mouth, And with the breath of His lips He shall slay the wicked."

In another, the rod of chastening is used in response to sin and is compared to physical wounds or blows:

"I will be his Father, and he shall be My son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the blows of the sons of men." (2 Samuel 7:14)

The Apocrypha continues with the same insistence:

"He that loveth his son causeth him oft to feel the rod, that he may have joy of him in the end. He that chastiseth his son shall have joy in him, ... An horse not broken becometh headstrong: and a child left to himself will be wilful. Cocker thy child, and he shall make thee afraid: play with him, and he will bring thee to heaviness. Laugh not with him, lest thou have sorrow with him, and lest thou gnash thy teeth in the end. Give him no liberty in his youth, and wink not at his follies. Bow down his neck while he is young, and beat him on the sides while he is a child, lest he wax stubborn, and be disobedient unto thee, and so bring sorrow to thine heart. Chastise thy son, and hold him to labour, lest his lewd behaviour be an offence unto thee." (Apocrypha, Sirach 30:1-2,8-13)

The chastisement of fathers towards children is regarded as normal in Old and New Testaments, and so too with God. Although, according to Isaiah 28:27 God knows not to beat something small like a seed with something large like a cartwheel, instead he uses a "rod" on that which is small.

"For whom the LORD loves He chastens, And scourges every son whom He receives. If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? If you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect." (Hebrews 12:6-9, NKJV)

Lack of chastisement is either an unlikely mark of perfection or an unwanted sign of illegitimacy. True relationships breed true discipline and respect. Though we are not to incite children to deeds or feelings of anger by pushing them over the edge.

"...fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the chastisement and admonition of the Lord." (Ephesians 6:4; cf. Colossians 3:21)

The theme of child and servant discipline is continued into the early Church in such 1st and 2nd century documents as Didache ('The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles') and the Epistle of Barnabas, which were considered by some to be valid for inclusion in the NT canon. Almost identical phraseology is used by them suggesting an earlier standard document on household management:

"You shall not withhold your hand from your son or from your daughter, but you shall teach them the fear of God from their youth..." (Didache 4.9; Barnabas 19.5)

Jewish attitudes to child discipline are evident from their commentaries upon Scripture down to the 5th century but also relating earlier practice.

Midrash Rabbah, on Exodus 1:1, expounds the verse concerning the names of the sons of Israel immediately by quoting Proverbs 13:24:

NOW THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE SONS OF ISRAEL, WHO CAME INTO EGYPT WITH JACOB; EVERY MAN CAME WITH HIS HOUSEHOLD (EX. 1:1): Thus we read: He that spareth his rod hateth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes (Prov. 13:24). Ordinarily, if a man's friend says to him: 'So-and-so, smite your son,' he is ready even to deprive him of his livelihood. Then why 'He that spareth his rod hateth his son'? To teach you that anyone who refrains from chastising his son causes him to fall into evil ways and thus comes to hate him.

In between David and Absalom, Isaac and Esau, Abraham and Ishmael, are cited as examples of children not disciplined and who as a result went astray. Whilst Isaac and Jacob, Abraham and Isaac, are mentioned as godly children raised through discipline.

'But he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes' (Prov. 13:24). This refers to the Holy One, blessed be He; because of His love for Israel, as it is written: I have loved you, saith the Lord (Mal. 1:2), doth He heap upon them chastisements. You will find that the three precious gifts which God gave unto Israel were all given after much suffering: The Torah, Eretz Israel, and the Life to Come.
'The Torah,' - for it is written: Happy is the man whom Thou chastisest, O Lord, and teachest out of Thy Law (Ps. 94:12). 'Eretz Israel,' - for it is written: And thou shalt consider in thy heart, that, as a man chasteneth his son, so the Lord thy God chasteneth thee (Deut. 8:5), and see what is written after this: For the Lord thy God bringeth thee into a good land . 'The Life to Come,' - for it is written: For the commandment is a lamp, and the teaching is light, and reproofs of instruction are the way of life (Prov. 6:23).
But a father who chastises his son causes the son to have additional love for him and he honours him, as it is said: Correct thy son and he will give thee rest; yea, he will give delight unto thy soul (Prov. 29:17), and it also says: Chasten thy son, for there is hope (Prov. 19:18). He will increase the son's love for him, for it is said 'But he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes' (Prov. 13:24); because he chasteneth him betimes, therefore doth he love him.

Judaism drew a distinction against disciplining or beating older children^F1 and those who went too far with chastisement. Three separate rabbis spoke out concerning those who "terrorised" their own household.^F2

The use of the rod on servants (non-Israelite) was also allowed, but tempered. For, if a slave were to be injured permanently or even die, the master was punished equally or the slave freed (Exodus 21:20-21,26-27).

"And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property." (Exodus 21:20-21, NKJV)

Based upon kal vechomer reasoning, a Jewish interpretative principle also used by Jesus, we could argue "of how much more" value is a child than a servant, hence if chastisement was not to cause permanent injury to a slave then "how much more" should it not harm your son.

The Bible does not rule out slavery in a fallen world but rather gives guidance for its good conduct. The modern Christian world has dispensed with it and hence the treatment of slaves is no longer relevant. On the same basis should we regard modern society as having moved on from physical child chastisement? The European Court of Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child would seem to think so. I think it is a decision for society to take, but on which the Bible cannot be claimed to be against physical discipline for it clearly allows it in the Old and New Testaments, as well as the early church. Whether we will see the behaviour, morals, and, respect for parents, of today's youth, deteriorate further as a result of a ban on smacking will no doubt be a case for future hindsight. Certainly the laws could be tightened to make abuse and correction clearly differentiable but I see no need for an absolute ban and see mild smacking of the young (not teens with reasoning ability) as acceptable even advisable according to the Bible, though for me personally it is always a last resort or rare threat.

There is a difference between discipline relating to discipleship and punishment, which is punitive. For true discipline in Scripture is related to learning and instruction (Proverbs 12:1; 13:1) and improved imitation of the tutor. Punishment often relates to anger, revenge and resentment and tends to emphasise the failed person not the foul practice. That said, it is interesting that Hebrews 12:6, quoted above, uses separate Greek words for discipline and punish in virtual parallelism and which elsewhere are used similarly in separate accounts of Jesus' scourging in the gospels (Luke 23:16,22 and John 19:1).

Given the Jewish sources we have cited above it is curious that even Israel since 2000 has effectively introduced a smacking ban.

Sweden has had a ban on child physical punishment in place since 1979 and one attorney and president of the NCHR^F3 has mentioned the following problems as a result:^F4

• While having the appearance of being altruistic and humanitarian, the 1979 law has led to unwarranted interference in private and family life, and has caused serious damage to the relationship between parents and their children, to the detriment of the family.
• Before the Bill abolishing the physical punishment of children was presented to the Swedish Parliament, several leading lawyers expressed strong misgivings. Their fears that the law would lead to prosecutions of parents who employed mild physical sanctions, while doing nothing to reduce the number of cases of genuine child abuse, have materialised.
• Parents belonging to ethnic minorities and parents with strong religious convictions, in particular, have been victimised under the 1979 law.
• The social authorities and the courts enforce the law concerning the child's right not to be subjected to physical punishment, irrespective of what the child has done. Many Swedish parents are therefore afraid of their children and dare not correct them for fear of being reported to the police, indicted and fined or sent to prison.
• The law against physical punishment does more damage to children than a smack from a mother or father. When the authorities intervene in the life of a well-functioning family, its life is destroyed. There is nothing that can mend the resulting hurt, pain and bitterness, and the children are the losers.
• When children are removed from their supposedly 'abusive' parents and taken into care, they suffer the torture of forced separation from parents, brothers and sisters, and other relatives and friends. They are also exposed to the risk of real abuse. Such children are frequently subjected to physical, mental, and even sexual abuse, but social workers and the police seldom listen to the complaints of children in care.

Despite being pro human rights NCHR seems to regard the Nordic countries' bans on smacking as detrimental to family life and rights.

It is not the purpose of this article to define the legal limits of smacking but sensible restraint and the advice of numerous Christian psychologists and family-life books suggest the following: Restrict smacking to ages 2-12 or an even narrower age range; never smack in anger; always use the backside never the face or head; always follow up with hugs and explanations; any lasting mark after an hour is abusive; and, some suggest using a light implement rather than the hand to avoid psychological identification of the parent’s hand with punishment.

We will end with a recent paraphrase translation of the text in consideration as it neatly summarises the love versus correction issue as one in which avoiding chastisement is weak love:

"A refusal to correct is a refusal to love; love your children by disciplining them." (Proverbs 13:24, The Message)

---

FOOTNOTES:
F1: "...one of the maidservants in Rabbi's house that had noticed a man beating his grown-up son and said, Let that fellow be under a shammetha! because he sinned against the words [of Holy Writ]: Put not a stumbling-block before the blind. For it is taught: 'And put not a stumbling-block before the blind', that text applies to one who beats his grown-up son." (Babylonian Talmud, Mo'ed Katan 17a)
F2: "A man should never terrorise his household" (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 6b)
F3: Nordic Committee for Human Rights, acts for the protection of Family Rights in the Nordic countries. It is an international, non-governmental organisation, free from politics and religion. It aims to increase the rights and freedoms of private individuals and their families, based upon:
The UN Declaration of Human Rights;
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
F4: Ruby Harrold-Claesson, Families First, Issue 2, Autumn 2001, http://www.nkmr.org/english/smacking_and_the_law_a_european_perspective.htm

Subscribe …

Receive the newest article each week in your inbox by joining the "Difficult Sayings" subscription list. Enter your email address below, click "Subscribe!" and we will send you a confirmation email. Follow the instructions in the email to confirm your addition to this list.

Copyright Statement
'Difficult Sayings' Copyright 2024© KJ Went. 'Difficult Sayings' articles may be reproduced in whole under the following provisions: 1) A proper credit must be given to the author at the end of each article, along with a link to https://www.studylight.org/language-studies/difficult-sayings.html  2) 'Difficult Sayings' content may not be arranged or "mirrored" as a competitive online service.

Meet the Author

KJ Went has taught biblical Hebrew, hermeneutics and Jewish background to early Christianity. The "Biblical Hebrew made easy" course can be found at www.biblicalhebrew.com.

Why not consider Greek, Aramaic, Biblical or Modern Hebrew online, it's easier than you think.

BMSoftware, founded by KJ, offer a wide range of biblical, Hebrew, Greek and multilingual software for theological use.