Considering that my blog is really not that influential in the blogsphere nor am I really all that controversial on my blog, I was very surprised to read a comment from TruthLover last month that was quite judgmental. The comment was in response to my input on the Pearl controversy at HSB. It began, "You have been greatly affected by the world." Is this akin to calling a Christian a name? Here it is in its entirety:

You have been greatly affected by the world. Your BPA practices, though well intentioned, have not brought you to a deeper knowledge of God's Word. They have only brought you deeper into the philosophy of men. If you really seek the truth, you should spend more time studying Scripture and less time in man-made definitions. Then you would be able to see the truth within the whole counsel of the Word and not just your "pet" ideas and verses. It is heresy to pick and choose those things that you agree with in Scripture. God's Word is either all truth or not truth at all. You can't have it "your" way. I wonder what God will say to you who have used His Word to support worldly ideas and philosophy and thereby lead others astray.
Today I am realizing for the first time, why the Principle Approach is not the best way to educate. Those methods immerse the teacher and subsequently the student into philosophies of men thereby reducing the time spent in Scripture and listening to the Holy Spirit as He reveals God's truth to the mind. I don't think this is the direction that Rosalee and Verna imagined this would go. But it is not unlike the abuses you note in talking about the Pearl's ideas...some people take them to the extreme. There will always be that. We are all human and falible. We always mess things up.
TruthLover

What concernes me is that TruthLover is now under the idea that PA is not the best method to educate. This is, of course, *her* right to think. She considers PA a philosophy of man. I would agree with her. It is a philosophy of education that Verna Hall & Rosalie Slater studied and taught. (Though they aren't "men" - praise God for faithful and intelligent women!) They realized a pattern in our founders study of God's Word and of subjects. Thus PA was born.

Where I disagree with TruthLover is the idea that PA has taken me out of God's Word or not taking me deeper into the knowledge of God's Word. She talks of my pet ideas and favorite verses. I will admit I only used one verse when talking about training. Aside from the fact that only one verse in the Bible discusses training in reference to children, the Pearl's book is entitled "To Train Up A Child." And the methods used in their teachings involve the word "train." It made sense to define that word as my discussion was on the Pearl's teaching. What does this word mean that is the foundation of the their work? This seems a logical step in understanding both the Pearl's teaching and the Biblical mandate of training up children. I do not see where this led me farther from knowledge of God's Word and into philosophies of men. Proverbs 22:6 is not a "pet" verse of mine as she states, but an illustrative verse to put into light the parents job in raising children. Again, because this word is so abundant in the Pearl's teachings, this is the one I focused on. I could focus on "rod" which perhaps later I will, but for that discussion it was "train."

As for "using God's Word to support worldly philosophies and lead others astray" I think PA is designed against that. With the caveat that anything can be perverted, PA is really designed to make you the learner and teacher of principles seek God's Word for the seed and truth of the subject and apply it to your life. As Dana pointed out, PA's foundational book is the Bible. The 1828 dictionary is a supplemental. The concordances are likewise supplementals. These are used to help search deeper into the subject through the Word of God. A dictionary defines and a concordance further explores the word through etymology and other verses. Because the foundational book for PA is the Bible, I prefer to call it the Biblical Principle Approach. Literally all you need to study any subject is the Bible, a dictionary, and a concordance. My interpretation of train came from the definition by Noah Webster and from the Hebrew root word used in the Bible. These were in agreement. Following the rest of the Bible - we are special designs of God, created in his image, Jesus allowed the children to come to Him and further said that unless you become as a child you cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven, fathers are given the admonition to not provoke their children to anger - the idea of directing children before beating them really confirms God's view of children.

With respect, I disagree with TruthLover's ascertation that PA is causing the teacher and the learner to delve into philosophies of men. What else does she want? The foundation is the Bible. Through much prayer and meditation, the Scripture is studied and explored. The dictionary and concordance are helps, but not foundational.

I do not read a man's book on raising children - I read God's Word. I do not need someone who advocates spanking before instruction to tell me what I should do with my children. God created my children. He is whom I seek first in raising them. My husband and I both call on Him for wisdom and guidance. I wonder if TruthLover does the same or just accuses me of not being in the Word and feels she is above that criticism?

If TruthLover was stating that I am extreme for using the dictionary, concordance, and God's Word to explore the word "train" then I would submit that "extreme" is what we should be. Extreme in our devotion to the Word of God, in seeking Him through prayer and meditation, in understanding the meanings of words and verses in context and in general.

TRAIN, v.t. [L. traho, to draw?]

… To exercise; to discipline; to teach and form by practice …

… To break, tame and accustom to draw; as oxen.

… In gardening, to lead or direct and form to a wall or espalier; to form to a proper shape by growth, lopping or pruning; as, to train young trees.

To train or train up, to educate; to teach; to form by instruction or practice; to bring up.

This is an interesting word as defined by the 1828 dictionary. The words exercise, discipline, teach and form really stand out to me with regards to training my children. Using the Biblical Principle Approach has caused me to view subjects with God as Author and Creator in mind. Training my children is no exception. He made each of these miracles and blessings in my life. In searching His word and seeking Him in prayer, my eyes are opened to “see” my children as He has made them. He also gives mercy and grace when I fail in my diligence to seek Him first. Training goes two ways – me training them and me continuing my training in Him.

Exercise is using or practicing your body and/or mind for a purpose. Folding towels is an exercise in obedience and neatness. My children are required to fold (at their level) neatly and then put the clothing away. To start my children in this exercise, I would let them play in the clean clothes as babies and then draw them into helping me by having them give me an article (“hand Mommy the washcloth”). Then when they have control over small motor skills, they begin with folding napkins, towels, and simple things like that. If it is done incorrectly, they are to fold the clothes again until it is done right.

Discipline is great word. It encompasses education, instruction, cultivation and improvement, but also has correction, chastisement, and punishment. This word refers to such a wide range of things such as studying the Principle Approach through the Self-Directed Seminar to correcting a baby relocating the dirt from the plant to the floor. Discipline, to my family and me, is more academic then punitive. The desire, when we discipline, is to teach, to form, to draw the child to the acceptable way of doing things or the right behaviour. As babies, it may mean physically moving those things that give opportunity for harm (a small object that could get lodged in the throat is not an acceptable toy on the floor – it is ridiculous to expect the baby to know the difference between ok items and not-ok items to put into his mouth. He is not punished for putting a small object in his mouth, but we take it out and put it away from his reach usually saying that the object is unacceptable for him to have in his mouth and thereby instruct him that some things are harmful to him.).

To teach has implications that go beyond the traditional “teacher” in a classroom. Everyone is a teacher. Our lives are teaching someone about what is acceptable or not acceptable to do. No one lives in a vacuum. Rather, we have a circle of impact that ripples out to the entire world. We are all teachers. I enjoy the first definition of teach from the 1828:

To instruct; to inform; to communicate to another the knowledge of that of which he was before ignorant.

Parents are the primary teachers in life. We instruct, inform, and communicate knowledge that the child was hitherto ignorant. We do so by our words, actions, deeds, and our very lives. This is done blatantly by actually saying, “this is acceptable behaviour, this is not.” It is also done stealthily in our priorities and daily actions. The children are ready learners absorbing our teaching – whether blatant or not.

A potter forms clay to be a piece of work that was predetermined. A gardener forms the landscape to bring forth the desired plants. An engineer forms designs for rockets to perform for a specific purpose. Parents are forming their children’s worldview – either knowingly or unknowingly. Forming encompasses bringing into existence, to shape, mold or fashion, to plan, scheme or modify. Forming implies a design to be formed to. I want my children to have organized closets, well at least neat closets. When I teach them to fold, this is my design. I exercise their bodies and minds in the art of folding, I discipline them to do so correctly, I teach them that correct method, and form in them the idea of a neat closet.

Training also means to break, tame, and accustom to draw, as in oxen. Though I am sure someone can use this as a great metaphor, I do not believe that this applies to children. Children are not animals – this is evolutionist thinking and very harmful to the actual training of children. Though the Bible refers to people as sheep – it is ALL people. In fact, I am hard pressed to find a verse that specifically singles out children as sheep or donkeys or oxen. This is a very damaging principle to assume children are mere animals that must be tamed or broken as animals. The Bible does not promote this premise at all. Our children are creations of the Most High God and are made in His image – not our own lest we be deceived that we are their maker! God made them not void of understanding, but with the seeds of understanding that must be cultivated with correct training and nurturing.

In looking at the only verse in the Bible that discusses to train – Proverbs 22:6 – I find that train here means to make narrow, to instruct, to dedicate. Wow! Dedicate a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart form it. Instruct a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it. Lay out (make narrow) the path for the child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it. I am looking for “spank the child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Can’t find it. Must be in those rod verses, it certainly is not in the verse on training our children.

A rod is a tool for chastisement according to the 1828 dictionary. It is not the first definition. When I did a search for rod in the Bible, I found 86 entries. Only a handful is for use as chastisement. Of those, even less is for correctional use on children. They are mostly for fools or those lacking understanding – not an accurate description of my children and probably not yours either. Again, children are created by God, not by a mere intimate act between parents. God created them in His image. God is no fool and lacks no understanding. A fool chooses his path (“the fool says in his heart there is no God”). This occurs at an age of accountability not in the beginning stages of life.

Before the rod is used as a weapon of mass correction, it is used as a tool for leading and as an icon of authority. Moses’ rod was not used on his children or the children of Israel (and they were a stubborn bunch). The rod refers to authority, leadership, leading, salvation, hope, judgment, etc … not just for striking!

When I was finally made aware of this controversy surrounding HSB and the Pearls, I did some reading and research. I had heard of the Pearl’s ministry and of their book “To Train Up a Child”, though I hadn’t read it. I wanted to know more of this issue and why my good friend left HSB.

I read through the Pearl’s doctrinal statement as well as a few of their articles. Much of their writing concerned me greatly. I was near tears last night in researching their articles concerning “spanking” and when to start as well as their regard of children. I read that training implies “spanking” which I clearly do not find any definitional nor scriptural support for this idea. I read that “spanking” should begin at birth through at least seven years of age, but you could continue into teenage years. What sin does a newborn knowingly commit that warrants a smack on the bum?!!!  Even a newborn or baby with fire in him (code for temper) doesn’t deserve a “spanking” for throwing a fit – he cannot fathom the relation between his fit and his so-called punishment to deter the fit. (For those of us with fit prone babies, I have found holding and singing soothing songs calms, not only baby but you, in a more lasting, effective and less painful way. You may be holding and singing for an hour, but you are showering your baby with love and not extinguishing that fire that God has given him. There is a reason for that fire that the Lord desired this child to have.) I read that “spanking” should be done slowly with ten licks, or more if the situation warrants. To be administered with a “rod.” A rod according to their website could be a “quarter inch plumbing line” that could “easily fit in your purse or for you to hang around your neck”. You are now in bondage to this “rod” that is not to be spared for ten times on your child: your precious child that you labor and pray for.

I have learned that children live up to expectations. Carrying a “rod” in your purse or having one in every room tells the child that you are expecting them to disobey. Why fight it? You are going to use the instrument to “train” him; he should get the most out of his disobedience. I would! Having a threat of being beaten is a deterrent, but a superficial one. It might have the end result (the closet is clean and orderly), but the heart of the child is far from the parents (giving lip service only).

The article that brought into national light the Pearl’s teaching on child rearing and discipline was about a parent who applied these misguided parenting techniques on her adopted son and ended up killing him. In that article another woman was admonishing the idea of “reasoning with a five year old.” Of course you can’t reason with a small child; they are incapable of understanding! I would say that this line of thought is blasphemous. Our children are created in the image of the Most High God, the Most Reasoned God, the Most Intelligent God. Do you get the picture? Within our children are the seeds of understanding and reason. To ignore this just because they are small is to ignore the beauty of the human person.

We reason with our babies, preschoolers, and teenagers. Sometimes their reasoning is misguided (“I really need food, so a piece of candy now before dinner is what I need”), but we are training them to think things through (“your body needs good nutrition for your cells to grow healthy and strong, you will wait for the good food and then have your candy afterward.”). When my babies are little, I remove what they cannot have from their reach and show them what is off limits and what is acceptable (and yes, I use those terms). I do not say “that is a no-no.” “That” is nebulous – what is “that”? No’s should be reserved for very grave, harmful things; touching a stove or anything hot that can’t be put out of reach. Never use “no, baby” for things like plants (if it is poisonous – get rid of it, keeping it is torturous to your baby), books, rooms you don’t want them in. “No” is an important tool that should not be overused. It is like saying “I love this” “I love that” and then telling your husband “I love you.” Is your love for him similar to those objects? I hope not! Reserve your love for those things that deserve it. Likewise, reserve “no” for those things that are dangerous. I use “off-limits.” My children have rarely told me “no” in defiance. With behaviour that is unacceptable, we say “This is unacceptable behaviour.” And then proceed to tell them what is acceptable.

Do the children understand when I talk to them like this as babies? Not the first few times, but they don’t understand “I love you” and we still tell them this. How short-sighted we can be!!

Before our baby was born, my husband and I had looked into cord blood banking. With our oldest son, we didn’t think we could afford to do this. When we looked into this with our second son, we decided we couldn’t afford not to do this. We are happy with our decision to bank our baby’s cord blood.

The umbilical cord is a baby’s source of life through his the growth and development in the womb. It is filled with rich, life-giving stem cells. Stem cells are those cells that have the ability to adapt into any cell and stimulate new growth there. These cells can be used for red blood cell diseases, white blood cell diseases, some cancers, and some tissue repair. When the baby is born, these cells, if properly saved, can be used in the future to treat diseases for that child or other family members.

Saving my baby’s cord blood was so easy. Everything we were given was explained and, with the company we went through, a courier was available to come pick up the cord blood. All we really had to do was take the kit with us to the hospital and call when baby was born. We had informed the midwife before hand and she made a note for the midwife who was going to do the delivery. There had already been a few cord blood savings at this particular hospital, but it was still a very new idea. The midwife who delivered my baby worked really well with us and was cautious in saving his blood for the cord banking. A few weeks later, we learned what was in our baby’s cord blood. It was real exciting. We will certainly do this for any other children we have.

I would strongly encourage any pregnant mommy or those hoping to have more children to look into this. If you want to do this for you and your baby e-mail me (markhylam@yahoo.com) and I will get them to contact you. Or you could just tell ViaCord that Shannon Hoskovec (that is me) told you about cord blood banking. I get a little gift for each referral, and I like to know that cord banking is getting the attention it deserves.

This is one investment you will never regret. However, as a further incentive, ViaCord has made cord banking easier in terms of finances.

Please look into this. These stem cells are life-giving and non-controversial as they do not involve the taking of life to get to them.