I wrote yesterday about TTUAC and the disturbing thoughts that I have read in this book. There have been deaths, and many cases of abuse... I just read about one today where a child was hospitalized with kidney failure due to this type of teaching.
This will be my last post on this topic in this manner. I wrote here, why that is.
I feel that I need to address this post because of the theology issue. False teaching is VERY serious.
Here is a direct quote from the section in the book called, "The Power of Absolution".
"The parent holds in his hand, (in the form of a little switch) the power to ABSOLVE THE CHILD OF GUILT, CLEANSE HIS SOUL, INSTRUCT HIS SPIRIT, STRENGTHEN HIS RESOLVE, AND GIVE HIM A FRESH START THROUGH A CONFIDENCE THAT ALL INDEBTEDNESS IS PAID.
"The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly. Proverbs 20:30. Inward parts of the belly " is a description of the physical sensations associated with guilt.
(He says this is Proverbs 20:30) My bible says, "blows that would cleanse away evil, strokes make clean the innermost parts. This is written amidst a huge amount of "reasoning verses" such as:
vs 17 Bread gained by deceit is sweet to a man, but afterward his mouth will be full of gravel.
SO, does anybody believe that the person really has gravel in his mouth?
Also, would the word "blueness" lead a person reading, that that would be a bruise?
Stripes ("scourgeth" Hebrews 12:6) are said to be to the soul what he healing blood flow is to a wound. A child properly and timely spanked is healed in the soul and restored to wholeness of spirit. A CHILD CAN BE TURNED BACK FROM THE ROAD TO HELL THROUGH PROPER SPANKINGS.
This is CLASSIC false teaching! There is NO SCRIPTURE that says that through proper spankings you can be healed and restored in spirit. NOT ONE.
"Withhold not correction from the child; for if though beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell. Proverbs 23: 13-14.
This verse is in the same area of proverbs mentioned above. Refer to the gravel verse. :) But I will say, Obviously we must discipline our children. YES. To NOT discipline and not instruct is insane.
Of course parents are responsible to teach their children.
This verse obviously does not mean what Pearl says it means because children died.
FATHER, AS A HIGH PRIEST OF THE FAMILY, YOU CAN RECONCILE YOUR CHILD TO NEWNESS OF LIFE. GUILT GIVES SATAN A JUST CALLING CARD AND A DOOR OF ACCESS TO YOUR CHILD. IN ACCOMPANIMENT WITH TEACHING, THE PROPERLY ADMINISTERED SPANKING IS RESTORATIVE AS NOTHING ELSE CAN BE.
Here again, there is not scripture that says you can reconcile your child to newness of life!
Guilt does not give Satan a just calling. Scripture calls Satan an accuser.
Where is the GOSPEL ?????
This is a section on guilt:
GUILT
Therefore, toward understanding the nature of a child, a knowledge of the presence of guilt is essential in the application of chastisement. A spanking (whipping paddling, switching, belting) is indispensable to the removal of guilt in your child. His very conscience (nature) demands punishment.
Most psychological problems are rooted in guilt. Guilt ONLY occurs where one HONESTLY judges himself to be worthy of blame. One may inappropriately be convinced of blame, but the guilt is nonetheless, self incrimination.
The guilt burdened soul cries out for the lashes and nails of justice. Your child cannot yet understand that the Creator has been lashed and in his place. Only the rod of correction can preserve his soul until the day of moral dawning. ..... Guilt is the law's chief witness against the sinner.
Oh my.... I have much to say on this. But I will sum it up. So, if a child is raped.... and they have guilt, he says they should be purged of their guilt though being spanked? In the cases of our own sweet daughters, one who was tormented by guilt and I repeat WAS..... because of her disruptions..... we should spank her??? REALLY??? She holds honest blame because she had guilt?????
Oh my words the implications of these statements shake me to my core.
Once again, GUILT is not "law's chief witness against the sinner"..... Satan is. And when Satan accuses, Jesus Christ says PAID IN FULL! amen.
So, basically the book teaches that a parent can save their child. This is a lie. A parent cannot offer salvation to a child. Salvation comes through Christ alone, through Faith. We do NOT pay the penalty for our sin, Jesus Paid it ALL....
Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and stop keeping them away, because the kingdom of heaven belongs to people like these." Matthew 19:14.
John 3:16 says, "For God So Loved the World that HE gave His ONLY son that WHOEVER believes in Him will have eternal life."
And I leave with this: HEBREWS 4:12- For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
And here I will stop. There is no use in "beating a dead horse" you get the picture of what is in the book.
I will close this post with Psalm 23..... (this verse is a Psalm of David)
The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me to lie down in green pastures. HE leads me beside still waters. HE restores my soul. He leads me in the paths of righteousness for HIS name's sake. Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I WILL FEAR NO EVIL, for YOU ARE WITH ME. Your ROD AND YOUR STAFF, they COMFORT ME. YOU prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies and you anoint my head with oil, my cup overflows. SURELY GOODNESS AND MERCY will follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever.
The Minich Family Blog: Every Family Has A Story...Welcome To Ours
Showing posts with label Pearl. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pearl. Show all posts
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
The Disturbing World of the Pearls
JUST IN CASE!! TO MAKE IT CLEAR::::: I THINK THE PEARLS AND THE BOOK TO TRAIN UP A CHILD ARE EXTREMELY DISTURBING . What I have written below are excerpts from the first book and a little from the website. CM
I was challenged the other day, that I was being unfair to the Pearl's teachings and that it was unfair that they were being brought into 3 recent murder cases. I think it would be safe to say there are COUNTLESS child abuse cases where they are "center stage".
So, what I did, was take it to heart.
I decided that I would go back and read the ORIGINAL book that I skimmed years ago and decided it was not for us.
The newer book, I have not read, and may need to get to compare. What I did notice in the Lydia Schatz case, was that her parents had the old version of the book. I didn't see the copies of the other families involved.
The website still contains information that was so disturbing I had tears reading it.
Michael Pearl gets upset and says people are taking what he says out of context. He says that he has never advocated beating a child. He says he has never advocated child abuse and people just don't understand what he is saying. So, I took that to heart. EVEN in HIS BOOK, he says this.
But his book is very schizophrenic. He says that, and he also says the opposite.
You really do need a tutorial for his book, because the words he uses do not mean the same things that you would think they do.
His opening premise is and I quote IN CONTEXT:
"Training does not necessarily require the trainee be capable of reason; even mice and rats can be trained to respond to stimuli.Careful training can make a dog perfectly obedient. If a seeing eye dog can be trained to reliably lead a blind man through the obstacles of a city street, shouldn't a parent expect more out of an intelligent child? A dog can be trained not to touch a tasty morsel laid in front of him,. Can't a child be trained not to touch? A dog can be trained to come, stay, sit, be quiet or fetch upon command. You may not have trained your dog that well, yet every day someone accomplishes it on the dumbest mutts. Even a clumsy teenager can be trained to be an effective trainer in a dog obedience school."
So, there you have it. Pearl compares children to mice and dogs. And a couple of paragraphs later starts with TENNNN--HUTTTT!!!!! He believes in training children like you would for the military. NO thinking allowed!
My son Joe commented that, "Military training is specifically designed for out of the ordinary circumstances like WAR, so you don't think and will do something dangerous and even contrary to your gut feeling. We don't want our children to NOT THINK!"
Pearl uses the word train = to switch
Pearl uses the word chastise= spank
Pearl uses the word discipline= beat
His words are progressive and to read the book properly, you must know this. When he says TRAIN, he is talking about physical use of plumber supply line, switches from trees. When he says chastise: he uses both a little harder, and when he used the word discipline, he even mentioned paddle and belt.
He says quote:
"There is much satisfaction in training up a child It is easy and challenging." (which is it, easy or challenging?)
"When my children were able to crawl, (in the case of one, roll) around the room, I set up training sessions. "
So he set his INFANTS up so they could be "trained" or switched..... On his website, I down loaded an article where he described in DETAIL switching his baby at 4 months old for trying to go onto the stairs. He says he switched (him or her) several times and finally layed the switch on the stairs and the baby stayed away from the stairs.
In fact, he suggests having switches all over your house because you will need them on average 4 or 5 times a day! YIKES! REALLY!!!!! Golly if you had 5 kids, that is 25 sessions a day in hitting kids.
Oh, I forgot, it isn't hitting. They don't hit. They train. (sarcasm intended)
Back to the book: He has a section called "Come when I call you", where a 10-12 month old baby is in "booty camp"..... yep that is what he said.
He suggests getting them deeply interested in a toy and then going in the other room and calling them. If they don't come, the father explains the necessity of immediately coming when called....
The baby is returned to the toy and left alone long enough to again become engrossed in the toy. Another call.... father explains , sets child up again. This time, child is "lightly spanked" and "lectured"! "The father continues this THROUGHOUT THE EVENING until the child readily and immediately responds to a summons. Thereafter, until the child leaves home, he is expected to drop everything and come upon the first call. As long as the parents remain consistent, the child will consistently obey. This "obedience training" is carried out in the utomost patience and concentration. The spanking should not be viewed as punishment but as reinforcement to commands"
Really??? You explain details to a baby and expect them to understand and then spank them???
But when you spank him you aren't punishing him, just training him?????
Frankly, if an animal was trained in this way, it would be a very dangerous animal.
I have DEEP concern about what he says about children who have not been "trained' at an early age.
TRAIN=switched, especially ADOPTED children.
The following is an exact quote:
To Do My Duty
When the time comes to apply the rod, take a deep breath, relax and pray, "Lord, make this a valuable learning session. Cleanse my child of ill-temper and rebellion. May I properly represent our cause in this matter." No jerking around. No raised voice. The child should be able to anticipate the coming rod by your utterly calm and controlled spirit. At this point, IN UTTER PANIC, he will rush to demonstrate obedience. NEVER reward delayed obedience by reversing the sentence. (this is so hard for me to type, because I can just feel how this fits in the case of Lydia Schatz and Hana Williams)
And unless all else fails, don't drag him to the place of cleansing. Part of his training is to come submissively. (training meaning switching) However, if you are just beginning to institute training
on an already rebellious child, who runs from discipline and is too incoherent to listen, then use WHATEVER FORCE is necessary to bring him to bay. If you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher, more patiently enduring and are unmoved by his wailing. DEFEAT him TOTALLY. Accept no conditions for surrender. No compromise. You are to rule over him as a benevolent sovereign. Your word is final.
He goes on to say.....
"Use your own judgment as to what is effective. I found five to ten licks usually sufficient. Sometimes, with older children, usually when the licks are not FORCEFUL enough, the child may still be rebellious. If this occurs, take time to instruct and then continue the spanking. A general rule is to continue the disciplinary action UNTIL THE CHILD IS SURRENDERED. A spanking is made effective, not by its severity but by its certainty. Spankings don't have to be as hard where they are consistently applied.Your calm dignity will set hte stage to make it more effective. "
Ok, that is all I can type on this right now, it is too upsetting. He will use extreme verses about beating and uses the word through out his book, yet then says spankings don't have to be as hard as long as you are consistently applying them?? WHAT? SO, if they don't hurt, why would a child be in UTTER PANIC???
On his website yesterday in the section "The Rod" he describes that the backside of a child is where to strike them.. This can be the back down to the feet.
And that is what happened to Lydia and Hanna. :(
My next post will be about his screwed up theology regarding children..... Oh my.... it is oh so perverted and strange.
And then there are NUMEROUS examples of not allowing a child food and various strange ideas on what to do if a child does anything including a baby cry if they fall down. Oh yes, he says "switch them". UGH
I was challenged the other day, that I was being unfair to the Pearl's teachings and that it was unfair that they were being brought into 3 recent murder cases. I think it would be safe to say there are COUNTLESS child abuse cases where they are "center stage".
So, what I did, was take it to heart.
I decided that I would go back and read the ORIGINAL book that I skimmed years ago and decided it was not for us.
The newer book, I have not read, and may need to get to compare. What I did notice in the Lydia Schatz case, was that her parents had the old version of the book. I didn't see the copies of the other families involved.
The website still contains information that was so disturbing I had tears reading it.
Michael Pearl gets upset and says people are taking what he says out of context. He says that he has never advocated beating a child. He says he has never advocated child abuse and people just don't understand what he is saying. So, I took that to heart. EVEN in HIS BOOK, he says this.
But his book is very schizophrenic. He says that, and he also says the opposite.
You really do need a tutorial for his book, because the words he uses do not mean the same things that you would think they do.
His opening premise is and I quote IN CONTEXT:
"Training does not necessarily require the trainee be capable of reason; even mice and rats can be trained to respond to stimuli.Careful training can make a dog perfectly obedient. If a seeing eye dog can be trained to reliably lead a blind man through the obstacles of a city street, shouldn't a parent expect more out of an intelligent child? A dog can be trained not to touch a tasty morsel laid in front of him,. Can't a child be trained not to touch? A dog can be trained to come, stay, sit, be quiet or fetch upon command. You may not have trained your dog that well, yet every day someone accomplishes it on the dumbest mutts. Even a clumsy teenager can be trained to be an effective trainer in a dog obedience school."
So, there you have it. Pearl compares children to mice and dogs. And a couple of paragraphs later starts with TENNNN--HUTTTT!!!!! He believes in training children like you would for the military. NO thinking allowed!
My son Joe commented that, "Military training is specifically designed for out of the ordinary circumstances like WAR, so you don't think and will do something dangerous and even contrary to your gut feeling. We don't want our children to NOT THINK!"
Pearl uses the word train = to switch
Pearl uses the word chastise= spank
Pearl uses the word discipline= beat
His words are progressive and to read the book properly, you must know this. When he says TRAIN, he is talking about physical use of plumber supply line, switches from trees. When he says chastise: he uses both a little harder, and when he used the word discipline, he even mentioned paddle and belt.
He says quote:
"There is much satisfaction in training up a child It is easy and challenging." (which is it, easy or challenging?)
"When my children were able to crawl, (in the case of one, roll) around the room, I set up training sessions. "
So he set his INFANTS up so they could be "trained" or switched..... On his website, I down loaded an article where he described in DETAIL switching his baby at 4 months old for trying to go onto the stairs. He says he switched (him or her) several times and finally layed the switch on the stairs and the baby stayed away from the stairs.
In fact, he suggests having switches all over your house because you will need them on average 4 or 5 times a day! YIKES! REALLY!!!!! Golly if you had 5 kids, that is 25 sessions a day in hitting kids.
Oh, I forgot, it isn't hitting. They don't hit. They train. (sarcasm intended)
Back to the book: He has a section called "Come when I call you", where a 10-12 month old baby is in "booty camp"..... yep that is what he said.
He suggests getting them deeply interested in a toy and then going in the other room and calling them. If they don't come, the father explains the necessity of immediately coming when called....
The baby is returned to the toy and left alone long enough to again become engrossed in the toy. Another call.... father explains , sets child up again. This time, child is "lightly spanked" and "lectured"! "The father continues this THROUGHOUT THE EVENING until the child readily and immediately responds to a summons. Thereafter, until the child leaves home, he is expected to drop everything and come upon the first call. As long as the parents remain consistent, the child will consistently obey. This "obedience training" is carried out in the utomost patience and concentration. The spanking should not be viewed as punishment but as reinforcement to commands"
Really??? You explain details to a baby and expect them to understand and then spank them???
But when you spank him you aren't punishing him, just training him?????
Frankly, if an animal was trained in this way, it would be a very dangerous animal.
I have DEEP concern about what he says about children who have not been "trained' at an early age.
TRAIN=switched, especially ADOPTED children.
The following is an exact quote:
To Do My Duty
When the time comes to apply the rod, take a deep breath, relax and pray, "Lord, make this a valuable learning session. Cleanse my child of ill-temper and rebellion. May I properly represent our cause in this matter." No jerking around. No raised voice. The child should be able to anticipate the coming rod by your utterly calm and controlled spirit. At this point, IN UTTER PANIC, he will rush to demonstrate obedience. NEVER reward delayed obedience by reversing the sentence. (this is so hard for me to type, because I can just feel how this fits in the case of Lydia Schatz and Hana Williams)
And unless all else fails, don't drag him to the place of cleansing. Part of his training is to come submissively. (training meaning switching) However, if you are just beginning to institute training
on an already rebellious child, who runs from discipline and is too incoherent to listen, then use WHATEVER FORCE is necessary to bring him to bay. If you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher, more patiently enduring and are unmoved by his wailing. DEFEAT him TOTALLY. Accept no conditions for surrender. No compromise. You are to rule over him as a benevolent sovereign. Your word is final.
He goes on to say.....
"Use your own judgment as to what is effective. I found five to ten licks usually sufficient. Sometimes, with older children, usually when the licks are not FORCEFUL enough, the child may still be rebellious. If this occurs, take time to instruct and then continue the spanking. A general rule is to continue the disciplinary action UNTIL THE CHILD IS SURRENDERED. A spanking is made effective, not by its severity but by its certainty. Spankings don't have to be as hard where they are consistently applied.Your calm dignity will set hte stage to make it more effective. "
Ok, that is all I can type on this right now, it is too upsetting. He will use extreme verses about beating and uses the word through out his book, yet then says spankings don't have to be as hard as long as you are consistently applying them?? WHAT? SO, if they don't hurt, why would a child be in UTTER PANIC???
On his website yesterday in the section "The Rod" he describes that the backside of a child is where to strike them.. This can be the back down to the feet.
And that is what happened to Lydia and Hanna. :(
My next post will be about his screwed up theology regarding children..... Oh my.... it is oh so perverted and strange.
And then there are NUMEROUS examples of not allowing a child food and various strange ideas on what to do if a child does anything including a baby cry if they fall down. Oh yes, he says "switch them". UGH
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)