Does a kid need to obey the adult always?

 It is said that a kid is to listen to the adult. The Bible teaches this and society teaches this.

Are there exceptions that are pertinent, however? I say yes.

Consider a kid who is told by the adult to murder. The kid is not supposed to murder here despite what

the adult says. Does this stand in contradiction to the Bible and what society has taught? No.

The answer is no because the obligation imparted to the kid wherewith the kid has to obey the adult is

to be understood in different contexts.

In the case of the exhortation from the Bible and society for the kid to obey the adult, it is (1) a general

rule because a kid tends to not be shrewd, (2) a truth that kids act more according to impulse as opposed

to forethought, and (3) a natural method wherewith a kid is taught growth.

Now, in the case of the relevant exception, the failure of the proper functioning faculties of the

adult means that the kid does not need to obey the adult, such as an adult who is a lunatic exhorting

a kid to murder. 

The objector says that the above defense of my "exceptional" position means I am saying that a

person can commit "An eye for an eye" because a failure done on the adult means that the kid should

commit a failure also.

First thing to note is that the reason the Bible and society has taught the above is that it is so the adult

fulfills their proper function and so the kid has to reply to the proper function in obedience. Because

there was never a proper function of the adult in the first place, a response need not be had. Further,

one other way to answer the objector is by saying that the failure of the adult is not a good. Because

it is not a good, the kid need not to adhere to it. The kid adheres to the good of not committing an

eye for an eye, rather, the kid commits a non-eye for an eye.

Further, scripture shows forth: Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set

an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity (1 Tim. 4:12). So

an adult who is in defiance to the gospel through hatred, unfaithfulness, and impurity is to be taught

an example, even if it is a kid who is the example.

Further, Jesus was only twelve since he had talked to the teachers about the faith. 

Further, the Bible never says that a kid is to obey their parents in every respect and every time. Just as

how a kid is encouraged by his parent to go eat but it does not mean that the kid has to eat unceasingly.

There is a relevant time for the kid to stop, namely, when he's full or think he's had enough.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dr. Alexander Pruss's Blog called, "Sexual Orientation" against same-sex sexual relationships: Minh's commentary

  Consider the following two claims that some people seem to accept [so, for example, i guess that most secular college students would accept these 2 claims] : Same-sex and opposite-sex sexual relationships are on par [so it’s not like it’s better to be in a same-sex sexual relationship than opposite sex sexual relationship, and vice versa–no…rather, they are on par or equal to each other]. Heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality are on par [so it’s not like it’s better to be heterosexual than homosexual , or it’s not like it’s better to be homosexual than heterosexual, or it’s not like it’s better to be bisexual than homosexual, or it’s not like it’s better to be bisexual than heterosexual–no! Rather these three orientations are simply on par or equal] , and persons of one orientation do not have reason to try to change to another [so, if i’m a homosexual, i do not have reason to try to change to be heterosexual or bisexual, etc. because they are all on par to each other]...
Read more

Q: "Why does Paul mention James before Peter (Galatians 2:7-9) and why is Peters' name used as "Cephas" instead sometimes?"

  Firstly, if the hidden assumption behind the question here is, “Any name mentioned first in a list of names necessarily means that the person holding that name mentioned first is superior to all others in that list” then we should recognize that the assumption is not always true. Now, of course, Peter’s name is mentioned first when it comes to the listing of apostles, and that’s a case to be made for his superiority among the apostles. But, this type of conclusion is made with (1) the additional biblical and historical data that shows Peter was in fact the leader of the apostles, and (2) the fact that Peter is consistently mentioned first not only one time, but many times over and over, making it more likely. Second, I want to recognize that this is a good question, and we can actually see the logical pattern as to how Paul lists the four people (me [Paul], James and Cephas and John), as opposed to being merely random. But before that, it is important for us readers to recognize ...
Read more

justification

  Second Council of Orange (AD 529): CANON 18 . “That grace is not preceded by merit.  Recompense is due to good works if they are performed; but grace, to which we have no claim, precedes them, to enable them to be done.” Council of Trent on Justification: “but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification . For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.” Efficient cause: “ a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance” Meritorious cause: “ His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Fat...
Read more