They [the parents] will say to the elders of his city, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious; he doesn’t obey us. He’s a glutton and a drunkard.” ~Deuteronomy 21:20
In 1954, William Golding wrote a book that I had to read in high school. The Lord of the Flies was the story of seven boys who, due to a sequence of unforeseen cir- cumstances, were given total reign on a small island. It was interesting to watch what the strong boys—like Ralph—did to the weak ones—like Piggy. What the thinkers—like Simon—did with the bullies—like Roger. Ultimately, the experiment became a disaster.
I have a few friends who, along with their wives, soon after they were married, made a conscious decision not to have children. The reason for this dramatic resolve was common among these folks who had made this dramatic decision: they had met a few kids. I’m not kidding. These couples had visited the homes of friends who had small children. They saw what it looked like when parents let their little ones run the house, and like the boys in Golding’s classic, it was a disaster. These children were disobedient and loud-mouthed. And not wanting to be disliked by the little ones, their parents refused to take decisive action to stop them.
Today’s passage is incredibly sobering, isn’t it? In fact, some people would just as soon strike the verses from the Bible. How could the Scripture promote such a severe penalty for naughty children? In the New Testament, Jesus gives us a clue. He tells the people that if their eye causes them to sin, they should gouge it out. If their hand leads them to wrongdoing, they should cut it off. Then He gives a pointed explanation: “is better that you lose one of the parts of your body than for your whole body to go into hell” (Mt 5:30).
Here’s the straight message: It is better to have a home with one less child than to have a family in total disarray. It’s better to have to deal with the sorrow of a child who’s not around than to live in the destruction this child causes the entire house- hold. Parents who let their son have his way, refusing to discipline him, are taking that child’s life from him.
And here’s the application: if you have a son or daughter whose activity is ruining your family, deal with it. Treat it as if this child had a terminal illness. Better yet, act as though this child is at the wheel of the family van—with everyone aboard—recklessly headed toward an oncoming gravel truck. This problem will not fix itself or go away. You’re in charge here; take charge.
Of course, I’m not advocating taking out your disobedient child. But this is an important message for dads who, rather than being inconvenienced with the hard decisions that come with disciplining a difficult child, need to step up and be the father. It’s a message for managers who have an incorrigible employee. Talk to them. If their behavior doesn’t change, show them the door.
Sometimes love is tender and warm. Sometimes it’s soothing and encouraging. And sometimes love is tough. Sometimes our love for each member of our family—or for our employees—forces us into decisive action. And sometimes this action causes pain. That’s OK.
A godly father—employer—is tender. And a godly father—employer—is this kind of tough. It’s for everyone’s good.