Train up a Child

Wikipedia

"Train up a child in the way he should go;

    even when he is old he will not depart from it."

The above verse, from Proverbs 22:6, has formed the basis over the years of much teaching on the issue of Christian parenting.

Often, the verse is interpreted as follows: "teach a child the word of God, model it by personal example, nurture it with prayer, and, when that child reaches adulthood, they will live a godly Christian life." 

While most Christians would agree that these are excellent actions for a Christian parent to do, there are several problems with assuming that the above verse is correctly interpreted in that way.

One problem is that the saints in the Bible did not always have that experience. The summary of Solomon's life in 1 Kings 11:4, for instance, could not be clearer:

"When Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father."

Lot's daughters (incest), Noah's sons (drunkenness) and Job's children (wild parties) are just three of the other examples of ungodly children raised by godly parents. Are we pushing the example too far when we also note that God himself had two sons (Adam and Israel) who had an excellent upbringing, but a rebellious adulthood? Examples also abound from church history.



The above interpretation can produce significant pastoral problems for Christian parents who have sought to raise their children according to Biblical principles and have backed these precepts up with their prayerful lifestyle, only to find their children as adults pursuing very sinful lifestyles.



An alternative interpretation of the proverb hinges on the meaning of the word "should." The word can be used in two ways. Consider these two sentences:



"You broke it, so you should pay for it."



"An apple tree should produce apples."



In the first sentence, the word "should" is a moral imperative. It speaks of an external obligation or a duty.



In the second sentence, the word "should" conveys the idea of that which is natural, expected and fitting. There is no moral connotation. 



The word in the second sense can be used of people as well as trees:



"Usain Bolt should win gold at the Olympics, because he's in top form this season."



 If the proverb uses "should" in the second sense of the word, it allows the verse to be understood in a different way from that outlined at the start of this post. Instead, its meaning could be: "train a child in the way that is natural for him or her to go in."



If this interpretation is correct, it raises the question, "What is the natural way for a child to go in?"  My answer would be "It depends on the child."




As an apple tree naturally produces apples, and Usain Bolt naturally wins races, so a child naturally wants to "go" in a certain direction. 

 

The English word "educate" comes from two Latin roots: e- (out of, from) and duco (I lead). To educate is to "lead out from" within a child. It is not the same as putting information into a child; more like, bringing out that which is already inside them. I understand every child to have God-given inherent potential, which exists in two forms. The first is that which is within most children generally. The second is that which is specific or particular to that individual child.  Some children have a natural inclination towards sport; others to building things, some to making things, writing, music or public speaking.



A child who is educated according to their natural inclinations will not depart from them, even as an adult, since they will be doing what is natural for them to do.



Interpreted in this way, the proverb is not a verse about moral or spiritual formation as such, but about education and skills development.



What do you think?