That is the question at the heart of a debate between a Gospel Coalition author and Christian proponents of the increasingly popular parenting method, highlighting a growing conversation about discipline, love and theological interpretation in the realm of parenting. Howard emphasized two main points of the practice he considers "unbiblical": the belief that children's challenging behavior is caused by external factors and can be mitigated through emotional validation without the need for punishment; and the notion that rewards and punishments are ineffective at addressing the underlying feelings behind behaviors.
The author contends that gentle parenting overlooks the inherent sinfulness of human nature, as outlined in Scripture, and fails to acknowledge the necessity of punishment as part of godly discipline.
He contends that painful punishment, when administered in a loving context, is vital for conveying the seriousness of sin and guiding children toward righteousness. Painful punishment, administered by loving parents, drives home the message. I distinctly remember thinking, one time when my father was disciplining me, Oh. Erickson, also a former pastor and seminary theology professor, criticized Howard for allegedly misrepresenting gentle parenting as "permissive" and failing to distinguish it from authoritative parenting, which balances guidance with empathy.
Well, he just argues that the world just doesn't work that way. The world punishes, therefore, Christian parents need to punish … if we believe we live in a sin-soaked, sin-infected world, why are we taking our cues from the world around us about how to treat our children rather than looking to God and His desire for how followers should treat their children?
Erickson posited that the true measure of gentle parenting's compatibility with Christianity lies in whether it reflects the character of Christ and His teachings on love, forgiveness and redemption.
