Parenting by The Book: Biblical Wisdom for Raising Your Child

by John Rosemond

Picture respectful, responsible, obedient children who entertain themselves without television or video games, do their own homework, and have impeccable manners. A pie-in-the-sky fantasy? Not so, says family psychologist and bestselling author John Rosemond. Any parent who so desires can grow children who fit that description -- happy, emotionally healthy children who honor their parents and their families with good behavior and do their best in school.

In the 1960s, American parents stopped listening to their elders when it came to child rearing and began listening instead to professional experts. Since then, raising children has become fraught with anxiety, stress, and frustration. The solution, says John, lies in raising children according to biblical principles, the same principles that guided parents successfully for hundreds of years. They worked then, and they still work now!

Through his nationally syndicated newspaper column and eleven books, John has been helping families raise happy, well-behaved children for more than thirty years. In Parenting by The Book , which John describes as both a "mission and a ministry," he brings parents back to the uncomplicated basics. Herein fi nd practical, Bible-based advice that will help you be the parent you want to be, with children who will be, as the Bible promises, "a delight to your soul" (Pro. 29-17). As a bonus, John also promises to make you laugh along the way.

Genres: Parenting, Christian, Nonfiction, Family, Self Help, Religion, Christianity

288 pages, Hardcover

First published September 25, 2007

About the author

John Rosemond has worked with families, children, and parents since 1971 in the field of family psychology. In 1971, John earned his masters in psychology from Western Illinois University and was elected to the Phi Kappa Phi National Honor Society. In 1999, his alma mater conferred upon John the Distinguished Alumni Award, given only once per year. Upon acceptance, he gave the commencement address.

From 1971-1979, he worked as a psychologist in Illinois and North Carolina and directed several mental-health programs for children.

From 1980-1990. John was in full-time practice as a family psychologist with Piedmont Psychological Associates in Gastonia.

Presently, his time is devoted to speaking and writing. John is syndicated in approximately 225 newspapers nationwide. He has written eleven best-selling parenting books. He is also one of America’s busiest and most popular speakers and most certainly the busiest and most popular in his field. He’s known for his sound advice, humor and easy, relaxed, engaging style.

In the past few years, John has appeared on numerous national television programs including 20/20, Good Morning America, The View, The Today Show, CNN, and CBS Later Today, as well as numerous print interviews.

All of his professional accomplishments aside, John is quick to remind folks that his real qualifications are that he’s been married to the same woman for over forty years, is the father of two successful adults, and the grandfather of seven children…make that seven well-behaved grandchildren.

Reviews

[Nicole · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best parenting book I've ever read. It is honestly effective and changed my life and the way I raise my children. I couldn't believe how well it worked...

[Carolyn · Rating 1 out of 5]

I stand behind my review (below) of the first half of this book. I will say the second half makes a good point about overparenting, but already I think "Parenting with Love & Logic" does a much better job making the same point. Skip this one -- too many other parenting books are better. -csd

This is the kind of book that gives Christians a bad name because:
1. The author assumes there was a golden age of family/parenting pre-1960s when everyone did it right.
2. His "evidence" is anecdotal and at times misleading.
3. He makes broad generalizations which are clearly untrue (e.g. "God makes nothing complicated." or "Teenagers in prior historical eras were not described as reckless and foolhardy." or "Raising children did not consume, exasperate, or exhaust [mothers before 1960:].").
3. He only references a handful of scriptures in a book that's supposed to be all about the Bible.
4. His arguments are not rigorous (or even logical at times). There are too many examples to list them all here, but one example: He bemoans our post-Christian society but believes we should parent as if we lived in a Christian society.
5. He dismisses the many resources available to help parents today as merely a "tower of babble" that confuses rather than instructs -- as if parents were all born knowing how to handle the menagerie of issues they will face.

I could go on, but I think you get my point. If you're looking for a good parenting book, read Grace-Based Parenting (by Tim Kimmel) or Shepherding a Child's Heart (by Ted Tripp).

[Danielle · Rating 1 out of 5]

Possibly the worst parenting book I have ever read! Though there are two or three specific tips I feel are sound in principle and useful, his overall philosophy is offensive. He spends most of the book building a case that children are born evil (he uses this word often)and demonic (another frequent adjective) because of the Fall of Adam and Eve, and therefore must be saved by their parents who should not find parenting stressful because our kids' grandparents didn't think parenting was stressful.

One of his most bizarre suggestions is to lock a 3 year old in his room for 9 hours for taking a cookie. He states that a home should not be family centered, it should be parent centered. For example, he says children should wash dishes while parents sit in the living room reading the paper. He doesn't believe in family togetherness and feels children should be seen and not heard.

I personally believe homes should be family centered, not parent centered or child centered.He rejects all modern child development theories. I do not subscribe to all of them either, but he throws the baby out with the bath water.

I know several of my friends love his books. Perhaps this one was just a horrible collection of his rantings based on false doctrine. I would be interested to hear opinions of others who have read his books.

[Scott Kennedy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Parenting by the book

This is the fourth John Rosemond book I have read in the past month or so. In this book he lays out what he considers to be a Christian approach to parenting. Although holding a license to practice psychology, he does not consider himself a “Christian psychologist”, but first and foremost a Christian. In fact in his introduction he argues that while psychology holds that the individual is fundamentally good, and has a central doctrine of nonresponsibility, Christianity is the antithesis of this. He thinks that if you are a parent seeking guidance in child-rearing matters, the Bible will become a parenting manual.” While I do not agree with this statement, I understand the point he is making, and I do believe the Scriptures do have application to parenting, but I do not see it as a parenting manual.

In the first chapter, he outlines the attack on traditional (and he ties this with a more Christian perspective) parenting. He argues that if a parent does not follow God’s blueprint for parenting, there will be troublesome consequences, while adhering to God’s blueprint does not rule out difficulties it can bring relief from many difficulties and woes. Once again, I understand the point he is making. I do think many troubles we have are a result of ignoring God’s rules and biblical principles, but following these principles does not guarantee success either since children are sinful and ultimately make their own choices and decisions no matter what kind of parent you are. Rosemond appears to agree with this as I read on.

In chapter two he reviews the three antagonistic schools of psychological thought which have lead us into the parenting mess we find ourselves in today. They are Freudian, humanist and behavioural psychology. Freudian psychology contributed the idea that early childhood experiences cause later personality problems. Rosemond contrasts this with the biblical idea that behaviour is influenced, but not determined by outside influences, and that a child chooses his path in life. The humanist contribution was that children are fundamentally good and that high esteem is important for developing children. However, Rosemond points to the Biblical perspective on both of these; that children are born fundamentally sinful, and that modesty and humility are virtues not self-esteem. Behavioural psychology contributed the idea that behaviour modification works as well on humans as it does on animals. However, a Biblical anthropology views man as above the animals, possessing free will, and therefore able to resist the manipulations of behaviour modification.

His analysis of the sinfulness of the child is extremely important. He describes how a ‘raging sociopath’ emerges from behind the mask of infancy some time in the second year of life. To anyone who has had children this should be obvious. Like a sociopath, the child is entitled (what I want I deserve), pragmatic (ends justify means), and narcissistic (the rules do not apply to me). He reminds the reader that toddlers do not need to be taught to hit, lie or disobey and it is impossible to teach a child to be nonviolent, truthful and obedient unless you force wrong behaviour to stop. At this point he probably loses some of his audience, but in my experience he is spot on. This force requires parents to communicate simply what they will not tolerate, and then have consequences that are powerful enough to form permanent memories for a child. Some might argue that this force is demeaning. In fact the opposite is true. Legitimately exercised authority slowly liberates the human spirit from its innate selfishness.

Chapter three is entitled the Serpent’s currency. Here Rosemond begins by talking about the core curriculum of “Grandma’s” parenting. It was made up of the three Rs: respect, responsibility and resourcefulness, from which emanated all other more specific virtues. Children were taught respect for others by the teaching of good manners. Interestingly enough, Rosemond points to the fact that although children in the 1950s entered first grade with far fewer skills than they do today, but far greater respect for adults, they performed at much higher levels in every subject area and at every grade than today’s kids when parent education and income levels are held constant. Secondly, children were taught task responsibility by being involved from an early age in household chores, and social responsibility by holding them accountable. Before the psychological revolution of the 60s, parents expected children to fight their own battles. They would not go into bat for a child if the child came home complaining about a teacher, but told the child to stop acting in such a way that caused the teacher’s displeasure. Today’s parents however tend to fight their children’s battles for them. Yesterday’s parents would allow children to lie in the beds they made, but today’s parents tend to lie in their children’s beds, taking upon themselves the consequences of their children’s behaviour. Yesterday’s parents would require children to paddle their own canoe (do things on their own), whereas today’s parents are all too willing to paddle their child’s canoe. I’ll leave you to guess which approach will produce a more responsible child. Thirdly parents prior to the 1960s were able to develop resourcefulness because Grandma did as little as possible for her children helping them learn to stand on their own two feet.

In chapter 4, Rosemond addresses ‘the tower of parent babble”, or the prevalent myths about parenting today. One issue that resonated with me was his description of the change in parent teacher relationships. As a teacher of 7 years experience, I have noticed that often when I put my finger on a child’s behaviour or character and talk to a parent about this, I end up on the back foot, defending myself. Not always mind you, but often enough to make me wary. In previous generations, the parent would thank the teacher for this and then punish the child. But a new approach is now taken to parenting – a direct result of the psychologies we have bought. Firstly the child is no longer responsible for what he is doing. Rather, circumstances cause his behaviour. Secondly, this turns the child into a victim of his circumstances. This means that thirdly, the child’s circumstances justify the child’s behaviour. This means that parents cannot discipline their child. Ultimately, parents end up becoming enablers or accomplices of their child’s antisocial behaviour. He completes the chapter by describing two things modern parents tend to do, that was absent from Grandma’s parenting. Firstly, they try talking their children into discipline. Secondly, they try to discipline without hurting feelings. He points out that our forebears understood that unless emotional pain was associated with misbehaviour, it would continue unchecked.

In part two of the book, Rosemond deals with how we can recover from the current parenting malady. One issue he wants parents to understand is the difference between behaviour modification, and biblical discipline which is aimed at instilling proper habits of thinking. He notes that we as adults tend to be reluctant to discipline a child’s thoughts because of the general relativism of our times, because we are concerned about making a child feel bad about something a child has said (lowering their self-esteem) and the idea that children’s ideas are innocent and that they will eventually come to the right conclusions without adult intervention.

He also addresses the importance of disciplining a child’s emotional expressions. There seems to be an insidious idea circulating (I’ve seen stupid comments and posts about this on social media) that children should be allowed to express whatever they are feeling (for example rage at not being allowed to have a sweet in the shop). Actually, as freely expressing ones emotions is entirely inappropriate for an adult, we should be training our children not to always express their emotions.

Another interesting point he makes is the importance of parents being the number on influence in their children’s lives. He argues that many parents allow other influences including teachers, peers, coaches and media to take precedence over their own influence. He takes a year in the life of an average child and looks at the number of hours spent in various activities. The result is sobering.

In chapter 7 Rosemond deals with what he describes as ‘farsighted parenting.’ He offers a thought experiment, asking parents of a 3 year old to describe how they would want him to be at age 30. He suggests that parents will not describe their future 30 year old in terms of material wealth or accomplishments, but in terms of his character. This being the case, we should take this long term view into our present parenting. We should parent with long term character in mind. All too often however, we worry about the short term, or we parent at odds with our long term goals, perhaps wanting a child who is a self-starter, but always doing things for him.

Chapter 8 contained a brilliant summary of the seasons of parenting, the different roles a parent plays in those seasons, and the goals they should have. This was excellent. The first season from birth to 2 years is the season of service. Here the parent plays the role of servant, and the goal is to help root the child securely into the world. From 3-13 years, is the season of leadership. Here the role of the parent is authority, and the goal of this season is a self-governing child. Between the first two seasons is where parents often go wrong. A mother must transition from being a servant to her child and doing everything for him to building a boundary between herself and her child, expecting the child to do things for himself which she previously did for him. Where once he was at the centre of her attention, she must now be at the centre of his. Unfortunately, cultural fads and pressures are causing mother’s to become stuck in season 1. Following the season of leadership is the season of mentoring, running from 13-21ish. Here the main role of the parent is mentor, and the goal is for an emancipated child (a child who moves out of home and functions as an adult). The fourth season starts when the child is emancipated and is called the season of friendship. The main parent role is as a friend or counsellor and the goal of this season is to be a good friend to the child.

In part 3 Rosemond looks into the issue of discipline. One interesting section here is his discussion of ‘the rod’, where he argues that the useage does not indicate corporal punishment. However, Rosemond is not against the use of spanking and investigates the research surrounding the issue and concludes that done correctly it can be effective. Interesting here was the research he quoted which showed that parents who are opposed to smacking are more likely to fly into verbal and physical rages than those who smack occasionally. Ultimately though, Rosemond is concerned that people understand that effective discipline is not about methods, but leadership. This is the topic of chapter 11.

Here he looks at 3 principles of effective discipline. Disciplinary communication must command. Rosemond spends some pages on this, but essentially parents must speak authoritatively. They should not feel the need to always explain or get into arguments about what they are asking a child to do. Parents should issue commands that are clear, concise and authoritative. The second principle is that disciplinary consequences must compel. He argues for painful consequences since consequences that fail to create lasting memories are unlikely to produce a lasting persuasive effect. An interesting suggestion he made is that the punishment a parent gives for a ‘crime’ should NOT fit the crime, or fit the contemporary definition of fair, since your aim is to shorten the lifespan of this particular behaviour! The third principle of effective discipline is that disciplinary consistency must confirm the parent’s determination to further the best interests of the child.

Finally I’ll leave you with a brilliant quote from the afterword.


For the past few years, I have been advising parents to do all they can to isolate their children from popular culture. If you feel up to it, I say, educate your children in your home, where you can control the curriculum as well as their exposure to peers. Eliminate television from your children’s lives until they are fully literate and from that point use it as an educational tool, but with great discretion. Don’t let your children, even teens on the Internet without your supervision. Be a cultural and media filter in your children’s lives, and as were librarians in a bygone era, be ruthless in that regard. The Serpent is alive and well, and as always he is intent upon getting your children’s attention so he can ‘broaden their knowledge.’

[Crystal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good Christian parenting book that focuses on holding children to a standard, regardless of perceived limitations. I have SO appreciated this book. As a parent of a child with a lot of anxiety, I wholeheartedly agree with the author that all of the current psychology guiding parenting is steering so many Christian families wrong. Especially in convincing parents that our children are incapable of meeting appropriate standards of behavior.

One of my big takeaways was in chapter 1, where the author talks about how mothers in America are overly focused on their kids, and how that makes the mother feel like she's carrying all the weight and responsibility for her childrens decisions, and the significant impact this actually has on the mother as well as the entire family. He goes on to give examples of how mothers 20 years ago had a different balance, and children were expected to take on more responsibility, resulting in more responsible children, who became responsible adults.

While I very much enjoyed this book and felt like it was very enlightening, I did feel like most of the focus was on showing the reader how misled America has been by the Postmodern Psychological Parenting movement. There were little nuggets and threads in there about the correct and biblical way to parent, and I took so much away from those paragraphs and pages, but I wish there would have been more of a focus on what TO do, on what DOES work, and on what IS effective. The wisdom that was presented was incredibly valuable, and wisdom that has actually been turning things around in our home for the better. I'll definitely be reading more parenting books from this author in the future!

[Patrick O'Hannigan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Any book whose primary thesis is that your grandmother knew more about raising kids than the professionals invested in "Postmodern Psychological Parenting" is bound to sound smug sometimes, and John Rosemond has no lack of confidence in his message. On the other hand, his approach to child rearing is a refreshing antidote to much of what passes for wisdom these days.

The man thinks time outs are silly, that "discipline" and "discipleship" are more intimately related than most people give them credit for being, and that it's perfectly appropriate for a parent to use rejoinders like "because I said so" when challenged by obstreperous progeny. Behavior modfication works on dogs and toddlers, he says, not on children. Punishments should exceed crimes, not "fit" them, else there is no deterrent to future misbehavior. Moreover, the cultivation of humility is what paradoxically leads to self-respect, and humility is always preferable to "self-esteem."

This is an unabashedly "old school" approach, but, as Rosemond also shows, there's no arguing with its effectiveness, or its biblical pedigree. As a result, this might be the only parenting book that any frazzled parent really needs to read. I suspect it would pair well with Fred Reed's Nekkid in Austin: Drop Your Inner Child Down a Well, but I'm not sure. In any event, John Rosemond's paraphrase of Old- and New Testament parenting advice is a keeper.

[Erica · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was an okay book on parenting. I picked up a few helpful tips. But overall, the author has rose colored glasses about what life was like in the 50's and his view on pretty much everything was black or white. I read between the lines a bit to get to his main point, and thus could come away with something useful, but I would recommend a handful of other parenting books before I would recommend this one.

[Laura · Rating 3 out of 5]

A more seasoned mom warned me about the guilt right before Claire was born. "I think they inject you with something in the hospital because you will feel guilty about everything all the time once you have a child."

Both as a working mom and a stay at home mom, I've experienced that mom-guilt often. I appreciated John Rosemond's sympathy for the guilt-ridden mom, and his ability to explain this phenomenon in terms of psychological ideas. His explanation for present day mommy-guilt made a great deal of sense to me: if we believe in behaviorism (i.e. every behavior can be explained as the effect of some cause--either a reward or a punishment), then we must take on a great deal of responsibility for every behavior our kids exhibit. If, however, we believe in original sin, then we can acknowledge that kids are born rebels and can choose their behavior regardless of what we reward or punish, and may, in fact, choose behaviors that require punishment simply to show that "You're not the boss of me!" This rings incredibly true to my experience thus far as a parent.

As Rosemond says, "Freud’s most significant contribution to present-day parenting is guilt, infections of which tend to single-out mothers. Because Freudian mythology has managed to stay alive despite a lack of proof, the all-too-typical modern mom believes that she is the cause and her child’s behavior is the effect. This belief has benefit only as long as one’s child is behaving properly and doing well in school, but the downside of pride is a heavy load of guilt when behavior or grades suddenly go south."

Parenting is actually quite simple: Say what you mean and mean what you say. There are a million books (John Rosemond calls them the Tower of Parent-Babble) but Rosemond cuts through the noise to offer simple, straightforward, time-tested advice about parenting. I'm not sure this book could win over a skeptic simply because Rosemond employs a confident tone that suggests he doesn't even need to bother much with disproving his opponent's ideas. So, I could see people reading this simply to be deeply offended by his assertions. I happen to agree with him already, so I found his book increasing my confidence in my own parenting instincts.

There isn't much in terms of practical advice (there's no "here's 5 ways to deal with every conceivable kind of misbehavior" or anything like that.) It reads more like a philosophical manifesto that will build your confidence as a parent. It did mine.

[Jessica Worthen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is incredible! It keeps it simple and clarifies the parenting noise/chaos that can come at us as Christian parents or parents in general. Must read!

[Jason Cross · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is great and explains why so many children today are turning into adults who feel they are entitled to work less and get paid more. As someone who does HR work I have noticed this trend. The Bible tells how to raise a child and, since before the 1960s, people were using this model - even if they weren't Christian - to raise children and they have turned out to be hard working respectful people, not like people today who were raised with a different model and can't seem to survive on their own. A must read for all parents even if you are not Christian.

[Donna Craig · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best parenting book I've ever read. It literally changed our lives.

[Honorah Deatrick · Rating 2 out of 5]

For a book titled “Parenting by the Book: Biblical wisdom for raising your child”, the main emphasis seemed to be comparing how Grandma did it to modern Psychology’s influence on parenting, and very little actual Bible. Using grandma’s way of parenting as synonymous with Biblical parenting falls very short for anyone who’s grandma did not actually parent by the Bible. This was especially frustrating after the author began the book by claiming this book wasn’t his opinion but Bible, so to disagree is to disagree with the Bible - and then proceeded to give a lot of opinion without any biblical backing.

Nonetheless, there were many little biblical based nuggets throughout that I thought were very good and challenged me as a mother - it just took a lot of sifting.

There was a general sense of unnecessary sarcasm towards children that I found very distasteful (I.e. “demon-child”, “Spawn of Satan”) Also, many parts of the book seemed to contradict each other. He references a paper he got a lot of flack for where he said that an 18 month old who was sexually abused was not likely to remember the event, citing his belief that long term memories don’t form until after age 3. Then later on he recounts a story where he spanked his 2 year old grandson because he hit him for the purpose to form a permanent memory.

Towards the end, however, there was one specific phrase that left me appalled and is the sole reason I will never recommend this book. On page 220 he lists guidelines for spanking (after claiming that the Bible doesn’t actually command or encourage it - he believes the rod passages are figurative for leadership). Then he writes, “Unfortunately, most parents do not spank according to the above guidelines, which is why most spankings, while they do not qualify as harmful, much less abusive, nonetheless qualify as meaningless. They are delivered in anger....and entirely too often.” That is extremely dangerous and 100% false. Spanking in anger IS both harmful and abusive.

[E.J. · Rating 1 out of 5]

Stopped on page 43. There are several issues with this. The first one is huge: John Rosemond believes that children are innately evil, always up to no good, and mischievous in need of harsh discipline. They are morally depraved. He misinterpreted the Psalms passage that children are born evil and into sin to back his argument. This is far from the truth. King David said while his mother was in sin, she conceived him, he does not bear the guilt or sin of Adam or his mother's (Ezekiel 18:20)! John Rosemond, however, stresses that David was born a sinner.

This doctrine is heartbreakingly erroneous. To believe that newborn babies and toddlers are sinners separated from God and in need of Jesus is contrary to God's word. He literally dramatizes childhood development into a monstrosity. Here's an example, ". . . children are fundamentally bad and in need of rehabilitation" (23). He then goes on to say that new age psychology tragically makes children to be good people instead of perpetrating, misbehaving children marred by sin (24). They are "honest-to-badness human [beings]--raging sociopath[s]--emerg[ing] from behind the deceptive mask of infancy sometime during the second year of life" (38). My eyes literally grew wider with each passing page. When he stresses, "the toddler is a factory of antisocial behavior" (40-43), I couldn't go on. I casually flipped through the book and came across this passage: "a child is inclined, by human nature, to do the wrong thing, not the right thing; the self-serving thing, not the other-serving thing." Wow. I closed the book then. 

Here's something to ask yourself, if you believe children are depraved:
-- If children are naturally corrupted "spawns of Satan" (Rosemond’s words, not mine), why did the Blessed Christ beckoned a child to come to Him, beholding him before a crowd of adults saying, "except you change and become like a child, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 18:1-3)? 
-- Why did Jesus rebuke His disciples shooing away children and told them, "Allow the little children to come to Me, forbid them not, for such is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 19:14)?
-- Why did the apostle Paul admonish Christians, "in evil, be infants" (1 Corinthians 12:40a)? That word evil in the Greek means "moral depravity, wickedness." What did Paul mean by this? Obviously, children are innocent regarding evil. Until they reach the age of accountability, they are innocent in the eyes of God and are not depraved people. Hence, Paul says to be as infants--not depraved or wicked. 
— How were the morally depraved children in the gospel of Matthew able to praise Jesus, causing Him to say, “out of the mouths of infants and nursing babes, You have prepared praises for Yourself” (Matthew 21:15,16)?

Childhood development is a wonderfully challenging and frustrating experience for parents and especially for the child. Rosemond brushes off each cognitive and emotional developmental stage as sin, failing to realize that children enter this new world constantly learning, curious, teachable, and explorative. They discover what's right and wrong (because they have no concept of that, that's where parents come in to teach and guide them!) by pushing limits. They become frustrated little children because 1)they are not capable of expressing themselves. 2)They cannot yet speak and their receptivity is rapidly growing, so they feel overwhelmed, and 3) they have not honed their emotions. Imagine how scary that must be for them. They do not know how to control their emotions yet, which is why we, as parents, must extend absolute patience and show them problem solving skills. And as they get older, teach them about taking responsibility for one’s own actions, communication, healthy ways of expressing negative emotions, etc.

I look at my 17 month old son, learning new ways to guide him and rear him up. He's entered this developmental stage of discovery and processing, so often times I have to tell him no or take certain things away and redirect him to something more appropriate and safe. You literally do not have to yell or get angry. I understand frustration, I often become frustrated, but I tell myself that he's still new on this earth and his brain is processing everything around him. He's slowly learning how to speak and identify items he wants; he's far from perfecting self-expression which becomes overwhelming and frustrating for him (though Rosemond would have me believe that his sin has birthed forth and is in need of eradication by discipline). He's learning that he is, indeed, a person. By age 2, this is the time to gear him up and firmly establish all that I've been previously teaching him.

This entire book is written on the foundation that children are depraved; thus, I cannot stand by this book to learn from it. I was looking forward to reading it, too. 

Another thing that was a disappointment was his sweeping generalization that family homes before the 1960s was a breeze. Hmm... WWII was actually a turn of events for women, especially mothers. They worked men’s job at factories and businesses while they went to war. They discovered a newfound freedom. In fact, after the war they were told that the married life was the only life for a woman. This sparked a rise in depression in mothers who suffered in silence or were admitted into mental institutions. Copious amounts of mothers in the ‘50s spoke about a loss of identity and feeling stressed because they felt confined. So, Rosemond speaking as if the ‘50s were the golden age of family life is interesting. Especially when he’s only talking about white-oriented homes. Black Americans, for example, had vehement, racist social forces trying to dismantle Black family life (this was still the Jim Crow era).

Overall, these were the main things that hindered me from continuing on. I would like to stress that I’m a firm believer in God’s design for the home:
— one male and one female bounded together in marriage, heirs together for the grace of life.
— They live out Ephesians 5:21-33.
— Children being reared up in the fear of the Lord and under the subjection of their parents.

[Caitlyn · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have mixed feelings on this book. Within the pages there were concepts that will definitely change my discipline as a parent. The last few chapters, especially the final two which focus on confident, corrective discipline, are exceptional. I am confident that I will refer back to this book in the future and take the concepts from this book into my parenting to make me a more confident mom and leader.

On the other hand, it took me 6 months to finish this book because I repeatedly put it down for months at a time due to frustration. I'm glad I worked through it to the end but I struggle with the tone of the author, some of his concepts, and lack of research.

Here is a list of my frustrations:

1. Lack of citing sources: This is my strongest issue with this book. Rosemond repeatedly uses the phrase, "Research says" but without any citations! For being an expert with multiple degrees he should know better! If you write, "Research says" but cite no sources for your research then I have no choice but to nullify your research and assume it as just your opinion on the matter.

2. 1950s Parenting: Of second issue with this book is the assumption that parenting in the 1950s is the gold-standard of parenting. I do not disagree with his point that Postmodern Psychological Parenting has offered confusion and disagreement among parents and sent them into this spiraling cycle causing them (us) to lose our authority. However, as the Bible reminds us, a tree is known by the type of fruit it produces. Children of the 1950s grew into the adults of the 1960s and 1970s. This does not apply to all 60s and 70s adults, but for the most part, you have the hippie generation exploring drugs, drinking, etc. When you overgeneralize and place on a pedestal one type of "generation" you set yourself up for criticism.

3. Author Tone: A matter of personal preference, I did not care for his tone as it was sarcastic and demeaning in the book.

4. Attitude toward Sports: I wholeheartedly disagree that a family attending a member's sporting events is not participating in a family activity. Regarding attending sporting events, as a family member, and part of a team, it is critical that we learn to support one another and lift one another up. My husband's family grew up attending one another's events. They used those sporting trips as family trips - supporting one another and growing close at the same time. It is very true we are overcommitted, exhausted, and overstretched which takes us away from focusing on character building. However, eliminating sports from the equation is not the answer. There has got to be a form of balance in life. Participating in sports also helps produce character while you practice being part of a team, listening to authority, etc. My husband is an excellent leader both at work and at home with us and many of his techniques and skills he earned was through the sporting environment. However, with one note, his parents and in particular his father, played an important role in supporting the coach and walking through situations together with his son (children) to help respond in healthy, growing ways. It is a partnership between the coach and parent (or parent and teacher) that is the ultimate goal for growing healthy, loving, adult leaders. Part of me wonders if he places such an emphasis on the parent/teacher relationship because of his background and love of learning/education. As a side note, I believe it is possible to learn to be part of a team by being part of a family team and a sports team. There are many "teams" in life and we should teach children that they can be part of multiple teams simultaneously like they will be in their adult life (employee, family member, church member, etc).

Regarding the parts of the book that I really did like...
This book would be excellent in my opinion if I could eliminate the above which is contained in the first half of the book, and focus on the second half. Rosemond has great points on discipline, structure, leadership, etc. Part two in this book is excellent.

1. Parenting as one flesh: AGREE! We need to emphasize more that it is marriage first, children second. His assertion to determine the percentage of time you spend with your spouse vs. with your children caused me to evaluate this in my own marriage and seek out more time for marriage only.

2. Farsighted Parenting: YES! Just all of it. Parent with the end in mind. Period. Who do you want your child to be? Picture it and make your aim to be that person with every decision you make as a family.

3. To Everything Turn, Turn, Turn: Stages of parenting. 100% agree with this. In fact, I heard something very similar in a conference with Andy and Sandra Stanley on parenting. Read this chapter, listen to the message on North Point's website and realize that there are stages to parenting based on the child's age.

4. Leadership Discipline & Command, Compel, Confirm: All of this.

Would I recommend this book? Hesitantly, yes. If you can filter out the stuff at the beginning and the author's tone you will find this book has great biblical concepts and will offer you confidence in your parenting.

[Brooke · Rating 5 out of 5]

I highly recommend this book. I have always liked Rosemond’s honest, unapologetic and straightforward approach. This book pushed me to admit that I have swallowed a lot of postmodern psychology.

This book will encourage you to hold your children responsible for their thoughts and actions and it will challenge you to have a marriage-centered home instead of a child-centered one.

This book will also help you focus on long range goals for your children and the building of godly character.

[Kayla Lane · Rating 3 out of 5]

I listened to this, didn’t agree with everything he said, but had a lot of good practical ideas and biblical wisdom. He seemed to hold up our “grandmas” generation a little too highly and didn’t get into things they might’ve gotten wrong but still worth thinking through.

[Karen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I agree with Rosemond that the Bible is full of wisdom that can help parents raise their children. I also agree that we need to learn from historical parenting! Old-fashioned parenting just makes more sense! His principles are solid. However, it seems that his philosophy is entirely void of GRACE. Obviously, grace is not a license to sin, and in order to properly train children - they must be consistently disciplined. But, I don't think I even saw the word grace in the entire book. He doesn't seem to deal with the heart issue, but instead more or less getting kids to act the right way. Rosemond's philosophy, though better than most out there, does not make exceptions - he doesn't address the fact that some children are considerably more difficult than others (except for maybe 1 page in the book)....his bottom line, if a child is unruly - it is the parent's fault. Now I agree that probably 75% of the time, that is probably true and even difficult children need to be taught to behave. However, the same methods do not work the same way for all children (exhibit a - my firstborn). That being said, I did take away some good ideas. Loved how he equated parenting with leadership. Enjoyed the chapter on discipline techniques. Thoroughly appreciated the concept of the Referee Rule. Glad I took the time to read it, even though I think it's incomplete.

[Katelynn · Rating 4 out of 5]

I promised myself on New Years that I would finish this book before I read any more fiction. Whew, it was a slog! Not because it's uninteresting or slow, I just do NOT like reading nonfiction. It's like work.

That being said, this book is fantastic- I'd say a must-read for parents or soon-to-be-parents. I have an 18 month old and I feel so much liberation and purpose after reading this. I have so often been confused and exasperated and truly exhausted in my parenting. This book shows you how to cut through the noise and focus on the principles and parenting world-view of Scripture. I honestly think I've been making parenting too hard. I appreciate that the book has not just big-picture ideas but TONS of practical, every day wisdom.

I only give 4 stars because I had so much trouble getting through it. Again, not the fault of the content.

[Sharon · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excerpt: "When I ask parents to identify the family activity that takes up most of their time, many name going to their children's after school sports practices and events. I'm sorry, but watching a child play a sport and cheering from the sidelines does not constitute a family activity. A picnic is a family activity, as is a nature hike, spending the afternoon in a museum, or going to Niagara Falls or Dizzy World; cheering from the sidelines as one's child plays a sport does not qualify."

Oh, Dr. Rosemond, Don't you know that is anathema in America. Them words is feuding words. (I'm so glad you said them). Thank you for kicking over one of the sacred (American) cows.

[Lisa · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is more of a broad approach to parenting philosophy than a specific “what-to-do in this situation” parenting book.

There were definitely parts of the approach that I don’t agree with and will not employ. However, there are other great pieces in this book as well. I like how he talks about parenting with the long game in mind, rather than just managing short term behaviors.

Overall a decent read. Some good takeaways.

[Magda · Rating 3 out of 5]

After listening to (most of) one of Dr. Philip Mamalakis' talks on parenting and human roles, I realize that the parts of John Rosemond I don't like have to do with theology, and the parts of John Rosemond I do like have to do with theology.

In any case, I still have to be the one to put the theology into practice.

[Lindsey · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best Biblically based parenting book I have ever read! Very helpful!!

[Kate · Rating 1 out of 5]

Perhaps this book would have gotten better, but I couldn't even finish it. I have been waiting months for our library to open so I could check this out and have been sorely disappointed. The author claims that his "way" of child rearing is God's way, however, I disagree. Of what I read, he did not even use the Bible that much, but took some ideas and made some sweeping generalizations and infused his opinion. He is so hung up on pre-1960's parenting being easy and so much better than todays. That is completely anecdotal. I have heard first hand accounts of parenting struggles from that era and asking individuals in their 70s-90s is not a reliable way to deem how easy parenting was anyways. Ask an adult how hard it was to learn to ride a bike and many won't even remember the scraped knees, tears, and challenges they may have incurred. I do not believe that raising kids was ever easy, but I don't think it is meant to be. It doesn't always have to be challenging, but being blessed with a child to teach and love and help grow is an enormous task. Most great things in life, do take hard work and are not easy. Sure, we may have different challenges today, but not all of them are due to bad parenting.

The author also makes a ton of generalizations about psychologists. He claims that they are all secular, with the exception of himself and a few other Christian authors of course. This is just so wrong. While many may very well be, I know multiple psychologists who live in different areas even, and they are all Christian. Like any career, there are a mix of different belief systems. He also goes on to claim that an 18 month old won't be able to remember being sexually abused...I don't even understand what he was trying to prove here. Whether the child remembers it or not, there most certainly can be long term effects. He obviously has never fostered or adopted a child from foster care. Even children adopted under the age of one can have some residual trauma. I have observed the difference between children adopted from foster care around birth versus later than six months and there is often a difference, despite their child rearing being the same. This is not always the case and context and duration of situations and even heredity can impact how a person is affected, but it is harsh and simply incorrect to claim it has no affect since it happened when they are young.

He discusses discipline, but punishment isn't always necessary depending on the circumstances. He is cherry picking parts of the bible as he is sure to discuss God's justice, but doesn't account for the grace He gives us either. When the prodigal son returned to his father, he wasn't disciplined, then welcomed. The adulterer who was to be stoned, was saved by Christ, and told to go and sin no more. Circumstances vary and everyone is different. Our job as parents is not to make sure we blindly discipline. Natural consequences can be much more effective than disciplining. Of course there are circumstances when discipline may be necessary and suit the situation, but it doesn't always, and as parents, we should know our children and be guided by the Lord to do what is best for our child, not our pride.

Typically, I will continue to read books, even when I don't agree with them. Yet, this book was just not edifying at all and did not bring the peace and spirit that I often feel when reading books that testify of Christ and teach by the Spirit. He also claims that babies are "sinful" and that a generally good baby that starts acting like the "Spawn of Satan" is actually the latter and that the sweet boy was not the "real boy".....like what? He cites Psalm 51:5, David's psalm, but his interpretations contradict other scriptures and are just based on his opinion, once again. While I do think humankind sins by nature, I do not believe that babies are born sinful, but that they are pure and innocent. As they live on Earth longer, they do start to sin, but how on earth do you say anything a newborn baby is doing is sinful? Children do not even understand the implications of their behavior for awhile, and the prefrontal cortex does not even completely develop until around the age of 25! Of course this doesn't mean that a child shouldn't be taught and disciplined, but different ages and stages calls for different approaches and an acknowledgement that before a certain age, it isn't really sinning. I would hate to hear the author's opinion on mentally handicapped individuals who are not aware of the consequences of actions. He totally forgets the grace, discernment, and awareness that Christ has for each of us and our circumstances. Understanding and development matters and I don't agree with indiscriminately using the term sinning.

The one thing I did like from the book is that he mentioned how the decisions children make is not a reflection of our parenting. They have their free agency and can make choices that we didn't teach them. I do agree with that. The rest of what I read was just nonsense though, and certainly not endorsed by God, simply the author's ramblings.

[Jeanette · Rating 5 out of 5]

"...the matter of how a child should be raised is not about the parent; it's about the child." (1) // in reference to parents who read books and feel like this style or that style of parenting would suit *them* best

"A number of years ago, I came to the realization that for all of its pretenses to scientific objectivity, post-1960s psychology is a secular religion that one believes in by faith. I had been slowly losing that false faith since the early 1980s, but I lost the last vestige seven years ago, when I submitted my life to Jesus Christ." (2)

"Every Christian is a minister. Each Christian's ministry is unique. You don't choose it for yourself; it's chosen for you." (9) // ask God what your purpose is

"A short list of those changeless things includes consensus concerning morality, the need for adults to be contributing members of society, and constants regarding how the family should function, including how children should be brought up." (15) // times change, but not all things should change with that

"Progressivism holds that just as most new technologies (such as computers) are better than old technologies (typewriters), new ideas are better than old ideas." (18) // not necessarily true

"The new way transformed the parent-centered family into the child-centered family. The new way substituted high self-esteem (individualism) for respect for others (good citizenship). Parents who subscribe to the new way are not supposed to simply tell their children what to do; they are to reason with them and reward them when they 'cooperate' (being de facto peers, children of enlightened parents do not simply obey).
The new way would be most satisfying to Karl Marx, who said that in order for socialism to succeed, the traditional family had to go. . . In the 1970s I did postgraduate course work in family therapy and ultimately came to the conclusion that the real intent was to put parent and child on equal footing, to destroy the authority of parents. The authority that would step into the vacuum was the authority of the therapist, who usually sided with the kids in family disputes." (23)

"I know that whereas child rearing wasn't perfect before the 1960s, it worked for the ultimate good of the child, the marriage, the family, the school, the community, and the culture. I also know that the new way - what I call 'Postmodern Psychological Parenting' - has never worked, is not working, and never will work, no matter how diligently anyone works at it. Why? . . . it is not in harmony with God's master blueprint, which he has bequeathed us in the form of his Word, the Bible." (24)

"God created the universe and all that is within it. The Bible tells me so, but my faith i the truthfulness of the Word is shored up by a number of relatively recent discoveries in physics, math, astronomy, and chemistry that have confirmed that the universe had a definite beginning." (26)

"...all three of these philosophies [psychological determinism, humanism, behavioralism] are bogus. They are not only antithetical to a biblical view of human nature but also contradicted by both common sense and social science research." (32) // brackets added

"...the most powerful shaping force in a person's life was the force of the person's own free will. . . the power of their choosing was more powerful than the power of her parenting." (35)

"The Adam and Eve Principle: No matter how good a parent you are, your child is still capable on any given day of doing something despicable, disgusting, or depraved." (36)

"Authority, legitimately exercised, slowly liberates the human spirit, which is creative and loving, from the prison of human nature, which is anything but." (45)

"Over the past forty years, as promoting self-esteem has taken precedence over promoting academic excellence, the self-control of America's kids has taken a nosedive." (55)

"Once upon a time not so long ago, parents understood that for the most part, the discipline of a child was accomplished by simply meaning what one said and saying exactly what one meant." (64)

"...the fundamental difference between self-respect and self-esteem is the difference between wanting to do for others (looking for opportunities to be of service), and wanting/expecting others to do for you (wanting to be served). As I said earlier, these two attributes are polar opposites; they define people who are fundamentally different and therefore different in every way." (75)

"What with all the after-school activities kids are involved in , not to mention homework, there's just no time. I contend, therefore, that many children are growing up without an adequate sense of what 'family' really and truly means. They know what the word 'team' means, but they do not know that one's family is the greatest team one can ever be a member of.
A child learns how to be a family-team player by having a meaningful role, consisting of meaningful responsibilities within his family. That role and those responsibilities should be defined before a child is four years old and expand as the child grows." (79)

"...consumption without contribution inevitably engenders a feeling of entitlement. . . Ironically, the ubiquitous effort to make children happy is putting them at risk for becoming perpetual malcontents." (80)

"Today's kids are rarely seen as simply children; rather, they are regarded through the filters of their supposed unique needs. . . For example, it is typical for the parent of a child who has been diagnosed with attention deficit disorder to say 'My child is ADD,' as if that one trait defines the entire child. He is no longer a child; he's a diagnosis. We do not say about someone who has been diagnosed with cancer that 'he is cancer,' yet certainly cancer is more significant to how a person should be treated than the fact that he or she has a shorter-than-average attention span." (97)

"The Amish aspire to a Christ-like state of no self-esteem, yet they are some of the most resourceful and emotionally healthy people in the United States, perhaps the world. Studies of the Amish find that they suffer mental health problems at roughly half the rate of the rest of the population. Furthermore, pediatricians who treat Amish children find little if any incidence of attention deficit disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, or any of the other behavior disorders currently plaguing children who live in what the Amish refer to as 'the world.'" (144)

"...when one goes about any task according to God's instruction, accomplishing the task will be relatively simple, though not always easy and painless." (152)

"...the Season of Service, begins at birth and lasts approximately two years. During this initial season parents function as servants to a child who cannot serve himself and cannot anticipate the consequences of his actions." (170)

Season two [Season of Leadership and Authority] lasts for ten years, from three to thirteen, at which point a second transition takes place (or should) that moves parent and child into season three, the Season of Mentoring. It is no coincidence that in traditional cultures, early adolescent rites of passage - Jewish bar and bat mitzvahs being extant examples - occur when a child is thirteen. . . He no longer needs adults to tell him what and what not to do; rather, he needs adult mentors to help him acquire the practical skills he will need to emancipate successfully - how to apply for a job, balance a budget, plan for the future, and the like.
The successful emancipation of the child marks the end of season three, the last season of active parenting, and the beginning of season four, the Season of Friendship. During this last and most rewarding of parenting's seasons, the child's parents are parents in the biological sense only; in reality, parents and child now regard one another as peers." (173) // brackets added

"The breakdown is occurring between the second and third birthdays, when it is imperative that a mother initiate the transition between season one and season two, then team with her husband and complete it." (175)

"I remember my mother saying to me, 'John Rosemond, you don't need a mother right now, and I"m not going to be one.' She said it calmly and matter-of-factly; therefore, I knew she was serious." (178)

"I submit that today's children are not developing respect for female authority [because women/mothers are failing to establish that authority with their own children], and that this is going to come back to haunt us all in the very near future." (179) // brackets added. also, i would submit that perhaps we're starting to see this lack of respect come back to haunt us - already.

"By age three, a child has come to one of two conclusions concerning his relationship with his parents:
Conclusion one: It's my job to pay attention to my parents.
Conclusion two: It's my parents' job to pay attention to me.
A three-year-old who reaches conclusion one can be successfully and fairly easily disciplined." (180)

"...discipline and punishment are not one and the same. There will certainly be times when it will be necessary, right, and just for you to punish your child, but as we will see, punitive expressions of your leadership should be the exception, not the rule." (215)

"The real intent is to insert government into the parent-child relationship and eliminate parental discretion in discipline. . . A warning from Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (1856-1941) seems particularly appropriate: 'The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.'" (222)

"...there is a difference between giving a reason (right and proper) and trying to reason (trying to convince the child that your reason is valid, which is fruitless)." (232)

"It is, in fact, more important for a leader to be always decisive than for him to be always right. Besides, it is possible to be always decisive; it is impossible for anyone to always be right." (234)

"In the long run, it's the unforgettable consequences that count.
Compelling consequences create permanent, decidedly unpleasant memories. A consequence that isn't memorable isn't going to 'last'." (244)

"...the punishments parents dole out should not 'fit' the crimes for which they are doled. They should not be 'fair' by contemporary standards. A misbehavior that merits a rank of 3 on a scale of 1 to 10 deserves a punishment that's at least a 6. That greatly increases the likelihood that the misbehavior will enjoy the shortest possible lifespan, which is in everyone's best interest, especially the child's." (246)

"Time-out is silly and pointless because it creates no lasting, discomforting memory." (247)

[Julieta · Rating 5 out of 5]

I absolutely LOVED this book! I have not read any other parenting book and I don’t plan to unless it’s by this author or one with a similar line of thinking. If you are a Christian that believes your grandparents generation had child raising right, this is the book for you.

There are so many profound lessons to be sought out in this reading.

A few of my favorite passages from the book:
•••••••••••••••
Psychology holds that a person can be saved through the process of therapy as mediated by another human being, that coming to grips with the corruption suffered at the hands of one's parents will set one free. Christianity holds that salvation is attained only through faith in Jesus Christ, that he is the Truth, and that only his truth can set one free.
•••••••••••••••
As a wise man wrote thousands of years ago: "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun" (Ecclesiastes 1:9).
•••••••••••••••
So, whereas the old way enforced responsibility on the child for his behavior, the new way neatly absolves him of that responsibility. The misbehaving child, once a perpetrator, has become a victim, in need
of therapy or drugs or both.
•••••••••••••••
This is a fact: If you depart from God's plan in any area of your life, you will experience more (and more serious) problems than you would have encountered otherwise. Oftentimes, those problems will seem never-ending, as if there is no light at the end of the tunnel. America has departed from God's blueprint for childrearing. That explains it all.
•••••••••••••••
For that reason, I advise parents of infants to prepare themselves for the Little Criminal's bursting upon the scene, and when he does, to make it clear to him from day one that they do not exist to please him, that they are not going to obey him, that, in fact, it's the other way around.
•••••••••••••••
One of Grandmas favorite parenting aphorisms was "good citizenship begins at home," which simply means that at all times, and in all things, parents should "aim" their child rearing at the goal of producing a good citizen, a person of value to the culture. In this regard, Grandma understood that she was raising an adult, not a child. This is also the meaning of Proverbs 22:6: "Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.'
•••••••••••••••
I contend, therefore, that many children are growing up without an adequate sense of what "family" really and truly means. They know what the word "team' means, but they do not know that one's family is the greatest team one can ever be a member of.
•••••••••••••••
First, truly good social skills are founded on respect for others, and I can't say it loudly or often enough: Respect for others is taught through manners, not how to kick a soccer ball.
•••••••••••••••
Third, to any parents who really wants to help their child improve his or her social skills, I say; "Then turn off the television, get rid of the video games, and remove the personal computer from your child's bedroom!" Nothing dampens a child's social skills more than solitary, mind-numbing electronics.
•••••••••••••••
How is it that today's parents, raising two kids, feel more stress than did parents of fifty years ago who were raising five kids? How is it that the latter felt hardly any stress at all? A large part of the answer is that the more parents feel they have to get involved in their child's lives, the more stress they're going to experience. It's just that simple.
•••••••••••••••
I will ask parents in a seminar audience to answer the following question: "Of the time you spent in your family during the past week, what percentage was spent in the role of father or mother versus the percentage you spent in the role of husband or wife?"

The typical distribution is 90 percent parent versus 10 percent spouse, which is the empirical definition of a child-centered family. If in fact the first figure is above 50 percent, the family is child centered. The right answer to the seminar question above is no less than 60 percent wife/husband, and no more than 40 percent mother/father, and that's acceptable only during a child's infancy, when parenting demands are unusually high. Ideally, the relative percentages should be 75 percent spouse, 25 percent parent.
•••••••••••••••
These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk long the road, when you lie down and when you get up.
-DEUTERONOMY 6:6-7

Deuteronomy 6:6-7 is the first of God's instructions to parents. It informed Grandmas primary focus, which was to do all she could to see to it that her children became "people of character. To have God's commandments "upon your heart" means that as a parent you are to live your life according to the model hid out in the Bible, thus being a living example to your children of what is always and forever right and proper. Your example is to be a constant, consistent presence in their lives. The Bible says that you should take every possible opportunity to talk to your children about the difference between right and wrong and guide them toward doing what is right according to
the commandments, directions, and instructions God has given us. You should explain to them why you are doing what you are doing, and in your explanation you should always be able to refer to God's Word, the gold standard.
•••••••••••••••
You have heard that it was said, "Do not commit adultery.” But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
-MATTHEW 5:27-28

In this key passage, God is also telling parents to discipline their children's thoughts! That's important, because today's parents think discipline is all about behavior. That is, in fact, the logical conclusion that follows upon postmodern psychological parent-babble. Psychology would have parents believe that discipline is all about behavior modification- "shaping" proper behavior by manipulating reward and punishment. The Bible, on the other hand, dearly says that discipline is accomplished primarily through proper instruction, by instilling proper habits of thinking into one's child. The Bible says that proper thought must precede proper behavior. Jesus says the same thing when he says that before there is adultery, there is lust in broader terms, before there is sin, there is the thought of sin.
•••••••••••••••
I appreciated the author’s notes on disciplines and his example. If you tell your child that the grass is green and they purposefully disagree, you shall discipline their train of thought. If they’re too young to write, sit them in a thinking chair and tell them to call for you when the grass is green. If they can write, sit them down and don’t let them get up until they’ve written the grass is green 100 times.
•••••••••••••••
“Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.” -Proverbs 22:6

If there is one verse of Scripture that more represents God’s design for child rearing than any other, it is Proverbs 22:6. Of those verses that refer to the upbringing of children, it's also one of the best known. Its meaning is obvious: Parents should aim their child rearing at a target that lies some distance off in the future.

One's aim in this regard should be unwavering. It needs to be maintained every hour of every day and in every situation.

Furthermore, because the "way" a child should go does not vary from child to child, every parent should be aiming at the same target: an adult of right character, morals, and ethics who loves God. That adult is a responsible and compassionate citizen, a devoted spouse, and a parent who "passes it on" a parent who rains up his children in the way they should go. Maintaining that aim requires that a parent hold in the forefront of his "parent mind" a clear vision of the kind of person he wants his child to be when his child is thirty years old - a vision to which he regularly refers.

Ask yourself, "Do I have such a vision, and if so, do I hold it in the forefront of my mind?"
•••••••••••••••
In summary, good leaders act as if they know what they are doing, where they are going, and how they are going to get there. Furthermore, good leaders act as if they have every confidence in the world that the people they are charged with leading will, in fact, follow.
•••••••••••••••
1. When your child asks for something, and you say he can't have it or do it, and your child demands an explanation, as in, "Why not?!" give one of the only six reasons there are:
(1) You're not old enough, (2) you might get hurt, (3) we don't have the money (or will
not use it that way), (4) we don't have the time (or won't take the time) for that, (5) we don't believe in that (our values don't allow that), (6) we don't like those kids.

2. When you have given your chosen reason in five words or less, and your child stomps his foot and yells out that he doesn't agree with your reason, thinks it's dumb, or wants to tell you why you should change your mind, simply look at him with great compassion and say, "If I was your age, I wouldn't like that decision either."
•••••••••••••••
Indeed, parents should make every effort to deliver consequences consistently, but one can be consistent in that regard without being predictable. For example, the next time our rebellious eight-year-old defies his parents, I'd encourage them to put him in the time-out chair for an hour! Upon his next act of insubordination, I'd have them send him to his room until he has written, neatly, "I will obey my parents because they love me's one hundred times. The next incident could result in his parents' taking his bicycle away for a month. And so on. This approach to the delivery of consequences prevents immuniza-
tion and keeps the child "on his toes" (or, minding his ps and qs") because he cannot predict what's going to happen when he misbehaves.
•••••••••••••••
For the past few years, I have been advising parents to do all they can to isolate their children from popular culture. If you feel up to it, I say, educate your children in your home, where you can control the curriculum as well as their exposure to peers. Eliminate television from your children's lives until they are fully literate, and from that point use it as an educational tool, but with great discretion. Don't let your children, even teens, on the Internet without your supervision. Be a cultural and media filter in vour children's lives, and as were librarians in a bygone era, be ruthless in that regard. The Serpent is alive and well, and as always he is intent upon getting your children's attention so he can "broaden their knowledge."

[Megan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Let me start by saying there is some very good content in the last quarter or so of this book. It’s worth reading if you already have a solid biblical foundation for parenting and feel confident reading with a critical eye.

The particular high point of the book for me was Rosemond’s discussion of “the rod” in Scripture, and his fleshing out of discipline, and spanking in that context. That section was one of the best I’ve read on that topic.

My major criticism of this book is that Rosemond neglects to address sin, grace, and the Gospel as a whole. While I don’t fundamentally disagree with much of what he says in principle, the great majority of the book reads like an idealistic rant of a type that one could understandably respond to with “Ok, Boomer.” I don’t say that lightly.

Rosemond appeals to a sort of typological “Grandma” to sum up what he views as the only really valid parenting based on common sense and the Bible. That’s all fine as a tool. But it becomes the hammer for which everything in life is a nail, and he fails to acknowledge that his vision of 1940s parenting came from somewhere ideologically, and he fails to show the reader why his ideal is ideal at all. For a book with a subtitle suggesting the reader will learn biblical principles to parenting, I thought it worth noting that it’s not until 40% or so in that Rosemond references Scripture (and that’s just to use the Tower of Babel as a metaphor to criticize the volume of parenting psychology books), and even in later chapters, his use of Scripture majors on proof texting without instruction in principles. It is a significant flaw that he urges the reader to return to a “good old days” style of parenting but neglects teaching parents how to recognize and deal with their own sin (to take the log out of their own eyes) so that they can be instruments of the Gospel in their kids’ lives (removing the specks). It’s more biblical and more relationally valuable, in my opinion, to have a family life that’s routinely working through confession, repentance, forgiveness, and reconciliation in a Gospel context, however imperfectly. That doesn’t mean parents abdicate their duty, or that their authority is somehow lessened, or their parenting less effective. Rather it will result in the fruit of righteousness in the family, according to God’s promises.

[Brandi Atchison · Rating 5 out of 5]

Profound and Enlightening. Calling all parents, soon to be parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and anyone else involved with children. I am not one to normally recommend non-fiction books, but this is by far one of the most applicable books I’ve ever read. I’m a Christian raised in the Bible Belt and would have been hard pressed most of my growing up life to find someone who didn’t claim to be the same regardless of denomination. Why then has parenting become so complicated and stressful since the 1960s when so many Christians are following God’s plan laid out in the Bible? They aren't.

In this book, Dr. Rosemond, a Christian with a psychology degree, explains just how things have changed, as well as why and how to get them back to what they used to be. In the 1960s Postmodern Psychological Parenting reared its ugly head. Most parents of today - Christian and non-Christian - have been influenced in some way or other and even unknowingly by PPP. In the 1950s and before, parenting was referred to as child rearing and even non-Christians adhered to its rules. The decline of children's overall happiness and mental health is proof that change isn’t always for the best. Kind of like “if it's not broke, don’t fix it.” That’s usually when the problems arise. As a biblically based book, my favorite part is that it's not a laundry list of what you’re doing wrong but how to do it right...giving the reader a sense of empowerment over stress.

[Julianne Carmack · Rating 4 out of 5]

I agree with most of this book…particularly that we’ve strayed way too far from biblical principles and that the hyper obsession with psychology and behavior modification is creating problems rather than solving them. However, I think especially the chapter on marriage is a little harsh and too “children should be seen and not heard” for me. ABSOLUTELY a proponent of a God-spouse-children hierarchy, but I think it can be as simple as prioritizing daily public displays of affection and friendship as well as “just us two” time and not that your home has to be a cold, authoritative place where no one is important but Mom and Dad. Also 100% agree that we are all born sinners and need the gift of Jesus, but I don’t think hammering “sinner” as your primary and only identity is a good idea. 😭 Referring to children as “little sinners” and nothing else seems to waaay tip the scale of grace and truth/judgement (judgement as in what we rightly deserve for our sins) towards truth with a hard stop on the fact that we are all sinners. If that makes sense? Overall refreshing take on the state of America’s parenting!

[Kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author expounds his theory that childrearing was better 50 years ago and that as a culture, we need to return to historical methods which just so happen to coincide with Biblical methods.

Things I liked:
Discipline does not necessarily mean spanking (Spare the rod can be a figurative rather than literal.)
Let your Yes be Yes and let your No be No.
All the research demonstrating that children are not as happy today as they were 50 years ago.

Things I didn't like:
The general tone that everything about modern parenting is bad. Are we throwing out the baby with the bath water here? Maybe my experiences with what he is talking about are all hard sided discipline. I believe that firmness and gentleness can be married.
Over-emphasis on what was wrong with society. I understand that he needs to prove why his perspective is correct, but it really felt like he was harping on the same point over and over.

[Kevin Godinho · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you are wondering as to whether or not you are on the right parenting track, then this book is for you. Filled with common sense and biblical principals, John provides guidelines and wisdom from the ages. Every parenting strategy and household is going to be different, utilize this book as a guideline to see where you're at.

Raising adults who think rightly for themselves is the goal. Children who can exist independently without relying on others to accomplish tasks; who are not entitled, but rather look for ways to serve/give.

What a gift it would be to have God fearing children who were active participants in the family unit. Then, to have those children mature into God fearing adults who are active participants in society. I sense a method forming for cultural revolution if applied properly.

Get back to biblical roots and stop being swayed by fleeting feelings and emotions.

Man up. Woman up.