Ok. Well, I'm inclinded to think that the child may have chosen his own wording. I believe the phrase is "Spare the rod, spoil the child." Not really in the bible I think, but this seems to me to be one of those "Kids say the darndest things" where the father may have said something and the child either misinterpreted it or mispoke. I work in a jail with lots of people whose parents probably should have smacked them, and at the same time quite a few who's parents smacked them for too many reasons. Either way the lesson of right and wrong was lost in the translation and they ended up in jail. If I'm wrong walk over to your neighbor and smack him. Then tell him God told you to.

Having read your works, I can understand that 'bells' would go off in your head. A child talking about being hit, father a teacher, understandable. Being autistic, John does not make connections well. Perhaps it is only by raising hackles, pushing buttons that he gets attention. One bright note is that he is trying to make a connection with you, kindness/what ever positive attention you can give him may be what he needs. God/Great Spirit/Creator, what ever term is used for Higher Power fosters love, John's father may be working from a point of (1)guilt~my child is not normal (2)exasperation~what AM I going to do with this child or (3)~the worst~Apathy, not wanting to connect with this 'difficult' child. Whatever the reason(s), you have had a 'lesson' placed in front of you. You will do what you feel is right. God/Great Spirit/Creator will love you for it. :) Take care

"One bright note is that he is trying to make a connection with you, kindness/what ever positive attention you can give him may be what he needs" - well said, Netsia.

From another Christian's perspective: Actually, the statement, "spare the rod, spoil the child is in Proverbs, in the old testament. But if you read all of it in context, it's very clear that corporeal punishment is acceptable ONLY within the bounds of careful understanding and NEVER to the excessive point of abuse. Striking a child lightly on a resilient posterior, just enough to trigger a painful memory associated with a disobedient behavior is, in fact, biblically acceptable. Just as clearly, however, using brutish excessive force, striking in raw anger instead of in calm instruction, or repeating a pattern of physical roughshod over a child are definitely NOT what Jesus taught, and anyone who has read any of His teachings should know this as well. The point behind the proverb was that if you let your children be disobedient without consequences, you are hurting their social development (and their sense of right and wrong)in the long run. Young children (who still have only a limited understanding of cause and effect) respond best to a carefully administered moment of discomfort as a consequence of serious disobedience. If my toddler ran out into the street in front of a car after I had told him not to, you had better believe I would impress on him the serious danger he was in with sharp scold and a bottom smack to remember it with; My love for him and not wanting him to dismiss the incident as frivolous, rightly demands that I impress it on him in a way he's sure to learn from, and hopefully live longer because of. Do people abuse this? Sadly, of course they often do. I'm defending only the biblical principle, not the imperfect ways that some people might misguidedly choose to apply it. Just like any law, rule, or guidline, when it is applied without forethought and wisdom, it can undermine its own purpose and be detrimental to all involved. My prayers go out to you for wisdom for you and your neighbors. --

Thank you all for your thoughts on this. Basedon how John describes most things, I believe that he likely copied his father's words verbatim. And he did tell me that his mother says his father shouldn't hit the children, so that's a good thing. I will wait and see if anything else arises.