You hear this quote indigenous time to time, usually offered as some sort of creepy sound bite (a-la the Stephen King quick story of the name). What is the meaning of this expression in its initial context?


“Allow” the little children (to approach me). “Suffer” way “permit” in this context.

You are watching: Suffer the little children meaning

Edit: The new International Version has actually "When Jesus observed this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the tiny children come to me, and do no hinder them, because that the kingdom of God belongs come such as these.”


“And they lugged young children to Him, the He should touch them: and also His practical worker rebuked those that brought them. Yet when Jesus saw it, the was much displeased, and said unto them, endure the tiny children to come depend Me, and also forbid lock not: because that of together is the kingdom the God” - mark 10:13-14

Jesus is informing his hands-on worker to permit the youngsters to come approximately him. The only provided in the other means because we seldom use “suffer” to typical “allow” this days.


*
hibernicus:

“Allow” the tiny children (to approach me). “Suffer” method “permit” in this context.

That’s my understanding too.

The original context is the Bible, an event that is taped in Matthew chapter 19, note chapter 10, and Luke thing 18.

The regional Jews lug a bunch of little rugrats to check out Jesus, and his Apostles try to operation interference, figuring the the last point the huge boss wants is to deal with small tykes. After ~ the kids crowd around him Jesus drops the ethical of the story: “Whosoever candlestick not obtain the kingdom the God as a tiny child, that shall not go into therein.”

I hope the that helps. Waves in ~ Zsofia top top preview.


The phrase “tenants in ~ sufferance” comes to mind – ‘suffer’ in the sense of allow, allow is tho a typical usage. A tenant at sufferance is merely someone that does not have a present lease, a person renting month come month. Our experience as renters has actually been the landlords market the legally forced lease because that the first year, then proceed to collect the rent without giving to renew the lease. This way that every month’s rental payment buys girlfriend the right to occupy her dwelling place (apartment, house, etc.) for that month – through no guarantees beyond that month except as noted by law. She occupying it at the sufferance of the landlord, that is, in exchange because that rent he permits you to live there, there is no an explicit created contract, the problems of the lease being presumed to hold over on a month-to-month basis until he or you choose to readjust them – you deserve to move the end on ideal notice, and owe that nothing (other than feasible forfeiture of all or part of a damages security deposit); he can offer you notification he’s raising the rent.

‘Suffer’ in this sense works a lot favor ‘let’ – if you say, “Let’s walk to the beach,” your meaning is, “I suggest we go to the coast if friend agree”; it’s not instructions to who to grant permission come go, also though it sounds choose it.

Similarly, ‘suffer’ has traditionally carried the meaning of ‘permit, allow’ – the much more common an interpretation of ‘be in pain’ derives native the idea the you, or the civilization in general, is permit the human being suffering (in this sense) to remain in pain, rather than exhilaration to mitigate it.


*
Polycarp:

‘Suffer’ in this feeling works a lot choose ‘let’

Whereas ‘let’ provided to typical ‘prohibit’, together in ‘without allow or hindrance’ to mean ‘without any type of barriers’.


*
Derleth:

Whereas ‘let’ supplied to mean ‘prohibit’, as in ‘without let or hindrance’ to average ‘without any type of barriers’.

So “Let him suffer!” would certainly have virtually reversed in an interpretation over 300 years?

*


On a tangential note, I read an Ann Landers obelisk a te or an ext ago in which the letter-writer bemoaned the decline in parenting skills among the hoi polloi these days. The letter finished with: “And experience the children.”

What the writer meant, of course, was “and the children suffer.” somehow the usage of pseudo-classical rhetoric and genuine linguistic ignorance come stake out the moral high ground really rubbed me the wrong way, and also I still can’t view the expression “suffer the children” there is no wishing I’d written a crackpot letter about it. No that it would certainly have achieved anything, the course.


*
Gary_T:

Perhaps now the meaning of the women’s suffrage activity will make more sense to you.

I think that “suffrage” is unrelated come “suffering.”


I believe that Gary T’s suggest is that the “woman’s suffrage movement” refers to “allow females movement”.


*
BobArrgh:

I believe that Gary T’s allude is that the “woman’s suffrage movement” refers to “allow ladies movement”.

Exactly.


There are probably locations of the bible belt whereby the King James version of the i is quote in support of corporeal penalty in order to raise youngsters to it is in God-fearin’ Christians. :rolleyes:


There space probably areas of the bible belt wherein the King James version of the i is quote in assistance of corporeal penalty in order to raise youngsters to be God-fearin’ Christians. :rolleyes:

I don’t understand why you will do think that and I’m not seeing any type of support for it. The civilization here who taken the accurate meaning were the civilization who to be obviously familiar with the context of the verse. The human being who usage it conveying the wrong meaning are the ones that take it out of the Biblical context (Stephen King, presumably for intentional wordplay purposes, and also Ann Landers, probably not among America’s leading exponents that the brand-new Testament).

The i in the scriptures doesn’t do a bit of feeling using the other meaning. “Punish the kids to come depend to me?” appropriate after the disciples had been, well, trying to swat the children away however he rebuked them? Nah.

Nice gratuitous destruction at lock dumb fundy hillbillies though.


There are probably areas of the bible belt wherein the King James variation of the passage is quote in support of corporeal punishment in order to raise youngsters to it is in God-fearin’ Christians. :rolleyes:

Nitpick: that “corporal” punishment.


Nitpick: that “corporal” punishment.

Yeah, yet Corporal penalty was supported to significant Havoc and also then basic Mayhem!

*


Exactly.

But Tom Tildrum was merely pointing out that the 2 words have almost nothing to perform with each various other in regards to origin. ‘Suffrage’ is indigenous sub + fragor (under + ‘sound the approval’), and also ‘suffer’ originates from sub + ferre (under + carry). ‘Suffrage’ as in ideal to vote have the right to be attested to 1787.


But Tom Tildrum was merely pointing out that the 2 words have nearly nothing to execute with each other in terms of origin. ‘Suffrage’ is indigenous sub + fragor (under + ‘sound the approval’), and also ‘suffer’ comes from sub + ferre (under + carry). ‘Suffrage’ as in right to vote have the right to be attested to 1787.

See more: Megan Thee Stallion Make It Hot, Megan Thee Stallion, More By Megan Thee Stallion

Thanks because that pointing the out, and my apologies to Tom Tildrum for not picking it increase from his link. I had actually assumed, incorrectly, the the words came from the same root. Friend gentlemen have reduced my ignorance.