For this child I prayed, and the LORD has granted me my petition that I made to him. Therefore I have lent him to the LORD. As long as he lives, he is lent to the LORD.” And he worshiped the LORD there. - 1 Samuel 1:27–28 (ESV)

A Bad Premise

“I brought you into this world, and I can take you out!” This is a joke (mostly) that I have heard at different times throughout my life, and I imagine that you have heard it too. This tongue-in-cheek statement is a statement made by a parent who is claiming the right to end a child’s life based on the premise that the parent is responsible for the child’s birth in the first place. I have never heard anyone say this seriously. Nevertheless, although the speaker doesn’t really intend to harm a child, there remains a bad premise in the statement that is required to make it work.

The bad premise in the statement is the idea that parents have full freedom to do whatever they want with their children. While it is true that the child was conceived and subsequently born to a mother and father, it does not therefore follow that the parents have full and complete ownership of the child. I will make a couple observations about this point from Hannah’s words about Samuel in the passage above.

First, Hannah received Samuel from Yahweh. Hannah had been unsuccessful in bearing children. What made the difference was not her choice, but Yahweh’s kindness. Hannah had prayed for a child, and Yahweh granted her petition. That is why Hannah was able to have Samuel. 

Second, Hannah is only returning to Yahweh what is His. By dedicating Samuel to service in the temple, Hannah was not abdicating her responsibility as a mother and she was not transferring ownership from herself to Yahweh. Her dedication of Samuel to the temple was a reflection of what is true for all children: they are a gift from Yahweh for parents to steward. In Hannah’s unique case, she promised to return Samuel to Yahweh once she received him. 

For Hannah, the common saying would not make sense. Yes, she is Samuel’s mother. But Samuel is not hers to do with as she pleases. Samuel is a gift from Yahweh in response to her prayers. She did not control bringing Samuel into this world. Yahweh did.

What, then, is Hannah doing by lending Samuel to Yahweh? She is fulfilling her vow to Yahweh that she had made. She had promised to dedicate Samuel to Yahweh’s service, and that is what it means for her to lend him to Yahweh.

Children Are a Gift

What do parents today take from this passage? The point of this article is to remind parents that children are a gift from God. We do not own our children in the sense that we have absolute rights over them. All things are from God, through God, and to God. That means that there is nothing that is categorically and absolutely mine with no qualification whatsoever. Whatever I have, I have from God. That includes children. The fact that parents are stewards of children and not owners leads to a few implications.

First, parents do not get to decide to do whatever they want with their children. Parents do not have absolute, despotic control over their children. Parents are accountable to God for the way they treat their children. It is possible for parents to treat their children as though they get to do whatever they want, but this is simply not true. Parents have limited authority over their children, not because a group like the government or society has more authority than parents do, but because God does. Children of parents are children of their parents not because parents decided it. Parents do not choose their children. If anything, it is more accurate that God chooses parents for children. 

Second, parents must seek to raise their children as God would have them. This implication is a corollary of the first. If parents do not get to decide what to do with their children, who does? It is not the state, because the state’s role is not to decide how children should be raised. The state’s role is to administer justice and protect its citizens. It is not children, either, because children need to be raised to know what is right and good and true. They are not born knowing it. If parents allow their children to dictate how they should be raised, things have become backward. Who, then, gets to decide how children should be raised? Well, the answer is rather simple: God does. It is not for nothing that parents are instructed to raise children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6). Parenting is about setting children on a path toward what is good, right, and true. All that is good comes from God; all that is right is determined by God; and all that is true is verified by God. If parents are going to raise their children “right,” that will mean raising their children as God would have them, and not simply as they please.

Third, parents’ words toward their children should reflect the truth. I like a good joke as much as anyone else (maybe more than some), so I can appreciate a parent joking with their children about their supreme authority over them. It could be a good bit if the circumstances are right and the children get it. But that is part of the point. The line is not true; the only way it can be said in any sincerity is if it is said in jest.  How I raise my children is not a decision that I get to make with no reference to anything other than my own will. 

Conclusion

In conclusion, parenting is a stewardship, not an ownership. I do not own my children. They are fundamentally creations of God, made in His image, and ought to be raised in a manner which seeks to please God before myself. Children are a marvelous gift. They are not our right. They are a charge from the Lord rather than objects of my making to be used how I please.