Christians' addicted need our help

:thumbsraise the Lord people....I made it through day one smoke-free.I was a little dizzy all day and I'm sure my fiance would tell you I was almost incoherent but I MADE IT and by the grace of God and the prayers of many of you good brothers and sisters,God will deliver me.
Thank you my friends.Keep praying.

Bro.Greg

 

You go Greg!

One day at a time...

 

Well, well, now! Remember that you were the one who said that I was ill-informed. When I refute you and show you that I am very well-informed and qualified to speak to the issue, you lose your cool and become angry. BTW, you need to go back and re-read my post. You have it all wrong. I AM NOT a “psychobabbler” as you aver. On the contrary, I am on the other side of the issue. I think you have just proven yourself ill-informed of the whole business. Your sentence is full of sound and fury signifying nothing (with apologies to Shakespeare).

No one is arguing against the power of God. However, I am questioning whether this is of God or Satan. I am saying that the whole 12-step business is straight out of the psychobabble, not the power of God. Bill Wilson, the co-founder of AA, wrote to Jung in 1961 thanking him for the influence he had on the development of the 12-step method. Christians have bought into this heresy wholesale without discerning the Jungian psychology behind it. Jung, who was a neopagan and volkisch follower, believed in the god within and the collective unconscious. It didn’t matter to him what god you worshipped. He played with the occult and supposedly received much of his theory from his spirit-guide named Philemon. It is this power that all 12-step methods are seeking to tap—the power within, the collective unconscious, or some religious god. Jung reject God but he believed that all religious beliefs (Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, or whatever) were remnants of the collective unconscious imperfectly known. All this pagan rottenness is inherent in any 12-step method by whatever name. A skunk by any name still smells the same (with apologies to Rbt. Browning).

So, would you rather remain ignorant? Why don’t you read the books that I suggested?

Well, once again you are wrong on all points! First of all, I did not say and I am not a “Christian psychologist” as you charge. You mis-read my post or misconstrued it. This is your term, not mine. I said that I have training in psychometrics. Obviously, you don’t know what that is. Also, I am very cognizant of what secular and Christian psychology teaches—i.e. I’ve done graduate work in this field. This is not to say that I believe or practice it but I am knowledgeable. In other words, I know what my opponents believe.

Furthermore, I am a Bible-believing Christian but I thoroughly and completely reject the “Christian psychology” of Narramore, Dobson, Crabb, Collins, Minirth, Meier, et. al. Therefore, I am not a “Christian psychologist.” I did say that I studied under Jay Adams. Again, you obviously don’t know who Jay Adams is and what he believes or teaches.

Furthermore, you say that you reject “Christian psychology” yet you are promoting Reformers Unanimous, a 12-step methodology. This, BTW, is one of the most popular and devilish facets of “Christian psychology.” This is why I don’t think you know what you are talking about. Compare your Reformers Unanimous to AA and you will find a 1 to 1 parallel. RU apes AA with a few Bible verses and Christian jargon thrown in for good measure. The whole addiction and recovery movement—call it Christian or secular—is un-Biblical and false.

I agree that “Christian psychology” does not mix with Biblical teaching but you are supporting that very thing that you are condemning.

Why don’t you learn good manners? The problem is self when one cannot debate ideas without rancor. When you cannot refute my facts and arguments, you make an ad hominem (i.e. personal) attack by name-calling. Your vinegar and uncouth manners don’t win the argument for you. Truth and reason win arguments.

And, what knowledge do you have to add? Why don’t you take the challenge and read the recommended books? Then we can talk.

 

And where do you find the Biblical basis for this nonsense? Despite the pious terms, you are speaking straight Jungian heresy that tries to connect with the god within. It is very sad day when professing Christians have no discernment.

 

Nope, that’s not true! In fact, I know that we’re talking about behavioral patterns, not chemical events. Read the books I suggested and you will find medical doctors telling you that biochemical theories of addiction are not proven scientifically. There is no medical and scientific evidence to support biochemical theories of addiction. Also, I recommend Dr. Bob Smith’s book, The Christian Counselor’s Medical Desk Reference.

This is habituation, not biochemical addiction. The metabolic products are the result of habitual behavior, not the cause of it. Behavior is volition based. Now, you’re on my turf. If you are interested in ideas, truth, and facts, then I can help direct you to the sources. Otherwise, if you are simply interested in venting your spleen and proving you are right, then I can’t help you.

The problem is that you are mixing pop psychology and Christianity. And, you are not even aware of it. Using Christ’s name and a few Bible verses in a secular methodology is still a secular program. You have to change your whole paradigm to make it Biblically based. All 12-step programs have the wrong view of the self.

Are all the addicts and drunks saved when they begin the RU program?

I said nothing of the kind. You have jumped to a lot of false conclusions. You are wrong again. Get your facts straight before you blast someone.

Do you know what love is? It is not about coddling the sinner in his sin. Furthermore, what does this have to do with my faith. I don’t question your faith, your truthfulness, your manhood, and your patriotism just because I disagree with you.

BTW, I didn’t show off. I merely refuted your accusation that I was ill-informed. Can you now say that I am ill-informed? I’ve done my homework. What was I to say? There’s no bragging in my post. I was just stating my vitae. Challenge my qualifications, if you like, but you are hitting below the belt by making a personal attack on me. Shame on you. You are definitely wrong and in violation of Scriptural teaching. I rebuke you for your sin as commanded in Luke 17:3.

 

What do you think is the proper training? Jungian psychology upon which the 12-step programs are based?

Check out the following website:
http://www.nouthetic.org/

 

Doesn't the Jungian psychology behind all this bother you? You are simply substituting God for Jung's higher power (i.e. collecitve unconscious). Can you take pagan heresy and morph it into truth?

 

Why does it work? Is it the power of God? How do you know? How is this different, other than a few Bible verses and Christian buzz-words, from any other AA (12-step) program? (Jung, you see, said it really didn't matter what terminology you used--it was all the same.) May I suggest that it is pure Jungian with Christian words? It would be the same to use Hindu or Buddhist terms. Do you accept Jungian psychology?

Furthermore, using Christian words without Christian meanings is extremely dangerous because it so easily deceives people into thinking it is Christian and Biblical. This is exactly what Jung said was legitimate.

Any 12-step program is WRONG.
*Wrong view of self
*Wrong view of sin
*Wrong view of confession
*Wrong view of repentance
*Wrong view of man

BTW, remember that Jung tapped into occult power for his success. Furthermore, all 12-step programs seem to offer about the same recovery rate regardless whether they are called Christian or secular. So, how do you differentiate that one is by the power of God and the other is of some other power since success is seen in light of recovery rates? In other words, it is success rate, not Biblical truth, that justifies the program.

 

Haughty………pride………….????????? Now, Bro. Greg, seems that you were cussing the judgmental Fundamentalists in the Greenville, SC area just a few posts ago. Isn’t this judging me?

And Bro. Greg, I know you’re trying so hard not to be offensive by saying, “I assume you didn't mean to(at least I hope not).” However, I am responsible for all I say and do. No, I make the choices and am thereby responsible. Don’t hedge. There’s nothing wrong in rebuking a brother (Luke 17:3); it is an obligation.

But, you know something, I’ll accept the rebuke. Yes, pride (self) is a terrible sin and humility (I desire it) is a mighty virtue. Pride and self are fundamental problems that we all face. It comes out in many ways including “addiction” (satisfying selfish habits) and exalting one’s accomplishments. This does not, however, mean that we tolerate it—either in ourselves or in others. Yeah, I think I’m smart and well educated. I would call that pride. Wouldn’t you? Pride is thinking that we’re something when we’re nothing. Let’s deal with it Biblically.

Greg, Soulman, Sue, & whomever:
I was wrong in sticking it to Soulman when he made a gaffe. Whereas I spoke the truth and maintain the rightness of my position, I did enjoy sticking in the knife with a twist. This is wrong and sinful. It is of the flesh and self. I was wrong for being prideful and exalting self. I should have forthrightly spoken the truth with integrity and humility without letting personal satisfaction enter the picture. Therefore, I confess my sin before God and man (i.e. I agree with God that my sin is evil, wicked, filthy, dirty, rotten, and disgusting) and I repent (i.e. I have a change of mind and heart about it and turn my back upon it). It is pride. Greg, you are right and I am wrong.

Soulman & others, will you please forgive me?

Also, I promise not to do this thing again.

Thank you

 

QUESTIONS
Why do we need Reformers Unanimous?

Can anyone deny that RU is based on Jungian 12-step methodology?

Why can’t we simply use the Word of God to reach poor lost drunks and druggies. They need salvation, not reformation. It is being done in a number of Bible-believing ministries.

 

And where do you find the Biblical basis for this nonsense? Despite the pious terms, you are speaking straight Jungian heresy that tries to connect with the god within. It is very sad day when professing Christians have no discernment. </font>[/QUOTE]Brother, you have made many assumptions about me, based upon a simple statement.

I have no idea who or what Jungian is... I do not care...

I know that the Word of God, teaches that we are all sinners...

Romans 3:23

Even after we are saved, we continue to struggle with sin. Read Romans 7 about the struggle that Paul had.

I know that as a Christian and as a Pastor I want as many people praying for me as possible.

Remember 1 John was written to Christians. In that wonderful little book we find 1 Jn 1:9. If Christians do not struggle with sin, why is that included in this book written to believers?

Now I have given you Scripture to back up my statement of requesting prayer, and that Christians constantly struggle with sin on a daily basis.

What I would like from you is the following:

1. What did you assume about me and my lack of discernment, after only reading a simple statement?

2. What would even make you think I support or do not support 12 step programs for Christians... based upon my statement?

3. Don't you just hate it, when Christians jump to conclusions?

God Bless

 

Paid....I thank you for your post and I want you to know that I have no problem with the apparent fact that you are well-informed and probably well-educated.I'm inclined to agree with your assessment of the 12 step programs and the so-called "christian psychology" programs.They are replete with worldly wisdom(so-called)and tend to draw people away and get them focused on such unbiblical ideas as "self-esteem" and how badly we have been "wounded" in the past.The Bible definitely teaches that SIN is SIN and that we are to FORGET what is past(Phil.3:13-14)We don't need to revisit the past!!!
Now...as to my smoking ...it is a SIN...it is an HABITUAL SIN.....It is an habitual sin BEHAVIOUR....and lastly,due to the element of nicotene it is an habitual SIN behaviour that does indeed have a CHEMICAL component to it.Brother,I'm not using a 12 step plan or patches or anything else...I'm trying to quit this beast COLD TURKEY and I have a real fight on my hands so you and all the rest of the folks in here keep praying for me.I made it fairly well on day one but today I bowed to some "stress" I encountered and smoked a few small cigars.I am NOT going to beat myself up about this.Tomorrow is a new day so I have asked the Lord to forgive me and help and strengthen me to do better tomorrow.I have been dizzy and "spaced out" all day so please keep praying.I will have VICTORY somehow,someway because I believe the Lord wants me to be free of this.
Paid...one more thing...I did not "cuss" the brothers here in Greenville...but there are some of them that really think they are God's gift to the world.Legalist to the core...and proud of it.I forgive you and I'd appreciate it if you would forgive me if I sounded impatient or offensive in any way.I agree there is a scriptural mandate and proper way to rebuke a brother if he(or she)be overtaken in a fault.We just need to do it in love and humility considering ourselves lest we also be tempted.

God Bless You

Bro.Greg

 

</font>[/QUOTE]Being honest with God is called confession (not the Roman Catholic idea). Confession is to say the same thing as God says about our sin, namely that our sin is evil, rotten, filthy, dirty, wicked and without excuse. It is agreeing with God about our sin. It is without excuse!

This is horrible advice! What in the world is a recovering sinner? This is a cliché of the so-called “Christian” recovery movement. A sinner is a sinner—either repentant or unrepentant. There’s no middle ground.

Paul knew nothing of a “recovering sinner” as he wrote: “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 6:1-23)”

Brother, you have made many assumptions about me, based upon a simple statement. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]What assumptions have you assumed that I made?

Does this mean that you choose to remain ignorant? Paul warns that we are to be wise and discerning “[l]est Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. (2 Corinthians 2:11) “ The Apostle warns: “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:3)” This is the danger we face when we start spouting Jungian clichés. After awhile, they become so familiar that we think they are true without discerning the subtle different between the psychological lie and the truth of God’s Word.

The Bible says that we are sinners, not recovering sinners. The two thoughts are antithetical. Now, we are either unrepentant, unforgiven sinners abiding under the judgment and wrath of God or we are repentant and forgiven sinners saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Nowhere does the Scripture teach that we are recovering sinners.

Romans 7 does not say that Paul was a recovering sinner nor does it give that idea (read chapter 6)! The Biblical idea is clearly explained by the struggle between the old man and the new man. It is the battle between the flesh and the Spirit (see Galatians 5). The concept of a recovering sinner is clearly adopted from the secular recovery movement and 12-step programs which are a direct derivative of Jungian psychology. The Biblical view of a sinner and the recovery idea (i.e. recovering sinner) are two entirely different animals. Anyone who says differently must not understand the meaning of one or the other.

This is totally irrelevant and immaterial since I do not oppose and did not say anything against intercessory prayer. It is Biblical and I do believe strongly in intercessory prayer.

Again, there is a world of difference between the concepts of a recovering sinner and one who is a forgiven sinner struggling with temptation and sin. 1 John 1:9 is true and rightly applied to the believer but you must also read and understand 1 John 3:2-10; 5:2-5,18-20. John writes in black and white contrasts.

The real problem is that your Scripture does not say anything about a recovering sinner. It surely does NOT back up your statement of being a recovering sinner. A sinner is unrepentant and under God’s judgment or he is forgiven and his sins are under the Blood of Christ. There is no recovering sinner of Scripture in the sense of the term in modern usage. Let me emphasize that the term recovering sinner is a concept taken directly from the unbiblical recovery movement with its attendant debt to Jungian psychology. You cannot sanitize and clean up this false, unscriptural movement by talking about Jesus and adding a few Bible verses out of context. This is like inserting the name Jesus and Bible verses in the Tibetan Book of the Dead or the Koran.

I didn’t assume anything about you and I didn’t say anything about you. I just attacked what you said. IMHO, it is undiscerning for any professing Christian to favorably quote, unwittingly or not, ideas based on pagan sources (Carl Jung was a neopagan) although a couple of steps removed (i.e. Jung -&gt; AA -&gt; "Christian" recovery movement).

Why are you personalizing this and taking it personally? I have no personal argument with you. I still believe in the old-fashioned idea of debating and arguing ideas upon their own merits. The problem is that people want to take things personally when their ideas are refuted. This is paranoia. I did not call you names, question your character or sincerity, ridicule you, disparage your person, etc. I just said that you are wrong in your advice.

You posted what is a direct quote out of so-called “Christian” 12-step programs. If you are quoting the jargon then it appears that you have had some contact with the ideas. Your post indicated that you approved of the concept.

No, Christians should judge ideas with discernment. In fact, Scripture commands it. If you are implying that I erroneously jumped to a conclusion, then you are wrong. There is nothing wrong with drawing conclusions from data. I did that and supported it with rational argument. Furthermore, if you are implying that reaching a conclusion is un-Christian, then you are wrong again. Support it!

However, you did erroneously draw conclusions about my post by reading your own ideas into it:
1. You intimated that I was opposed to intercessory prayer—I am not.
2. You intimated that I didn’t think that Christians sinned—I do.
3. You intimated that I made assumptions about you—I haven’t.

You were wrong on all points. So, what is your point?

Now, having said all that, please allow me to offer a more personal perspective. Whereas you posted an apparent statement that is unbiblical and wrong, I think that you did it ignorantly, not knowing the meaning and background of such statements and being unfamiliar with Jungian psychology and 12-step fallacies. You repeated what sounded good and reasonable to you. That’s okay. We all make gaffes and I’ve made more than my share of foolish statements and blunders. The important thing is how you respond to the information that I’ve shared with you. Don’t accept my arguments just because I cogently and forcibly stated them. Become knowledgeable in this area yourself by reading the recommended books (see my earlier posts) by Almy, Fairplay, and Bobgan. Furthermore, I highly recommend Jay Adams’ Competent to Counsel. All these are written from a Biblical, not secular or psychological, viewpoint. As a Pastor, you need this knowledge in order to counsel, warn, teach, and lead your people aright. Whenever I see error that goes against Scripture, I come on strong without apology to refute it and save others from being led astray. You have the same responsibility as a pastor. Also, check out this website for further training in this area: http://www.nouthetic.org/

I am interested in hearing your response. Thank you.

 

Paidigogos

Celebrating Recovery
is a Biblically based program that was started at Saddleback Church.

 

How so? What is Biblical about it? What separates it from other recovery programs? Saying it is Biblical doesn't make it so! A lot of heresy masquerades under the guise of being Biblical.

 

Oh Lord not the saddleback here to.

Christian Science = Robert Shuller = Rick Warren = the purpose driven books = being led astray by the teaching that God is in everything and everyone and that = the road to New Age thinking.

Sorry but research it.

Peace in Jesus.

Brother SM.

 

I found the following on the Internet. Please note the description, appeal, and emphasis. It appeals to the pragmatic rather than the Biblical, to experience rather than principle, and to feelings (emotions) rather than truth. Anyone familiar with the recovery movement can readily identify this as part and parcel of the recovery package.
Celebrating Recovery
By: Rick Warren & John Baker
Celebrating Recovery fills a long-standing need in the church in its role as Christ’s healing agent. Developed by John Baker and Rick Warren of the renowned Saddleback Church, this program’s life-changing effectiveness has gained it an explosive, grass-roots popularity. Drawn from the Beatitudes, Celebrating Recovery helps people resolve painful problems in the context of the church as a whole. Rather than setting up an isolated recovery community, it helps participants and their churches come together and discover new levels of care, acceptance, trust, and grace.

 

I checked it out on the web and they're cut with the same cookie cutter as AA. Talking Christian jargon in a pagan (Jungian) program doesn't make it Christain and Biblical. It merely confuses the issues and deceives undiscerning people into believing it's Christian. Changing the word Allah in the Koran and replacing it with Jesus doesn't make it true or Christian.

Furthermore, no one, I repeat no one, on this thread has even challenged or argued that all of the so-called Christian recovery programs are not based on Jungian psychology. They can't because it is true and they would be blown away by the facts. AA, RU, CR, etc.--it doesn't matter because they are all the same with just a different wrapper. A skunk by any other names still smells the same.

Why are so many so-called ministries getting involved in these wildly popular (read faddish) programs?

It's simple! Lust (i.e. desire), power, money, and presitige.
1. The success syndrome
2. The economics of ministry—it’s profitable to publish and do programs
3. Megalomania
4. Feelings of altruism
5. It’s the thing to do—fad
6. Market driven philosophy

Once again, we are being programmed to death. Have we lost the power of God in our ministries? Are we trying to do God’s work man’s way? IMHO, this was one of the major factors (i.e. programs) in the decline of the old mainline denominations. Are we replicating their error?

 

(no words necessary to express my opinion)

 

As a man who is VERY familiar with A.A., I can say unequivicably (sp) that paidagogos is right on this one.
Folks, this is a (Loose)quote of Bill W.
He was the founder of A.A. along with Dr. Bob S.
"To Christ I was willing to grant a good man. His teachings most helpful. But my mind snapped shut and was unwilling to ascribe him as Sovereign of the Universe. Then my friend suggested I choose my own concept of God. To this I could readily agree." (Taken from Bill's story in the Big Book of Alcoholic's Anonymous)
Folks, the facts are historical. Bill W. and Dr. Bob S. founded A.A. on June 10 1935. Since that time, every single 12 Step program has been a direct descendant of their anti-christ program.
N.A.,O.A., G.A.,C.A.,CoDA, Al-Anon, the list is endless anymore. They have even published a NKJV Bible with their anti-christ philosophies built right into it. They call it "The Serenity Bible". These are facts.
No Christian in his right mind would allow the marriage of anti-christ with Christ.
Sadly, today, millions of "Christians" are terribly deceived.
I have had nearly 14 years experience with A.A. and I, too, was deceived for many years until God showed me these words of Bill W. in light of Scripture. I, too, thought I could "marry" Christ with A.A.. I was wrong, and so are you folks if you think you can get away with it.
There are much better models for dealing with addicts.
BTW, addiction IS a real thing. One's body becomes dependant on the drug for normal functioning. However, Christ is more powerful than any drug. "Greater is He that is in me than he that is in the world".
Yes, the church should reach out to these folks. Get them to repent first, then help them with their struggle to obey God and lay the drugs aside. Many times, God works a miracle and the person is delivered on the spot. Other times he must fight for his freedom. In either case, if he truly wants to be free, Christ meets him at his need and supplies the strength to walk away from it.

This has been my experience, and Scripture backs it up.

In HIS service;
Jim