Is Psychology biblical?

You straight-up added text to the Bible. Just admit it.

 

No, it is changing the words of Scripture in order to support a foolish position.

 

I've noticed that the "anti-psychology at any cost" crowd won't say whether they go to medical doctors for extra-biblical aid. Foolish positions cannot be held consistently nor followed to their logical conclusions. Scripture does not directly cover all areas of life. As an outdoors-man, I've yet to find direction in Scripture for surviving the elements. There are many areas of lie that Scripture does not discus in detail. That does not make those details anti-Scripture.

 

Paul...

You have just slanderd me. :tonofbricks: Congradulations on that. But dont worry about it, I've been slandered before. :wavey:

Im my post I said...

So much for adding to scripture.



God bless.

 

That is still adding to Scripture and adding to or twisting Scripture to support your position in wrong. Twisting Scripture to support your position shows how weak that position really is.

 

Interesting how you condemn others for "adding" to Scripture while you justify blatantly changing its wording to match your beliefs by calling it "paraphrasing". Putting a nice name on adding to God's Word doesn't make it right, nor does it prove your point. Just the opposite; if you must change Scripture to prove your point, then your point is unScriptural. Isn't it interesting how that works?

 

Well said, kudos :thumbs:

 

Nooo...there was no adding scripture.

I said..."it could be paraphrased", which of means that I was saying that "psycho-babble" would fall under what the passage of scripture is referring to.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

AiC

 

Hello, Michael...

I'm sorry you misunderstood.

I said that the verse "could be paraphased"...meaning that I believe that "Psycho-babble" would fit perfectly with what the scripture is saying.


Hope that helps. Thank you for your input.

AiC

 

Have I missed anyone? :wavey::godisgood:

Praise the Lord.



AiC

 

May I suggest that most of the posts in this thread are generalizing? I suggest that there are two kinds of psychology that should be distinguished.

(1) Speculative psychology, based on nothing scientific. Freud would obviously fit in this category, with his nonsense about id, ego and super ego. Maslov would fit in here with his self esteem (prophesied as self love in the Bible and condemned). Rogers would fit in with his non-directive approach. And so forth. We can oppose this kind of psychology on Biblical grounds, and many Christian counselors have done so: L. Gilbert Little, Jay Adams and Wayne Mack (NANC), Don Matzat, Charles Solomon, etc.

(2) Medical treatment of the mentally ill, and the straight scientific research (on the brain, etc.) that produces the treatment. This is where psychology can actually be scientific and useful. I used to believe that one goal of a Christian counselor with anyone mentally ill should be to get them off their medicine. After counseling a schizophrenic girl and during that time being set straight by a doctor at a NANC counseling clinic (Jay Adams' people), I realized that the medicine which the girl took was actually benificial--to the family to prevent trouble!

 

You probably wouldn't. Of course, you probably wouldn't know if you were being counseled according to God's word if you went to a pastor either. The problem in this situation is that you are blindly going to someone for counseling help without getting the advice of someone with more experience in the faith. Also, don't rule out the work of the Spirit to guide you in this formative time. When I was a new believer and even now (32 years later), the Spirit has given me discernment even when I did not intellectually know enough to make the call.

The pastor should know something about the person to whom he refers people. Last year when I went to see a counselor, I asked three or four people I trusted (including my pastor) for advice, laying out a series of concerns. I had three sets of recommendations, including a very strong endorsement from a friend who works in a homeless ministry, that included a counselor about 20 miles away. I prayed about it and it seemed right, so I made an appointment.

To a point. A pastor is charged with being faithful to Christ and leading according to the best of his ability, as led by the Spirit. Spiritual growth and maturity can be promoted and enabled by a pastor, but it is ultimately the work of the individual and the Spirit. (We don't blame Jesus for Judas Iscariot or the fact that His disciples were often cowardly and spiritually immature.) A pastor should check things out and be ready to assist his flock in these circumstance.

Sure. So be very careful about condemning something that may be very helpful to members of your congregation simply because you read something on a website or read some verses ripped out of context and misinterpreted.

Have you noticed that, up to this point, no one who has condemned psychology will deal with the issue of using modern medicine?

This question doesn't make sense. Which is it? Have they mixed "truth with error" or have they not mixed truth with error (throwing out the error)?

1) Everyone walking on the earth today holds a mixture of truth and error - even your pastor. That's why it is important to listen to different points of view and take responsibility for truth and error on your own.

2) You seem to assume that the insights of psychology are of necessity, 100% error, although your question is so unclear, I can't know for sure.

Again, this is a very unclear demand.

1.) I am not advocating mixing truth and error.
2.) I am advocating discernment.

I think exercising discernment is so blatantly biblical, I don't really need to pull out a bunch of proof texts. I think the real issue here is that you are trying to win a debate by ascribing the idea of "mixing truth and error" to me and then making me defend it. At least, that's the way it seems base on you loaded/incoherent questions.If that's not the case, please rephrase you queries where you are not asking two contradictory things at once.

I wouldn't send anyone to a psychologist who puts quote marks around Christian...

In cases of apparent mental illness, I would recommend a church member see both an M.D. and a psychologist counselor to diagnose the issue. (I am somewhat knowledge regarding the symptoms of various kinds of mental illness based on my experience with troubled people.) And yes, often there are spiritual problems that go along with mental illness. I would continue ministering to the individual myself.

You really need to demonstrate that ALL psychological insights are "darkness" before you pull that prooftext out of context to make blanket condemnations.

 

Self-esteem is not, in a bad sense, self-love.

 

John of Japan has given the best answer so far.

 

A number of years ago, our church (over 2000 in attendane) retained or had an agreement with a Christian Counseling business to refer counseling cases to. I was not personally involved, so I don't know the details.

At a business meeting, the rationale was to preclude possible lawsuits against the church by referring cases to licensed counselors. It was felt that it was cheaper to do this than to hire a licensed counselor on staff.

Anyone have any experience in this area?

 

Wow, it is amazing how so many broad statements are made about this topic. Many of the statements made show a complete lack of understanding and little if any true Biblical discernment. It is so inconsistent to say that psychology is evil because it is "man's wisdom" and then to say it is ok to use or participate in other disciplines that are so called "man's wisdom" such as medical practice, electronics and technology and so on.

Yes, all wisdom is from God. God gave man wisdom to understand medical procedures and to discover new medicines. Not all those who have done so are believers and yet most Christians freely use that wisdom which is from God to man in order to develop such procedures and medicine.

The same could be said of electronics. God gave man the wisdom to develop the things we enjoy today. Were all things in the electronic world developed by "godly men"? Of course not, yet we use our computers daily.

Do ungodly people pervert these disciplines? Does man's wisdom distort the things of God and add to or change what God teaches in His Word? That I think is an obvious answer. And yet when it comes to the discipline of psychology many refuse to see that it has value as does medicine, electronics and so on.

Medical practice also is constantly changing. Medical procedures and medicine are quite different than they were even 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago. And just as the quote says "One method will not work on every problem.", not every problem is treated with the same method. Even patients with similar conditions may need to be treated in different manners.

It appears to me (just my observation, not an accusation) that many comments that have been made come from the prospective of someone who has not dealt with any or has had very little exposure to those with mental disorders. As the Father of a son who is bi-polar, we have dealt with several suicide attempts, homicide attempts and extreme behavioral swings. I have appreciated the value and wisdom of Christian counselors. I have also dealt with many folks who have mental disorders and have been greatly appreciative of a counselor who can guide a person spiritually while guiding them in the treatment of the disorder.

Ever been to a Christian doctor? Based on the logic used, there cannot be a Christian doctor because much of medicine has been developed by "ungodly men". Man's wisdom has perverted medicine in many ways yet Christian's go to medical doctors all of the time. Should we avoid the doctor because it is man's wisdom?

Many so called Pastor's have perverted the wisdom of God by twisting the Scripture to fit what they want it to say or taking Scripture out of context. The science and practice of psychology is wisdom from God given to man. Yes, some have perverted that wisdom, many have not.

 

Yes, what does that have to do with our discussion?

That’s an unsupported assertion.

Furthermore, this kind of statement makes me think (if you’re being honest) that you believe psychology is something different than what the rest of us are talking about.

Here’s what I’m talking about when I refer to psychology:

psy•chol•o•gy
[sahy-kol-uh-jee] –noun, plural -gies.

1. the science of the mind or of mental states and processes.
2. the science of human and animal behavior.
3. the sum or characteristics of the mental states and processes of a person or class of persons, or of the mental states and processes involved in a field of activity: the psychology of a soldier; the psychology of politics.

Psychology is not a “voice.” It is a field of study based on observation and experience with human behaviors, mental states and processes, actions, and ways of thinking.

Based on long-term observations and interactions with large groups of people, psychologists can detect patterns of behavior, destructive mental states, and make predictions of how someone might act in the future based on those patterns, unless there is a break with their routine (whether religious or otherwise).

For instance, I went to a counselor last year for personal reasons. I was suffering some post-traumatic stress (dreams always ending in death of loved ones, insomnia, irritability, intense anger) because of the need for me to manage the clean-up of the scene where a near family member committed suicide by shotgun to the head. I also needed help figuring out constructive ways to deal with my intense grief and anger to deal other family members who are mentally ill, and (in my opinion) largely responsible for creating the conditions while drove the deceased family member into despair.

The counselor, using knowledge of psychology, explained what science has observed regarding certain types of behavior, asked very probing and relevant questions which clarified what I was dealing with, and worked with me to develop a workable plan to help other family members who are innocent victims of the mentally-ill relatives. Furthermore, he helped me work through the issues that were exacerbating my grieving process, and gain understanding of how grief may manifest itself in the near to long-term future based on my circumstances. Armed with this knowledge, I am more prepared to deal with unexpected issues (such as when observing the Lord’s Supper and the pastor asks us to consider the “body and blood” of Jesus, I am immediately taken to that bloody suicide scene in my mind).

A good counselor, who is using the findings of psychology appropriately, is not trying to control his clients or dictate to them the way things are (unlike certain people here), but is a confidant who helps clients figure out what is going on in their lives and how they can make positive steps forward.

I don’t think anyone has tried to hang the label of “Christian” on anyone.

Should we allow a non-Christian to testify in court about what he/she has witnessed?

Do you allow a surgeon to operate on you if they (and all of the people who taught them and wrote the medical books) are not Christians?

Is it possible for a lost person make accurate observations regarding the behavior (not necessarily motivations) of others?

 

This statement adds nothing to the conversation. We're talking about benefits of psychology, the truth in psychology, not a false gospel leading little lambs astray.