Replies

Great article.

I wonder if that's true about Sproul. 1994 is rather dated. Some preachers like John MacArthur will come up with some weird stuff now and then only to later make corrections down the road. Problem is, once you published a certain view then it seems to float around forever even though you might have retracted it.

I couldn't determine one way or another from Sproul's website if he really still holds this view. It won't stop me from reading his articles but it is a little disappointing.

Great article, Ksen.

...if her problem is organically caused, she needs a medical doctor.

Exactly. If someone has a real brain injury or disfunction, they should be seeing a psychiatrist, a medical docotor.

But a person's first and primary resource for how to live one's life should be Scripture. Only then will our lives become "God-entranced."

From a sermon by Pastor William Robison...

"We see that Paul's first recorded sermon (preached in the synagogue of Antioch of Pisidia) had two main points. One point is that everything in the history of Israel was leading up to the coming of Jesus and the great salvation for sinners that he would accomplish when he died and rose again. The other point in this sermon is that the story behind Jesus is God's story. His sermon is utterly saturated with God. Sixteen times Paul presses home the truth that God is the central Actor in history. Therefore, we are to lift all of our lives up to God and a God-ward lived, God-centered, God intoxicated, and God immersed life-lived out in a God entranced worldview. Parenting, marriage, sex, eating, school, work, play, television, music, sports, life, and money, are all meant to be swept up into the Holy presence of God."

And as John Calvin said, we understand these truths through the reading of Scripture...

"Therefore, while it becomes man seriously to employ his eyes in considering the works of God, since a place has been assigned him in this most glorious theatre that he may be a spectator of them, his special duty is to give ear to the Word, that he may the better profit." -- Institutes, I.vi

"this most glorious theatre..."

And...

"For what accords better and more aptly with faith than to acknowledge ourselves divested of all virtue that we may be clothed by God, devoid of all goodness that we may be filled by Him, the slaves of sin that he may give us freedom, blind that he may enlighten, lame that he may cure, and feeble that he may sustain us; to strip ourselves of all ground of glorying that he alone may shine forth glorious, and we be glorified in Him?" -- Institutes, Prefatory Address.

Also, Calvin has a wonderful chapter titled, “The Sum of the Christian Life: The Denial of Ourselves” (3.7). As I read Calvin’s solidly biblical treatment of the nature of man and sin, I realized that I had erred greatly by falling into the “proper self-esteem” teaching of Christian psychology. I realized that Christian psychology served to build man up in his sin and to pull God down as our good buddy who loves us unconditionally so that we can accept ourselves. But the Bible lifts God up as holy and glorious, while it strips man of his pride and self-righteousness and lays even the most righteous man on earth in the dust so that he proclaims, “I am insignificant; what can I reply to You?... I abhor myself and repent in dust and ashes” (Job 40:4; 42:6).

With this kind of attitude, is it any wonder the Christian Reformed Church supports three psychiatric hospital? I noticed that this article makes little or no mention of God's love for men. Typical of hyper-Calvinism. Man is scum and is absolutely worthless.

The author gives as good a view of the Christian anti-psychology position as any written by that camp. However, he is critical of virtually every major figure in the contemporary evangelical church, Reformed or not, with the exception of John MacArthur, for their support of Christian psychology. Opposition to most psychological practices can be found outside Christian circles as well: Thomas Szasz, for example.

The brain is an organism that can suffer from injuries, disorders, and other malfunctions. While alcohol and drug dependence and other self-abusing behaviors may be initiated by a person's free will, the long term effects of such substances and behavior may destroy a person's volitional capacity. As a result, psychiatric drugs and behavior modification programs (like the 12 Step Programs) serve useful purposes in addressing problems. A person who needs an anti-depressant to function or is impaired due to drug or alcohol problems is likely not to hear the Gospel message any more than a deaf or unconscious person. Not even a separationist, fundamentalist Baptist or a "double predestination" Calvinist would oppose obtaining a hearing aid or reviving an unconscious person. The use of medication or behavior modification would fall into the same category.

The opponents of Christian psychology would do well to develop an alternative that would incorporate what has been proven to be sound practices in the treatment of mental disorders.

I wish these threads wouldn't degenerate so fast (or if they did, they were at least funnier).

There is a general view, both in and out of church, that people "deserve" happiness and that interior "feelings" are our best and truest guide. I've completely given up on this theory.

Happiness on earth is a combination of the luck, hard work and common sense. Happiness is not particularly a function of salvation. If we strive to eradicate sin in ourselves and to worship God and to minister to our neighbors we may or may not "feel" better about ourselves but we're doing the right things.

Scripture really tells us all we need to know about our behavior (whether we like it or not). Scripture is less forthright about how we are suppose to "feel" at any given time. Popular psychology seems to emphasize these feelings over behavior. To me, it's a cart-before-the-horse type thing.