Psychology and the Church

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gentlemen I share LF's concerns. The things neither Pastor Tim or Pastor Kevin nor Pastor Joe seem to be aware of are these:

1. Depression can and often does put a barrier between the sufferer and the Word of God. Drugs will stop the destructive thoughts long enough to accurately hear any counsel or therapy.

2. Inequity in mental health coverage. The insurance companies will pay for Prozac but not for the therapy that is needed in concert with the meds. So people are on meds long term they should be on for a few months (to allow the "noise" to calm down.

3. Bipolar is real. Schizophrenia is real. Psychosis (short or long term) is real. Saying they are "sin" does nothing but create shame, fear and pain for the families impacted by these diseases.

I would say this: Y'all don't know how many families you are serving are quietly suffering with a family history of mental illness (the UP has a lot of alcoholics who are "self medicating" their disorders).

Number 1 is accurate. Often the cycle can be broken by drugs. And, often the use of drugs can reveal to the counselee that they are depressed, when they denied it prior.
Number 2 is a non issue. Counseling costs nothing, unless you go to a professional. Pastors are shepherds, not professionals. If a pastor is able to work closely with the doctor and the doctor isn't of the "high and mighty" variety, then much can be accomplished through conventional medicine and biblical counseling, with no psychological treatment. In such cases I would neither advise the counselee to start nor stop taking anything. I would, however, advise them to seek medical help - never psychological help. Again, read my long quote. The goal is to help them build the skills to cope with what ails them, which is usually a failure to deal with sin properly. However, there are exceptions, which God uses to help conform us into the image of Christ. Spurgeon was an excellent example.
Number 3 is an empty assertion based on pseudo science. Yes, the experiences are real. And, yes, they might be caused by external or internal causes. But any sin, regardless of the cause, is sin. It can be helped. Bipolar, as I mentioned earlier, can be a real problem. However, most who are diagnosed are not bipolar, but depressed and don't have a proper view of God. Schizophrenia is nebulous and difficult to define. Generally it's accepted as an exaggerated response to fear, guilt and hopelessness. Generally there is no such thing as a Christian schizophrenic. (I said generally) Psychosis is too generic to deal with here.

Gail, I know you mean well, but you don't know our church. One woman has a husband who she has described as "self medicating" with alcohol. She sees the reality of what's happening, but he's not interested in the things of the Lord. Another couple is rebounding from a time of slipping back into drugs. The simple fact is, these folks were studying and practicing nouthetic counseling before I ever arrived. When I showed up I just blended in. So, actually, I am quite aware of how many families I'm serving that are "self-medicating." You picked on the UP, so obviously had me in mind when you made that assertion.

When it comes right down to it, regardless of the reasons, if the person will not accept biblical counseling then there's nothing we can do for them. If someone refuses to follow the counsel I give them and do their homework I stop working with them. They can go to any shrink and gain a sympathetic ear. But if they want to have victory in the spiritual battle they're facing then they need Scripture, pure and simple. This isn't cold and sterile. It's empathetic and loving, being more concerned with their soul than their immediate comfort or perceived needs. Even if much of their challenge is from some form of brain damage (yes, we have one of those too), genetic predisposition (I have worked closely with an autistic young man), chemical imbalance or whatever. They can see a doctor about their physiological issues. Leave matters of behavior to the sufficiency of Scripture. If this is denied then perhaps Paul's words to Timothy are considered superfluous.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

I will meet with any person, any time, to assist them in knowing God and growing in Christ. That's the focus, regardless of what ails them. And there is no fee.
 
Here is one example of a practical use for psychology as it affects Christians:


MISSIONS & PSYCHOHERESY Chapter 2 Answers to Three Questions

Psychological screening of missionaries before they are sent overseas.

The group Psychoheresy says that this is a great error. What do you think? Is screening and testing of missionaries before they are sent overseas to tough places a legitimate use of psychology?

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 12:54:28 EST-----

P.s. if pastors are alone "competent" to handle those with mental illness, how then would any medications be given? Or would the solution be that there are absolutely no mental illnesses that would benefit from medication.

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 01:04:30 EST-----

Is this also a legitimate use of Christian psychology: Marital Satisfaction among Christian Missionaries: A longitudinal Analysis from Candidacy to Second Furlough | Article from Journal of Psychology and Christianity | HighBeam Research

It would seem pretty useful to study patterns of martial satisfaction among Christian missionaries and the factors that impact this. A local pastor at a local church might not be "competent" to handle this task (his concerns are local, after all); specialized professionals might be needed.

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 01:07:11 EST-----

Or how about this classic book that helps missionaries adjust to overseas: Amazon.com: Psychology of Missionary Adjustment: Marge Jones, E. Grant Jones: Books.

Is this a legitimate use of "Christian psychology?" Even if it is written by a woman?

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 01:13:27 EST-----

A final question:

Does an individual's sin have a direct correspondence to their state of mental health?

This seems to be Jay Adam's repeated claim.

I do not buy it. It is reductionistic and formulaic. Often sinners are mentally happier and also one's depression is often not linked to sin.

To tell a woman with post-partum depression that she is depressed due to her sin is silly. She is depressed because we live in a fallen world where our chemicals don't work right.
 
Is this a legitimate use of "Christian psychology?" Even if it is written by a woman?

Nope. It's merely a use of secular paganism.

To say that there are Christians who use psychology is one thing. To say that there is such a monster as "Christian psychology" is another.

Also one must not confuse psychiatry (which requires one to be an MD and occasionally has legitimate uses based upon emperical knowledge) with psychology - a shamanist practice which belongs up there with the labyrinth. The appeal to pragmatism the givaway.
 
Gentlemen I share LF's concerns. The things neither Pastor Tim or Pastor Kevin nor Pastor Joe seem to be aware of are these:

1. Depression can and often does put a barrier between the sufferer and the Word of God. Drugs will stop the destructive thoughts long enough to accurately hear any counsel or therapy.

2. Inequity in mental health coverage. The insurance companies will pay for Prozac but not for the therapy that is needed in concert with the meds. So people are on meds long term they should be on for a few months (to allow the "noise" to calm down.

3. Bipolar is real. Schizophrenia is real. Psychosis (short or long term) is real. Saying they are "sin" does nothing but create shame, fear and pain for the families impacted by these diseases.

I would say this: Y'all don't know how many families you are serving are quietly suffering with a family history of mental illness (the UP has a lot of alcoholics who are "self medicating" their disorders).

Number 1 is accurate. Often the cycle can be broken by drugs. And, often the use of drugs can reveal to the counselee that they are depressed, when they denied it prior.
Number 2 is a non issue. Counseling costs nothing, unless you go to a professional. Pastors are shepherds, not professionals. If a pastor is able to work closely with the doctor and the doctor isn't of the "high and mighty" variety, then much can be accomplished through conventional medicine and biblical counseling, with no psychological treatment. In such cases I would neither advise the counselee to start nor stop taking anything. I would, however, advise them to seek medical help - never psychological help. Again, read my long quote. The goal is to help them build the skills to cope with what ails them, which is usually a failure to deal with sin properly. However, there are exceptions, which God uses to help conform us into the image of Christ. Spurgeon was an excellent example.
Number 3 is an empty assertion based on pseudo science. Yes, the experiences are real. And, yes, they might be caused by external or internal causes. But any sin, regardless of the cause, is sin. It can be helped. Bipolar, as I mentioned earlier, can be a real problem. However, most who are diagnosed are not bipolar, but depressed and don't have a proper view of God. Schizophrenia is nebulous and difficult to define. Generally it's accepted as an exaggerated response to fear, guilt and hopelessness. Generally there is no such thing as a Christian schizophrenic. (I said generally) Psychosis is too generic to deal with here.

Gail, I know you mean well, but you don't know our church. One woman has a husband who she has described as "self medicating" with alcohol. She sees the reality of what's happening, but he's not interested in the things of the Lord. Another couple is rebounding from a time of slipping back into drugs. The simple fact is, these folks were studying and practicing nouthetic counseling before I ever arrived. When I showed up I just blended in. So, actually, I am quite aware of how many families I'm serving that are "self-medicating." You picked on the UP, so obviously had me in mind when you made that assertion.

When it comes right down to it, regardless of the reasons, if the person will not accept biblical counseling then there's nothing we can do for them. If someone refuses to follow the counsel I give them and do their homework I stop working with them. They can go to any shrink and gain a sympathetic ear. But if they want to have victory in the spiritual battle they're facing then they need Scripture, pure and simple. This isn't cold and sterile. It's empathetic and loving, being more concerned with their soul than their immediate comfort or perceived needs. Even if much of their challenge is from some form of brain damage (yes, we have one of those too), genetic predisposition (I have worked closely with an autistic young man), chemical imbalance or whatever. They can see a doctor about their physiological issues. Leave matters of behavior to the sufficiency of Scripture. If this is denied then perhaps Paul's words to Timothy are considered superfluous.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

I will meet with any person, any time, to assist them in knowing God and growing in Christ. That's the focus, regardless of what ails them. And there is no fee.

For what it's worth, modern Psychology is more than Freudian or Jungian theory. And God can use a mental health professional (MSW, Psychologist or Psychiatrist) in a different way than He would use a pastor to reach His Children. :2cents: Sometimes, they calm the person down enough so they can hear what they are being told. :2cents:

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 08:07:01 EST-----

Is this a legitimate use of "Christian psychology?" Even if it is written by a woman?

Nope. It's merely a use of secular paganism.

To say that there are Christians who use psychology is one thing. To say that there is such a monster as "Christian psychology" is another.

Also one must not confuse psychiatry (which requires one to be an MD and occasionally has legitimate uses based upon emperical knowledge) with psychology - a shamanist practice which belongs up there with the labyrinth. The appeal to pragmatism the givaway.

I notice the omission of the MSW in your blanket condemnation. I guess an MSW is kinda ok but a PsychD is a shaman? :eek:
 
A final question:

Does an individual's sin have a direct correspondence to their state of mental health?

This seems to be Jay Adam's repeated claim.

Perhaps you are once again misunderstanding Adams. Let him speak for himself:

You Talk About Nothing Else But Sin!

Now that is an interesting charge. I want to forestall all misunderstanding on the subject. Yes, I speak a lot about sin. So does the Bible. ... All problems stem from Adam’s sin. Had there been no fall, there would be no remedial counseling. But Adam did sin, and if you were to trace genetic problems, environmental factors, and poor training back far enough, you would discover that it is because of the fall that these problems exist. Sin, then, rather than being a limiting concept, is the broadest of all. It covers the waterfront!

But not all of an individual counselee’s problems may be traced to some specific sin in his life. It may be that he has been injured by others, misled, and so on. While he bears responsibility for how he handles wrongdoing toward himself, nevertheless, he is certainly not responsible for everything that occurs.

In Competent to Counsel, published 40 years ago, I stated clearly that the cases of Job and the man born blind (John 9) are explicit examples of the fact that people do not always bring their problems upon themselves.[2] In the providence of God, who knows how many illnesses, and other untoward circumstances, may accrue from transactions that take place in the unseen world? We are not privy to such information. The only thing that is important for us to say about such matters is that God held Job (and his four counselors) responsible for interpreting and dealing with his condition so far as they were able to do so.

In cases where no causal relationship between one’s behavior and his circumstances is apparent, that usually calls for a similar tact to be taken by Nouthetic counselors. They help their counselees to understand (so far as possible) what is happening, to face it with biblical attitudes and actions, and to learn how to grow more like Christ from doing so. Often, an exposition and application of Romans 8:28-29 to the counselee’s situation is in order. We certainly would not postulate some hidden sin where there is no evidence of it. Rather, with Christ, we would declare, “Neither did this man nor his parents sin (John 9:1-2).” We would also take our stand with Job against the accusations of the first three counselors.

I hope from this explanation, the calumny that has been leveled against us will be dispelled once and for all. We do not accuse every person of sin when he comes for counseling. In addition to those who have not brought trouble upon themselves, there are those who are neither in trouble nor are seeking to overcome sin in their lives. I speak of those who simply desire counsel about whom to marry, what school to attend, how to deal with life issues biblically, and the like. So, it is just not true that we go searching for sin in every counselee’s life. Nor is it fair or accurate to charge us with doing so.

Or, with regard to medication:

Nouthetic Counselors Oppose the Use of Medicine, Don't They?

Of course not. From the outset of the Nouthetic movement we have worked closely with physicians. We feature them in training programs, publish their books, and refer people to them regularly. That is a totally false charge that is often made against us. Now, we are careful to distinguish between true disease and that which does not have an organic etiology. We are concerned to see that medicine not be used to obtain pain relief while by-passing non-organic causes of some difficulty in living.

Roughly speaking, there are two types of medicine. One is supplementary to bodily output. For instance, if the body is not producing insulin as it should, we think it proper to add insulin from the outside. Or, if one is suffering from atrial fibrillation we believe in taking a beta blocker in order to achieve a normal, steady heart beat. The use of medicine in such cases helps the body to junction as it was supposed to function.

The use of psychotropic drugs, on the other hand, inhibits the body from functioning as it should. It is that use of medicine that we deplore. ... There are, of course, many organically-caused problems. Our counselors regularly refer counselees to physicians whenever they suspect that something organic may be behind their behavior. They do not want to miss a brain tumor, an aneurysm, or anything else that might require medical treatment. ... What we do deplore is the use of medicine to deal with problems that have no organic cause. We are adverse to masking those difficulties with medicine. For instance, if one’s conscience is troubling him by triggering unpleasant feelings, we think that the solution to the problem is not found in drugs but in dealing with whatever it is that activated the conscience in the first place. In such cases the counselor deals with sin, not with the feelings. That is the bottom line.

You can find much more here. And you may not agree with his conclusions, but it is unfair to describe his approach as "psychology" and to accuse him of only harping against sin and being opposed to all forms of medication. Perhaps there is a lot of talking past one another because this is an emotional topic. But there has also been a lot of misunderstanding and wrongly imputed motives as well. Hopefully an ad fontes approach can clear some of that up.
 
I don't think anybody said there is no place for medical treatment in counseling. But the polarity still is being maintained by some here. Let it go. Tim and I both have made it clear that it can be helpful, and even necessary in some cases. But any idea that psychology and "Christian" go together is a misunderstanding of what is entailed.
“Christian psychology” as the term is used today is an oxymoron. The word psychology employed in that expression no longer speaks of studying the soul; instead, it describes a diverse menagerie of therapies and theories that are fundamentally humanistic. The presuppositions and most of the doctrine of psychology cannot be successfully integrated with Christian truth.7 Moreover, the infusion of psychology into the teaching of the Church has blurred the line between behavior modification and sanctification.
John MacArthur, Introduction to Biblical Counseling: Basic Guide to the Principles and Practice of Counseling, Electronic ed. (Dallas, TX: Word Pub., 1997, c1994), 10.
 
I have to be honest and say (about myself - not judging anyone else, because I can't) that every time I've been depressed or have experienced anxiety, it's because of sin in my heart and in my behavior - bitterness, laziness, gossip, discontentment, covetousness, clamouring, selfishness, arrogance, etc. And God's word tells me that if I'm disobedient to His Word, there will be reprocussions in my heart, mind and walk. The Bible tells me so. And when I stew in these sins, I'm going to feel bad. I'm going to feel anxious. If I'm walking in Christ and putting off these sins, and put on Christ, refusing to give into these sins and living in opposition to them, I'm not going to feel depressed or anxious. I'm going to feel good. I'm not going to want to lie in bed all day or leave chores in the home undone or spend hours crying and wringing my hands in despair. I'm going to want to get up, get things done and rejoice in the Lord who gave me His Promises and an inheritance in Him. I'm going to want to minister to others, rather than focus on how miserable I am.

I have no doubt whatsover that things can go wrong with our brains, their chemistry, etc. We're a fallen people, and things go wrong with everything. We are fearfully and wonderfully made, and all sorts of things can happen to our bodies and brains. The Lord knows our frame. He is compassionate with us, and we are to show that compassion to others. But when it all comes down to it, I can't blame my sinful attitudes on PMS or pre-menopause, an anxiety "disorder" or whatever. Sinful attitudes (which lead to depression and anxiety) are still judged by the Law-Word of God. They are a sin against Him. There are consequences to our thoughts, attitudes, behavior and actions, because His Word tells us so. I really don't believe that depression and anxiety just come out of nowhere. We live in a fallen world, and it's fallen because of sin - our sin.

I think it's a lot more compassionate to remind a Christian of his inheritance in Christ and such a great love which has been showered upon him by His grace and that he doesn't have to live with this dispair, than to just give him a bunch of mind-numbing meds and tell him he has a problem he'll just have to live with.

I have a hard time understanding why as Christians, we can't see that our problems all boil down to sin, one way or the other. And there's no way out but repentance.

When it comes down to it, I don't think the problem is our depression and anxiety. It's our worldview.
 
All of our problems are from sin in that we live in a fallen world. All of our problems cannot be said to be directly from our individual sins.
 
All of our problems are from sin in that we live in a fallen world. All of our problems cannot be said to be directly from our individual sins.

No, not all of them are, true. But the ones that are from our individual sins, need to be repented of. That's all I'm saying. There's a lot I need to repent of, daily.
 
I agree and think that is quite true of most 'normal' people Toni.
However, in cases of psychosis, when one is totally out of touch with reality, there is then no way to reach them with any type counseling until their psychosis is abated and they are able to reason and process the truth. When one is in the throes of extreme paranoia and thinks all food from the kitchen is prepared to poison and kill them and they refuse to eat at all, then medication must be used for a while. You cannot reason with a psychotic person and they may be of danger to self or others due to their grossly distorted thinking. I would think it cruel to withold meds from them at that time.
When my DH had cardiac bypass surgery and experienced ICU psychosis I pleaded with them to give him a dose or two of Haldol to return his thinking to normal. Finally they did but only after he had torn all tubes from his arms and split his incision open while trying to climb out of bed. He 'needed to go get help to get him out of this jail where he was being held'. I dressed this wound for a week before he was returned to the hospital to get it stapled together. All this was preventable had he been relieved of his psychotic symptoms in a timely manner. Meds are wonderful when used appropriately and in short duration for a specific purpose and then discontinued. The problem today is the overwriting of prescription drugs and allowing the refills to continue far beyond any demonstrated clinical need!
 
I think we are quibbling a lot over semantics.


Staphlobob: have you read the books I have linked? Studying cross-cultural stress is no more pagan than studying how germs work in the body.
 
I think we are quibbling a lot over semantics.


Staphlobob: have you read the books I have linked? Studying cross-cultural stress is no more pagan than studying how germs work in the body.

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

There are also studies on this and TCKs (Third Culture Kids: military, missionary, political).
 
All of our problems are from sin in that we live in a fallen world. All of our problems cannot be said to be directly from our individual sins.

No, not all of them are, true. But the ones that are from our individual sins, need to be repented of. That's all I'm saying. There's a lot I need to repent of, daily.

There's conditions not linked directly to our individual sin. Mental illnesses and deficiencies include aspergers, schizophrenia, dementia, and various other diseases that we cannot say "AHA" this is due to your sin. Repent of whatever you need to every day, but recognize that living in a fallen world maks us sick even when it is not always directly "our fault."
 
All of our problems are from sin in that we live in a fallen world. All of our problems cannot be said to be directly from our individual sins.

No, not all of them are, true. But the ones that are from our individual sins, need to be repented of. That's all I'm saying. There's a lot I need to repent of, daily.

There's conditions not linked directly to our individual sin. Mental illnesses and deficiencies include aspergers, schizophrenia, dementia, and various other diseases that we cannot say "AHA" this is due to your sin. Repent of whatever you need to every day, but recognize that living in a fallen world maks us sick even when it is not always directly "our fault."

Very true! Cristiana's post is just one example. Many, many things can go wrong.

And even if someone's problem (as with myself for example) is due to sin, an AHA approach isn't right either. And anyone who says AHA to someone's sin is acting very wickedly, for they are also a sinner in need of God's healing grace.
 
Too Valuable to Lose: Exploring the ... - Google Book Search


I suppose this is secular paganism as well?

"Too Valuable to Lose" is a study of the causes of missionary attrition. In my opinion it is a great blessing to the church, a study that pastors of local churches would never have time to do. This is a legitimate use of Christian psychology, in gathering data about how factors effect behavior and how to avoid unwanted consequences.

Many of my missionary teammates experience many psychological stressors; this is not due to greater sin on their parts but do to the place in which their calling has placed them. Their psychological "problems" therefore are not caused by sins which they need to repent of, they are causedbecause we live in a fallen world in which they are laboring....and they need help without stigmatization.
 
Many of my missionary teammates experience many psychological stressors; this is not due to greater sin on their parts but do to the place in which their calling has placed them. Their psychological "problems" therefore are not caused by sins which they need to repent of, they are causedbecause we live in a fallen world in which they are laboring....and they need help without stigmatization.

This sounds like an interesting thing to study and an interesting ministry. I can see how missionary work can be very mentally and emotionally taxing.
 
I'm sure some of the difficulties that arise with missionaries are undetectable by testing prior to their being placed in unknown and perhaps even unthinkable situations. Humans are just hard to predict and much of their response to extreme stress is determined by their own history in coping methods, either 'flight' or 'fight', whichever. They likely experience great guilt if there is a need to send them home, feeling they failed their goals. That would be sad if they, in good faith, had a great desire to serve the Lord. However, if they should display symptoms of being out of touch with reality they would no longer be usuable on the mission field, unless short term treatment was of benefit.

For sure I remember well,when working in a psych hospital, when a patient approached the desk and told me he was Jesus Christ or Napoleon or whoever, and I was to follow his directions, I made no reply but rapidly checked his physician's orders for the quickest available antipsychotic medication I could give, plus summoning the techs to be ready to place him in seclusion if he displayed the need for such. This was not an unusual occurence at all in psychosis.
 
I agree and think that is quite true of most 'normal' people Toni.
However, in cases of psychosis, when one is totally out of touch with reality, there is then no way to reach them with any type counseling until their psychosis is abated and they are able to reason and process the truth. When one is in the throes of extreme paranoia and thinks all food from the kitchen is prepared to poison and kill them and they refuse to eat at all, then medication must be used for a while. You cannot reason with a psychotic person and they may be of danger to self or others due to their grossly distorted thinking. I would think it cruel to withold meds from them at that time.
When my DH had cardiac bypass surgery and experienced ICU psychosis I pleaded with them to give him a dose or two of Haldol to return his thinking to normal. Finally they did but only after he had torn all tubes from his arms and split his incision open while trying to climb out of bed. He 'needed to go get help to get him out of this jail where he was being held'. I dressed this wound for a week before he was returned to the hospital to get it stapled together. All this was preventable had he been relieved of his psychotic symptoms in a timely manner. Meds are wonderful when used appropriately and in short duration for a specific purpose and then discontinued. The problem today is the overwriting of prescription drugs and allowing the refills to continue far beyond any demonstrated clinical need!

And that is a problem with the MD's who are not trained in how psychotropic meds are supposed to be used, the drug reps who push the pills as a panacea for everything and the insurance companies who prefer drugging their clients up to treating the issue once the "noise" has lessened. :2cents:
 
How true. I once took a medication that was to be of great help in managing the deterioration of lower back discs. I kept wondering why I felt no relief when I saw a documentary on TV exposing the worthlessness of that drug! It was both costly and frustrating! The drug rep exposing its misuse declared he had been instructed to push its use for any and all purposes possible! This is a sad reflection on the drug industry! My DH was a pharmacist and was very aware of such problems and games used in peddling more drug use and was always very conscientious in screening any and all Rx written for our family!
 
Are Psychological Techniques Ever Advisable?
Does that mean the modern behavioral sciences offer nothing of value in treating emotional or behavioral problems? Don’t medication, shock therapy, group therapy, and other techniques help in some cases? Aren’t some soul-sicknesses actually medical problems that should be treated by skilled psychiatrists?
Certainly, it is reasonable for people to seek medical help for medical problems. We would send someone to the doctor for a broken leg, dysfunctional kidney, tooth cavity, or other physical malady. And it is true that certain kinds of depression actually have physical causes requiring medical treatment. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, best known for his powerful expository preaching ministry, was actually trained as a physician. He pointed out that depression and certain mental illnesses often have causes that are physical rather than spiritual. Pernicious anemia, arteriosclerosis, porphyria, and even gout are all examples Lloyd-Jones suggests of physical diseases that can cause dementia or produce depression.6 It is entirely appropriate—even advisable—for the counselor to advise the counselee suffering from such symptoms to seek medical advice or get a thorough physical examination to rule out such causes.
It is also sensible for someone who is alcoholic, drug addicted, learning disabled, traumatized by rape, incest, or severe battering, to seek help in trying to cope with their trauma. Some kinds of therapy or medical treatment can serve to lessen trauma or dependency. In extreme situations medication might be needed to stabilize an otherwise dangerous person.
It must be noted that these are relatively rare problems, however, and should not be used as examples to justify the indiscriminate use of secular psychological techniques for essentially spiritual problems. Dealing with the psychological and emotional issues of life in such ways is not sanctification. That is why such techniques are equally effective in modifying behavior in both Christians and non-Christians.

John MacArthur, Introduction to Biblical Counseling: Basic Guide to the Principles and Practice of Counseling, Electronic ed. (Dallas, TX: Word Pub., 1997, c1994), 9.
Let's let the psychologists speak for themselves a little here.
At about the same time the Church was becoming infatuated with behavioral science, those who knew psychology best were beginning to voice aloud the question of whether it was a science at all. Eleven years ago, Time magazine ran a cover story called “Psychiatry on the Couch.” It said this:
On every front, psychiatry seems to be on the defensive.... Many psychiatrists want to abandon treatment of ordinary, everyday neurotics (“the worried well”) to psychologists and the amateur Pop therapists. After all, does it take a hard-won M.D. degree... to chat sympathetically and tell a patient you’re-much-too-hard-on-yourself? And if psychiatry is a medical treatment, why can its practitioners not provide measurable scientific results like those obtained by other doctors?
Psychiatrists themselves acknowledge that their profession often smacks of modern alchemy full of jargon, obfuscation and mystification, but precious little real knowledge....
As always, psychiatrists are their own severest critics. Thomas Szasz, long the most outspoken gadfly of his profession, insists that there is really no such thing as mental illness, only normal problems of living. E. Fuller Torrey, another antipsychiatry psychiatrist, is willing to concede that there are a few brain diseases, like schizophrenia, but says they can be treated with only a handful of drugs that could be administered by general practitioners or internists....By contrast, the Scottish psychiatrist and poet R. D. Laing is sure that schizophrenia is real and that it is good for you. Explains Laing: it is a kind of psychedelic epiphany, far superior to normal experience.
Even mainline practitioners are uncertain that psychiatry can tell the insane from the sane.17​
The article went on to chronicle the failures of psychiatry, noting that “of all patients, one-third are eventually ‘cured,’ one-third are helped somewhat, and one-third are not helped at all.”18 But as the article further stated,
The trouble is that most therapies, including some outlandish ones, also claim some improvement for two-thirds of their patients. Critics argue that many patients go into analysis after a traumatic experience, such as divorce or a loved one’s death, and are bound to do better anyway when the shock wears off. One study shows improvement for people merely on a waiting list for psychoanalytic treatment; presumably the simple decision to seek treatment is helpful.19​
The article concludes with a pessimistic forecast by Ross Baldessarini, a psychiatrist and biochemist at the Mailman Research Center. He told Time, “We are not going to find the causes and cures of mental illness in the foreseeable future.”20
Several years later, a conference in Phoenix, Arizona brought together the world’s leading experts on psychotherapy for what was billed as the largest meeting ever on the subject. The conference, called “The Evolution of Psychotherapy,” drew seven thousand mental-health experts from all over the world. It was the largest such gathering in history, billed by its organizer as the Woodstock of psychotherapy. Out of it came several stunning revelations.
The Los Angeles Times, for example, quoted Laing, who “said that he couldn’t think of any fundamental insight into human relations that has resulted from a century of psychotherapy. ‘I don’t think we’ve gone beyond Socrates, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, or even Flaubert by the age of 15.’”21 Laing added,
“I don’t think psychiatry is a science at all. It’s not like chemistry or physics where we build up a body of knowledge and progress.”
He said that in his current personal struggle with depression, humming a favorite tune to himself (he favors one called “Keep Right On to the End of the Road”) sometimes is of greater help than anything psychotherapy offers.22​
Time magazine, reporting on the conference, noted that in a panel discussion on schizophrenia, three out of four experts said there is no such disease.23
R. D. Laing, the favorite shrink of student rebels in the ’60s, retains his romantic opinion of schizophrenics as brave victims who are defying a cruel culture. He suggested that many people are diagnosed as schizophrenic simply because they sleep during the day and stay awake at night. Schizophrenia did not exist until the word was invented, he said....At a later panel, a woman in the audience asked Laing how he would deal with schizophrenics. Laing bobbed and weaved for 27 minutes and finally offered the only treatment possible for people he does not view as sick: “I treat them exactly the same way I treat anybody else. I conduct myself by the ordinary rules of courtesy and politeness.”24​
One truth came out clearly in the conference: among therapists there is little agreement. There is no unified science of psychotherapy; only a cacophony of clashing theories and therapies. Dr. Joseph Wolpe, a leading pioneer of behavioral therapy, characterized the Phoenix conference as “a babel of conflicting voices.”25
And indeed it was. One specialist, Jay Haley, described what he called his “shaggy dog” technique. Evidently he means it is like a fluffy animal that appears to be fat until it gets wet—there seems to be more substance than really exists. This is his approach to therapy:
Get the patient to make an absolute commitment to change, then guarantee a cure but do not tell the patient what it is for several weeks. “Once you postpone, you never lose them as patients,” he said. “They have to find out what the cure is.” One bulimic who ate in binges and threw up five to 25 times a day was told she would be cured if she gave the therapist a penny the first time she vomited and doubled the sum each time she threw up. Says Haley: “They quickly figure out that it doubles so fast that they can owe the therapist hundreds of thousands of dollars in a few days, so they stop.”26​
Jeffrey Zeig, organizer of the conference, said there may be as many as a hundred different theories in the United States alone. Most of them, he said, are “doomed to fizzle.”27
Ibid, 13.
 
How true. I once took a medication that was to be of great help in managing the deterioration of lower back discs. I kept wondering why I felt no relief when I saw a documentary on TV exposing the worthlessness of that drug! It was both costly and frustrating! The drug rep exposing its misuse declared he had been instructed to push its use for any and all purposes possible! This is a sad reflection on the drug industry! My DH was a pharmacist and was very aware of such problems and games used in peddling more drug use and was always very conscientious in screeing any and all Rx written for our family!

My dad is a retired pharmacist. And I run questions by him on Rx's to this day. His descriptions of the drug reps was interesting. They went from nice guys and gals who knew their stuff to cute girls (cheerleader types) in short skirts flirting with the doctors. :eek: What infuriates me is the ads on TV for meds. They really need to be stopped. :eek:
 
I just want to throw this question into the mix: Does the Reformed Church allow for any of these "mental disorders" to be due to demon possession? I'm certain Scripture allows for that, and could be an explanation for the abnormal actions and thoughts of people. Possibly, those who are too "revved up" to listen to the Gospel don't need drugs to calm them down, but a good old exorcism. In fact, we see it worked for Christ.

NOTE: THIS IS AN HONEST QUESTION.
 
That, Ian, seems more like an observation than a question. I would agree that much we chalk up to illness is demon related. And, frankly, I don't have enough experience in that area to balance what I know. I think Lawrence has had some experience with this though. He usually weighs in on these discussions because he has some family that struggles with mental illness.
"Too Valuable to Lose" is a study of the causes of missionary attrition. In my opinion it is a great blessing to the church, a study that pastors of local churches would never have time to do. This is a legitimate use of Christian psychology, in gathering data about how factors effect behavior and how to avoid unwanted consequences.
The study of behavior, one's dispositions, strengths, weaknesses, etc., is simply an interviewing technique and not psychology, per se. This is why I posed the history of psychology earlier. There is prudence on the one hand which involves some in-depth questioning, cross examining and some pretty penetrating and challenging testing. But that was all present in one form or another long before psychology came on the scene.

Many of my missionary teammates experience many psychological stressors; this is not due to greater sin on their parts but do to the place in which their calling has placed them. Their psychological "problems" therefore are not caused by sins which they need to repent of, they are causedbecause we live in a fallen world in which they are laboring....and they need help without stigmatization.

Could these not be more readily termed, "spiritual stressors?" The mission work is a spiritual work, and some succumb to spiritual stress. Part of the problem in much of the argumentation here is that it's done by the world's standards. We don't succumb to such standards, but embrace biblical standards. To cave to these worldly perceptions flies in the face of 1 Cor 10:13 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17, among a whole host of others. Does the arsenal of the missionary include God's Word, faith, Christ and psychology? Either we rest in the fullness and comfort of Christ, or He is insufficient. If we claim we "need" psychology in the spiritual war then our faith is based on men and not on God. There is no middle ground here. And, yes, when we cave, and almost all of us do at one time or another, it is because of sin. It might not be a sin directly related to the straw that finally broke them. But it is sin. Otherwise the promises of God are rendered moot.

It has been said that we're quibbling over words. Well, words are what God has used to communicate with us. Words have meaning. And, words get highjacked by the world and must be used in accordance. Let's face it folks, the PB is about words - specifically the written word of God. So, as you can see, at least a couple of us think it matters.
 

Of course it is! Paganism is an ism, a worldview. Where in the world would one get the idea that Christianity is immune to it? Certainly not Scripture, or even Christian experience.

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 11:44:31 EST-----

I think we are quibbling a lot over semantics.

Staphlobob: have you read the books I have linked? Studying cross-cultural stress is no more pagan than studying how germs work in the body.

No more semantic than a Hindu talking with a Christian.

I haven't read the books, but I've read enough like them, by authors who agree with them, and by syncretists who want to use paganism through the years to know that 2 Tim 3:16-17 is true.

Furthermore, as a counselor I daily encounter the idea that psychology is compatible with Christianity ... if I would just "open my mind" to it, even as I (daily) see the damage done by psychology and its secular values.

Am I a knucke-dragging neanderthal? You bet'cha. (Blame it on my Freudian id; or my Jungian archetype; or the child of my TA; or my parents; or the system; or "the man"; or my Moslerian inability to move to a "higher" form of morality; or my Rogerian refusal to talk about it, etc., etc. :p)
 
I just want to throw this question into the mix: Does the Reformed Church allow for any of these "mental disorders" to be due to demon possession? I'm certain Scripture allows for that, and could be an explanation for the abnormal actions and thoughts of people. Possibly, those who are too "revved up" to listen to the Gospel don't need drugs to calm them down, but a good old exorcism. In fact, we see it worked for Christ.

NOTE: THIS IS AN HONEST QUESTION.

Last night when I was looking at scripture on this topic, there were many passages regarding Jesus healing people where casting out unclean spirits or demons was mentioned in addition to healing diseases, etc. I think it is odd that we avoid this so much in reformed circles. I totally believe some of the mental "illnesses" are spiritual.
 
I just want to throw this question into the mix: Does the Reformed Church allow for any of these "mental disorders" to be due to demon possession? I'm certain Scripture allows for that, and could be an explanation for the abnormal actions and thoughts of people. Possibly, those who are too "revved up" to listen to the Gospel don't need drugs to calm them down, but a good old exorcism. In fact, we see it worked for Christ.

NOTE: THIS IS AN HONEST QUESTION.

Ian, that is an excellent question. Here is one Reformed response (Adams again).

Basically, he is saying that believers are immune to demonic influence because of what Christ has done. I would agree with him. He seems to leave open the possibility, though, that unbelievers could be influenced by demonic activity (if I am reading him correctly). I am certainly willing to entertain that idea.

There is an excellent little book by David Powlison (Power Encounters) that deals with this subject. Powlison (and the article by Adams linked above) are mainly critiquing "healing ministries" that involve overcoming sin by casting out demons (e.g., spirit of covetousness, I cast you out!). The idea is that such practices are unscriptural. I think we would have broad agreement on this thread that such things can also be very dangerous to the person suffering (such as giving a false hope).
 
From Web MD:

What's the difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist?

That may sound like a setup for a knee-slapper, but it's actually a good question, and many people don't know the full answer.

It's not as simple as who tends to what, like the difference between a goatherd and shepherd. Both kinds of professionals treat people with problems that vary widely by degree and type, from mild anxiety to schizophrenia. Both can practice psychotherapy, and both can do research.

The short answer is, psychiatrists are medical doctors and psychologists are not. The suffix "-iatry" means "medical treatment," and "-logy" means "science" or "theory." So psychiatry is the medical treatment of the psyche, and psychology is the science of the psyche.

Some thoughts of mine...

What happens if the science of the psyche that backs the treatment of the psyche is wrong?

If I have problem X and go to a psychologist influenced by Maslow for counseling I’ll get treated one way, but if I go to a neo-Freudian I’ll get treated another. What happens if I make them psychiatrists and throw meds into the mix?

Why do normal M.D.’s diagnose psycological problems and dispense mind altering medications? When I was 12-13 years old my family doc. and his student doc. diagnosed me with panic attacks and sent me home with free meds. What were my symptoms, you ask? I woke up one morning gasping for air. I could barley breath and was terrified! Thankfully my intelligent mother didn’t allow me to take the meds. and had me go to a specialist instead. I had a lung infection.

There are, no doubt, real bio chemical problems that people suffer from, but can we trust spiritually incompetent men to prescribe this type of medication? How much of the medication perscribed by psychiatrists and normal MDs is actually needed?

:think:
 
I just want to throw this question into the mix: Does the Reformed Church allow for any of these "mental disorders" to be due to demon possession? I'm certain Scripture allows for that, and could be an explanation for the abnormal actions and thoughts of people. Possibly, those who are too "revved up" to listen to the Gospel don't need drugs to calm them down, but a good old exorcism. In fact, we see it worked for Christ.

NOTE: THIS IS AN HONEST QUESTION.

Ian, that is an excellent question. Here is one Reformed response (Adams again).

Basically, he is saying that believers are immune to demonic influence because of what Christ has done. I would agree with him. He seems to leave open the possibility, though, that unbelievers could be influenced by demonic activity (if I am reading him correctly). I am certainly willing to entertain that idea.

There is an excellent little book by David Powlison (Power Encounters) that deals with this subject. Powlison (and the article by Adams linked above) are mainly critiquing "healing ministries" that involve overcoming sin by casting out demons (e.g., spirit of covetousness, I cast you out!). The idea is that such practices are unscriptural. I think we would have broad agreement on this thread that such things can also be very dangerous to the person suffering (such as giving a false hope).

Tim, I understand what he is saying, but then Eph. 6 makes little sense to me if there is no spiritual battle. (I don't believe believers can be demon possessed.)

"Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. 12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. 13Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm." Eph. 6:11-13
 
Janis, I think he is saying two things (or this would be my view, at least): 1) Christians cannot be demon-possessed (which is his main argument); 2) Christians have everything they need in Christ and His word to resist/fight off/conquer demonic forces.

I would think as long as a Christian is living according to the Spirit (which the armor of God passages speaks of), then he/she has the necessary resources to stand firm against the evil one. However, if we are not living according to the Spirit, then we can leave ourselves open to all sorts of problems. This would seem to fit with the way expresses the activity/results of church discipline in 1 Corinthians 5 -- to bind up the disobedient one and hand him over to satan. If he outside of the church, no longer under Christ's protection, then he will endure the buffeting of the evil one since he has turned away from Christ (the hope, of course, is that this would lead to repentance).

Keep in mind that's just my :2cents: I think Dr. Adams' main point is to disspell the notion that when Christians have spiritual problems they can solve it by casting out demons.
 
That, Ian, seems more like an observation than a question. I would agree that much we chalk up to illness is demon related. And, frankly, I don't have enough experience in that area to balance what I know. I think Lawrence has had some experience with this though. He usually weighs in on these discussions because he has some family that struggles with mental illness.
"Too Valuable to Lose" is a study of the causes of missionary attrition. In my opinion it is a great blessing to the church, a study that pastors of local churches would never have time to do. This is a legitimate use of Christian psychology, in gathering data about how factors effect behavior and how to avoid unwanted consequences.
The study of behavior, one's dispositions, strengths, weaknesses, etc., is simply an interviewing technique and not psychology, per se. This is why I posed the history of psychology earlier. There is prudence on the one hand which involves some in-depth questioning, cross examining and some pretty penetrating and challenging testing. But that was all present in one form or another long before psychology came on the scene.

Many of my missionary teammates experience many psychological stressors; this is not due to greater sin on their parts but do to the place in which their calling has placed them. Their psychological "problems" therefore are not caused by sins which they need to repent of, they are causedbecause we live in a fallen world in which they are laboring....and they need help without stigmatization.

Could these not be more readily termed, "spiritual stressors?" The mission work is a spiritual work, and some succumb to spiritual stress. Part of the problem in much of the argumentation here is that it's done by the world's standards. We don't succumb to such standards, but embrace biblical standards. To cave to these worldly perceptions flies in the face of 1 Cor 10:13 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17, among a whole host of others. Does the arsenal of the missionary include God's Word, faith, Christ and psychology? Either we rest in the fullness and comfort of Christ, or He is insufficient. If we claim we "need" psychology in the spiritual war then our faith is based on men and not on God. There is no middle ground here. And, yes, when we cave, and almost all of us do at one time or another, it is because of sin. It might not be a sin directly related to the straw that finally broke them. But it is sin. Otherwise the promises of God are rendered moot.

It has been said that we're quibbling over words. Well, words are what God has used to communicate with us. Words have meaning. And, words get highjacked by the world and must be used in accordance. Let's face it folks, the PB is about words - specifically the written word of God. So, as you can see, at least a couple of us think it matters.

This is quite a clever tactice you are using and who could argue with it....


Under normal definitions, psychology is the observation and study of behavior and attempts at modification of thoughts and behaviors. Psychology includes studies of thoughts and attitudes of people, psychology includes counseling, and sometimes testing, and sometimes medication.

In comes Jay Adams and uses 80% of what is commonplace among psychology, but denies that it is "psychology"....



"What?, studying behaviors and testing missionaries...NO, NO, NO, that's not psychology at all...that's study......"

"What?, counseling people and talking to them...No, NO, NO that is not psychology at all, that is counseling....."



You are distorting the commonly held definitions in order to push your own assumptions and make your point.


Then you admit that some mental illnesses do have biology and heredity behind them. Then you admit that some mental illness does require medication.. You've admitted every major point I am trying to make, and yet you still hate the label that I am using....which is "Christian psychology", which is the field of study that most people group Jay Adams and David Powlison into.

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 09:18:43 EST-----


Of course it is! Paganism is an ism, a worldview. Where in the world would one get the idea that Christianity is immune to it? Certainly not Scripture, or even Christian experience.

-----Added 5/16/2009 at 11:44:31 EST-----

I think we are quibbling a lot over semantics.

Staphlobob: have you read the books I have linked? Studying cross-cultural stress is no more pagan than studying how germs work in the body.

No more semantic than a Hindu talking with a Christian.

I haven't read the books, but I've read enough like them, by authors who agree with them, and by syncretists who want to use paganism through the years to know that 2 Tim 3:16-17 is true.

Furthermore, as a counselor I daily encounter the idea that psychology is compatible with Christianity ... if I would just "open my mind" to it, even as I (daily) see the damage done by psychology and its secular values.

Am I a knucke-dragging neanderthal? You bet'cha. (Blame it on my Freudian id; or my Jungian archetype; or the child of my TA; or my parents; or the system; or "the man"; or my Moslerian inability to move to a "higher" form of morality; or my Rogerian refusal to talk about it, etc., etc. :p)

I think you need to read the books I linked before you call them paganism. They are there on google books...have a read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top