"Christian" Psychology

"Christian" Psychology

The purpose of this monthly newsletter is not only to inform but to stir readers into action. It is not enough to lament false doctrine in the church—we must do something to stop it.

The nailing of Martin Luther's 95 theses to the Wittenberg door was the catalyst that began the Reformation. Today the church is in even worse condition. Catholicism continues to promote the very evils against which the Reformers fought. Protestantism no longer protests Roman Catholic errors that still lead millions into hell, but its ecumenically minded leaders hope for a merger with Rome. In the popular clamor for "love and unity," vital issues for which the martyrs gave their lives are ignored.

We desperately need another Reformation, but there is little interest in correcting false doctrine. Today Martin Luther would be denounced not only by Catholics but by Protestants as well for causing "division." I have documented horrendous heresies (and others have also) on the part of many of today's most popular church leaders. A great cry of protest should have forced these false teachers either to repent of their errors or to lose their support from Christians. Instead, I am banned for being divisive.

Let's take one category of error as an example: humanism. Its penetration into the church has been staggering! Once confined to liberals/modernists and pseudo-evangelicals, humanism is now embraced by virtually the entire evangelical church. How did this come about? Largely through the acceptance of psychology. It was Norman Vincent Peale who first conceived "Christian psychology"—the very thought of which, J. Harold Ellens reminds us, was opposed by "the entire Christian church for nearly half a century." Peale persisted. His protegĂ© Schuller picked up the banner, then others followed. Today "Christian psychology," once heresy to Christians, is the new evangelical orthodoxy. Weep and pray and work to uproot it from the church!

Bruce Narramore (nephew of Clyde Narramore, another of the early godfathers of "Christian psychology") unashamedly writes, "Under the influence of humanistic psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, many of us Christians have begun to see our need for self-love and self-esteem." He thus admits that no one in 1,900 years of church history ever imagined that self-love and self-esteem (and other popular selfisms) were taught in the Bible. The secular humanists invented selfism and the "Christian psychologists" bought it and brought it into the church.

Consider the ironic statement by James Dobson in his December 1988 Focus on the Family: "Christian psychology is a worthy profession for a young believer to pursue, provided his faith is strong enough to withstand the humanistic concepts to which he will be exposed...." He thus promotes a strange new brand of "God's truth," a new interpretation of Scripture, unknown in the church for 1,900 years, that was invented by and must be learned from godless anti-Christians! This new Christianized humanism is fast becoming the basis for an ecumenical union, not only between Protestants and Catholics but with New Agers as well, to form Antichrist's coming world religion. Wake up to what is happening and take action!

Dobson is to be commended for leading the fight against humanism's immoral stepchildren: abortion, pornography, child-abuse and homosexuality. Yet he has based his entire ministry upon another stepchild of humanism: the theory that virtually every problem in modern society and the church today (from drugs, rape or murder to depression) is caused by a "bad self-image" or "low self-esteem." Josh McDowell and Chuck Swindoll (like many others) promote the same antibiblical myth, justifying from the theories of godless psychologists the love and esteem of self, in spite of Christ's command to deny self. That such men have otherwise fruitful ministries does not excuse them for such serious false teaching.

Christian colleges, universities and seminaries have become breeding grounds for secular humanism accepted as psychology. For example, the Narramores' Rosemead Graduate School of Psychology has merged with Biola University and also infects Talbot Theological Seminary through its psychology program. Literally thousands of pastors are now following humanism's pied pipers back to seminaries for further study—not in theology, however, but in psychology in order to become competent to counsel their flocks in the new truth!

And who sets the standards for these studies? The godless secular humanists, of course! Take, for example, the following ecstatic announcement by Fuller Theological Seminary: "Accredited! The Graduate School of Psychology has received accreditation from the American Psychological Association for a third five-year period after evaluation by two APA site visit teams...the [APA] committee on accreditation...found the program's religious orientation not to adversely affect the quality of [psychological] training." Isn't that terrific? Our seminaries merit Satan's imprimatur of approval because his representatives find that in spite of a "religious orientation," students are being well trained in humanism!

Like other seminaries, Fuller places a heavy emphasis upon hypnosis, which comes right out of the occult. Related occultic visualization techniques, again justified by humanistic psychology, are now rampant among evangelicals. Inner healing, as it is popularly taught, is simply occultic Jungian analysis dressed in a thin veneer of Christian terminology. (For substantiation of these and other charges see Beyond Seduction, Chapters 6-9, and The New Spirituality, Chapters 7-8).

But surely Christian psychologists such as Larry Crabb, who is considered by his followers to be the most biblical of all, could not have imbibed humanism's lies! Let us take but one example. In Understanding People (p 129) Crabb writes, "Unless we understand sin as rooted in unconscious beliefs and motives and figure out how to expose and deal with these deep forces within the personality, the church will continue to promote superficial adjustment while psychotherapists, with or without biblical foundations, will do a better job than the church of restoring troubled people to more effective functioning."

So this "most biblical" Christian leader tells us that the Bible lacks the real solution, which can only be found in psychological concepts and techniques invented by such godless anti-Christians as Freud—who, by the way, couldn't straighten out their own lives. And what of this merger between theology and psychology that Peale pioneered nearly 70 years ago? Gary Collins, who has been one of the leading evangelicals working for decades to realize Peale's dream, states in Can You Trust Psychology? (p 130), "It is too early to answer decisively if psychology and Christianity can be integrated." In other words, the very term "Christian psychology" has been for all these years a fraud, a blatant misrepresentation that continues to be foisted upon the church!

We desperately need another Reformation! I have nailed my "95 Theses" to the church's door, and so have many others. Still the church sleeps and the false teachers we challenge will not agree to discuss the issues publicly. John Ankerberg has tried for three years to get anyone we name in Seduction (from Copeland to Schuller) to come on his program and discuss the issues with me. Other TV programs have also tried as well without success. The "Christian psychologists" have all made their excuses. Gary Collins, Mark McMinn and James Foster had agreed to a discussion of the issues with me, Martin Bobgan and Jay Adams on The Ankerberg Show, but backed down at the last moment.

It is time we carried the battle for a return to biblical truth to the individuals and institutions that are supporting humanism. I appeal to you to ask God what He would have you to do and then to follow His leading with prompt and vigorous action.

posted with permission
"Christian" Psychology - Part II

This is the second of two brief discussions of so-called Christian psychology. What we are saying in few words could be thoroughly documented if we had the space, which we don't, so I am trying to be very basic. Psychology pretends to be the study of the soul; it has in fact been called the cure of souls. Yet the Bible claims to provide the diagnosis and cure of the soul. God is the only One who can take care of man's spiritual problems, and in fact He has done so. The Bible claims that God has given to the believer "all things that pertain unto life and godliness" (2 Pt 1:3). We don't need help from Freud, et al.

Christian psychology says that we do need such help, that the Bible doesn't have all the answers we need, that prayer, repentance, being filled with the Holy Spirit and other biblical remedies are not enough because there are psychological problems that require something more. Does it not seem a bit odd that God has apparently inspired the likes of Freud, Jung, et al. with "truths" unknown to the apostles and prophets and all of the leaders in the entire history of the church? No, we are told reassuringly, this is not to be considered strange at all. What we need to understand is that "all truth is God's truth." This specious phrase is invoked whenever questions are raised and is generally accepted without further thought.

The question of what is meant by truth is seldom asked. Are we talking about scientific facts involving the brain and body, or about God's truth involving the soul and spirit? Jesus said, "Thy Word is truth," not part of the truth. Psychology pretends to deal with the soul and spirit (it actually claims to be a science of mind), a subject upon which God has spoken with finality and about which He claims to have communicated in His Word the whole truth. There are no parts of this truth missing from the Bible and left in limbo to be discovered by godless theorists. To suggest that there are is to contradict the clear testimony of Scripture and the consistent teaching of the church since the beginning, a church that got along very well without psychology until its very recent introduction into secular society and from there into the Christian realm.

As soon as the door was opened for the "truths" of psychology to shed further light upon Scripture a subtle process began. If "all truth is God's truth," and psychology is part of that truth, then it has to be given equal authority with the Bible. Of course Christian psychologists deny this. In all sincerity they assure us that no psychological theory will be accepted that contradicts the Bible; but in actual practice "psychological truth" is imposed upon the Bible and becomes the new grid through which the Bible is to be interpreted.

Imperceptibly but inevitably, psychological theory by this process gains authority over the Bible and the church, and anyone not trained in the new truths of psychology is not qualified to question the new interpretations. Christian universities and seminaries develop large and growing psychology departments in order to keep up with "current trends." No church staff of any size is any longer complete without at least one psychologist. Pastors begin to believe that they are not competent to counsel from the Bible without going back to seminary for an advanced degree in psychology. They are competent to preach or to teach the Word of God if they have a degree in theology, but incompetent to counsel from the Word of God without a degree in psychology. This new state of affairs is accepted almost without question; and those of us who do question it as unbiblical are accused of causing division or of speaking from ignorance because we presumably don't know enough about psychology.

Christian psychology could almost be described as a cult inside the church. It has its own vocabulary to describe, an endless array of problems tagged with labels not found in the Bible and unknown to the church in its entire history. These strange new phrases now roll glibly off the tongues of pastors who are sincerely trying to be "relevant" and to "communicate" in modern terms. In short, this cult has its own gospel, its own religious rituals administered by its own class of priests, the Christian psychologists, who have gained authority over those who only know God's Word but have not yet been initiated into their inner academic circle and are thus unqualified to counsel from the Word of God. Nor can one appeal to the Scriptures as a means of correcting this new priest class, because they alone hold the keys to the new interpretation of the Bible and the new Christianity. It is a master stroke of genius from the great mastermind of deception himself. And it is being carried on in the name of the Lord and for the good of His church, so they sincerely believe, by men and women who earnestly desire to benefit the body of Christ.

We desperately need a return to biblical Christianity!

posted with permission
  Deceptive Diagnosis

A major shift began in the 1960’s regarding how evangelicals viewed and dealt with sin. The church moved sinful and deviant behavior out of the category of sin and placed it in the category of sickness. For example, the sexual sinner Paul wrote about (1 Corinthians 2:13) became the sex addict. The thief (1 Corinthians 2:14) became the kleptomaniac. The drunkard (1 Corinthians 6: 10) became the alcoholic. The rebellious child (2 Timothy 3:2) became afflicted with “Oppositional Defiant Disorder.” A family in which the husband will not work, the wife will not keep the home and the children will not obey are no longer considered a sinful family. They have become a dysfunctional family. The liar became a compulsive liar. The gambler became a compulsive gambler. The idolater became a person who suffers from an obsessive-compulsive disorder. The “deeds of the flesh… which are immorality impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing” (Galatians 5:19-21) have all been redefined using psychopathological words. The impact of using these words in a different manner has been devastating.

It for this reason we wrote Deceptive Diagnosis: When Sin is Called Sickness.

What is a Deceptive Diagnosis?

A deceptive diagnosis is labeling a problem of living, like rebellion, with a psychological term, like oppositional defiant disorder. The behavior, feeling or thinking of an individual is declared to be a disease, just like cancer or diabetes. Cancer and diabetes have a proven organic cause and their effects can be seen using objective laboratory or radiological tests. Deceptive diagnoses are made based on the subjective viewpoint of a medical or mental health professional, thus they are declared diseases. The diagnosis is deceptive because it is not a real disease as disease is historically defined. There is no alteration in the anatomy (structure) or physiology (function) of the human body. Rather, the problem lies in feelings (depression, anxiety, guilt) and behavior (rebellion, anger, selfishness, immorality).

A deceptive diagnosis subsequently removes the accountability and responsibility for one’s thinking, behaving and feeling from oneself and places it on the disease. “My disease made me do it” has become the rallying cry for sinful people who do not want to confront their sin for what it really is.

What is the Effect of a Deceptive Diagnosis?

Placing sin in the category of sickness compromises the message of salvation. It sets aside the historical-grammatical method of interpreting Scripture and replaces it with a hermeneutic centered on pathology of the flesh. This interpretation views man as a victim who is sick rather than a sinner who is responsible to God. It eliminates the necessity for repentance. As such, the doctrine of the total depravity of man is undermined. Culpability and guilt vanish and there is no need for a Savior. In a similar way, sanctification is hindered. There is no need for repentance and change, no need for discipleship and spiritual growth. Believers are duped into thinking they are sick and need recovery.

Posted with permission:

By Debbie O'Hara

In the last days "people will be lovers of themselves" so the Bible warns us in 2 Timothy 3:2. I wonder how many Christian churches realize that they might be helping to fulfill this prophecy. One of the biggest threats to Christ's church today is the religion of psychology. I'm probably going to step on more than a few toes here, but yes, you heard me right. Psychology is indeed a religion and it is very destructive to the Word of God. While psychology has infiltrated our American Culture, the worst tragedy is its infiltration of the Christian church where it has been synthesized with the teachings of the Bible. To synthesize psychology with the Bible is like putting together devil-worship and Christianity. It is an oxymoron of the highest sort and yet many Christian churches have done just that.

Psychology is a religion based on man's self-centered wisdom whereas true Christianity believes in the sufficiency of God's Word. As our nation is becoming increasingly secularized, even many Christians are buying into thinking that religion is something separate from their everyday lives. Forgetting that Christianity is a complete way of life, Christians no longer believe that all the wisdom they need for a fruitful life has been given to them in the Bible by God Almighty Himself. Instead they turn to the human experts and psychology.

Looking at the fathers of psychology and its anti-Christian roots should be enough to prove that Christians should take no part in its practice. Probably the two biggest names in psychotherapy are Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung. Freud called religion inherently evil and said it was a form of neurosis. Jung called religion a mental illness and said it was just an imaginary coping mechanism. Both of these men dabbled in mysticism and the occult. Adler, Maslow, Fromm, Rogers, Janov - not a one believed in Jesus Christ. Their theories were based solely on their own opinions of how they thought they could change people without God.

With the decline of true religion came the rise in psychology. Since its birth in the 1850's, Americans can't seem to get enough therapy. Even though we are the most prosperous nation on earth people wonder why they are unhappy and how they can improve their lives. Instead of opening their Bibles, they are turning to psychology which offers the latest theories and treatments that try to explain to us why we think, feel and act the way we do according to man's theories not biblical truths about the nature of man.

While people who focus on others tend to have more joy and peace of mind, man's true nature is one of sinfulness and selfishness and it is that very nature that causes his unhappiness. Those who focus on themselves are never happy or content because they are always striving for something better - a better car, house, mate, better body, more money etc. - but it is never enough. Most problems tend to be a direct result of self-focus, and yet that is what psychology tells us to focus on - ourselves. It teaches that our unhappiness comes from OUR unmet needs. It's about how WE feel, about OUR plans and OUR desires.

Most psychological thinking believes people are basically good and if we just look inside ourselves we can through our own self-effort improve our lives without God. But God's word says, "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" Jeremiah 17:9. Psychology also teaches that we are victims of our past and our problems stem from people and environments that negatively influenced us in the past. In other words psychology believes our past controls our present, but there was no one in Adam and Eve's past and they had a perfect environment. Their problem was that they trusted their deceitful hearts instead of God. Sin was the cause of their misery.

Look at the misery in our government schools since they kicked out God and began heavily promoting psychology. Schools are being flooded with psychologists and counselors and the like. Knowing how extremely biased these schools are against Christianity, I don't think there is any bigger proof that psychology is anti-Christian than that. If it was anywhere close to being Christian, these schools would dump it. (In fact just recently a counselor at a North Carolina high school was suspended because a student struggling with homosexuality asked for biblical advice and the counselor gave it.) Statistics show that even with all the psychology that kids are getting at schools, cheating, theft, violent crime, vandalism, venereal disease, teenage suicide, etc. continue to increase at an alarming rate. Not only is psychology not Christian, but it doesn't work. Besides do you really believe government should be involved in your child's "mental health"? But then that is a story for a future article.


I was reading what John MacArthur wrote about the sufficiency of scripture and he included some info about psychology that I'd thought I'd share here:

It used to be that we could accept what the Bible said in sociological areas, whether it's homosexuality or the role of a woman. Now we're hearing that the Bible is rather unsophisticated and cannot comment on these contemporary sociological issues because of its lack of sophistication. And so there is an insufficiency in the Bible's ability to deal with contemporary sociological phenomena. This is coming on a wholesale level into the church, particularly marked in the area in the liberal church homosexuality, in the more evangelical church in the redefining of the role of women away from the traditional biblical teaching.

But perhaps as dominant or more dominant than any of these themes is this area of psychology. Psychology today is making inroads into the church that really are frightening. In fact, there is in the evangelical church what is fast becoming a wholesale exodus from the traditional land of biblical theology into the new promised land of psychology and psychotherapy. Churches that once and for always would hire pastors and evangelists and teachers are now hiring psychologists. Pastors that once would go to seminary and learn the Word of God or Bible college and master the Scripture are now going to schools of psychology to study human wisdom in dealing with the problems of mankind. This again is a subtle way of saying the Bible is insufficient. When coming to grips with these deep seeded emotional anxieties of man, we cannot expect the Bible to speak in any sophisticated way to those problems. Seminaries are changing their curriculum dramatically. For the first time in the history of the church, seminaries are hiring psychologists on their staff to teach, psychiatrists to teach, they're teaching psychology, they're adding more psychology courses in many places, diminishing the biblical content of their curriculum. Colleges are doing the same thing. Churches are doing it. It's a wholesale exodus.

And to this sort of encroaching mysticism and preoccupation with supernatural powers and science of the mind and visualization techniques and hypnosis and all of this self-image stuff comes this psychology and together it is creating the new God of the church. And I can look back to our own law suit where we were literally mocked for being so primitive as to assume that the Bible could give people help when they had severe problems. The world has been saying the Bible cannot help and now sad to say, the church is chiming in and agreeing that the Bible is inadequate to deal with psychological problems. In fact, I would go so far as to say there are many advocating today a psychological salvation in place of the new birth. There is nothing in this more than a pseudo-evangelical humanism. This preoccupation with self-esteem and self-love and self-fulfillment and self-actualization that psychology has brought into the church knows no biblical counterpart.

And just to put things in perspective, the church inevitably...inevitably, buys into these things and in fact, the world will more readily admit the error of these things often than we will. For example, in the Los Angeles Times on the eighteenth of this month, you perhaps read an interesting article about a recent convention of psychiatrists, psychoanalysts and psychologists in Phoenix, Arizona, the largest convention, 7,000 people apparently attended. And for the first time in the history of the world, the leading psychoanalyst, psychologist and psychiatrist of the world got together. Men like Carl(?) Rogers, Albert Ellis, R.D. Lang, Bruno Bettleheim(?), Joseph Walpi(?) and Thomas Szaz, those are the most famous names in the world in terms of techniques and methods of psychotherapy. They were all there.

And the article was really amazing. It said, for example, "The heroes were there to evaluate where psychotherapy has come in 100 years and where it might be going." Except, they really couldn't agree on either. Lang, one of the famous ones, known for his work on schizophrenia said, "He couldn't think of any fundamental insights into relations between human beings that had resulted from a century of psychotherapy." He couldn't think of any? The 7,000 practicing and student psychotherapist, psychiatrist and social workers who attended various sessions were undaunted by the debates and differences of opinion. Obtaining autographs was the priority for many.
One of these leading psychoanalysts said, "The best therapy he had found for his anxiety was to hum a tune." And the sad thing about that is that the church has bought into that as if it is the savior of man. Nobel prize winner Richard Fryman(?) said, quote: "Psychoanalysis is not a science." What did he mean by that? He meant that there are no rules to guide it, it's a whole lot of human opinion. New York University professor, Paul Veets(?) criticized Christianity and he criticized the Christian church for its tendency to do what he called "buying high and selling low" in regard to social science. He said, "The church is eager to adopt popular trends of thought at the very time the secular professionals are beginning to criticize them." In fact, he put it this way, "It is a matter of climbing on the bandwagon just about the time it's slowing down," end quote.

We tend to do that, to jump into movements that are just about dead because they have proven a washout even to the people in the world who started them. But here we have in our contemporary Christian church, these things making tremendous inroads. I am absolutely amazed at the inroads of mysticism, science of the mind, occultism, psychology and these other things into the church, the college, the seminary environment and the pooh-poohing of biblical theology and biblical sufficiency.

Now all of this, I believe, is not some small problem. I believe it is a serious and sinful view of the Word of God. I believe it is the sin of the church to believe the Bible to be inadequate. J.I. Packer in his little book on the Word of God puts his finger on the problem in a paragraph that says this: quote: "Certainty about the great issues of Christian faith and conduct is lacking all along the line. The outside observer sees us as staggering on from a gimmick to gimmick and stunt to stunt like so many drunks in a fog, not knowing at all where we are or which way we should be going. Preaching is hazy. Heads are muddled, hearts fret, doubts drain strength, uncertainty paralyzes action. Unlike the first-century Christians who in three centuries won the Roman world and those later Christians who pioneered the Reformation and the Puritan awakening and the evangelical revival and the great missionary movement of the last century, we lack certainty," end quote.

And the reason we lack certainty is because we have a sinful view of Scripture. We do not any longer seem to believe that the Bible is sufficient for the life and conduct of the church. That is a sin...a sin of monstrous proportions, to deny the sufficiency of the Word of God.

...... We get ourselves into problems, we assume the problems are beyond the purview and the capability of the Word of God because we're really not into the daily application of the Word of God. Noble spirituality is tied to a daily study of the Word of God. That's where the strength comes to deal with life. And that's where the sufficiency lies. People sadly who are finding their sufficiency...chasing their sufficiency, not finding it, but chasing it in psychology and in this sort of science of the mind and mysticism and ecstatic experiences and the supernatural and in entertainment and management techniques for the church, all of that pursuit is running the wrong direction. And instead of bringing what they think they need and what they think they're going to get, it will bring them the very opposite...the very opposite......

.........As I pointed out last time, the almost wholesale move in the evangelical church to psychology as a means of solving man's problems, the search for methodology for church growth in the world's patterns of business and corporate structure, the demand for political power as the key to revival as some are saying, the cry for miracles and signs and wonders and new revelations and supernatural activities, the perversion of the simple gospel and the true Word of God into a sort of pop gospel of prosperity, indulgence, sensuality and success propagated by celebrities who are supposed to have a great ability to reach people that the simple Word could never reach all betray to me not only a horrifying worldliness in the church but a woefully weak view of Scripture.......

These quotes are from two sermons he gave about the sufficiency of scripture. They can be found here:


Is "Christian Psychology"Christian?

The so-called "Christian Psychology" movement is by far the most popular movement among professing Christians today. Just check out your local "Christian" bookstore to see how much space is given to it. This heresy is being embraced by tens of thousands of professing Christians who claim to believe in the inerrancy, validity, and sufficiency of Scripture. "Christian" psychologists are enjoying a papal-like authority. Instead of analyzing what these men say according to Scripture (Acts 17:11), professing Christians come in droves to witness the next great insight -- how to overcome addictions, co-dependency, depression, or neurosis; how to deal with your children, spouse, or parents; or how to heal your "wounded inner child" ... and the list of buzzwords goes on and on. The Promise Keepers movement is, at its heart, a "Christian Psychology" movement.

Just the fact that the prominent psychologists and counselors in this movement are Arminians should be enough for the true Christian to discern that they are wicked and are to be avoided. But there are some who call themselves Reformed who are involved in and advocate "Christian Psychology" and who integrate the theories of pagan psychologists into their philosophies and approaches.

I can hear it now: "But isn't all truth God's truth?" What this questioner fails to realize is that the issue is not about the origin of truth. Instead, the issue is this: What truth about the human condition and the remedies for the soul can an ungodly man comprehend? It takes only a brief perusal through the works of the fathers of psychology to see the following facts: (a) The concept of sin (as the Bible portrays sin) is nonexistent. (b) The concept of God (as the Bible portrays God) is nonexistent; thus, the concept of the biblical relationship of man to God is nonexistent. (c) The concept of law, or absolutes, is nonexistent; thus morality becomes relative. (d) The true gospel of salvation conditioned on the blood and imputed righteousness of Christ is nonexistent. If secular psychologists start from ungodly premises, how then can a "Christian" psychologist use this tainted insight in finding the causes and cures for any of the ills of the soul such as rebellion in teenagers or interpersonal problems or worry?

The examples of "Christian" psychologists' using secular theory are innumerable; because of space limitations, I will offer only a few examples. Just take a look at the books in the "Psychology" or "Men's/Women's Issues" or "Family Issues" sections in your local "Christian" bookstore (and be prepared with one of those air-sickness bags).

Freud: Sexual Perversion. For those of you who are not familiar with the "big daddy" of psychoanalysis, here's an extremely condensed primer on Sigmund Freud: Freud was obsessed with sex. He described human development in terms of how the individual received sexual pleasure. He interpreted dreams as attempts to resolve underlying sexual conflicts. He saw the phallus, or phallic symbol, in everything. Freud admittedly lusted after his own mother, and he concluded that the first sexual attraction in all humans was for the parent of the opposite sex. He said that the young child's unconscious sexual longings for the parent of the opposite sex (in the "Oedipal Stage") explained the later outward hostility toward the same-sex parent during the teen years because of jealousy (called the "Oedipal Conflict").

What do the perverted sexual theories of Freud have to do with Christian Psychology? To answer this question, I will simply provide the reader with direct quotes from several leaders in the movement. To let you know that these are not from the fringes of the movement, I will introduce the first quote: it is from Always Daddy's Girl by H. Norman Wright, a best-seller when it was released because of the large amount of publicity given it by James Dobson. The book also quotes as authorities on father-daughter relationships various humanistic and overtly wicked sources such as the Freudian book Modern Woman: Her Psychology and Sexuality that includes a section written by Dr. Leon Hamner, who says that fathers give daughters sexual pleasure. Other sources used by Wright include Suzanne Fields' Like Father Like Daughter and Linda Leonard's The Wounded Woman that also put forth the incestuous sexual attraction view. The reader will see that Wright and others such as the ones quoted below promote the view that a quasi-incestuous relationship between fathers and daughters is a normal, non-sinful part of human existence. Here is Wright:

"It is true that a woman's sexuality develops over her entire lifetime, but it is definitely encouraged -- or retarded -- by her early interactions with her father. ... Your father was the first man you flirted with, the first man to cuddle you and kiss you ... Her femininity is encouraged by his smile or wink when she bats her eyelashes at him ... [There exists] an initial courtship experience with her father ... A woman's sexual self-image is partially molded by her father's response to her. ... Fathers are sometimes bothered by the sexual effect their daughters have on them or the effect they may have on their daughters. ... Unfortunately, some fathers are ... uncomfortable ... [and thus] tend to be absent when she displays her charms ... The results of these rejections will be seen in a young woman's insecurity and doubt about her ability to attract a man."

[The reader should note that many professing Christians think that there is nothing wrong with "flirting" with someone of the opposite sex. In fact, they even jokingly attribute the sin of flirting to little babies when they tell another adult of the opposite sex, "he's flirting with you" or "shame on you for flirting with a married man," as if this were not utterly sinful. So, too, many professing Christians imbibe the so-called "Christian romance novels" and the worldly dating scene in which flirting and lust are condoned.]

"Christian" psychologist David Stoop, in Making Peace With Your Father, says this:

"The beginning of adolescence is marked by what is called the Oedipal conflict. ... [It] is often used to describe the emerging adolescent who, as his or her sexuality begins to emerge, falls in love with the parent of the opposite sex and competes with the same-sex parent in an effort to 'win over' the object of his or her love. In its strong form, the incestuous overtones of this psychological model may seem repulsive. Yet it is generally accepted that all of us go through at least a mild form of this experience as we arrive on the doorstep of adolescence."

The February 16, 1993 edition of the "Minirth-Meier Clinic" radio program affirmed these twisted views by saying that every child goes through an Oedipal Stage where the child becomes attached to the parent of the opposite sex and has a resulting conflict with the same-sex parent. If you listen to that program, you will find more of the same twisted thinking. They rationalize sin as those awful "co-dependencies" or "addictions," and they encourage callers to "work it out" with "professionals."

In a book entitled The Masculine Journey, which is endorsed by Promise Keepers and was handed out to all Promise Keepers attendees, Robert Hicks uses his "stages of manhood" theory to condone sin and even to blaspheme. One of the stages he puts forth is the Zakar stage, which is a phallic stage. He says, "The phallus has always been the symbol of religious devotion and dedication" [referring to pagan sexual rites] and that every man has "the deep compulsion to worship with our phallus." He says that a teenager's first sexual sin should be thought of as a "rite of passage" and says that "we usually give the teenagers in our churches such a massive dose of condemnation regarding their first experiences with sin that I sometimes wonder how any of them ever recover." He then says this about Jesus Christ:

"I believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent phallic passions we experience as men. But it was never recorded that Jesus had sexual relations with a woman. He may have thought about it as the movie The Last Temptation of Christ portrays, but even in this movie He did not give in to temptation and remained true to His messianic course."

This is blasphemy. Yet it is not beyond the thinking of most professing Christians, who think that mere "attractions" and "passions" outside the marriage bond are not sinful, as long as they are not consummated. How many times have you heard a professedly Christian person comment on how "good-looking" or "sexy" a person of the opposite sex is? This is wickedness. To demonstrate this, here is a quote from another "Christian" counselor, Michael R. Saia (from Counseling the Homosexual), who says that a homosexual attraction is not sin:

"The dilemma here is that many people may assume that a man is sinning just because he is attracted to another man. ... [The attraction] is not something for which the person is morally culpable. As one gay man told me, 'Nobody in his right mind would choose to be homosexually oriented if he had a choice in the matter.' Before a counselor has comprehended and accepted the involuntary nature of the homosexual sexual preference, he may speak tremendous condemnation into the life of a counselee. Constant, subtle insinuation that a person is responsible for his sexual attractions can be a terrible psychological pressure."

I hope the reader sees that if one believes that a heterosexual attraction outside of marriage is not sin, then it follows that a homosexual attraction is not sin.

Me Me Me: Self-Esteem. The other principle part of the "Christian" psychology movement is the focus on self-esteem and self-worth. The secular psychologists most famous for this approach were Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. Their view was that psychological ills stem from a self-evaluation that is too low and that counselors should work at improving people's evaluations of themselves.

There are two prominent leaders of the self-esteem movement in Christendom. One is the pastor of a professedly Reformed congregation in a professedly Reformed denomination, and the other is a semi-Pelagian. Both are wicked. They are Robert Schuller and James Dobson.

The following are some quotes from Schuller: "Prayer, worship, and well-thought-out sermons will not produce morally strong and spiritually exciting Christians if they fail to produce self-confident, inwardly secure, nondefensive, integrated persons. What we need is a theology of salvation that begins and ends with a recognition of every person's hunger for glory. ... Why would love-needing persons resist, rebel against, and reject beautiful love? ... Deep down we feel we are not good enough to approach a holy God. ... It is precisely at this point that classical theology has erred in its insistence that theology be 'God-centered,' not 'man-centered.' ... [Original sin] could be considered an innate inability to adequately value ourselves. Label it a 'negative self-image,' but do not say that the central core of the soul is wickedness. If this were so, then truly, the human being is totally depraved" (in Self-Esteem: The New Reformation).

He went on to say the following in Christianity Today (8/10/84): "I don't think anything has been done in the name of Christ and under the banner of Christianity that has proven more destructive to human personality and, hence, counterproductive to the evangelism enterprise than the often crude, uncouth, and unchristian strategy of attempting to make people aware of their lost and sinful condition."

Does James Dobson, the leading "Christian" psychologist and darling of the evangelicals, oppose Schuller's heretical teaching? Here are some quotes:

"Feelings of self-worth and acceptance ... provide the cornerstone of a healthy personality. ... What is the primary motive that would cause a husband or wife to 'cheat' -- to even risk destroying their homes and families for an illicit affair? ... I have observed the most powerful influence to emanate from ego needs" (from Dr Dobson Answers Your Questions).

"If I could write a prescription for the women of the world, I would provide each one of them with a healthy dose of self-esteem and personal worth … I have no doubt that this is their greatest need" (from What Wives Wish Their Husbands Knew about Women).

Paul warned Timothy that "in the last days ... men will be lovers of self" (2 Tim. 3:1-2). Jesus said that the Kingdom of Heaven is for those who are poor in spirit (Matt. 5:3). Look up "pride" in your concordance or topical Bible to see what the entirety of the Word says. Would you conclude that the problems of the world stem from too little self-esteem or too much of it?!

A common rationalization takes the form of the following: "If Jesus came down to earth to shed His blood for us, then there must be some inherent worth in us." However, Scripture clearly tells us that God saved His elect not because of anything that was worth saving in us, but purely by His grace (Rom. 5:6,8; Eph. 2:8-9). Instead of reacting to God's grace by looking to ourselves as worthy, we must react by glorifying the sovereign God who loved the unlovable and who came for the sin-sick and not for the "self-esteemed" healthy (Matt. 9:12-13). Paul said, "For who regards you as superior? And what do you have that you did not receive? But if you did receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?" (1 Cor. 4:7)

The story of the tax gatherer and the Pharisee illustrates the point perfectly: "The tax gatherer ... was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, 'God be merciful to me a sinner!' I tell you, this man went down to his house justified" (Luke 18:13-14).

Which one had the high self-esteem - the Pharisee or the tax gatherer? We have a good idea of what Dobson would say to the tax gatherer. In his book Hide or Seek, he responded to a woman who felt worthless in this way: "Jesus did not leave his throne in heaven to die for the 'worms' of the world."

Dobson's "jesus" didn't die for the worms of the world. But my Jesus died for the worms and wretches -- those who know they have no worth and who are saved by the worthiness of their substitute.

Is the reader still not convinced that Dobson is wicked? If the following quote won't do it, nothing will:

"There is only one cure for the cancer of bitterness, that is to forgive the perceived offender. Once and for all, with God's help, as strange as it seems, I am suggesting that some of us need to forgive God for those heartaches that are charged to His account. You've carried resentment against Him for years. Now it's time to let go of it. Please don't misunderstand me at this point. God is in the business of forgiving us, and it almost sounds blasphemous to suggest that the relationship could be reversed. He has done no wrong and does not need our approbation. But the source of bitterness must be admitted before it can be cleared. There is no better way to get rid of it than to absolve the Lord of whatever we have harbored. … It is the only way you will ever be entirely free. … Corrie ten Boom forgave an SS guard who shared responsibility for the deaths of her family member. Surely we can forgive the King of the Universe Who sent His only Son to die as an atonement for our sin" (from When God Doesn't Make Sense).

This is blasphemy. And this book was endorsed by R.C. Sproul and J.I. Packer, leaders of the "Reformed" bandwagon. Let us who are Christians have nothing to do with the blasphemy, perversion, and self-worth-ship of the so-called "Christian Psychology" movement.

Posted with permission:

Carl Jung: psychologist or sorcerer?

By Marsha West

"Many Christian psychology professionals are only average pew warmers, who then practice secular psychology." — Steven J. Cole

Psychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung changed the way we think about the human psyche. For those who have never heard of him, he was the foremost pioneer of dream analysis, which is the process of assigning meaning to dreams. In many ancient traditions dreams were considered to be messages from the gods.

Jung's research asserts the concept of an impersonal or "collective unconscious" (a type of library containing everything ever known) present in each person's unconscious. The inspiration came to Jung from contacting the spirit realm. Jung claimed that his spirit guide, Philemon (more on "it" later), was a source of information that gave him crucial insights. According to Don Matzat, "Jung theorized that all humanity, past and present, were connected on an unconscious plane. Therefore, deep within each individual was the collective wisdom of the ages, including all religious, mythical content. ... Jung placed a "scientific" footing under occult phenomena and mystical experience. Jung was deeply involved in the occult and did his doctoral thesis on parapsychology. He also was interested in Catholic mysticism and conducted seminars on the teachings of Ignatius Loyola." [1]

The lie detector test and the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) are also based on Jung's theories. MBTI is a personality and psychological test to see what makes people tick. Are you an extrovert or an introvert? Do you mentally live in the now or in the future? Do you plan in advance, or do you move into action without a plan? Take a personality quiz and find out! Several years ago a church I attended gave newcomers the MBTI to identify their spiritual gifts. Knowing an individual's desires and gifts helped the leadership figure out where they could best serve the church body. It's pretty much a given to say that in most congregations today, 20 percent of the people do 80 percent of the work. Which means desires and gifts have to be put on the back burner when there's a shortage of Sunday school teachers. So why take the test in the first place? But I digress.

Carl Jung was a "spiritual thinker" a man "who offered Western culture a way back to religion that places no shame on being human."
Spiritual teacher, codependency therapist and author, Robert Burney, agrees with Jung: "We are not sinful, shameful human creatures who have to somehow earn Spirituality. We are Spiritual Beings having a human experience." [2]

If Burney's assertion is correct that the human race is not sinful then the Bible is nothing more than myths and fables and Jesus was a nut job for declaring He was the Son of God who came into the world to die for the sins of mankind. Jesus clearly taught that we are sinners, with a capital S, who "fall short of the glory of God." Sin was the reason Jesus went to the cross. His death was payment for mankind's sin debt. He threw open the gates of heaven. All who believe in Him are reconciled to God. If it is true that we are merely "Spiritual Beings having a human experience" as Burney put it, the Son of God would have had no reason to leave His throne in heaven and come to Earth. Which is Burney's whole point! If we're not sinners, we have no need of a Savior!

But what if Burney and all the other Jungian psychologists have it wrong? If they do, those that never admit their sin and accept Christ as their Lord and Savior are in a pickle. The unsaved have a one-way ticket on the H Train. There is no getting off the H Train. No turning back.

Bear with me for a moment while I share the biblical account of the Fall of Man (and woman, if you must). "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat."

Because the fruit was pleasing to the eye Eve gave into temptation. She came, she saw, she ate. Bingo! Her eyes were opened. In one split second Eve went from God-centeredness to self-centeredness. After that everything went downhill.

What did Eve do next?

"And gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked" (Genesis 3:6-7). When Adam and Eve deliberately disobeyed God, sin entered into the world and infected all humankind. The only sin cure is Jesus Christ!

Burney's approach to psychology might seem right for unbelievers, but it's wrong for Bible believing Christians.

Which brings me back to Carl Jung. As I mentioned above, Jung was considered a "spiritual thinker," albeit his lofty ideas came from Eastern mysticism, not Christianity or Judaism. The man was no ordinary psychologist by any stretch. Actually, he thought of himself as a "spiritist." According to Elliot Miller, "The movement that Jung initiated is much closer in nature to a neopagan (Aryan) cult than the scientific psychiatric discipline that it has always claimed to be. It is not just religious but a religion." [3] And a pagan religion at that!

Jung was deeply involved with his mother and two female cousins in hypnotically induced séances. He was also involved in alchemy, fortune telling, and channeling spirits. All are occult practices. Involvement in any of this sort of thing is going against God.

Now ponder this. When Carl Jung was three years old a "spirit guide" contacted him. Philemon was the spirit's name. He was one of Jung's teachers and tutored him all of his life. Other spirits came to him as well. He made this observation about them: "Philemon and other figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life. Philemon represented a force that was not myself. In my fantasies I held conversations with him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought. [...] Psychologically, Philemon represented superior insight." [4] There was no reason for Jung to believe that his visitors were benevolent spirits; nevertheless he chose to believe they were. Could the "forces that were not myself" have been the forces of evil?

You betcha! Scripture tells us that Satan masquerades as an angel of light. The apostle John warned: "Do do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world" (I John 4:1).

John says the devil is a "liar, and the father of it." He upbraided false teachers in no uncertain words: "You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies" (John 8:44).

Carl Jung has been called the "Father of Neo-Gnosticism and the New Age Movement." American psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, and physicist Jeffrey Satinover maintained that "One of the most powerful modern forms of Gnosticism is without question Jungian psychology, both within or without the Church." [5]

Jung's view of good and evil is worth noting. To quote the Rev. Ed Hird, "Jung believed that 'the Christ-symbol lacks wholeness in the modern psychological sense, since it does not include the dark side of things...' For Jung, it was regrettable that Christ in his goodness lacked a shadow side, and God the Father, who is the Light, lacked darkness." [6]

Further, Jung believed not that good should overcome evil, good should be integrated with evil in order to achieve wholeness. "The homosexual who has the courage to 'come out,' for example, is welcoming and integrating the darker and 'opposite-sex side of the personality. There can be no moral condemnation when wholeness is achieved." [7]

The Apostle Paul had something to say about uniting good and evil, (my comments in brackets) Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness (good) with unrighteousness (evil)? And what communion hath light (good) with darkness (evil)? And what concord hath Christ (our standard of goodness) with Belial (Satan, who is pure evil)? Or what part hath he that believeth (good) with an infidel (evil)? (2 Cor. 6:14, 15) The answer to Paul's last question is, in a word, nothing! The Prophet Habakkuk says of God, "Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity: wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, and holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous than he?" (Habakkuk 1:13)

Unfortunately, Jungianism has influenced not only our popular culture, but also Christian teaching despite the fact that God expressly forbids practicing sorcery in any way shape or form. (Leviticus 19:26-31; II Chronicles 33:6; Isaiah 47:8-11)

J. Budziszewski, professor of Government and Philosophy at the University of Texas, says this about Jungianism: [I]"t is based on damnable lies about the nature of good, evil, God, and the human soul. Yet these lies are being taught in ostensibly Christian seminaries and promoted by ostensibly Christian psychotherapists. I shuddered when I spoke to a Christian lady who said that her minister had been teaching her to 'gain strength from her dark side.'" [8]

Amazingly, Jung believed that "It is possible for a man to attain totality, to become whole, only with the co-operation of the spirit of darkness..." Jung said that opposites always balance one another and "onesideness, though it lends momentum, is a sign of barbarism." [9]

Who knew?


"How can these dangerous teachings be confronted?" asks Budziszewski. His answer is to inform Christians who have never heard of Carl Jung about his New Age teaching. Many years ago when I first heard about Jungianism it was described to me as a kind of psychoanalysis that's open to "spirituality." (Not knowing what was really behind "spirituality" I dived into "Christian psychology books.")

The catchword "spirituality" has a whole host of meanings. For Carl Jung spirituality "blended psychological reductionism with gnostic spirituality to produce a modern variant of mystical, pagan polytheism in which the multiple 'images of the instincts' (his 'archetypes') are worshipped as gods." [10]

The difficulty, says Budziszewski, is that there's a little truth mixed in with Jung's lies. "Through a little twist, he turns the truth that for the time being God tolerates certain evils into the lie that God is beyond good and evil. Through another twist, he turns the truth that we must reckon with what we repress into the lie that we must achieve a reconciliation with what is evil. To dispel this kind of confusion, we need to identify each truth, but show how he distorts it."

For "the wolves of the flock," who fully understand what Jung's ideas mean, and teach them anyway, Budziszewski offers this advice:

"Like the Gnostics against whom St. Paul and the early church waged spiritual battle, these people don't need instruction, but rebuke. Christ gave disciplinary authority to the church for a reason (emphasis added). He meant it to be used."

We face two obstacles to exposing Jung's earlier writings says Budziszewski: (1) His writings were composed in a misleading style. (2) His teachings twisted the truth rather than ignoring it. He suggests that Christians respond to this dangerous philosophy in two ways: First, become informed about the deceptive teachings of Jung's psychology. Second, become familiar with the metaphysical concepts and techniques of New Agers.

If someone claims to be a Christian and yet embraces an incompatible, non-Christian pluralistic worldview, he/she is unregenerate. In Scripture believers are admonished, "Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I am the LORD your God" (Leviticus 19:31).

How much plainer could God be?

Because of what we know about Carl Jung, it would be wrong for Christians to "seek after" his dangerous worldview. Christians play a part in his twisted religion when they incorporate the theories and therapies that come from dream analysis, 12-step programs, inner healing, and through personality types and tests. Apostle Paul warns, "be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God" (Romans 12:2).

I suspect I'll receive a lot of hate mail for expressing my views on psychology in the Church. I don't pretend to be an expert on this subject. Far from it. I'm expressing my not only my opinion but the opinion of a large number of Christians who oppose meshing sorcery and Christianity. This is what so-called "Christian psychology" does. Granted, it could help some people. But at what cost?


[1] The Intrusion of Psychology into Christian Theology By Don Matzat

[2] Transcendent Spiritual Beings having a human experience

[3] Book review "The Jung Cult: Origins of a Charismatic Movement" By Elliot Miller Includes all quotes By J. Budziszewski

[4] The Automatic Writings of Jung By Philip Coppens

[5] Carl Jung, Neo-Gnosticism, & the MBTI — A report by Rev. Ed Hird, Past National Chair of ARM Canada

[6] Ibid

[7] Carl Gustov Jung: Enemy of the Church By Dr Pravin Thevathasan

[8] Book review "The Jung Cult: Origins of a Charismatic Movement" By Elliot Miller Includes all quotes by J. Budziszewski

[9] Jung, Psychology & The East, p. 11

[10] Carl Jung, Neo-Gnosticism, & the MBTI — A report by Rev. Ed Hird, Past National Chair of ARM Canada

Posted with permission:
  Dominion Theology, The New Evangelicals and Post-Modern Psychobabble

Almost every seminar and teaching series in Evangelical Christianity is now laced with doctrines of psychology as if psychology was biblical or even scientific truth. Much of psychology is founded on doctrines of humanism and demons. Psychology is the virus in the backbone of so much evangelical teaching that it is getting hard to find evangelical teachers that are not helping to spread the virus. There is not much point in trying to list all the teaching and the programs that have infected the church because there would be no end to the list. I will give a couple of good examples so you get the drift.

First, let me define the type of psychology that I am mainly talking about. It is mostly theories of psychotherapy that originated from satanically inspired men. This would include but not be limited to theories by Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung.

One of my main concerns is the temperament profiling psychology and psychotherapy that originated in mythology and ancient paganism. It was most likely reinspired by Jung’s introvert, extrovert, thinker, feeler theory. Today there are more developed temperament typing theories and testing that are named "Myers-Briggs type indicator" (MBTI), "Keirsey temperament sorter" and “DISC Profiles" as well as some others.

Another concern of mine is Bill Wilson’s 12-step program that inspired Christianized 12-step programs. Wilson’s solution to his addiction from alcohol was inspired from Carl Jung’s idea that sometimes only a spiritual experience will break an addiction. The 12 steps of Bill Wilson’s 12-step program mostly originated from doctrine in the
Oxford group movement religious cult. Both Carl Jung and Bill Wilson claim in their own writings that they heard the voices of spirits that gave them some of what they wrote. Bill Wilson wrote a letter to Carl Jung and at the end of the letter, he refers to psychic phenomena among AA members and he gives praise for “I Ching” (an ancient Chinese philosophy and system of divination).

My final concern in this section will be on the psychology and the dominionist teachings of Dr. James Dobson who is now the most influential person in “Christian” America.

There are additional unbiblical psychologies and psychotherapies in the church but these examples should be sufficient. I will also explain how all this “Christian psychology” ties into Dominionism in bold type toward the end of this topic.

Temperament or personality typing is a prime example of pop-psychology replacing biblical thinking in the church. Temperament typing now occurs in churches, Christian organizations and even in Christian job hiring placement. The temperament analysis theory of four human temperaments originated from ancient myth and pagan thought. It came from the ancient theory of there being four bodily fluids that when imbalanced display a person’s temperament or personality in their physical appearance. It has long been discredited but recently temperament typing is making a comeback in pseudo-psychological practices.

The four temperaments were regurgitated through the spirit guide influence on Carl Jung with his introvert, extrovert, thinker, feeler theory. Others further developed the myth and developed testing to define the temperament of individuals. It was first popularized in evangelical circles through Tim LaHaye’s book written in 1966 called Spirit-Controlled Temperaments”. Later LaHaye wrote “Transformed Temperaments”. LaHaye’s first book drew extensively on the writings of Dr. Ole Hallesby who wrote on this subject in 1940. LaHaye took psychological temperament theories and Christianized them by reinforcing the theories through his unique and rather strange interpretation of a couple of Bible passages. In his books, LaHaye attaches presumptive temperament types to well know biblical characters. For more information on this, see Tim LaHaye & Psychoheresy. None of this should indicate to anyone that LaHaye is not solid on areas such as Bible prophecy. Many modern Christian teachers have been influenced by theories of psychology. Advanced degrees in psychology are given in many Bible colleges.

Most psychologists do not accept temperament or personality typing theories nor put these theories into practice but it is now very popular with large corporations, and with government organizations who find it useful as a tool in their tolerance, diversity training and team concept brainwashing. Much of Evangelical Christianity now accepts temperament typing as truth, much the same as they have with marketing, success and self-help psychologies.

Temperament typing analysis, like astrology, is really all about learning about oneself in the flesh. It is rooted in well-established pagan myth and theory expounded on by men who have doctrines of fantasy. The four human temperaments are not taught in the Bible. Those who live by this stuff cast themselves into molds and then find reasons to reinforce their imprisonment. The temperament tests are said to reveal the nature of a person so that that can understand self, work on self-improvement and know what their brain equips them to do in the world and church. It is very much like astrology, which is also said to reveal information on self with just about as much scientific validity. Now we know why temperament typing is so popular. I can hear the conversation now. What is your sign
Charlie? “I’m an Aries but Christians don’t believe in astrology”. O.K., what is your Temperament then? “Well, I’m a blue, compliant, compliance, analytical, perfect melancholic, blue, beaver, idealists. You see, I found my chart....er… I really meant my charted purpose in life, through eight different temperament tests.”

I have come to believe that the root of the almost fatalistic “Purpose Driven” doctrine comes from this conjecture that people are molded into some shape from birth. Thus, they seem to think that even before spiritual regeneration, everyone on earth is a pot whose flesh has already been almost unalterably shaped by God for His purpose. I guess we can forget about the Bible verses that tell us to walk by the Spirit, to deny self, and to die daily. We now must learn about this dead earth pot we live in to fit into the plan of God. I guess we can stop singing the song that says, “you are the potter and I am the clay, mold me and make me this I pray”. Frankly, I thought we were all crackpots until the Holy Spirit came into the pot and sealed us. I actually believe what is in the pots is far more valuable than the clay that holds this new creation.

What is really crazy about this, is the depth of involvement in this unbiblical practice coming via our “wise” church leadership. Some pastors are taught this junk in Bible College. Many others have taken Saddleback’s “purpose driven” church growth package that includes temperament typing. Still others are getting it in various other programs within their denominations. I have been told that you cannot even be a member of the Saddleback mega church unless you take the class they offer on temperament typing. Some places of employment even make you wear a color-coded ID when working so that everyone will deal with you according to your personality type color. Now around the water cooler, you might hear, “You better be cool man, you are talking to a dominant red lion.”!

The Saddleback temperament types or profiles are part of the purpose driven SHAPE program that have now been purchased by thousands of churches and offered to their congregations. Temperament testing is also in the church by the names of the “Keirsey temperament sorter” and “DISC Profiles”. There are additional names as well; they all do their own twist on the four temperaments. After a person is typecast, the next step is to tell them what ministry or job they will be suited for in the church or organization. Therefore, the temperament profile becomes self-fulfilling and validates the temperament theory. Ministry in the church or organization then becomes more likely to be based on attributes of the flesh than Holy Spirit directed gifts. Sure, some also have programs to tell people how to find out their spiritual gifts but that is a topic of discussion in itself. In any case, pagan mythology that finds the purpose of the crucified flesh is not compatible with determining spiritual gifts. By using psychology and theories of men they put the cart before the horse. Where does the following scripture fit into all this?
Pr 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding 6 in all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

Celebrate Recovery is a “Christianized” 12-step program that was developed by John Baker and Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in 1991. Thousands of churches that span most denominations now offer this program. Saddleback claims to have Christianized the twelve-step program of Bill Wilson. However, the claim that this “Christianized” program is based on biblical principals is misleading. Instead of using the applications already in scripture to overcome sin they search the scriptures to find passages to take their place or to “Christianize” Bill Wilson’s twelve steps. For example, they totally misapply the teaching of Jesus in the beatitudes and use most as principles to overcome addictions. No Bible scholar has ever defined them that way! The Beatitudes are statements of principals for happyness and Godly living in the Messianic kingdom. They are spiritually discerned principals that conflict with the fleshly way of achieving happiness through the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. This twisting of the meaning of Bible passages to fit some worldly theory is a fine example of how post modernism pragmatic Christianity uses, or should I says misuses, scripture. They redefine the scriptures to mean what they want it to mean even if they have to twist the meaning or find an obscure paraphrase of the passage. If one questions why they have twisted the meaning, they will justify what they have done by telling you “it works”. The original version of the 12-step program also works according to those that are in it, but many also disagree with that statement.
Just the fact that Saddleback had to Christianize Wilson’s 12 steps to recovery should say wonders about the whole theory and modern practices like this in Christian churches. Was there no overcoming addiction before Bill Wilson? Do Christians now need to study the philosophies of men that were actually inspired by demons? Some have said, “All truth is God’s truth”. Of course, it is, but there can be no truth that conflicts with the truth that God revealed in scripture. His word is totally sufficient to overcome sin in our lives by confessing it, submitting to His will and by growing in maturity. This maturity comes through Bible study, meditating on His word, through prayer, applying biblical truths in our lives and walking in faith. Sanctification and God’s truth does not come in a 12-step formula inspired by demonic sources. Read more from Dave Hunt about Bill Wilson and the AA program here.

The “Celebrate Recovery” program has additional problem besides the 12-steps. The whole program is laced with theories of pop psychobabble. It seems that Christian leaders cannot get enough worldly counsel from pop psychology these days. For many in post-modern Christianity, the Bible is simply a textbook of passages to search to find a passage to validate their own preconceived philosophies. If they cannot find a passage in the Bible to support their preconceived notions, they will redefine one. By the way, you will not find any serious Bible study or anyone with solid teaching credentials doing any Biblical instruction in Celebrate Recovery small groups since this is not permitted. This alone should say the foundation of the program is built on sand.

Dr. James Dobson with his Focus on the Family Organization is the most influential person in “Christian” America. Dobson is a child development psychologist. He is not a minister of the gospel, yet Dr. Dobson has more influence on Christians in America than any other religious figure today. Dobson has done more to bring in psychology and theories of self-esteem into the church then probably any other individual. Dobson’s theory on self-esteem and other pop psychology that he supports (such as temperament typing) is simply not compatible with the Bible.

Most of Dobson’s platform focuses on establishing, maintaining and enforcing biblical morality in American. I guess someone has to try to do it since America has now embraced moral relativism in place of biblical moral standards. Yet, Dobson’s views much too often are psychological theories dressed in biblical jargon. They may sound good to Christians who desire biblical morality in the world but it really is a humanistic substitute for the work of the Holy Spirit. The conversion and sanctification process that brings morality cannot occur through psychological techniques. Moreover, the unbeliever knows nothing of the Spirit and they can only know the moral reasoning of their own mind. Dobson teaches a mixture of psychological techniques and biblical law for morality in America. He makes no claim about knowing much theology, so one has to wonder why so many “Christians” have made him their theologian.

James Dobson is a Nazarene, This denomination takes no position on eschatology other than that Jesus will return. Dobson does not display understanding of prophetic scriptures but his organization does display a Dominion Theology type of worldview that the Church will overcome evil through her social and political action. Dobson’s agenda implies that Christians are to confront the world system through efforts of social and political action. This is so much like Dominion Theology that it probably has to be labeled as such. When Christians believe they will succeed in the world system through psychological, social and political techniques and through their own self-efforts, they have missed the scriptures that indicate that the world will hate Christians and that our kingdom is not of this world.

I am not implying that Christians should not take part in the political process nor do good social works. Focus on the Family has been a very productive force against certain evils in the United States. Nevertheless, it does seem to me that the focus of Focus on the Family is somewhat out of adjustment, as is the focus of much of Evangelical Christianity. Dobson’s expertise is in child psychology yet somehow a psychologist has become the foremost moral authority for Evangelical Christianity against all unpopular adult sinful lifestyles in American (there are popular ones such as materialism, laziness, gossip, and gluttony but few Evangelicals focus on them). The focus seems to be to educate Christians to take political action or economic action against a sinful unregenerate group of non-Christians as if sinful people can live a moral lifestyle. The only logic is that Dobson and his supporters must believe that most Americans are Christians and that this "moral majority" in America will live by the teachings in the Bible. If that were truly the case, the educational cause would have more meaning. However, polls and the lifestyles of those that call themselves by the name “Christian” in America demonstrates otherwise.

The idea that the United States can be Christianized by political and social action is very compatible with the views of Dominion Theology. The worldly method of using a confrontational attitude toward those living in unpopular sinful lifestyles actually makes these people less receptive to Christians who preach the message of salvation. The Church is not Israel nor is America Israel. No enforcement of biblical law can bring a nation to morality; morality comes when a person or nation has a change from within. The Church was directed to preach the good news so that people can overcome sin by believing in Jesus and receiving God’s Holy Spirit.

The ungodliness that is going on in America is the norm for those in the world. The fact that Evangelicals think they have to bring America back to morality (as if it ever was moral), so that we can comfortably live in this world, tells me that we all value this world a bit too much. Dobson is so popular in America because he tells Evangelicals what they want to hear and not what they need to hear. Evangelicals rightly see trouble is coming by the downward spiral of morality in America but they expect simple humanistic solutions. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal! I totally expect the world and much of America to be in opposition to Christian values. If it is not happening in your neck of the woods yet, just wait a few years, it will. The Bible tells us to expect it. Those who make great social and political efforts to change a fallen world before God establishes His kingdom of righteousness on earth are spitting into the wind.

Gods laws were given to us show us how much we are missing the mark so we will seek God’s Savior by faith (Gal 3:24). Dobson and Dominionists use Jewish law to try to reform sinful society. This cart before the horse method of Christianizing the world is quite impossible no matter how noble their motives. It never worked in unbelieving Israel and it will not work in the Gentile unbelieving world. Those who use this method will bring a worldly backlash of hatred on their own head.

Dobson also has a very ecumenical worldview of the church proven by his associations and his endorsements. Sound biblical salvation doctrine is obviously not the main criteria for unity among denominations with Dr. Dobson.

There is a book available from psycoheresy-aware.org that analyzes the teaching of Dr. Dobson if you wish further information. This link to the book also has a very good short brief on the major points in the book, James Dobson’s Gospel of Self-Esteem and Philosophy. Reputable discernment ministries such as Dave Hunt’s The Berean Call endorse and sell the book.

(Update Sept 2007 - James Dobson meets Joel Rosenburg author of the "Ezekiel Option" by divine appointment when seated across the aisle from each other on a plane trip. Joel obviously got through to James Dobson about end time Bible prophecy being fulfilled. Dobson invited Rosenthal to speak about end time events on Focus on the Family radio program. Perhaps what I said about Dobson and Dominionism no longer applies but time will tell he may have been just talked into considering what Joel said and is not actually a convert)

Psychologies with underlining theories of psychotherapy are major tools of Satan to bring Eastern pagan thought and doctrines of demons into the Church. The view of psychotherapy is that everyone is a victim and any bad behaviors that people might display are caused by physiological illnesses from which they can recover through using the right techniques. In contrast, the Bible tells us that all people of flesh are sinful and they must turn to Jesus, die to self and become reborn into a new spiritual creation. Only this spiritual rebirth will begin the process through which the soul of a person starts a transformation by the renewing of the mind toward the Spirit that is in him (the process of sanctification).

Psychology programs might bring some change in outward behavior in people but the heart of the unregenerate man is still wicked. Putting a coat of paint over a cracked pot does not fix the pot. Control over the flesh comes by the soul conforming to the likeness of the Spirit. Psychotherapy is a worldly substitute for sanctification and true healing but it is now being taught in churches, Christian seminars and Christian groups like it was biblical truth. They Christianize the terms and use scripture out of correct context but the information in these programs still originated from the theories of psychotherapy that we ought to know came from atheistic men and spiritualists.

If a proper analysis is done of the post-modern “Seeker Friendly” and “Emerging Church” one should see that their whole approach to evangelism and church growth derives from theories of marketing and psychotherapy psychology. These churches see these programs as a door to get people into their church. Therefore, they present popular psychology wrapped in pages torn out of the Bible. Few are the wiser, and their church is numerically and monetarily richer. So many people have now come in the church through the psycho-door that they perpetuate these theories for subsequent generations. Church leaders that went through this door have been so thoroughly brainwashed into supporting psychology as practical Christianity that the average “Saddleback Joe” and “Emerging Sally” think this Western psycho-Christianity is true Christianity.

They have substituted psychology from demonic men for Godly counsel by elders, counsel from the scriptures and counsel from the Holy Spirit. They learn pre-packaged psychological techniques to control the flesh instead of putting on the spiritual man with a renewed mind. This sanctification process is the program God designed to bring a believer to true repentance and a more abundant life. In contrast, learning psychological techniques to control the flesh is really conforming to the ways of the world.
Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

“Christian psychology” ties into Dominion Theology because leaders and churches who teach Dominion Theology extensively use tools of psychology. Go to any large church that practices any form of Dominion Theology and you will also find programs that are more likely to be based on theories of psychology than on sound biblical doctrine - Observe the prosperity teaching, the success seminars and the sensual emphasis. Many who say they do not believe in Dominion Theology indicate differently in their worldly lifestyle. The only kingdom they are really concerned with is the earthly one they now live in. They give little thought to spiritual matters. These real or defacto dominionists wish to make the flesh and the spiritual kingdom compatible. This of course is quite impossible but many will certainly die trying.

“Word of Faith” leadership uses another form of psychology. They knowingly or unknowingly use psychological mind control techniques that bring on mass suggestion, hypnotism and altered states of consciousness. They use these tools to lord over their flock and to make their presumptions plausible. When mystical experiences occur in their presence through using these psychological techniques it validates to the sheeple that these leaders are anointed. The leaders then tell their subjects that they are latter day apostles, prophets, and healers anointed to lead the Church to take the world back from the Dominion of Satan before the return of Jesus and these sheeple believe them.

Additional psychologies that have infiltrated the church include theories on visualization, inner healing and contemplative prayer. These and more are beyond the scope of this paper on Dominion Theology but
The Intrusion of Psychology into Christian Theology by Don Matzat will tell you much about it. (This really is a must read - I believe I disagree with only one point - Matzat’s Lutheran view of Jesus coming through sacraments).

We now also have philosophies that originated from psychology that teach that all truth is relative and if you get the results you want, it is your truth. Without holding groups to the absolute truth that salvation comes by God’s grace through faith (trust) some Evangelicals now take some rather strange unbiblical positions about salvation. With their pragmatic philosophy, if a program is growing, then God is in it regardless if it is biblical. If it does not appear biblical, they will just redefine the scriptures.

We have Evangelical leaders uniting with Catholics on the common ground of completely different gospels. We have some Evangelical leaders saying that we should not proselytize other religions. We have Evangelical leaders who evangelize and then turn the converts back to the same denominational theology that never presented them a path for salvation. I suppose they think that these reborn Christians will now be sanctified within a theology of works and mysticism. We have Evangelical leaders saying that Moslems and Mormons worship the same God. We have Evangelical leaders joining with the ultra liberal World Counsel of Churches and signing agreements with them on their socialistic agendas of secular humanism.

These neo-Evangelicals take the position that being one in Christ is saying we have agreement on one or more worldviews. They think this “unity” is then fulfilling the prayer of Jesus that the Church be one as Jesus and the Father are one. If unification on programs of secular humanism makes us one body then we might as well throw out the Bible because what is written there has no meaning. Indeed, some “Evangelicals” apparently have stopped using parts of the Bible, especially the prophetic passages that do not fit their worldview.

The name “Evangelical” has lost its meaning. Neo-liberals wolves in sheep’s clothing have crept into the Evangelical movement and have eaten the choice cuts. Old Evangelicals need to drop the name Evangelical and just start calling themselves what they are – Bible believing Christians. I am sure the wolves will work on that name next, as they did with the name “fundamentalist”.

By now you should get my drift that worldly psychology has infiltrated the church and has corrupted the church to conform to the secular humanistic dream of a utopian society on earth brought through man’s own efforts. Much of “Christianity” wants a flesh appealing utopian society on the earth before the return of Jesus but the Bible teaches that Christians will be persecuted and hated by the world as Jesus was (Joh 15:18–20). Many who follow the teachers of Dominion Theology do not have a clue about what they believe. Most are just playing following the leader and have never even read through the Bible themselves. Most are just following preachers who tickle their ears.

Posted with permission:

Many Christian counselors are guilty of ignoring the divine Counselor. It's time to rediscover His role.

I think it's no exaggeration to say that the Christian counseling scene today is in total shambles. I'm not talking about true Christian counseling -- that which trusts the Bible and the power of the Holy Spirit to conform a person to Christ -- that kind of counseling has been successfully changing sinners since the apostolic age. I'm talking about pseudo-counseling -- the attempt to fix people with a blend of secular psychological theory and the Bible.

But have integrationist counselors affected any real change among evangelical Christians?

Are people really fixed?

It has been sad to see so many Christians seek counsel from Christian psychotherapists who fumble around with theories developed by Sigmund Freud, Carl Rogers and B. F. Skinner Psychology and talk therapy are so bankrupt that many are abandoning them to embrace biological psychiatry.Psychotropic medicine is the new savior.Problems that were once blamed on dysfunctional families and Id/Superego conflict are now charged to chemical imbalances and disorders.

Yesterday's psychology and today's psychiatry share the same fatal errors -- they reject the total depravity of man due to sin; they treat the symptoms instead of the heart; and they aim for change that is not true sanctification.

In spite of obvious failure, the notion prevails within the church that psychotherapy and psychiatry are more effective agents of change -- particularly in dealing with the most difficult cases -- than the Holy Spirit who sanctifies. But can psychotherapy or psychiatry possibly accomplish something the Holy Spirit cannot? Can an earthly therapist achieve more than a heavenly Comforter? Is behavior modification more helpful than sanctification? Of course not.

(Excerpted from "The Work of the Spirit and Biblical Counseling" in Introduction to Biblical Counseling, John MacArthur and Wayne Mack, editors).
The facts are that both psychology and psychiatry are totally counter to what the bible teaches. They teach the exact opposite and are a huge part of the reason this world is as messed up as it is.

"Christian counseling" which is simply someone who is a Christian or says they are, using worldly techniques and theories
such as psychiatry and psychology instead of biblical ones to supposedly help people- is nothing more then a cover up and counterfeit of Satan's to try and put a so called Christian veneer over something that's totally ungodly so it will look more acceptable.

Biblical or
Nouthetic counseling is the exact opposite. No worldly theories or psychology or psychiatry are used. All help comes from the Word of God and prayer. Like with anything else though, you have to be sure you're getting a true born again Christian as a biblical counselor because this world is filled to overflowing with counterfeits.
I was entering my books into my database and thought that I'd post the list of books that was given to me when the Lord called me to be a Nouthetic (Biblical) Counselor. My godfather has been a nouthetic counselor for decades (which I was unaware of at the time) so when I told him that was what God was calling me to do, he sent me this list of books to read and study. He told me that he always had all his students read and study these books as part of his course. They are really fantastic books. Even though they are non-fiction, they grab your interest right away and don't let go till the book is finished. They will really open your eyes to what's going on the world, in the body of Christ and even in yourself. Here they are:

Why Christians Can't Trust Psychology by Ed Rulkley, PhD

Price: $10.19 or
17 new from $4.24 41 used from $0.86


Competent To Counsel by Jay E. Adams

Price: $13.59
31 new from $10.83 34 used from $6.25


The Christian Counselor's Manuel By Jay E. Adams

Price: $15.63 41 new from $9.50 34 used from $5.951 collectible from $29.90

Introduction To Biblical Counseling by John F. MacArthur Jr. and Wayne A. Mack
and The Master's College Faculty

5 new from $74.99 23 used from $9.00


The school used this last one too 
 Check the doctrine of psychology against the doctrine that the Bible teaches. They don't match, they're not even close; they're exactly opposite in most cases even. As I've harped on before, the bible doesn't teach "self esteem" the way the world does. Once you start comparing these things it's pretty easy to determine what is right and what is wrong--at least for those who believe that the Bible is 100% true and that the Bible truly and really does give us all we need to live this life.

2 Peter 1:3 His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness.

The world and Christian psychologists preaching of self esteem and self worth is paying off even now. We are all reaping what they've sown. Through their constant preaching of self esteem and self worth, and loving yourself and putting yourself first etc. another biblical prophecy is being fulfilled in our day:

2 Timothy 3:1-2 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves....

and boy oh boy, that is certainly true of people today. They've swallowed that poison, hook line and sinker and got further from God every day, and now look at the way this world is: very very sick with sin and in need of the only thing that can help them which is the Gospel and salvation and living a godly life instead of saying they're a Christian and living a life just like their next door neighbor who's a muslim or their other neighbor who's nothing at all--he just believes in himself. That's mainly what psychology and christian psychology is all about though; they call sin an "illness" instead of what it is, just plain ugly outright sin.

Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.
To view the rest of this series go here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K79ZhPUHFvQ


  1. I think its worth noting that both psychology and pschiatry have their roots in the occult. Jung was into the occult.


    "ung's unique approach to psychology was influential in countercultural movements in Europe and the United States in the 1960s. He has emphasized understanding the psyche through exploring the worlds of dreams, art, mythology, world religion and philosophy. Although he was a theoretical psychologist and practicing clinician, much of his life's work was spent exploring other realms, including Eastern and Western philosophy, alchemy, astrology, sociology, as well as literature and the arts. "

  2. http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/3847/the_occult_world_of_cg_jung.html

    "In the 1920s, he plunged into a study of the Gnostics – whom he had encountered as early as 1912 – and alchemy. It was Jung, more than anyone else, who salvaged the ancient Hermetic pursuit from intellectual oblivion. Another Hermetic practice he followed was astrology, which he began to study seriously around the time of his break with Freud. Jung informed his inner circle that casting horoscopes was part of his therapeutic practice, but it was during the dark days of WWII that he recognised a wider application. In 1940, in a letter to HG Baynes, Jung speaks of a vision he had in 1918 in which he saw “fire falling like rain from heaven and consuming the cities of Germany”. He felt that 1940 was the crucial year, and he remarks that it’s “when we approach the meridian of the first star in Aquarius”. It was, he said, “the premonitory earthquake of the New Age”.

  3. Its also worth noting that Freud, the devleoper of psychoanalysis was into the occult as well. I have researched enough to find this a reasonably provable, but wont publish links to books & web sites as some of them are not stuff you want to read as a Christian.

  4. All true and covered in the post as well. I really do highly recommend the book: Why Christians Can't Trust Psychology by Ed Rulkley, PhD. This isn't a conspiracy theory or anything at all like that. It's just plain hard truth, that comes straight from the Word of God.


Please comment so we can grow in faith together & edify each other.