Psychology and the Bible

The Controversy Surrounding Psychology in the Church Today

There are many biblical counselors and clergy who oppose the use of contemporary psychology in counseling and view psychology in general as contrary to the Bible. The recommended reading at the end of this book lists several works that take this position. While these books make some valid points, they also tend to present a distorted picture of psychology and psychotherapy. The result is that they “throw the baby out with the bath water.” The main objections made by critics of psychology are:

• Psychology is not a true science.

• There is no evidence that psychotherapy works.

• Psychology is based on Godless assumptions that are incompatible with Scripture. The result is 1) Psychology causes people to discount or overlook sin, and 2) it is impossible to be a Christian counselor if you use anything from secular psychology— you must only use the Bible.

• Psychology stops on the surface and is only capable of dealing with people superficially on a temporal level. The solutions psychology offers are of no value because they fall far short of the real needs of the soul, which only are met in Christ.

• Psychology moves Christians away from a biblical perspective on problems and solutions. The result is a weakening of the Church and distortion of the Gospel message.

In order to address the above concerns adequately and see what psychology has to offer to Christians, you need some understanding of how psychology developed, the different areas of psychology, and how these areas of psychology function.

The Different Areas of Psychology

The American Heritage Dictionary, Third Edition defines science as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Psychology is defined as “the science that deals with mental processes and behavior.” For this discussion, I divide psychology into three general areas: psychological research, psychological theory, and psychotherapy.

In Genesis 1:28 we are given the command to “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” Science is an important tool for carrying out this command. The problem with science in general and psychology in particular occurs when they become divorced from God. Then the fruit of scientific research becomes a curse rather than a blessing.

Psychological research focuses on gathering facts about mental processes and behavior. One example of psychological research is the extensive work done in observing large groups of children of different ages and identifying the abilities, characteristics, and behaviors typical of each age group. Another example is work done with sophisticated medical equipment to try to identify what happens in the brain when we think about or do specific activities. Yet another area is the investigation of how a person learns. Psychological research of this type has proven very beneficial. One application has been the help it has given parents and teachers in understanding children so they can more effectively follow Proverbs 22:6 and “Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.”

Psychological theory is the attempt to explain the various facts gathered by psychological research and the practical experience of therapists working with people. This is the main area where psychology can conflict with what the Bible teaches.

Psychotherapy is the art of helping people who are experiencing a set of identifiable symptoms that are interfering with a person’s life. These symptoms can be behavioral such as lack of impulse control and/or emotional such as excessive depression or anxiety. In essence, it is the application of the knowledge that has come from psychological research and theoretical speculation to the real world difficulties that people face by means of a variety of counseling techniques.

Is Psychology a True Science?

For much of their history, psychology and psychiatry were considered “soft” sciences. They were not taken seriously by people working in the “hard” sciences such as engineering, chemistry, medicine, or physics. The reason for this was simple: for many years there was little experimental testing of psychological theory based upon sound scientific methodology. Most early psychological theory came from therapists observing people, many of whom were patients with problems, and trying to explain what they saw. These theories were rarely tested except when treating patients. If a patient improved, the theory was considered valid. Psychological theories were essentially opinions that were shaped by a particular therapist’s background, experience, and the time and culture in which the therapist lived.

In contrast to the early psychological theory that was based mostly on personal opinion, the “hard” sciences such as engineering, chemistry, and physics were founded on decades of controlled experiments. Much energy was and continues to be spent testing new theories experimentally. While this often only creates more questions and controversies, the center of debate on a given question usually is the interpretation of carefully obtained experimental data.

All of this began to change with what is known as the “psycho-pharmacology revolution” in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s. During this period several drugs were discovered that had powerful psychoactive effects (they caused changes in specific mental processes). This began to open up new treatments for a variety of serious and perplexing problems for which there previously had been no real treatments. The discovery of these psychoactive drugs revolutionized the way people thought about mental health problems and triggered three other revolutions in the field of psychology.

The first was an ideological revolution. Prior to the psycho-pharmacological revolution, most people outside of psychology did not view mental health problems as real problems with defined causes and for which specific treatment responses could be developed. Because of the clear action of psychoactive medications, mental health problems came to be seen as involving the interaction of biological and psychosocial factors. For the first time psychiatric problems were accepted as the same as other health problems. Practitioners and researchers now used the “illness model” for mental health problems.

The second revolution was a methodological revolution. This is perhaps more important than the ideological revolution. Researchers in early drug trials needed a reliable diagnostic system— a system of labeling the various behavioral or emotional symptoms that cause problems for people— that would allow people to agree with one another about what constituted a specific problem. The subsequent development of a reliable diagnostic system allowed researchers to identify for the first time the nature and extent of various mental health problems. These diagnostic criteria also became the foundation for all the research including both biological and psychosocial research. Prior to this, everyone was doing his or her own thing based on etiological assumptions (assumptions about the cause of a given problem) and there was no way to compare experimental results.

The third revolution was the rapid growth of the neural-sciences. Once the effect of the early psychoactive drugs was seen, the neural-sciences rushed in and attempted to understand how these drugs were having these powerful effects. This increase in the use of true scientific methodology has spilled over into every other aspect of psychology and there is now a large body of research and data that can help us understand emotions more clearly.

As you can see, the charge that psychology was not a real science was true for much of its history. However, psychology has finally come of age and is a true science. Psychology now uses the same scientific methodology that has resulted in modern medicines, household appliances, and all of the other modern inventions that you see.

Does Psychotherapy Really Work?

Just as there was little science in early psychological speculation, there was also little science in early psychotherapy. Therapists used techniques and methodologies for which there was little or no research that showed they were effective. With the advent of the psychoactive drugs came efficacy studies— studies that compare a group of people taking a drug with a group taking a placebo under controlled conditions to see if the drug was effective. In the 1970’s researchers began to conduct efficacy studies on the various “talk therapies.”

The early efficacy studies found that psychotherapy often was ineffective. These early studies are the ones usually cited by critics of psychology. However, this early work spurred a new line of research that began to intensify in the 1980’s. The effectiveness of different treatment approaches when used with a specific and clearly identified problem was compared. The goal was to identify which treatment or combination of treatments were most effective for a given problem. While this work is still fairly new, important strides have been made.

One area in which I specialize is the treatment of anxiety-related problems. Research data showing that current treatment approaches are effective is now so strong that the National Institute of Health Consensus Statement on Anxiety Disorders issued in 1992 states “treatment that fails to produce benefit within 6-8 weeks should be reassessed.” This statement is based on a wide range of efficacy studies that use solid scientific methodology. (A good single source overview of this type of research that has extensive bibliographical references is Anxiety and Its Disorders: The Nature and Treatment of Anxiety and Panic by David H. Barlow, Guilford Press, New York: 1988.)

While research indicating that effective treatment approaches for mental health problems do exist, there are two problems. First, many therapists are either unaware of these newer approaches or are unskilled at applying them. The result is that treatment is often far less effective than research indicates it could be. As a specialist in anxiety-related problems, I routinely see many people who have been to several medical or psychological specialists prior to seeing me. During this time they often receive improper diagnoses and inappropriate treatment. Every field of science experiences a delay between the discovery of new information and its widespread application. Unfortunately, this delay in the area of psychology is especially obvious because the systematic application of sound scientific methodology to the field of psychology as a whole is still relatively new.

Another problem that often renders psychotherapy ineffective stems from the intense rivalry that existed among the different schools of psychology during its infancy and to some extent, even today. Like the various schools of philosophy in ancient Greece, the various schools of psychology— Freudian, Neo-Freudian, Adlerian, Jungian, Cognitive, Behavioral, Rogerian, etc.— thought their ideas were superior to those of the others. When working with clients, a “one size fits all” mentality was present where every problem was treated with the same approach. Because psychology is still a fairly young science, this feeling of superiority and rivalry still exists among many practitioners. Fortunately, the situation is slowly improving.

When done in a proper manner by a well-trained therapist, psychotherapy does achieve positive results with clearly defined problems. However, since the knowledge and training of therapists vary widely, the selection of a therapist is important in order to achieve good results. If you or someone you know needs to seek help, this site offers a list of guidelines for locating and choosing a therapist.

Is Psychology Incompatible With Scripture?

The question of whether or not psychology is compatible with Scripture needs to be addressed by examining psychological theory and psychotherapy separately. There is a wide body of psychological theory consistent with the Bible. My observation is that psychological theory based on solid research is usually very consistent with biblical truth. Theories on learning and perception are two examples. The main problem areas usually involve psychological theory that is based more on speculation and personal opinion than on research. There are two main areas where this mostly opinion based psychological theory differs with Scripture: the reality of sin and our inability to attain ultimate answers by human power alone.

We now know that many mental health problems exist which have a large biological component such as bipolar disorder (formerly known as Manic-depression), Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, and Attention-Deficit Hyperactive Disorder. Some types of problems such as Social Phobia are due mostly to early childhood experiences and/or the lack of specific social skills or knowledge. Emotional trauma that generates intense condition-response reactions as described in Lesson 3, also can cause problem behaviors. However, one important problem that can arise with the illness model is that the spiritual and moral aspects of many human problems are either minimized or not considered. As Gary Habermas, a strong advocate of the value of psychology to Christians, has noted, “. . . human sinfulness is often sidestepped by an overzealous psychological agenda. Frequently, persons are viewed (at least implicitly) as being essentially good, while biblical areas of sin are treated as uncontrollable factors, such as those found in one’s childhood or environment. Then therapy, rather than repentance, is prescribed.”

Many psychologists believe and teach that you can be the master of your life and solve all of your problems through human effort. You only need to base your life on the right principles, change your beliefs, or learn certain techniques in order to live a happy and fulfilling life. On this manner, the Bible is clear. Because you are tainted with sin, you are unable to help yourself (Romans 7:14-25). The only force that can truly transform you is the Holy Spirit (2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:2). Much more will be said about this in later lessons.

Now let us consider psychotherapy. The explosion in psychological research that has taken place over the past few decades has resulted in a refinement of the methodologies and techniques used with psychological problems. Many of these approaches, both old and new, are based on normal human interactions and approaches specified in the Bible. A few examples include systematic problem solving (Matthew 5:23-24; 18:15-17), listening skills (James 1:19), encouragement (Ephesians 4:29), and the challenging of inappropriate beliefs (2 Timothy 4:2).

The various counseling techniques used in psychotherapy are neutral in the sense that whether or not they conform to biblical truth depends, in large measure, upon both the theory a therapist is using for direction and the therapist’s personal beliefs. Dr. Jay Adams, for example, is a well-known biblical counselor who has developed a system of counseling that he would assert is strictly from the Bible. He is also a strong critic of secular psychology who has stated that “theological and biblical training, then, is the essential background for a counselor; not training in psychology or psychiatry.” In spite of his extreme position, many of his counseling techniques are very similar to techniques used in a form of secular psychology called cognitive psychology. The word “cognitive” refers to how you think. Cognitive techniques focus on changing a person’s beliefs and thoughts. This is called cognitive restructuring.

Of course, Dr. Adams’ use of cognitive restructuring differs greatly from a therapist using a purely secular approach. Dr. Adams focuses on how a person’s thoughts and beliefs reflect or are contrary to biblical truth. A secular approach would simply look for whether a person’s thinking was rational or irrational from a logical perspective. Of course, the criteria for what constitutes “rational” thinking is greatly influenced by personal beliefs. Albert Ellis, a prominent psychologist, presents a strong contrast to Dr. Adams. Dr. Ellis has stated:

“There is no place whatever for the concept of sin in psychotherapy . . . no human being should ever be blamed for anything he does; and it is the therapist’s main and most important function to help rid his patients of every possible vestige of their blaming themselves, blaming others, or blaming fate and the universe.”

“(Religion) is in many ways equivalent to irrational thinking and emotional disturbance . . . the elegant therapeutic solution to emotional problems is to be quite unreligious . . . the less religious they are, the more emotionally healthy they will be.”

Clearly, Dr. Ellis would view Dr. Adams’ belief that true healing can only come with a heart that has been transformed by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as irrational. This is especially important for Christians seeking counseling. The October 1993 issue of Christian Counseling Today reported that, “. . . past surveys of the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association found that only 43 percent of their members believed in God— less than half the rate of the general public.” At the same time, there are many psychologists and therapists who are deeply committed Christians and whose work is rooted firmly in the Bible. Two well-known examples would be Gary Collins and Larry Crabb. As mentioned previously, the general web pages at this site includes guidelines for selecting a therapist.

Do the Solutions Offered by Psychology Have Any Value to Christians?

Prior to returning to the church and recommitting my life to Christ, I was very effective at helping people with a variety of problems. Two of my main areas of focus were helping people overcome panic attacks and avoidance patterns associated with Panic Disorder and relieving the many distressing symptoms associated with Post-Traumatic Disorder. Even at that time however, I noticed that while I could help people with the intense symptoms associated with these conditions, there often remained other, long-term habits and predispositions which did not respond to a purely secular psychological approach.

This is similar to what has been found in the various efficacy studies that were mentioned earlier. For example, the cognitive-behavioral techniques I use have been shown to be very effective at eliminating or greatly reducing panic attacks and avoidance patterns in people suffering from Panic Disorder. However, these are the only factors that are measured. One of the topics discussed at the 1994 National Conference on Anxiety-Related Problems was the problem that after these acute symptoms are resolved, there often remains a tendency to worry or other long-term problem traits that are untouched. In this sense, it is similar to the way in which medicine can help cure distressing symptoms associated with many types of illness or injury but does nothing about a person’s basic nature or deeply ingrained habit patterns.

When the Holy Spirit and biblical truth direct the counseling process, people go beyond mere surface fixes and rediscover the true source of inner healing— reconciliation with God through Christ and the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. Often, my knowledge of both the Bible and psychological techniques help me show a person how to overcome obstacles that keep the person from thinking clearly about salvation or other biblical concepts. Helping to free a person from terrifying nightmares or panic attacks is valuable; doing this and helping them develop a deeper relationship with God through Christ is eternally more valuable and results in a much deeper healing.

Does Psychology Weaken Or Strengthen the Church?

As I’ve already mentioned, the discoveries of psychological research, when based on sound scientific methodology, always confirms biblical truth. The reason for this is best summarized by a set of assumptions that underlie work done by Hugh Ross, an astrophysicist, an active Christian apologist (someone who defends Christianity), and the president of Reasons to Believe:

• God speaks without error through the words of the Bible.
• God also speaks through the facts of nature.
• It is impossible for God to lie through the words of the Bible or the facts of nature because He is a perfect being who cannot lie.
• The general revelation of God through the facts of nature is completely consistent with the special revelation of the Bible since they are both coming from the same God— truth is always consistent with itself.

Jesus often spoke in parables that used knowledge and examples from the first century to illustrate eternal truths. Likewise, Paul sometimes quoted pagan thinkers in order to make a spiritual point (Acts 17:23, 28; Titus 1:12-13). When psychology is used to focus on biblical truths and point people to Jesus, it helps to make them more effective ministers of the gospel and strengthens the church. Unfortunately, psychology often is not used in this manner. Many therapists who call themselves “Christian counselors” have weak biblical backgrounds and unknowingly teach secular psychological theory that is partially or wholly in conflict with Scripture. When this occurs it weakens the church and dilutes the gospel.

Christ As the Center

In order to use psychology wisely, we need to follow the example of the Bereans in Acts 17:11 who “examined the scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.” This is especially true when Scripture is used to support a particular idea. I often see classes that use Scripture to support ideas put forth by secular psychology that are actually contrary to sound biblical doctrine. My experience is that these ideas also usually lack sound scientific research.

One verse that I often hear used in this manner is John 8:32 “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” Unfortunately, this quotation is often used to peddle whatever “truth” a person is selling. What is occurring is a common misapplication of biblical truth. When trying to understand what the Bible is saying you must always view a phrase or verse within the context of the lesson and book where it appears. To whom was it addressed? Why was it written? In addition, you need to examine a verse in terms of how it relates to the Bible as a whole.

When you read John 8:25-32 you see that Jesus is telling the Pharisees that He is the Messiah and that He is the only way for people to be set free from sin and know God. The real meaning of the quotation that began this section comes only when you begin at verse 31: “To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, ‘If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.’”

The truth to which Jesus is referring is both the person of Jesus and His teachings. In other words, accepting Jesus as our Lord and Savior and following what He taught are what sets us free— not some “truth” developed by man. Jesus stated this another way in John 14:6 “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Return to Top

E-mail comments to: lrsc@rpeurifoy.com

Disclaimer: This site contains general reference information and is not intended as a substitute for consulting with a physician or a psychotherapist.

Copyright © 1999 by Reneau Peurifoy, MA — All Rights Reserved