printable version

THE INTEGRATION OF PSYCHOLOGY WITH SCRIPTURE EXPLORED IN THE LIGHT OF GALATIANS 1:6-1
 
By Anne Richardson


If there ever was a warning, given by the Holy Spirit, in apostolic days for the very times in which we are living, it is surely the one found in Galatians 1:6-10: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed, from him that called you unto the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. But I certify you, brethren that the gospel, which was preached of me, is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.”

Paul’s words of caution to the Galatians echo down through the ages with an equally imperative message to the 21st century Apostolic Church. Spurious doctrines have come and gone throughout the ages; however, it has only been during the twentieth century that many Christians began to trust psychology more than the Bible when dealing with problems of living. “The word psychology is a good one. Literally it means ‘the study of the soul.’ As such it originally carried a connotation that has distinctly Christian implications, for only someone who has been made complete in Christ is properly equipped to study the human soul” (MacArthur, 1991, p. 30). However, in present day psychology the idea of soul or spirit is markedly absent. Many texts now define psychology as the study of behaviour and mental processes, and the application of knowledge to human functioning. So we see that implicit in the current definition of psychology is a denial of the existence of the soul, or at least of any practical importance of the soul in human behaviour. Perhaps this is because psychological theories originated in the minds of men who assumed there is no God, making them incapable of any true study of the soul. It seems that a great number of Christians are unaware of psychology’s godless origins and that the core principles of psychology are in total opposition to the core doctrinal base of the Bible. Consequently, the two have ended up unequally yoked, and ambiguously labeled “Christian” psychology. This endeavour to unify or reconcile such differing beliefs is a classic example of syncretism. “Syncretism of the Christian gospel occurs when critical or basic elements of the gospel are replaced by elements from the host culture” (Imbach, paragraph 4). The attempt to “Christianize” psychology often results in psychology assuming the primary role, while the Word of God becomes secondary.

The United Pentecostal Church Manual states, “The Bible is the only God-given authority which man possesses; therefore, all doctrine, faith, hope, and all instruction for the church must be based upon, and harmonize with, the Bible” (UPC Manual, 2002, p. 23). The word all leaves no area of the believer’s life uncovered.

But, many who would never doubt the Bible’s authenticity as God’s Word, or distrust its essential authority as a guide for righteous living have nevertheless accepted the notion that Scripture simply does not contain all we need to minister well in these complex and sophisticated times. (MacArthur, (1991), p. 117).

Seeking psychological counsel and integrating psychology’s theories with Scripture is viewed much the same as seeking medical attention for the body. Receiving treatment for a physical ailment will not alter a person’s faith in God or jeopardize his spiritual growth. However, the same is not true for Christians who receive ungodly counsel when they are in a vulnerable emotional state. So often these believers are “removed” from the simplicity of God’s ways. Faith in God is undermined and hearts are turned away from the One who has promised to deliver us out of all our afflictions and to bind up our broken hearts. Jesus said, “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31,32). This includes freedom from the numerous problems that in today’s society are propelling people into the offices of psychologists and psychiatrists or to some type of “professional” counselor, Christian or otherwise.

Blending psychology with Scripture is a practice that has seriously compromised the United Pentecostal Church’s commitment to trust only the Bible as the ultimate source of instruction for its members. The Scriptures clearly state that, “…his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue”(2 Peter 1:3). The question is whether we believe God, are willing to obey His Word, and are content with what He has given us for “life and godliness.” Do we trust His “divine power” as sufficient, or do we think that some psychologist, “Christian” or secular, knows what God doesn’t, and can do what God can’t? When the Corinthians were experiencing many trials and temptations, Paul provided them with a word of comfort, “No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make a way of escape, that you may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13). In many instances we have deprived God of the opportunity to show Himself strong in our moments of greatest weakness. Sadly, “the most dangerously effective assault on God’s Word may be a subtle one that has been fostered primarily by those who think themselves as Bible believers-but who doubt the perfect sufficiency of Scripture” (MacArthur, 1991, p. 117). The blending of psychology with Scripture challenges God’s sufficiency and has become a controversial issue within the United Pentecostal Church. These differing views are forcing God’s people to take sides in an issue that ought not to be an issue in the first place. We are reminded of the Corinthian church that began to identify itself with men rather than with Jesus. Paul asked the Corinthian believers, “Is Christ divided” (1 Corinthians 1:13)? A question that perhaps the twenty-first century church should also ask with regard to this issue. Divisive matters have been a problem in the Church since its beginnings. Discord will inevitably arise when believers choose to embrace knowledge and practices that are incompatible with Biblical Truth. God has not left us without a standard to discern the cause of confusion and division. Paul cautioned the Corinthians to be wary of those who teach, “ contrary to the doctrine which they had learned” (1 Corinthians 16:17). The Word of God provides the standard against which all other teaching must be measured. Psychological theories may contain an element of truth when it comes to the observable areas of human behaviour, however, all truth is not necessarily God’s truth. With this in mind, John admonished the Church not to believe, “every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God” (1John 4:1). Ideas that do not originate with God give rise to controversy and result in schism in the Body of Christ. Within the United Pentecostal Church two factions have sprung up; both are passionately committed to their viewpoint. One group seems to regard psychology, or some aspects of it, as being compatible with the Scriptures, and a helpful addition for effective ministry in today’s culture. Some of the theories and techniques used by secular counselors which are currently practiced in many denominational churches are also being utilized by some apostolic believers. Another group refuses to relinquish their faith in Scripture as the sole means of solving all human problems. They steadfastly resist the teachings and the practice of psychology in the Church. These differing views, regardless of how slight they may seem, will result in a widening separation until these two factions are no longer in sight of one another.

The controversy which has evolved around the use of psychological theories in church counseling, can only be resolved when these theories are tested honestly and carefully against what the Scriptures say concerning the care of the psyche or soul. In Galatians 1:6-10, the apostle Paul provides six distinguishing traits of false doctrine by which I will attempt to explore and identify the principles of psychology as being incompatible with the fundamental principles of God’s Word.

Historically, False Doctrines Have Led Believers Astray with Surprising Ease

Paul begins his admonition to the Galatians with an expression of amazement, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed, from him that called you unto the grace of Christ“ (Galatians 1:6). The first distinguishing trait is the apparent ease with which error has crept in, and turned the hearts of God’s people. The present tense of the verb removed suggests that the Galatians’ defection from truth was not yet complete and would continue unless they changed their views (Vines, 1981, p. 276). In other words they needed to stop and carefully examine this “other gospel” in the light of God’s Word. Human reasoning and opinion will never bring the Church into “the unity of the faith” (Ephesians 4:13). Only as our thinking is renewed and reshaped according to Scripture are we truly able to be of one mind and, “prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God” (Romans 12:2). Independent thinking has been a stumbling block to God’s people throughout history. Like Paul, one is amazed and obliged to ask why believers have such a long track record of turning aside from Divine commandments. Numerous examples of such disloyalty can be found in the Old Testament. Consider the conduct of the Israelites when Moses, “delayed coming down from the mountain” (Exodus 32:1a). During Moses’ extended absence the people turned aside from the first commandment by making a false image to worship. They created an image similar to the gods of their neighbours, a calf, and they worshipped it along with their worship of the living God. Moses was God’s voice to the children of Israel. Through him God was reaching out to the Israelites by giving Moses instructions for how they should live. In his absence, when they were no longer receiving his instruction, the Israelites were compelled to seek after something else. Israel’s history is overflowing with such incidents. She repeatedly abandoned God, disgraced Him, and forgot Him. The people of God had lost their focus on His imminence, the fact that He is the God of present provision. His importance in terms of day-to-day living had diminished. Israel had forgotten that everything she possessed had been given to her by the Lord.

When the Israelites settled among the Canaanite people, they were not good farmers. They were nomadic herdsmen who didn’t plant crops, so they had to learn from the Canaanites. And in adopting the Canaanite way of life, they observed that the people depended on their gods (Groins, paragraph 12). The worship of Baal along with the worship of God became feasible to the Israelites when they considered the richness of the Canaanite lands and herds. They had lost sight of God as their ultimate strength and hope. “As the years went by Baal worship became more and more entrenched. They depended more and more on Baal and less and less on Yahweh” (Groins, paragraph 12).

The world has brought to bear a false pressure on the Church to utilize its patterns and methods in dealing with certain problems of life. Like the Israelites we have supposed that the world possesses a richness of wisdom in dealing with problems of the psyche. The Church has yielded to the intimidation of secular counselors who claim to have a greater understanding of human problems than believers who possess the wisdom and anointing of God Almighty. Looking back to the events of the New Testament we find the early church similarly influenced by the Gnostic teachings of their day.

From the earliest days of the church there has existed a tendency to follow unbelievers in placing more importance on human knowledge and human endeavour than on revealed knowledge. The Christian heresy known as Gnosticism is a theological system which asserts that “over and above the simple Gospel, which is all the ordinary spirits can understand, there is a secret knowledge reserved for an elite (Almy, 2000, p. 158). The desire to pursue a “higher” knowledge truly reveals that we are the offspring of Adam and Eve.

Gnosticism found in early Christianity an easy target. The canon of Scripture had not yet been established or even widely circulated. There did not yet exist a well-developed body of church doctrine. As a result many of the terms, concepts, and even practices of the faith could be expanded upon and reinterpreted in terms of the Gnostic system which was, in contrast, already well-established and influential” (Almy, 2000, p. 160). It seems that whenever Christians fail to provide answers from Scripture, “gnosticism will almost invariably arise in some variety of reincarnation” (Almy, 2000, p. 161). Undeniably, we have seen it revived through the gradual blending of psychology with Scripture.

Unfortunately, some Christian counsellors have let their training and their desire for acceptance in this world cloud their vision. Often well-intentioned “Christian” psychologists have welcomed into their counselling rooms methodologies and perspectives that have at their root a denial of God. They begin sessions with prayer but then weave godless therapies and Freud-inspired techniques into the minds and souls of their counselees (Gantz, 1993, p. 49).

Psychology was not embraced by Christians overnight, however, it has gained astonishing acceptance in a relatively short period of time. In the 1950’s and 1960’s there were those who began to voice their concern that current church teachings and methods were not adequately addressing many of the problems Christians were facing. As the church lost its grip on the assurances of God’s Word, it began to place its dependence on someone else’s capacity to provide what it needed. In the midst of this perceived void The Christian Association for Psychological Studies (CAPS), and Fuller Seminary’s Graduate School of Psychology were founded. Clyde Narramore was the first advocate of Christian psychology. In 1970, Jaye Adams stepped on the scene to challenge this growing movement with his book, “Competent to Counsel.” The response to his criticisms of psychology marked a new wave of research and development in the field by several notable individuals. “Christian” psychology became a respected feature of evangelical Christianity as men like James Dobson, Larry Crabb, and Gary Collins came on board and provided added credibility to the movement. It was in the mid 1980’s when “Christian” psychology became widely popular and had a more defining influence on the Church. Terms such as dysfunctional and victimization became the common language of church life. The best-selling Christian books were those addressing various forms of personal pain, and how to obtain victory over them. Throughout the 90’s and into the 21st century we have seen this trend accelerate. Christian bookstores now have a “psychology” section where you can find book topics such as how to stop worrying, overcome co-dependency, manage stress and live free of guilt. Most apostolic believers would agree that much of what we see and hear via Christian media is not necessarily biblical. Christian radio, for example, “once a bastion of Bible teaching and Christian music, is overrun with talk shows, pop psychology, and phone-in psychotherapy. Preaching the Bible is passé. Psychologists and radio counsellors are the new heroes of evangelism.” (MacArthur, 1991, p. 67). Much of Christianity has been radically redefined by those who “have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof” (2 Timothy 3:5). This Scripture describes Christians who have only an outward appearance of reverence for God. As time progresses, many of the activities these believers participate in have little to do with a true relationship with the Lord. Subsequently, in one area after another they let go of biblical principles, not wanting to, “endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they heap up for themselves teachers; and they turn their ears away from the truth, and are turned aside to fables” (2 Timothy 4:3-4)The exodus from Truth has been gradual, but toxic. Because many who call themselves Christian no longer follow Christ according to His Word, it has been much easier for false teaching to slip in undetected. Scripture has been subtly interwoven with secular theories to meet the perceived needs and complicated problems of the day. However, the Bible reveals that our felt needs are not our real needs.

To set a goal of meeting felt needs is to divert people away from facing their real need. To assume that a felt need is the real need is cruelty in the name of compassion, and it is from the Father of Lies. The Bible is clear that man’s real need is for redemption from sin. It never suggests that we need to be saved from the sin of our environment or from the sin of another individual (Almy, 2000, p. 202-203).

Certainly, the Church must seek out and provide biblical solutions to the problems facing Christians today. But have we waited on God until we genuinely hear the voice of His Spirit, or have we been more influenced by current trends in mainstream Christianity and acted on ideas instead of the anointing? In the last several years, attending a Christian seminar on marriage and the family, or other ministry events geared to addressing problems of living is no guarantee of receiving biblically based teaching. This ought never to be the case in the present day Apostolic Church. Like the early church we must rely on revealed truth, and count on the Holy Ghost working in and through our lives. Jesus taught this clearly in his analogy of the vine and the branches. He made it clear that, “apart from Him we can do nothing” (John 15:5) The worthiest pursuit for Christians in these last days is to love God with all of our heart, soul and mind. (Matthew 22:37) It is only as we diligently seek after Him, that we will experience the abundant life He has promised. Those who genuinely desire to glorify God will also aspire to submit every aspect of their lives as a form of worship to Him. Such loving submission produces the fruit of His Spirit in the lives of believers. For the Christian, this is the only avenue acceptable to God whereby our personal life and our relationships with family and others must grow and strengthen. Nonetheless, there are those who are studying psychology, and consulting secular sources to meet the rising demand for Christian counselling. In some instances, the words of popular authors prevail over the words of God. Somehow the knowledge of God has not been applied to the everyday life of many believers.

They haven’t developed the habit of discerning or applying biblical principles to their daily situations. Consequently, when they get into problems, they assume Scripture can’t help them. Then they turn to humanistic or worldly alternatives that only compound their grief. They witlessly renounce their sufficiency in Christ and then struggle to fill the void with utterly inadequate substitutes” (McArthur, 1991, p. 130).

For some these substitutes are radio and television talk show hosts who are the contemporary spiritual gurus of our day. They, along with their various guests spew out advice on every human problem under the sun; advice that even some Christians are heeding. What believers don’t hear over the airwaves, or view on television, they read in the best-selling books lauded by the talk show counselors. They visit the offices of Christian counselors, who in many instances charge their counselees for a mixed bag of secular ideas entangled with the truths of Scripture. It is this kind of double-mindedness that has spawned a generation of Christian “victims” who feel they need psychology’s theories to help them gain victory over problems of living. The psychology industry has successfully fostered the “victim mentality” in such a large percentage of society that the industry has grown in order to meet the alleged needs manipulated by the industry itself. After thirty years as a psychologist, Dr. Tana Dineen wrote “Manufacturing Victims”, an expose of what the psychology industry is doing to people. Her insights are thought provoking and disturbing. She says, “It is not news to say that psychology has become an influential cultural force or that society is becoming more and more filled with people who consider themselves victims who are psychologically needy in one way or another” (Dineen, 1996, p. 17). The word victim was once reserved, “for those who suffered from a calamity of nature, of fate or of violent crime“ (Dineen, 1996, p. 20). Today the word has taken on a much broader meaning to include “anyone and everyone who knowingly or unknowingly has been exposed to or experienced stress, distress or trauma. Feelings of unhappiness, boredom, anger, sadness and guilt can now all be interpreted as signs of prior trauma creating victims“ (Dineen, 1996, p. 20). The problem is that “once individuals accept a “victim label, their lives become centred on this new identity“ (Dineen, 1996, p. 27).

The influence of psychology is, indeed, a clear and certain reality in our world today, but what is amazing is the influence it is wielding over God’s people.

The American Association of Christian Counselors has over 17,500 members. The Christian Psychological counselling market includes many individuals, small counselling centres, and also large conglomerates with radio programs that entice Christians into therapy programs. In 1996, the Minirth Meier New Life Clinic was reported as having 25 inpatient units, 55 outpatient units, and over 600 employees. That clinic alone reported 500 inpatient admissions and 7,600 outpatient clinic visits just during the month of June 1996. Rapha, another mental health provider, has 63 programs, “has a network of 3,500 churches in its RaphaCare program,“ and “has doubled in size in the last 18 months” (Bobgan, 1991, paragraph 26).

What great reproach is brought against the name of the Lord when believers follow in the footsteps of the world under a Christian label. The Word of God abounds with encouraging examples of suffering and triumph. Scripture is consistent in conveying two immutable facts; those who place their trust in God experience His promised blessings, and an abundant life, and those who fail to do so will suffer consequences. Paul endured many trials as an apostle of Jesus Christ, yet his testimony to those who suffer is that “in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us” (Romans 8:37}.

How did the early Church ever function without the “expertise” we have today? Yet those Christians turned the world upside down (Acts 17:6), and they did it without any celebrity testimonies, without modern management techniques, without psychotherapy, without mass media, and without most of the means the contemporary church seems to view as essential. All they had was God’s Word, and the power of His Spirit, but they knew they were sufficient. (MacArthur, 1991, p.122)

If, as some are saying, the Apostolic Church needs the help of psychology, then other conclusions must be drawn from this assumption. Psychology is only a recently developed field. If Scripture is lacking essential insights into human personality, behaviour and treatment then we must conclude that the Church has been incapable of properly dealing with many emotional and spiritual problems for the last 2,000 years. We must also conclude that because these new and essential psychological insights have been brought into the Church to supply what is lacking in Scripture, that today’s Christians must live happier and more fruitful lives. If anything, evidence points to an increase of problems as faith in God has been undermined by the false teachings of psychology. Few similarities exist between the lives of those in the early Church and believers of the twentieth, and now twenty-first century.

The true church without Christian psychology, withstood the Roman arena and the Inquisition and, by the blood of her martyrs, left the stamp of victorious Christian living upon the pages of history long before Freud or his “Christian” successors came upon the scene (Hunt, 1998, p. 463).

God is grieved by our lack of faith in Him. In fact, whenever we attempt to “mix” the unholy with the Holy, such as “Christian” Psychology, we profane the precious Name of God (Ezekiel 36:22), and we make a mockery of His Sovereignty, authority and sufficiency. We imply that God is not capable of dealing with a certain class of problems—“psychological” (Blowers, paragraph 9). What we perceive to be psychological problems are, in reality, spiritual problems that have never been dealt with properly according to God’s Word.

I am convinced that many who submit to various kinds of extra biblical therapy do so precisely because they are looking for a way of solving their problems without surrendering to what they know God’s Word requires of them. Scripture hasn’t failed them-they’ve failed Scripture (MacArthur, 1991,p. 89).

How effectively Christians cope with the trials and suffering of life is directly proportional to the depth of their relationship with God, and the degree they submit themselves to His Word. There is no substitute for submission to Scripture. The Bible says that without faith it is impossible to please God. To say that with Him all things are possible and add the word “but” suggests that God has left us short of what we need, and that is simply unthinkable.

This is a “yes, but” generation. Isn’t the Bible God’s inerrant Word? Yes, but…for me it doesn’t work. Don’t we have the Holy Spirit? Yes, but…Hasn’t Christ come to live in our hearts and won’t He guide and empower us? Yes, but…Was not the Word of God, the comfort and guidance of the Holy Spirit, and the indwelling Christ enough for suffering and martyred Christians during the first 19 centuries of the church? Yes, but…the world is more complex today and we need additional help. The heroes and heroines of the faith mentioned in Hebrews 11 triumphed amidst fierce persecution without Psychology. Yes, but…..you don’t understand my situation….my children, my husband, my wife, my boss, the abuse I suffered as a child (Hunt, 1998, p. 467).

Like the Galatians, have we also been easily “removed” from an abiding trust in God? Have we unwittingly followed the wisdom of men instead of relying on the power of the Holy Ghost?

All Truth is not God’s Truth

The second defining trait of false teaching is that it may be presented as an acceptable alternative or addition to the Scriptures, but in reality it is something fundamentally different. When Paul speaks of the gospel in Galatians 1:6, the word denotes the good tidings of the Kingdom of God and of salvation through Jesus Christ. He chastises the Galatians for moving away to “another [heteros] gospel“, which is not “another” [allos] gospel at all. There is a beautiful distinction in the Greek words, heteros and allos. Heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes another of a different sort. Paul emphasizes that this teaching is immeasurably distinct from, and in opposition to the true good news of the gospel. Allos expresses a numerical difference indicating that this teaching was not, in fact, “another” gospel but something entirely different. (Vines, 1981, p. 60) It was a perversion of the true gospel; a false message denounced for its pretentious claims to be an improvement on Truth. “Christian” psychology is a modern day version of “another gospel which is not another”. The fact that professing Christians have considered psychology to be needful for the Church is a direct contradiction of Scripture. The Word of God tells us that only one thing is needful. In Christ are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col 2:3). We have been made complete in Him (Col 2:10). And nothing can ever separate us from His love (Rom 8:35-39). All we need is found in Jesus. Rather than attempting to add something to Christ we must simply learn to use the resources that are already ours in Him. Much confusion surrounds the notion of a “Christian” psychology. The Christian Association for psychological Studies (CAPS) is a group of psychologists and psychological counselors who are professing Christians. At one of their meetings the following was stated:

We are often asked if we are “Christian Psychologists” and find it difficult to answer since we don’t know what the question implies. We are Christians who are psychologists but at the present time there is no acceptable Christian psychology that is markedly different from non-Christian psychology. It is difficult to imply that we function in a manner that is fundamentally distinct from our non-Christian colleagues….as yet there is not an acceptable theory, mode of research or treatment methodology that is distinctly Christian” (Vitz, 1994, p. 8).

If, in fact, no distinction can be made between the fundamentals of secular and “Christian” psychology somehow the pillars of psychology will be covertly communicated to hurting Christians. “Christian” psychology is not another “good news” message for believers; it does not provide an alternative method of understanding human problems biblically. Dr. Richard Ganz who once practiced psychotherapy in an institutional setting asked himself a life-changing question when he became a Christian, “ I knew I was a Christian; I knew was a clinical psychologist, but I didn’t know what it meant to be a ’Christian psychologist.’ How did these two realities fit together? Could they?” Dr. Ganz eventually discovered the answer to his question is, no. He found that when Christians study psychology, “inevitably the fruit of those years [of study] subverts even their best efforts as Christian believers” (Ganz, 1993, p. 24 & 27). Nevertheless, it would seem a large percentage of believers view the practice of psychology as harmless or inconsequential though nothing could be further from the truth. “Numerous are the examples of “Christian” psychologists who are ordained ministers. They begin with a desire to Christianize psychology and end up psychologizing Christianity“ (Vitz, 1994, p. 9). In his book, How Christian Is Christian Counseling?, Dr. Gary Almy provides an eye-opening account of the danger of secular influences in the Church. Following his conversion, a deep realization of the vanity of his years as a psychiatrist set in. He writes,

Slowly but surely I began to see the dissonance between what I had been taught about the human mind and what Scripture has to say on the subject. It took time, but I could not ignore the gross incompatibility of insight-oriented psychotherapy with the care of souls as shown in Scripture. Increasingly, the difference seemed not only significant but of fundamental importance to the transmission of the Gospel. I concluded that my study of psychiatry had led me away from life and godliness, but that a loving and merciful God had used that experience to cause me to despair of mankind’s efforts to achieve “life…I began to wonder how Christians could claim a need to add Freud to Scripture. Why are evangelical seminaries, colleges, and even churches increasingly populated by psychologists? I began to wonder just how “Christian” so-called Christian counselling really is“ (Almy, 2000, p 9).

Christian psychology and its counselling methodologies bear a more striking resemblance to the world than to the ministry of souls outlined in the Word of God. One is caused to wonder if Paul’s plea to the Romans is as important to the Church of today, “And do not be conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Rom 12:2). Does God approve when the minds of His beloved saints are being shaped by the theories of humanistic psychologists? Our minds are to be renewed or rehabilitated according to the Scriptures, not according to the vain philosophies of the world. As clearly as the Bible differentiates between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of man, there is, in fact, a psychological way and a biblical way to understand human nature. The contrast is stark. When Paul spoke of those who would pervert the gospel of Christ, the word denotes a transformation into something of opposite character (Vines, 1981, p. 180). This kind of perversion can be clearly recognized in the fundamental teachings of psychology. Dr. Gary Almy identifies six pillars or principles of psychotherapy and the core biblical truths they contradict and undermine. Each of these is explained in response to six questions a person might ask about his life. They clearly reveal that psychology’s truths are not God’s truth.

1. In answer to the question, why am I unhappy, psychology suggests that the key lies somewhere in our past and points to the bad experiences in our lives. Although past relationships and experiences certainly play a part in shaping the person we become, the solution to our unhappiness is not found through revisiting those events and attempting to analyse them. “The first and most foundational pillar of Freudian theory and psychotherapy is the assertion that human mental and emotional difficulties are the result of improper external environmental influences” (Almy, 2000, p. 22). The concept of environmental determinism contradicts the doctrine of original sin. It implies that man is inherently good, and evil is viewed as coming from our environment. “The idea that people are born innocent, or have a natural inclination toward purity, is inconsistent with Scripture and personal experience. It is inconsistent with the observations of any objective historian and of any mother caring for her own children” (Almy, 2000, p. 33).

2. In response to the question, What goes on inside my mind, psychology emphasizes the unconscious aspect of the human mind. “The second pillar of Freudianism is the belief that there exists in each person a ‘dynamic unconscious’ that determines and controls our every thought and action” (Almy, 2000, p. 24). This idea promotes introspection and human reasoning as a means of understanding. The Bible, however, is the ultimate authority on the human mind and has a great deal to say about it. The Scriptures describe the mind using the words commonly translated heart, soul and spirit. Psychic determinism is at odds with the biblical understanding of the human mind.

3) When individuals ask how they can make sense of their problems, psychology says it is necessary to explore the depths of the mind to receive insight for change to occur. “The insight-oriented therapist focuses on why people think, feel, and do” (Almy, 2000, p. 42). The psychological quest for insight conflicts with the conviction of sin spoken of in the Scriptures. Is all of the supposed knowing and understanding of “self” gained through psychology’s insights really necessary? “Scripture closes the door on inquiry into the whys of life, except for what is clearly stated in the Holy Writ. God asks, ’Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundations? Tell me, if you understand’ (Job 38:4)? (Almy, 2000, p.42). Human introspection is highly subjective and will “always be blinded by our self-centered nature, unless we make our assessment in the light of God’s perspective as revealed in Scripture” (Almy, 2000, p. 43).

4) In answer to the question, who can help me with my problem, psychology has ordained the professional therapist as one who is essential in facilitating meaningful change. “While the therapist is the central figure in psychotherapy, the Bible’s teaching on the “care of souls” describes no such central figure” (Almy, 2000, p. 50). The elevated position of the therapist contradicts the sources of counsel provided by God; the Word of God, the Holy Spirit, other Christians and the organized church.

5) The question how can I be happier has taken on a more militant tone through the idea that we not only can, but must make ourselves happier. Psychology tells us the answer lies within ourselves and can be realized through self-empowerment, self-esteem, and self-actualization, to name just a few. “The Bible defines unhappiness as the result of mankind’s separation from God or sin. For the unbeliever this can only be changed through salvation and for the believer through the process of sanctification” (Almy, 2000, p. 57).

6) In response to the question what is the purpose of my life, psychology provides an answer that appeals to the carnal senses. “Continuous and pervasive personal pleasure is available for you through our methodology; this is as far as we expect to go in defining the true meaning and purpose of life” (Almy, 2000, p. 63). Scripture cancels out the pleasure principle and calls us instead to a life of self-denial.

These fundamental differences are substantial and warrant an honest examination of, first, the credibility of a “Christian” psychology, and subsequently of its practice within the United Pentecostal Church. The Word of God identifies all human problems as being rooted in sin, and clearly explains how the problem of sin should be dealt with. Scripture points believers to the power of the cross, repentance, forgiveness, personal responsibility, accountability, discipline and obedience. Man’s way is to blame others, to identify himself as a victim, and to rely on self for answers. Sin and its devastating consequences-shame, guilt, and feelings of worthlessness-cannot be solved by any other means than the redemptive blood of Jesus and the sanctifying work of the Holy Ghost.

False Doctrine Undermines Faith in God’s Sufficiency

The third trait points out that false teaching undermines faith in the sufficiency of God’s grace, and leads people away from the biblical objective of trusting Him implicitly in all matters of life. The goal of the true gospel is to save and to keep individuals from self-seeking or sinful inclinations that would hinder this kind of deep and abiding trust in God. No one can deny that the apostle Paul endured emotional and physical hardship as a Christian. As a matter of fact, he would be considered a prime candidate for the modern day Christian counsellor. Yet, God’s message to Paul was continually, “My grace is sufficient for thee.“ Peter called it the “manifold” (in Greek, poikilos, “multifaceted” or “multicoloured”) grace of God (1 Peter 4:10). He used the same Greek word in 1 Peter 1:6 with reference to the various trials that believers face. That’s a wonderful parallel: God’s multifaceted grace is sufficient for our multifaceted trials (MacArthur, 1991, p.244).

So many of the men and women who served God in biblical times would be labelled victims by today’s society. The countless examples of human suffering detailed in the pages of Scripture, coupled with many post biblical examples are linked together by a common thread of faith in God‘s unmerited grace. The psychologizing of Scripture has resulted in a dramatic shift away from an abiding trust in God. Many in the Church today are relying, instead, upon the humanly devised theories of psychology. In this sense we have, like Jacob, traded our birthright for a mess of pottage (Hebrews 12:16).

It seems we have missed the great lesson in the story of the woman with the issue of blood. (Matthew 9:20) The multitude of philosophies and therapies available in our present age has successfully derailed this kind of single-hearted faith. When he recorded the story, Matthew was careful to mention that the woman had exhausted all the resources of the world and come up empty. It was nothing more than her complete dependence upon and faith in Christ that made her whole. The Church of North America marvels at the magnificent healings and other manifestations of God’s power in third world countries. Although we understand that a lack of resources has deepened the faith of these people, we are unwilling to cease depending on them ourselves, even when they are rooted in some sort of pagan belief system. Somehow the Church has failed to recognize the christianizing of psychology as this type of system. Dependence on such methods typifies the Bible‘s references to leaning on the “ arm of flesh”. Every time this phrase is used in the Bible, it refers to people turning their hearts away from God and placing their confidence in man. The “arm of flesh” represents the world, or the ways of man as opposed to the ways of God. The prophet Isaiah denounced those who sought human support rather than depending on the Lord. He unflinchingly declared that those who trust in the beggarly elements of the world will reap the beggarly result of its counsel or ways.

Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the Lord!……Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses are flesh, and not spirit. When the Lord stretches out his hand, both he who helps will fall, and he who is helped will fall down; they all will perish together” (Isaiah 31:1 & 3).

In the book of Jeremiah the heart of the people had once again become inextricably entangled in stubborn rebellion against God. His displeasure was clear, “Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord” [Jeremiah 17:5]. One cannot trust in God and mankind. To rely on human wisdom, is to turn away from God. Psalm 146 points out that even those we hold in high esteem such as princes, are mere mortals and are limited in their efforts. The admonition to trust God explicitly is continued in the New Testament. Not only do we read awe-inspiring examples of God’s faithfulness to those who depend on Him, we see also that the apostles urged believers not to follow the wisdom of men, but to rely on the power of God. They faced any type of false teaching head on, and reminded believers that the Spirit of Truth indwelling them is far greater than the deceiving spirits in the world. (1John 4:4) Many times in Scripture the people of God felt pressured by the sheer numbers and strength of their enemies. Today, popular opinion and the growing number of supporters of “Christian” psychology have created a similar type of peer pressure. It bids believers to join the flow of the ever- widening stream of integrationists who in order, “to ‘prove’ the goodness of this marriage between psychology and Scripture, are quick to relate ‘experiences’ of people who have been ‘helped’ by their techniques” (Blowers, paragraph 13). But should the Church make any decision or adopt a practice merely on the basis of experience or results? Psychics, astrologers, new age meditation and channeling all boast a measure of success, but should Christians seek their methods or their counsel? Saul lost the anointing when instead of seeking God, he consulted the witch of Endor (1Samuel 28:6-7). God is more concerned that the outcome of anything we do is the result of obedience to Him. The Scriptures portray Him as a God of detail Who demands that His people do things His way, according to His will. Moses’ disobedience cost him the Promised Land. When the people murmured against Moses because there was no water, God specifically said, “speak ye unto the rock before their eyes; and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock” (Numbers 20:8). Contrary to the way God had instructed, Moses “lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rod twice; and the water came out abundantly” (verse 11). Without question, Moses got results when he struck the rock, but there was a great price to pay for his failure to follow the instructions God had given.

Though many erroneous doctrines have wormed their way into the thinking of Christians, none has undermined the sufficiency of Christ and the Word of God like psychology. The trend continues in spite of the fact that, “No one has ever shown that the Bible needs psychological augmentation to be more effective in dealing with life’s problems. No one has proven that a Christianized cure of minds [psychotherapy] is any more beneficial than the original unadulterated simple cure of souls” (Vitz, 1994, p. 7). Those who would integrate the philosophies of humanistic theorists with God’s Holy Word are setting an example, not of faith but of double mindedness. The word double-minded literally means “two souls”. (Vines, 1981, p. 334) If one part of a person is set on God and the other is set on the world the result will be constant confusion. Jesus Himself, warned against the spiritual danger of serving two masters, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other” (Matthew 6:24). Although the Scripture refers to money or wealth, the principle applies to anything that would divide the heart of a believer. The Bible beckons Christians to pursue God in faith and with a singleness of heart. Scripture tells us that trials and suffering are to be expected in the lives of those who are true followers of Christ. But rather than driving us to the counsel of the ungodly, difficult occasions are opportunities for believers to look to and trust God for answers and direction

Those Who Teach False Doctrine Must Be Exposed and Confronted
Paul’s fourth point focuses on the individuals who blend incompatible teachings with Scripture. He emphatically states that no tolerance must be exercised toward one who would pervert the gospel. Twice he declares that such individuals should be “accursed” (Galatians 1:8-9). It is quite possible for persons in positions of authority who are highly regarded by other believers to bring erroneous teaching into the church. Paul adamantly proclaims that Truth should never be compromised, even in the event that the apostles, or an angel should become such perverters (Galatians 1: 8). The language used is strong and implicit to show us the need of separating the messenger and his message. Erroneous teaching is more readily accepted when delivered by someone who is accomplished and highly esteemed. It is easy to shift our focus from what the person is saying to how he is saying it. Without exception, the words of men must always be weighed against the Word of God. Even the apostle Paul admonished the Corinthian believers to follow him only as he followed Christ (1Corinthians 11:1). In the same way that well respected professing Christians gave credence to a “Christian” psychology in its beginning stages, the same pattern of influence continues today. Paul warns in his letter to the Colossians, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ” (Col 2:8). In modern vernacular Paul is saying, “Watch out! You will encounter many people promoting empty man-made ideas that sound good but are based on the world’s wisdom and not God’s wisdom. If you are not discerning you will be deceived and led away from the sufficiency that is in Christ.”

Behind all of this deception lurks the enemy of our soul. Like a roaring lion, he roams this earth seeking whom he may devour with his suggestions that God is not enough; that He has withheld from us a wisdom that transcends the Word of God. He offers tempting ideas that are targeted at the self -bent of human nature. He is not only effectively deceiving the world at large, but the Church as well. His strategy remains unchanged since the Garden of Eden. He continues to cast doubt on the Word of God by whispering, “Hath God said?” (Genesis 3:1). Obedience to Scripture has, and will forever remain, the only way the Church can guard against his lies. With just a few words, the apostle James revealed the heart of spiritual warfare, “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and He will flee from you” (James 4:7). The operative word in this Scripture is submit. It means that as the church yields to righteousness, giving God the right of way in our lives we remain under the umbrella of His protection. Satan dwells in darkness and feeds upon the areas of our carnal nature that remain unsubmitted to Christ. Individual believers, and the collective church body must learn to “cast down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ“ (2 Corinthians 10:5). Clearly, this Scriptural admonition calls for attention to detail.

We must understand that psychology was invented by humanists and cannot be separated from the humanism upon which it is founded. The care of the soul or psyche is God’s territory. Exposing this vulnerable part of our lives to humanistic philosophies makes us easy targets for the enemy of our soul. It is only as we walk and live in the light that we experience victory over the dark trials of life. Apostolic believers who fail to search the Scriptures for themselves, and who may not be cognizant of the origins of psychological theories are among those most susceptible to deception. Many of today’s counselling theories and therapies are built upon the foundations laid by renowned theorists like Sigmund Freud. Who these men were must also be exposed. An exhaustive study of psychology’s leading theorists and their theories is really not necessary. A cursory look into the backgrounds of just a few of these men should be enough to convince the Church of the incompatibility of their theories with Scripture.

Sigmund Freud is the most prominent name in all psychotherapy. He is considered the father of the psychotherapy movement and his ideas permeate later theories and therapies.

Probably no single individual has had a more profound effect on twentieth-century thought than Sigmund Freud. His works have influenced psychiatry, anthropology, social work, penology, and education and provided a seemingly limitless source of material for novelists and dramatists. Freud has created a “whole new climate of opinion”; for better or worse he has changed the face of society (Theories & Theorists, p.1).

The bottom line concerning Freud and all those who followed after him is their blatant disregard for God and the Truths contained in His Word. In fact many psychological theories were designed in a spirit of rebellion and with the specific intent of undermining the Bible.” One psychologist says that ‘certain of the most influential pioneers in American psychology found in it an ideal vehicle for renouncing their own Christian upbringing in the name of science’” (Hunt, 1998, p. 457). Professor of psychiatry Thomas Szasz, a non-practicing Jew, declares, “One of Freud’s most powerful motives in life was…to inflict vengeance on Christianity” (Szasz, 1978, p. 139). Szasz called psychotherapy “not merely a religion that pretends to be a science…[but] a fake religion that seeks to destroy true religion” (Szasz, 1978, p. 28}. Freud’s influence is still evident among Christians today. “Therapists who believe in a Freudian notion of the unconscious, with its powerful defense mechanisms of repression and denial, have led suffering souls into the morass of false memories, because they believe some hidden trauma is causing present suffering. (Counseling from Scripture, p. 12). This is not something that occurs only in the secular world, but through the therapies of “Christian” psychologists; many who sell their blended theories from offices set up in their churches.

Other prominent individuals in the field of psychology were equally guilty of developing anti-Christian philosophies and theories. “Carl Jung rejected Christianity but maintained an intense interest in the spiritual realm. He delved deeply into the occult, practiced necromancy, and had daily contact with disembodied spirits, which he called archetypes” (Theories & Theorists, p.6). Jung had a part in the development of Alcoholics Anonymous and created a theory of psychological types from which came the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). This inventory is used by Christians to evaluate pastoral and missionary candidates, couples who want to get married and for various other situations in the church.

Personality typologies and tests put people under bondage to worldly systems and standards. Each psychological system presents a theory to explain the human condition, describes how they should be, and presents a method of change. Once a person buys into such a system, he vainly attempts to become what that system promises he can be. It is a never ending cycle of works with users always trying to reach the standard, but never quite making it. (Bobgan, 1992, p.188)

Christians are dabbling in a false belief system when they employ Jung’s personality types and tests, the concept of inner healing, dream analysis, or integrate 12 step programs in their churches.

Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers are considered the founders of humanistic psychology. Maslow developed the well-known theory of the “hierarchy of needs” which is believed and integrated by many Christian psychologists today. “The hierarchy could be envisioned as a pyramid, with each layer resting on and dependent upon the satisfaction of the needs at the level beneath it” (Adams, 1986, p. 32). Physical needs are at the base of the pyramid followed by safety and security needs, love and belongingness needs, self-esteem needs, and finally self-actualization needs. Christians who accept Maslow’s formulation oppose the Scriptures by saying “that to love God and to love other people (the sum of the commandments and, for that matter, the entire Scriptures) is not possible for a person until all his other needs have been met” (Adams, 1986, p. 32). Carl Rogers was one of the best known and most admired humanistic psychologists recognized for his “Client- Centered” model of therapy. He viewed Christianity as restrictive and limiting, and eventually became involved in spiritism, the ouiji board and necromancy. Rogers rejected the authority of Scripture and established an internal authority of self.

Thomas Harris developed the theory of “Transactional Analysis”, a therapeutic system that examines interactions between people. He did not believe in doctrinal absolutes, embracing instead a totally self-directed theology. Harris believed that a person is born again by using his reason to understand his condition. He taught that people must decide to change their position from I’m not ok to I’m ok; a process that relies totally upon human works. “Harris evidently doesn’t know the truth about why man is not OK nor how he can become OK. The idea that I decide to be OK and then I am OK, without repentance and forgiveness, is an heretical theology and a disguise of self-indulgence and self-centered love” (Theories & Theorists, p. 6).

Albert Ellis was an avowed atheist who developed “Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy” (REBT); a theory based on secular humanism and hedonism that had its own form of morality and separated people from what they do. Ellis rightly believed that emotional disturbance can sometimes be self-created, but he erred in his assertion that it can be self-dispelled. He believed Christianity to be pathological and a sign of mental illness, and was vehemently opposed to all musts, shoulds and absolutes. “What Ellis’s theory boils down to is this: The human is worthy because he exists. God does not exist. Therefore the human’s worth exceeds God’s worth” (Theories and Theorists, p.7).

Another well-known theorist, Erich Fromm, was also an atheist who argued against the fundamentals of the Christian faith. He created the theory of “Unconditional Love” which set the stage for the unscriptural notion of having to love ourselves before we can love others. It is only as we experience God‘s love and are reconciled with Him through the new birth, that we could possibly love ourselves and others as the Scripture commands. Human love is self-seeking and limited in and of itself. “Instead of reconciliation with God, Fromm insisted that man’s solution ’to overcome separateness’ is to be found within himself, through unconditional self-love, which he believed would enable individuals to love the whole world” (Theories & Theorists, p.2)

Alfred Adler who developed “Individual Psychology” was another godless philosopher who broke with Freud to form his own group. “As with other self theorists, Adler left out God. He was a humanistic psychologist who placed man at the center and designed a doctrine of the creative self whereby man supposedly creates his own personality, gives meaning to life, and creates his own goals and means of reaching them {Theories & Theorists, p.11).

How could the ideas of such unashamedly godless men possibly be deemed compatible with the Word of God? Their denial of God is clearly substantiated in the blatant theme of self-deification so prominent in all of their theories.

False Doctrine Appeals to the Carnal or Self-bent of Human Nature

Paul addresses the issue of “self” in the fifth trait of false teaching, “For do I now persuade men or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ” (Galatians 1:10). Humanistic philosophies are appealing because they cater to the carnal or “self” bent of human nature; the part that desires to please man, rather than God. The Bible makes a clear distinction between the “mind of the spirit” and the “mind of the flesh“. The apostle Paul had much to say on the subject, particularly in his letter to the Romans. He often pitted the “flesh” against the “Spirit” as two diametrically opposed forces. He describes the carnal or natural mind as “enmity against God” (Romans 8:7).When Paul said, “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit”(Galatians 6:25), he meant that Christians who have been filled with the Holy Spirit must choose whether they will yield to their natural inclinations toward self-fulfilment or submit themselves to the leading of God’s Spirit. Although pleasing self may bring real, though temporary satisfaction, God’s plan and purpose for humanity may only be fulfilled when we are willing to put His will above our own. Jesus said, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me” (Matthew 16:24). Not only must we follow the great Cross-bearer, but we ourselves must also become cross- bearers. The Scriptures admonish us to be crucified with Him through the ongoing process of sanctification. Sanctification is God’s will for the believer (1 Thessalonians 4:3). It is His answer for the damaged body, soul and spirit. Self-gratification has never been the goal of true Christians. Rather, we are called to “be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ” (Romans 8:29).

True sanctification is not a matter of assessing yourself and meeting your felt needs. It’s a matter of knowing Christ deeply. The more you focus on yourself, the more distracted you will be from the proper path. The more you know Him and commune with Him, the more the Spirit will make you like Him. The more you are like Him, the better you will understand His utter sufficiency for all of life’s difficulties. And that is the only way to know real satisfaction” (MacArthur, 1991, p. 157).

The apostle Paul understood that God’s thoughts and ways were far above that of mans. He was careful to die daily to his natural tendency toward self-gratification and to walk instead in the ways of God through the power of His Spirit. Paul’s beliefs and the decisions he made in everyday life were firmly rooted in the Word of God. He was not influenced or impressed with current trends and philosophies that seemed to be capturing the minds of his fellow believers. The position allotted to “Self” is where psychology and Scripture are really in opposition to one another.
What a debt self owes psychology! Instead of being denied, self is now loved, esteemed, and promoted. We are being told repeatedly from pulpit, radio, television, books, magazines and seminars that the greatest need facing the church is for Christians to develop their self-love, self-esteem, self-worth and positive self-image“ (Hunt, 1998, pg 468).

Scripture puts an entirely different face on self. Looking back to the Book of Genesis we discover that self had its awful birth when Adam and Eve wilfully acted independently of God. Self is the “I” in sin, the self-will that stands in opposition to God (Genesis 3). In psychology it is further expressed through self-love that supersedes love for God and neighbour, and through self-esteem that displaces Christ-esteem. More than 200 years ago, William Law expressed what Christians had always understood, “Self-love, self-esteem, and self-seeking are the essence and the life of pride; and the Devil, the father of pride, is never absent from these passions, nor without an influence in them” (Hunt, 1998, p. 470).

The power of God is the cross of Christ; nothing more or less can redeem and transform the nature of fallen humanity. Yet, the offence of the cross is an occasion of stumbling to the natural and carnal man . It is a stumbling block to human pride, human righteousness, human wisdom, human ambition, and human selfishness. It demands repentance, humility, self-surrender, service and self-denial. Blending the false teachings of psychology with Scripture takes away these stumbling blocks by lowering God’s standards, thus strengthening the flesh. Whatever makes Christ’s gospel palatable to the carnal nature does this by mixtures that are adulterations. Man’s greatest need in redemption is utter, full and final self-surrender and self-renunciation. There is not a form of self-life that is not antagonistic to the holiness God demands of His true followers.

God’s Truth is Revealed Only in His Word by his Spirit

Paul’s conclusive remarks to the Galatians reveal what separates God’s truth from the perceived truths of human philosophies, “for I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:10). The Greek word translated “revelation” speaks of the communication of the knowledge of God to the soul. It is an expression of the mind of God for the instruction of the church (Vines, 1981, p.292). Knowledge conceived in the minds of humanists can neither be compared to, nor can it be considered compatible with the revealed knowledge of God’s Word. The United Pentecostal Church is a fellowship of believers devoted to patterning itself after the first Church, yet, in some very important areas we have turned aside from this goal. In his book, “One Vision”, Kenneth Haney writes,

Many of us have preconceived ideas and concepts which we have developed through twentieth century methods, when what we should do is revert back to the New Testament church found in the Book of Acts and the Epistles. In many cases we have been quick to follow the methods and patterns of modern day denominational churches, while equally as quick we condemn heresy and false doctrine which they embrace” (Haney, 2001 p. 35).

However, condemnation seems confined to topics of theology. In matters of counselling, church growth techniques and leadership training we have, in fact, followed the denominational churches, and thus the world more closely than we would care to admit. “Scripture is the only perfect blueprint for all true ministry, and those who build according to any other plan are erecting a structure that will be unacceptable to the Master Architect (MacArthur, 1991, p. 120) God will not share His glory with “another gospel which is not another”. He will not share the credit for emotional healing with psychologists and counselors who do not trust Him implicitly, and minister solely from the Word of God. While the United Pentecostal Church has fervently defended the message and the method of true biblical salvation, and the oneness of God, in some cases we have missed how this powerful salvation message touches and changes every area of the believer’s life. It is the answer for the “whole” man, body, soul and spirit. God’s will is for believers to be transformed into the image of Christ. Lack of biblical change is an indication of spiritual stagnation, while transformation is a sign of spiritual vitality. God desires His people to rely on His Word and the work of the Holy Ghost. This involves learning to know God in the school of practical experience. We must embrace Him daily as our very present help in times of trouble (Psalm 46:1). He alone holds the answer to every human anguish.

The evil habit of seeking God-and effectively prevents us from finding God in full revelation. In the and lies our great woe. If we omit the and we shall soon find God, and in Him we shall find that for which we have all our lives been secretly longing” (Tozer, 1982, p.18).

The United Pentecostal Church does not need the Scriptures and psychology. “Christian psychology” pleases and persuades men with its “perceived results, but it does not please or persuade God. In these last days He is calling believers “ to continue their walk with Him on the same basis as their initial salvation by Scripture alone, by grace alone, By Christ alone, by faith alone, and to the glory of God alone” (Bobgan, 1996, paragraph. 4).


REFERENCES Adams, J.E. (1986). The Biblical View of Self-Esteem, Self-Love, Self-Image. Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers.

Almy, G.L. From Psychology To Christ. [On-Line].

Available: http://www.psychoheresy-aware.org/almygv71.html. Almy, G. L. (2000). How Christian Is Christian Counseling? Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books. Blowers, Mel & Gloria. Psychology: A Biblical Analysis. [On-Line].

Available: http://www.revelationwebsite.co.uk/index1/occ/blower45.htm
Bobgan, Martin & Deidre. (1977). The End of Christian Psychology. [On-Line]. Available: http://www.psychoheresy-aware.org/images/Ecp_01.pdf. ------- (1992). Four Temperaments, Astrology & Personality Testing. Santa Barbara, California:Eastgate Publishers -------- (1996). The Biblical Care of Souls in the Body of Christ. [On-Line].

Available: http://www.psychoheresy-aware.org/images/ctm_01.pdf. Dineen, T. (1996). Manufacturing Victims. Montreal: Robert Davies Multimedia Publishing. Ensey, J.R. Christian Counseling from Scripture.Willis, Texas: Advance Ministries. Ganz, R. (1993). PsychoBabble. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books. Groins, D. The Sin of Syncretism. [On-Line].

Available: http://www.pbc.org/dp/goins/4390.html Haney, K.F. (2001). One Vision. Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press. Hunt, D. (1998). Occult Invasion. Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers. Imbach, S.R. Syncretism. [On-Line].

Available: http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/syncreti.htm MacArthur, J. Jr. (1991). Our Sufficiency In Christ. Dallas, Texas: Word Publishing. The Nelson Study Bible: New King James Version. (1997). Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson. Powlison, D. (1992). Putting Christ Back into Christian Counseling. [On-Line].

Available: http://www.raphacare.com/yourhealth/christiancounseling.html Szasz, Thomas. (1988). The Myth of Psychotherapy. New York: Syracuse University Press. The Thompson Chain-Reference Bible: King James Version. (1982). Indianapolis, Indiana: B.B. Kirkbride Bible Co., Inc. Tozer, A.W. (1993). The Pursuit of God. Camp Hill, Pennsylvania: Christian Publications. United Pentecostal Church International Manual. (2002). Hazelwood, Missouri: Pentecostal Publishing House. Vine, W.E. (1981). Vines Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Bible Publishers. Vitz, P. (1994). Psychology as religion: The Cult of Self-Worship. [On-Line].

Available: http://www.narth.com/docs/vitz.html