February 16, 2012

Is Psychology the 67th Book of the Bible?

by Matt Waymeyer

All truth is God’s truth, or so the saying goes. The problem with this seemingly axiomatic assertion is not simply its ambiguity, but the way it serves as a means to justify using extra-biblical sources (such as psychology) to deal with spiritual issues. This is especially common among integrationists in the field of Christian counseling. The view of integrationism is that only when Scripture and psychology are integrated—brought together into a unified whole—is one able to engage in a truly effective counseling ministry. This view is really an assault on the idea that Scripture alone is sufficient for spiritual growth.

Psychology as General Revelation

But how exactly does this relate to the idea that all truth is God’s truth? The integrationist argument goes something like this: Because God has made Himself known through two channels—special revelation (the propositional truth recorded in scripture) and general revelation (the non-propositional truth deposited by God in the created order of things)—man has a mandate from his Creator to investigate and discover truths through means such as psychological research, the findings of which should be accepted as having their origin in God. Scripture alone, then, is not sufficient, but rather, as John H. Coe asserts, “Only when all forms of revelation are taken together can we speak of the sufficiency of revelation.” Put simply, all truth is God’s truth and should be embraced as such whether it be found in Scripture (special revelation) or in psychological research (general revelation).

This argument has been articulated in various ways by different integrationists. Notice the language of divine revelation in the following examples:

  • Larry Crabb: “All truth is certainly God’s truth. The doctrine of general revelation provides warrant for going beyond the propositional revelation of Scripture into the secular world of scientific study expecting to find true and useable concepts.”
  • Bruce Narramore: “The evangelical church has a great opportunity to combine the special revelation of God’s Word with the general revelation studied by the psychological sciences and professions. The end result of this integration can be a broader (and deeper) view of human life.”
  • Gary Collins (explaining how he would counsel someone): “My knowledge of special revelation—the Bible—would have been combined with my knowledge of general revelation—what God has taught me about his world through my study of psychology, physiology, counseling, rehabilitation, and other fields.”
  • Eric L. Johnson: “Non-Christian bias has influenced the content and practice of modern psychology, but it is also the case that God has revealed so much about the brain, learning, human development, motivation, social influences, forms of abnormality, and even helpful counseling practices through the labors of secular psychologists.”
  • Stanton L. Jones and Richard E. Butman: “Just as the rain falls on the just and the unjust, so too does truth, by the process that theologians call God’s common grace. Romans 1 speaks of God even revealing central truths about his nature to unbelievers (v. 19)…. If we understand God’s counsel to be truth, we will be committed to pursuing truth wherever we find it. And we sometimes find it in the careful and insightful writings of unbelievers.”

The Fundamental Flaw

Initially this argument sounds biblical, but it contains a fundamental flaw: the findings of psychology simply cannot be categorized as general revelation. Biblically defined, general revelation is the universal self-disclosure of God in which He makes Himself known to all people everywhere at all times, (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:18-23; 2:14-15; Acts 14:17). To break down some of the specifics, the means of this revelation is God’s creation (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:19-21), God’s provision (Acts 14:17), and man’s conscience (Rom 2:14-15); the audience of this revelation is all of mankind without exception (Ps 19:4, 6; Rom 2:14-15; Acts 14:17); the content of this revelation is truth about God—His existence (Rom 1:19-25), His glory (Ps 19:1a; Rom 1:19-23), His power (Ps 19:1b; Rom 1:20), His goodness (Acts 14:17), and His law (Rom 2:14-15); and the outcome of this revelation is that unbelievers suppress the truth in unrighteousness and are therefore left without excuse before their Creator (Rom 1:18-25).

Consider, then, the vast array of differences between general revelation and the insights of modern psychology. First, these insights come through human discovery rather than divine revelation. Because revelation is that which God reveals or discloses to people through specific means—not that which man extracts through his own investigation—the findings of psychologists cannot be considered general revelation.

Second, in contrast to the universal audience of general revelation—consisting of all men everywhere at all times—the findings of psychology have been discovered and known only by some people in some places at some times, being relegated to only certain parts of the world over the last 150 years. In this way, the insights of secular psychologists are not the common possession of all mankind in the way that general revelation is.

Third, in contrast to how unbelievers suppress the truth made known through general revelation, unbelievers believe and embrace the findings of psychological research, being enlightened by the truth they have discovered.

Finally, the most significant difference concerns the actual content of general revelation. In contrast to general revelation—which exclusively communicates truth about the nature and character of God—the findings of secular psychologists focus on the nature of man and his relationships with other human beings. This, in itself, precludes the possibility of categorizing psychological insights as general revelation. As Robert L. Thomas writes, “Any efforts to widen the scope of general revelation to include information or theories about aspects of creation, man, or anything else besides God do not have support from the Bible.” For this reason, to include the findings of social sciences like psychology in the category of general revelation is to depart from the teaching of scripture itself.

The Crux of the Issue

As Thomas summarizes:

Information and discoveries originating in secular fields do not belong in the category of God’s revealed truth. They therefore have no basis for a ranking alongside God’s special revelation. They may appear to be beneficial to one or another generation and thereby earn at least temporarily the designation of truth, but they must always be tentative because they lack the certitude and authority of God’s revealed truth.

This brings us to the crux of the issue. By smuggling the findings of secular psychology into the category of general revelation, integrationists have elevated the ever-changing fallible theories of man to the same level of authority as the never-changing infallible truths of God’s Word, almost as if psychology were the 67th book of the Bible. This is no small problem.

As Douglas Bookman observes, “To assign human discoveries to the category of general revelation is to lend God’s name to a person’s ideas.” Consequently, when the discoveries of man are categorized as divine revelation, they are by definition true and authoritative and therefore must not be questioned, but rather believed and obeyed.

The end result is that the findings of psychological research not only possess a falsely perceived validity but also lack any genuine accountability, for to question them is to question the very revelation of God. In this way, various unbiblical theories avoid the scrutiny of Scripture by hiding behind the motto, “all truth is God’s truth.” The better approach is to return to a biblical understanding of theological categories and to deny Sigmund Freud and his successors a place in the canon of divine revelation.

Matt Waymeyer

Posts

Matt Waymeyer serves on the pastoral staff of Grace Immanuel Bible Church and the faculty of The Expositors Seminary in Jupiter, Florida.