Sin and Christian Psychology: Sin as Pervasive

Posted on May 16, 2008

Mike McGuire
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

The saying “A little leaven leavens the whole lump” appears to apply not only to groups, but to individuals, for sin has been observed to be pervasive. To combine this with the idea of sin as pollution (see my last blog) is to realize that the corrupting influence of sin pervades all that we are individually and socially. Now, how might this pervasiveness of pollution provide potential insights for a Christian view of human dysfunction?
First, we might consider what we learn about humans from the Bible and think about what these aspects might be as they were fully functional in a pre-fallen state. If we observe humans as they are described in the Bible, we find they are physical, spiritual, moral, thinking, feeling, language using, sexual, familial, and social creatures, and we find they were placed in the perfect environment for such creatures to thrive. Thus each aspect functioned properly individually and one would reasonably expect that they functioned together in an integrated fashion. We also discover from the Bible that humans were created this way in order to exercise dominion over the earth and in order to fill the earth and subdue it for God.

Second, with this done, we might want to think through what it might mean for each of these aspects to be polluted by sin and thus for each aspect to dysfunction (assuming a pervasive sinfulness produces a pervasive dysfunction). Thus we humans become dysfunctional physically, spiritually, morally, cognitively, emotionally, linguistically, sexually, familially, and socially. Our God given ability to have dominion becomes dysfunctional. Sex and reproduction become dysfunctional. The integrity of the original humans becomes a bit disintegrated. Our thinking doesn’t quite line up with our feelings and our intentions don’t quite line up with our behaviors.

Now, if this brief analysis is correct, then sin is far more complex that we usually think of it. First, sin is not merely a moral fault: it pollutes that which was well designed, it corrupts it, and it causes it to dysfunction. Thus, moral reformation is thus not sufficient to cure all human dysfunction. Adding less pollution may prove helpful, but it doesn’t necessarily return the organism to a functional state. Second, this analysis describes the types of problems that people bring to counselors. Just reread the list and compare it to your counselees. Third, one does not have to be very creative to see the similarity of this list of dysfunctional aspects of humans and the history of counseling theories. Consider behavioral theories, developmental theories, cognitive theories, moral theories, cognitive-behavioral theories, family theories, postmodern (linguistic) theories, and biological theories. These theoreticians are not blind to the dysfunction; they are only blind to the divinely revealed, spiritual aspects of the dysfunction. They do not understand its ultimate cause and its true context. Fourth, the ultimate cleansing has been prepared, and we groan together with the creation waiting for that time. Fifth, until that time people need others who understand the cause and the context and who are willing to wade into the pollution found in this present world in order to help.

Sin and Christian Psychology: Sin as Pollution

Posted on May 9, 2008

[Guest blogger Dr. Michael McGuire of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary considers the topic of sin from the perspective of Christian Psychology in the first of two posts]

The media is permeated with the compelling image of pollution damaging some pristine ecosystem, an image that portends problem for all humanity. Allow me to use this powerful image to launch a brief consideration of sin and Christian psychology.

In the biblical meta-narrative, God created a universe that was good, harmonious, and at peace. It functioned as it was designed to function. He populated this creation with creatures (angels, humans, and beasts), and He placed humans in a garden where they could live, work, get to know Him, and raise a family. Yet, the humans disobeyed the one rule He had given. They sinned and God placed creation under a curse. We observe Adam and Eve hiding from one anther and then from God. We see them blame others. Work becomes difficult. There are thorns. One child kills the other. Within a few chapters we discover that God needs to destroy most of humanity in order to cleanse the earth from its moral pollution.

Thus sin can be seen as a type of pollution that damages, disrupts and corrupts God’s harmonious creation. Now, this is not a new insight merely following our society’s present focus on the environment, for as seen above, this image is biblical. In addition, this concept can be found in some systematic theologies (for example, “pollution” in Berkhof and “corruption” in Grudem, and “defilement” in Culver).

Before going further, let me make it clear that I am not suggesting this is the only way to think about sin, for the Bible is rich in descriptive words for sin. Sin is characterized as darkness, death, ignorance, wandering off the path, falling short of the mark, and alienation. Yet, each of these negative descriptions of sin corresponds to a positive description of God and what He offers. He offers light, knowledge, life, the path, the standard and reconciliation. Although many of these descriptions are relevant to human behavior and thus Christian psychology, I want us to think about conceptualizing sin as pollution. This way of thinking about sin strikes me as particularly germane to our interests.

How so? The biblical meta-narrative presents the original universe at rest, and it conceives of the final state in a very similar way. The problems that occur in between are then associated with the time of sin and curse. Or we might say that God created a functional creation, sin polluted creation causing dysfunction, and God will one day again make things functional. This is relevant to those interested in Christian psychology for we live in this “in between time,” this time of dysfunction. We see individuals, marriages, and families that are not functioning as God designed them to function. We can at times make out the beauty of the original design, but we also see pollution, some tracing its origin to the original pollution, some created by other humans, and some self-generated. Even those who have sought to avoid the corruption that is in the world find themselves vexed by the pollution around them. One must wonder what the incarnation might have been like for the second member of the Trinity. The pure One living in a morally polluted and dysfunctional world. Little wonder that He was predicted by Isaiah to be a “man of sorrows.”

Thus, conceptualizing sin as pollutions is particularly relevant to those interested in thinking Christianly about humans, including their functioning and dysfunctioning. This is an image that we should recapture, for the image likely draws its remarkable force from the original moral pollution, that destroyed the original pristine environment, and that portended untold problems for all humanity.

Wrist Watches on Roman Soldiers

Posted on September 24, 2007

[Editor's note: This is the 4th blog from Mike McGuire for the month of September]

In Stanley Kubrick’s Spartacus, Roman soldiers are seen wearing wristwatches. In a more recent movie, Gladiator, one can clearly see a modern gas canister underneath an over turned chariot. In the movie, Troy, a very astute viewer has spotted a crew member’s bullhorn poking into the edge of a street scene. These three errors, remind us of the difficulty faced in keeping anachronisms out of the portrayal of ancient cultures.

We Christians can learn a lesson from these errors. God, in His wisdom, chose to reveal His word in ancient languages, through ancient writers to ancient audiences who lived in ancient cultures. Careful exegesis requires that we identify what God revealed in that time, in that place, and in those cultural circumstances, before we attempt to understand the message within our culture and apply it to our audience. In the rush to launch our product, we face the real danger of putting wrist watches on Roman soldiers.

Allow me to share what I see as three common errors we will need to avoid in order to create a Christian psychology. First, I believe we must be very careful with the tendency to study the Bible with our audience’s felt needs in mind. Appealing to felt needs is not always wrong as we can see from how Jesus approached the Samaritan woman (John 4). Yet we are not Jesus and we need to prevent those identified needs from distorting our interpretation of biblical passages. We must begin with a careful interpretation of the biblical passage, before we consider the needs of our contemporary audience. First we study, then we frame our message.

Second, I believe we often err when find step-wise problem-solving processes imbedded in Scripture. Since it first struck me that these processes are a common theme of modernity, I have begun to read the Bible differently. If we stop bringing this idea to the text, we shall largely cease to find it in the text. A couple of years ago, I became interested in a passage in a contemporary book that pointed to four prepositional phrases in a particular Bible verse as biblical support for there being four invariant steps in Christian counseling. I do not have time to explain all I did to test the author’s assertion, but I could find no support in the Greek NT, Greek lexicons, Greek grammars, or the interpretive history of this passage from our day back to the reformation. Yet, this author is not alone in reading such problem solving steps into the Bible. If we eliminated this from sermons and books, I fear a large amount of contemporary American Christianity would go quite.

Third, I have begun to suspect that we read key elements of our personal psychology into what the Bible says about emotions. Matthew Elliot, in a recent book (Faithful Feelings), observes that theologians, when discussing the negative feelings that the Bible warns us avoid, view these as actual feelings, yet many of those same theologians, when discussing positive feelings that we are commanded to exhibit, see these as “attitudes” (a far less emotive term). The author asks, if hatred is a feeling, then why is love an attitude? He thus raises the possibility that in this way we are reading our own psychology into the holy text rather than finding it there.

Clearly, if we are to develop a biblically based Christian psychology, we must think deeply about the proper interpretation of Scripture. We must try to hear what God has said in the Bible in its historical contexts, and not merely what God appears to have said, if His words are run through our contemporary interpretive framework. To do less is the equivalent of putting wrist watches on Roman soldiers.

Unity, Liberty, and Charity in Christian Psychology

Posted on September 17, 2007

[Editor's note: this is the 3rd of 4 weekly posts made by Dr. Mike McGuire this month.]

Those who attended the conference last week reminded me of the words of Rupertus Meldenius: “In essentials unity, in nonessentials liberty, in all things charity.”

If we are to explore the idea of a Christian psychology, then I believe we must be unified around Christianity—especially the historic doctrines that are at its core. It will not work to build our unity around psychology. That would change our focus, and as fascinating as this subject is, it is unlikely to provide unity. On the other hand, Christ prayed for Christian unity (John 17:11). Let us seek to maintain unity in essentials.

Our diversity in nonessentials last week produced such a richness of insight. I return from each SCP conference with two deep convictions: there is so much more I need to understand and I so desperately need my intellectually gifted siblings in Christ to help me learn what I lack. This conference reflected this point.

Let us affirm liberty in nonessentials.

Our Lord encouraged his disciples saying that all people would know that they were his disciples if they loved each other (John 13:35). This clearly has implications for the SCP.

Years ago one of my fellow seminary students nicknamed our aging professor “the Winnie the Pooh of the theology professors,” highlighting his gentle spirit (and possibly alluding his somewhat portly build). One day when this professor was asked a question about a theological position with which he disagreed, he paused, drew a deep breath, and sighed. After shaking his head slightly as if to banish some stray thought, he looked up and, in a moment of self-reflection, declared, “Oh my, how easy it is to pick up the cudgel!”

We students were shocked. This dear, gentle fellow had been tempted to bash in the head of those with whom he disagreed. We could not imagine such a thing existed in his kindly heart. The details of that class have merged with other memories, yet the insight of that event remains distinct. That professor was right. It is so easy to pick up the cudgel!

So, in all things, let us show charity toward one another.

Now, you as the reader may puzzle over this: have I in this post merely given you a devotional thought, or have I suggested a motto for SCP, or have I elucidated some element of Christian psychology, or have I attempted two or more of these?

Christian Psychology and Christian Worldview

Posted on September 10, 2007

[This is the second post this month by guest blogger Dr. Mike McGuire]

In this post, I want to suggest that there are several reasons that those involved in Christian psychology should think of Christian psychology in terms of Christian worldview.

First, I would like to see us think in terms of worldviews because of the strong influence of non-Christian worldviews on much (if not all) of what might be called modern psychology. Without thinking carefully about these worldviews and the bias that they introduce, one is unlikely to avoid those errors. Worldview thinking promotes discernment.

Second, I would like to suggest that we should be committed to thinking about Christian psychology in terms of a Christian worldview. One might think of working out a Christian psychology by taking the Christian worldview element by element and asking oneself about the implications of that element for understanding human psychology. Keeping Christian psychology Christian requires that it be built upon a foundation of Christianity and what else beside a Christian worldview might provide such a foundation?

Third, I believe we should be committed to distinguishing between the Christian worldview and our preferred theologies. Here I am thinking of a Christian worldview as a constellation of ideas that are descriptive of beliefs shared by Christians –Christians who may take a variety of theological positions. As much as I would love to convert everyone to my way of thinking (as I suspect others would like to convert me to their way of thinking), I believe it is essential to know the difference between worldview and theology. For if I do not understand the difference, I may be tempted to accuse others of being outside Christianity when they have merely disagreed with some point of my theology, maybe even a minor point.

Fourth, I believe that it might prove helpful to think about the differences and the potential commonalities between worldviews as a guide to the differences and commonalities between a Christian psychology and various non-Christian psychologies. Here, I am assuming just because worldviews differ from one another on some elements, that does not necessarily mean that they differ on all elements. I am suggesting that it is important to understand both commonality and difference, and that focusing on one to the absence of the other is important.

Christian Psychology as a Christian Discipline

Posted on September 3, 2007

This is the first post My Dr. Mike McGuire, guest blogger for the Society this month.–Blog moderator.

What is Christian psychology? Answers to this question have permeated the previous blogs. Allow me to add to this discussion.

I view Christian psychology as a Christian discipline that is both academic and practicable, so let’s see what that might mean.

To say it is an academic discipline is to recognize that it is an intellectual pursuit. At a minimum, it is composed of historical studies, philosophical studies, theological studies, and experimental studies. Another way of saying this is to say that we who are interested in Christian psychology need those with skillful intellects to help us comb through the history of the Christian church so we might grasp and highlight our rich Christian heritage concerning the understanding of humans and how they might be counseled. We also need philosophers and theologians to help us understand the ideological currents which influenced those historical documents as well as the present currents that influence us today. We also need those skillful in the exegesis of Scripture to help us mine the wealth of God’s word. In addition, we need those who understand empirical research to help us test the ideas that have been proposed. We need these and possible more in avoiding some of the superficial approaches that currently exist in Christian counseling.

In addition to the academic, I perceive Christian Psychology as a practicable discipline. While we attempt to think seriously about this topic, the application of those thoughts should not be forgotten. The Christian minister, the Christian counselor, and even the Christian medical doctor need the guidance of a well developed Christian psychology.

From my perspective, Christian psychology should be profoundly Christian, for it should be Christian both in its broad interpretive framework and in the lives of those who participate in this discipline. By Christian interpretive framework, I am thinking of the Christian worldview to which other bloggers have alluded. For our purposes, it appears to me indispensible for if we define Christian too broadly, we may include ideas that are “Christian” in name only, and if we define Christian too narrowly, we may exclude ideas merely because they do not fit our individual preferences.

Yet, this leads to the most personal of issues, for Christian psychology must be Christian in the lives of those who promote it. This is important to Christian psychology for at least two reasons. Christian psychology is likely to be defined in the minds of observers, not as what we say it is but what we do, not just what we write but how we write it. In addition, as one might observe in reading various psychological theories of personality, theory often flows from biography. I would suggest a review of what has been written in Christian counseling will reveal the same conclusion. The theory reveals the author. This should not surprise us for our Lord said that we may be judged by our words for they, when properly understood, accurately reveal our hearts (Matt 12: 33-37).

Thus the commitment to a Christian interpretive framework and the commitment to the work required to participate in this discipline (both academically and practically) must flow from a life that reflects a vital relationship with Christ. Thus, the “Christian” in Christian psychology is not merely reduced to an academic understanding of the Christian worldview, but will necessarily be a reflection of the lives of those who promote it. Thus Christian Psychology must flow from the lives people who follow Christ.

For clarification, let me share what I think Christian psychology is unlikely to be. I think it is unlikely to be a single theory or a single approach to counseling. Although I would confess that there is an ideal Christian psychology and an ideal approach to Christian counseling (just as there is an ideal theology), the history of Christianity and the history of psychology suggests it would be unwise to think that all would agree on a single theology, psychology, and practice.

What is important is that we think Christianly about human psychology and live Christianly in our intellectual pursuit and practice of Christian psychology, for that will ultimately define what we mean by Christian psychology.

Blogger for September 2007

Posted on August 31, 2007

The Society welcomes Dr. William Michael (“Mike”) McGuire as our blogger for the month of September. Dr. McGuire is Associate Professor of Psychology and Counseling at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Forth Worth, TX. For many years he served as a counselor in the counseling center of First Baptist Church, Dallas, TX. He earned a Ph.D. in Marriage and Family Therapy and his concern for understanding the bible also led him to earn a Th.M. Look for his posts each monday of this month.

In other news: it is not too late to register for the Society’s annual conference, September 10-12 at the Gaylord Oprland Hotel, Nashville. Check out the details of plenary and breakout speakers on other pages of this site. We’d love to see you there. For those that can’t make it, check back here for some live blogging by me. I will try to give a sense of the atmosphere and content of a number of presenters.

Phil
blog moderator

Designed by Business Broker