[geocentrism] Psychoheresy in the Pulpit
- From: Bernie Brauer <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
http://www.pamweb.org/psych_in_pulpit.html
Psychoheresy in the Pulpit
Comments on Britt Merrick?s 11-26-06 Sermon at Reality, Carpinteria, CA
"The Spirit-Filled Family: Parents and Children"
---------------------------------
The primary promoters of psychoheresy used to be people who studied
psychology directly and then combined what they learned with Christianity.
These were generally psychologists who practiced counseling based upon
personality theories of secular psychotherapists, such as Sigmund Freud, Carl
Jung, Alfred Adler, Erich Fromm, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Albert Ellis, and
Thomas Harris. Such psychology was incorporated into the pastoral care classes
in seminaries and then seminaries began to train professional psychological
counselors. Soon these Christians turned psychologists brought their theories
and therapies into the Christian mainstream through their books, radio
interviews, and speaking engagements. Psychological counseling became the
answer to every dilemma, not only in the world, but also in the church.
As demonstrated in our other writing, these counseling theories and therapies
are based on human opinion rather than strict scientific investigation.
Furthermore, because of how they attempt to deal with the very same issues
dealt with by God?s Word, these psychological theories and therapies constitute
a rival religion. Nevertheless, there are many who supplement Scripture with
psychological theories (opinions), which are no more than the very wisdom of
men about which Scripture warns believers. Not only is Scripture supplemented;
it is being supplanted. Scripture?s clear meaning is hijacked by these theories
as psychology is used to interpret the very Word of God. After about a
half-century of expansion, psychoheresy is everywhere in the church to the
degree that even many pastors who want to be biblical are preaching
psychological answers for living the Christian life. Thus every believer needs
to be a Berean!
We recently heard a sermon titled "The Spirit-Filled Family: Parents and
Children." This sermon is quite typical of many that are a mixture of
biblically sound teachings and psychologically contaminated ones. Since this
sermon, along with sermon notes, is posted on the web, we thought it would be
helpful to our readers to go through the sermon and notes as an exercise in
being a Berean in the pew. While not everyone may be able to identify the
source of the psychoheresy, there is a question that every believer must ask as
he listens to sermons: "Where is this in Scripture?" This question is
especially important when the statement to be examined is being used to
explain, clarify, or expand on a verse or its application. Besides the Bereans
looking to see if what Paul was preaching was truly biblical (Acts 17:10-11),
Paul gave instructions for everyone to judge what is said when believers meet
together: "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge" (1 Cor.
14:29). Discernment is especially needful today! Therefore we all need to:
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain
babblings; for they will increase unto more ungodliness" (2 Timothy 2:15, 16).
The sermon being analyzed is "The Spirit-Filled Family: Parents and Children"
on Colossians 3:20-21 preached by Britt Merrick at Reality, Carpinteria, CA, on
11-26-06.
Sermon: Link
http://realitymessages.com/audio/2006-11-26-The_Spirit_Filled_Family_Parents_and_Children-Col_3.20.21.48kbps.mp3
Sermon Notes:
http://reality.sjc.cachefly.net/notes/StudyNotes-2006-11-26-Parents_and_Children.pdf
Analysis of Sermon on Colossians 3:20-21
"The Spirit-Filled Family: Parents and Children"
In analyzing this sermon, we title the area of concern, state what the
preacher said, describe the psychoheresy involved, and then give a biblical
solution. Numerals in parentheses indicate minutes and seconds into the
recorded message at the previously given web site.
Adding Psychological Opinions to the Word of God
What the Preacher Said:
At the beginning the preacher said that the Bible "says surprisingly little
about parenting. It has some things to say ? but not as much as we would like"
(4:34). He continued with "The Bible approaches life.... by putting Jesus
Christ on the throne of our lives and everything will fall into place ? sets
our other relationships in order." We say Amen to that! However, after that he
proceeded to use psychological opinions to expand the meaning of Colossians
3:21. In adding psychological opinions to the Word of God, the preacher quoted
the following from Between Parent and Child by Haim Ginott:
"If he lives with criticism he does not learn responsibility. He learns to
condemn himself and to find fault with others. He learns to doubt his own
judgment, to disparage his own ability, and to distrust the intentions of
others. And above all, he learns to live with continual expectation of
impending doom" (Ginott quoted in the preacher?s notes, p. 4).
Psychoheresy Involved:
In discussing Colossians 3:21, "Fathers, provoke not your children to anger,
lest they be discouraged," his examples were psychologically tainted in
describing what provoking anger looks like and why that is so dangerous, to the
point of having life-long consequences. Quoting psychologists as experts is
preaching the religion of the world, even if some of what they say sounds
factual and even makes sense. Psychologists speak as experts, as if what they
say is absolutely true, when it is generally their opinion based upon their own
psychological viewpoint.
The Haim Ginott Between Parent and Child quote may sound as if it is true,
but research has shown otherwise (see our later comments). His words are very
Freudian. He sounds predictive, but that generality may apply only to a few
people. He has built an imaginary figure based upon his own Freudian-influenced
imagination and his own definition of self-esteem. This is an example of the
kinds of myths from psychology that many Christians believe.
The Ginott quote, which is stated in absolutist language, is quite
characteristic of the psychological mindset. If A happens to a child, he will
turn out to be or do B. Except for extreme cases, Ginott?s assertion is,
scientifically speaking, untrue (more on this later). It is true that no one
should be unjustly critical of a child, but it is untrue that such criticism
will automatically cause all the horrible consequences Ginott lists in what the
preacher quoted.
Ginott and other psychologists over-dramatize the fragility of children
rather than referring to the resilience of children (more on this later). Some
children may actually become overly conscientious in being responsible as a
response to criticism. Self-condemnation does not necessarily lead to finding
fault in others. And some, in the face of constant criticism quit listening and
form their own judgment and place themselves in a superior position to their
parents. Of course this would be bad, too. But the point is that Ginott?s
statement is too authoritative sounding and too general and should not be
quoted as evidence of anything but Ginott?s opinion. Quoting Ginott and listing
his book in the preacher?s sermon notes may encourage parents to read his book.
If they do, they will get a psychological rather than a biblical view of
mankind.
When a pastor is teaching from the Bible and quoting psychological opinions
to expand the understanding, people begin to trust psychology more than they
should. As it is too many Christians trust what psychologists say. And when
Christian pastors and leaders quote Ginott and others like him, their listeners
may easily assume that the statement is true and put it into the same mental
category of truth as Scripture. That is why pastors have to be especially
careful in quoting psychologists as experts. These are often opinions absent
solid research. There is a vast chasm between psychological research and
psychological counseling theories and therapies. Personality theories are based
more on the personal opinions and life experiences of the theorists (e.g.
Freud, Jung, Adler, Maslow, Fromm, Rogers, Ellis). Moreover, none of the
theorists who established the practice of psychology were Christians. Some were
adamantly opposed to Christianity and some were heavily involved in
the occult (Freud, Jung, and Rogers).
A Biblical Solution:
Stick with Scripture and biblical exegesis. The preacher did not have to go
outside Scripture. He could have shown what provoking to anger looks like by
going elsewhere in Scripture, even though these are addressed to all
interpersonal relationships. Examples of sinful interpersonal behavior would
have particular bearing on the relationship between parents and children. The
preacher could have used Ephesians 4:25-5:2. For instance, "corrupt
communication" would include rude, humiliating, debasing remarks that could
provoke wrath.
Confirming a Victimhood Stance
What the Preacher Said:
In warning parents about what might happen to their children if they provoke
their children to wrath, the preacher said:
"As a pastor again, I sit with people . . . . I have grown men weep in my
office. . . . My dad never told me he loved me. . . . My dad said I would never
amount to anything. And, my mom called me good-for nothing. . . . . The human
heart seldom gets over things like that" (24:56).
Psychoheresy Involved:
In dramatizing the complaints of these men, the preacher may have encouraged
a victimhood stance, not only for them but for others who had less-than-perfect
childhoods. Psychology has made much of this and has encouraged people to pay
attention to how they were hurt when they were children. This is a great
emphasis in psychology, because of the false belief that these long-past
hurtful things formed the person?s present personality and caused his current
problems. Examples of adults describing their bad childhood to support sermon
points will not help those adults to get over their "woundedness." Rather it
confirms their victimhood.
Many Christians are still blaming their parents and past circumstances for
their present problems. Many Christians believe the Freudian myth that what
happened to them in the past determines their present words, actions,
attitudes, and behavior. They are still blaming their parents and past
circumstances for their present problems. Or they are still complaining that
their parents did such and such or deprived them of such and such. They see
themselves as wounded and needing healing. In doing so they are missing a
powerful truth from Scripture that would set them free from the position of
being a victim of the past needing to be healed.
A Biblical Solution:
The flesh cries out, "I?m a victim!" However, Christians need to be brought
to a place where they see first and foremost how they have sinned against
others through thoughts and behavior as they were growing up.
The preacher gave a solution when he said, "The truth of Jesus has set you
free." The truth of Jesus will indeed set them free if they believe it and
follow it to the point of trusting God enough to repent of their bitterness,
etc. Indeed, there is much they can do in response to all that Christ has done
for them.
There is great hope in Romans 8:28-29, knowing that "all things [truly] work
together for good," not only for believers? present and future circumstances,
but also for all that happened to them prior to salvation. If a grown believer,
for instance, who has survived great difficulties as a child sees that God can
and does use every circumstance in his life for a purpose, there is hope. For
indeed God does use "all things [past, present, and future to] work together
for good to them that love God, to them that are the called according to His
purpose." The words of the very next verse speak of God?s foreknowledge.
Therefore God was cognizant of all that was happening to one who would become
"conformed to the image of His Son."
Rather than wallowing in self pity or blaming parents for one?s own sinful
ways, a person can become free from the bondage of the past by the truth of
Scripture. Part of that bondage has come through the lies of the enemy that
cause people to believe that they are the way they are because of their past
and are therefore stuck to the past. Part of that bondage comes from hanging on
to the old man through thinking about all the bad stuff of the past. Freedom
comes through realizing that God allowed those circumstances for reasons beyond
human comprehension: for His glorious purposes to bless His people, to conform
them to the image of Christ, and to use His children in present opportunities
to minister in the Body of Christ, and for magnificent purposes extending into
eternity (Romans 8:28-29). Remember what Joseph said to his brothers: "But as
for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to
pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive"
(Genesis 50:20). Indeed there have been Christians whose most difficult
childhoods prepared them for serving God in unique and important ways.
Another consideration is that if Christians blame the past for their present
circumstances, they are also blaming God for their past and present
circumstances. Rather than pathetically looking for healing, they need to
repent. They need to turn around and quit looking at the past, quit blaming the
past, and put off the old man. Christians have been given a brand new life in
Christ. How can they live that new life if they are looking backwards at what
happened to them in the past? They need to follow Paul through Philippians
3:13-14: "? but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind,
and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark
for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."
This turning around may not be easy, because the flesh is so accustomed to
think according to the old ways of self-pity and blaming the past. But, that?s
what it is to put off the old man, to be renewed in the spirit of the mind, and
to put on the new man (Eph. 4:22-24). Here also is the road to sanctification,
overcoming the flesh by walking according to the Spirit (Galatians 5:16-17).
Wouldn?t it be glorious to hear those bitter and weeping men begin to be
grateful to God for all He has done to give them the gift of salvation and new
life!
Past Determinants of Behavior
What the Preacher Said:
The preacher quotes the following from John Phillips regarding the
deterministic impact of the first seven years of a person?s life:
"The Jesuits used to say that if they could have the commanding influence
in the life of a child until that child was seven years old, the child was
theirs. By then the child's character was formed, his convictions were
embedded, and his course was set. No amount of contrary teaching would greatly
alter the basic bent of that child" (John Phillips, Exploring Proverbs, p.168).
Quoting Phillips (preacher?s sermon notes, p. 10), who quotes the Jesuits
(Catholics), who merely regurgitate Freud plus two years (seven instead of
five) is double jeopardy. Phillips and many others in the church are blind
about the extent to which they have been psychologized.
Psychoheresy Involved:
The above statements promote the psychological idea of past determinants of
behavior and particularly the importance of the first seven years. This
psychological myth of past determinants of behavior leads most people to
believe that they are what they are and do what they do because of childhood
experiences. In other words, it?s still the parents? or caretakers? fault. This
idea has been promoted so heavily in our therapeutic culture that people remain
victims rather than going on with life. Psychoanalysis and its offshoots
attempt to fix the past, but any attempt to do that is purely a fleshly
activity, and when Christians do that they are indulging in the flesh and
strengthening it.
The idea that what happened during a person?s early childhood is a powerful
force that controls his emotions and drives his present behavior is both
erroneous and dangerous. Freud postulated that a newborn will go through
several "psychosexual stages of development." He named them the oral (0-18
months), anal (18-36 months), phallic (3-5 years), genital (through puberty).
Freud believed it was the first five years of life and how a person maneuvered
through these stages that determined the person?s life.
There is no predictive validity to the relationship between early life
circumstances and present life. If you want to test it out, examine 100, 200,
500 kids in preschool or at whatever point in early life. Give all the tests
you want and then predict what the children will be like as adults. Even Freud
knew better than this. He could be postdictive (look back to connect one?s
early life with one?s present adult life), but never predictive (look ahead
from a child?s present life to tell how his future life as an adult will be).
Given an adult with a problem, a Freudian (or any number of psychologists who
use theories that continue the idea of a past that powerfully motivates or
drives present thinking and acting) will then interview the person and tell him
how his childhood determined his present life. It is obvious that there is no
science involved in this, only guess work.
In his book The Psychological Society, Martin Gross summarizes the work of
Dr. Stella Chess, professor of child psychiatry at New York University Medical
Center. Gross says that a potent conclusion that evolves from Chess?s work is
that "the present psychiatric theory that the first six years of life are the
exclusive molders of personality is patently false."
Social psychologist Dr. Carol Tavris discusses research about constancy
versus change in an article titled "The Freedom to Change." Referring to Freud
and his psychoanalytic therapy, she says:
"Now the irony is that many people who are not fooled by astrology for one
minute subject themselves to therapy for years, where the same errors of logic
and interpretation often occur. . . . Astrologists think we are determined at
birth (or even conception) by our stars; psychoanalysts think we are determined
within a few years of birth by our parents (and our anatomy)."
Tavris cites research that opposes the idea of Freudian determinism and
describes the work of Dr. Orville Brim of the Foundation for Child Development
in New York. She says, "Most of Brim?s career has been devoted to charting the
course of child development and its relation to adult personality." She reports
that Brim is convinced that "far from being programmed permanently by the age
of 5, people are virtually reprogrammable throughout life." She quotes him as
saying, "Hundreds and hundreds of studies now document the fact of personality
change in adulthood." She also quotes Brim as saying:
"Social scientists are unable to predict adult personality from childhood
or even from adolescence in any important way. We can?t blame the methods
anymore, and we can?t say that people who don?t fit the predictions are
deviant, unhealthy or strange. They are the norm."
Brim and Dr. Jerome Kagan, a professor at Harvard University, wrote a book
together titled Constancy and Change in Human Development. They say:
"The view that emerges from this work is that humans have a capacity for
change across the entire life span. . . there are important growth changes
across the life span from birth to death, many individuals retain a great
capacity for change, and the consequences of the events of early childhood are
continually transformed by later experiences, making the course of human
development more open than many have believed."
Kagen and his co-researcher Howard Moss say they "could find little relation
between psychological qualities during the first three years of
life?fearfulness, irritability, or activity?and any aspect of behavior in
adulthood."
Victor and Mildred Goertzel investigated this fallacy of early life
determinants. In their book Cradles of Eminence they report on the early
environments of over four hundred eminent men and women of the twentieth
century who had experienced a wide variety of trials and tribulations during
their childhood. It is surprising and even shocking to discover the
environmental handicaps that have been overcome by individuals who should have
been psychically determined failures according to Freudian formulas. Instead of
being harmed by unfortunate early circumstances, they became outstanding in
many different fields of endeavor and contributed much to mankind. What might
have been environmental curses seemed to act, rather, as catalysts to spawn
genius and creativity. This study is not an argument for poor upbringing; it is
an argument against psychic determinism.
A Biblical Solution:
There is no biblical basis for the use of the past (past determinants of
behavior). The Bible includes the past works of God in history, because we are
to remember the works of God both individually and corporately. But, regarding
the Christian walk, the cross took care of the past. The walk of the believer
is to be according to the new life and is therefore present and future
oriented. In Philippians 3 Paul gives his religious and personal background, on
which he had depended for righteousness before God. But when confronted by
Jesus he saw his own wretched sinfulness, not only that he had persecuted the
church, but that he was sinful to the core. He knew he could not make himself
righteous by going back into his past. Therefore he declared: "This one thing I
do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those
things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high
calling of God in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3:13-14). This does not
mean an inability to recall the past; it means that the past now has a
different significance. Biblically speaking, trying to fix the past through
psychological means is purely a fleshly activity, which when indulged in wars
against the spirit.
A person need not be trapped in negative patterns of behavior established in
the early years of life, for the Bible offers a new way of life. Put off the
old man; put on the new. Jesus said to Nicodemus, "Ye must be born again," and
He said elsewhere that new wine could not be put into old wineskins. Jesus
offers new life and new beginnings. One who is born again has the spiritual
capacity to overcome old ways and develop new ones through the power of the
Word, through the action of the Holy Spirit, and through his own response of
faith, obedience, and ongoing spiritual growth. One wonders why so many have
given up the hope of Christianity for the hopelessness of past determinism.
Fragility and Innocence of Children
What the Preacher Said:
In spite of the preacher?s statement regarding children near the beginning of
the message, "They don?t listen very well and they don?t behave all that often"
(9:54), he authoritatively quoted Warren Weiersbe as saying, "For the most part
children do not CREATE problems; they REVEAL them." A false implication could
be made that any rebellion on the part of children did not create problems, but
simply revealed their parents? problems. There was also an underlying
psychological idea throughout the section on Col. 3:21 that children are very
fragile.
Psychoheresy Involved:
Over-dramatization of the child with the broken spirit may make parents so
afraid of damaging their children that they will fail to discipline them. Some
children happen to be more rebellious and need stronger discipline than others,
who may need only a look or a soft word.
Too many parents have failed to discipline their children because the
psychological wisdom of men has taught them that they might damage their
children?s psyches for life, or, according to "Christian psychology," cause
their children to have a "broken spirit." Thus, if the children become angry or
resentful when disciplined, the parents may worry about having "provoked their
children to wrath" and back off from necessary discipline. They may become
hesitant to discipline if their children sob "uncontrollably" or react in
anger, resentment, hurt feelings, etc. What often happens after a sermon like
this is that parents who are doing it right will think they?re not if their
children are not responding well, and those who are truly doing a bad job of
parenting may be blaming their own parents, etc. (Incidentally, Freud blamed
nearly every problem in an adult person?s life on the person?s parents and
particularly the mother.)
A Biblical Solution:
Later in the message, the preacher actually gave a good solution to his
earlier emphasis on the psychological fragility of children when he quoted
Proverbs 23:13-14 (NASB): "Do not hold back discipline from the child. Although
you beat him with a rod, he will not die. You shall beat him with the rod, and
deliver his soul from Sheol." Indeed, children are not as fragile as people
think?not even as psychologically fragile as psychologists would have us
believe. In fact, some psychologists are taking a second look at this because
of research in this area. A recent issue of the Harvard Mental Health Letter
(Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 5, 6) says the following:
"For a half-century, long-term studies of child development have shown that
some people remain psychologically healthy even after years of severe
deprivation and trauma. These findings surprised many clinicians, who tended to
regard such experiences as overwhelmingly destructive. In response, some
researchers have shifted their focus away from the causes of psychopathology
and toward the characteristics and circumstances that buffer against stress?.
"Interest in resilience is also encouraged by the positive psychology
movement, which has turned attention? in all circumstances, not just stress or
trauma?away from pathology and toward strengths and virtues. That movement has
also been concerned with the phenomenon of post-traumatic growth?a process
through which suffering can give rise to compassion, wisdom, and well-being.
Advocates of positive psychology judge that stress and trauma are as likely to
stimulate as to impede adaptation and growth."
Whether our children are sturdy or fragile, the admonitions of Col. 3:20-21
and Eph. 6:3 are commands to be diligently followed by all parents in obedience
to the Lord, just as the preacher said near the beginning of the sermon
regarding the command to obey given to children: "The reason [to obey] is for
the Lord." And just as children are to obey their parents "in all things,"
parents are to obey the Lord in all things. That is the foremost reason for
parents to follow the admonitions of Col. 3:20-21 and Eph. 6:3.
Why People Are the Way They Are and Do what They Do
What the Preacher Said:
The preacher asked, "Why are parents sometimes critical?" and then gave three
reasons. Fortunately each of his answers started with "It may be. . . ."
Nevertheless, these were typical guesses from psychological theories.
Psychoheresy Involved:
"It may be. . ." may compute in some listeners? minds as "It must be . . ."
or "It is . . . ." Personality theories attempt to tell us why people are the
way they are, why they do what they do, and how they change, but they are only
guesses. The answer, "It may be all they know from their parents" sounds very
psychological, as if only the parents influenced the child. Once children are
in preschool or regular school and exposed to people outside the family, they
have many opportunities to learn all kinds of things?good and bad?from other
adults and especially from peers.
People themselves often do not know why they do certain things. They may
explain and rationalize after the fact, but we have to remember Jeremiah 17:9,
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. Who can know
it?"
A Biblical Solution:
The Bible gives the true reasons why people do what they do. If they are
Christians, they are either walking according to the Spirit or according to the
flesh. If they are being Spirit-led they may be critical of wrong behavior and
want to bring about correction. Moreover, they will teach and encourage the
child to do what is right. However, if a parent is constantly critical of the
child and not teaching and encouraging, he is walking according to the flesh.
Our own behavior is a good indication as to whether we are walking after the
flesh or the Spirit, because if we "Walk in the Spirit," we will "not fulfil
the lust of the flesh" (Gal 5:16).
Overly Dramatic
What the Preacher Said:
Some of the statements sounded overly dramatic, such as the preacher?s
comment that boiled down to "One hard day" equals "a child losing heart"
(23:22) and "crush the spirit of a child" (23:58), as well as the Ginott quote
(cited earlier) and the following statements:
"I?ve seen 40-year-olds sit in my office. As their pastor, counseling with
them, I have seen them seethe with resentment and irritation against their
parents" (15:25).
"As a pastor again, I sit with people . . . . .I have grown men weep in my
office. . . . My dad never told me he loved me. . . . My dad said I would never
amount to anything. And, my mom called me good-for nothing. . . . . The human
heart seldom gets over things like that" (24:56).
Psychoheresy Involved:
There were too many generalizations of an extreme nature. Such
over-dramatizing is very typical of promoters of psychological counseling
theories and therapies. The way the preacher expressed these examples made it
sound as if these are common fare. Psychology books are punctuated with extreme
examples presented as common occurrences. Psychologists mainly write about
extreme situations to show how serious everything is and how much parents need
their help.
The section on Col. 3:21 was so extreme and dramatic that it almost
contradicted the preacher?s more biblical section (aside from the quote about
the Jesuits) on nurture and admonition.
A Biblical Solution:
Stick with the Bible and be a Berean! Be aware that psychological ideas from
the wisdom of men, about which God has warned His people, permeate "Christian
books" on the family and even seep into various Bible commentaries, because too
many Christians trust what the so-called psychological experts say, especially
if they are also Christians who teach this psychology in Bible colleges and
seminaries.
Use of Statistics
What the Preacher Said:
The preacher said:
"It has been estimated that fathers spend an average of 37 seconds a day
with their infant sons, and one hour a day with their adolescents. These
figures are for intact families. After divorce, 50 percent of adolescent
children have no contact, 30 percent have sporadic contact and 20 percent see
their father once a week or more. Average it all out and fathers spend
approximately 10 minutes a day with their children" (preacher?s sermon notes p.
5).
Psychoheresy Involved:
How can we know that is true? Who said this? Where is the source? Is it
reliable?
A Biblical Solution:
A preacher needs to be sure that he only uses reliable statistics based on
reliable surveys or tests. He needs to be sure that such a statement is not
just personal guesses and opinions. He should be able to refer his listeners to
the research basis of such statements.
Misapplying Scripture
What the Preacher Said:
The preacher used Absalom for the classic example of fathers neglecting their
children and expanded the clear meaning of 1 Timothy 5:8. "But if any provide
not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the
faith, and is worse than an infidel."
Psychoheresy Involved:
There is no record regarding the amount of attention David gave to Absalom
when he was a child. The incident to which the pastor was referring is not
neglect of a young child, but a clear example of a ruler not ruling his own
household. Instead of confronting his eldest son, Amnon, after he sinned
against Tamar, which by Old Testament Law would have been the death penalty,
David neglected his responsibility to follow God?s law when it meant harming
his own children. Then after waiting two years, Absalom took matters into his
own hands and had Amnon killed (2 Samuel 13). This is a powerful example of a
father avoiding confronting serious sin, but it is not an example of fathers
neglecting young children or even adolescents.
1 Timothy 5:8 refers to necessities, but the preacher expanded the meaning to
include luxuries such as "a place to play, a place to study," or "their own
possessions" (preacher?s sermon notes , p. 6). These could only be given as
examples of "necessities" in an affluent culture. Yes, in our society many
parents can provide most of these things, but some cannot. During the
depression parents who dearly loved their children were only able to provide
the bare necessities, as described in 1 Timothy 6:8: "And having food and
raiment let us be therewith content." We may actually be doing great harm to
our children by getting them used to having many possessions, for the time may
come when they, too, will have to be content with bare subsistence.
A Biblical Solution:
The preacher could have limited himself to his second statement under #7 in
his sermon notes: "By providing necessities parents show their respect and
concern for their own children."
One needs to be careful about coming to a conclusion and trying to support
the idea with Scripture (2 Samuel:13).
Self-Esteem
What the Preacher Said:
The preacher said, "God has given them [children] a conscience and they need
parameters in which they can begin to exercise that conscience and develop
healthy self-esteem."
Psychoheresy Involved:
The world has promoted self-esteem. Self-esteem is not a biblical concept. We
don?t even find "healthy self-esteem" in Scripture. From the early work of Dr.
Stanley Coopersmith, whom the preacher quotes, people began to place great
faith in self-esteem and its importance in children. Subsequent research has
not supported this great faith in self-esteem. In fact, high self-esteem is now
a characteristic found in high-risk takers and criminals. (See our book James
Dobson?s Gospel of Self-Esteem & Psychology)
A Biblical Solution:
Please read the article titled "Self Esteem for Christians?" Parts One and
Two.
http://www.pamweb.org/selfestm.html
http://www.pamweb.org/selfestm.html#Part Two
Our Prayer:
We pray that this analysis, along with access to the actual sermon and the
preacher?s sermon notes, can be used as an encouragement to all Christians to
be discerning listeners and readers, rightly dividing the word of truth, so
that they might walk according to truth rather than according to the
psychological wisdom of the world. We also pray that pastors who read this
analysis will do this work ahead of time so that their messages will be pure
and holy, uncontaminated with the psychological wisdom of man.
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Other related posts:
- » [geocentrism] Psychoheresy in the Pulpit
