Christianity and Psychology: 5 views

This weekend, I attended an excellent symposium, Christianity and Psychology: Five Views. Representatives from each of five major schools of thought in “Christian psychology” shared their approach. Although billed as a psychology conference, it was really more of philosophy of science, or even philosophy of religion and science, conference. Diverse perspectives were offered by Warren Brown of Fuller Seminary (levels-of-explanation), Stanton Jones of Wheaton College (integration), Paul Watson of UT Chattanooga (Christian Psychology), John Coe of Rosemead School of Psychology (Transformational Psychology), and Dave Powlison of Westminster Theological Seminary (Biblical Counseling). A panel discussion between them concluded the weekend.

I took something away from each of the presenters. Dr Brown, for example, spoke of a “compassionate ministry,” a great model for his work in neuropsychology and something I hope to bring to my practice. John Coe pointed back to the history of science and asked whether what is currently being done in psychology is “science” in the historic sense of the word. Dave Powlison was, well, Dave Powlison. If I were to pick someone from the group as my counselor, Powlison would be the guy. Hands down.

As the men each had different views about interpreting psychology, they also had different views on interpreting scripture. Perhaps why I liked Dr Powlison so much (and Drs Jones and Coe, to an extent) was his high view of scripture. It was apparent that to them, scripture was supreme.

Conversely, Dr Brown seemed to hold a high view of science and a low view of scripture. From this perspective, science is supreme in understanding people and scripture offers little. Dr Brown stated that exegesis faces many obstacles and that people may arrive at different interpretations based upon history, faith tradition, and so forth. I am not sure he would apply the same standard to science.

I believe that the Bible is God’s word to his people, not only historically to the nation of Israel, but throughout the ages. I believe that His word is inspired, sufficient, and inerrant. If there are difficulties to be dealt with in exegesis, I think there is no more important task that we can undertake. Saying that Biblical interpretation is fraught with difficulties and then not engaging in it because it is not a part of science seems counterintuitive in working with people. Knowing God, through his general and special revelation, is supremely important. We should desire to understand the Bible in its original context and how it applies to us today.