Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Social Activism and Psychology

Dave...

Member
by Warren Throckmorton, PhD
Is Psychology Losing Its Way?
December 22, 2005 12:39 PM EST

http://www.theconservativevoice.com./ar ... l?id=10963

A recent book edited by eminent psychologists Rogers Wright and Nicholas Cummings delivers a stunning indictment of the mental health professions. Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm documents and critiques the ascent of social activism over open-minded scientific inquiry and quality mental health care in the current mental health establishment. This book is a must-read for anyone who cares about mental health care in this country.

The book casts a critical eye on much of the social activism of the psychological and psychiatric professional associations over the past thirty years. However, Drs. Wright and Cummings cannot be dismissed as disgruntled conservatives. Their deeds validate their claim to be “lifelong liberal activists.†For instance, while president of the American Psychological Association, Dr. Cummings supported the development of the first task force championing the mental health needs of gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

In addition to being personally involved in social activism, the authors have been keen and pragmatic observers of the mental health professions over the past 40 years. My own contact with Nick Cummings made a lasting impact on me. I first met Dr. Cummings in 1986 when American Biodyne, the first real managed behavioral health care company in America, came to Ohio as a manager of the state employee behavioral health care program. I just started my counseling private practice in Portsmouth, Ohio, and wanted to get on board the managed care train. Biodyne did something very novel for a managed care company: all therapists in the preferred network were required to be trained by the company leaders, including the president and founder, Nick Cummings. In all my years of education, both in school and post-grad, I have never listened to a better trainer than Nick Cummings. He believed mental health therapy could be a powerful influence in a person's life but it was never to be used to gratify the therapist or to promote a political agenda. That same theme permeates this book. Drs. Cummings and Wright believe that modern psychology has been overthrown by forces of social activism and as a consequence faces irrelevance.

As one example, Cummings and Wright demonstrate how political support for gay activism has led to stifling of client self-determination. Consider this quote from the book regarding sexual identity therapy:

"In the current climate, it is inevitable that conflict arises among the various subgroups in the marketplace. For example, gay groups within the APA [American Psychological Association] have repeatedly tried to persuade the association to adopt ethical standards that prohibit therapists from offering psychotherapeutic services designed to ameliorate "gayness" on the basis that such efforts are unsuccessful and harmful to the consumer.
Psychologists who do not agree are termed homophobic. Such efforts are especially troubling because they abrogate the patient's right to choose the therapist and determine therapeutic goals. They also deny the reality of data demonstrating that psychotherapy can be effective in changing sexual preferences in patients who have a desire to do so." (From the introduction, page xxx).

Sexual identity therapy is not the only political hot potato tackled by the authors. They demonstrate how politically correct posturing can serve to obscure research findings. For instance, co-editor Wright cites research by Cummings suggesting that positive male figures in the lives of children are significantly related to a decrease in the number of children requiring medication for behavior problems. However, he laments that such research results are frequently stifled or even dismissed because they offend feminist sensibilities.

Drs. Wright and Cummings express concern over the professional consequences of psychology’s misadventures into social activism. They paint a picture of psychologists being unable to support themselves as psychologists because the profession has become enamored with producing position statements about social change. Mental health care in America is adequate but barely so. Any practicing counselor knows how difficult it is to find quality services anywhere outside of the metropolitan areas of this country. Cummings and Wright predict that psychology’s preoccupation with social activism threatens to make it irrelevant as a force for quality and affordable health care for all people.

So how is the current leadership of the APA reacting to the critique of Cummings and Wright? Not well. It appears the former APA luminaries are getting a cold shoulder from the current leadership. At a recent meeting of National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, Dr. Wright noted that the APA adopted a "strategic decision not to respond" to their book to avoid giving it undue attention. Furthermore, the APA initially prohibited its member-publications from even reviewing the book. Observed Dr. Wright: "So much for diversity and open-mindedness."


In my opinion, the current APA leadership will ignore these warnings at their peril. When it comes to trends in mental health care, Nick Cummings has rarely been wrong in his predictions. I don't think he is wrong this time.

Warren Throckmorton, PhD is an Associate Professor of Psychology and Fellow for Psychology and Public Policy in the Center for Vision and Values at Grove City (PA) College. Dr. Throckmorton is past-president of the American Mental Health Counselors Association and is the producer of the documentary, I Do Exist about sexual orientation change. His columns have been published by over 80 newspapers nationwide and can be contacted through his website at http://www.drthrockmorton.com.

Warren Throckmorton, PhD
http://www.warrenthrockmorton.com
 
Sexual identity therapy is not the only political hot potato tackled by the authors. They demonstrate how politically correct posturing can serve to obscure research findings. For instance, co-editor Wright cites research by Cummings suggesting that positive male figures in the lives of children are significantly related to a decrease in the number of children requiring medication for behavior problems. However, he laments that such research results are frequently stifled or even dismissed because they offend feminist sensibilities.

When I read this article, I see how man can become so distant from God while we seek our own solutions to our own problems.. It is through this distance that allows the politically correct view to continue to propagate not only in out society, but through our communities, churches and families as well.

I realize what I'm about to post is a farce, but then again, are we on this road?

INFANT DISCOVERED IN BARN, CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES LAUNCH PROBE

Nazareth Carpenter Being Held On Charges Involving Underage Mother

Bethlehem, Judea - Authorities were today alerted by a concerned citizen who noticed a family living in a barn. Upon arrival, Family Protective Service personnel, accompanied by police, took into protective care an infant child named Jesus, who had been wrapped in strips of cloth and placed in a feeding trough by his 14-year old mother, Mary of Nazareth.

During the confrontation, a man identified as Joseph, also of Nazareth, attempted to stop the social workers. Joseph, aided by several local shepherds and some unidentified foreigners, tried to forestall efforts to take the child, but were restrained by the police.

Also being held for questioning are three foreigners who allege to be wise men from an eastern country. The INS and Homeland Security officials are seeking information about these who may be in the country illegally. A source with the INS states that they had no passports, but were in possession of gold and other possibly illegal substances. They resisted arrest saying that they had been warned by God to avoid officials in Jerusalem and to return quickly to their own country. The chemical substances in their possession will be tested.

The owner of the barn is also being held for questioning. The manager Bethlehem Inn faces possible revocation of his license for violating health and safety regulations by allowing people to stay in the stable. Civil authorities are also investigating the zoning violations involved in maintaining livestock in a commercially-zoned district.

The location of the minor child will not be released, and the prospect for a quick resolution to this case is doubtful. Asked about when Jesus would be returned to his mother, a Child Protective Service spokesperson said, "The father is middle-aged and the mother definitely underage. We are checking with officials in Nazareth to determine what their legal relationship is.

Joseph has admitted taking Mary from her home in Nazareth because of a census requirement. However, because! she was obviously pregnant when they left, investigators are looking into other reasons for their departure. Joseph is being held without bond on charges of molestation, kidnapping, child endangerment, and statutory rape.

Mary was taken to the Bethlehem General Hospital where she is being examined by doctors. Charges may also be filed against her for endangerment. She will also undergo psychiatric evaluation because of her claim that she is a virgin and that the child is from God.

The director of the psychiatric wing said, "I don't profess to have the right to tell people what to believe, but when their beliefs adversely affect the safety and well-being of others - in this case her child - we must consider her a danger to others. The unidentified drugs at the scene didn't help her case, but I'm confidant that with the proper therapy regiment we can get her back on her feet."

A spokesperson for ! the governor's office said, "Who knows what was going through their heads? But regardless, their treatment of the child was inexcusable, and the involvement of these others frightening. There is much we don't know about this case, but for the sake of the child and the public, you can be assured that we will pursue this matter to the end."
 
Stovebolts said:
When I read this article, I see how man can become so distant from God while we seek our own solutions to our own problems.. It is through this distance that allows the politically correct view to continue to propagate not only in out society, but through our communities, churches and families as well.

Excellently said! and very delicately put!




Now, for my harsh but stark truth in regards to these hole in the head researchers and the whole psychology profession as it has developed since it's inception! 8-)


Consider this quote from the book regarding sexual identity therapy:

"In the current climate, it is inevitable that conflict arises among the various subgroups in the marketplace. For example, gay groups within the APA [American Psychological Association] have repeatedly tried to persuade the association to adopt ethical standards that prohibit therapists from offering psychotherapeutic services designed to ameliorate "gayness" on the basis that such efforts are unsuccessful and harmful to the consumer.
Psychologists who do not agree are termed homophobic. Such efforts are especially troubling because they abrogate the patient's right to choose the therapist and determine therapeutic goals. They also deny the reality of data demonstrating that psychotherapy can be effective in changing sexual preferences in patients who have a desire to do so." (From the introduction, page xxx).

That's like telling a necromaniac that it's okay to do what they are doing!
Or any of these people in some abnormal and manic states of mentality, that it's okay to do what they are doing , as long as they are comfortable in the choice they made!
Or that telling a whore that it's okay to do what they are doing!
Or even like telling an adulterer that it's okay to do what they are doing!
Or a a person who loves to do perverse things with animals that it's okay to do what they are doing! There have been recent stories about a person who actually married his pet snake! How sick is that!!!!!


So what now? Is the one who is in the field of psychology going to be restricted in giving any "constructive" therapy at all? :-?

I'm telling you, the psychology field has become so corrupt! The only thing they are allowed to do these days is to tell the person things like "If that's what you want then you have to learn how to be comfortable with your choices. "
These days, the so called therapist has no other options but to accept what was considered "abnormal" and destructive behavior as that which is considered as being "normal" for the sick minded person!
It is all because of political correctness! Not because of what is in "absolute truth", " without denying the truth" considered good and healthy for your mental and physical well being, or not! The minds of men have become so corrupt that the corrupt is being forced upon us as a thing that is "normal". It is pure Perversion! Even the person who commits to the act of adultery is told to learn how to be "comfortable" with the choices they made. The psychologist has no rights to tell the person to stop unless the patient shows some signs of wanting to stop! What a crock of garbage! this form of therapy has become! I've said it in other posts, I'll say it again. The psychologist's these days don't know squat!


Sexual identity therapy is not the only political hot potato tackled by the authors. They demonstrate how politically correct posturing can serve to obscure research findings.

Shocking! Just utterly shocking! So now research is being interfered with! As if history doesn't prove what has already been proven! History is our greatest teacher in proving the truth of consequences and that it cannot be and will not be altered! And these so called "researchers" think they are going to discover some "New way of modifying behavior" ? !!!!


suggesting that positive male figures in the lives of children are significantly related to a decrease in the number of children requiring medication for behavior problems. However, he laments that such research results are frequently stifled or even dismissed because they offend feminist sensibilities.

Anybody with half a brain could tell you that a broken up family will produce children with having to go through some severe emotional and mental adjustments they would then need to go through! Children are not immune to the horrors of the consequences of corruption! It is the balanced family that God wills for us all, and that includes both male and female parents, not separate from each other and not sames sex parents! Corruption of God's "holy" will for us will end up in unholy consequences! And any women , or man, who doesn't fess up to the fact that a family needs both parents in order to bring a healthy balance in the family, has a few screws loose themselves! Feminine sensibilities!!! Hog wash! this political correctness!!!!!
These so called" researchers" are the ones who need their brains examined to see how many holes they have in them!

When the secular world comes to see that God is the ruler of all things both material and spiritual, they will come to respect the rule of order in all things and not continue to try and alter what God deems as being His absolute truth and law or order.
There is no new thing under the sun. And the bible, along with other documents of history show this over and over again! History keeps proving truth vs. corruption over and over again! Even the human emotional well being is repeatedly shown to them through history, that when corruption is the ingredient they live by, the consequences will be perversion of health! When are they going to get it?

Deny God and you thereby deny health!
A healthy person, a healthy society, a healthy world!
How simple can it be?

These people just don't get it do they? :sad


.

Galatians 5:19-21
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.


Romans 6:6
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.



.
 
I know this guy personally. He's a good guy and his heart is in the right place with helping other people, but sadly, we disagree on this one... Although there is truth in what he says, it does not define what Evil is, rather it enables evil to propogate under an innoncent assumption.

http://www.aboutcrutcher.com

Isabella posted this thoughtful letter on Crutcher's Guestbook on June 10, 2005. His complete response is posted right below it. Length barriers in the Guestbook program would not allow for the full text to be posted there.

ISABELLA'S LETTER:

I loved your new book called The Sledding Hill. It made me think alot about alot of stuff. I especially loved the girl named Montana, because she was very interesting and had a lot of secret problems that she didn't tell anyone about. I also liked how Eddie was always there for his friend even after he died. I do want to ask a question about something that the character Eddie says when he is dead in the middle of the book. He ays there is not a difference between good and evil. Is this something that you believe? It didn't make sense to me when I thought about those evil men who flew those planes into the Twin Towers to kill all those innocent people. Then I thought about the people in those buildings who helped to rescue others instead of getting out fast themselves. Those people were good, I think. Do you really think there is no difference?

CRUTCHER'S RESPONSE:


I think we have to be very careful throwing those words around. When I was a little kid and my father showed me his bombing strike pictures from World War II in which he was a bomber pilot, I asked if he could tell who all he was hitting with his bombs and he said no. That was the first time I understood that there were likely little German kids down there who may not have liked Hitler one bit, who were getting killed because of my dad's bombs. Was he evil? I'll bet he was to those kids and their mothers.

There is still some argument as to whether or not it was okay to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of that same war. Many people think we could have blown one of those bombs off in an unpopulated area to show the Japanese what they would do. We killed hundreds of times more people with those bombs than were killed in the World Trade Centers, and some of them were American prisoners of war. Were we evil? Or were the Japanese evil for having bombed Pearl Harbor in the first place?

What about what's going on in Guantanamo Bay now? Are we evil for treating those people so harshly when only a few of them are proven enemy combatants, or are they evil for being connected to the mid-east?

My point is that good and bad, or good and evil, are relative terms, and they are also terms of perspective?

Here's another real dilemma: Random chance alone will tell you that there were at least a few kids who felt some relief when their relative disappeared in that bombing because of how that person was treating them. In a group of three thousand + people you will find some sexual molesters, some dangerous abusers, some wife beaters, some drug addicts, etc. etc. etc. Are the people who feel that relief evil because they are happy they don't have to be treated that way any more?

DON'T GET ME WRONG, there are all kinds of acts that I think humans shouldn't have to endure but labeling them good and evil takes the true complexity of life out of the equation. So in that regard I do think there is no good or bad. That is not to say there aren't things you want to prevent because for people you love or yourself, and it doesn't mean you shouldn't be passionate for what you stand for, but it means it's kind of lazy to simply define things as good and bad and operate out of those definitions.
 
DON'T GET ME WRONG, there are all kinds of acts that I think humans shouldn't have to endure but labeling them good and evil takes the true complexity of life out of the equation. So in that regard I do think there is no good or bad. That is not to say there aren't things you want to prevent because for people you love or yourself, and it doesn't mean you shouldn't be passionate for what you stand for, but it means it's kind of lazy to simply define things as good and bad and operate out of those definitions.


No labeling anything as being "good" or "bad"? :o :o :o

----------

And then, you go onto stating "there aren't things you want to prevent because for people you love or yourself, and it doesn't mean you should be passionate for what you stand for.... " :o :o :o

Pray tell Stovebolts, what are these things?
They couldn't be labeled as "good" things, can they? 8-)

-------------

And then, you go onto stating "it's kind of lazy to simply define things as good and bad and operate out of those definitions." :o :o :o :o

Pray tell Stovebolts, Since when it is, as you say, "lazy to define things as good and bad and operate out of those definitions" ?

Pray tell Stovebolts, What are we to use as a definition of what is permissible and what is not? What exactly is the word we are to use to define such things we want to " prevent" because of the people we love or for ourselves? What is the title of this line that one should never cross?

----------

The definition of transgressions are clearly defined in the bible. It has many "descriptions" and the word "bad" is used, as well as "evil" and "sin". I could go on in clearly showing you what is "labeled" as good and or bad or evil in the bible! :-?

Sorry :-? , but those statements of yours make no agreement with the truth of God's definition and description of good , bad, evil, etc. God's word does not say to ignore the truth of what is deemed good or bad, evil or sin. Nor does it say to change the definition or description of it!
Where does it tell us to ignore the truth of the definition of these things and to stop speaking out about the truth of a behavior, be it good or bad, evil or not?


What is your point? You make none and neither does Dr. Crutcher who states that " My point is that good and bad, or good and evil, are relative terms, and they are also terms of perspective?"

Of course they are terms that should be kept in perspective! :roll:
But we are to NEVER! change the definition of terms nor are we to deny the truth of consequences of actions by turning our backs on the truth of consequences, just because it is politically incorrect to do so! Thereby, allowing people to commit to the sins and reap the consequences of the seeds they sow. Enabling sin to continue is NOT what God wills for us!

Social activism, feminine sensitivity(in the sense it is depicted in the article) , and political correctness have nothing to do with the Truth of the consequences that result from the action taken. What they do have to do with is the perversion of truth!

God's Holy Word teaches the truth of consequences throughout history, But people, those without ears, and eyes to see from a Godly perspective, continue to ignore the lessons the Holy word of God teaches from generation to generation. They ignore the truth and attempt to alter the truth of definition of terms or alter the severity of the action being taken. They mock Godly principals and precepts and are of the worldly. They are not of the Holy spirit that Christ Jesus calls us to take on. They deny the cross and the meaning of it. They deny the lessons we learn from the words of Jesus in his saying, in Luke 9:23 and Matthew 16:24 and Mark 8:34. They deny taking up their own cross, they have no idea what it means to sacrifice their sins and give them up! To nail them to the cross. They in turn, deny God. They insist that sin has no effect on their lives and they insist that the consequences are null and void, by claiming grace is their key out of giving up sin. When in fact! Grace is given only to those who REPENT! and call out to God for salvation FROM sin. Not TO sin. But FROM sin. They have it all messed up and pervert the truth of what it means to GO and SIN NO MORE! These people deny God by enabling sin to continue!

Hence, accusing those who quote truth of God's "Holy" word, of being homophobic and prejudice.
Hence, accusing those who quote truth of God's Word, of being insensitive to the so called feminine movement. Hence :-?

Why do you think there is such a movement these days to eliminate Christian principals from the schools, from the mental health field, from the laws of government, off the face of the earth?

Because "Christ" is truth! And those who want to pervert and continue in sin, evil, bad things, do not want this truth to be thrown in front of them!
So health official and others, are forced to accommodate the so called social liberties of the secular society! and redefine what was deemed "normal". They are now faced with having to eliminate the truth of the word. And call whatever is normal to you is normal. They are strictly secular in their thinking!

Makes no difference if God uses evil to serve his purpose. The point is that God's word is to be taken as means for sinners to come to Repentance from sin, evil, bad. The point is that we are called to preach the gospel of Christ to all sinners. The point is that those who ignore sin and try to ignore the truth of what defines a "bad", or "evil" thing, are in opposition to the Holy Word of God. We are not called to enable sinners. We are called to preach the gospel of Christ Jesus. And Jesus did not enable sinners! Luke 9:23 and Matthew 16:24 and Mark 8:34!



So again,
There is no new thing under the sun. And the bible, along with other documents of history show this over and over again! History keeps proving truth vs. corruption over and over again! Even the human emotional well being is repeatedly shown to them through history, that when corruption is the ingredient they live by, the consequences will be perversion of health! When are they going to get it?

Deny God and you thereby deny health!
A healthy person, a healthy society, a healthy world!
How simple can it be?

These people just don't get it do they?

Galatians 5:19-21
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.


Romans 6:6
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

.

WE are all called to Repentance!
We are not called to "enable" sin to continue!

Not one of us is excluded of this calling!


.

======================
 
Relic,
ummmm.... can I clarify something real quick? :oops:

Stovebolts said:
I know this guy personally. He's a good guy and his heart is in the right place with helping other people, but sadly, we disagree on this one... Although there is truth in what he says, it does not define what Evil is, rather it enables evil to prorogate under an innocent assumption.

www.aboutcrutcher.com AKA Chris Crutcher (CC) said:

Relic said:
And then, you go onto stating

Perhaps it was in my err of not making a social call condemning my friend in this matter. Because I do not condemn him, but rather discern his words, do his words therefore become mine? BTW, my name is Jeff, and thank you for not calling me Steve as so many in the past have. :wink:

As an opening statement, let me just say that there is a clear line between right and wrong, good and bad, evil and righteousness. The fact is, good and bad are aspects of our lives that nobody can escape on a permanent basis until the day we are reconciled to God.

Now, I'll leave the condemning to God and if you please, feel free to condemn CC’s words if you are so compelled. As for me, I know where I stand and I happen to disagree what Chris views as evil and part of his position on the matter. However, let me please state a few other aspects if I may for there is much truth in his ideology.

Let us also keep in mind that Chris Crutcher is not a professed Christian, may God have mercy on his soul. However, he does have a spiritual belief that I know very little of, but do know of from inference none the less. Now, if you may be so kind, please hear me out.

There is much work to be done and each of us are called for a specific purpose. As from a Christian view, Chris and I differ in opinion in a few areas, but there are many areas that we do agree on that just happen to be Christian views. Is it true then that God will judge us from our hearts and if so, will love really cover a multitude of sins? I boldly testify that what Chris does, comes from his heart as he earnestly cares for others more than himself and happens to have the works to testify for him in the matter. Again, do I agree with all of his words? Certainly not. So tell me Relic, does one need to be a Christian to do good deeds and if so, as a Christian are we therefore exempt from doing wrong? Furthermore, does a wrong view or opinion nullify ones good works and cancel all of the good things that one may do? Or, are we simply wretched beings that can do nothing good on our own and must have Christ in us to do anything good. If this is truly the case, then is God truly omnipresent or is he only in His elect, and by what measure of faith will we stand before God’s throne?

Just what is my point to all of this anyway? Life is a gift from God and God does not change, nor does he go back on his promise.
Deuteronomy 32:39 See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god besides me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.

Good things happen to bad people and God really is in control.
Romans 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

So often, we are so quick to judge and condemn. We look at something that we see as wrong, but instead of actually trying to understand it, we get scared, bullheaded and out of our own righteousness, we build ourselves up on the folly of others.
Romans 2:1 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whosoever you are that judge: for in what you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you that judge do the same things.

Please, read chapter one and you should find my statement in context.

Romans 2:2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them who commit such things.

Chris Crutcher said:
DON'T GET ME WRONG, there are all kinds of acts that I think humans shouldn't have to endure but labeling them good and evil takes the true complexity of life out of the equation.

First, I think you 'Got Him Wrong'... but let me say this as far as the complexity goes...

Romans 11:33-36 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who has known the mind of the Lord? or who has been his counselor? Or who has first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory forever. Amen.

If it were not for Pauls words, would you realize that the grace we (gentiles) received was through the stumbling and disbelief of the Jews? God's chosen people? So, I beg you to answer, was it a good thing that the Jews rejected Christ? Or was it a Bad thing? While were thinking of this, was it a good thing that Christ was crucified or a bad thing?

While were at it, was it a good thing that the first born in Egypt were slain by the angel of the lord? Was it a bad thing that God hardened pharaoh’s heart? May I present that sometimes on the surface, things that seem bad, might actually be good? The question therefore becomes, are we obeying and trusting? Is it our hope, or the hope of the Lord?

CC said:
So in that regard I do think there is no good or bad.

And from that regard, I would agree. Now, I know that Chris has no idea of the scriptures I have posted, but I'll bet that if he and I sat around a cup of coffee, the essence and principal would be the same. So I offer from my post, is it the mechanics or the principal?

CC said:
but it means it's kind of lazy to simply define things as good and bad and operate out of those definitions.

And from the context, I'd have to agree. You see, God has created each and every one of us differently and we have experienced different things in life. Is the act of hitting someone bad or is it good? Would the answer not be dependent upon the situation? Let’s say a simple version of child abuse. It's pretty safe to say that hitting would be a bad thing, agreed? What about defending yourself. Like somebody doing a 'bad' thing like trying to rape you. Would hitting back therefore be justified while remaining a bad thing? Just what defines bad or does this not require justification and if is so, would not discernment become a valued factor to define what is righteous? If hitting is bad, then is it good if your hits succeed in warding of a molester? So, is bad still black and good still white? No, we must be able to discern because if we can’t, then we show no mercy and we condemn those who desperately need the hope that comes through Christ Jesus. The way I see it, this is wickedness and regardless if were talking about the abused or the abuser, they both need Christ in the same measure. Now, for me salvation = Christ = happiness because of grace. For Chris, I’m sure that salvation = freedom from torment because of release and he cares as much for the abuser, as he does the abused.

You see, IN SOME CASES, we need to be careful what we call good, and what we call bad but in all cases, as Christians, we know that ALL THINGS work for the good that love the Lord and this simply put, is our hope through Christ Jesus that one day, we will spend eternity with Him. Now, just to clarify, this position does not negate good from bad, evil from righteousness, but rather calls for discernment, endurance and hope, for as it is described in Romans 9, Therefore has he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardens.

Relic said:
Of course they are terms that should be kept in perspective!
But we are to NEVER! change the definition of terms nor are we to deny the truth of consequences of actions by turning our backs on the truth of consequences, just because it is politically incorrect to do so! Thereby, allowing people to commit to the sins and reap the consequences of the seeds they sow. Enabling sin to continue is NOT what God wills for us!

Absolutly. I am in agreement but the reality remains that sin is a fact of this lifetime so it really isn’t a matter of enabling sin, but rather it becomes a matter of how I view and act upon that sin because simply put, how I view that sin will determine how I respond to that sin (or sinner) because it is this view that we hold, that will either continue in that sin, promote that sin, or repent from that sin. Since I seem to be on the defense here, lets quickly look at this word Enabling, for it is an abused buzz word out and about here and there. If I am lost in my sins and therefore cannot see the truth, have I enabled sin to continue or have I been deceived by sin? Let me first ask you, what is sin and were we not slaves to sin? Is not the wages of sin death and did not Christ die that we might be made alive and clothed in Christ therby being freed from death’s grasp and if this be so, are we free from sin’s grasp? Furthermore, if I have been deceived by sin, by whom have I been deceived by and for what purpose? Be careful how you answer this, for Paul (Saul) was deceived by sin to do glorious things in Christ. Which brings me to this point. Does sin condemn us or do we condemn ourselves through our sin?

Anyway… I’ve just opened up a box and I can’t believe I’ve barely scratched the surface and that I’ve spent this much time at home, the day before Christmas on this computer. Please, allow me this if you will.

I do not advocate psychology nor do I approve of psychiatry. That being said, I know that it has helped many and it has harmed many. From a fleshly perspective, I hate both institutions for the pretense in which they earnestly stand, for there is no salvation outside of Christ and that is why in psychology, one is a survivor living with earned coping skills, but in Christ, you are truly set free. If I allowed myself, I could swallow myself up in the hatred I have toward the institution. Unfortunately, if I were to give into my fleshly desires and bask in the false power that that kind of hatred deceives us with, I would be consumed by my own greed toward power and righteousness and therefore, would loose the human, case by case, person by person, opportunity by opportunity to preach the word of Christ to those who have not heard.

Lastly, I am reminded of the story of David when he was fleeing Jerusalem and a member of the tribe of Benjamin was cursing David and David says, if God has told him to curse me, then who am I to say to him to stop? If you disagree with what I have written, then so be it. I have stated what is on my heart.

I would be interested in your response, but please know that I probably won't have the time to respond, as I have not fully responded to your last post.

May peace be with you.

Jeff
 
Oy. I'll have to come back after I've had time to read and reply to your post.

Jeff, It was difficult to determine if the last part of that post, where it said, "DON'T GET ME WRONG" were your words or the words of Dr. Crutcher. I should have asked you if they were your words or not before I placed your "Stovebolts" Tag in front of my comments to you in those regards, Sorry about that.

I will read what you wrote, and get back afterward.




[edited]

.
 
Hey Relic,
No problem... I should have put CC's response in a quote. I can see how you could have thought that some of his words were mine.

To be honest, my post has been bugging me anyway... The discernment part anyway. It's somewhat convoluted and in reading it, I almost make it sound like I'm justifying right and wrong with through discernment.

A book called "A Call for Discernment" written by Jay E. Adams clarify's the word Discernment from a biblical perspective.

Jay E. Adams writes: said:
There are two principal terms in the Bible for discernment: the Hebrew word bin and the Greek diakrino. Both, in etymology and usage are similar.
The Hebrew term bin, which is used 247 times in the Old Testament, has been translated in various ways- 'understand, discern, distinguish." It is related to the noun bayin, which means "interval" or "space between," and the preposition ben, "between." In essence it means to separate thngs from one another at their points of difference in order to distinguish them. It refrers to the process by which one comes to know or understand God's thoughts and ways through separating those things that differ. Discernment is skill in reaching understanding and knowledge by the use of a process of separation.

Simply put, as your aware, sin seperates us from God and really, you did and excelent job in seperating truth, from the politically correct.

Relic said:
Why do you think there is such a movement these days to eliminate Christian principals from the schools, from the mental health field, from the laws of government, off the face of the earth?

Because people are moving away from God and the church isn't disciplining like it should. Instead, if you don't like what one church is preaching, just find another one that can tickle your ear. To be honest, it makes me sick how 'christians' can on one hand go to church and read their bibles, then go see a psychologist to 'help' them with their problems. What angers me even more, is how a 'church' or a professed 'christian' like James Dobson will be the first to send somebody to a 'professional' and how that 'professional' is integrated INTO the church.

Just to clarify, because one can justify or understand how something works, doesn't make it right. We still need to discern (seperate right from wrong) and sadly, we've been fooled and deceived. Here's what Moses had to say about the matter.

Deuteronomy 13:1-4 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and gives you a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke unto you, and he says, Let us go after other gods, which you have not known, and let us serve them; You shall not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and you shall serve him, and cleave unto him.


Relic said:
Makes no difference if God uses evil to serve his purpose. The point is that God's word is to be taken as means for sinners to come to Repentance from sin, evil, bad. The point is that we are called to preach the gospel of Christ to all sinners. The point is that those who ignore sin and try to ignore the truth of what defines a "bad", or "evil" thing, are in opposition to the Holy Word of God. We are not called to enable sinners. We are called to preach the gospel of Christ Jesus. And Jesus did not enable sinners! Luke 9:23 and Matthew 16:24 and Mark 8:34!

And for the sake of a long reply, I agree 100%. I suppose the only thing I would add is that when the serpent coaxed Eve into eating the forbidden fruit, what she (and Adam) gained through 'Experience', could have simply been gained through hearing and obeying. It all comes back to God's Word huh?
 
Back
Top