AssemblyBoard

Folks,

The other day I was in the Buena Park library.  As I looked over the shelf of new books, I spotted the name Phillip Zimbardo.  My interest was piqued immediately. 

As I have done more reading on cults and mind control in the past few years the name Phillip Zimbardo has come up many times.  He has been the president of the American Psychological Association, a researcher in his field, a college professor, (Stanford), and an author of several books.

In 1971 he conducted an experiment at Stanford.  A group of typical college students was selected, then divided into two sub-groups.  One group was designated "guards", and the other was designated, "prisoners".  The subjects were then placed in a facility where their conduct was monitored constantly by cameras.

The guards quickly bacame abusive, and then the prisoners became rebellious, and then depressed.  The experiment was supposed to run for two weeks.  After one week the monitors became so alarmed that they called it off! What had happened was that their was a prison rebellion with barricaded doors and attempts to break them down.  When interviewed the "guards" testified that they had rapidly come to hate the prisoners, and vice versa.

In this book Zimbardo uses what was learned in this experiment to shed light on many incidents in history including the Abu Graib, (sp?) prison abuse scandal.  He concludes that in just about any group of people there are factors present in human personalities that can be activated by placing the person in the right conditions.

I think that this goes a long way to explain the way the assembly leadership developed and behaved, as well as the response of those subject to their influence.  Increasing abusiveness producing rebellion, (I'm outa here), and depression, (I wish I were outa here but I can't bring myself to make the break), followed by depression caused illness.

By showing that these possibilities are present in all of us, it seems to me that Zimbardo has unintentionally shed light on the question of how Christians can do such things.  We do not shed human nature the day we are born again. So,the right conditions can trigger these tendencies unless we "have our senses excercised to discern good and evil" and the spiritual strength to excerise enough courage to stand against the crowd.

Below, I have copied an editorial review:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Book Description
What makes good people do bad things? How can moral people be seduced to act immorally? Where is the line separating good from evil, and who is in danger of crossing it?

Renowned social psychologist Philip Zimbardo has the answers, and in The Lucifer Effect he explains how–and the myriad reasons why–we are all susceptible to the lure of “the dark side.” Drawing on examples from history as well as his own trailblazing research, Zimbardo details how situational forces and group dynamics can work in concert to make monsters out of decent men and women.

Zimbardo is perhaps best known as the creator of the Stanford Prison Experiment. Here, for the first time and in detail, he tells the full story of this landmark study, in which a group of college-student volunteers was randomly divided into “guards” and “inmates” and then placed in a mock prison environment. Within a week the study was abandoned, as ordinary college students were transformed into either brutal, sadistic guards or emotionally broken prisoners.

By illuminating the psychological causes behind such disturbing metamorphoses, Zimbardo enables us to better understand a variety of harrowing phenomena, from corporate malfeasance to organized genocide to how once upstanding American soldiers came to abuse and torture Iraqi detainees in Abu Ghraib. He replaces the long-held notion of the “bad apple” with that of the “bad barrel”–the idea that the social setting and the system contaminate the individual, rather than the other way around.

This is a book that dares to hold a mirror up to mankind, showing us that we might not be who we think we are. While forcing us to reexamine what we are capable of doing when caught up in the crucible of behavioral dynamics, though, Zimbardo also offers hope. We are capable of resisting evil, he argues, and can even teach ourselves to act heroically. Like Hannah Arendt’s Eichmann in Jerusalem and Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate, The Lucifer Effect is a shocking, engrossing study that will change the way we view human behavior.

About the Author
Philip Zimbardo is professor emeritus of psychology at Stanford University and has also taught at Yale University, New York University, and Columbia University. He is the co-author of Psychology and Life and author of Shyness, which together have sold more than 2.5 million copies. Zimbardo has been president of the American Psychological Association and is now director of the Stanford Center on Interdisciplinary Policy, Education, and Research on Terrorism. He also narrated the award-winning PBS series Discovering Psychology, which he helped create. In 2004, he acted as an expert witness in the court-martial hearings of one of the American army reservists accused of criminal behavior in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. His informative website, www.prisonexperiment.org is visited by millions every year. Visit the author’s personal website at www.zimbardo.com.
----------------------------------------------------------

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

i agree, tom, a very interesting study. i posted some thoughts about this same prisoner study a while ago here: http://www.assemblyboard.com/index.php?topic=1151.0

zimbardo is one of the psychology's most recognized and respected leaders. he did a bunch of video seminars that are used extensively in college classrooms. one of the interesting aspects of the prisoner experiment was how zimbardo himself got caught up in it. even though some of the young men were clearly suffering real psychological damage, he was so blinded by his position of power and excited by what he was observing that he didn't see how unethical it was until his wife harshly took him to task. thats one of the catch-22s of the field - its almost impossible to get interesting results without risk of damaging the subjects.

Zimbardo has made slide show about the experiment.  It is posted on his website at:

http://www.prisonexp.org/

Reading it is unpleasant, but informative.

Tom Maddux

The amazing part to me was when they broke that fat kids glasses first, and then
dropped a boulder on him. "Piggy" didn't deserve that. Oh wait, that's "Lord of the Flies", not the Zimbardo experiment. :P

Just kidding.  But seriously, I remember reading "Lord of the Flies" (as many were required
to do in school) and thinking "Oh come on! People wouldn't turn into savages that quickly!"

Though fictional, and with the result that the kids turned into literal "savages", it makes one wonder. If College students can turn into brutal guards after 6 days, and a professor can be taken in by it also, what really is in the human heart? The Bible says it is "deceitful above all things and desperately wicked".  That is a very enlightening article.

Yes, very interesting indeed!

  "What does this Lucifer factor have to do with the Assembly?", some will surely ask.  The Assembly had no prison walls, guards, or any other physical restraints---- and, "people were free to come and go as they chose."

   "And besides all that, the Assembly was made up of good bible believing servants of God who were maybe just a little bit misguided," some still say to this very day!  "We weren't un-regenerated college kids, or even just regular religious people, and as such were not subject to the same kind of psychological reactions as the unspiritual folks in this study!"

   What do you think?

                                                                                God bless,  Mark C.

Mark,

Zimbardo's point, in his new book, is that this sort of thing has been happening all through history.  The prison experiment and Abu Ghraib are extreme cases, but the tendency is there in all of us.  Parents of the "prisoners" in the experiment came in on visiting day and behaved as if their kids were in a real prison.  When the bogus officials told them their kids were ok, they just believed it and went along...after all, a designated authority figure had told them so.  Only a few subjects or parents ever really kicked up a fuss.

Anyone who has been subjected to the brutal humiliation tactics that the assembly leadership practiced..."gang bang" confrontations, preaching against people without naming them when everyone knew who was being targeted, and more, will understand just how much pressure a person was under.

In addition, one knew that everyone would go along with the leadership's position, and even publicly back them up if asked.  You were in a hopeless bind and there was no one to appeal to.  It was submit or leave.  No other alternatives were available.  You were not physically restrained, but if you had been indoctrinated sufficiently into GG's "church truth" and "Heavenly Vision" you believed there was no where else to go.  So the bonds were mental, but effective nonetheless.

One example, a brother who GG decided should be suppressed was attacked and criticized publicly and privately for a couple of years.  Soon he began showing the signs of stress induced illnesses.  Depression, general weakness and lack of energy, rashes, sleep problems, on and on.  He went out of the assembly the same way I did later on.  He dragged his depressed, broken-hearted, discouraged, sick butt out the back door by withdrawing from contact with 'the saints" until he finally just quit showing up.

The attacks on his character had worked so well that he spent many years feeling that it was his fault!   :o >:( :'(  I had had sweet fellowship with this brother before I ever heard of George Geftakys.  When he heard GG had been exposed it finally dawned on him that it was not his fault, and he is making a good recovery.

The prison was mental....but very real.

Thomas Maddux

Tom,

  I was also wondering about what happened to those that participated in this experiment---it is obvious both groups suffered some damage--- so, did these participants need some therapy in order to recover from the experience?

  I have been out of the Assembly for many years and there are still certain situations where I experience a weird kind of post traumatic reaction.  An example of this happened just the other day when at work I was challenging "the leadership" at work re. a minor alleged rule infraction re. hours logged for the purposes of truck driving (don't ask for the details as it would take several posts to explain). 

   I had to go into a small closed room and sit at a conference table filled with management types all in suits and ties.  I was the odd man out in my shorts, dirty work shirt, 4 o'clock shadow, etc.  Out of no where, my heart started to race and my breathing quickened---- I was feeling extreme anxiety and almost unable to speak!

  Nothing bad happened, and I don't know if anyone noticed, but I think that this experience might hearken back to my Assembly days where I lived for 20 years as  "prisoner" # 123.  It was weird because I almost lost control of my composure and felt an intense desire to escape!

  I believe both the guards and the prisoners (and the Assembly version of these too) were hurt in some way and that those only "escaping" the circumstances would still require some kind of help.  Think of the basic kind of damage that occurs when the conscience is hardened in the guard and on the prisoners part think of the total feeling of powerlessness in the face of abuse! :'(

   As to a Christian in such circumstances as we were in the Assembly:  Is there a way to apply recovery psychologicaly (as the soul was what was broken or turned into a instrument of breaking) and still allow for a person to hold on to their faith?  Better yet, can the two work together to be means of solace and healing?

   Has anyone else had an experience like mine after leaving the group?

                                                                         God Bless,  Mark C.

For a long time, I tensed up whenever a pastor invited me out to lunch.  I always thought I was going to be corrected about something.  After years of this not happening, I started feeling more relaxed.

To this day, my mind still goes completely blank and I lose all strength when confronted by someone who feels more powerful than me.  This is why I consciously decided to never go into management because of this limitation.  For me, I trace it back to my over-brearing and over-controling mother which prepared me to see Assembly dysfunctions as "normal".

Tom 

I read in amazement, these posts concerning the experiment conducted by Phillip Zimbardo,  president of the American Psychological Association.  I was not unduly surprised by the results of the experiment.  I was, however, somewhat taken back by your failure to recognize the protection that a follower of Christ has against succumbing to such Satanic activity.  As Brian stated, “it’s almost impossible to get interesting results without the risk of damaging the subjects.”  That is certainly true for unbelievers, for they are without the protection of the Holy Spirit and become prey to the wiles of Satan who  “prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8).  However,  we are told, “We are of God, little children, and have overcome them [the spirit of the antichrist]; because greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world” (1 John 4:4). 

I would wager that the “typical college students” that professor Zimbardo employed in his experiment were non-Christians or, at best,  nominal Christians.  For, a Christian with any measure of maturity would have recognized the foolhardiness  of participating in any such psychological experiment, except for the purpose of demonstrating the power of Christ over the power of the antichrist.  I find it hard to believe that any mature Christian would be so easily reduced to functioning in the same manner as would a non- believer in the situation.
To attribute the results of this experiment as going “a long way to explain the way the assembly leadership developed and behaved,” seems to indicate that there was a very low level of maturity in those who were in leadership and those who acquiesced to their leading.  For anyone who had even a cursory knowledge of the Scriptures and of their Savior would have eventually recognized that George Geftakys was not a follower of Christ
When we first came under George’s tutelage I was extremely immature in my knowledge of scripture, but as I began to hear his teachings, it began to become more and more apparent that there was something wrong, particularly with his teaching on church leadership.  Initially. it had been exciting to presume that he truly was “God’s man for this age,” but after being subjected to his teaching either directly or through his subordinates, I felt compelled to question his doctrine.  From that point on it was just a matter of time until I realized that I was alone in my convictions and that I wasn’t going to be able to bring about any change.  Oh, the coercion was difficult, but Christ was always there to say, “Stand.”  And eventually He said, “Leave.”   The Word and the Holy Spirit had been my protection. 
I have tried not to be unduly critical of those who remained in fellowship for a long period of time, but I cannot accept the contention that there was an underlying psychological reason for their doing so.  I have asked the question before, but it bears repeating – “Had not George’s immoral conduct been exposed, how many would still be in His Assemblies?” 
How could anyone who studied the scriptures fail to come across 1 Peter 5:2-4, Matthew 20:26-28, and its companion verse in Mark 10:42.

But Jesus called them to Himself and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.
"It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave;  just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many."                                  Matthew 20:26-28

“ shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness;
 nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock.”
   2 Peter 5:2-3

But even if one was totally ignorant of these exhortations, wouldn’t the understanding of Jesus’ attributes have clearly indicated that the authority that George ascribed to leadership in the church was totally incompatible with the teachings of our Lord and Savior?
And by simply observing the double standard that was applied between the saints and the leadership, one could surmise that Jesus would never sanction such hypocritical conduct.  This alone should have been ample warning that the man was a fraud.

So I think we must acknowledge that the reasons that many had for remaining in this man’s Assemblies, were not rooted in any psychological responses, but rather, in a reluctance to step out in faith when doubts arose in their minds

I can’t believe that the leading of the Holy Spirit that prompted me to leave was exclusive, and I’m sure that many others were equally enlightened regarding the man’s un-Christ-like qualities.  It didn’t take a spiritual giant to recognize that he was ill-mannered, insensitive and egotistical, and the adulation he demanded from the saints belied his title of “The Lord’s Servant.”  Whatever factors there may have been for dissuading one from acquiescing to his “lording over” them, I believe we can be too quick to adopt a defensive posture to explain away a failure to even question what had to be obvious discrepancies between George’s teaching and the teachings of Christ. 

"When he puts forth all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice.
 "A stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers." (John 10:4-5)

 Hi Chuck!
  (side note:  I have tried to email you in response to the article of yours re. "The Founding Fathers" that you asked me to respond to, but have received no response.  Do you have a new email address?)

  I think that your "amazement" re. this psychological experiment and rejection of any analogy re. former members of GG's group is understandable----how can any truly regenerated person fall into this kind of psychological manipulation? We have the Holy Spirit in us, and the promises from God that we are victors over the World, Flesh, and the Devil!

  There is a classic misunderstanding among many bible believing Christians called "triumphalism" that assumes our new birth somehow turns us into a super-person that is no longer subject to "psychological" influences.  Followers of GG would call this achieving the status of "Overcomer". 

   While having the Holy Spirit does give us a resource the unsaved do not have --Rom. 8--- in this life we still struggle in our minds re. our fallen humanity---"I do not understand what I do.  For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate to do------" RM 7:13--.   This demonstrates that within the Apostle Paul there was a psychological conflict and it is this human weakness that allows for the kind of failure that many of us experienced in the Assembly.

   Peter demonstrated this weakness (Gal. 2) after Pentecost when he succumbed to the pressure he felt from the big guns from Jerusalem that visited the church at Antioch.  Surely Peter had the Holy Spirit in him and should have been able to respond to the promptings of God vs. the psychological pressures of men---- but, he failed!

   You can call it failure of faith vs. failure of mind, but in Rom. 7 and here (as well as many other places in the NT) it is described as just ol' human weakness that all sinners own, including those saved by grace!  Maybe that is why Jesus mentions the verses you quoted above in warning that leaders in the church not "lord it over" the members as he recognized this harmful social dynamic and it's ability to manipulate our thinking and deceive us.

   I do not believe that the Holy Spirit takes control over our inner lives (psyche) via some hidden power and erradicates all of our human sinful dispositions-- "we know what is right, but we find ourselves failing to do what is right"--- is a fact that works into us probably the most important component of godliness and that is humility ("my grace is sufficient for you").

   As an Assembly member I was very proud of the group, and myself, for I considered myself the opposite of "a nominal believer" whom had acheived a higher status than your normal run-of-the-mill church goer.  One very big lesson that is an advantage for all former members is learning that the above is Laodicean in nature and thoroughly repugnant to our Lord (it makes Jesus sick!).  We, as believers, are just as human as the next guy, and just as subject to psychological manipulation as anyone else, if we come to it with an attitude of "Triumphalism" that believes we are secure in our own higher victorious status that makes us immune to the perils of humanity.

  "Stepping out in faith" is a development of character (read the life of Abraham) and is not some kind of magic possession of our inner life via regeneration that somehow skips the learning process that comes from Rom. 7 real life failures.

                                                                           God Bless,  Mark C.

Chuck,


Actually, Satan's primary tool is deception.  He is the inventor and grand master of deceiving men and women.  George deceived you, me, and lots of other folks, and I do not consider myself or anyone else deception proof.

Cult researchers strongly warn parents and journalists who wish to infiltrate cults to rescue kids or expose them not to do so.  The reason is that even people who place themselves in the cult environment with full knowledge that it is destructive usually end up becoming part of it!   :o

The reason for this is that the mind-control techniques used by cults are both powerful and subtle.  MInd control techinques work, and many Christians have been captured by them.  I do not know if Satan is behind the techniques.  They are based on human nature, and work by activating people's deepest desires and most cherished values.  These things are used as levers to move people into accepting things that go against reason.  A Ronald Enroth said in one of his books, it is amazing just how good Christians are at excusing the sinful behavior that they see in their abusive leaders.


Which, of course is why George and every other cult leader does his recruiting among young, intelligent, idealistic people. This is why they focus their outreach on college campuses.  I was 27 when I met GG, so I should have known better I suppose.  However, I already believed much of what GG taught from my having grown up in the Christian Church/Church of Christ movement, and then having been exposed to Plymouth Brethren teaching.  I believed I had found a man who was sold out for Christ, committed to His word and will, and that I could learn from him.

You must have been around 40 or so when you met him.  Fred Boyer was older than I was also.  Almost everyone else was younger.   How long did you stay?


After a couple of years I began to question his doctine as well.  By that time, however, the influence of Deeper Life teaching on my thinking plus the subtle destruction of my trust in my own ability to discern the truth had made me susceptable to his influence. 

I discussed my problems with his teachings with GG many times.  His answer was always the same: You are depressed and upset Brother Tom, you are not rejoicing. (that was true)  "You have given way to the Devil and have opened your mind to his wiles.  He always opposes the truth, and your are using your carnal mind to try to figure things out instead of allowing yourself to be broken by going the way of the cross so that the wonderful light of Christ can renew your mind."  (Straight out of Watchman Nee's, "The Spiritual Man".)

That worked for years.  I was not alone in my bondage to GG, and in that environment I, and we, were wide open to psychological manipulation.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

Chuck---

You said:

I can’t believe that the leading of the Holy Spirit that prompted me to leave was exclusive, and I’m sure that many others were equally enlightened regarding the man’s un-Christ-like qualities.  It didn’t take a spiritual giant to recognize that he was ill-mannered, insensitive and egotistical, and the adulation he demanded from the saints belied his title of “The Lord’s Servant.”  Whatever factors there may have been for dissuading one from acquiescing to his “lording over” them, I believe we can be too quick to adopt a defensive posture to explain away a failure to even question what had to be obvious discrepancies between George’s teaching and the teachings of Christ. 

"When he puts forth all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice.
 "A stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers." (John 10:4-5)

I would just mention that the Book of Galatians is written to a whole church which knew the voice of Jesus Christ (they had been born-again), yet somehow had been "bewitched" by false teaching. Paul wasn't just writing to immature believers, but to everyone in the church---especially the leaders! They had gone off the right path and were attempting to be sanctified by keeping the law. This church was definitely following "the voice of strangers", though they were true sheep of Jesus Christ.

As Jesus said: "a little leaven leavens the whole lump". The Galatians had slowly been manipulated away from the true Gospel of Jesus--even though they knew his voice! How had that happened?

A boat leaves the dock for a destination. But somehow, someone sets the compass just one degree off course. At first, everything seems fine--the one degree error is not noticeable. But after a time, people begin to feel uneasy as they begin to become aware that something "just isn't right". After traveling some distance they realize they are really far off course---that one degree off at the beginning had been almost unnoticeable, but over time and distance it had led them far from their intended destination!! This is truly the Assembly experience for many--it took time to realize just how far off the teaching was---despite both outward and inward warnings.

As Tom noted, the Devil's greatest weapon is deception. His greatest work is not the full blown cult, but the groups that come so close to appearing real that they fool everyone at first. Of course, we know, that the best counterfeit bill is not the obvious one, but the one that looks so much like a real bill that you are fooled, if you are not exercised to know better. Unbelievers fall for obvious counterfeits, like the Jehovah's Witnesses--believers need a far better counterfeit---one that closesly resembles the true church and true church teachings. But take 90% correct teaching and add 10% leaven and pretty soon the whole lump is leavened. Some say about a false teacher "Oh, most of what he had to say was right on the money!"---yet it is the other 10% of what he taught that did all of the damage---just as the church of Galatia!!! "They shall secretly bring in damnable heresies..."(2 Pet. 2:1) They "sneak" their teachings in slowly, little by little, deceiving the unwary person.

Paul warned the church with tears in Acts 20 that teachers would arise amongst them that would lead many astray. If it were not possible for true sheep to be deceived he would not have bothered to warn them so severely. The Assembly went the way of the Galatian church--God became a Moses/Jesus hybrid whose combined voice of fear and comfort led many into a psychological quagmire---a Catch 22. Both sincerity of heart (the vast majority of people in the Assembly were deeply sincere, true sheep of Jesus), and deep fear kept them frozen.  Fear (from the booming voice of Moses) that they would lose out, and sincerity of heart (because they really loved Jesus Christ) because they sincerely did not want to displease Jesus, and did not want to leave "his best".  This combination lead many after leaving into deep despair--an angry Moses-like voice accusing them of failure and rebellion, and a grieved voice of Jesus asking why they had forsaken "the highest, and best way"? And such is the case with so many groups that are led astray by a false teacher--many lay broken in the aftermath.

Perhaps the Lord allowed this to happen to many so that they would never be fooled by an imitation voice ever again---they would be exercised to know what is REAL and what is FALSE. For when the Lord says that his sheep will not follow the voice of strangers, he is not saying they can never be deceived, but that they will eventually realize their state and return to the voice that loves them so. Again, I believe that is why Paul warns the church so vehemently---the sheep CAN be deceived by a hireling if they are not careful and watchful. "Let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall."

As for a College experiment I would say that Christians are no different than anyone else--they are saved by Grace--but they are sinners with wicked hearts. If one were to get into that situation and follow the flesh I think a Christian could be just as capable of falling into it as anyone. If he had his heart set on the Lord it would be a far different result though--I believe it would be far harder to sway him to be an accomplice of evil.

[continued from above]

People followed George Geftakys because they wanted to follow him.  Men accepted leadership in George’s Assemblies either because they wanted to be leaders or because they, like myself, were too immature to recognize that they didn’t meet the qualifications set forth in the scriptures. George had his own standard for those he chose for leadership.   It had nothing to do with the requirements set forth by the apostle Paul or Titus and everything to do with selecting men that he could control.  In my own case, my being selected was only because of the fact that our little group had been established at my instance and we were meeting in our home. When George came and virtually took control, he recognized that it might not serve to his advantage to exclude me from leadership and that it might cause some disturbance if I were not to be selected.  To guard against that possibility, he moved Jim Hayman to Omaha to maintain that control.  If I sound redundant in my emphasis on “control” it’s because the nature of George’s leadership required absolute control. Those who rebelled against it were coerced into either succumbing or leaving.  I cite this merely to show that there was nothing patently psychological in George’s modus operandi.  He merely chose those he assumed would submit to his authoritative style and would help him to maintain it.  He dealt with those who rebelled against it as the occasion arose.

When it became impossible for me to reconcile with scripture, George’s conduct and his teaching, my first impulse was to try to point it out to others.  When I did, the floodgate was opened and the coercion began.  I don’t remember for one instant, being in doubt as to the course of action I was taking.  Needless to say, the most discouraging aspect of the whole scenario was the actions of my brothers who seemed blinded to the truth and unable to reason rationally.  Was it a “psychological barrier” that made them react in this way?  I don’t think so.  I believe it was a willful decision of each one individually for reasons known only to them and the Lord.  I know for certain that there were some who knew in their hearts that the man was a hypocrite, yet they chose to ignore the obvious and remain silent in my defense.  I’m not suggesting that there wasn’t some deep mental trauma going on in their minds and in their spirit, but it eventually came down to one of two things – following Christ or following George. It was that simple.  For I never attacked George’s character – something the Lord had me forego – but I attacked his teaching and his conduct.  I suppose you can inject some deep-seated psychological basis for their response, but when the whole thing imploded in 2002, none of those who sought our forgiveness pleaded innocence due to the influence of some inner psychological struggle.  They knew and admitted that they had sold out.  Men broken by God have no option but to confess and repent.  And though there was a question about the genuineness of some of the confessions, that is in the Lord’s hands and each will all have his day in His court. 

Mark, you say, “We, as believers, are just as human as the next guy, and just as subject to psychological manipulation as anyone else, if we come to it with an attitude of "Triumphalism" that believes we are secure in our own higher victorious status that makes us immune to the perils of humanity.  Let me put  my own definition on some of the terms you use.

psychological manipulation = temptation
Triumphalism = self confidence
Perils of humanity = sin

I prefer to say, - We, as believers, are just as human as the next guy, and just as subject to temptation as anyone else.  If we have the attitude that we have victory over sin just because we are believers, we are mistaken.  Jesus said, “Keep watching and praying that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41).   We must recognize that we still have a sin nature to deal with, and must depend upon the power of Christ to overcome it.  As Paul said, ““Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?  Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!”  and remember – “No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it” (1 Corinthians 10:13).  Praise be to God!

Paul said, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Philippians 4:13).  But he also said, “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.”  (1 Corinthians 10:12)
We must understand that His grace is sufficient to take us through any temptation, yet we never reach a point in this life when we can say that we have conquered that temptation.   

You can put some psychological spin on it if you desire, but I believe it merely clouds our thinking. 

God bless      Chuck

Mark,

You wrote: , “I do not believe that the Holy Spirit takes control over our inner lives (psyche) via some hidden power and eradicates (sic) all of our human sinful dispositions.”   

 And

“There is a classic misunderstanding among many bible believing Christians called "triumphalism" that assumes our new birth somehow turns us into a super-person that is no longer subject to "psychological" influences.”

It sounds as if you are suggesting that I actually believe this.  But if you will re-read my post you will find that I neither said nor implied such ideas.
I would therefore ask that you refrain from introducing these ideas into our discussion. If you want to rebut this theory called “Triumphalism,” you can initiate another BB Topic, but please don’t interject it into our discussion as if it were something to which I subscribe.

What sets the follower of Christ apart from the unbeliever is grace.  When subjected to these “perils of humanity” (temptations) the follower of Christ can avail himself of the grace of God to provide the way of escape.  The unbeliever has nothing but his feeble will power to rely upon and any “victory” is merely temporary.   

You seem to have totally misunderstood what I said, Mark.   No, I don’t believe our new birth turns us into a “super person that is no longer subject to psychological" influences.”  But I believe that the Holy Spirit gives us protection against those influences.  Yes, Paul talked about his sin nature and the battle between the flesh and the spirit.  So, the battle is real.  But Paul said, “Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?  Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.”  (Romans 7:24-25)

I don’t believe Paul was speaking of some sort of “psychological conflict” but rather, the temptations of the flesh?  And he knew the source of his deliverance from them saying, “No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it. (1 Corinthians 10:13).  No, not a “super person” just one who knew His Savior and the means by which we are to deal with temptations that inevitably beset the follower of Christ. 

Regarding our participation in the Assemblies, however, I believe we have an entirely different set of circumstances, and certainly those circumstances varied from saint to saint.  Coming from different backgrounds, and different stages of spiritual maturity, a bond of unity was formed locally and globally as we gradually accepted the attitude of exclusivity that was subtly introduced by George’s exposition on “God’s having His man for every age.” Admittedly, I myself experienced a certain sense of excitement in contemplating the possibility that our own “Brother George” might actually be that man for the current age.  And having accepted such an awesome premise, it wasn’t difficult to concur with his disdain for the “traditional” churches and their un-scriptural practices, and subsequently to develop one’s own cavalier attitude toward other Christians. To be selected to be a part of the leadership in such an august group merely served to enhance that attitude.   Satan had all the ingredients for a cult led by a man who quite possibly had been duped into believing he actually was God’s man for this age.” 

But God is faithful and He has His own means of exposing those who oppose Him. We may not always understand the “means” nor the timing, but we can be certain that His word is true in that He - “causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose” (Romans 8:28). In retrospect, I can now see how He used it in my own life to teach me some valuable lessons and to draw me closer to Him.

Well, Mark, at this point you’re probably wondering where I’m going with this in relation to how the psychological factors enter into it.   Let me make some observations.

I believe strongly in the fact that the Holy Spirit intervenes in our lives to safeguard us from error, I also believe that, knowing our weaknesses and the sincerity of our heart, He gives us whatever measure of enlightenment is necessary to lead us on the path of righteousness and to overcome these so-called “psychological barriers.” And may I suggest that what some might view as psychological barriers may be nothing more than pride and a lack of fortitude.

From what I’ve read and observed, psychologists try to discover (or invent) the causes of our behavior in order to change or cure that which is detrimental to our well being.  Many people subscribe to their conclusions and take comfort in being told that they are not responsible for their actions.  I find nothing in scripture to substantiate such a premise. The only thing that could exonerate us for failing to make righteous decisions is ignorance.  However, once enlightened, there is no excuse.

[continue below]

Chuck,

You said:

You also said:

It seems to me that you are claiming that the Holy Spirit intervenes to safeguard us from error....but that he did not do so in your case.  Or if he did, he waited until enough time had passed to do significant damage.

Huh?

If God protects us from error...then no deception should be possible.  Joe said the entire church at Galatia was decieved.  Galatia was a region, not a city, so many many people must have been caught up in the error Paul was opposing.  Why didn't the HS intervene?
Or was Paul's letter the intervention?

I don't see much profit in getting caught up in a long wrangle over the validity or non-validity of psychology.  Remember however that there are many subjects the scriptures only address in part, or not at all.

Some psychologists may claim people are not responsible for their actions.  Most, from what I have seen and read, are about helping people understand why they think and do certain things and helping them to take responsibility for their own lives.  They sure enough aren't perfect, but then is there any field of study in which we have perfect understanding? 

I am not about to discard theology merely because theologians don't know everything.  Same thing for psychology.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

Tom,

I would say one of the biggest changes in my thinking in my post-Assembly years is transitioning from the belief of "The Bible has all the answers" position to the "All Truth is God's Truth" position.

Of course, we never really held the first position absolutely.  The Bible doesn't tell us how to change the oil in our car, for instance.  However we assumed that in certain areas such as science, psychology and philosophy there was really no point in learning because they probably just war against the absolute authority of the Bible anyway.  Thus, we set up our wall and remained in ignorance.

When I got into the foster care world I began to ask myself questions such as "what does the Bible really say about reactive attachment disorder or bi-polar disorder?"  Really, nothing.  So at least on one point, we have to look to psychology for our only source of answers, however imperfect.

Since then I have taken the position of Francis Schaeffer and Isaac Newton who believed that we Christians have nothing to fear delving into other disciplines.  There is nothing that is going to pop up and cut off the root of the foundations of Christianity.  We may, at times, have to question our long-standing interpretation of Bible passages (as the church did when Galileo pointed out that the earth really went around the sun).  And we have to rely on God for wisdom in taking a firm stand where the Bible indeed trump science (e.g., the so-called "gay gene" does not mean we have to reinterpreted the Bible in a "gay-friendly way"!)

God is sovereign in all areas of life which means, if we are discerning, we can find remnants of His truth sprinkled in many places.

-Dave

Dave,

I agree.

Tom

Chuck,

  I apologize for misunderstanding what you were trying to say re. this topic re. "The Lucifer Factor."  When I write my responses I often am thinking of those I have talked with in the past and tend to generalize my answers to speak to a wider group (in this case those that believe in the super Christian concept, as well as other similar beliefs).
 
 Of course, there are many reasons why someone might take the position that any true believer "who is walking with God" would not fall prey to the "temptations" involved in this prison experiment.  I am very glad that you have taken the time to post and to share your opinions as I think it helps many to think through these issues that are very relevant to former members of the Assembly.  You have offered strong challenges and it has forced me to really try and understand this issue.

  When I use the word "psychological" I do so in the context of my faith in Christ.  You may think of Sigmund Freud when using the word (or Dr. Phil, etc.) but, consider that Dr. Dobson (clearly an evangelical Christian) is also a "psychologist."  In other words, the meaning of the word "psychology", the study of the human soul, should not be understood always as being the instrument of the world/devil in and of itself.

  Psyche is the Greek word for soul, and this is a very Biblical word, and it simply means to describe who we are as humans.  Honestly facing the facts of who we are, the reality of how our enviornment has shaped us, and our responses to our experiences therein are necessary in order to properly mature in our lives (Christians don't get a pass in this regard either).

  I'm not a "psychologist," nor am I trying to raise psych. experiments to a level that would supplant a view of the soul that the bible teaches----- but, I believe that this particular "Lucifer" experiment only validates what I see re. humans in the bible.

  As Christians we do have grace, and this does make a difference between us and the unsaved, but not to the point of the loss of our human soul.  It's easy to say we would not act like one of these prisoners/guards in such a situation when not put to the test (remember again that the great apostle Peter gave in to human weakness in Gal. 2).

  How do we understand what Paul was saying in Rom. 7?  This was an internal conflict in his soul between an enlightened conscience and a weak will---- he knew what to do, but couldn't do it.  If we are honest we have to admit we have the same struggle and fall very, very short of fulfilling the 1st and 2nd commands of Jesus.

  Deception does have it's root in pride, as you suggested, but it is the kind of pride that believes that ones salvation somehow makes us immune to all the faults and pressures upon the soul.  I think the only real way that we ever learn grace is by failing in just the kind of situation that many of us did via our deception in the Assembly.

  This should be a great encouragement to former members as we have been able to learn things about the depths of our human weakness, but with that we've also learned the exceeding depths of God's loving grace! :)

                                                           God Bless,  Mark C.

     

[continued from above]

I recall meeting a young Air Force officer who was on the Psychiatric staff at Offut Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska.   Stewart was a young  Jewish man and had become a Christian through the  witnessing of one of his buddies when he was contemplating suicide – yeh, think about it, a psychiatrist contemplating suicide because he couldn’t  come up with answers for his problems and his depression.  He said that as he began to study the scriptures , he began to realize that his psychiatric counseling was unable to get to the root problems confronting his patients.  He then began each initial interview with a new patient by pointing to the open bible on his desk and saying, “The only means I have of giving you some permanent solutions to your problems is through this book.  If you don’t believe that or don’t want to pursue that course, then I will refer you to one of our other doctors, OK?”   There were some reprecussions at first, but eventually, all of the other doctors on the staff began to send Stewart their “basket cases” since he was the only one having any success in treating them.

Then there was a gentleman named Fred who also had been talked out of committing suicide by a brother in our fellowship, who then asked me to meet and counsel him.  I began to meet with Fred and we would have him over for dinner every Wednesday night to just spend time with our family.  He was very high strung and nervous and his hands would shake constantly.   His psychiatrist had him on several medications including Lithium and he said that they seemed to help him.  After several months of interaction and biblical “counseling” with him, I told him that I didn’t believe he needed the medications any longer.  He was somewhat reluctant, saying that he felt that he would suffer mentally should he discontinue.  I gently persisted in my encouragement even though some thought I might be overstepping the bounds by doing so.  It wasn’t until a couple of months later that he came one Wednesday evening and said, “Look at this,” holding his hands out without a trace of a tremor.  He had stopped taking his medications and had suffered no ill effects whatsoever.  He gave the credit to the Lord and we rejoiced together.

YOU WROTE:  Since then I have taken the position of Francis Schaeffer and Isaac Newton who believed that we Christians have nothing to fear delving into other disciplines.  There is nothing that is going to pop up and cut off the root of the foundations of Christianity. 

MY RESPONSE:  I agree, but there is a vast difference between “delving into” these disciplines and embracing them.  Many Christian counselors who have investigated (delved into) them have determined that they are heretical and dangerous. 

YOU WROTE:  We may, at times, have to question our long-standing interpretation of Bible passages (as the church did when Galileo pointed out that the earth really went around the sun).

My response:  Your reference to “the church” exposes your lack of knowledge about Catholicism.

  YOU WROTE:  And we have to rely on God for wisdom in taking a firm stand where the Bible indeed trump science (e.g., the so-called "gay gene" does not mean we have to reinterpreted the Bible in a "gay-friendly way"!)

MY RESPONSE:  Indeed we do and I would repeat what Peter said, “seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence” (2 Peter 1:3)

YOU WROTE:  God is sovereign in all areas of life which means, if we are discerning, we can find remnants of His truth sprinkled in many places.

MY RESPONSE:   I think I understand what you are trying to say, Dave, but we must also be careful in granting credibility to ideas just because there is a “sprinkling” of God’s truth in them.  One of Satan’s deceptions is to use even the scriptures to lend credibility to his lies.  Praise God that He has given us His Spirit to enable us to discern Satan’s deceit and expose it


Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28)

God bless,     Chuck

[ continued from above]

Man is a tripartite being - body, soul, and spirit.  Psychology deals only with the body and the soul (mind).  To suggest otherwise is folly.  It views morality and truth as being relative to influences such as language, culture or biological makeup.  But truth and morality can only be understood by the spirit of man in communication with the Spirit of God.  For we know that:

“ Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,  Nor have entered into the heart of man  The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.  For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.  Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom  teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.  But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.  But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one.  For “who has known the mind of the LORD that he may instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ”
 1 Corinthians 2: 9-13

Admittedly, psychological methods have been able to bring about changes in individuals (mostly children) by behavior modification techniques or by medications.   However, these techniques merely result in responsive  behavior, usually based upon reward or punishment.  Even rats and other animals can be trained to respond in a manner that Is desired.   But with human beings, although the behavior may be modified, the underlying attitude remains unchanged.  A social worker once related to me, “Yes, we can change their behavior, but the old attitudes are still there and can be aroused in times of stress.”   And as regard to the medications, one of the primary purposes is to control, not to cure (i.e., Ridalin).  There is some interesting and enlightening information on sites such as http://cchr.org/index.cfm/22/19521 

 James Dobson effort to incorporate psychology into Christian counseling, has led many Christian apologists  to question some of his ideas.  See:  http://www.psychoheresy-aware.org/e-books/JDG-webbk.pdf  and other sites listed under “James Dobson, Psychology.”

 I was very much impressed with Dobson’s   “tough love” concept since it seemed to be scripture based, but I questioned his more recent concept of “self esteem.”  It seems to me that it is a contradiction to biblical instruction given by Peter :“Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you at the proper time” (1 Peter 5:6).  And  Paul:  "But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24).

We are told: “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.” (Philippians 2:3)

[continue below]

Dave,

YOU WROTE:
I would say one of the biggest changes in my thinking in my post-Assembly years is transitioning from the belief of "The Bible has all the answers" position to the "All Truth is God's Truth" position.

Of course, we never really held the first position absolutely.  The Bible doesn't tell us how to change the oil in our car, for instance.  However we assumed that in certain areas such as science, psychology and philosophy there was really no point in learning because they probably just war against the absolute authority of the Bible anyway.  Thus, we set up our wall and remained in ignorance.

When I got into the foster care world I began to ask myself questions such as "what does the Bible really say about reactive attachment disorder or bi-polar disorder?"  Really, nothing.  So at least on one point, we have to look to psychology for our only source of answers, however imperfect.

MY RESPONSE:  I guess I never asked myself questions  concerning what the Bible said about “Reactive Attachment Disorder” or ”Bi-polar Disorder”  (and let’s not forget the parents and teachers favorite, ”Attention Deficit Disorder”) any more than I wondered what the Bible said about Transcendental Meditation, Mind Control, or Out of Body Experiences.  But I can guarantee you one thing, Dave, it’s not because the Lord didn’t foresee the advent of these theories and, therefore, left us unprepared to deal with them.  No, the bible doesn’t tell us how long to soft boil an egg or how to jump start our car, but in regard to everything pertaining to life and godliness,  He has granted us everything we need “through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.” (2 Peter 1:3)
You say that you changed your thinking about the belief from "The Bible has all the answers "position, to the "All Truth is God's Truth" position.  Are you saying that the Bible doesn’t have the answers to the mental problems of this modern age?   Sorry, Dave, the day that I start to believe that, will be that day that  I put this book up on the shelf with my fiction novels and  head for the nearest pub.   I’m not going to try to dissuade you from the psychological milieu that has permeated our culture – I just wish you good luck and may Dr. Phil keep his good hand upon you.   I’m not trying to be facetious, but I am repulsed by the acceptance of this discipline as being adaptable to Christian counseling.   You say, “There is nothing that is going to pop up and cut off the root of the foundations of Christianity.”   Well, let me suggest that psychology attempts to do just that

[continue below]

YOU WROTE: 

Chuck,
It seems to me that you are claiming that the Holy Spirit intervenes to safeguard us from error....but that he did not do so in your case.  Or if he did, he waited until enough time had passed to do significant damage.

Huh?

My Response:  No, Tom, I believe the Holy Spirit did intervene in that I began to sense an uneasiness about George and his teachings without fully understanding why at the time.  As I said, I was a new immature Christian and could not refute George scripturally.  But it made me wary of unquestioningly accepting whatever George said. I began to check the scriptures to see if what he was saying was true.  Of course, some of George’s teachings were so confusing, I couldn’t always understand the point that he was making.  And some of it was just flowery speech with nothing very profound.  I believe the Lord honored my heart in seeking truth, but did so in a way as to accomplish what He knew I needed in my life. It was all in his perfect timing.   
I don’t yet fully understand that timing, but I know that it has helped me to understand things about the church in a way that I might not have grasped otherwise. 

YOU WROTE:  If God protects us from error...then no deception should be possible.

MY RESPONSE: You tell me, Tom. Can deception be possible with those who are totally committed to Christ? Notice that I said “totally” since I believe that narrows the field considerably.  If one is filled with the Spirit, isn’t He greater than he who is in the world?

YOU WROTE : Joe said the entire church at Galatia was deceived (sic).  Galatia was a region, not a city, so many many people must have been caught up in the error Paul was opposing.  Why didn't the HS intervene?
Or was Paul's letter the intervention?

MY RESPONSE:  Obviously the doctrine was deceiving many, but I’m not sure we can say that the “entire church” was deceived.  The church was in its infancy and like all of the others, false doctrine was being introduced, no doubt, even from among themselves.   They didn’t have the New Testament, but the Holy Spirit was inspiring Paul and others to write about Jesus - His life, death and resurrection, His teachings, and - as was Paul’s letter, a refutation of false doctrine.  Ever form of false doctrine was exposed in the letters that these men wrote to the churches. so that we can identify and reject it.   

YOU WROTE : I don't see much profit in getting caught up in a long wrangle over the validity or non-validity of psychology.  Remember however that there are many subjects the scriptures only address in part, or not at all.

MY RESPONSE:  But it addresses everything we need to know.  What is there that it doesn’t address, Tom?

YOU WROTE : Some psychologists may claim people are not responsible for their actions.  Most, from what I have seen and read, are about helping people understand why they think and do certain things and helping them to take responsibility for their own lives.  They sure enough aren't perfect, but then is there any field of study in which we have perfect understanding? 

MY RESPONSE:  I doubt it, but then is there any other one that transcends cultures and languages and gives us everything we need for life and godliness?  And it’s not just a matter of not being perfect.  It’s also a matter of the value of pursuing it and the dangers involved.

YOU WROTE : I am not about to discard theology merely because theologians don't know everything.  Same thing for psychology.

MY RESPONSE:  Huh?

I don’t discard psychology merely because psychologists don’t know everything. Nor do I discard fortune tellers merely because psychics don’t know everything.  I don’t discard hypnotism merely because hypnotists don’t know everything, nor do I discard transcendental meditation merely because Maharishi Mahesh Yogi doesn’t know everythin.  No, I discard these practices because they open the mind to entrance of the evil one. There are two spirits in this world and we are instructed (warned) to “test the spirits to see if they are of God.”  I fail to recognize the Spirit of God in psychology.  Instead, I see the spirit of antichrist.

There is a vast difference between theology and psychology.  Psychology is defined as the so-called “scientific” study of the human mind and mental states, and of human and animal behavior.  It is practically devoid of absolutes.  In describing psychological “disorders,” we frequently find phrases such as ”doctors do not know,”  “it is unclear,” “wrongly diagnosed,” “many practitioners believe,” and others that indicate a lack of understanding of the root cause of the problems – and therefore, the solutions.
Theology is defined as “the study of religion, especially the Christian faith and God’s relation to the world.”  In contrast the Bible is replete with definitive expressions such as, “we know,”  “I am,” “it is,” “you shall,”  “you shall not,” Surely, Tom, you can distinguish the difference.

God bless,    Chuck

Chuck-----

Psychology is a relatively recent study. Physical medicine in it's infancy was greatly misunderstood---
ex: even in the 1700's they would "bleed" people---thinking that by doing so the person would regain their health. It was a "medical process" at the time, fully accepted and often used. The belief that releasing the blood from the veins was somehow "cleaning" the person of the evil that had entered his bloodstream was actually considered "medicine".  Through time much of this "quackery" was discovered and discarded and true medicine took over. Medicine truly is of God--he has given great minds to discover cures for diseases, and to perform operations that just a hundred years ago were deemed impossible, or "devilish" in nature. You can imagine the reaction of the medical community a couple of hundred years ago,  if you were to say that someone was going to perform a "liver transplant", let alone a heart transplant!!   "This is the devil's work!!" would have been the cry, especially when considering taking one person's heart and transplanting it to another!

So, in the same way, psychology, being a new "science",  is called "the devil's work" by many who don't understand that there really are diseases of the mind. Before this became knowledge, everyone called the insane "demon-possessed". It's true that some mental illness is definitely demon inspired, but there are maladies just as real in the mental realm as they are in the physical realm. To call an appendicitis an "attack of the devil" would be termed foolish nowadays, so to call a schizophrenic "demon-possessed" is most likely just as foolish. We just understand schizophrenia less--perhaps one day it can be treated with more success just as some physical ailments are.

One goes to a medical doctor for all kinds of physical problems. Why wouldn't one consult a psychiatrist or a psychologist for something such as severe depression also?  True--there are far more "quacks" in the psychology world--mainly because it is far less understood. There are still "quacks" in physical medicine also ---but we don't call all physical medicine "of the devil" because of a few quacks----so we shouldn't be labeling all psychology as "not of the Lord", due to the quacks that exist in the field either.

The true field of Psychology is another example of the mercy of the Lord, trying to reach out to hurting and fractured people. Further study and discoveries in this area may lead to the cure and healing of many people. To "demonize" it because of some "quacks" would be a great mistake.

Just my opinion.  I'm sure Tom has a far better response, but I wanted to throw in my two cents on the subject.

 Hi Joe,

I appreciate your thoughtful response and will share my own thoughts on the points you made.  Pardon me if I ramble a bit.

The correlations that you make between the “sciences“ of “physical medicine” (for lack of a better term) and psychology seem valid enough since they both deal with diagnosing and healing ailments.  But let’s not forget the vast difference that separates the two - one deals with ailments of the body while the other deals with ailments of the mind – and that’s a vast difference, Joe.

Perhaps the most overlooked or neglected areas of both physical medicine and psychology is prevention.  Doctors who treat  bodily ailments  and injuries are concerned about alleviating pain and curing ailments that cause them.  Medications play a large part in their treatment and more often than not, they are prescribing drugs, most of which can produce serious side effects.  I can personally vouch for this.   And of course, the greatest object in many people’s minds is to live longer.  Yet, living in a retirement community, we find that many don’t really have a great deal of purpose in living longer, they just go from day to day, marking time until they die.   Then there are the more affluent ones who retire in luxury and spend most of their time in leisure activities, entertainment and fine dining .   Corporate heads have learned how to cater to their desires, and devise marketing concepts that entice them.   And since debilitating ailments can keep them from these pleasures, they keep their doctors employed trying to maintain their bodily health – health that might have been improved by a different or more moderate life style.  Prevention seemed unnecessary.   Joe, I’m not trying to put down those folks who have prospered in life and now want to reap the “rewards” of their efforts.  I’m just finding that many have “arrived” and find it to be not all they had anticipated. 

Doctors who treat mental ailments are concerned with curing them by means of counseling and medication.  Medications also play a large part in the treatment of those with psychological “disorders.” And , in like manner,  the side effects can be unpleasant and even dangerous.  Psychologists and psychiatrists are unable to understand that the basic problems with most children today is that they have not been raised in accordance with biblical instruction.   Permissive parents (or single-parents) have allowed their children to train them up in the way they should go, with the dire consequences we are witnessing today.  And adults without Christ have no effective means to deal with their trials and anxieties.   
Instead of advocating or supporting psychological solutions to the problems that plague this country’s citizens, we should be working on prevention of these problems by helping them to come to know Jesus Christ .  I do not believe that any true follower of Christ can suffer mental problems.  Now, before you start your refutation of my assertion, read it carefully – I do not say that I don’t believe that any “Christian” can suffer mental problems – I said any “follower of Christ.”  If you don’t recognize that there is a distinction, then I’ll take that up in another post.  Let me offer jus t one case-in-point to illustrate what I mean.  Would a follower of Christ divorce their spouse for any other reason than adultery?

The “experts” were quick to tell us why a young Korean boy at Virginia Tech went berserk and randomly shot classmates and teachers .  One report read:

 Television analysts have Cho deconstructed very quickly: “He's a madman, he's a psychopath, a schizophrenic, a psychotic—or maybe just an angry depressive.” Experts have rendered definitive diagnoses on every network—and they are wildly contradictory. The Today show alone has made a grand tour through the diagnostic manual. Thursday morning Matt Lauer proclaimed Cho "clearly a psychotic individual." Lauer described psychosis as an evolution from his previous diagnosis of depression. "We should make the differentiation there," Dr. Lauer advised.

Well, let me give you my expert opinion.  This young man was living in a spiritual vacuum and had no concept of good and evil.  He was influenced and under the power of the father of lies – Satan.  His only salvation would to have been to have come to have known Jesus Christ as His Savior.  But you won’t hear the ”experts” refer to any such suggestion.

 I haven’t seen Michael Moore’s documentary “Bowling for Columbine” but I will wager that there was very little, if any, reference to Rachel Scott, who refused to deny her God and was willing to die for it.   Nor will you hear about the tremendous influence for good that Rachel’s life and death had upon her friends. 

As a nation, the U.S. has turned away from God.  Only a spiritual revival can save it from His wrath.   
So, Joe, when you say, - “In the same way, psychology, being a new "science",  is called "the devil's work" by many who don't understand that there really are diseases of the mind.”  - I don’t deny that there are “diseases” of the mind (or what they now call, “disorders”)  -  I just don’t see that psychology has been able to discover either the causes, the remedy,  or the means of prevention. 
Jesus said,

"Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
"Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.                Matthew 11:28-29


God bless,     Chuck

Hi Chuck,

I hope you don't mind that I add a few things to your conversation here.

I agree with what you are saying here, but not all followers of Christ can help someone with a "disordered" mind, nor is just a blanket diagnosis of "sin" the solution for a "disordered" mind.

Psychology has been able to identify some disorders and that in itself has been a help to many, whether they are followers of Christ or not.

Post partum depression, and certain forms of schizophrenia are caused by physical changes in the body that affect the mind. They are not a result of the sin of the individual afflicted by them. I believe you can be a follower of of Christ when you are in those states, but to say that a follower of Christ will not be afflicted by them, is just plain not true and is one of the reasons Christians (followers of Christ included) have gone to psychiatrists for help; they are helped without the infliction of the salve (sp?) of guilt that other Christians (and/or followers of Christ) have heaped upon them.

The next point I'd like to make is that there does need to be a remedy for those who do not accept what Christ has offered to them. If psychology can help them in some way, let it. They still need to learn to get along in this world whether they believe Christ is their savior or not.

I think that in some way this issue may come under "common grace".

Moonflower

Chuck,

A couple of comments on your recent posts:

1.
Yes it does address everything we need to know...about salvation.  But there is a whole lot about physiology, body chemistry, psychology, biology, anatomy, infection, on and on just in the field of medicine. The scriptures don't tell us about this.  Not to mention every other field of science.

2.

Chuck, this is so very, very wrong...and so very, very harmful.  For example, I know two women who are, and have been sincere followers and servants of Christ.  One was a full time servant with her husband for many years.  I know of nothing in their lives that would indicate to me that they are not "true" followers of Christ.  Yet they both have suffered with debilitating bouts of depression all their adult lives.  It has been partially controlled through medication, but as they age and their body chemistry changes, what once worked stops working.  Menopause seems to be a factor too.

What you are saying is that their problem has its root in sin. Yet they have struggled with this for years, crying out to God to show them what their sin is so they can repent and be freed from this bondage.  How may decades must they wait?

Do you realize what your attitude, (which is shared by many well-meaning but ignorant Christians), means to them?  They are sentenced to the living hell of being exposed to the condemnation of self-righteous Job's counsellors in the Church.  These folks come armed with verses such as "Come unto me...and I will give you rest". 

Yes, Chuck, rest from striving to find peace with God through works and rituals.  But not rest from everything in life!!! 

These women, as well as at least millions of other people need help and understanding.  Not stones from those who believe themselves more spiritual.

Tom Maddux

[continued from above]

There are Christians who are not following the commandments of Christ .  Would you say they are followers of Christ?   He says to them, “Why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?” (Luke 6:46).  Some of these suffered sickness and even death. (1 Corinthians 11:29-31).  Were they believers?  I find nothing to indicate they weren’t.  We all know Christians who have illnesses and diseases.  Do I believe that it indicates that they are not followers of Christ.
No.  Please read that again so that you don’t misunderstand.

We had a dear young Christian friend who was dying of cancer.  In fact, I would call her a follower of Christ.  In the months prior to her death she became a living testimony for the love of Christ and touched the hearts of doctors, nurses, friends and relatives by her joy in the expectation of being with her blessed Lord. And let me tell you something - if that joy is there you can’t hide it – if it’s not there you can’t fake it.

I had another friend in a nursing home.  He was deaf, practically blind, and bed-ridden.  He wanted to go to be with the Lord.  I prayed that the Lord would take him home.  He became rather cantankerous and lingered for months before passing away.  I don’t judge why the Lord kept him.  I don’t judge his spiritual condition.

I will concede that I don’t always know or understand the Lord’s will for the life of another.  Nor do I know the heart of those who are believers.  But if you will try to convince me that a true follower of Christ can suffer a mental illness, I cannot agree.  For you are saying that even if I am a follower of Christ, I am powerless against forces that could effect my mind (even for evil) and that I cannot control them, and that God would allows this to happen.  That is not the Christ I know. 

YOU WROTE: Psychology has been able to identify some disorders and that in itself has been a help to many, whether they are followers of Christ or not.

MY RESPONSE:  Well good for them.  But of what profit is it unless they can help the spiritual disorder?

YOU WROTE:  Post partum depression, and certain forms of schizophrenia are caused by physical changes in the body that affect the mind. They are not a result of the sin of the individual afflicted by them.

MY RESPONSE:  Since psychology is called a science, perhaps you wouldn’t mind giving me scientific proof of your assertion.”   On the “Schizophrenia.com” site, we find this bit of scientific jargon

Making a Diagnosis

It is important to rule out other illnesses, as sometimes people suffer severe mental symptoms or even psychosis due to undetected underlying medical conditions. For this reason, a medical history should be taken and a physical examination and laboratory tests should be done to rule out other possible causes of the symptoms before concluding that a person has schizophrenia. In addition, since commonly abused drugs may cause symptoms resembling schizophrenia, blood or urine samples from the person can be tested at hospitals or physicians’ offices for the presence of these drugs.
At times, it is difficult to tell one mental disorder from another. For instance, some people with symptoms of schizophrenia exhibit prolonged extremes of elated or depressed mood, and it is important to determine whether such a patient has schizophrenia or actually has a manic-depressive (or bipolar) disorder or major depressive disorder. Persons whose symptoms cannot be clearly categorized are sometimes diagnosed as having a “schizoaffective disorder.”

YOU WROTE:  Post partum depression, and certain forms of schizophrenia are caused by physical changes in the body that affect the mind. They are not a result of the sin of the individual afflicted by them. I believe you can be a follower of of Christ when you are in those states, but to say that a follower of Christ will not be afflicted by them, is just plain not true and is one of the reasons Christians (followers of Christ included) have gone to psychiatrists for help; they are helped without the infliction of the salve (sp?) of guilt that other Christians (and/or followers of Christ) have heaped upon them.

MY RESPONSE:  Both you and Tom imply that I am inflicting guilt on those who suffer from mental disorders.  In the first place, Moonflower, you don’t seem to think that the “guilt” of not accepting what Jesus offered to them, is very serious and can be remedied by a psychiatrist, so we have no common ground of reference. 
I will address Tom’s accusation in a separate post.

And then, of course,     

YOU WROTE:  The next point I'd like to make is that there does need to be a remedy for those who do not accept what Christ has offered to them. If psychology can help them in some way, let it. They still need to learn to get along in this world whether they believe Christ is their savior or not.

MY RESPONSE:  You have my response above.  I shall pray that you receive it in the spirit in which it is given.

YOU WROTE: I think that in some way this issue may come under "common grace".

MY RESPONSE: Common grace?  Is this another of your theological concepts, or are you referring to that of James Boice?  In any event, you don’t need to explain it.

In His love,    Chuck

Dear Moonflower,

At the end of your last post you wrote:

The next point I'd like to make is that there does need to be a remedy for those who do not accept what Christ has offered to them. If psychology can help them in some way, let it. They still need to learn to get along in this world whether they believe Christ is their savior or not.

MY RESPONSE:  I thank you for clarifying where you are coming from.  You should be commended for having discovered a “remedy” for what Jesus called the “unforgivable sin.”  I would also say that your blasé attitude toward the enormity of what He did for a sinful world demonstrates your complete ignorance of the grace and mercy of our heavenly Father.  If this sounds harsh, it is meant to, since I hope it will cause you to seek to fathom the dreadful consequences of our condemnation and come to understand and appropriate the mercy of God in His means for our  justification.  Paul’s epistle to the Romans would be a good place to start since your statement raises doubts in my mind as to whether you, yourself “have accepted what Christ has offered.”   

I also notice that Tom made no reference to your post, so I thought I would wait to see if there were any responses to it from him or from any of the others before I posted my own.  I would have assumed that either he or one of the other defendants of psychology would have made an attempt to correct your outrageously shallow perception of salvation.  Perhaps they were as shocked as I and too dumbfounded to respond.  I’m speculating, of course, that they disagree as vehemently as I.

In view of your above stated conclusion it seems somewhat useless to pursue further discussion with you, but I will offer my response in the event that someone else might have similar concerns about psychology.

YOU WROTE:
   
Hi Chuck,

I hope you don't mind that I add a few things to your conversation here.

I agree with what you are saying here, but not all followers of Christ can help someone with a "disordered" mind, nor is just a blanket diagnosis of "sin" the solution for a "disordered" mind.

MY RESPONSE:  Please hear what I am saying. I did not say that all followers of Christ can help someone with a disordered mind, nor did I say that one who is not a “follower of Christ” is a sinner. 
I can attest to the fact that I was able to help a man with a disordered mind – not because of any special ability on my part, but simply by befriending him and assuring him that He was a child of God and that Jesus would lift his burdens from him.  That’s what Jesus said.  I believe it.  He believed it.  Jesus did it.
It would be great to say that the story had a happy ending, but it doesn’t. 

After being freed from his dependence on drugs, the man continued to consult with his psychiatrist and receive the medication he prescribed.  When I questioned him about it he said that if he discontinued his counseling, he would probably lose his Social Security disability benefits and would have to go to work. He refused to acknowledge that this was dishonest and contrary to the will of God and finally discontinued our relationship.

I can also attest to the fact that I was unable (as far as I know) to help a man who was mentally disturbed - he claimed he was Jesus Christ.   He was in the psych ward at a local hospital.   I was convinced that he was demon possessed, but being very young in the Lord, I didn’t feel prepared to try to exorcise the demon.  Perhaps I should have, but the littleness of my faith kept me from trying. (Matthew 17:14-20).

[continue below]

Chuck,

 Well, no one can accuse you of pulling your punches re. your strongly held opinions.  There's a lot I would like to say here, but I am going to try and narrow my answer to addressing the point above.

  First:  I am not a "defender of psychology" nor do I believe that this science/practice is beyond criticism. 2nd: I would agree that salvation of the soul is of eternal value while health of the soul is temporal (something that Moon. agreed with you on---so, I don't understand why you took off on her with such vehemence).  However, our expression of that salvation we have is demonstrated in our human frames and given in a human context (not a theological concept).

  You say that "I don't judge" quite often above, but your posting above makes all kinds of assumptions that are shared from the perspective of someone who considers himself a higher grade of believer-- "a true follower of Jesus Christ"vs. those Christians who aren't living up to your standards.  How would you judge your own life before God Chuck?  If "true followers" are those who are perfectly keeping the commands of God---- do you do so?

  Paul in Galatians answered those who arrogantly called themselves "the spiritual" by using a bit of sarcasm in an effort to extinguish this idea of "nominal believers" and "true followers": ----if someone is caught in a sin restore him gently.  But watch yourself, or you may be tempted.  Carry each others burdens , and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.  If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself.  Gal. 6:1-4"

   First:  Paul expected that any believer could be "caught in a sin" and that other believers had an obligation to "restore him."  This process must have been more than just rebuke or scripture quoting as he doesn't say, "preach to them and if they don't listen let them wallow in their fallen state."  The "spiritual one" was to "restore" and was to use "gentleness" in that process.

    2nd:  Paul is making the point that we all have "burdens to bear" and that means that Christ has not taken them all away from us.  Furthermore, we are to "lift" that person who has fallen under the weight of their own human failure vs. just praying for them---- in other words there is some kind of action where we make that persons problem ours and feel the weight of it.

        3rd: Paul is also saying here that without an understanding that we share the same human fraility with our brethren (class distinctions) we will lack the one essential ingredient that can make us sympathetic and truly helpful to those in need (Christ's law of love).

               Now, human suffering in the soul, whether you want to call it mental illness or something else, is real and a real burden for that person to bear.  Demanding a believer so burdened to somehow "get over it" via an exhortation does not provide the lifting of that burden and it most certainly will not restore.  The view that we should restore by saying "this is your fault for true followers don't have these problems" is contra grace and contra the meaning of "bearing one anothers burdens". 

    Paul sought the Lord for "a weakness" he had and the Lord told him, no "for my grace is sufficient for you for it is perfected in weakness."  It is the acknowledgement that we are very human and do indeed have that heavy weight with us as long as we're in the body.  Those who think themselves too spiritual to experience problems in the soul are worse off than those who are clearly suffering from them.

                                                              In His love?   May it always be so.   God Bless,  Mark C.

           

Chuck---

I was away from the computer over the weekend and just read Moonflower's post, and your response, along with the other posts on the board. I have to say I am not a strong supporter of psychology for every mental complaint, but I do see it's place in the field of medicine. There are people that can be truly helped by a good psychologist.

I want to say that I believe you have greatly misunderstood what Moonflower is saying. It is a reality that not everyone will accept Christ---and there are many that the Lord will have to "work on" for some  time before they accept the message(many of us did not immediately accept the Gospel and can remember being "preached to" and having tracts handed to us etc. before we finally accepted Christ).  I think what Moonflower is saying, is that the Lord is SO VERY MERCIFUL that he wants to reach out and help in any way possible a suffering humanity. His love for the world is towards ALL---but especially towards those who believe. Though there are those who would try to have us believe that God does not care for, or hear the prayers of the unsaved, it is absolutely untrue, as God will use any means possible to reach men, whether through his judgment or through his great mercy.

10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, especially of those that believe (1 Tim. 4:10)

He is the savior of "all men" especially those that believe. How is he the savior of all men, if not all believe?
This verse has been misinterpreted by those who think ALL men will be saved. The verse is not saying that (though the Bible does say that it is God's desire that all men should be saved-- 1 Tim 2:1)---but it is saying that God cares deeply for all men on earth. There are men whom the Lord wants to be saved who will never receive him---but he still works to cure, heal and comfort them while they are on earth.  "He makes the rain to fall on the just, and on the unjust". Moonflower is not cheapening Grace, or Jesus' death on the cross by any means----Moonflower is stating that God is merciful to ALL--and if psychology is a means to help someone in severe mental pain, he has provided it---whether the person is a Christian or not!!

Moonflower stated:
The next point I'd like to make is that there does need to be a remedy for those who do not accept what Christ has offered to them. If psychology can help them in some way, let it. They still need to learn to get along in this world whether they believe Christ is their savior or not.

I think that in some way this issue may come under "common grace".

The word "common" here is not referring to the value of the death of Christ, but the term used to refer to the grace that God shows to ALL men while they are on earth. It is this grace which provides the doctors, surgeons, psychologists, etc. to help alleviate much of the pain in the world. Does God care for the avowed atheist? Yes he does---the wheat and the tares grow together in the ground on this earth, and they both receive the same sunshine and the same rain---they both receive all the benefits and blessings of God. There is a chance the avowed atheist may become a Christian, but if not, he will face the consequences in eternity. But while he lives on the earth he receives the same gracious benefits God provides for all. I believe this may be what Moonflower was saying. This is a term called "common Grace"--the graciousness of the Lord towards all men.

It's too bad that we as Christians cannot be more like psychologists in one particular way: To take the time to really listen to someone who is suffering, rather than quote verses and think that this will take care of everything. Often, the person suffering mental anguish just needs someone to talk to who is understanding and shows some mercy---and this is why there are so many psychologists--some people literally have to pay someone to listen to them--and that is a real shame.

[continued from above]

YOU WROTE:  Do you realize what your attitude, (which is shared by many well-meaning but ignorant Christians), means to them?  They are sentenced to
the living hell of being exposed to the condemnation of self-righteous Job's counsellors in the Church.  These folks come armed with verses such as "Come
unto me...and I will give you rest". 

MY RESPONSE:  Excuse me, Tom, but wasn’t it Jesus who came “armed” with that promise?  Should He have said, “Come unto Me and I will give you rest. – unless you have one of those disorders that I am not familiar with?” 

Aso, your indignation sounds somewhat disingenuous in light of the relationship you had with George that afforded you ample opportunity to rebuke him for his domineering tactics and badgering of those who opposed him. Anyway, I’m not intimidated by your accusation because when I rarely do offer counsel to another believer, I don’t do it in the manner you suggest. 

One of the most common problems that Christians seem to encounter is depression.  There are times when I have experienced depression in my own life and in the process have made some helpful discoveries. 
My depression always seemed to emanate from a feeling that God had abandoned me, and there is nothing worse than feeling that God is not concerned about your life or your welfare.  Tom’s example of the two women is typical.  It wasn’t until I learned to look upon these times as that of opportunity, that I began to understand depression.  The prayer from Psalm 139:23-24 - “Search me, O God, and know my heart; try me and know my anxious thoughts; and see if there be any hurtful way in me; and lead me in the everlasting way” – that prayer – and the Lord’s answer to it – has led to a deeper understanding of Him and of myself through His caring discipline.  I could best illustrate this through experiences that have happened in my life; experiences that I treasure, although, at the time, they were painful.  For through them, the faithfulness of the Lord’s promises became a glorious reality.
Like most Christians, if anyone were to ask me if I were one of His followers, I would say, “Yes, I try to follow Him.”   Yet, how often does He put me in situations where He shows me how weak I am and where my heart really is.  It is not pleasant.   And when I realize that He is disciplining me, I try to ascertain what it is that He is trying to teach me, because it is not always immediately apparent.  And other times, it becomes all too obvious.  But just knowing that He cares enough to continue to train me in His ways gives me the all of the assurance I need to know that He loves Me and  is concerned about my life and my spiritual welfare .

I used to feel a great deal of empathy for Christian brothers and sisters who were going through difficult times and would pray with them and for them that God would deliver them from their dilemma.  Anymore, because I know that the Lord uses situations to try to teach us something - all designed to draw us closer to Him - I now pray that they will humble themselves before Him and seek to understand what He is trying to teach them.  He most often does this by taking us through adversity rather than delivering us from it, and He tells us that, “All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (Hebrews 12:11).  And there have been times when I didn’t immediately respond to that training, yet in His forbearance and mercy, He persists and doesn’t give up on me.  Praise His unfathomable kindness.
YOU WROTE: Yes, Chuck, rest from striving to find peace with God through works and rituals.  But not rest from everything in life!!! 

MY RESPONSE:  Good advice, Tom.  At my age I am unable to do some things that I would like to, but I don’t intend to wind up just marking time waiting to die.   The Lord has given me opportunities to minister to some folks here at the facility and the BB exchanges help me to examine and express my beliefs and have them scrutinized by yourself and others.  I have changed some of my beliefs from time to time during the past 30 years, and don’t mind having them challenged or being corrected when I see that I am in error.  I am also writing my biography for my grandchildren, sharing some of the wondrous things the Lord has done in our lives that become clearer in retrospect.

YOU WROTE:   These women, as well as at least millions of other people need help and understanding.  Not stones from those who believe themselves more spiritual.

MY RESPONSE:  I agree and the only place I know to find permanent help is in the arms of our loving Savior.

God bless,   Chuck

Tom,

YOU WROTE : I don't see much profit in getting caught up in a long wrangle over the validity or non-validity of psychology.  Remember however that there are many subjects the scriptures only address in part, or not at all.

MY RESPONSE:  But it addresses everything we need to know.  What is there that it doesn’t address, Tom?

YOU WROTE:  Yes it does address everything we need to know...about salvation.  But there is a whole lot about physiology, body chemistry, psychology, biology, anatomy, infection, on and on just in the field of medicine. The scriptures don't tell us about this.  Not to mention every other field of science.

MY RESPONSE:  Quite true, and there is nothing wrong with some of these pursuits, but don’t confuse psychology with science.  Read the manuals and you will find that they admit their ignorance and rely for the most part on trial and error when it comes to medications, and on their own particular speculation concerning causes and cures.  And most importantly, they are not dealing with physical absolutes (I;e;, the Law of Gravity,  The Laws of Thermodynamics, Chemical Analysis, etc.), they are dealing with the mind and guessing as to how it has, does, and will function under certain circumstances.

I do not believe that any true follower of Christ can suffer mental problems.  Now, before you start your refutation of my assertion, read it carefully – I do not say that I don’t believe that any “Christian” can suffer mental problems – I said any “follower of Christ.”  If you don’t recognize that there is a distinction, then I’ll take that up in another post.

YOU WROTE:  Chuck, this is so very, very wrong...and so very, very harmful.  For example, I know two women who are, and have been sincere followers and servants of Christ.  One was a full time servant with her husband for many years.  I know of nothing in their lives that would indicate to me that they are not "true" followers of Christ.  Yet they both have suffered with debilitating bouts of depression all their adult lives.  It has been partially controlled through medication, but as they age and their body chemistry changes, what once worked stops working.  Menopause seems to be a factor too.
 
MY RESPONSE:  No, I am not saying that their problem has its root in sin. I don’t know the women and will not judge them.  What you are saying is that these devout Christian women are suffering from debilitating bouts of depression, have cried out to the Lord who promises rest to those who come to Him, but He has ignored their plea.  Something wrong here, Tom. 

I can understand why God does not always answer pleas for physical healing, I don’t recall that He ever promised that He would.   But if you are going to try to convince me that we can’t rely on His promise to give rest to those who come to Him, then maybe we should wonder about His promise to give us eternal life. 

Both you and the utterly confused, Moonflower, seem determined to accuse me of branding as “sinners,” those who are not “followers” of Christ.  Let me point out the distinction.

I think we would all admit that there are Christians who are weak in their faith, or slothful in their service to Christ.  Christians? Yes,  but perhaps lacking in the diligence of which Peter speaks in his second letter (2 Peter 1:5-11).  Or they may be the foolish one who build their house upon the sand (Matthew 7:26).  Or the one who knew His master’s will but did not act in accord with his will (Luke 12:47). 

Jesus said,”If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; ( John 8:31).  Notice what follows the qualifier “if” and notice the adjective “truly.”  A disciple, then, would be what I call a follower of Christ.  It would behoove us, then, to ascertain what Jesus means when He admonishes us to “continue” in His word.   

[continue below]

[continued from above]

You all seem to think that my description of one who is a follower of Christ as being one who has “arrived” in their Christian walk. Or like Mark who erroneously assumes that I believe that”true followers" are those who are perfectly keeping the commands of God.  He wrote:

You [Chuck] say that "I don't judge" quite often, but your posting makes all kinds of assumptions that are shared from the perspective of someone who considers himself a higher grade of believer-- "a true follower of Jesus Christ"vs. those Christians who aren't living up to your standards.  How would you judge your own life before God Chuck?  If "true followers" are those who are perfectly keeping the commands of God---- do you do so?

MY RESPONSE:  They are not “my standards,” Mark, they are His standards.  I didn’t make them.  He did.  With His enabling grace, I try to live by them and encourage others to do so.  I don’t try to judge my own life or the life of others – unless it is an unrepentant sinner in the body.   Paul tells us that we are to judge them. (1 Corinthians5:12),
As for judging my own life before God, I try not to engage in such foolishness. Our own heart will deceive us (Jeremiah 17:9) and I ask Him to search my heart, and reveal to me my hurtful ways and lead me in the everlasting way (Psalm 139:23-24).

 Now, allow me to elaborate.and clarify what I mean by “a follower of Christ” .
 
Followers of Christ are ones who seek to build their house upon a rock (Matthew 7:25 ), ones who are applying diligence in seeking to attain the qualities of which Peter speaks in his second letter (2 Peter 1:5-11). ).  They are those who “continue in His word” (John8:31), or they are seeking to be the “faithful  and sensible stewards”  of Luke 12:47, or the ones who seek to bear fruit (Matthew 13:23), and yes, Tom, the ones who seek to ”overcome” (Revelation 2 and 3).  Are they perfect?  By no means, but like David, their heart is for the Lord.  Do they stumble occasionally?  Most certainly.  Do thy never sin?  Certainly not.   Do they suffer the discipline of Christ?  Most assuredly. 

This is what I believe.

So please don’t try to make me out to be a pompous, self-righteous, “better than thou,”  jackass who thinks he is better than you.   And please don’t say we can’t strive to be one of the above.   Would I be so stupid and naïve to think that I have” arrived” when not even Paul would make such a declaration until he was about to go to be with the Lord.   Only then, Paul would say:
”I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing”
                                                                                    2 Timothy 4:7-8

May we be counted among those who have loved his appearing. 

God bless,  Chuck

Mark,

The apostle John wrote:

If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for the testimony of God is this, that He has testified concerning His Son.
The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son.
And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.
He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.
                              1 John 5:9-12

When someone hears the gospel, and the Holy Spirit witnesses to their spirit as to who Jesus is and what He came to do – to reject that, is unforgiveable. The Holy Spirit doesn’t have to ”work on” them, as if they are trying to figure out a geometry equation, for we read:

“For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).

There is power in the word of God that transcends the intellect and penetrates to the very depths of the spirit.  That doesn’t necessarily mean that someone who has heard the gospel and not responded, has rejected the message. It is all in God’s perfect time for that individual and if, at that time, there was not the enlightening by the Holy Spirit and he does not respond, he merely rejects the testimony of man and he makes man a liar.  But if, at that time, the Holy Spirit does, in fact,  bear witness to that individual and he rejects it; then he makes God a liar.  I believe this is the unpardonable sin. 

 On a 2/8/04 post, Moonflower wrote:  “There are unsaved people who have lived lives as kind, loving and generous people, but won't be in heaven because they rejected the One who died for them.”  I concur.

But then on her July 07, 2007 post, she wrote:  “The next point I'd like to make is that there does need to be a remedy for those who do not accept what Christ has offered to them. If psychology can help them in some way, let it. They still need to learn to get along in this world whether they believe Christ is their savior or not.”

When she says, “those who do not accept what Christ has offered,”  I believe that she is indicating that they have been enlightened, but have rejected the gift. The rest of her statement bears this out.  She then proceeds to belittle the gospel and elevates psychology to the status of a “remedy.”  So then, we are to believe that those who have rejected the Savior who died for them, can have their conscience salved by some sympathetic psychologist who will help them to “get along in this world.”
Yes, Mark, I took off on Moonflower with vehemence for this tragic bit of nonsense and am somewhat surprised and disappointed that you tried to bail her out with your explanation of what you think she meant.  I’m not trying to mock her, but I would like to shock her into the realization that she has trivialized the condemnation of unbelieving sinners and its horrendous consequences.
Then Joe comes to her defense also, saying, ”I think what Moonflower is saying is that the Lord is SO VERY MERCIFUL that he wants to reach out and help in any way possible a suffering humanity.”   
Well, Joe, God has already reached out in the only “possible way” that He could help a suffering humanity - by having His Son die to make atonement for our sins.  Nothing else satisfies His justice.   Paul wrote of Jesus”

“whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:25-27).

If you are suggesting that God has given us psychology in order to alleviate human suffering, I’m not buying it.  I believe that Satan has given us psychology in order to relieve us of our guilt and responsibility for our deeds of the flesh, to give us self-esteem instead of esteem for Christ. 

[continued  below]

Chuck---

It was actually me who said that the Holy Spirit has to "work on" some people, not Mark. That was
a poor choice of words. What I meant to say is that not everyone immediately accepts Christ upon
hearing the message for the first time. Sometimes the Spirit knocks several times on the door of some-
one's heart before they open---that's all I meant. And without going into doctrinal arguments I realize
that anyone receiving Christ is a miracle of God.

However, you did not respond to the verses "He makes his rain to fall on the just and on the unjust" or that he is
"the savior of ALL men, especially those that believe". You are entitled to your opinion Chuck regarding psychology, and don't have to "buy" the suggestion that God is thereby assuaging human suffering.  I just have to say that medicine has helped countless millions of people who do not believe in Jesus Christ (many of them may come to receive him one day who knows?), and he did not put it on the earth only to help Christians.  There is a common Grace that God does show to ALL men on the earth---he states this in the Bible---once again "He makes his rain to fall on the just and on the unjust"---the very same rain---the very same blessings. This is a Biblical fact.

Would this same God who is merciful to millions concerning their physical ailments, also want to help those with mental ailments also?  I believe he would.

You said:

Then Joe comes to her defense also, saying, ”I think what Moonflower is saying is that the Lord is SO VERY MERCIFUL that he wants to reach out and help in any way possible a suffering humanity.”   
Well, Joe, God has already reached out in the only “possible way” that He could help a suffering humanity - by having His Son die to make atonement for our sins.  Nothing else satisfies His justice.

Chuck---you are incorrect.  God did make the ultimate sacrifice of his Son to pay for man's sins. There is no denying this.  But this is not the only "possible way" that God can help a suffering humanity. There are suffering African children NOW who need treatment for something as simple as diarrhea, whom God has provided "physical help" for. There are those whom God knows will not accept him at the moment, whom he still helps in a physical manner because of his great love for them.  There are also those suffering with mental illnesses, afflictions, and mental pain, who are not Christians---but God loves them.

Chuck---you are correct--nothing will satisfy the Justice of God for sin but the death of Jesus Christ. But what of present suffering going on right now in front of our eyes?

There is a verse in James that says "if one of you sees your neighbor without food or clothing and says 'go be ye warmed and filled' without helping them, what does it profit?" The same applies here. Do we see a mentally suffering person and simply preach at them? Is that what Jesus would do? Would Jesus see a man in deep suffering and only make speeches? No---he would heal him.  Well, I don't personally have the gift of healing---neither do most Christians, and all the "preaching" I do towards a person in severe depression is not going to alleviate their problem. So what is the answer? God has provided intelligent men, trained in psychology, who might be able to help this person. Do I say "Go--be ye warmed and filled" or do I take them to a psychologist that God has provided for that very purpose?

God loves everyone---on this present earth he provides the same sun, rain, vegetation, etc. etc. for the evil and the good. He says so in the Scriptures. His ultimate desire is the salvation of ALL souls, and for this he paid the ultimate price---but he also knows many will not receive him and will pay the price in eternity. But while they are on earth he provides all the mercy possible in hopes they will turn to Him. As I mentioned before, the wheat and the tares grow together on the earth--and God has provided the very best for both of them--he says so. They grow in the same field, with the same nutrients, and the same sun and water.

You said:
If you are suggesting that God has given us psychology in order to alleviate human suffering, I’m not buying it.  I believe that Satan has given us psychology in order to relieve us of our guilt and responsibility for our deeds of the flesh, to give us self-esteem instead of esteem for Christ.

Chuck---that is rather a bold statement to make don't you think? If God has given the world good psychologists to alleviate mental suffering, you are attributing a gift of God to Satan. (God is merciful though and I think He knows where you are coming from--but it is wrong to make a blanket statement like that not knowing the true will of the Lord regarding Psychology). A few hundred years ago men called Galileo of the devil, and held extreme beliefs about medicine--and yet we know Galileo was right, and that medicine has helped millions upon millions of people----and many millions of these people are not Christians. But God shows his mercy to ALL while they are upon the earth.

To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. (1 Cor. 9:22)  Paul said this knowing that all mean will not receive the same message the same way.  We should remember that many of the people who Jesus healed received him AFTER they had been helped or healed. (The Gadarene, the blind man, the woman at the well). Is it possible that someone can be brought to the Lord from mental healing--as much as someone who is physically healed may turn to Christ?  God uses every means possible to save souls---he becomes all things to all men----could he use psychology in that rare case to heal and lead someone to Christ? With God ALL things are possible.

Chuck,

  I think we have strayed from the original topic re. the psychology experiment called "the Lucifer Factor" done up in Stanford and so I am not going to try and give a point by point response at this time.  Is all psychology of the Devil?  How about psychologists who try to understand and treat Alzheimers, Downs syndrome, retardation, senility, etc.?  The "friend" that you had Chuck who "just wanted to die"; could he have been in this state because of some kind of interaction between illness (regular ol' physical type stuff), medication he was taking, or because of some emotional pain due to the loss of a spouse?  In the experiment at Stanford this was a controlled situation that was observed.  These humans, including those running the experiment, were surprised at what they discovered about how people react in a prison situation.

  Okay, some of us see a comparable real life expression of this in our involvement in the Assembly.  Then we can read documented cases in books like, "Toxic Faith, Churches That Abuse, The Subtle Power Of Spiritual Abuse, etc."  The Bible itself clearly warns against abusing fellow believers (beating of the men servants, harming the little ones, etc.) and placing this warning in the context of harshly using ones position of authority to control, manipulate, and dominate another disciple of Christ.

  The last paragraph shows that this experiment is demonstrable among professed followers of Jesus.  I have mentioned to you before (which I don't recall your response to) the fact that the Apostle Peter fell victim to his fear of the big guns from Jerusalem not accepting him (Gal 2) and this fear was the same kind of psychological pressure that many of us felt in the Assembly.

  Now we can argue that "well none of the examples given are of true believers", and that may explain some of it, but with Peter I think it would be safe to say that he was truly saved and a follower of Jesus.  If we shrink the population of the "truly spiritual," who are immune from reacting as the experimenters did, those in the Assembly, etc., I would venture to say that I have never met a true follower of Jesus as yet.

  If Tom doesn't mind I will use him as an example.  You had some very unkind comments to make re. how Tom supported GG during his time with the group, and I know for certain that Tom is very, very sorry now(just as I am, and I'm sure Peter is for his failings in Gal. 2).  I knew Tom pretty well back in those days.  I rode back and forth with him for years to Fullerton from the Valley, and attended upteen million meetings with him.

  Tom was (and still is) a serious follower of Jesus Christ.  He was not looking for any kind of self gain, and was constantly anguished over how to truly follow Christ and to do the will of God.  Why did God allow this to happen?  How could a true follower ever buy into such a fraud as GG created?  How could God just seem to allow this kind of real life "experiment" to twist such a good desire into a decidedly evil end?

  True followers of Jesus are also made, but that making is not instant.   Furthermore, we are not made into spirit beings, but humans who have been given the Spirit of God.  Tom had to learn through this trial something he couldn't any other way.  Inner strength via the Spirit comes when we are weak vs. when we are confident that we have obtained a stregth via ones true following.  Regular human life supplies ample opportunity for us to admit to our needy human condition, or we can just try and deny it (an unhealthy psychological reaction).

  God became flesh in Jesus Christ.  Jesus understood psychology (how we think, feel, how sin tempts us, how weak human character can be, how easily we can be manipulated by social pressures, etc.)  Yes, he understood how Satan could manipulate us too.  True, some are more sensitive than others to certain kinds of pressure and Paul reminds us to take care of those like this and also goes on to state that those that we think are the least spirtually profitable are "more necessary."  What did Paul mean by "the feeble minded" and our need to support them btw?"

  For those with strong wills, able to withstand emotional suffering better than most, or less likely to succumb to strong social pressures--- to these we can admire their strong natural character, but there is a danger that these in a Christian community can be mistaken as "true followers" while those who failed in the Assembly as simply being "the deceived", and therefore worthy of only contempt.

  The Jesus I know as Lord has a very special place in his heart for those like Tom.  For those former members who (mostly former leaders) who have not awakened to what the Assembly was, their part in it, and what it made of them--- to these, they are far, far, away from knowing the heart of God.  How do I know this?  The prayer of the Publican vs. the one of the Pharisee for one.

  I know there are those who read here who might feel the weight of their failure while in the group, or one like it, and despise themselves for being taken in (just like those in that experiment were)--- it causes real emotional pain in the form of deep regret, anger, self loathing, sense of emptiness, etc.  Reading bible verses and prayer have not helped some of these much.  "How come I can't be like some others that don't seem to have these problems and whose God seems to care about them?"

  No Chuck, these are not nominal believers, but those deeply loved of God and whose pain he knows and shares!

                                                                              God Bless, Mark C.      

Mark,Joe, and Tom,

You may be right, brothers.

God bless,   Chuck

Mark---

What experiment at Stanford? What do you mean Lucifer Factor?  ;D  Thanks for bringing the
original thought back into play.  Way off the subject again, huh? I'm one of the biggest offenders!!  :P

--Joe

it is a fact that your moods and emotions are controlled by chemicals released in your brain. if you don't believe me, trying taking a mood-altering drug some time. any anti-depressant will do. no matter how strong your relationship with christ is, your mood will alter. a healthy brain releases these chemicals at appropriate times and in appropriate amounts so a person experiences 'normal' emotions. a strong relationship with christ can give a healthy brain more 'reasons' to release the chemicals that make a person feel peaceful and happy.

very few people have perfectly healthy bodies, and some people are born with bodies that produce almost no 'happy' chemicals at all. these people have a much harder time feeling happiness, and it has nothing to do with their spiritual state. conversely, someone who is manic is producing way too much 'happy' chemicals. it is a physical, chemical problem. this is what a competent mental health professional means when they diagnose someone as having a mental illness. the best they can currently do is offer such a person a drug that will help balance the chemicals in their brain properly, and try to teach them not to behave destructively based on their moods when their brain's chemical balance is out of whack.

i stumbled across an article that somewhat applies to the bent this discussion has taken:
http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3&art_id=nw20070709105012263C912426
granted, it was the church of scientology, not a christian church, but the basic point is the same: pressuring mentally ill people into not taking their meds can have awful, life-threatening consequences. people who insist on doing that will eventually end up with blood on their hands. granted, there are people who take meds who would be better off without them. i agree with you on that, chuck. pharmaceutical companies have vast marketing budgets because every new disease they invent to convince people to buy one of their meds is a big payoff for them.

my point is that i would not want to put myself in the position of deciding if someone really needs to be taking their meds or not. the stakes are just too high.

chuck, it sounds like most of what you are objecting to is 'pop psychology' - the simplistic convenient version of psychology they spew on the news or in sitcoms. i don't have much respect for pop psychology either. its about as accurate as a sitcom's (or news show's) portrayal of anything else.

you mentioned that your friend was taking lithium. lithium is a mood stabilizer, and it is typically prescribed when someone is manic depressive (bipolar). someone on lithium will generally be somewhat depressed, which is much better than being manic or deeply depressed. when such a person stops taking their meds, they can swing into a manic phase which means they will be "rejoicing" bigtime. nothing can bring a person down when they are manic, which is more dangerous than it sounds. they will enthusiastically run with any idea, no matter how foolish. they typically end up with massive debt and lots of unstable relationships before they go crashing down into a deep depression. people are actually more likely to kill themselves while swinging into a manic state than when they are depressed, because their behavior becomes so rash and impulsive. ideally, they will be weaned off of their meds at some point, but its a dangerous thing to mess with and should be approached very carefully.


as for the original topic this discussion was about: just as people's moods largely depend on  measurable, observable elements of the brain, so does their behavior and learning. people who are in positions of unaccountable power will eventually be corrupted by it - as demonstrated in the prisoner experiment and countless abusive churches, such as the assembly. the antidote is openness and accountability in the leadership. someone who has cultivated the true wisdom and humility that comes from a deep spiritual life will be protected, not by some mystical force, but by having the sense not to set up a church with such a controlling, unaccountable power structure. anyone who persists in such an unhealthy environment will be negatively affected by it, whether they are the one in power or are subjected to its abuses. that is the lesson i see in both the prisoner experiment and the  assembly.

gotta run,

brian

Thanks, Joe, that's exactly what I meant.

Chuck, you incorrectly defined some of the words I used and in doing that, you changed what I actually said.

Moonflower

Brian, what you have said is so true with bi-polar disorder. A friend's sister, if not on lithium, will be unable to sleep at all and will lose complete touch with reality, as most of us would without sleep.

COMMON GRACE:

http://www.mbrem.com/calvinism/commongrace.htm

http://www.prca.org/articles/article_7.html

This could be another topic and may have already been discussed here in relationship to the unsaved doing "civil good", but I want to leave a website here for those who may be interested in the idea of "common grace", since it has previously been bashed by Chuck in an earlier posting (below):

CHUCK'S STATEMENT:


Moonflower

Moonflower,

Perhaps, before accusing me of “bashing” the idea of “common grace,” you should have read the information on the sites you listed.  Had you done so, you would have found that the site you  recommend  (http://www.prca.org/articles/article_7.html ) is a rather uncompromising rebuttal of the reformed doctrine of “common grace.”   
Pretty careless of you, Moonflower, but perhaps your defenders would like to offer their counter-rebuttals or explain what you and these Reformed theologians really meant. 

Chuck

Chuck,

You wrote:

I find it odd that you would object to this doctrine on the basis of terming it a "theological concept".  The doctrine of the Trinity is also a theological concept.  I am sure that you don't object to that.

I looked over the link you gave in your last post.  The one from the Protestant Reformed Church in America.  At the bottom of the page is a link to another rebuttal entitled "Uncommon Grace". 

Seems that the objection arose from the fear that teaching common grace would lead people to doubt the strict Calvinist view of total depravity.  Strict Calvinists take this to mean "total inability to do anything God thinks of as good".  This, they fear, will lead people to accept the idea of universal atonement, that Christ died for all men.

I'm pretty sure you don't reject universal atonement.  But anyway the whole argument of the article is that common grace undermines some strongly held Calvinist ideas.  IMHO, these ideas are highly questionable anyway...so it doesn't seem like a very strong argument to me.

Personally, I believe that the idea behind common grace is quite biblical.  Simply that God is benevolent towards his creation and creatures, that he limits the effects of evil, and allows an adequate degree of civil goodness that people have societies to live in.

Tom Maddux

Chuck,

I felt that the entire idea of common grace would be more completely understood if the argument for and against it was represented more fully with the multiple websites.

It's quite obvious from Tom's post that with even an additional website he was able to see both sides of the argument very clearly.

It was such a heated topic at the time, that the preachers who were ousted from the Christian Reformed Church formed yet another dutch group called the Protestant Reformed Church.

Moonflower

Moon flower:

YOU WROTE:  I felt that the entire idea of common grace would be more completely understood if the argument for and against it was represented more fully with the multiple websites.

MY RESPONSE:  I apologize for my lack of understanding your motive and your fairness in presenting both sides of the debate .   However,  inasmuch as the case against “common grace” is so compelling, I find it strange that you still find it plausible. 

YOU WROTE:  It's quite obvious from Tom's post that with even an additional website he was able to see both sides of the argument very clearly.

MY RESPONSE:  Yes, and he has decided that the idea of common grace is “quite biblical.  I find it quite compromising and unbiblical.

YOU WROTE: It was such a heated topic at the time, that the preachers who were ousted from the Christian Reformed Church formed yet another dutch group called the Protestant Reformed Church.

MY RESPONSE:  How typical. And completely contrary to Paul’s exhortation ,  “Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Corinthians 1:10) and that of Jesus "I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;  that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me” (John 17:20-21).

Chuck

Yes, how typical, and I can imagine that their responses to eachother were probably not unlike your response of July 8 that was directed to me below:

Moonflower

There's an interesting article today on "World Net Daily" site entitled

Millions of Americans hooked on psychiatric drugs -
The shocking link between pharmaceuticals, suicide, violence and mass murder.


Chuck Miller

Chuck,

I went to the World Net Daily site but I couldn't find the article.  It is a good idea to copy and paste the link when you refer to another website.

Do you know how to do this?

Tom Maddux

Tom,

The site is:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56536

Chuck

I remember reading various articles after someone went on a rampage and a common theme you will hear often (if the person was once in the military) is (example): "Herb Smith, 38, went on a shooting rampage today, killing 12 people. Smith, a former marine....etc"   Somehow, the article is trying to link his being a former marine with his rampage. I have seen this times without number.

The article below is doing the same thing-- somehow linking psychiatric drugs to mass murder and suicide. The fact is the drugs did not cause the mass murder or suicide---these people were on these drugs due to deeply rooted problems ALREADY affecting them.  It's an effort to say "SEE!! Look what psychiatry does to people!!!! All of these killers were using psychiatric drugs!!!"

I'd like to know how many of these killers used to go to church? How many were in the military?   "SEE!!!  Look what 'church-going' did to these people's minds!!!!  And being in the military only made that sickness worse!!  The church and the military make people mentally ill so they wind up using psychiatric drugs and then go on killing sprees!!"

It's the same logic really. These people were sick--and they were determined to do evil--as the Columbine offenders.  Psychiatric drugs didn't cause those two kids to go on a rampage. The drugs had been prescribed due to feelings and behavior already very apparent. Had there been far better parental supervision and care in their lives it most likely would never have happened. Who really knows how much these same drugs may have delayed the amount of time before the tragic events happened?

I am not massively defending psychiatry or psychiatric drugs, but I must say the amount of real HELP these drugs have given to people I'm sure greatly outweighs the negative. Many schizophrenics and people with bi-polar disorders have been greatly helped by the use of these drugs. In my opinion, statisics can be easily garnered to "prove" many things.  Take a list of 10 "killers" and ask each of them if they used to watch horror movies.  9 our of 10 of them have seen a horror movie, therefore horror movies may lead to murder.  9 out of 10 of them played with toy guns as a kid---therefore toy guns used as children can lead to murderous impulses.

People who kill or commit suicide are usually mentally ill in one way or another. They have been displaying signs of illness for some time. The chance that they have used, or are using psychiatic drugs is therefore greatly increased due to seeking help, or being "forced" to seek help by family, or by a legal order. But there are literally millions of others who don't kill or commit suicide, who also use these drugs and are greatly helped by them. The fact that killers or suicide victims were using psychiatric drugs only shows they already had a deep-rooted problem. In the vast majority of cases the people are on drugs because they are already suicidal, they are not suicidal because they took the drugs.

By the way, last Wednesday, after a class I'm taking on learning to be less argumentative, 10 of us went to an Italian restaurant. 9 of us had lasgana. After the meal a huge argument broke out about who is the best NFL team.  Because of this we came to the conclusion we shouldn't eat lasagna any more, as it causes arguments. Next week we're doing Chinese---perhaps it will have a more calming effect.   ;D    --just kidding, I'm not in a class teaching how to be less argumentative--but I think you catch my drift. 


--Joe

Joe,

You can no more prove that there is no link to mass murders than they can prove that there is. But many reliable sources seem to think there is.  And your stats about “literally millions of others who don't kill or commit suicide, who also use these drugs and are greatly helped by them,” are pure conjecture. 

News Target,com  reports the following:

“The FDA has now finally admitted that children who use antidepressant drugs are 180 percent more likely to have suicidal tendencies than children taking placebos. This is after the agency stalled for months by requesting an independent investigation of the research data, during which antidepressant drugs continued to be prescribed in huge numbers to children around the country and around the world -- all at great profit to pharmaceutical companies”.-

The Epilepsi Foundtuion reports:

“Drug companies that produce antiepileptic medications have been asked by the Food and Drug Administration to re-examine their clinical study data after claims of increased risk of severe depression, suicide or suicidal thoughts were levied against the drug Neurontin.”
“This inquiry comes as the FDA is working to rebuild its damaged reputation stemming from two cases of drug mishandlings last year, involving the antidepressant Paxil and painkiller Vioxx. The latter was linked to cardiovascular problems, while Paxil, in addition to other widely-prescribed antidepressants, was linked to increased suicide risks.”

Sheller, P.C reports:

“Prozac (fluoxetine hydrochloride) is manufactured by Eli Lilly & Co. Proizac is prescribed for the treatment of depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and other psychological disorders. The FDA approved Prozac in 1987 for treating depression. It is classified as a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and has had many millions of users.
Prozac has been linked with serious, sometimes fatal, reactions. These reactions include liver damage, liver failure, and suicide. There have also been reports that Prozac may cause aggressive and violent behavior.”

Teen Screen Truths reports:

One has to ask the question "Why are so many murders and suicides taking place by people who are on supposedly 'anti-psychotic' or 'anti-depressant' medications?" If drugs such as Prozac, Zoloft, Ritalin, Xanax, Paxil, Thorazine and other related "anti-depressants" are actually an effective treatment, one would naturally expect suicides, murders and violent behavior to be decreasing, yet this is apparently the reverse of what is happening. Read the following quotes, headlines and reports on the rising statistics of suicides, murder and violence caused by people on the very drugs that are supposed to be helping them.
"These drugs can cause Akathisia, mental and physical agitation that sparks self-destructive, violent behavior. They can also induce dissociative reactions, making those who take the drugs INSENSITIVE to the consequences of their behavior.
"...guns and movies don't cause these tragically frequent episodes of inexplicable violence. The real reason is written out on a prescription pad by psychiatrists and doctors all over the country—these monstrous acts were done not by criminals, but ordinary people high on prescription drugs.
 
"Yet the overuse of PROZAC-LIKE DRUGS is not even a part of the national debate, and those who sound the warning against them are ignored. I can only surmise that the reason the FDA continues to disregard these mounting SSRI-related casualties is because of this agency's close alliance with the multi-billion-dollar drug companies. Just imagine what the FDA would do if there were evidence that these massacres were performed by people taking natural antidepressants."

There are more, if you care to search "drugs - suicide"

Chuck

Chuck----

This is probably an arugment that could go back and forth for a while. Even in your statistics, when mentioning Prozac, it says there are "millions of users"---but you don't hear about millions of suicides and murders---the percentage is extremely low.

I was watching a program last night on "48 Hours" about the criminally insane, and in a large majority of cases where the people murdered or became extremely violent they were refusing to take their medicine. But it is easy to then say that this person was "using psychiatic drugs"--the fact that they were refusing to take them will not be part of the statistic---just that they were prescribed them, and had been using them.

They were speaking with one woman who admitted that she had decided not to take her medicine and then attacked some children after she admittedly had a "psychotic religious episode". She saw one child in a Halloween mask and thought that the child was leading the other two to a satanic sacrifice. However, when using the medicine she clearly recognized how "crazy" she had been. The medicine she takes is clearly helping her---her failure to use it is what caused her psychotic episode.

Just about every commercial you see about a drug has warnings associated with it. I saw a commercial just last night for some syndrome involving the legs and people who cannot sleep well as a result. "Some reactions that could occur are nausea, vomiting, and dry throat...etc."  It also said that one's taking it might cause a  desire to "gamble".  As ridiculous as the whole thing seems, it shows that every drug has a risk associated with taking it. If someone is severely depressed, or has other severe mental problems, the likelihood that the drug could have adverse effects is greatly enhanced.

But again, I realize this argument could go on forever as opinion plays a large part in this, and polls and surveys can be manipulated any way you want them to appear. It appears we have gotten way off the original topic though, and will just say that I understand where you are coming from Chuck, and appreciate your opinions.

--Joe

Chuck,

Let me tell you about Kevin G.

Kevin was a student in my class during my second year as a teacher.  In class Kevin was a constant disruption, he moved constantly, talked to the other kids and sometimes just into the air.  On the playground, (I was teaching 6th grade), he was a bully.  He was a big kid, and rarely got through a day without getting in a fight or tormenting smaller kids.  His grades were awful.  He had had just about every punishment applied to him that I, his parents, and the school could come up with.  Spanking, benching, grounding, restriction of TV and other priviliges, making him take "naps" in the nurses office, writing huge amounts of "standards", suspension from class and school.  Nothing worked.

In those days, 1971-72, the term ADHD was not known.  We called kids like this "hyperactive".  One dead giveaway that they had this condition was their handwriting.  Their cursive was large, scrawling, poorly formed and messy. Something was wrong with their brain/body coordination.  Other indicators were sloppy personal habits, along with the types of behaviors I already described.

In desparation, Kevin's parents took him to a psychiatrist, who prescribed Ritalin.  Kevin was suddenly transformed into a well behaved child who was attentive in class, did his work, earned good grades, played fairly and well on the playground.  We were amazed.

The next summer Kevin volunteered in the Summer School to tutor the 1-3 grade kids and help in thier games and art projects.  Five or six years later I ran into him when we were doing street witnessing on Van Nuys blvd. out in the Valley.  He was polite and listened politely to my presentation of the gospel. (His family is Jewish)

Chuck, should Kevin have been left in his original state?

 One of the problems with the type of non-science based criticisms you have posted is that they highlight the problems while ignoring the benefits.  Vague allusions to the FDA being in collusion with the drug companies do not describe realities.  If the source has evidence of wrongdoing, they should contact: a. a news outlet and go public. b. The Justice Department and tell them what they know.

Instead, they fiddle statistics and play on people's fears.  But this is nothing new.  You can find websites devoted to other wild theories based on bogus science and fear.  Some that come to mind are aspartame, flouride in drinking water, heating tv dinners in microwaves, Ibuprofin, Tylenol, dental fillings, on and on.  One common element in all of these is the fear that "they" are out to get us, whether they is the Commies, drug companies, big agriculture, the Trilateral Commision or perhaps the PTA.

I bought a book back in the 70's about the use of psychotheraputic drugs in education.  It was authored by a psychiatrist who was also a Plymouth Brother.  He compared the success/problem ratio, and came down firmly on the side of using what is available to help people.

I agree.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux