Soul: Why Only Christian Psychologists Can Practice “True Psychology”
Today, there are more than one hundred thousand licensed psychologists practicing in the United States. These mental health professionals are in a unique position to provide individuals, groups, and American society with valuable counseling services for a wide range of mental health issues and mental disorders. This study uses a triangulated research approach to demonstrate that true psychology can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources that are needed to understand and transform the soul in healing ways. The first leg of the research approach consists of a review of the relevant literature, the second leg consists of a custom survey of 25 practicing American psychologists, and the final leg of the triangulated research approach consists of an exegetical analysis of relevant biblical verses concerning the human soul and its relevance for mental health professionals. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings in support of the foregoing proposition are presented in the study’s concluding chapter.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
Statement of the Problem
Purpose of the Study
Research Question
Importance of the Study
Rationale of the Study
Overview of the Study
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature
Overview of “True Psychology”
Christian Dogma and the Human Soul
The “Fruit of the Spirit”
Discussion
Chapter 3: Methodology
Description of the Study Approach
Data-gathering Method and Database of Study
Chapter 4: Data Analysis
Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions
Chapter 1: Introduction
Today, psychologists practice in a wide range of fields and are in a unique position to provide valuable services to individuals, groups, and society (Vallis, 1996). Through the judicious application of their scientific and applied skills, psychologists are also in a position to develop innovative interventions and best practices that can be used by other clinicians to help individuals, groups and society at large (Vallis, 1996). These contributions have become even more important in recent years as the demand for health care reform has created the need for more cost-effective clinical approaches to the resolution of a wide range of mental health issues and mental disorders (Vallis, 1996).
The American Psychological Association’s Center for Workforce Studies estimates that there are currently more than 100,000 practicing psychologists in the United States, and current estimates of religious affiliation for Americans means that the overwhelming majority of these practitioners are Christians. At present, California (17,890) New York (12,020) and Pennsylvania (5,620) have the most licensed psychologists, while Wyoming (170), South Dakota (190) and Alaska (190) have the fewest (How many psychologists are licensed in the United States?, 2014). As will be discussed further in chapter two, a majority of these psychologist and the American population (perhaps as high as 80%) hold at least a nominal Christian worldview.
Statement of the Problem
Although there is no religious restriction on the practice of psychology, by definition, the practice of psychology involves understanding and transforming the soul. For example, the word “psychology” is derived from two terms, study (ology) and soul (psyche) or mind (Zimmer, 2013). This definition of psychology, though, has changed in substantive ways over the past several decades to reflect its efforts to assume the qualities of a real science, including using the scientific method to help clients resolve their mental health issues and mental disorders (Zimmer, 2013). The transition of psychology from a practice or study into a science has meant that virtually anyone who is otherwise qualified can become a licensed psychologist in the United States irrespective of their religious affiliation. As will be demonstrated in this study, though, true psychology can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources that are needed to understand and transform the soul in healing ways, an eventuality that directly relates to the purpose of this study which is described below.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to provide a review of the relevant literature in support of the assertion that true psychology (i.e., “the study of the soul”) can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul.
Research Question
This study was guided by the overarching research question, “Do practitioners have to be Christian in order to practice true psychology?”
Importance of the Study
Properly applied, psychology offers numerous benefits for individuals and society. Moreover, by refocusing the discipline on its original intent, the study of the soul, Christian psychologists can provide counseling services that are transformative in nature, effecting lasting positive changes in people’s lives. For instance, according to Pan and Liang-Yu (2013), “Christian faith, as well as spiritual resources, used properly and ethically, could have contributions to the science of psychology” (p. 147). Conversely, psychologists from other faiths may fail to integrate the study of the soul into their practice in ways that fail to provide optimal clinical outcomes. As Pan and Liang-Yu (2013) emphasize, “Contextually, psychology and [Christianity] have common concerns and elements of focus such as humanity, purpose, meaning, the human soul, emotions, the mind, human behavior, philosophical perspectives on suffering, goodness, badness, and human potential” (p. 147). In sum, the importance of this study directly relates to the respective efficacy of psychology as practiced by Christians compared to non-Christians.
Rationale of the Study
All religions reflect a desire to better understand the universal human condition that can help psychologists recognize that other religions, such as Buddhists, Sikhs, and Muslims, apply their values and traditions to cope with the exigencies that are inevitable in life as well as in searching for spiritual truth (Gottlieb, 2002). Nevertheless, the argument can be made that only Christians are capable of practicing “true psychology” because of the Christian concept of the human soul and its relationship to mental well-being. This is not to say of course that other religions do not have belief systems in the afterlife and the human soul (Campbell, 2009). In fact, many modern religions hold that humans will live forever, and the archaeological record confirms that ancient peoples buried grave goods to help their loved ones in the afterlife (Elliott, 2013). As Elliott emphasizes, “Indeed, today most of the religious world believes in an immortal soul that lives on in some form. It is a shared teaching of Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and Baha’i, as well as of native and tribal religions throughout Africa, the Americas and elsewhere” (2013, para. 3).
There are some varying views about the human soul held by different religions, though, with some teaching that the human soul lives through eternity in a heaven or hell while others hold that the human soul will manifest in some other type of life form after death in a perpetual cycle of reincarnation (Elliott, 2013). Conversely, the most nonbelievers reject the notion of a soul altogether, and believe that death spells the end of the human existence altogether (Elliott, 2013). Therefore, it is the Christian conceptualization of the human soul that sets this religion apart and provides the foundation for effective psychology practice.
Finally, it is also important to note that human beings were designed as spiritual as well as physical beings that have innate emotional, mental and social aspects ( as physical, emotional, mental, social, and spiritual beings (Do Christianity and psychology really mix?, 2015). All of these aspects of the human condition affect one another, but spiritual issues are typically a part of the problem (Do Christianity and psychology really mix?, 2015). This, of course, does not mean that “all of [humanity’s] problems have a physiological or psychological basis,” but it is reasonable to suggest that physiological and psychological factors are almost always an important part of the overall mix (Do Christianity and psychology really mix?, 2015, para. 3). Consequently, Christians have often experienced successful clinical outcomes in coping with the day-to-day exigencies of life in the 21st century by seeking help from qualified psychologists (Do Christianity and psychology really mix?, 2015).
These successes, though, are the result of the practice of “true psychology” as opposed to the secularized versions that have become increasingly popular in recent years (Do Christianity and psychology really mix?, 2015). Indeed, some authorities suggest that Christians seek mental health assistance from otherwise qualified psychological practitioners who also subscribe to the Christian faith: “For this reason, believers need to exercise discernment in seeking psychological treatment. In fact, we strongly recommend that they receive therapy only from practitioners who share their Christian faith” (Do Christianity and psychology really mix?, 2015, para. 4). Likewise, other authorities maintain that Christian psychologists alone possess the resources needed to practice true psychology since it involves the study of the soul (Fykholm, 2014). Taken together, it is apparent that there are divergent views on this issue, but determining an accurate answer to the guiding research question can help clarify the underlying concepts and provide Christians with some sound guidance concerning the efficacy of psychological practice by Christian and non-Christian psychologists.
Overview of the Study
This study was organized into five chapters to develop an informed and timely answer to the study’s guiding research question. Chapter one was used to introduce the issues of interest, as well as to provide a statement of the problem, the purpose and importance of the study, as well as its rationale. Chapter two of the study was used to provide a systematic review of the relevant and peer-reviewed literature, and chapter three describes more fully the study’s methodology, including a description of the study approach, the data-gathering method and the database of study that was consulted. The penultimate chapter consists of an exegetical analysis of relevant scripture concerning the human soul and chapter five provides a summary of the research and important findings.
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature
Overview of “True Psychology”
The more straightforward definition of psychology is that it is the study of the soul or mind and human behavior (Cherry, 2011). In sum, psychology seeks to develop a better understanding of the human mind and soul as manifested through thoughts, emotions and behaviors (Cherry, 2011). Although “true psychological” research is focused on these issues, in clinical practice, true psychology can assume a wide range of specialty areas, including mental health treatment, performance enhancement, self-help, ergonomics, and a number of other areas that have an effect on health and daily life, among many others (Cherry, 2011). In this regard Cherry advises that, “It’s difficult to capture everything that psychology encompasses in just a brief definition, but topics such as development, personality, thoughts, feelings, emotions, motivations, and social behaviors represent just a portion of what psychology seeks to understand and explain” (2011, para. 2).
As noted above, there are a number of different areas of psychological practice, including, but not limited to, those set forth in Table 1 below.
Table 1
Areas of Psychological Practice
Specialty Area of Practice
Description
Abnormal Psychology
This is the study of abnormal behavior and psychopathology. This specialty area is focused on research and treatment of a variety of mental disorders and is linked to psychotherapy, and clinical psychology. There are a number of different perspectives used in abnormal psychology. While some psychologists or psychiatrists may focus on a single perspective, many mental health professionals use elements from multiple areas in order to better understand and treat psychological disorders:
* Behavioral: The behavioral approach to abnormal psychology focuses on observable behaviors. In behavioral therapy, the focus is on reinforcing positive behaviors and not reinforcing maladaptive behaviors. This approach targets only the behavior itself, not the underlying causes.
* Medical: The medical approach to abnormal psychology focuses on the biological causes on mental illness. This perspective emphasizes understanding the underlying cause of disorders, which might include genetic inheritance, related physical disorders, infections and chemical imbalances. Medical treatments are often pharmacological in nature, although medication is often used in conjunction with some other type of psychotherapy.
* Cognitive: The cognitive approach to abnormal psychology focuses on how internal thoughts, perceptions and reasoning contribute to psychological disorders. Cognitive treatments typically focus on helping the individual change his or her thoughts or reactions. Cognitive therapy might also be used in conjunction with behavioral methods in a technique known as cognitive behavioral therapy.
Biological Psychology
Also known as biopsychology, studies how biological processes influence the mind and behavior. This area is closely linked to neuroscience and utilizes tools such as MRI and PET scans to look at brain injury or brain abnormalities. Practitioners in this field frequently look at how biological processes interact with emotions, cognitions and other mental processes. The field of biopsychology is related to several other areas including comparative psychology and evolutionary psychology.
Clinical Psychology
This specialty area is focused on the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of mental disorders. It is also considered the largest employment area within psychology. While professionals in this field often work in medical settings, clinical psychologists are not medical doctors and do not prescribe medications in most states.
Cognitive Psychology
This is the study of human thought processes and cognitions. Cognitive psychologists study topics such as attention, memory, perception, decision-making, problem-solving, and language acquisition. Cognitive psychology has many practical applications. For example, cognitive principles are often used in the creation of educational curriculum and software design.
Comparative Psychology
This is the branch of psychology concerned with the study of animal behavior. This type of research can lead to a deeper and broader understanding of human psychology. The comparative method involves comparing the similarities and differences among species to gain and understanding of evolutionary relationships. The comparative method can also be used to compare modern species of animals to ancient species.
Developmental Psychology
This is a specialty area that looks at human growth and development over the lifespan. Theories often focus on the development of cognitive abilities, morality, social functioning, identity, and other life areas. Childhood is obviously a time of tremendous change, but people also continue to grow and develop during the early adult, middle age, and senior years.
Forensic Psychology
This is an applied field focused on using psychological research and principles in the legal and criminal justice system. Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, known as the Executive Council for the American Psychology-Law society (AP-LS), formally defines forensic psychology as: “The professional practice by psychologists within the areas of clinical psychology, counseling psychology, neuropsychology, and school psychology, when they are engaged regularly as experts and represent themselves as such, in an activity primarily intended to provide professional psychological expertise to the judicial system.”
Industrial-Organizational Psychology
This field uses psychological research to enhance work performance, select employee, improve product design, and enhance usability. People who work in this area apply psychological principles to areas such as human resources, employee training, marketing and sales, and organizational development. Industrial-organizational psychologists frequently apply their research findings to increasing workplace productivity, selecting employees best suited for particular jobs, and product testing.
Personality Psychology
This field looks at the various elements that make up individual personalities. Well-known personality theories include Freud’s structural model of personality and the “Big Five” theory of personality. A personality disorder is a chronic and pervasive mental disorder that affects thoughts, behaviors, and interpersonal functioning. The DSM-IV currently lists 10 different personality disorders.
School Psychology
This is the branch of psychology that works within the educational system to help children with emotional, social, and academic issues. The goal of school psychology is to collaborate with parents, teachers, and students to promote a healthy learning environment that focuses on the needs of children.
Social Psychology
This is a discipline that uses scientific methods to study social influence, social perception and social interaction. Social psychology studies diverse subjects including group behavior, social perception, leadership, nonverbal behavior, conformity, aggression, and prejudice. It is important to note that social psychology is not just about looking at social influences. Social perception and social interaction are also vital to understanding social behavior
Source: Adapted from Cherry, 2011
While true psychology can be applied in any of these specialty fields, Sartre believed that experimental psychology is the only true psychology; in addition, he also believed that non-experimental interventions that were designed to explain human behavior should be regarded as pseudo-scientific or philosophical approaches (Schuster, 1998). Conversely, House (2013) maintains that existential meaning-making experiences are the key to the work of a true psychology.
Clearly, there are some fundamental differences in the views about true psychology, but it is important to examine these issues in order to formulate an informed opinion concerning whether true psychology can only be practiced by Christian psychologists or not. If this statement is true, then psychology could not be strictly regarded as a science since pure sciences can be practiced by anyone irrespective of their faith or lack thereof. In fact, the legal definition of the practice of psychology does not include the mention of science. For instance, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, psychotherapy is “a method or system of alleviating or curing certain forms of disease, particularly diseases of the nervous system or such as are traceable to nervous disorders, by suggestion, persuasion, encouragement, the inspiration of hope or confidence, the discouragement of morbid memories, associations, or beliefs, and other similar means addressed to the mental state of the patient, without (or sometimes in conjunction with) the administration of drugs or other physical remedies” (1990, p. 1227).
Nevertheless, psychology as a discipline can trace its origins to the philosophical perspectives that were emerging during the late 19th century at which time it attempted to establish itself as a science (Entwhistle, 2009). According to Entwhistle, “In doing so it adopted methodological naturalism, that is, it seeks natural explanations for the phenomena it investigates and it embraced the scientific method as the means by which those explanations are sought” (2009, p. 142). This observation would appear to refute the proposition that only Christian psychologists are capable of practicing true psychology, but there have been further developments over the years that have affected the manner in which psychology is practiced and how it is viewed by clinicians and the public alike. Over time, the “psychology as a science” methodology was formalized as the biopsychosocial approach, which means that psychology “seeks to understand behavior as it is mediated by biological, psychological, and social forces” (Entwhistle, 2009, p. 142). Since its development, the biopsychosocial approach has been highly effective, and has resulted in pharmacological interventions for mental illness that draw on various psychoanalytical techniques (Entwhistle, 2009).
Despite these trends, the characterization of psychology as a science means that it is not capable of studying the soul in isolation of other factors. As Entwhistle points out, “Psychology, as a science, is constrained to study religious and spiritual matters as biological, psychological, and social. Notice, however, that even if this approach is adopted, it does not mean that spiritual beliefs are necessarily illogical or pathological, nor does not mean that there are not spiritual realities; it just means that psychology — as a science — cannot study spiritual realities directly” (2009, p. 143). This also means that in order for the proposition that only Christian psychologists are capable of practicing true psychology to be true, psychology must be regarded in terms of being something other than a strictly scientific discipline.
Further complicating this analysis are the different directions that psychology has taken over the past century, with some practitioners adopted a metaphysical naturalism mindset, or the belief that the only reality is the physical world, to further reinforce the psychology as a science view (Entwhistle, 2009). If this strictly scientific version of psychology is regarded as “true psychology,” the aforementioned proposition would have to be refuted. In this regard, Entwhistle advises that, “From this perspective, human behavior can only be seen as a product of material forces and as bounded by physical life: death is the end of existence” (2009, p. 144). Indeed, mental health practitioners who do not believe that psychology should “study the soul” as a part of the healing process are ignoring the fundamental realities of the immutability of the human soul and its centrality in mental health. As Entwhistle points out, “Individuals who subscribe to metaphysical naturalism typically view belief in supernatural phenomena as an impediment to science and as an expression of primitive, illogical beliefs. It is from this perspective that individuals condemn religious belief” (2009, p. 144).
The foregoing divergence of views has special implications for psychologists of any faith because the debate concerns the fundamental approaches that are used in mental health practice. In this regard, Entwhistle reports that, “Against this backdrop, a dominant strand of orthodox Christian theology views personhood as a holistic unity. An orthodox Christian worldview affirms that there are spiritual realities (e.g., the existence of God and the activity of God within the created realm) and that we inhabit a physical, created world which we share with other created beings” (2009, p. 143). Therefore, Christian dogma asserts the reality of psychological, physical, social and spiritual social aspects of the human condition (Entwhistle, 2009). This also means that Christian psychologists have the resources needed to fully comprehend the holistic nature of mental health issues and mental disorders in ways that are not available to non-Christian practitioners. As Entwhistle makes clear:
Christian theology does not give us an explicit theory about how these realities operate, but it affirms the essential unity of personhood. . . . The natural realm of creation operates by fixed, discernible rules made by God, which make scientific and rational inquiry possible. A holistic view of human personhood that emerges from a Christian worldview has important implications for how best to conceptualize psychological phenomena. (2009, p. 143)
Therefore, an important part of problem in confirming or refuting the proposition that true psychology, or the study of the soul, can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul concerns the definition used. When psychology’s actual root definition is used, the problem becomes less cloudy. For instance, according to Zimmer, “The derivation of the word from Latin gives it this clear and obvious meaning” (2013, para. 2). Over the years, though, the concept of psychology has been changed in some minor but nevertheless important ways that have had significant implications for practitioners. Indeed, as Zimmer points out, “The subject of psychology currently has very little to do with the mind, and absolutely nothing to do with the soul or spirit” (2013, para. 2). In this context, “psyche” can be alternatively defined as: (a) the spirit or soul; or (b) the human mind. Conversely, soul can be alternatively defined as: (a) the spiritual or immortal elements in a person; or (b) a person’s mental or moral or emotional nature (Zimmer, 2013).
Although differing in conceptualizations, it is reasonable to suggest that the majority of Americans concur that humans possess a “psyche” as defined above in the context of the mind, emotions and thoughts, and a majority of Americans would also likely agree that they possess as “soul” as defined above that is related to humankind’s moral, mental and emotional states (Zimmer, 2013). The etymology of the word “psyche” shows that it is derived from Latin and the Greek psukhe (breath, life, soul) (Zimmer, 2013). According to Zimmer, “To get a better ‘feel’ for this term try to think of it as the invisible animating principle or entity that occupies, interacts with and directs the physical body” (2013, para. 5). The dictionary definitions of psychology also provide some indication of the nature of “true psychology.” For instance, the Oxford American Dictionary defines psychology as:
1. The study of the mind and how it works.
2. Mental characteristics, ‘can you understand his psychology?’ (cited in Zimmer, 2013, para. 5).
Likewise, the Concise Oxford Dictionary provides the following definition for psychology:
1. The scientific study of the human mind and its functions, esp. those affecting behavior in a given context.
2. A treatise on or theory of this.
3. The mental characteristics or attitude of a person or group
4. The mental factors governing a situation or activity (the psychology of crime) (cited in Zimmer, 2013, para. 5).
In addition, the American Heritage Dictionary defines psychology as:
1. The science that deals with mental processes and behavior.
2. The emotional and behavioral characteristics of an individual or group (cited in Zimmer, 2013, para. 5).
As can be seen from these differing definitions, views about the nature of psychology range from a focused study of the mind (soul) to those that describe the discipline as a scientific approach to mental health treatment. These definitions and their manifestation in real-world practice have altered the nature of true psychology and changed it into something far different from its original intent. In this regard, Zimmer emphasizes that:
These definitions have further altered the true meaning. In actual practice, modern psychology deals almost exclusively with physiology (brain chemistry, neurology, genetics) and the behavior of the biological organism (stimulus-response), completely disregarding and ignoring the mind (man’s inner self, and more to the point, man’s true and vital self). (2013, para. 6)
Indeed, Zimmer and like-minded authorities believe that over time, even the dictionary definitions of psychology will eliminate the notion of the mind and soul entirely, based on the manner in which the discipline is taught in universities in the United States. According to Zimmer, “Members of the educational establishment write the dictionaries, and the educational establishment is entrenched in modern psychological theories” (2013, para. 6). The accurate definition of psychology, though, confirms that psychology is primarily concerned with the study of the human mind or alternatively, the human soul. In this regard, Zimmer emphasizes that, “Adhering to the strict definition of the word, psychology would involve the study of man’s invisible world as described above, and nothing else” (2013, para. 6). Consequently, strictly applied, true psychology is the study of the human mind or soul irrespective of the specialty field that is involved. It is also important to note that this is not conjecture, but is rather a strict reading of the etymology of the word and its meaning. As Zimmer concludes, “This is not an opinion or bias. This is according to exactly what the word means and nothing else. Of course, relations to behavior could be studied, and relations to brain activity could be studied, but the subject in itself, by definition is or should be the study of the mind or soul” (2013, para. 6).
Some indication of the significance of this issue can be discerned from the responsibilities that psychologists have to their clients as licensed practitioners in the United States. Irrespective of religious affiliation or non-affiliation, the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (hereinafter referred to as the Ethics Code) consists of an Introduction, a Preamble, five General Principles and specific Ethical Standards that are applicable to all practicing psychologists in the United States today. The five General Principles are set forth in Table 2 below.
Table 2
Five General APA Ethical Principles of Psychologists
.Principle
Description
Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence
Psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm. In their professional actions, psychologists seek to safeguard the welfare and rights of those with whom they interact professionally and other affected persons and the welfare of animal subjects of research. When conflicts occur among psychologists’ obligations or concerns, they attempt to resolve these conflicts in a responsible fashion that avoids or minimizes harm. Because psychologists’ scientific and professional judgments and actions may affect the lives of others, they are alert to and guard against personal, financial, social, organizational or political factors that might lead to misuse of their influence. Psychologists strive to be aware of the possible effect of their own physical and mental health on their ability to help those with whom they work.
Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility
Psychologists establish relationships of trust with those with whom they work. They are aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to society and to the specific communities in which they work. Psychologists uphold professional standards of conduct, clarify their professional roles and obligations, accept appropriate responsibility for their behavior and seek to manage conflicts of interest that could lead to exploitation or harm. Psychologists consult with, refer to, or cooperate with other professionals and institutions to the extent needed to serve the best interests of those with whom they work. They are concerned about the ethical compliance of their colleagues’ scientific and professional conduct. Psychologists strive to contribute a portion of their professional time for little or no compensation or personal advantage.
Principle C: Integrity
Psychologists seek to promote accuracy, honesty and truthfulness in the science, teaching and practice of psychology. In these activities psychologists do not steal, cheat or engage in fraud, subterfuge or intentional misrepresentation of fact. Psychologists strive to keep their promises and to avoid unwise or unclear commitments. In situations in which deception may be ethically justifiable to maximize benefits and minimize harm, psychologists have a serious obligation to consider the need for, the possible consequences of, and their responsibility to correct any resulting mistrust or other harmful effects that arise from the use of such techniques.
Principle D: Justice
Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all persons to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the processes, procedures and services being conducted by psychologists. Psychologists exercise reasonable judgment and take precautions to ensure that their potential biases, the boundaries of their competence and the limitations of their expertise do not lead to or condone unjust practices.
Principle E: Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity
Psychologists respect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and self-determination. Psychologists are aware that special safeguards may be necessary to protect the rights and welfare of persons or communities whose vulnerabilities impair autonomous decision making. Psychologists are aware of and respect cultural, individual and role differences, including those based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language and socioeconomic status and consider these factors when working with members of such groups. Psychologists try to eliminate the effect on their work of biases based on those factors, and they do not knowingly participate in or condone activities of others based upon such prejudices.
As indicated in Principle E, Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity, psychologists have a fundamental responsibility to be aware of and respect religious differences. Moreover, there is no restriction of any type concerning the religious affiliation or non-affiliation of any practicing psychologist in the United States, but there are some published guidelines concerning how to provide optimal psychological services for clients with Christian, Jewish or Islamic beliefs (Richards & Bergin, 2004). Therefore, in order to confirm or refute the proposition that true psychology (I.e. “The study of the soul”) can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul, it is essential to determine precisely how psychologists effect meaningful changes in their clients to resolve mental health issues and mental disorders. .
Moreover, while most psychotherapeutic techniques are based on one of three main categories of psychotherapy, the majority of psychologists, irrespective of their personal preferences for a treatment modality, rely on a blend of techniques depending on the unique needs of their clients (Passantino & Passantino, 2013). According to Passantino and Passantino, this general characteristic of the psychology profession has significant implications for Christian practitioners. In this regard, Passantino and Passantino emphasize that, “This allows for Christians to reject techniques incompatible with a Christian world view and to use techniques they can reconcile to a Christian world view, but it does not promote a unified, coherent philosophy of therapy” (2013, para. 3).
The research to date suggests that psychotherapy can only be “moderately helpful” in most cases and the majority of individual resolve their mental health issues without consulting professional mental healthcare providers (Passantino & Passantino, 2013). Therefore, Passantino and Passantino point out that in order for Christian psychotherapy to be effective, “It must start from the firm biblical foundation of a Christian world view, with each technique part of a coherent biblical paradigm” (2013, para. 4). In fact, such a coherent biblical paradigm is also congruent with the diagnostic criteria and recommended treatment protocols for mental health issues and mental disorders.
The most recent version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV), published by the American Psychiatric Association, differentiates between mental disorders and manifestations of religious and spiritual problems (what some have termed “spiritual emergencies”) (Callahan, 1999). Although some religious problems can be diagnosed as overlapping with mental disorders, the two categories are not the same in the DSM-IV (Callahan, 1999). As a result, Callahan advises that, “Prudential judgments are required in the psychiatric practice of differential diagnosis, just as they are in the traditional practice of discernment of spirits” (1999, p. 8). In this context, the relevance of religion in people’s lives becomes especially important since it bears directly on the interplay between emotions, physiology and reactive states, and Christian psychologists are especially well equipped to make these distinctions. As Callahan points out, “What is the meaning of a particular religious experience and by what criteria do we judge it? The spiritual tradition insists that ‘by their fruits you shall know them’” (1999, p. 8).
The DSM-IV also provides a useful breakdown of mental health and mental disorders that can help determine whether these conditions are best treated by psychologists who subscribe to Christian theology and the Christian concept of the human soul. According to a study by Stein, Phillips, Bolton et al. (2010), DSM-III and DSM-IV have made important contribution to patient care and to the scientific study of psychiatric disorders by providing comprehensive and reliable diagnostic criteria for a wide array of mental health disorders. Conversely, both the DSM-III and DSM-IV have been attacked for providing a bewildering array of diagnostic categories as well as for permitting the erosion of the distinction between psychopathology and normal psychological episode such as shyness in social settings or bereavement following the death of a loved one (Stein et al., 2010).
Notwithstanding these accolades and criticisms, both the DSM-III and DSM-IV have underscored the problems that are associated with developing a precise demarcation between a healthy mental state and a mental state that requires professional counseling (Stein et al., 2010). Researchers continue to reevaluate and redefine the concept of mental disorder as part of the DSM-IV developmental process but more work is still required in this area (Stein et al., 2010). For instance, the DSM-IV concedes that:
Although this manual provides a classification of mental disorders, it must be admitted that no definition adequately specifies precise boundaries for the concept of ‘mental disorder.’ The concept of mental disorder, like many other concepts in medicine and science, lacks a consistent operational definition that covers all situations. All medical conditions are defined on various levels of abstraction — for example, structural pathology (e.g., ulcerative colitis), symptom presentation (e.g., migraine), deviance from a physiological norm (e.g., hypertension), and etiology (e.g., pneumococcal pneumonia). Mental disorders have also been defined by a variety of concepts (e.g., distress, dyscontrol, disadvantage, disability, inflexibility, irrationality, syndromal pattern, etiology, and statistical deviation). Each is a useful indicator for a mental disorder, but none is equivalent to the concept, and different situations call for different definitions.
Notwithstanding these constraints, though, the DSM-IV does advise that:
Despite these caveats, the definition of mental disorder that was included in DSM-III and DSM-III-R is presented here because it is as useful as any other available definition and has helped to guide decisions regarding which conditions on the boundary between normality and pathology should be included in DSM-IV. In DSM-IV, each of the mental disorders is conceptualized as a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress (e.g., a painful symptom) or disability (i.e., impairment in one or more important areas of functioning) or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom. In addition, this syndrome or pattern must not be merely an expectable and culturally sanctioned response to a particular event, for example, the death of a loved one. Whatever its original cause, it must currently be considered a manifestation of a behavioral, psychological, or biological dysfunction in the individual. Neither deviant behavior (e.g., political, religious, or sexual) nor conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict is a symptom of a dysfunction in the individual, as described above.
The DSM-IV’s current definition of mental disorder is set forth in Table 3 below.
Table 3
DSM-IV Definition of Mental Disorder
Category
Description
Features
A a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual
B is associated with present distress (e.g., a painful symptom) or disability (i.e., impairment in one or more important areas of functioning) or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom
C must not be merely an expectable and culturally sanctioned response to a particular event, for example, the death of a loved one
D a manifestation of a behavioral, psychological, or biological dysfunction in the individual
E neither deviant behavior (e.g., political, religious, or sexual) nor conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict is a symptom of a dysfunction in the individual
Other Considerations
F no definition adequately specifies precise boundaries for the concept of “mental disorder”
G the concept of mental disorder (like many other concepts in medicine and science) lacks a consistent operational definition that covers all situations
As can be readily discerned from the breakdown in Table 3 above, the DSM-IV does not take the human soul into account in its diagnostic criteria for mental health issues or mental disorders or interventions, but many mental health practitioners and theologians alike agree that Christian psychologists are in a better position to practice “true psychology” since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul, and these issues are discussed further below.
Christian Dogma and the Human Soul
Not surprisingly, there has been considerable debate over the centuries concerning the precise nature of the human soul. When conceptualizing the human soul, many modern Americans generally think of a nebulous entity that exists within them that somehow survives their death and carries their life essence to heaven where it lives forever in harmony with the Creator in return for a life surrendered, but this perspective has not always been in the mainstream. For instance, according to Neander, “In determining the nature of the human soul, a controversy arose between those who regarded it as something corporeal, and those who thought it to be spiritual” (1872, p. 340).
Consequently, one of the most significant points made in the New Testament is the notion that the essential personality (typically termed the “psyche” or the “pneuma”) survives bodily death (Brown & Murphy, 1998). According to Brown and Murphy, “This soul or spirit may be temporarily disembodied, but it is not complete without the body, and its continued existence after bodily death is dependent upon God rather than a natural endowment of the soul” (1998, p. 29). There have been some advances in scientific knowledge that have also contributed to a better understanding of the nature of the human soul. For example, based on the discovery of DNA and the humane genome, it is now known that humans inherit their bodies from ancestors, including ancestors of other species; however, humans do not inherit their souls from their ancestors (Anderson, 2007).
According to Descartes, the fundamental difference between souls in animals and the human soul is that the human soul is immortal while animal souls die when the animal dies (Klein, 1970). An important point made by Klein (1970) concerns Descartes’ views about the human soul have relevance for the discussion concerning whether only Christians can practice true psychology. In this regard, Klein points out that, “Moreover, to the extent that [Descartes] employed the word ‘soul’ as a synonym for ‘mind,’ the souls of animals were regarded as being nonrational and unintelligent” (p. 37). According to Klein, “Precisely what the function of the animal soul might be is not made clear. By implication, unlike the human soul, it is united with the animal’s body. At all events, in commenting on the difference between the two kinds of soul [Descartes] maintained that the human soul ‘is of a nature entirely independent of the body, and consequently not liable to die with body’” (1970, p. 349).
The point is also made in the Bible (NIV) in Genesis 1:26-27 that humans have a spiritual element in their lives, and it is clear that people have the capability to make important choices and decisions. Likewise, in 1 Corinthians 2:11, the Apostle Paul points out that human intellect is attributable to the “spirit of the man which is in him” (Do you have an immortal soul?, 2014). This “spirit of the man” is characterized further as that aspect of humans that enables people to reason and think, an ability to differentiates humankind from other animals (Do you have an immortal soul?, 2014).
Therefore, the existence of the human soul means that life has a rational as well as spiritual element that must be taken into account when mental health issues or mental disorders are involved (Danielson, 2007). Moreover, Danielson (2007) suggests that this spiritual element provides substantive support for the existence of the human soul. In this regard, Danielson advises that:
The intellectual soul is capable of spiritual as well as rational experience, and this capacity for spiritual experience means that the human soul is able to transcend physical nature. This power would be impotent, indeed incoherent, if there were no transcendent order accessible by means of it. The existence in the human soul of a faculty aimed at transcendent order is formidable evidence that such an order exists. (p. 50)
Other biblical scholars maintain that human beings do not possess souls per se, but rather, humans are souls, and these can either live forever or die depending on the type of life the individual led while alive (Do you have an immortal soul?, 2014). For instance, in Genesis 2:15-17, God issues a warning to the first living souls that they could lose their lies and the point is made again in Ezekiel 18:40, 20 that “the soul that sins, it shall die.” Other salient passages regarded the human soul include the following:
God declared that the life of a living creature is in the blood (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:11 — 14; Deuteronomy 12:23).
Isaiah prophesied that the Messiah would make his soul an offering for sin (Isaiah 53:10).
Jesus as Messiah poured out his soul to death (Isaiah 53:12).
Jesus gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45).
Christ foretold of pouring his blood out for many for the forgiveness of sins (Matthew 26:28).
It is the sacrificial blood of Christ that cleanses all sin and redeems us (1 John 1:7; Ephesians 1:7) (cited in Do you have an immortal soul?, 2014, para. 4)
These aspects of the human soul suggest that Christian mental health practitioners are better equipped to effect transformative changes in clients than non-Christian practitioners. For instance, Entwhistle emphasizes that, “A Christian worldview that takes seriously the idea of personhood as a holistic unity presents an ideal perspective from which to explore human behavior as an expression of biological, psychological, and social influences (the “biopsychosocial” perspective now common in psychology)” (2009, p. 142). In addition, a Christian worldview also provides practitioners with the ability to integrate the spiritual aspects of their clients’ lives into the therapy in order to formulate more efficacious interventions. In this regard, Entwhistle (2009) adds that, “A Christian worldview that holds that human beings are a unity of biological, psychological, social, and spiritual realities creates an opportunity for theoretical integration and holistic practice” (2009, p. 142).
Moreover, psychologists with a Christian worldview are in a better position to determine which type of therapy is most appropriate for a given situation. According to Entwhistle, a Christian worldview “also creates practical tensions regarding how to discern the root causes of behavior (e.g., biological, psychological, social, or spiritual etiology) and attempting to discover the best way to intervene when impairment of functioning is noted (e.g., whether biological therapy, psychotherapy, social intervention, or religiously-based interventions are called for)” (2009, p. 142).
The views about the specific role played by spiritual in mental health have ranged the entire spectrum, with one extreme regarding spirituality as the source of mental problems to the other extreme that holds that only religious solutions are effective for treating psychological problems (Entwhistle, 2009). The view that good mental health and religion are incompatible was popular among psychologists during the first half of the 20th century, and even thereafter to some extent (Entwhistle, 2009). This view can be discerned from a quotation from Albert Ellis who wrote:
In most respects religion seriously sabotages mental health. Try to avoid a doctrinal system through which you are dogmatically convinced that you absolutely must devote yourself to the one, only, right, and unerring deity…. Otherwise, in my view as a psychotherapist, you most probably are headed for emotional trouble. (cited in Entwhistle, 2009, p. 143)
While Ellis later changed his views concerning the incompatibility of religion and psychology, this quotation above is characteristic of what Entwhistle terms “naturalistic metaphysical extremism” (2009, p. 143). According to Entwhistle, “Naturalistic metaphysical extremism assumes that human nature indeed all of nature – is a purely naturalistic system and that any reliance on religious systems is likely to be damaging psychologically” (2009, p. 143). By sharp contrast, there is a growing consensus among modern mental health practitioners that the human soul or mind is the proper area of study and that religion and good mental health go hand-in-hand (Entwhistle, 2009).
Although views about the human soul differ among mental health practitioners, many people derive their own views about the soul based on a combination of biblical and non-biblical teachings. In this regard, Elliott (2013) reports that, “Today, thanks largely to church fathers Irenaeus and Augustine, most Christians blend the nonbiblical idea of an immortal soul with the biblical promise of resurrection and arrive at their own doctrine of immortality” (2013, p. 2). According to Scott (2010), Irenaean theology views human perfection as something that will be achieved at some future date, and is the result of an ongoing process. Conversely, Augustinian theology is based on the fundamental concept of the fall of man from an original state of righteousness (Scott, 2010). In this regard, Scott (2010) advises that Augustinian theology “begins with the presupposition that God, conceived of as omnipotent and benevolent, created the world good, including humanity. At some precosmic moment Satan and his angels fell through their misuse of freedom, and, correspondingly, Adam and Eve were led astray by Satan, thereby ushering evil and suffering into the universe” (p. 315). The blending of these “soul-making” teachings has had a cumulative effect on the popular perception of the human soul and its immutability. For instance, Elliott notes that, “This view reads accepts that after the body dies, the soul continues and at the resurrection is combined with a spiritual body. Soul has come to mean that all humans were endowed with immortality either at creation or by a gift already given through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ” (2013, p. 3).
This popular perception of the human soul, though, is inaccurate because the Bible makes it clear that the only two entities in the entire universe who possess inherent life are God and Jesus Christ. For example, John 5:26-29 (ESV) reads as follows: “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. . . . Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.”
Although the majority of Christians hold the belief that their immortal souls will ascend to heaven after their deaths, John 3:13 makes it clear that the human soul is placed in a type of celestial limbo until they are resurrected: “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.” Indeed, even King David who is characterized as “a man after God’s own heart,” has not reached heaven yet: “Let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. . . . David did not ascend into the heavens” (Acts 2:29, 34).
In 1 Corinthians 15, the Apostle Paul describes the dead as follows:
15 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand.
2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.
6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.
7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles,
8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
9 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them — yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me.
11 Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
Rather than being dead in the traditional sense, Paul describes them as having “fallen asleep,” a description that is repeated in verse 18: “Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.” The Second Coming of Christ will be the catalyst that will resurrect the “those who have fallen asleep” (Elliott, 2013). The Apostle Paul expounded on this issue in verses 51-53 wherein he states: “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed — in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye. . . . The dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.”
In sum, the biblical message contained in these and related passages means that humans are not automatically given immortality but the gift of immortality is available to all who subscribe to the Christian worldview. As it states in Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Besides the human soul, other aspects of a Christian worldview also have significant implications for determining whether the practice of true psychology can only be performed by Christian psychologists or not, including the Fruit of the Spirit which is discussed further below.
The “Fruit of the Spirit”
According to Christian evangelist Joyce Meyer’s essay, “Understanding the Fruit of the Spirit,” Christians have been provided with a powerful gift that can be used to avoid mental health problems and help resolve them when they do occur. In this regard, Meyer advises that, “You may not know it, but when you gave your life to Jesus, all the fruit of the Spirit were planted inside you in seed form. Through the Spirit you can experience joy and peace in every circumstance, no matter how difficult or painful” (2014, para. 2). The foundation of the Fruit of the Spirit is love. For instance, Meyer notes that, “All the fruit of the Spirit are held in place by love. Jesus said that loving God and other people is the most important commandment. ‘You must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind’” and ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’” (2014, para. 3). This point is also made by Bassett (2013) who suggests that grace can be regarded as being:
A state of right standing with God,
An impartation of power to live and act in a godly manner, and,
As particular behaviors resultant from (1) and (2) above (p. 43).
A grace-oriented life, then, is a manifestation of the Fruit of the Spirit in general and the first Fruit of the Spirit, love, in particular. For example, Limouris (1990) counsels that, “It is in this sense that we define grace in terms of godly behavior, attitudes and dispositions founded on and flowing from God’s work in individual lives. For example, a grace-oriented life should manifest the Fruit of the Spirit and especially the first fruit of the Spirit: love” (1990, p. 288). A grace-oriented life that manifests the Fruit of the Spirit recognizes that the recipient is unworthy of the gifts bestowed by God and acknowledges the enormity of the gift (Bassett, 2013).
Besides the first gift, love, the other Fruits of the Spirit identified in Galatians 5:22 are joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control (Plante, 2012). As Plante points out, though, “There remains a profound dearth of research that has analyzed the evidence-based findings of those attributes that contained in the scriptures concerning the Fruit of the Spirit in both a scholarly and applied fashion” (2012, p. 37).
Notwithstanding the paucity of research in these area to date, Galatians 5:22 makes it clear that there are a number of positive mental health outcomes that are possible when people draw on the Fruit of the Spirit (Plante, 2012). Because these aspects of the human condition fall outside of conventional scientific investigation, it is not surprising that the credibility of the Fruit of the Spirit has been called into question by modern practitioners. In this regard, Plante reports that, “Contemporary behavioral scientists living and working within an often secular, scientific, and empirically focused world as well as being affiliated with rigorous academic institutions and research programs, we wonder if the fruits of the spirit have any empirical and scientific basis” (2012, p. 3). As noted above, until fairly recently in the history of psychology, a prevailing view was that religion was the cause of many of the mental health problems that humans experience during their lives.
This perception has resulted in a lingering legacy that questions whether the Fruit of the Spirit is capable of effecting meaningful changes in transformative ways in mental health treatment settings (Raymond, 1908). Indeed, depending on the circumstances, religious beliefs appear to contribute to poor mental health while in others they appear to improve it. As Plante points out, “We are certainly well aware of the horrific behaviors that some people engage in stating that they are doing so due to their religious beliefs and practices. Some choose to kill and abuse others in the name of their religion, for example. Some discriminate against others and treat others with contempt, justifying their behavior and attitudes through their religious beliefs and affiliations.” (2012, p. 4).
In fact, religious beliefs can result in behaviors that span the entire continuum, ranging from genocide to selfless charitable acts and even the sacrifice of one’s life for others (Plante, 2012). According to Plante, “For centuries and perhaps millennia, people chose to treat others horrifically in the name of God. Religion can bring out the worst in people. However, the opposite also appears true” (2012, p. 4). When people believe they are conforming to the will of God, the outcomes can be horrific or noble, appalling or inspiring. As Plante concludes, “Religion and spirituality clearly appear to bring out the very best in people. So religion appears to play a role in turning out Mother Teresas as well as suicide bombers, both saints and sinner” (2012, p. 4).
Interestingly, although there are several gifts of the Spirit, there is just one fruit. In this regard, Hoekema (1994) reports that, “Though there are many gifts of the Spirit, there is only one fruit. Both in 1 Corinthians 12 and in Romans 12 the word for gifts (charismata) is in the plural, and the clear teaching of these chapters is that not everyone has all the gifts. What Paul teaches us in Galatians 5, however, is that every true believer should bear the entire fruit of the Spirit” (p. 44). Implementing the Fruit of the Spirit, though, means that people must practice all of the gifts together rather than selectively using one and then another as they see fit (Hoekema, 1994). For example, Hoekema adds that:
The fact that the Spirit’s fruit is one, moreover, has another implication. It implies that growth in spiritual maturity is not a matter of practicing now this virtue and then that one, in piecemeal fashion. It is not a matter of saying to oneself: this week I’ll practice love, next week I’ll cultivate joy, and the week after that I’ll work on peace. Spiritual growth means yielding ourselves habitually and totally to the Holy Spirit, being led by the Spirit, walking and living in the Spirit day by day and hour by hour. When we do so, we shall be growing in all these virtues together. (Hoekema, 1994, p. 44)
These observations have special implications for Christian psychologists since spiritual growth in the Fruit of the Spirit can directly translate into improved mental health. Therefore, being filled with the Fruit of the Spirit represents an important element in responding to religious beliefs in mentally healthy ways. Unfortunately, far too many Americans lack the Fruit of the Spirit in their lives. Although fully 90% of Americans believe in God, they are unwilling to incorporate the Fruit of the Spirit for whatever reasons with the result being a “numbness of the soul.” For instance, Campbell (2009) notes that, “When asked if they believe in God, 9 out of 10 Americans will answer yes, yet their belief is not accompanied by a deep interest in or love for God. This numbness in the soul, he claims, fosters a bland indifference to the cries of suffering humanity” (p. 18).
This “numbness of the soul,” though, can be overcome and the Fruit of the Spirit gifts can all be leveraged to improve mental health. As noted above, patience and self-control are two of the gifts of the Fruit of the Spirit and both of these attributes have been shown to have significant mental health implications. For instance, Westerndrop (2010) reports that, “Delayed gratification is the ability to wait in order to obtain something I want. It is often associated with success in life because of its association with impulse control, or what the Bible calls self-control” (p. 37). A well-known experiment conducted by an American psychologist, Walter Mischel, used marshmallows to evaluate the differences in 4-year-old children’s personalities and behaviors when they were offered marshmallows (Westendorp, 2010).
The Mischel experiment involved providing a group of 4-year-olds with one marshmallow, and then promising then another one if they would just wait 20 minutes before eating the first marshmallow. The results of the experiment showed that some of the children were able to wait the full 20 minutes and received an additional marshmallow while others were unable to wait and gobbled their first marshmallow right away (Westerndorp, 2010). Although these results were not earth-shattering, the significance of this experiment was related to its longitudinal design and all of the participants were tracked into their adolescence and adulthood (Westendorp, 2010). The findings that emerged from the study of these participants in their adolescence are highly salient for the purposes of this study. In this regard, Westendrop reports that, “They demonstrated that those with the ability to wait were better adjusted and more dependable (determined via surveys of their parents and teachers), and they scored considerably higher on standard scholastic aptitude tests” (2010, p. 37).
Moreover, the young people who demonstrated self-control through the ability to delay immediate gratification also experienced fewer major problems in their lives, including a lower incidence of substance abuse and divorce (Westendopr, 2010). The self-control exhibited by the young people who were able to wait the full 20 minutes to receive an additional reward is an example of a Fruit of the Spirit. As Westerndrop concludes, “At a time when greed is wrecking the economy we need to learn delayed gratification more than ever. And we can… because the Bible teaches that this quality is a fruit of the spirit that flows from accepting the gospel of Jesus Christ” (Westendorp, 2010, p. 37).
Other biblical scholars, sociologists, criminologists and mental health practitioners likewise agree that the gifts of the Fruit of the Spirit correspond to improved mental health and a moral life. For example, according to Cross, “We become members of the living body of Christ by being consciously and voluntarily baptized in the Spirit of Christ — a baptism witnessed by the evidence of moral purpose and character as the Fruit of the Spirit” (2001, p. 174). Likewise, Wilner (1995) advises that, “Positive psychology has revealed that many of these emotional states, such as kindness, love, and joy, are a major factor in living a flourishing life. It’s funny to say, but living by the Fruit of the Spirit may have some empirical validation” (para. 3). This empirical validation of the contribution of the Fruit of the Spirit gifts in general and self-control in particular can be found in a number of areas of life. According to Wilner, “When we have self-control it provides the means to live by all the above attributes. It can help us be more patient, kind, and faithful. We can resist temptation and delay gratification we will be more likely to accomplish what we desire” (1995, para. 4).
Moreover, the Fruit of the Spirit gifts also translate into improved mental health and physical well-being in other ways as well. For example, Wilner notes that, “We will have a strong foundation for making decision and dealing with problems that may arise. Self-control is a true variety of wisdom that can improve our life outcomes. These last four ‘fruits’ are just as powerful and impacting as the other five” (1995, para. 4). Finally, the gifts of the Fruit of the Spirit can produce an overall improvement in the quality of life people lead, which naturally results in improved mental health. As Wilner concludes, “When we can bring our awareness to these standards of living, we are much more likely to see improvements in our attitude, relationships, and overall life-satisfaction” (1995, para. 4). Taken together, it is reasonable to suggest that Christian psychologists who draw on the Fruit of the Spirit can produce lifelong transformative changes in their clients.
Discussion
The proposition that Christian psychologists are the only mental health practitioners capable of practicing true psychology runs the risk of being labeled exclusionary or elitist unless the reality of the environment is taken into account. Today, the United States is predominately a Christian nation, with just over half (51.3%) subscribing to a Protestant faith, just under a quarter (23.9%) subscribing to Roman Catholicism, while another 1.7% are Mormons and 1.6% “other Christians.” Just 1.7% of the American population is Jewish, and less than one percent of the population is Buddhist (0.7%) or Muslim (0.6%) (American people and society, 2015). The remainder of the American population is unaffiliated (12%), unspecified (2.5%) or specifies no religion (American people and society, 2015). These demographics suggest that the majority of psychologists and that a majority of their clients, perhaps nearly 80%, are also Christians. This demographic breakdown should therefore translate into clinical settings where treatment outcomes for Christian clients are more effective than for non-Christian psychologists and non-Christian clients. As the American Psychiatric Association (APA) points out, though, a definite answer to the question, “Is psychotherapy effective?” may be unattainable. In their 1982 research book, Psychotherapy Research: Methodological and Efficacy Issues, the APA concludes: “Unequivocal conclusions about casual connections between treatment and outcome may never be possible in psychotherapy research” (1982, p. 7).
Although there have been no studies concerning the efficacy of psychology by religious affiliation to the author’s knowledge, there is some indication that Christians are able to benefit from psychological interventions more than their counterparts who subscribe to other religions. For instance, Bobgan and Bobgan (1987) report that, “It is paradoxical that at a time when secular psychological researchers are demonstrating less confidence in psychological counseling, more and more professing Christians are pursuing it” (p. 37). The efficacy of psychology that is based on a Christian worldview has also been cited as a reason for its growing popularity. In this regard, Bobgan and Bobgan point out that, “Christian counseling centers are springing up all over the nation offering what many believe is the perfect combination: Christianity plus psychology. Furthermore, Christians who are not even in the counseling ministry look to psychologists for advice on how to live, how to relate to others, and how to meet the challenges of life” (p. 37). These statistics and trends lend further support to the proposition that only Christian psychologists can practice true psychology.
Chapter 3: Methodology
Description of the Study Approach
This study used a triangulated study approach to develop an informed and timely answer to the study’s guiding research question, “Do practitioners have to be Christian in order to practice true psychology?” According to Neuman (2003), a triangulated study approach helps to improve the trustworthiness of the findings that emerge from a social research project. The first leg of the triangulated study approach was a review of the relevant literature. This approach is congruent with the guidance provided by numerous social science researchers. For instance, Fraenkel and Wallen (2001) report that, “Researchers usually dig into the literature to find out what has already been written about the topic they are interested in investigating. Both the opinions of experts in the field and other research studies are of interest. Such reading is referred to as a review of the literature” (p. 48). There are a number of valuable outcomes that can be achieved using a well-conducted literature review, including the following:
1. It helps describe a topic of interest and refine either research questions or directions in which to look;
2. It presents a clear description and evaluation of the theories and concepts that have informed research into the topic of interest;
3. It clarifies the relationship to previous research and highlights where new research may contribute by identifying research possibilities which have been overlooked so far in the literature;
4. It provides insights into the topic of interest that are both methodological and substantive;
5. It demonstrates powers of critical analysis by, for instance, exposing taken for granted assumptions underpinning previous research and identifying the possibilities of replacing them with alternative assumptions;
6. It justifies any new research through a coherent critique of what has gone before and demonstrates why new research is both timely and important (Wood & Ellis, 2003, p. 51).
The second leg of the triangulated research approach was a survey of practicing American psychologists to determine their reviews concerning the proposition that true psychology (i.e., the study of the soul) can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul. A custom survey instrument was designed for this purpose and a proforma copy of the survey instrument is provided at Appendix A. Respondents were recruited through personal and emailed contacts, and of the 100 invitations made, a total of 25 respondents completed the survey in time for their results to be included in the data analysis. The survey results were analyzed using SPSS Version 13.0 for Windows (Student Version) and the findings presented in tabular and graphic form, with the results interpreted narratively in the concluding chapter.
An exegetical analysis of salient biblical passages was the final leg of the triangulated research approach and was used to establish the groundwork for corresponding theological conclusions concerning the efficacy of practice of true psychology by adherents of faiths besides Christianity (Johnson, 2013). Although the history of biblical interpretation or hermeneutics can be traced to the writings of the Stoics and church fathers, the term became popularized as the name of a specific field of study during the Protestant Reformation (Richardson & Fowers, 1999). The need for exegetical analyses has long been established. For example, the Council of Trent (1545 — 1563) decreed that Scripture is nebulous and that church authority and tradition are required in order to identify the correct allegorical interpretation of God’s Word (Richardson & Fowers, 1999). The overarching goal of this hermeneutical exposition was to define the concept of the human soul and its relationship to psychological practice.
Data-gathering Method and Database of Study
The data needed to for the literature review and exegetical analysis components of the research approach were systematically gathered from a variety of sources, including public and university libraries, online research databases such as JSTOR, Questia and EBSCOHost. In addition, relevant resources from the author’s personal library were also consulted.
Chapter 4: Data Analysis
Results of the Survey of Psychologists
Section One: General Information
Years in practice: Average 11.5 years
Treatment setting(s): School: 2
Industry: 11
Private practice: 12
Religious affiliation: Protestant: 17
Roman Catholic: 3
Other Christian: 1
Muslim: 1
Jewish: 1
No religious affiliation: 2
Section Two: Likert-Scaled Questions
The results of the administration of the custom survey to 25 practicing psychologists are presented in Tables 4 through 8 and depicted graphically in Figures 1 through 5 below.
Table 4
Responses to the statement, “Religious beliefs are an important component of psychological practice”
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Strongly agree
9
36.0
36.0
36.0
Agree
10
40.0
40.0
76.0
Neither agree nor disagree
4
16.0
16.0
92.0
Disagree
2
8.0
8.0
Total
25
Figure 1. Responses to the statement, “Religious beliefs are an important component of psychological practice”
Table 5
Responses to the statement, “My practice includes the use of true psychology, defined as the study of the soul”
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Strongly agree
5
20.0
20.0
20.0
Agree
9
36.0
36.0
56.0
Neither agree nor disagree
5
20.0
20.0
76.0
Disagree
3
12.0
12.0
88.0
Strongly disagree
3
12.0
12.0
Total
25
Figure 2. Responses to the statement, “My practice includes the use of true psychology, defined as the study of the soul”
Table 6
Responses to the statement, “True psychology can only be practiced by Christian psychologists since only they possess the resources needed for understanding and transforming the soul”
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Strongly agree
5
20.0
20.0
20.0
Agree
6
24.0
24.0
44.0
Neither agree nor disagree
6
24.0
24.0
68.0
Disagree
5
20.0
20.0
88.0
Strongly disagree
3
12.0
12.0
Total
25
Figure 3. Responses to the statement, “True psychology can only be practiced by Christian psychologists since only they possess the resources needed for understanding and transforming the soul”
Table 7
Responses to the statement, “True psychology can be practiced by anyone irrespective of their religious affiliation or lack of affiliation”
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Strongly agree
8
32.0
32.0
32.0
Agree
10
40.0
40.0
72.0
Neither agree nor disagree
4
16.0
16.0
88.0
Disagree
3
12.0
12.0
Total
25
Figure 4. Responses to the statement, “True psychology can be practiced by anyone irrespective of their religious affiliation or lack of affiliation”
Table 8
Responses to the statement, “I draw on the Fruits of the Spirit identified in Galatians 5:22 (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control) in my professional practice”
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Strongly agree
11
44.0
44.0
44.0
Agree
7
28.0
28.0
72.0
Neither agree nor disagree
3
12.0
12.0
84.0
Disagree
2
8.0
8.0
92.0
Strongly disagree
2
8.0
8.0
Total
25
Figure 5. Responses to the statement, “I draw on the Fruits of the Spirit identified in Galatians 5:22 (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control) in my professional practice”
Section Three: Open-Ended Comments
All told, four respondents provided comments in this section which are repeated verbatim below:
Christian psychologists are probably in a better position to help other Christians (Christian).
I feel a little offended by the suggestion (Jewish).
The profession has largely moved away from true psychology (Christian).
This is the first time that I’ve heard of such a thing.
Exegesis of Applicable Scripture
According to 1 Corinthians 2:14, “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto Him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” This passage provides clear evidence that, “The sanctified mind discerns the real beauties of holiness, but the power of discerning and judging about common and natural things is not lost” (Henry, 2003, para. 4). Therefore, like the gifts of the Fruit of the Spirit, the power of discernment is also an important component for good mental health. For instance, according to Ewart (2008), “The gift of discernment is the ability to recognize what is genuine from what is pretence; what is of God from what is not of God” (Joshua 2:8-11, Judges 4:4-5, 1 Samuel 16:6-13, 1 Kings 10:1-13, Matthew 16:21-23, Acts 5:1-10, Acts 8:19-25, Philippians 1:9-10, 1 Thessalonians 5:20-22, 1 John 4:1 & 6). Christians who have received this gift:
Have a clear sense of right from wrong; truth from error; genuine motives from false ones.
Perceive deception in others.
Recognize inconsistencies between words and deeds.
Sense falseness.
Know whether a word or action is truly in accordance with God or not (Ewart, 2008, para. 3).
According to Genesis 2:7 (KJV): “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” Similarly, the American Standard Version of Genesis 2:7 reads: “And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” and Webster’s Bible Translation reads: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
The divine “breath of life” combined with mere clay became Adam, the first living being in the universe and this first living being was endowed with a soul. In Genesis 2:7 the word “breath” is taken from the Hebrew word, “nesama”; if this breath of life is taken from a “living soul,” death follows as a natural result. In this regard, one biblical scholar advises that, “Removal of the breath of life from a ‘living soul’ results in its death. After Adam had sinned, God told him: ‘For dust you are and to dust you shall return’ (Genesis 3:19). There is no mention of an immortal soul dwelling in a physical body” (Do you have an immortal soul?, 2014, para. 5). Likewise, the word for soul in Genesis 2:7 is taken from the Hebrew word “nephesh,” and this word occurs more than 750 times throughout the Hebrew scriptures (Kroll, 2015). With respect to the precise meaning of nephesh, the New Bible Dictionary (3rd ed.) reports that, “As is clear from Genesis 2:7, the primary meaning is ‘possessing life’” (cited in Do you have an immortal soul?, 2014, para. 5). Not all modern transliterations of nepesh assume the form of “a living soul,” though, and are rather expressed in the following alternatives terms set forth in Table 9 below:
Table 9
Parallel Verses for Genesis 2:7
Source
Version
New International Version
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
New Living Translation
Then the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground. He breathed the breath of life into the man’s nostrils, and the man became a living person.
English Standard Version
Then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
New American Standard Bible
Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Then the LORD God formed the man out of the dust from the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being.
International Standard Version
So the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground, breathed life into his lungs, and the man became a living being.
NET Bible
The LORD God formed the man from the soil of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
In contrast to the Old Testament, the New Testament takes the word for the soul from the Greek word for “soul” which is transliterated as “psyche” or “psuche” (Kroll, 2015). According to Kroll, “The word psuche occurs over 100 times in the New Testament” (2015, para. 2). A representative example of its occurrence in the King James Version of the New Testament which retains the use of the word “soul” can be found at Matthew 16:26 which reads: “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul [psuche]? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” Other alternative transliterations of Matthew 16:26 that substitute the word “life” for “soul” are set forth in Table 10 below.
Table 10
Parallel Verses for Matthew 16:26
Source
Version
Holman Christian Standard Bible
What will it benefit a man if he gains the whole world yet loses his life? Or what will a man give in exchange for his life?
International Standard Version
Because what profit will a person have if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life? Or what can a person give in exchange for his life?
NET Bible
For what does it benefit a person if he gains the whole world but forfeits his life? Or what can a person give in exchange for his life?
GOD’S WORD Translation
What good will it do for people to win the whole world and lose their lives? Or what will a person give in exchange for life?
American Standard Version
For what shall a man be profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and forfeit his life? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his life?
English Revised Version
For what shall a man be profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and forfeit his life? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his life?
Weymouth New Testament
Why, what benefit will it be to a man if he gains the whole world but forfeits his life? Or what shall a man give to buy back his life?
World English Bible
For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, and forfeits his life? Or what will a man give in exchange for his life?
Young’s Literal Translation
For what is a man profited if he may gain the whole world, but of his life suffer loss? Or what shall a man give as an exchange for his life?
Because the Greek translation in the Septuagint uses the Greek word “psuche” to translate the Hebrew word “nepesh,” it is clear that these two words convey the same meanings with respect to life and soul (Kroll, 2015). The differences in translations are attributable to the different contexts in which these publications were produced. In this regard, Kroll reports that, “I is also interesting to note that the King James Version almost always uses the word ‘soul’ to render both the Hebrew nephesh and Greek psuche. Modern translations use a variety of English words and idioms that more precisely express the meaning of these biblical words in their specific contexts” (Kroll, 2015, para. 4). As shown in Table 10 above, the different versions of Genesis 2:7 include nephesh translated alternatively as a “living being” (Kroll, 2015). According to Kroll, “To get the best sense of the meaning of “soul” as used in Scripture, and to see where the Hebrew nephesh and Greek psuche appear, it is recommended that the reader first read the citations in the King James Version” (2015, para. 4).
As noted above and in chapter two, the word in the Old Testament, “nephesh” or “soul” only becomes a “a living being” or “soul” when the “breath of God” is received (Genesis 2:7). Interestingly, the word nephesh can be used to refer to humans as well as animals because they are all “souls” in this context which indicates only that humans and animals alike are all living beings (or creatures) (Kroll, 2015). In Genesis 35:18, the death or departure of the “soul” is referred to in connection with the cessation of breathing as shown in Table 11 below.
Table 11
Parallel Verses for Genesis 35:18
Source
Version
New International Version
As she breathed her last — for she was dying — she named her son Ben-Oni. But his father named him Benjamin.
New Living Translation
Rachel was about to die, but with her last breath she named the baby Ben-oni (which means “son of my sorrow”). The baby’s father, however, called him Benjamin (which means “son of my right hand”).
English Standard Version
And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin.
New American Standard Bible
It came about as her soul was departing (for she died), that she named him Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin.
King James Bible
And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Benoni: but his father called him Benjamin.
Jubilee Bible 2000
And it came to pass as her soul was departing, (for she died) that she called his name Benoni, but his father called him Benjamin.
American Standard Version
And it came to pass, as her soul was departing (for she died), that she called his name Ben-oni: but his father called him Benjamin.
Young’s Literal Translation
And it cometh to pass in the going out of her soul (for she died), that she calleth his name Ben-Oni; and his father called him Benjamin;
In sum, the “soul” is widely regarded as being the essence of life in both animals and humans and the soul is what provides them with the qualify of being living beings (Kroll, 2015). In this regard, Kroll advises that, “In modern terms, we could say the ‘soul’ or nephesh is the life-principle, or simply, life. Put in an existential context the nephesh is the self or person. In this way, the word can even refer to a ‘dead self’ — a dead body (Leviticus 19:28; Numbers 6:6 Haggai 2:13)” (2015, para. 6). As indicated in Table 11 above, though, the nephesh is said to “depart” when humans die; however, this describes a cessation of life itself rather than a relocation of the soul (Kroll, 2015).
This finding has significant implications for confirming or refuting the proposition that only Christian psychologists possess the resources needed to effect positive transformative changes. In this regard, Kroll emphasizes that, “Nephesh is not used for anything like the ‘spirit’ of the dead, and this is important to note in any discussion about any supposed transcendental nature of ‘soul.’ Quite simply put, when the Hebrew word for ‘soul’ is used, nothing more than the person as such — as human being — is meant” (2015, para. 6). If this strict interpretation is used, and the concept of soul simply means a human being, the proposition would have to be refuted. There are some other qualities to the term, though, that lend credibility to the proposition. For instance, Kroll addsd that, “The nephesh is said to be the seat of spiritual as well as physical needs and cravings, including one’s need for God’s presence. It is the state of consciousness itself. In this connection, nephesh can be used in a general sense to stand for the seat of emotions and experiences” (2015, para. 7). In this context, then, the proposition is not only supported, it is confirmed.
There are a number of scriptural references in the New Testament that likewise add support and, “Nephesh can stand for the full range of human needs, desires and feelings, including thought, memory and consciousness” (Kroll, 2015, para. 7). The use of “psuche” or “soul” in the New Testament was shown above to be the equivalent to the Old Testament word “nephesh.” Generally, the same referential attributes that apply to the “soul” in the Old Testament’s word “nephesh” are likewise applicable to “psuche” (Kroll, 2015). According to Kroll, “Psuche denotes one’s inner life or actual personhood. God, who has created the ‘soul,’ can also destroy it” (2015, para. 7). A good reference to explore this concept is Matthew 10:28, and the parallel verses for this passage are provided in Table 12 below.
Table 12
Parallel Verses for Matthew 10:28
Source
Version
New International Version
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
New Living Translation
Don’t be afraid of those who want to kill your body; they cannot touch your soul. Fear only God, who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
English Standard Version
And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
New American Standard Bible
Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
King James Bible
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Don’t fear those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul; rather, fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
International Standard Version
Stop being afraid of those who kill the body but can’t kill the soul. Instead, be afraid of the one who can destroy both body and soul in hell.
American Standard Version
And be not afraid of them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Darby Bible Translation
And be not afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul; but fear rather him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Weymouth New Testament
And do not fear those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.
In Matthew 10:28, Jesus distinguished between the body and the “soul” and the meaning is that although the body ends with death, the soul is immutable to all but the fires of hell (Kroll, 2015). Similarly, in Matthew 16:25, Jesus describes the outcome for those who sacrifice their lives in His name (“Whoever wants to save his life [psuche] will lose it, but whoever loses his life [psuche] for me will find it”) as shown in Table 13 below.
Table 13
Parallel Verses for Matthew 16:25
Source
Version
English Standard Version
For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
New American Standard Bible
For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life because of Me will find it.
International Standard Version
Whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
NET Bible
For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
Douay-Rheims Bible
For he that will save his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it.
Jubilee Bible 2000
For whosoever desires to save his life shall lose it, and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
American Standard Version
For whosoever would save his life shall lose it: and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Weymouth New Testament
For whoever desires to save his life shall lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake shall find it.
World English Bible
For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it.
Young’s Literal Translation
For whoever may will to save his life, shall lose it, and whoever may lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Likewise, in Matthew 20:28 (“The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life [psuche] as a ransom for many”) Jesus indicates that the soul can be given up at death (Kroll, 2015). Parallel verses for Matthew 20:28 are provided in Table 14 below.
Table 14
Parallel Verses for Matthew 20:28
Source
Version
New International Version
Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
New Living Translation
For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many.
English Standard Version
Even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
New American Standard Bible
Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.
King James Bible
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
International Standard Version
That’s the way it is with the Son of Man. He did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many people.
Jubilee Bible 2000
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister and to give his life a ransom for many.
Weymouth New Testament
Just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give His life as the redemption-price for many.
World English Bible
Even as the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
Young’s Literal Translation
Even as the Son of Man did not come to be ministered to, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
Darby Bible Translation
As indeed the Son of man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.
Webster’s Bible Translation
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered to, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
In Matthew 10:28, there is a differentiation between the body and soul but the paradoxical point is still made that both the body and soul can die. These differing interpretations suggest that hard-and-fast conclusions about the nature of the human soul are not possible, and the interpretation of these verses must take the context into account. As Kroll points out, “Clearly, the word psuche is used in various contexts, and it is difficult to draw any final conclusions as to what ‘it’ (the ‘soul’) might be in any transcendental sense” (2015, para. 8). Other aspects of the human soul are contained in other biblical references as well, including the following (all KJV):
Souls can also be purified by the truth (1 Peter 1:22): Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently.
Souls can be strengthened through ministry (Acts 14:22): Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.
Hope in God’s covenant promises provides Christians with an “anchor for the soul” (Hebrews 6:19): Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;
Souls are to be entrusted to God (1 Peter 4:19): Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.
Those who endure suffering without a loss of faith will “keep their souls” (Hebrews 10:39): But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.
The “soul” (person) can die, though, for example by drowning (Acts 27:22): And now I exhort you to be of good cheer: for there shall be no loss of any man’s life among you, but of the ship.
In addition, 1 Thessalonians 5:23 contains some controversial uses of “psuche” as set forth in Table 15 below.
Table 15
Parallel Verses for 1 Thessalonians 5:23
Source
Version
New International Version
May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
New Living Translation
Now may the God of peace make you holy in every way, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ comes again.
English Standard Version
Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
New American Standard Bible
Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
King James Bible
And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely. And may your spirit, soul, and body be kept sound and blameless for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
International Standard Version
May the God of peace himself make you holy in every way. And may your whole being — spirit, soul, and body — remain blameless when our Lord Jesus, the Messiah, appears.
NET Bible
Now may the God of peace himself make you completely holy and may your spirit and soul and body be kept entirely blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jubilee Bible 2000
And the very God of peace sanctify you completely, that your spirit, soul, and body be preserved whole without reprehension for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
American Standard Version
And the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
According to Kroll (2015), Paul’s use of “spirit,” “soul” and “body” in the same verse has been the source of significant controversy over the years, but there is a general consensus today. In this regard, Kroll advises that, “In recent times, most scholars have come to view these terms as being differing aspects of one reality, which is personhood” (2015, para. 9). The concept of complete “personhood” also connotes people who have accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. The use of “soul,” “spirit,” and “body” by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:23 describes an overall human reality that is comprised of three constituent elements. In this regard, Kroll suggests that, “It is a way of perceiving the totality of human life” (2015, para. 9). Some additional insights can be discerned from the use of “psuche” in Hebrews 4:12 as set forth in Table 16 below.
Table 16
Parallel Verses for Hebrews 4:12
Source
Version
New International Version
For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
New Living Translation
For the word of God is alive and powerful. It is sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires.
English Standard Version
For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
New American Standard Bible
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.
King James Bible
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
For the word of God is living and effective and sharper than any double-edged sword, penetrating as far as the separation of soul and spirit, joints and marrow. It is able to judge the ideas and thoughts of the heart.
International Standard Version
For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any double-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul and spirit, joints and marrow, as it judges the thoughts and purposes of the heart.
NET Bible
For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any double-edged sword, piercing even to the point of dividing soul from spirit, and joints from marrow; it is able to judge the desires and thoughts of the heart.
Jubilee Bible 2000
For the word of God is alive and efficient and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
American Standard Version
For the word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart.
This passage serves to clarify the debate over the precise meaning of “psuche” irrespective of its context. For example, Kroll notes that in Hebrews 4:12, “psuche simply means that the word of God (who is, ultimately, Jesus himself) probes the deepest parts of our personhood, or human self” (2015, para. 10). Clearly, “probing the deepest parts of the human self” is also congruent with the goals of psychology, and this finding provides further support for the proposition that only Christian psychologists can practice true psychology, but the support does not end there. For instance, in the Old Testament, the Hebrew word “rauch” is translated as “spirit” and this word occurs more than 375 times (Kroll, 2015). According to Kroll, “Most often ruach refers to the Spirit of God or to the ‘spirit’ of human beings. But it does not mean the ‘spirit’ as ‘part’ of a human persona, but that which designates the self as person, which is viewed from an internal, psychological place of motivation, emotion and thought” (2015, para. 10). When used to refer to humans, the notion of rauch views them as behaving in response to their consciousness or an inner motivation (Kroll, 2015).
The New Testament equivalent word for ruach is “pneuma” which occurs around 375 times, with approximately 66% of the usages of referring to the Spirit of God or the Holy Spirit. Some indication of the contextual meaning of this word can be discerned from its following usages in the New Testament (KJV)
When pneuma refers to the human “spirit” it is that which makes the human being a living person (Luke 8:55): And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat.
Death results in the release of the “spirit” to God (Matthew 27:50): Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
The pneuma represents an individual’s deepest thoughts and emotions (Mark 2:8): And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?
The “spirit” — in conjunction with the “body” (soma, 1 Corinthians 7:34): There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband, the flesh (sarx, 2 Corinthians 7:1): Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God; and “soul” (psuche, 1 Thessalonians 5:23): And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. — represents the whole person (Kroll, 2015, para. 10).
Further, the word, “pneuma,” which occurs nearly 40 times in the New Testament, is used to describe a venue wherein relations between humans and God can occur. According to Kroll, “Pneuma is used to describe that aspect of human personality or self through which these relations are possible. Coming to faith is sometimes seen as a revival of the human ‘spirit’ [and] a person’s ‘spirit’ can be united with the Spirit of God or remain a ‘spirit of slavery’ without it” (2015, para. 10). According to Hoekema (1994), “After having shown that those who have been justified by faith in Christ should no longer be entangled in a yoke of slavery, but should now exercise their Christian liberty, Paul goes on in this chapter to point out that the key to the believer’s newfound freedom is the Holy Spirit” (p. 44). This is an important point for Christian psychologists since it directly relates to the ability of mere humans to overcome the frailties of the human condition to become strong and healthy in Christ. In this regard, Hoekema points out that, “The Christian life is now to be lived, not first of all in obedience to a set of rules (though the rules of God are still important guidelines for Christians), but in the strength of the Holy Spirit. ‘So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature [or, of the flesh] (Galatians 5:16)” (1994, p. 44).
To develop a better understanding of the true nature of the human soul, it is important to revisit scriptural references such as Matthew 10:28 wherein the point is made that the soul can die or be killed. As noted above, this narrow view of the nature of the human soul fails to take into account the wider range of meanings — sometimes subtle — that occur time and again throughout the Old and New Testaments. As Kroll points out, “Reflecting on such passages, it can hardly be said that the soul is immortal, unless one were to argue that ‘destroyed’ in biblical usage meant something different from our normal conception of this word” (2015, para. 10). Moreover, the concept of immortality connotes eternal existence, meaning human souls have always existed contemporaneously with the Creator, but this interpretation is not supported by scripture (Kroll, 2015).
Since the nature of the human soul directly relates to the proposition as to whether only Christian psychologists can practice “true psychology,” developing a more concrete assessment of its nature is vitally important but nevertheless elusive. The Bible contains sometimes-conflicting views about the precise nature of the soul, and wholesale definitions concerning its precise meaning are therefore not possible. Indeed, Kroll maintains that:
In some ways, from the biblical perspective, it seems that the phrase ‘immortal soul’ may be an oxymoron, or contradiction in terms. The Bible tends to see human beings as mortal creatures, subject to death as persons, that is, as ‘souls’ in whom the ‘spirit’ resides. Immortality is something that humans must ‘put on’ in the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:50-54). It is not said to be a quality inherent in the ‘soul’ or ‘spirit’ of a person.
The comparison of parallel verses and nuanced meanings of nepesh, psuche, ruach and pnema indicate that the definition of the human soul depends on the context in which it is used and there is no “one-size-fits-all” definition that is available to confirm or refute the proposition that only Christian psychologists can practice true psychology. As Kroll concludes, “The Bible does not appear to be explicit about what exactly makes up human consciousness, self-awareness or mind — and how this might relate to something called ‘soul’ or ‘spirit.’ Because of the Bible’s ambiguity or silence on the matter, the church has not issued any formal and dogmatic statements on the ‘soul’ or ‘spirit in man’” (2015, para. 11).
Finally, and notwithstanding the paucity of a firm definition of the nature of the human soul contained in the Old and New Testaments, it is possible to categorize those who do not subscribe to a Christian worldview as still being in the “natural state” and therefore unable to benefit from psychological interventions in the same fashion as their Christian counterparts. For example, Piper (2015) reports that:
In 1 Corinthians 2, Paul uses the word natural to refer to someone still in his original (sinful) state. The Greek word psuchikos (“natural”) can be defined as ‘animal,’ as opposed to ‘spiritual.’ Natural men are those who are occupied with the things of this material world to the exclusion of the things of God. They are led by instinct rather than by the Spirit of God. They intuitively choose sin over righteousness. They are the ‘pagans’ Jesus refers to in Matthew 6:32 who only seek after the things of this world. (para. 3)
Therefore, when people accept Christ into their lives, they transcend their natural state to become spiritual beings, and the gifts and fruit of the Spirit can effect transformative changes in their lives that will promote improved physical and mental well-being (Piper, 2015).
Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions
Summary
The practice of psychology can provide individuals and society with a number of beneficial outcomes involving the resolution of various mental health issues and mental disorders. At present, there are more than 100,000 licensed psychologists practicing in the United States, and current demographic estimates indicate that about 80% of them subscribe to a Christian faith. One of the most serious charges that has been leveled against the psychological community in recent years is that the profession is not effective in producing the improved clinical outcomes that are needed to resolve mental health issues and mental disorders and yet growing numbers of Americans continue to seek out their counseling services. These trends indicate that at least some people are benefiting from psychological counseling, and that it is unrealistic to expect people to be “cured” of serious mental health issues overnight. The research also showed that the Fruit of the Spirit set forth in Galatians 5:22 are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control which are all factors that can contribute to mental well-being.
The results of the survey of psychologists provided some timely insights into how practitioners feel about the proposition that true psychology, or the study of the soul, can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul. The average time in practice of the 25 respondents was 11.5 years, and the treatment settings of the respondents included two practicing in schools, 11 in industry, and 12 in private practice. The religious breakdown of the respondents mirrored the demographic composition of the United States with 17 respondents identifying themselves as Protestants, three respondents as Roman Catholics, one each respondent as Jewish, Muslim or other Christian and two respondents reporting no religious affiliation. A statement-by-statement summary of the Likert-scaled statements is provided below.
In response to the statement, “Religious beliefs are an important component of psychological practice,” more than three-quarters (76%) of the respondents either strongly agreed (9 or 36%) or agreed (10 or 40%), while four respondents (or 16%) used the “neither agree nor disagree” option. Two respondents (or 8%) disagreed with this statement but none of the respondents strongly disagreed.
In response to the statement, “My practice includes the use of true psychology, defined as the study of the soul,” over half (14 or 56%) of the respondents either strongly agreed (5 or 20%) or agreed (9 or 36%) while five respondents used the “neither agree nor disagree” option. Three each respondents (or 12% each) disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement.
The responses to the statement, “True psychology can only be practiced by Christian psychologists since only they possess the resources needed for understanding and transforming the soul,” were highly mixed, with five respondents (or 20%) strongly agreeing, six respondents (or 24%) agreeing, six respondents (or 24%) opting for the “neither agree nor disagree” selection, and five respondents (or 20%) disagreeing. Three respondents (or 12%) strongly disagreed with this statement.
The responses to the statement, “True psychology can be practiced by anyone irrespective of their religious affiliation or lack of affiliation,” were also mixed, with eight respondents (or 32%) strongly agreeing and 10 respondents (or 40%) agreeing. Four respondents (or 16%) used the “neither agree nor disagree” option and three respondents (or 12%) disagreed. None of the respondents strongly disagreed with this statement.
Finally, in response to the statement, “I draw on the Fruits of the Spirit identified in Galatians 5:22 (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control) in my professional practice,” 11 respondents (or 44%) strongly agreed, seven respondents (or 28%) agreed, and three respondents (or 12%) neither agreed nor disagreed. Two each respondents (or 8% each) disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement.
Taken together, these findings indicate there is widespread (84% of the respondents self-identified as Christians) but not universal acceptance of the proposition that true psychology can only be practiced by Christian psychologists since they alone possess the requisite resources for understanding and transforming the soul. Given that four of the respondents (or 16%) of the respondents self-identified as non-Christians, this lack of universal acceptance is readily understandable especially since two of the four were from other mainstream religions (Judaism and Islam) which have their own conceptualizations of the human soul and supporting religious dogma.
Conclusions
The research showed that the practice of psychology by definition involves the study of the human soul, it is reasonable to conclude that true psychology, or the study of the soul, can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul. This conclusion does not mean that mental health practitioners who subscribe to other faiths or no religion at all for that matter cannot practice psychology, only that they are unable to practice “true psychology” because it involves the study of the soul. This conclusion does mean, though, that Christian psychologists are in a far better position to provide the assistance that many people need to overcome the mental health issues and mental disorders that adversely affect their lives, especially if they subscribe to the Christian faith themselves. In the final analysis, it is reasonable to conclude that other faiths can practice psychology, but only Christians can legitimately practice true psychology because of its fundamental focus on the human soul as codified in the Holy Bible in general and the New Testament in particular. Because there has been no formal guidance or dogma promulgated concerning these issues, though, this conclusion therefore depends on how the nature of the human soul is viewed and defined. Perhaps a reformulated proposition that Christian psychologists can help other Christians more effectively than non-Christian practitioners is more supportable based on the findings that emerged from the secondary and primary research.
References
American people and society. (2015). CIA world factbook. Retrieved from https://www.cia. gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html.
Bassett, R.L. (2013, Winter). An empirical consideration of grace and legalism within Christian experience. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 32(1), 43-49.
Black’s law dictionary. (1990). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.
Bobgan, M. & Bobgan, D. (1987). PsychoHeresy: The psychological seduction of Christianity.
Santa Barbara, CA: EastGate Publishers.
Byron, A. (2007, January 1). Evolution and Christian faith: Reflections of an evolutionary biologist. Electronic Green Journal, 1(25), 2-5.
Brown, W.S., Murphy, N. & Newton, H.N. (1998). Whatever happened to the soul? Scientific and theological portraits of human nature. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Callahan, S. (1998, May 8). Visions & other gifts: How can you tell if they are real? Commonweal, 125(9), 7-11.
Campbell, C.C. (2009, July 26). We hold these truths lightly; a sociologist examines the condition of America’s spiritual life. The Christian Science Monitor, 18.
Cherry, K. (2011). What is psychology? About Education. Retrieved from http://psychology. about.com/od/psychology101/f/psychfaq.htm.
Cross, A.R. (2001, Spring). The Holy Spirit: The key to the baptismal sacramentalism of H. Wheeler Robinson. Baptist History and Heritage, 174-178.
Danielson, P. (2007, Summer). Education and the human soul. Logos: A Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture, 10(3), 48-51.
Do Christianity and psychology really mix? (2015). Focus on the Family. Retrieved from http://family.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/25688/~/do-christianity-and- psychology-really-mix%3F.
Do you have an immortal soul? (2014). Foundations. Retrieved from http://www.vision.org / visionmedia/religion-and-spirituality-immortal-souls/64176.aspx.
Elliott, S. (2013, Winter). On the immortality of the soul. Religion and Spirituality, 1-8.
Ellis, A. (2002). No: Dogmatic devotion doesn’t help, it hurts. In Slife, B. (Ed.). Taking sides: Psychological issues, 12th ed. Columbus, OH: McGrawHill/Dushkin.
Entwhistle, D.N. (2009 Summer). A holistic psychology of persons: Implications for theory and practice. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 28(2), 141-144.
Ewart, D. (2008). Discernment. David Ewart. Retrieved from www.davidewart.ca.
Frykholm, A. (2014, May 14). What happens when people pray? The Christian Century, 131(10), 10-15.
Gottlieb, R.S. (1999, July/August). Religious eclecticism. Tikkun, 14(4), 64-67.
Henry, M. (2005). Matthew Henry’s commentary. Bible Hub. Retrieved from http://biblehub. com/commentaries/mhc/1_corinthians/2.htm.
Hoekema, A.A. (1994). Saved by grace. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.
House, R. (2013, May 23). Neurons don’t a man make: Letters. The Times Higher Education Supplement: THE. Issue, 2102, 32.
How many psychologists are licensed in the United States? (2014). American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/06/datapoint.aspx.
Johnson, M.P. (2013, June). Paul and union with Christ: An exegetical and theological study. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 56(2), 431-439.
Klein, D.B. (1970). A history of scientific psychology: Its origins and philosophical backgrounds. New York: Basic Books.
Kroll, P. (2015). Soul and spirit in scripture. Grace Communion International. Retrieved from https://www.gci.org/spiritual/soulspirit.
Limouris, G (1990). The sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit. Ecumenical Review, 42, 288-297.
Meyer, J. (2014). Understanding the Fruit of the Spirit. Joyce Meyer Ministries. Retrieved from http://www.joycemeyer.org/articles/ea.aspx?article=fruit_of_the_spirit.
Neander, A. (1872). Lectures on the history of Christian dogmas. New York: Bell & Daldy.
Neuman, W.L. (2003). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (5th
ed). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Pan, P.J. & Deng, L-Y (2013, Summer). Issues of integration in psychological counseling practice from pastoral counseling perspectives. Journal of Psychology and Christianity,
32(2), 146-151.
Passantino, B. & Passantino, G. (2013). Psychology and the church. Christian Research Institute. Retrieved from http://www.equip.org/article/psychology-and-the-church-part- three/#christian-books-4.
Plante, T.G. (2012). Religion, spirituality, and positive psychology: Understanding the psychological fruits of faith. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Raymond, G.L. (1908). The psychology of inspiration: An attempt to distinguish religious from scientific truth and to harmonize Christianity with modern thought. New York: Funk and Wagnall’s Company.
Richards, P.S. & Bergin, A.E. (2004). Casebook for a spiritual strategy in counseling and psychotherapy. American Psychology Association.
Richardson, F.C. (1999). Re-envisioning psychology: Moral dimensions of theory and practice.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schuster, S.C. (1998, January 1). Sartre’s Freud and the future of Sartren psychoanalysis. The Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 35(1), 20-25.
Scott, M.S. (2010). Suffering and soul-making. Journal of Religion, 90(1), 313-360.
Vallis, T.M. & Howe, J.L. (1996, May). The field of clinical psychology: Arriving at a definition. Canadian Psychology, 37(2), 120-122.
Westendorp, J. (2010, November 18). Bible’s Fruit of the Spirit needed more than ever. The Chronicle (Toowoomba, Australia), 37.
Wilner, J. (1995). Are you living by the Fruit of the Spirit or fruit of the flesh? Adventures in Positive Psychology. Retrieved from http://blogs.psychcentral.com/positive- psychology/2011/05/part-1-are-you-living-by-the-fruit-of-the-spirit-or-fruit-of-the-flesh/.
Wood, G.D. & Ellis, R.C. (2003). Risk management practices of leading UK cost consultants. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10(4), 254-262
Zimmer, G. (2013). The definition of ‘psychology.’ Foundation for Truth in Reality. Retrieved from http://www.sntp.net/psychology_definition.htm.
Appendix A
Proforma Copy of Custom Survey Instrument
Section One: General Information
Years in practice:
Treatment setting(s):
Religious affiliation:
Protestant
Roman Catholic
Mormon
Other Christian
Muslim
Jewish
Buddhist
Other
No religious affiliation
Section Two: Likert-Scaled Statements
Please indicate the extent of your agreement or disagreement with the following statements by checking the corresponding box:
1. Religious beliefs are an important component of psychological practice.
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
2. My practice includes the use of true psychology, defined as the study of the soul.
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
3. True psychology can only be practiced by Christian psychologists since only they possess the resources needed for understanding and transforming the soul
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
4. True psychology can be practiced by anyone irrespective of their religious affiliation or lack of affiliation.
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
5. I draw on the Fruits of the Spirit identified in Galatians 5:22 (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control) in my professional practice.
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Section Three: Open-Ended Comments
In this section, please provide any additional comments, insights, thoughts, or observations you may have concerning the proposition, “True psychology (e.g., “The study of the soul”) can be done only by Christians since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul.” Thank you for your participation in this research project. Your anonymity is guaranteed and the results of the survey will be used for academic purposes only.
____
Get Professional Assignment Help Cheaply
Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?
Whichever your reason is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.
Why Choose Our Academic Writing Service?
- Plagiarism free papers
- Timely delivery
- Any deadline
- Skilled, Experienced Native English Writers
- Subject-relevant academic writer
- Adherence to paper instructions
- Ability to tackle bulk assignments
- Reasonable prices
- 24/7 Customer Support
- Get superb grades consistently
Online Academic Help With Different Subjects
Literature
Students barely have time to read. We got you! Have your literature essay or book review written without having the hassle of reading the book. You can get your literature paper custom-written for you by our literature specialists.
Finance
Do you struggle with finance? No need to torture yourself if finance is not your cup of tea. You can order your finance paper from our academic writing service and get 100% original work from competent finance experts.
Computer science
Computer science is a tough subject. Fortunately, our computer science experts are up to the match. No need to stress and have sleepless nights. Our academic writers will tackle all your computer science assignments and deliver them on time. Let us handle all your python, java, ruby, JavaScript, php , C+ assignments!
Psychology
While psychology may be an interesting subject, you may lack sufficient time to handle your assignments. Don’t despair; by using our academic writing service, you can be assured of perfect grades. Moreover, your grades will be consistent.
Engineering
Engineering is quite a demanding subject. Students face a lot of pressure and barely have enough time to do what they love to do. Our academic writing service got you covered! Our engineering specialists follow the paper instructions and ensure timely delivery of the paper.
Nursing
In the nursing course, you may have difficulties with literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, critical essays, and other assignments. Our nursing assignment writers will offer you professional nursing paper help at low prices.
Sociology
Truth be told, sociology papers can be quite exhausting. Our academic writing service relieves you of fatigue, pressure, and stress. You can relax and have peace of mind as our academic writers handle your sociology assignment.
Business
We take pride in having some of the best business writers in the industry. Our business writers have a lot of experience in the field. They are reliable, and you can be assured of a high-grade paper. They are able to handle business papers of any subject, length, deadline, and difficulty!
Statistics
We boast of having some of the most experienced statistics experts in the industry. Our statistics experts have diverse skills, expertise, and knowledge to handle any kind of assignment. They have access to all kinds of software to get your assignment done.
Law
Writing a law essay may prove to be an insurmountable obstacle, especially when you need to know the peculiarities of the legislative framework. Take advantage of our top-notch law specialists and get superb grades and 100% satisfaction.
What discipline/subjects do you deal in?
We have highlighted some of the most popular subjects we handle above. Those are just a tip of the iceberg. We deal in all academic disciplines since our writers are as diverse. They have been drawn from across all disciplines, and orders are assigned to those writers believed to be the best in the field. In a nutshell, there is no task we cannot handle; all you need to do is place your order with us. As long as your instructions are clear, just trust we shall deliver irrespective of the discipline.
Are your writers competent enough to handle my paper?
Our essay writers are graduates with bachelor's, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college degree. All our academic writers have a minimum of two years of academic writing. We have a stringent recruitment process to ensure that we get only the most competent essay writers in the industry. We also ensure that the writers are handsomely compensated for their value. The majority of our writers are native English speakers. As such, the fluency of language and grammar is impeccable.
What if I don’t like the paper?
There is a very low likelihood that you won’t like the paper.
Reasons being:
- When assigning your order, we match the paper’s discipline with the writer’s field/specialization. Since all our writers are graduates, we match the paper’s subject with the field the writer studied. For instance, if it’s a nursing paper, only a nursing graduate and writer will handle it. Furthermore, all our writers have academic writing experience and top-notch research skills.
- We have a quality assurance that reviews the paper before it gets to you. As such, we ensure that you get a paper that meets the required standard and will most definitely make the grade.
In the event that you don’t like your paper:
- The writer will revise the paper up to your pleasing. You have unlimited revisions. You simply need to highlight what specifically you don’t like about the paper, and the writer will make the amendments. The paper will be revised until you are satisfied. Revisions are free of charge
- We will have a different writer write the paper from scratch.
- Last resort, if the above does not work, we will refund your money.
Will the professor find out I didn’t write the paper myself?
Not at all. All papers are written from scratch. There is no way your tutor or instructor will realize that you did not write the paper yourself. In fact, we recommend using our assignment help services for consistent results.
What if the paper is plagiarized?
We check all papers for plagiarism before we submit them. We use powerful plagiarism checking software such as SafeAssign, LopesWrite, and Turnitin. We also upload the plagiarism report so that you can review it. We understand that plagiarism is academic suicide. We would not take the risk of submitting plagiarized work and jeopardize your academic journey. Furthermore, we do not sell or use prewritten papers, and each paper is written from scratch.
When will I get my paper?
You determine when you get the paper by setting the deadline when placing the order. All papers are delivered within the deadline. We are well aware that we operate in a time-sensitive industry. As such, we have laid out strategies to ensure that the client receives the paper on time and they never miss the deadline. We understand that papers that are submitted late have some points deducted. We do not want you to miss any points due to late submission. We work on beating deadlines by huge margins in order to ensure that you have ample time to review the paper before you submit it.
Will anyone find out that I used your services?
We have a privacy and confidentiality policy that guides our work. We NEVER share any customer information with third parties. Noone will ever know that you used our assignment help services. It’s only between you and us. We are bound by our policies to protect the customer’s identity and information. All your information, such as your names, phone number, email, order information, and so on, are protected. We have robust security systems that ensure that your data is protected. Hacking our systems is close to impossible, and it has never happened.
How our Assignment Help Service Works
1. Place an order
You fill all the paper instructions in the order form. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper. It will also help to eliminate unnecessary revisions.
2. Pay for the order
Proceed to pay for the paper so that it can be assigned to one of our expert academic writers. The paper subject is matched with the writer’s area of specialization.
3. Track the progress
You communicate with the writer and know about the progress of the paper. The client can ask the writer for drafts of the paper. The client can upload extra material and include additional instructions from the lecturer. Receive a paper.
4. Download the paper
The paper is sent to your email and uploaded to your personal account. You also get a plagiarism report attached to your paper.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!
