How I Attend To Extra-Biblical Material

I majored in philosophy in college. I had learned that psychology was really just applied philosophy and so I decided to jump right to the source and study the thought behind the behavior. The original plan was to study psychology, then theology, and then go back to psychology at the doctoral level. But I shifted the first one and the last one over the years, ending up with a BA in philosophy, MDiv in theology, and DMin in Biblical Counseling. It took a long time, but I think the life lived in between each degree was helpful for the whole process. I wouldn’t change a thing, except I could have studied harder and played a lot less.

What did I learn in the philosophy stage? Well, for one thing, people who do philosophy are really smart guys. In fact, until aroun the time the printing press was invented, virtually everyone who did any thinking at all was a philosopher. What I mean by that is that when you take a class on the philosophy of art, science, ethics, religion, and on and on, until the printing press was invented, you see the same names over and over again. And when you study any particular area of study, you see those same names. These guys were really smart and they were into everything.

Another thing I learned was that each guy in the line spring-boarded off the guy before him. You have Thales and the Presocratics, then Socrates, then Plato, then Aristotle, then all the rest.  After he had dismantled the guy before him, each guy came up with his philosophy of good things. It was interesting to watch how various students bought into the current philosophy we were studying, then shifted when the next guy came along and blew the last guy away. Through the course, the students flip-flopped their views as many times as men we studied. By the time we were finished, many students were mentally exhausted. Some, at the conclusion of their studies came out not believing anything, except that to believe anything was futile and hopeless.

So how did I get through three years of philosophy without losing my mind (the first year was psychology)? I think it was because my hope was built on the Rock of the Word of God. Whereas the other students were drifting along, being blown about by every wind of doctrine (Eph 4:14), I was anchored to the Bible. Every time something new came up in class, I ran back to the Word and checked it out. I also read everything through the lens that the scriptures provided for studying the world around me.

Here’s how I read, listen to, interact with things and people outside the Bible:

I work really hard to know God and to be known by him. This is more important than to be a Bible scholar (if you have to choose). I met a fellow who had the New Testament memorized in Greek but said he wasn’t a Christian. How sad is that? So, I make it my aim to know God and to be known by him.

I work really hard to know him by studying his Word. The Christian Scriptures are the primary place for us to find out about and meet with God. By primary, I mean first and main, not only. I can’t know that what I’m reading, listening to, or looking at outside the Bible is true unless I know the truth well enough to compare the two. Someone said that bank tellers know when they are looking at counterfeit money because they know the real money so well that anything different jumps out at them. That’s the way I want it to be when I see something outside the Bible that claims to be true. When I see a person or an idea dressed up in a God suit, I want to instantly know that I’m not looking at the true God. I can only do that if I’m steeped in Scripture.

Next, I notice the source of this new information. If it is someone who wants to explain the Bible, I check out who they are, who they know and hang out with, how they got the information they are talking to me about, and who else buys what they’re selling. If, for example, they are a member of a liberal denomination, I take that into account as I listen to them. If in the area of counseling, all their education comes in the area of psychology, or if they are a psychologist, I note that. If all their friends are iffy, atheists, or pagans, that is important to know. If they tell me they aren’t Christian or if everything they say about Christianity is wrong, I notice that as well. This doesn’t mean I won’t read their stuff or listen to them, I’m just saying I take what they say with a grain of salt. I am careful to make sure my discernment hat is firmly fixed on my head.

Fourth, I am careful to notice how they handle scripture if they handle it at all. For example, one author I read recently had very accurate and profound insights into the world God made for us, but every time he mentioned Scripture or Christianity, he was very wrong. That kind of thing always make me check out the things I liked about what he wrote. Sometimes people can be amazingly persuasive, and we can drift away from real truth because we’ve been enticed by the nice packaging of something earlier in the conversation.

Another way I’ve seen Scripture mishandled, recently, was a book I read where the author used a metaphor from the Old Testament that was totally switched around in the New. The author didn’t seemed to notice this and has a whole series of book based on the errant understanding of Biblical truth. As it turned out, the author had a preconceived notion about behavior before he began, and I believe searched (not very diligently) the Scriptures to find something that backed up what he already thought.

There are lots of ways a person can mishandle Scripture.

Next, how have people I trust been interacting with this person, book, or article? I’ve wondered about things I’ve read and when searching in journals I trust, I’ve found articles about the subject and found out that it wasn’t such a good idea. Or I can talk with friends and get their take on things. Again, this doesn’t mean I don’t read it, it just means I read it carefully.

How a discussion is broached or begun can be telling. When someone, for example, starts out by saying, “All truth is God’s truth, but not all truth is in the Bible,” I know I’m about to hear something he thinks is controversial and I think is very wrong. I just know, it’s going to be bad. It always is. No one starts out that way and heads in a good direction. If someone starts with, “You’re probably not going to like this, but…” they’re probably right.

Definitions: Is the person using the right words in an agreed-upon way? Does good mean good? Does right mean right? Does truth mean truth? And on and on. I might not use those same words in those situations, but can we at least use the same language while we’re talking?  Sometimes, I can read a book by a psychologist and constantly translate what she is saying so that I can understand it in Biblical terms. Sometimes, however, no amount of translating will make what she is saying true. The problem, in this case, is worlds, not language. She is trying to ask me to allow her to blur the antithesis between the Kingdom of God and the kingdom of man.

I pay attention to the presuppositions the presenter is assuming in his argument. Sometimes the logic is flawless, but the conclusion is wrong, and I can’t figure it out until I remember presuppositions. Do we agree on those? Do his (or mine) agree with the Bible? Did we start the discussion in the wrong place? I’m pretty sure that if we grant a person’s presuppositions, we can be argued into almost any crazy position. Sometimes the presupposition can be wrong in such a way that the discussion can’t even take place. For example, someone might say, “Let’s have a discussion about which kind of high is better, alcohol or grass.” The underlying presupposition is that getting high, by either method, is a good thing. But since neither is good, the discussion is not a valid discussion.

After the presupposition question is answered, does the logic make sense? Does what he says, follow from what he says he believes? Do his statements follow one another? And does his conclusion follow from those? I want to pay attention to that. If it does, and it fits with Scripture (or perhaps doesn’t disagree with Scripture), then what he is saying is most likely true.

Can the application of the “truth” being discussed be applied to other similar or related situations? Suppose he is talking about abuse and says someone who is abusing others can never change. Once an abuser always an abuser. Does that fit for any other sin? Would he, for example, say that an idolater, adulterer, homosexual, thief, or drunkard can never change? If so, I wonder what the word were means in 1 Corinthians 6:10 when it says, “such were some of you.” If you can’t take a specific statement that someone says and universalize it, there is a strong chance that what they are saying isn’t true.

Will the “truth” we’re talking about still be true if we run the thought experiment out to its logical conclusion? Another way of stating this is, what would happen, down the road, if what this person is saying is true? Would the person or world look more like Jesus if we thought or did what this person is espousing?

This one continues from the last: Is the person promoting the glory of God? Will we find more joy by believing or acting on what he is saying? Will the outcome of this new truth produce joy, peace, fellowship? Will we be better Christians? Will be love God better? Will we be drawn to the Lord and to his Word? Or will be enamored by something (person, group, or a system) outside the Bible?

Finally, I put this one last because it is more subjective. When something someone says causes my little yellow or red lights to start blinking, I pay attention. I can’t always tell what is wrong without reflection or help from someone smarter than me, but if my little lights start blinking, my lights are blinking. That’s why knowing God and knowing my Bible are so important. Sometimes, I just know things are out of kilter.