I. What was (and IS) the root problem in our old way of life (our “old man”)? Eph 4:17-19 (Romans 1:18-32)
II. In what ways does our culture misdiagnose man’s “root problems”?
A. What is at the bottom of the heart of man?
B. How do we know what is true?
III. How does a right (biblical) diagnosis lead to hope of real change? (Eph 4:20-24)
“Biblical Counseling’s starting point is the conviction that ‘Scripture is comprehensively sufficient for understanding those aspects of human nature and those processes of change that are essential for wise and effective counseling… [It] was founded in the confidence that God has spoken comprehensively about and to human beings. His Word teaches the truth. The Holy Spirit enables effective, loving ministry. Our positive call has been to pursue and then to promote biblical truth and methods in counseling.’”—David Powlison, “Critiquing Modern Integrationists,” JBC XI:3 1993, pp.29, 24
“Integrationists attempt to wed secular psychology to conservative Christianity because they believe that Scripture is not comprehensively sufficient. Scripture… is in some essential way deficient for understanding and changing people… The stated intent of frank integrationists is to borrow theories and practices from secular psychology and to weave these in with Christian faith… The net effect in every integrationist’s system is that secular error eats up biblical truth, so that false views of human nature, of Christ and of the change/counseling process control the system.”—Powlison, Ibid, p.24-25
“[I]ntegrationists… have [these] major items in common: (1) a man-centered view of what is ‘deep’ in the “core” of man, and (2) a systematic embrace of secular psychology’s ‘riches’ because of Scripture’s inadequacy for the task of significant self-understanding and change… For them sin is never the specific issue that underlies problems in living. And the categories that emerge from [a careful study] of Scripture are never the significant categories for understanding and helping people…
Integrationists systematically make human needs and desires fundamental. They baptize certain lusts of the flesh as ‘needs.’ As need theories, rather than sin theories, they typically focus attention on supposed basic needs for love or to feel good about ourselves or to accomplish something worthwhile. In the logic of each theory the human heart is fundamentally good, but because of the rough sledding of life in a fallen world hearts become empty, needy, yearning, and wounded.”—Powlison, Ibid, p.29
“Biblically the heart of man is the crucible where the First Great Commandment plays out: Do you love, fear, trust, serve and listen to God? Or do you love, fear, trust, serve and listen to idols, self, other people, your own performance, mammon, Satan and cravings (for love, importance, self-esteem, control, among a horde of other things)? In other words, the law of God cuts to the very deepest issues of human life, not just in high-flown theory but in the trenches of daily life: behavior, thinking, emotions, priorities, relationships, attitudes, conscience, desires and the rest.
J. C. Ryle commented astutely: ‘There are very few errors and false doctrines of which the beginning may not be traced up to unsound views about the corruption of human nature. Wrong views of a disease will always bring with them wrong views of a remedy. Wrong views of the corruption of human nature will always carry with them wrong views of the grand antidote and cure of that corruption.’”—
Powlison, Ibid, p.29
“Scripture subordinates all under its master category of motivation: man is a religious creature who worships, serves, loves, hopes in, seeks, trusts, fears…something, either God or God-substitutes… In biblical anthropology, heart has to do with man’s relationship either to God or to false gods of world, flesh and devil. The issue of the heart is the question, ‘Who or what rules me? For which voice(s) do I have ears?’ …Secular thinkers would prefer to interpret man as self rather than as heart-before-God because they are secular.”—Powlison, Ibid, p.26-27
“[Integrationists say:] While the Bible provides us with life’s most important and ultimate answers as well as the starting points for knowledge of the human condition, it is not an all-sufficient guide for the discipline of counseling. The Bible is inspired and precious, but it is also a revelation of limited scope
[So it] ‘makes infinite sense’ to select and combine in orderly fashion ‘compatible features from diverse sources, sometimes from otherwise incompatible theories and systems; the effort to find valid elements in all doctrines and theories and to combine them into a harmonious whole.’ …In so doing, the [integrationists deny] that Scripture gives the ‘harmonious whole’ up front as God’s point of view—TRUTH—about human beings.”—Powlison, Ibid, p.27
“Our Statement of Faith beautifully proclaims: ‘The Word of God is therefore necessary and wholly sufficient for knowing the Father’s love in Christ, experiencing his glorious plan of redemption, and being instructed in the way of fruitful and godly living…. Scripture alone is our supreme and final authority and the rule of faith and life.’
Stated positively, Scripture is completely sufficient for us to receive salvation and live godly lives. It is enough. It includes everything we need to know. But, also, negatively, Scripture alone is our final authority for what is right and what pleases God, in all questions and controversies.”—Sovereign Grace Journal, Dec 2021, p.38
“The Present Challenges to Scripture’s Sufficiency. Traditionally, Protestants have affirmed four primary attributes of Scripture: sufficiency, authority, perspicuity (or clarity), and necessity. However, Kevin DeYoung observes, ‘Of the four attributes of Scripture, [sufficiency] may be the one evangelicals forget first. If authority is the liberal problem, clarity the postmodern problem, and necessity the problem for atheists and agnostics, then sufficiency is the attribute most quickly doubted by rank-and-file churchgoing Christians.’
The sufficiency of Scripture is the attribute we forget first. We often articulate the challenges to Scripture’s sufficiency as being ‘out there’—and outside the church. And those challenges are certainly present in the culture’s rapidly changing positions on sexuality, the redefinition of justice, the continued attempts to undermine Scripture’s authority, and so on.
But, perhaps the most significant challenge to Scripture’s sufficiency is not outside the church but within our hearts. It is the reach for more than what God has said.”—Sovereign Grace Journal, Dec 2021, p.39