Is Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy the Same as Biblical Mind/Heart Renewal? (Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 4:22-24; Colossians 3:1-10)
My short answer is, “Absolutely not.”
I’ll develop my longer answer in a moment.
In the last three days, I’ve shared three posts on depression, medicine, and counseling: here, here, and here.
These have been part of my interactions with my friend, David Murray.
In one of David’s posts, he stated regarding cognitive-behavioral therapy that:
“It’s actually one of the ways way the Bible describes and portrays how we work as well (Psalm 42; 73, 77; Proverbs 23:7; Romans 12:12; Philippians 4:8-9). If CBT is guilty of anything, it’s of unwittingly plagiarizing the Bible’s insights!”
Now, David doesn’t specifically mention Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 4:22-24; or Colossians 3:1-10). (I’m not sure if his reference to Romans 12:12 was meant to be Romans 12:2?)
However, many Christians who equate CBT with the Bible’s thinking on mind/heart renewal, attempt to link CBT with the three major passages where Paul discusses the biblical concept of putting off and putting on a whole way of life—Romans 12;1-2; Ephesians 4:22-24; Colossians 3:1-10.
Let’s think about that attempted linkage.
The Christo-Centric Context Foundational to All 3 Passages
All three passages follow Paul’s extended discussions of Christ alone—Christ alone for salvation, Christ alone for sanctification, Christ alone for all of life. We can’t read Romans 1-11, Ephesians 1-4, and Colossians 1-2, and miss the gospel-foundation of everything!
Before Paul ever talks about renewed minds in Romans 12, he has spent eleven chapters discussing works, the law, and self-effort versus grace, the gospel, and redemption in Christ alone.
Before Paul ever talks about putting off the old unregenerate way of life in Ephesians 4:22-24, he spends Ephesians 1:1-4:21 grounding the Ephesians in their gospel identity in Christ.
Before Paul ever talks about putting on the new self in Christ, he spends two chapters building the foundation that wisdom for living is found in Christ alone and in warning believers not to be taken captive by shallow, hollow, and deceptive human philosophies about how to live a healthy, holy, whole life in Christ.
So…for secular cognitive-behavioral therapy to be correlated to biblical mind/heart renewal and putting off/putting on, it would need to build on a Christ-centric foundation. Of course, it does not, and that makes all the difference in the world.
We must be incredibly careful not to “baptize” a secular concept as a Christian concept simply because they both appear to cover similar terrain: cognitions and behaviors. Yes, they both address beliefs and behaviors, but from diametrically opposed worldviews—one that is Christo-centric and the other that is self-centric.
The Unregenerate/Regenerate and the Folly/Wisdom Focus in All 3 Passages
In all three passages, Paul’s central theme is an eternal contrast between the unregenerate and the regenerate way of thinking and living. Paul develops the same theme we find in Psalm 1—the eternal contrast between folly and wisdom.
Paul is not simply saying, “Change some thoughts which will then change behavior which will then positively impact your feelings.”
Paul is clearly saying, “Put off the worldly way of thinking/living/being and put on in Christ the scriptural, biblical, Christ-focused, redeemed way of thinking/living/being.”
Romans 12:2: “Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” CBT is not saying that. It is not addressing foolishness versus wisdom. Just because CBT talks about cognitions, does not mean its worldview about cognitions has anything to do with Paul’s discussion in Romans 12:2.
In Ephesians 4:17-21, Paul’s entire point is to insist that we must no longer think like and live like the unsaved do in the futility of their thinking about the source of life. They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God. Paul is saying:
“Don’t go to those who are separated from the life of God to find out how to live wisely for and through God!”
In Colossians 3:1-11, Paul highlights that since we have been raised with Christ, we are to “set our hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God, and set our minds on things above, not on earthly things.” He goes on to say that “we have to put on the new person we already are in Christ—the new self, being renewed in Christ-centered knowledge and wisdom in the image of the Creator.”
Paul’s entire point in these passages is that the Christian must eschew the old unregenerate, foolish, self-effort, non-Christ, works-based way of thinking about life. That is not the message of CBT.
So, if someone wants to practice CBT, fine, but please, let’s not make a simplistic equation between CBT and Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 4:22-24; and Colossians 3:1-10. They are not covering the same terrain in any similar foundational way.
The Richer, More Robust, More Relational Emphasis Embedded in All 3 Passages
Someone might say, “Well, then, are you suggesting we ignore cognitions and behaviors just because CBT may handle them in a non-Christian way?”
Not at all.
Instead, with Paul, I am suggesting that we address beliefs and behaviors in the much richer, more robust, much deeper way Paul does in these three passages.
Why take the shallow scraps from secular thinking when we have the full feast in Christlike thinking?
Ephesians 4:17-24 is just one example that is illustrative of all three of these rich passages. In this passage, Paul dissects our thinking, our understanding, our relationship to Christ, our hearts, our volitions, our motivations, our emotions, our longings and our lusts, and much more.
In in each case, Paul talks not simply about individual beliefs, actions, or emotions to put on or off. Instead, he talks about deep-seated patterns of relational affections, rational mindsets, volitional motivations, and emotional mood states that we put off and put on. Paul talks about “the attitude of your mind”—the very spirit, core, or center of the depths of the heart—Paul goes deep.
And Paul does all of this in the context of holiness versus sinfulness. Our relationships, thoughts, beliefs, motivations, actions, and emotions are not neutral. We do all that we do in relationship to God as coram Deo beings.
Additionally, Paul does all of this in the context of the believer already having been changed by Christ. “Since you are already a new creation in Christ, no longer live like the old you. Instead, live like the new person you already are in and through Christ.”
The question is not so much, “How do people change?” The question is, “How has Christ changed people?” Then we ask, “How do we, through the Spirit of God, Word of God, and people of God live out the changed life that we already have in Christ?”
So, I am not saying and Paul is not saying to avoid cognitions and behaviors. Instead, Paul is saying to address the depths of the full human personality with Christo-centric richness. That is not CBT.
The Body Life Context Embedded in All 3 Passages
Others might say, “Well, this is all the domain of the ‘professionals’ and the ‘experts,” and certainly not something a lowly pastor, or heaven forbid, a lay person, should get involved in!”
Well, let’s use Colossians 3 as one example of how all three passages are embedded in a body life context.
Throughout Colossians, Paul is talking about the very matters that send people today to a psychologist. Read Colossians 1-4, and we quickly see that Paul is talking about relational problems, anger, addictive behavior, family matters, lust, poor parenting, emotions, habitual behavior problems, suffering, etc., etc., etc. And he’s always talking about how to handle these significant life issues in a Christlike way.
And who does Paul send the Colossians to in order to address these significant life issues?
To one another!
It is right in the context of all these matters that we need to put off and put on that Paul writes:
“Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God” (Colossians 3:15-16).
Paul is saying to the Church:
“Don’t take a back seat to anyone in addressing your significant life issues!”
So What?
Is cognitive-behavioral therapy the same as biblical mind/heart renewal?
Absolutely not.
- CBT’s foundation is not Christo-centric.
- CBT’s focus is not unregenerate foolish thinking/living versus regenerate wise thinking/living.
- CBT’s emphasis is not nearly as rich, robust, and relational as biblical mind/heart/soul/motivation/emotion renewal.
- CBT’s mindset is that there is some superior, expert, secret knowledge necessary to help struggling people, rather than the encouragement that members of the body of Christ can minister effectively to one another.
Do we need to address beliefs and behaviors?
Absolutely.
But let’s do so from a Christ-centric foundation, with a focus on regenerate wisdom thinking, with an emphasis on a rich, robust, relational comprehensive whole-person renewal in Christ, and with a respect for the calling and ministry of the body of Christ.
Join the Conversation
Is cognitive-behavioral therapy the same as biblical mind/heart renewal?
RPM Ministries: Equipping You to Change Lives with Christ’s Changeless Truth
They do not need to be the same for it to be true that cognitive-behavioral therapy accurately describes a way that human beings *as human beings* work. If it is true that human beings were created in the image of God and share certain commonalities–taking into account the various ways human cultures and nurturing affect these commonalities–it ought to be true that many people, regardless of how Christ-centered they are, should be able to discover important insights about human cognition apart from a biblical / redemptive framework.
Thanks, Rory, for sharing.
A couple of follow-up thoughts based upon your comment…
Since “cognition” biblically is always seen as either “thinking God’s thoughts after Him” or “thinking independently of God,” and it is always seen as “wise” or “foolish” thinking, do you think that the unregenerate CBT can think within those frameworks? And, if they cannot, what, if any, impact do you think their inability to think within a redemptive framework has on their overall theory-building and people-helping?
Another way to put this, since they would not even believe your premise that human beings are created in the image of God, since they would not believe that human beings are fallen image bearers, and since they would not believe that human beings need Christ’s grace to be renewed image bearers, do you think those wrong beliefs would have any significant impact on their CBT theory-building and counseling practice?
What impact does the noetic effect of sin (fallen thinking, depraved mindsets) have on how the unregenerate CB therapist develops and practices his theory of CBT?
Would love to engage with you on these types of questions.
Bob
Hi Bob,
I haven’t read ALL the posts, but I appreciate the point ur making on a whole.
I like ur model too & understanding of Pauls polemic train of thought; however 🙂 I *wonder* if people who are reformed (ie very “top heavy” everything’s primarily head knowledge first & foremost) see CBT as a useful model, like a scaffold, that when used with Biblical Pauline understanding can be helpful.
I guess, I wonder if you guys are simply talking past one another bc u both want to emphasize ur own point, but in the emphasis itself you lose the common ground….
Now I personally don’t agree with the traditional reformed anthropology so I tend to side with you in ur *emphasis*. But I would be willing to bet it has to do with their anthropology that sees CBT not as the “Queen of the Sciences” but more like a handmaiden.
Great discussion either way!
Mike
Mike, Thanks for your assessment. I’m not sure if it is just a case of talking past each other. We’ve both indicated many areas of mutuality and mutual respect. But at the end of the day, I think there are some real differences. Plus, I don’t think David and I would be too far apart in terms of the “Reformed basis” for our thinking about life. And, I don’t see David as approaching this as the stereotypical academic Reformed thinker (not sure if they exist, but David is an academic-practitioner). Bob
Hey.
Thanks for the response! I agree there are some real differences, but when we take a step back we notice that it’s possible to see the even u are utilizing a CBT *model/loose paradigm” but w/ a “Pauline cognition” that inherently effects behavior.
Again, in the *emphasis*, a non regenerate CBT won’t have a Pauline “Mind of Christ,” but a regenerate Christian who sees theology as the “Queen of the Sciences” (ie a “Pauline cognitive” foundation) can utilize a CBT *model* (what I *think* ur unconsciously doing) as a useful “handmaiden”…
Concerning the” Reformed anthropology” I had in mind what James K. A. Smith (albei rreformed) talks about in Desiring & Imagining the Kingdom–tho I believe that can be justified in a more robust epistemology than his postmodern, socia llinguistic theory allows.
Hope that was clearer & came out right.
Thanks
Thanks, again, Mike. I have no doubt that my “model” lacks 100% pristine purity. Which of us is unaffected by the world we live in. But I think that is quite different from assuming that if someone starts with a Pauline model and there appear to be some similarities to modern CBT, that the person is unconsciously using CBT. If my self-perception is at all accurate, I am consciously using (and definitely seeking to use) a Pauline and a Christo-centric model of dealing with the whole person–of which cognition and behavior is a part. But just because I and a unregenerate CBT address cognition and behavior, does not mean either of us is necessarily unconsciously borrowing from the other. This might seem like much ado about nothing, but I really think it hits at the core of what I am trying to say: an unregenerate person can address cognition and behaviors but it will/should be world’s apart from how the regenerate person assesses and addresses cognition and behaviors. Bob
Thanks Bob… is mud the same as spit?
If Jesus used mud to heal blindness he can use CBT in conjunction with the power of the Holy Spirit and powerful blood of Jesus to break addictions and bring deep healing/restoration to an individual. CBT is a tool not a saving grace. Mud (or spit) in and of itself is not “gospel centered” or “Christo-centric” yet Jesus chose to use an untraditional method/means/tool to confound the wise and bring transformational healing to two different blind men in two very different situations. Correct me if I’m wrong but… as a reader it feels to me like you have created a case for why CBT is not good and why Christians should run from it like it’s the plague. That concerns me deeply. In some situations CBT can be the mud that Jesus uses to bring transformation to addictive behaviors and in others it might actually cause more harm than good. It wasn’t until I joined a gospel centered/addictive behavior support group for pornography use that I was able to have any sort of sobriety in this area. I can assure you Jesus is the center… I can assure you Porn use is not the issue it is 100% of the time a symptom of a deeper idol/fear that needs to be addressed… however understanding how the way brain works, the chemicals the brain releases, the thought patterns/ruts/reward system that is triggered from consistent porn use,the triggers that trigger the desire to use porn has enabled a deeper awareness of the heart issue therefore allowing the gospel to breakthrough unseen places. Yes Jesus can do this without a support group and can do this through a myriad of ways.
Just like it was ok for Moses to strike the rock for water while in the desert the first time and it wasn’t ok a second time, I think we should leave the tools/mud Jesus wants to use to bring healing to the Holy Spirit and pursue his voice more than our pre-determined black and white approach. I would like to add… if one is exploring CBT they should do so in the context of their church leadership and the counsel of others as each situation is uniquely different from the last. Also the leaders should be a part of the healing process and should process the CBT with the person seeking treatment for accountability.
Kevin, Thanks for sharing.
I’m thrilled that you are finding victory in a gospel-centered group!
You shared very passionately, so I want to respect that and your sincere questions in my responses (although I have to be quick and brief…finalizing my prep for Sunday’s sermon on Psalm 13 and lamenting to God when life is a mess…).
I addressed in one of my posts the contrast between physical cures (in your example, mud) (in other examples going to a cancer specialist or going to a car mechanic for my engine) and spiritual cures for the soul. I believe those are very different categories–for soul issues God prescribes the grace-based, gospel-centered, robust, relational, relevant, rich wisdom of His Word applied compassionately as we journey together in Christ. (I also went to great lengths to say that physical cures for physical issues is totally legitimate.)
As far as my concern, I would say it is the Apostle Paul, in Colossians 2:4, 8, who is quite concerned when he says, “Beware” and “Do not be deceived” about human reasoning regarding matters of the soul. And, like Paul, rather than focusing a lot of time on cautions, I quickly move, as Paul does, to the power of the cross and to the much greater robustness of biblical soul care.
You shared a second set of examples that include understanding how the brain works…that, to me, is another distinct category–neuropsychology. That is totally different from the category of secular theory-building–what Paul calls deceptive and hollow human reasoning. Admittedly, we all have to discern where the fine line moves from soul to body and from neuropsychology to secular theory building–it is complex and worthy of prayerful reflection and the type of humble conversations we are trying to establish.
My basic premise, applied to the issue you raise of porn: gospel-centered care like what Heath Lambert develops in “Finally Free: Fighting for Purity with the Power of Grace,” illustrates the compassionate, comprehensive, Christo-centric care I am emphasizing. You mentioned joining a gospel-centered group–awesome. And that the group understood research (neuropsychology) on how the brain functions–awesome. Nothing I said in any of my posts would disagree with that. I would say then that the power of that gospel-centered group is Christlike love and Christlike thinking about life–the compassionate, comprehensive care I have been highlighting.
Thanks again for your passionate sharing and for sharing your story of gospel-centered victory.
In Christ’s Grace,
Bob
Thank you, Bob, for the time you have put into thoroughly engaging these issues. I so appreciate your tone and spirit! God bless. Hope to see you next week in Lafayette!
Hi Bob – thanks for your response to my comment, I didn’t see it until now. I’m not sure I have a comprehensive set of answers to the issues you raise, but here are a few scattered thoughts, and I do appreciate your determination to keep Scripture central to the way you think about whole-person counseling.
– In response to the first paragraph, I think it is certainly possible for an unregenerate person to think wisely and to even think God’s thoughts after him…in the limited sense of “discovering something true about human beings the way God designed them.” An unregenerate person would certainly not realize that they are in fact thinking God’s thoughts after him, but if they have correctly understood something about the way human beings function, Christians affirm that they are discovering something about the way God has made his image-bearers. I don’t think you and I would disagree on this; in my mind it is very similar to an unregenerate artist painting something very beautiful without recognizing the Source of all beauty, or an unregenerate mechanical engineer correctly applying divinely-created laws and using divinely-originated raw materials to create something well-functioning, without recognizing / giving thanks for God’s hands in all of this.
– I am admittedly skeptical of attempts to set exact boundaries on the noetic effects of sin from Scripture. I think setting such boundaries is an exercise in very creative / extrapolative theology (at best). So you and I may have a fundamental difference in the way we apply Scripture’s general & prescriptive statements on the effects of human fallenness to very specific conversations such as this one. This may relate to you and I having a different understanding of the way a phrase such as “the sufficiency of Scripture” ought to be applied. I have seen you expressly distancing yourself from this perspective in other posts / comments, so I am not insinuating that you’d agree with this, but my pushback comes from experiences with Christians who understood “the sufficiency of Scripture” to mean that the Bible was intended to function like an exhaustive manual of the human brain / emotions / etc., and thus would avoid all medicines, would attribute psychological problems to demonic possession or hidden sin, and so on. I don’t think this can be borne out exegetically when issues of context and culture are properly (hermeneutically) taken into account as the various scriptural data are summed up for a biblical theology. (As I mentioned, I know that you don’t discourage people [as a matter of necessary principle, though I too would in some specific situations] from medicine or believe that demonic possession or sin is behind every psychological problem, so I am not meaning to caricature you here. I am just sensitive to the ghosts of those perspectives whenever I encounter something that makes me wonder if the Bible is being marshaled in support of ideas that I have doubts it was originally written to convey.)
I believe that non-Christian counselors can discover a great deal of true things about how the human brain works. I do believe–with you–that they are not equipped to provide Christ-centered wisdom, and that when treating any given counseling issue it is the whole person that must be taken into account rather than one isolated aspect of a person. I do think that even here there is wisdom that many Christians have often overlooked, such as the admonitions to eating healthy, having a good sleep schedule, and maintaining good general boundaries, which you mentioned in your more recent monologue to someone considering anti-depressants. So I am not sure exactly where / if you and I disagree–you certainly know more about the specific area we’re talking about than I do, as my main triggers are the Bible’s usage / interpretation–but I appreciate the rigor with which you want to instill in Christians a sense of the Bible’s sufficiency for soul care, and your attempts to reorient the discussion in that direction. I am just hesitant to depend *too much* on the Bible in *some* instances for fear of turning the texts into something it was not meant to be used for. (A parallel situation would be my views on Genesis 1 and young earth creationism. YEC claims a high reverence / respect for the text but they are, in my view, actually turning the text into something else, and mistaking a particular interpretation’s authority for the authority of the text itself. Always a dangerous move.)
Anyways, thanks for your feedback, and I apologize if (reading back over this) my reply was somewhat rambling.
Thank you Bob for this article. Well written and insightful.
“We must be incredibly careful not to “baptize” a secular concept as a Christian concept simply because they both appear to cover similar terrain: cognitions and behaviors. Yes, they both address beliefs and behaviors, but from diametrically opposed worldviews—one that is Christo-centric and the other that is self-centric.”
This to me appears to be the foundational concept to the whole discussion. CBT comes to the table with a worldview built and based on self. While CBT may help an individual better their situation in a physical/psychological way, it can never get to the core problem that defines humanity, namely that we are in need of righteousness. Only a Christo-centric worldview can do that.
The ultimate end of the self-centric worldview is just that, self, while the Scriptures point us to the glory of God as the ultimate end of mankind. CBT and Biblical Mind/Heart renewal cannot be the same because they are built on completely different foundations.
I think the giant thing some people miss is the goal is not to stop a behavior but to be more like Jesus. While God can use an unbeliever to point His people to Christlikeness, it is not the means He established. I’m not going to put God in a box but I am going to take him at His word.
I’m with Brad – CBT as a secular methodology – necessarily imports a worldview that is not neutral but actually competes with a biblical worldview. Can we learn and even adapt some of the techniques? No, we cant because anything true or helpful about it was learned or adapted from God’s worldview in the first place and then corrupted.