What’s the Issue?
The London Lyceum just published Dr. Nate Brooks’s review of Heath Lambert’s book Biblical Counseling and Common Grace. You can read Dr. Brooks’s full review here: Biblical Counseling and Common Grace: A Review by Nate Brooks. You can learn about Heath’s book here.
What’s the issue?
Biblical counselors disagree on how the biblical doctrine of common grace relates to the biblical doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture. In Reformed Christian theology, unregenerate persons are totally depraved and all of their thinking is seen as under the noetic (mind) impact of sin and fallenness.
Yet, also in Reformed thinking, the unregenerate/unsaved person can make valid contributions to society, culture, the arts, research, science, and more.
How can these two truths be held together at one time? The Reformed doctrine of “common grace” explains this…and explains why, and in what ways, it may be possible for Christians to learn from non-Christians.
The central question is, “What is the relationship between common grace, the noetic effect of sin, scientific research, secular psychology, and the sufficiency of Scripture?”
Heath Lambert’s View
Dr. Brooks summarizes Lambert’s take on common grace and biblical counseling.
“Heath Lambert’s Biblical Counseling and Common Grace is a work inspired by perceived danger. Lambert looks across the landscape of biblical counseling as a discipline and believes that some biblical counselors have become ‘discourage[d] over the contents of Scripture when it comes to the practical concerns of counseling’ (57). This shift is ‘fueled by a Darwinian frustration with the contents of Scripture and a Freudian fascination with the contents of psychology’ (57). His work is a ‘rebuke’ towards those who have succumbed to an ‘instinct to integrate,’ as these biblical counselors ‘are on a dangerous course’ (72). Lambert tells his readers to ‘[r]est assured, everything is at stake in this issue. I mean that with all my heart’ (73).”
Dr. Brooks’s Review
Dr. Brooks summarizes the focus of his review of Lambert’s book.
“This review focuses on Lambert’s portrayal of four Reformed theologians. Lambert views Calvin and Van Til as supporting own affirmation that ‘the Bible tells us everything we need to know for counseling’ and that the use of common grace material sourced from secular counseling spaces constitutes a waste of time, even if those methods are true and helpful (68). Lambert contrasts these theologians with the neo-Calvinist approach of Kuyper and Bavinck, whom he views as overly enthusiastic about common grace. While I could develop a cumulative case against Lambert’s reading of the Reformed tradition, this article will focus on Lambert’s misunderstanding of these theologians which leads him to fail at achieving his stated goal.”
My Encouragement to You: Read Lambert AND Read Brooks
I won’t repeat all of Lambert’s arguments. You can read his book here. Nor will I repeat all of Brooks’s arguments. You can read his review here.
What I will do is share some of the primary source quotes that Dr. Brooks highlights in his review. I’ll also share a few of the many quotes I’ve collated on Reformed thinking about common grace.
Some of Dr. Brooks’s Quotes on Reformed Thinking on Common Grace—Van Til
Brooks writes, “While Lambert accuses those who would use empirically verified methods in counseling of unfaithfulness, Van Til writes:
‘Ministers of the gospel should have a knowledge of a sound psychological approach to men….We see then that as Christian ministers we can no doubt learn something from the technique of the modern school of psychology of religion. We should always be thankful for any improvement in the technique of handling men that any one offers us. But we cannot afford to forget that we must employ that technique for the propagation of the Christian religion.’”
“Here Van Til moves beyond simply encouraging ministers to be aware of the practices of secular psychology, affirming that such ‘techniques’ can be ‘employ[ed] for the propagation of the Christian religion.’”
Some of Dr. Brooks’s Quotes on Reformed Thinking on Common Grace—Calvin
Brooks writes, “Calvin writes in his commentary on Paul’s use of the pagan poet Epimenides in Titus 1:12:
“From this passage we may infer that those persons are superstitious, who do not venture to borrow anything from heathen authors. All truth is from God; and consequently, if wicked men have said anything that is true and just, we ought not to reject it; for it has come from God. Besides, all things are of God; and, therefore, why should it not be lawful to dedicate to his glory everything that can properly be employed for such a purpose?’”
“Calvin follows his own advice throughout his writings, positively using material from Greek philosophers. One such place can be seen in Institutes of the Christian Religion where he endorses the faculty psychology of Greek philosophers, and then uses their comments to build his own case for man’s powers of reason, desire, and will.”
Some of Dr. Brooks’s Quotes on Reformed Thinking on Common Grace—Bavinck
Brooks writes, “Bavinck sees in Calvin a theologian who was consistent with his own approach towards common grace. He notes that while Calvin spoke abundantly and clearly about the noetic effects of sin, when contemplating the philosophy, science, and art of unbelievers, Calvin:
‘Shows no hesitation in acknowledging these facts with gratitude. He does so without dragging his feet as if compelled against his will, without a choice in the matter. No, he eagerly grants it, second to none in expressing heartfelt gratitude. Had he not fully acknowledged these good and perfect gifts from the Father of Lights, he would have been in conflict with Scripture and guilty of gross ingratitude. This has been the sound position of all true Reformed people as well.’”
Brooks continues, “Bavinck notes Augustine affirmed that ‘God does not despise reason, which in any case is his gift. Pagan science, however much it erred, nonetheless saw a shadow of truth; it drew from God’s revelation in nature and reason. And Christians may, and indeed must, profit from the truth that is present in that pagan science; it is fitting that they appropriate it as their rightful property.’”
Brooks also shares this quote from Bavinck:
“It is often represented as if only the special science of theology concerns itself with God and divine things and as if all the other sciences, particularly the natural sciences, have nothing whatever to do with God…A chasm is thus created, objectively, in the sphere of reality, between God and the world and, subjectively, in man, between his intellect and heart, between his faith and knowledge. But such a dualism is impossible. God does not stand apart from the world, much less from man, and therefore the knowledge of him is not the peculiar domain of theology.”
My Collated Quotes of Reformed Thinking on Common Grace
In our biblical counseling world, we often tend to ignore the doctrine of common grace, or we provide very limited definitions of common grace. In four blog posts, I collated quotes on Reformed thinking about common grace. These quotes challenge us to think through the relationship between common grace, the noetic effect of sin, scientific research, secular psychology, and the sufficiency of Scripture.
As a small sampler of these four blog posts, here are two quotes from John Calvin.
“When we so condemn human understanding for its perpetual blindness as to leave it no perception of any object whatever, we not only go against God’s Word, but also run counter to the experience of common sense” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.12).
“Therefore, in reading profane authors, the admirable light of truth displayed in them should remind us that the human mind, however much fallen and perverted from its original integrity, is still adorned and invested with admirable gifts from its Creator. If we reflect that the Spirit of God is the only fountain of truth, we will be careful, as we would avoid offering insult to him, not to reject or condemn truth wherever it appears…. If the Lord has been pleased to assist us by the work and ministry of the ungodly in physics, dialectics, mathematics, and other similar sciences, let us avail ourselves of it. For if we neglect God’s gift freely offered in these arts, we ought to suffer just punishment for our sloths” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.16).
Jay Adams’s, John Bettler’s, and David Powlison’s Views
For an in-depth discussion of how early nouthetic biblical counselors engaged with secular psychology, see 6 Words Describing What Jay Adams and Nouthetic Counseling Do with Secular Psychology.
Join the Conversation
What do you think? What is the relationship between common grace, the noetic effect of sin, scientific research, secular psychology, and the sufficiency of Scripture?
