A Word from Bob
Two years ago I shared several posts where I collated quotes from Reformed theologians. Ever since then, I’ve wanted to collate those quotes into one blog post. After two years, here it is. (Please note that each author wrote comprehensively on common grace. Even in a lengthy blog post, I am only able to provide brief samplers from each theologian.)
Here are links to the original posts.
7 Reformed Theologians on “Common Grace.”
Herman Bavinck on “Common Grace,” Part 1.
Herman Bavinck on “Common Grace,” Part 2.
Cherry-Picking David Powlison on Secular Psychology and Biblical Counseling.
Introducing “Common Grace”
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 it is possible for Christians to learn from non-Christians.
Reformed Theologian #1: John Calvin
The Reformer, John Calvin, insisted that it is the Spirit of God who establishes all human competence in arts and sciences “for the common good of mankind” and that common grace is a tool given by God that should not be neglected. In the Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin taught that the Bible draws a distinction between God’s special or saving grace and His common or non-saving grace.
Calvin on the Unbelieving Mind
Calvin described the capacity for goodness in the non-Christian as a gift from God. He said that an unbelieving mind:
“Though fallen and perverted from its wholeness, is nevertheless clothed and ornamented with God’s excellent gifts” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.2.15).
Regarding “understanding,” Calvin wrote:
“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).
While a weakened human understanding stumbles around, according to Calvin:
“Its efforts do not always become so worthless as to have no effect, especially when it turns its attention to things below” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.13).
Here, Calvin hints at the distinction that clarifies much of his thinking on this subject. He then explained himself more fully:
“To perceive more clearly how far the mind can proceed in any matter according to the degree of its ability, we must here set forth a distinction. This, then, is the distinction: that there is one kind of understanding of earthly things; another of heavenly” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.13). (Note: Among “earthly things” Calvin includes government, household management, mechanical skills, and the liberal arts and sciences. Among the “heavenly things” are the pure knowledge of God, the nature of true righteousness, and the mysteries of the kingdom (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.13).
Calvin on the Knowledge of Earthly Things
According to Calvin, despite the Fall, unbelievers can come to a knowledge of earthly things, and he provides numerous examples. Regarding knowledge of the sciences, he wrote:
“Those men whom Scripture (1 Corinthians 2:14) calls ‘natural men’ were, indeed, sharp and penetrating in their investigation of inferior things” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.15).
In the next section, he continued along the same lines, even more forcefully admonishing Christians not to neglect the scientific studies of the ungodly:
“But if the Lord has willed that we be helped in physics, dialectic, mathematics, and other like disciplines, by the work and ministry of the ungodly, let us use this assistance. 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).
Calvin on “The Ministry of the Ungodly”
Similarly, Calvin made a startling case, in his Institutes (Beveridge ed.), 2.2.15–16, for Christians availing themselves of “the work and ministry of the ungodly”:
“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.”
Calvin on Understanding
According to Calvin, the light of intelligence is also to be regarded as a divine grace and its power is discussed extensively in the Institutes at II: 2.12-15. For example:
“While men dispute about individual sections of the law, they agree on the general conception of equity. The fact remains that some seed of political order has been implanted in all men” (II: 2.13).
“Hardly anyone is found who does not manifest talent in some art” (2: 17).
“If we regard the Spirit of God as the sole foundation of truth, we shall not despise it wherever it shall appear. Shall we deny that the truth shone in the ancient jurists? Shall we say they are insane who developed medicine? Shall we consider (mathematics) the ravings of madmen?” (II: 2.14).
“If the Spirit dwells only in believers, this refers to the Spirit of Sanctification. Nevertheless, he fills, moves and quickens all things by the power of the same Spirit. If the Lord has willed that we be helped in physics, dialectic, mathematics and other like disciplines by the work of the ungodly—let us own this assistance” (II: 2.16).
Of course, for Calvin, much more confined is humanity’s understanding of heavenly things. However, Calvin explained:
“Certainly I do not deny that one can read competent and apt statements about God here and there in the philosophers. The Lord gave them a slight taste of His divinity—sometimes impelled them to make utterances by the confession of which they would themselves be corrected. But their seeing did not direct them to the truth, much less enable them to attain it” (II: 2.18).
In his Commentary on Hebrews, while Calvin clearly distinguishes from the regenerate and reprobate mind, he still commends God’s work in the minds of the unbeliever:
“God indeed favors none but the elect alone with the Spirit of regeneration, and that by this they are distinguished from the reprobate; for they are renewed after his image and receive the earnest of the Spirit in hope of the future inheritance, and by the same Spirit the Gospel is sealed in their hearts. But I cannot admit that all this is any reason why He should not grant the reprobate also some taste of his grace, why He should not irradiate their minds with some sparks of his light, why he should not give them some perception of his goodness, and in some sort engrave his word on their hearts.”
Reformed Theologian #2: Herman Bavinck
The next set of quotes are from:
Bavinck, Herman. “Herman Bavinck’s ‘Common Grace.” Raymond C. Van Leeuwen, Translator. Calvin Theological Journal, 24(1), April 1989.
The Good Gift of Common Grace
Bavinck, following Calvin, taught that common grace is the source of all human virtue and accomplishment, even that of unbelievers who have not been regenerated by the salvific grace of God (Inst., 2.2.12-17) Bavinck’s view of common grace articulates a theological worldview that enables us to acknowledge the importance of creation and human culture as good gifts of God that not only form the arena of his redemptive activity but are themselves subject to redemption.
“There is thus a rich revelation of God even among the heathen—not only in nature but also in their heart and conscience, in their life and history, among their statesmen and artists, their philosophers and reformers. There exists no reason at all to denigrate or diminish this divine revelation. Nor is it to be limited to a so-called natural revelation…. The working of supernatural forces in the world of the heathen is neither impossible nor improbable” (41, in all quotes, the bold emphasis is added by me).
“…it would not do to deny the true, the good, and the beautiful that one can see in mankind outside of Christ. That would not only be in conflict with experience but would also entail a denial of God’s gifts and hence constitute ingratitude toward him…. All that is good and true has its origin in this grace, including the good we see in fallen man. The light still does shine in the darkness. The spirit of God makes its home and works in all the creation” (51).
“Consequently, traces of the image of God continue in mankind. Understanding and reason remain, and he possesses all sorts of natural gifts. In him dwells a feeling, a notion of the Godhead, a seed of religion. Reason is a precious gift of God and philosophy a praeclarum Dei donum [splendid gift of God]. Music too is God’s gift. The arts and sciences are good, useful, and of great value. The state is an institution of God. The goods of life do not just serve to provide for man’s needs in the strict sense; they also serve to make life pleasant. They are not purely ad ecessitate [for necessity]; they are also ad oblectamentum [for delight]. Men still have a sense of the truth and of right and wrong; we see the natural love that binds parents and children together. In the things which appertain to this earthly life, man can still accomplish much good” (51).
Bavinck on Calvin and Engagement with the World
Throughout this article, Bavinck insists that he builds his view of common grace upon the foundation of Calvin’s view of common grace. He also insists that Calvin and Reformed thinking insists on active engagement with the world rather than a separatist approach.
“In this doctrine of gratia communis the Reformed maintained the particular and absolute character of the Christian religion on the one hand, while on the other they were second to none in appreciating all that God continued to give of beauty and worth to sinful men. Thereby they acknowledged both the seriousness of sin and the legitimacy of the natural” (52). “In contrast, the Anabaptists scorn the creation; Adam was of the earth, earthly; the natural order as such is unclean; but Christ, who brought his human nature down from heaven, infuses a new, spiritual, and divine substance into man at his rebirth. The born-again man, since he is wholly renewed and other, may have no intercourse with unbelievers. Consequently, the Anabaptists reject oaths, war, the magistracy, the death penalty, worldly dress and lifestyle, marriage with unbelievers, and infant baptism; the supernatural order thrusts aside the entire natural order” (53).
“By means of this organic way of relating nature and grace, the Reformation in principle overcame the mechanical juxtaposition and dualistic worldview of the Catholic Church. And thereby, too, the significance of the cosmos increases greatly…. While it is true that the world has been corrupted by sin, it nevertheless remains the work of the Father, the Creator of heaven and earth. Of his own will he maintains it by his covenant, and by his gratia communis he powerfully opposes the destructive might of sin. He fills the hearts of men with nourishment and joy and does not leave himself without a witness among them. He pours out upon them numberless gifts and benefits. Families, races, and peoples he binds together with natural love and affection. He allows societies and states to spring up that the citizens might live in peace and security. Wealth and well-being he grants them that the arts and sciences can prosper” (60).
“The entirety of the rich life of nature and society exists thanks to God’s common grace. But why should he continue to preserve such a sinful world by a special action of his grace? Does he squander his gifts? Is he acting purposelessly? Is it not because natural life, in all its forms has value in his eyes in spite of sin’s corruption? The love of family and kin, societal and political life, art and science are all in themselves objects of his divine good pleasure…. Contempt for this divine order of creation is thus illegitimate; it flies in the face of experience and conflicts with Scripture. Here all separatism or asceticism is cut off at the roots. All world-flight is a repudiation of the first article of our Apostolic Creed. Christ indeed came to destroy the works of the devil. But more than that, he came to restore the works of the Father and so to renew man according to the image of him who first created man” (60).
Bavinck on the Role of the Arts and Science
Bavinck, again following Calvin, explains the purpose of common grace—in relationship to the arts and science.
“Christ came not to do away with the world and the various spheres of life but to restore and preserve them. Ultimately the same holds for the relation of the Christian religion to the arts and sciences” (64).
“But here too re-creation is something different than creation. The arts and sciences have their principium not in the special grace of regeneration and conversion but in the natural gifts and talents that God in his common grace has also given to nonbelievers. Therefore, Christian theologians of all times have also profited from pagan art and learning and have insisted upon a classical education for every man of learning, including the theologian. They were not blind to the dangers of such an education, and desired that it take place under Christian leadership. But they nevertheless maintained the right and independence of the arts and sciences, requiring only that they be sanctified by the Spirit of Christ. Scripture itself, they maintained, gave them freedom to this end. For Moses was reared in all the wisdom of Egypt, the children of Israel decorated the house of the Lord with the gold and silver of Egypt, Solomon used the services of Hiram to build the temple, Daniel was trained in the science of the Chaldeans, and the wisemen from the East laid their gifts at the feet of the baby in Bethlehem” (64).
“Theology itself as a science was not born apart from the gifts of the gratia communis. She does of course hold a unique place among the sciences. She has her own principle, object, and goal and derives these exclusively from the gratia specialis. But she would still not be theology in the scientific sense had she not availed herself of the thinking consciousness of man sanctified by faith and used it to penetrate revelation and understand its content. Theology first came into existence in the body of Christ when gratia communis and gratia specialis flowed together” (64).
“Consequently, theology accords to the other sciences their full due. Theology’s honor is not that she sits enthroned above them as Regina scientarium [Queen of the sciences] and waves her scepter over them but that she is permitted to serve them all with her gifts. Theology also can rule only by serving. She is strong when she is weak; she is greatest when she seeks to be least. She can be glorious when she seeks to know nothing save Christ and him crucified. Theology is ultimately nothing other than interpretation of the gratia Dei [grace of God] in the arena of science. Grace she ponders and grace she seeks to understand in its length and breadth, in its height and depth. In the middle of the human woe that life reveals all about us, and also in science, theology raises its doxology of the love of God shown forth in Jesus Christ our Lord. And she prophesies a glorious future in which all oppositions, including those between nature and grace, shall be reconciled, and all things, whether on earth or in heaven, shall again in Christ be one” (65).
Calvin and Bavinck on God’s Gifts to All People
The next set of quotes come from:
Bavinck, Herman. “Calvin and Common Grace.” Geerhardus Vos, Translator. The Princeton Theological Review, 7(3), 1909, 437-465.
Bavinck presents Calvin as delicately balancing the two scriptural truths of the depravity of the unregenerate person and common grace which is the foundation for the legitimate contribution of the unregenerate person.
“…with Calvin reprobation does not mean the withholding of all grace. Although man through sin has been rendered blind to all the spiritual realities of the kingdom of God, so that a special revelation of God’s fatherly love in Christ and a specialis illuminatio by the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the sinners here become necessary, nevertheless there exists alongside of these a generalis gratia which dispenses to all men various gifts. If God had not spared man, his fall would have involved the whole of nature in ruin. As it was, God immediately after the Fall interposed, in order by His common grace to curb sin and to uphold in being the universitas rerum. For after all sin is rather an adventitia qualitas than a substantialis proprietas, and for this reason God is operis sui corruptioni magis infensus quam operi suo. Although for man’s sake the whole of nature is subject to vanity, nevertheless nature is upheld by the hope which God implanted in its heart. There is no part of the world in which some spark of the divine glory does not glimmer. Though it be a metaphorical mode of expression, since God should not be confounded with nature, it may be affirmed in a truly religious sense that nature is God. Heaven and earth with their innumerable wonders are a magnificent display of the divine wisdom” (PDF, 9) (all page numbers are from the PDF linked above) (all bold wording has been added by me for emphasis).
“Especially the human race is still a clear mirror of the operation of God, an exhibition of His manifold gifts. In every man there is still a seed of religion, a consciousness of God, wholly ineradicable, convincing all of the heavenly grace on which their life depends, and leading even the heathen to name God the Father of mankind. The supernatural gifts have been lost, and the natural gifts have become corrupted, so that man by nature no longer knows who and what God seeks to be to him. Still these latter gifts have not been withdrawn entirely from man. Reason and judgment and will, however corrupt, yet, in so far as they belong to man’s nature, have not been wholly lost. The fact that men are found either wholly or in part deprived of reason, proves that the tithe to these gifts is not self-evident and that they are not distributed to men on the basis of merit. Nonetheless, the grace of God imparts them to us” (PDF, 9).
Calvin and Bavinck on Honoring and Making the Most of Art and Science
Based upon their theology of common grace, both Calvin and Bavinck teach that unregenerate persons can make contributes in the arts, sciences, and other areas that regenerate persons should not despise.
“The reason whereby man distinguishes between truth and error, good and evil, and forms conceptions and judgments, and also the will which is inseparable from human nature as the faculty whereby man strives after what he deems good for himself,—these raise him above the animals. Consequently it is contrary to Scripture as well as to experience to attribute to man such a perpetual blindness as would render him unable to form any true conception. On the contrary, there is light still shining in the darkness, men still retain a degree of love for the truth, some sparks of the truth have still been preserved. Men carry in themselves the principles of the laws which are to govern them individually and in their association with one another. They agree in regard to the fundamentals of justice and equity, and everywhere exhibit an aptness and liking for social order (PDF, 9-10).
“Sometimes a remarkable sagacity is given to men whereby they are not only able to learn certain things, but also to make important inventions and discoveries, and to put these to practical use in life. Owing to all this, not only is an orderly civil society made possible among men, but arts and sciences develop, which are not to be despised. For these should be considered gifts of the Holy Spirit” (PDF, 10).
“It is true the Holy Spirit as a spirit of sanctification dwells in believers only, but as a spirit of life, of wisdom and of power He works also in those who do not believe. No Christian, therefore, should despise these gifts; on the contrary, he should honor art and science, music and philosophy and various other products of the human mind as praestantissima Spiritus dona, and make the most of them for his own personal use” (PDF, 10).
“In the diversity of all these gifts we see the remnants of the divine image whereby man is distinguished from all other creatures” (PDF, 10).
“Calvin affirms, it is true, that the virtues of the natural man, however noble, do not suffice for justification at the judgment-bar of God, but this is due to his profound conviction of the majesty and spiritual character of the moral law. Aside from this, he is more generous in his recognition of what is true and good, wherever it be found, than any other Reformer. He surveys the entire earth and finds everywhere the evidence of the divine goodness, wisdom and power (PDF, 10).
Bavinck on the Reformed Appreciation for the Good and Beautiful Given by God to the Unsaved
The following quotes are from Anthony Hoekema, Created in God’s Image, pages 190-191, and derived from Bavinck’s 1894 lecture entitled Common Grace. You can find the source of these quotes here.
(Bavinck writing): “From this common grace proceeds all that is good and true that we still see in fallen man. The light still shines in the darkness. The Spirit of God lives and works in everything that has been created. Therefore there still remain in man certain traces of the image of God. There is still intellect and reason; all kinds of natural gifts are still present in him. Man still has a feeling and an impression of divinity, a seed of religion. Reason is a priceless gift. Philosophy is an admirable gift from God. Music is also a gift of God. Arts and sciences are good, profitable, and of high value” (Created in God’s Image, 190-191).
(Bavinck writing): “The state has been instituted by God…. There is still a desire for truth and virtue, and for natural love between parents and children. In matters that concern this earthly life, man is still able to do much good…. Through the doctrine of common grace the Reformed have, on the one hand, maintained the specific and absolute character of the Christian religion, but on the other hand they have been second to none in their appreciation for whatever of the good and beautiful is still being given by God to sinful human beings” (Created in God’s Image, 190-191).
Reformed Theologian #3: Abraham Kuyper
Abraham Kuyper defined common grace as:
“That act of God by which negatively He curbs the operations of Satan, death, and sin, and by which positively He creates an intermediate state for this cosmos, as well as for our human race, which is and continues to be deeply and radically sinful, but in which sin cannot work out its end” (see Principles of Sacred Theology, 279).
Kuyper added:
“God is glorified in the total development toward which human life and power over nature gradually march on under the guardianship of ‘common grace.’ It is His created order, His work, that unfold here. It was He who seeded the field of humanity with all these powers. Without a ‘Common Grace’ the seed which lay hidden in that field would never have come up and blossomed. Thanks to ‘Common Grace,’ it germinated, burgeoned, shot up high and will one day be in full flower, to reward not man but the heavenly Farmer. . . . A finished world will glorify God as builder and supreme Craftsman. What paradise was in bud will appear in full bloom.
Reformed Theologian #4—Cornelius Van Til
Cornelius Van Til, the man on whose work many biblical counselors base their epistemology, had a strong view of total depravity, the noetic effect of sin on the unregenerate mind, and of the role of God’s sovereign use of common grace. Ponder Van Til’s thinking from his work, A Survey of Christian Epistemology, 1969, p. 22:
“As far as the principle of interpretation is concerned, the natural man makes himself the final point of reference. So far then, as he carries through this principle, he interprets all things without God. In principle he is hostile to God. But he cannot carry through his principle completely. He is restrained by God from doing so. Being restrained by God from doing so, he is enabled to make contributions to the edifice of human knowledge. The forces of creative power implanted in him are to some extent released by God’s common grace. He therefore makes positive contributions to science in spite of his principles and because both he and the universe are the exact opposite of what he, by his principles thinks they are.”
Reformed Theologian #5: Charles Hodge
Charles Hodge, 19th century Reformed theologian, described common grace as:
“The Holy Spirit as the Spirit of truth, of holiness, and of life in all its forms, is present with every human mind, enforcing truth, restraining from evil, exciting to good, and imparting wisdom or strength, when, where, and in what measure seemeth to Him good … This is what in theology is called common grace” (see Systematic Theology, II:667).
Reformed Theologian #6: John Murray
John Murray provided this succinct definition of common grace:
Common grace “is every favour of whatever kind or degree, falling short of salvation, which this undeserving and sin-cursed world enjoys at the hand of God” (“Common Grace,” in the Collected Writings of John Murray, II:96).
Murray then developed common grace further, noting that through it, God endows men and women with gifts, talents, and opportunities they don’t deserve. God grants them:
“Gifts, talents, and aptitudes; he stimulates them with interest and purpose to the practice of virtues, the pursuance of worthy tasks, and the cultivation of arts and sciences that occupy the time, activity and energy of men and that make for the benefit and civilization of the human race. He ordains institutions for the protection and promotion of right, the preservation of liberty, the advance of knowledge and the improvement of physical and moral conditions. We may regard these interests, pursuits and institutions as exercising both an expulsive and impulsive influence. Occupying the energy, activity and time of men they prevent the indulgence of less noble and Ignoble pursuits and they exercise an ameliorating, moralizing, stabilizing and civilizing influence upon the social organism (“Common Grace,” in the Collected Writings of John Murray, II:102–03).
Reformed Theologian #7: John Frame
John Frame, in his book The Doctrine of the Christian Life, writes that:
“…unbelievers are able to do things that look good to us. They don’t look good to God, for God knows the heart. But they look good to us, and they often bring benefits to society. So non-Christians often improve society through their skills and ideas. They make scientific discoveries, produce labor-saving inventions, develop businesses that supply jobs, produce works of art and entertainment.
Reformed Theologian #8: Tim Keller
The Apostle James wrote, “Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows” (James 1:17).
Referring to this passage, Tim Keller writes in his book The Reason for God:
“This means that no matter who performs it, every act of goodness, wisdom, justice, and beauty is empowered by God. God gives out good gifts of wisdom, talent, beauty, and skill “graciously”— that is, in a completely unmerited way. He casts them across all humanity, regardless of religious conviction, race, gender, or any other attribute to enrich, brighten, and preserve the world” (Keller, The Reason for God, 53).
Reformed Theologian #9: R .C. Sproul
After stating that the church’s understanding of special revelation had been corrected by students of natural revelation, R. C. Sproul illustrated his point with a reference to the introduction of new astronomical ideas in the sixteenth century.
“Both Calvin and Luther rejected Copernicus as a heretic in the 16th century. I don’t know anybody in orthodox Christianity today who’s pleading for geocentricity. Do you? Do you know anybody? In that case the church has said, ‘Look, we misinterpreted the teaching of the Bible with respect to the solar system, and thank you scientists for correcting our misunderstanding.’ And so I think that we can learn from nonbelieving scientists who are studying natural revelation. They may get a better sense of the truth from their study of natural revelation than I get from ignoring natural revelation. So I have a high view of natural revelation is what I’m saying” (Luther, Calvin, and Copernicus: A Reformed Approach to Science and Scripture). (Note: This quote is technically less specifically related to “common grace” and more specifically related to “natural revelation”—which is able to be studied because of common grace.)
Reformed Thelogian # 10: David Powlison
In Powlison’s Affirmations & Denials, he develops the role of common grace in biblical counseling.
“We affirm that God’s providential common grace brings many goods to people, both as individual kindnesses and as social blessings: e.g., medical treatment, economic help, political justice, protection for the weak, educational opportunity. Wise counseling will participate in and encourage mercy ministries as part of the call to love.”
“We affirm that numerous disciplines and professions can contribute to an increase in our knowledge of people and how to help them. Scripture teaches a standpoint and gaze by which believers can learn many things from those who do not believe.”
“We deny that secular disciplines and professions are entirely benighted by the intellectual, moral, and aesthetic effects of sin. The operations of God’s common grace can cause unbelievers to be relatively observant, caring, stimulating, and informative.”
“We deny that the Bible intends to serve as an encyclopedia of proof texts containing all facts about people and the diversity of problems in living.”
In a 2018 article, Powlison had even more to say about the benefits of common grace insights for biblical counseling.
“But it is a true common grace that secular theories and practices always retain an instinct for the first word in that definition of human flourishing: love. Like most thoughtful people and most religions, they value human kindness and certain other aspects of person-to-person goodness. They witness and grieve the pain and misery caused by bad behavior, bad feelings, bad thoughts, and bad experiences. They know that caring for others is better than narcissism, arrogance, manipulation, revenge, and self-righteousness. To be cherished is far better than to be despised. Hope is far better than despair. Safety is far better than danger. Sanity and realism are far better than paranoia and delusion. Treating others well and being treated well is far better than all forms of using, misusing, mistreating, abusing, and betraying. A constructively purposeful life is far better than a pointlessly self-destructive lifestyle. To be part of the solution is far better than being part of the problem. And so forth!”
In 2010, Powlison was a primary developer of the Biblical Counseling Coalition’s Confessional Statement. On common grace and biblical counseling, Powlison and other biblical counseling leaders wrote:
“When we say that Scripture is comprehensive in wisdom, we mean that the Bible makes sense of all things, not that it contains all the information people could ever know about all topics. God’s common grace brings many good things to human life…. We affirm that numerous sources (such as scientific research, organized observations about human behavior, those we counsel, reflection on our own life experience, literature, film, and history) can contribute to our knowledge of people, and many sources can contribute some relief for the troubles of life.”
As part of this common grace approach to biblical counseling, David Powlison affirmed the importance of a variety of areas and avenues that biblical counselors follow.
“We recognize the complexity of the relationship between the body and soul (Genesis 2:7). Because of this, we seek to remain sensitive to physical factors and organic issues that affect people’s lives. In our desire to help people comprehensively, we seek to apply God’s Word to people’s lives amid bodily strengths and weaknesses. We encourage a thorough assessment and sound treatment for any suspected physical problems.
“We recognize the complexity of the connection between people and their social environment. Thus we seek to remain sensitive to the impact of suffering and of the great variety of significant social-cultural factors (1 Peter 3:8-22). In our desire to help people comprehensively, we seek to apply God’s Word to people’s lives amid both positive and negative social experiences. We encourage people to seek appropriate practical aid when their problems have a component that involves education, work life, finances, legal matters, criminality (either as a victim or a perpetrator), and other social matters.”
Powlison encouraged biblical counselors to learn from secular psychology and from Christian integrative counselors.
“We seek to engage the broad spectrum of counseling models and approaches. We want to affirm what is biblical and wise. We want to listen well to those who disagree with us, and learn from their critiques.”
In a 2012 article, Powlison had much to say about the value of secular psychology. Biblical counselors, according to Powlison, must start by looking for the good in secular psychology. To do otherwise equals “sectarian contentiousness.” Here’s Powlison in his own words:
“Look for the good. To make true sense of the psychologies, our critical thinking must intentionally look for the good. This has to be underlined.
Sectarian contentiousness only sees the bad, and does not produce redemption. But as in all the other mixed cases needing redemption, there is good in Psychology:
- Secular researchers and clinicians know reams of significant facts about people and problems, about strengths and weaknesses. (We may not have noticed or known some or many of those facts. In encountering psychological information, I’m listening, so tell me anything and everything you know about everybody and anybody.)
- Secular theories seek to answer crucial questions and address hard problems. (We may not have thought to ask those questions or address those problems. I want to take to heart hard questions that need answering.)
- Secular therapies often embody helpful skills in knowing, in loving, and in speaking so as to catch the ear of strugglers. (We may be relatively clumsy. O skillful God, make me more probing. Make me more patient and kind. Make me more able to speak constructive words, according to the need of the moment, that I might give grace to those who hear.)” (18)
“We gain much and lose nothing by being appropriately attentive to and appreciative of their strengths.” (19)
“Secular therapists describe troubled people so vividly! Their desire to help is so palpable!” (19)
“We gain a point of contact with non-Christian psychologists when we wed something true and clear to the very things they know, care about, pursue, and do.” (20)
Powlison on the Usefulness of Secular Psychology
In a 1993 article, Powlison noted how Jay Adams saw the value of secular psychology.
“This is not to say that biblical counselors should ignore or dismiss the various secular psychologies. For example, see Jay Adams’s What About Nouthetic Counseling? (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1976), page 31: Question: ‘Don’t you think that we can learn something from psychologists?’ Answer: ‘Yes, we can learn a lot; I certainly have. That answer surprised you, didn’t it? If it did, you have been led to believe, no doubt, that nouthetic counselors are obscurantists who see no good in psychology.’” (24)
“Every wise biblical counselor engages in lifelong empirical researches, informally if not formally. In this process psychologists, sociologists, historians, counselees, the non-Christians who live next door, USA Today and Agatha Christie may contribute to our grasp of the styles and how they develop. Often in counseling or reading—and even in our own repentance!” (21).
“Biblical counselors who fail to think through carefully the nature of biblical epistemology run the danger of acting as if Scripture were exhaustive, rather than comprehensive; as if Scripture were an encyclopedic catalogue of all significant facts, rather than God’s revelation of the crucial facts, richly illustrated, that yield a world view sufficient to interpret whatever other facts we encounter; as if Scripture were the whole bag of marbles rather than the eyeglasses through which we interpret all marbles; as if our current grasp of Scripture and people were triumphant and final.” (32)
Powlison (and Adams and Bettler) on the Use of Secular Psychology
In a 1993 article, 25 Years of Biblical Counseling: An Interview with Jay Adams and John Bettler Conducted by David Powlison, Powlison outlines 6 words descripting what modern nouthetic biblical counseling does with secular psychology (you can read my summary here). According to Adams, the goal of the discussion was:
“To produce a word that adequately and accurately expresses what a biblical Christian does with secular knowledge.”
They use six “R” words. Note that none of these “R” words are “Reject.” Instead, Adams, Bettler, and Powlison explain that biblical counselors should recycle secular knowledge, reinterpret secular knowledge, reshape secular knowledge, reconcile secular knowledge, redeem secular knowledge, and recast secular knowledge.
Bettler suggests that biblical counselors recycle error (in light of the truth). Sounds a bit like “integrating.”
In a 1996 article, Powlison illustrates recycling secular psychological theory using Adler as a specific example.
“Take as an example Alfred Adler’s Understanding Human Nature. He has a seventy-page section that is one of the finest descriptions of total depravity I’ve ever read. What’s interesting is that Alfred Adler doesn’t believe in total depravity; he doesn’t believe in sin. But he dissects things right down to why people pick their noses. He gets into the dirt of life and looks at the tricks and the chaos and the self-centeredness. He cares to help.” (38)
In a 1988 article, Powlison further develops the crucial need for contemporary biblical counselors to appreciate secular psychology.
“Perhaps it seems a paradox, but the final crucial issue for contemporary biblical counseling is the need to define more clearly the nuances in our relationship to secular thinking. The relationship of presuppositional consistent Christianity to secular culture is not simply one of rejection. Half of what biblical presuppositions give us is a way to discern the lie that tries to make people think about themselves as autonomous from God. But the other half of what biblical categories do is give us a way of appreciating, redeeming, and reframing the culture of even the most godless men and women.” (5)
