Psychology in Christianity Exposed.




Psychology in Christianity Exposed
A Critical Review.

My background had been in a professional capacity because of my experience this makes me qualified to write a critical review of psychology from a biblical perspective and to show why there cannot be any mixture between evangelical Christianity and Secular Psychology.

For any Christian, who thinks that various aspects of secular psychological models of therapy are going to help believers, then they should think again, we have two worldviews at work; that is the world and the other aspect is God both are opposed views.

Psychology is an Occupational Hazard and my job at the University of Manchester.

From 2004 to 2011 I had been employed in the area of psychology at the University of Manchester Clinical Doctorate Program in the school of psychological sciences, Without compromising any biblical integrity I was paid to train Clinical Psychologists, to consult with how the doctorate programme could be changed and to training in giving perspectives to university students who were on the doctorate programme, advising on the needs and views of people using specific parts of the Health Service, this was to inform Clinicians, students and the Academic Course Team with regards to the Post Graduate Curriculum in order to better improve health services within the following subjects that modern-day psychology is rooted in the philosophy by Occultist Carl G. Jung.

Adult Mental Health
Child Mental Health
Working with People with Learning Disabilities
Physical Health Services.
CBT, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

I have also worked with external agencies, i.e. other Universities, Health Care Trusts, Strategic Health Authority, Mental Health Professionals, people involved in research, selection skills, public speaking, chairing meetings, and planning small projects.

At the time I was acutely aware of the problems and incompatibility between Biblical Christianity and Psychology in its self, I was contracted to work with the University this had eventually put me in a position that I had been presented with a choice to stand by my convictions or be pressured into activities that are against essential teachings of the Bible, this would have resulted causing me to act contrary to the scripture’s itself, these activities I have refused to take part in concerning training in using manipulative techniques to apply into practice that the ends justify the means for the benefit of the university, this is to promote further increase support for improving mindfulness techniques that are rooted in Zen Buddhist practices which are the basis for CBT (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy), Altering Perceptions, Child Intervention Therapy, UK government funded IAPT 1, 2 & 3 (Improving Acess to Psychological Therapies), Clinical observations of Behaviour in the delivery of Psychological services, and various lectures that as observational work concerning the way lectures are being delivered and other new age philosophies, etc.

The hostility is shown deeply rooted towards Christians by the reaction of the psychology students themselves when I gave a lecture on how Psychology and Faith are incompatible, especially if you’re a Christian and created a presentation video on the subject.

After the presentation that I had given the reaction of students had been typical but unexpected, responses and comments were given showed some of the students thoughts on Fundamental Christian Beliefs were considered a psychosis, these comments were made after the lecture enabled me to present the gospel to a class of 30 Ph.D. students, it was the reaction I have raised the issue with the clinical director of the school, to challenge the students and the university itself with the question is Religion a psychosis?

I believe the question is this, is psychology a religion or a cult or both?

Carl Jung himself wrote:

“Religions are systems of healing for psychic illness. … That is why patients force the psychotherapist into the role of a priest, and expect and demand of him that he shall free them from their distress. That is why we psychotherapists must occupy ourselves with problems which, strictly speaking, belong to the theologian.”

Note that Jung used the word “religions” rather than Christianity. Jung had repudiated Christianity and explored other forms of religious experience, including the occult. Without throwing out the religious nature of man, Jung dispensed with the God of the Bible and assumed the role of the priest himself.

Jung viewed all religions, including Christianity, as collective mythologies. He did not believe they were real in essence, but that they could affect the human personality, and might serve as solutions to human problems.

In other instances by some psychology has been regarded for its cultic practices concerning manipulating behavioural patterns is a form of control, psychology is also about indoctrination by using psychological manipulation, many cults use this technique.

We also know that the use of Psychology has a lot of powerful connections from politicians and the government, the British psychological society to the HPC (Health Professionals Council), as well as the National Health Service as a whole.

It is a shame that many Christians are being duped into believing that psychology provides the tools that are needed to deal with life’s problems are from Myers Briggs to CBT, for example, the Myers-Briggs Test is being used for personality profiling but in reality, to my knowledge and speaking from experience from my work in Psychological Sciences, the Myers-Briggs Test is rarely and only used as a rating system in order to help psychologists diced what psychological theories are suitable for people who use those services but this is one in many.

There are major problems that occur with the Myers-Briggs Test that this cannot be used to diagnose properly, clients, Christians or People who run these services are putting more people in danger rather than believing it is there to help them, the Myers-Briggs is not the model used to refer people on to CBT based therapies.

It is that I had discovered through working with the clinical core team at the University of Manchester that this has had its limitations as there is very little clinical trials done with this test, most of what is done in psychology today is analytical, as there are various models used, I cannot agree with your statement that this test is best for all people in any circumstance, I have worked amongst individuals in the profession for over 9 years, but when people make claims and statements promoting Psychology as a whole, I cannot agree that we should shoehorn people into compartmentalisation for a complex range of issues that Psychology has been known for, this places individuals in a one size fits all approach to recovery from depression to trauma, this is dangerous for Christians, and their spiritual development, The University of Manchester is considered one of the world’s leading CBT based universities, but has also been mentioned by other professionals in the field at the time I had worked there, to be one of the world’s leading universities in best practise as far as Psychologists are concerned.

My capacity as a clinical consultant is that Psychology is purely based on a secularist worldview and to Conservative evangelicals there no place for Secular Psychology in our Christian walk, because it puts man’s approach and wisdom away from trusting in God this practice is indeed making merchandise out of men’s souls, Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoils you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

I am not a former clinical but in my time as a consultant I had advised Clinicians and Students in the field of Secular Clinical Psychology, some time back I had a question and answered session by someone who promotes the Psychological aspects of the Myers-Briggs Test, it is in this and other aspects of psychology is an attempt to replace Christianity with his concept of psychoanalysis, with reference from Psychoheresy’s research, states Carl Jung wrote to Freud:

I imagine a far finer and more comprehensive task for [psychoanalysis] than alliance with an ethical fraternity. I think we must give it time to infiltrate into people from many centers, to revivify among intellectuals a feeling for symbol and myth, ever so gently to transform Christ back into the soothsaying god of the vine, which he was, and in this way absorb those ecstatic instinctual forces of Christianity for the one purpose of making the cult and the sacred myth what they once were – a drunken feast of joy where man regained the ethos and holiness of an animal.12
C. G. Jung quoted by Richard Noll. The Jung Cult. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994, p. 188.

Jung’s goal for psychoanalysis was to be an all-encompassing religion superior to Christianity, reducing its truth to myth and transmogrifying Christ into a “soothsaying god of the vine.” God’s answer to such blasphemy can be seen in Psalm 2:

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Christians dabble in Jung’s religion when they incorporate his notions about man and deity through imbibing in his theories, therapies, and concepts that have filtered down through other psychotherapies, through 12-step programs, through inner healing, through dream analysis, and through personality types and tests.

Jung’s View of Christianity – Psychoheresy Research

However, because Jung left room for religion, many Christians felt more comfortable with his ideas. Thus, it is important to look at Jung’s attitudes towards Christianity. His father was a Protestant minister, and Jung experienced aspects of the Christian faith while growing up. He wrote the following about his early experience with the Holy Communion, which seems to be related to his later ideas about religions being only myths:

Slowly I came to understand that this communion had been a fatal experience for me. It had proved hollow; more than that, it had proved to be a total loss. I knew that I would never again be able to participate in this ceremony. “Why, that is not religion at all,” I thought. “It is the absence of God; the church is a place I should not go to. It is not life which is there, but death.”6

From that one significant incident, Jung could have proceeded to deny all religions, but he didn’t. Instead, he evidently saw that religion was very meaningful to many people and that religions could be useful as myths. His choice to consider all religions as myths were further influenced by his view of psychoanalysis. According to Viktor Von Weizsaecker, “C. G. Jung was the first to understand that psychoanalysis belonged in the sphere of religion.”7 That Jung’s theories constitute a religion can be seen in his view of God as the collective unconscious and thereby present in each person’s unconscious. For him, religions revealed aspects of the unconscious and could thus tap into a person’s psyche. He also used dreams as avenues into the psyche for self-understanding and self-exploration. Religion was only a tool to tap into the self and if a person wanted to use Christian symbols that were fine with him.

My assessment and response to Psychology.

I have often had debates concerning the nature of psychological intervention therapies like I had explained the Myers-Briggs test is not the only one that is used esp in psychometric assessments, but it is quite a distorted view to use any of these secular psychological approaches to Bible-believing Christians here are a list of questions from someone who claims to be a Christian with my answers given on the subject.

1. What is the nature of truth and why is it relevant to your study?

Truth is an objective reality. Therefore, if something is true, its essential nature as truth will not be dependent on who discovers that truth, who explains it, or who applies it to everyday life. The nature of truth will remain constant. For example, the truth of “gravity” is not dependent on, nor impacted by who discovered it, or who studies or explains it now. It is an essential truth that has an objective reality of its own.

Truth cannot be reconciled between the hermeneutics of Biblical Philosophy and a philosophy that rejects the Bible as Gods word if truth is objective then it is only pragmatic and about your interpretation.

Also in the Psychological world in the study, there have always been debates and disagreements that relation to your particular area, you can have studies that may have two entirely different hypothesis.

I cannot find that just because someone may strictly adhere to a textbook, in reality, does not always fit the person situation, this was the whole point of the British White Paper on community-based, and community led prospectives into psychological interventions because much of what has been done in psychology itself has not been efficient, even when you look at a vignette, this cannot be used to define every individual.


2.When a scientist of any kind (physical science, social science, behavioural science, etc.) makes a discovery about an essential truth about creation or human life, that truth is also not dependent on the character of the scientist, nor their particular belief structures. In fact, sometimes the truth that is discovered causes the scientist to be impacted and not the other way around.

Firstly is Psychology an actual science as I can call it a pseudoscience that has only been around relatively recently, when I look at the term for example behavioural sciences most of what has been carried out was through Psychosurgery, Human Lobotomy, in order to increase its studies in behaviour, has only recently been suggested a few years ago as I know all to well psychology has a darker side, one that is rarely touched because of controversy, this has never been hidden.

Psychology as a science denotes any existence that there is a creator because of evolutionary concepts this is why Fraud called any form of belief in a Deity or Creator to be a psychosis, Young was simply into occultism if you want to know about the science of young you have to go to The Theosophical Society you can read Carl Jung’s work he admitted to what influenced his studies.

Psychologists do not accept that you can go to God for any answers as this is what Psychologists are here for to find an alternative way of looking at things.

3. It is also important to note, that often God allows truth to be discovered over time, and by more than one person. Our participation in discovery appears to be part of the Image of God in us, and one way he allows us to learn and grow. Thus, one person will learn one aspect of truth, and another person will learn something more…. and over time, humanity will progress in its understanding of how God has created the world and human beings. God allows us to learn and grow more and more about Himself and all of creation. This learning no doubt will continue throughout eternity.

This thinking is contrary to Modern Psychological philosophy to a Psychologist what you suggest here is dangerous, simply because God’s truth is not adherent to modern ideas that Science has proved otherwise, I have often had this debate with some who are part of the British Psychological Society (BPS) who often are one of the biggest opponents to the Bible, you just cannot reconcile God with a psychological worldview with a biblical one, I would suggest you contact my old colleagues and present this idea to them The British Psychological Society St Andrews House, 48 Princess Road East, Leicester, LE1 7DR, (UK) see what they say, within the 8 years I have worked in the field if even this were suggested you would be sacked, I cannot agree with this statement simply because it is what the RCC does through the Jesuits mix the two, the Bible says the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. 1 Corinthians 3:19 depends on your world view.

Psychology does not give room for Gods truth if you hold to the Bible as being Gods word, I think you are then possibly ignorant of what Psychology does teach from a purely at a Ph.D. Doctorate Level. I can’t imagine you have studied a three-year course after attending four years ad med school as I have taught some of these students this has not been without controversy.

4. For your study, it is important to remember that all are sinful, including Christians, and that God has and does use both Christians and non-Christians to discover, describe and explain truths about his created world, including humanity. This is part of the abundant mercy of God. Just as Scripture says that God brings rain to believers and non-believers, so God has allowed people through history – both Christians and non-Christians – to be his instruments. This is indeed, an amazing truth – that God, in his deep mercy – even uses non-believers as his instruments. Thus, it is possible for a non-believer to discover and describe aspects of God’s truth. In the end, as the saying goes, “all truth is God’s truth.” If it is the truth, then it is from God, no matter who discovers it.

If I may play devils advocate here what you state is simply irrelevant Psychology is purely a philosophy Sin does not exist, neither does God, the human brain is made up of many chemical compositions what you feel as guilty is nothing more then neurological that can be altered by changing the brain structure of that individual he can simply be cured we are nothing more then molecular this means God does not exist we simply are made up of random processors this is what is taught in Psychological Sciences this is called the Modularity of mind.

Some of the practices include mindfulness techniques, altering a person perception that effect a change in their behaviour to help them live a stable life without the need for drugs and Nero Linguistic Programming, etc., for example, CBT uses some of these techniques

If you are a Christian yes from this perspective, God does use believers and unbelievers but what gives you the right to use unbelievers or secular philosophies as a source of truth does not seem that you are very Conservative in your view a liberal would state such.

For example, Hero/Heron Of Alexandria is not to my knowledge identified as a Christian. He lived during the period of Christ, but there is no indication that he did believe in Christ Jesus, and there is no evidence that he was saved. But he developed the formula for a triangle, any triangle, even a scalene triangle, and you can look him up on the internet if you search for “Hero of Alexandria” or “Heron of Alexandria”.

Alexandria was hardly into philosophy let along a psychologist, if you quote him the University would tell you to consult a historian, however if you quote some of the great minds such as Plato or Aristotle the professional world would sit up and take notice as also some of the greatest humanists that lived are quoted much by Psychologists.

Benjamin Franklin was evidently a Deist. He believed in God, but there is no evidence that he worshiped Christ. He believed in the Deistic view. And he discovered a truth about lightning rod connecting with an object that caused light (this is electricity). Electricity is truth. Benjamin Franklin found out that truth, and he was evidently not a Christ-follower. If you carefully examine his writings, he was a Deist, like George Washington.

These other names you mentioned were also Freemasons who worshipped Lucifer, for example, Washington was a Freemason.

XZL151141 George Washington as a Freemason (litho) by American School, (19th century); Private Collection; ( Washington (1732-99); 1st President of United States;); American, out of copyright

XZL151141 George Washington as a Freemason (litho) by American School, (19th century); Private Collection; ( Washington (1732-99); 1st President of United States;); American, out of copyright

So was Franklin.


I would not consider these people to be Christian or Christ centred.

As I have a copy of this book quote ”

The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands, and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to apply energy properly.  He must follow in the footsteps of his forefather, Tubal-Cain, who with the mighty strength of the war god hammered his sword into a plowshare.” [Manly P. Hall, 33rd Degree, K.T., The Lost Keys of Freemasonry or The Secret of Hiram Abiff , Forward by Reynold E. Blight, 33rd Degree, K.T., Illustrations by J. Augustus Knapp, 32nd Degree, Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, p. 48; “


5. And electricity has helped Christians worldwide. Do you use it? Likely. Do many Christians use it? Yes. Do many Christian churches use it? Yes. Do many Christian worshippers use it in tents or buildings or basements or prayer rooms? Yes.

You would have to admit that there cannot be any comparison between natural sciences we all use every day and mind science, there cannot be any justification for this, these are things we simply through our God gave minds been able to gain enough knowledge to use these everyday inventions.


6. Thus, God has allowed both Christians and non-Christians to discover the truth about human beings – including facts about personality structures. Just as God has allowed many medical researchers to learn things about the physical human nature, so God has allowed many psychologists, sociologists, and other researchers to discover things about the nature and development of human beings.

This is the same argument I have heard from some who try and reconcile Christianity and Evolutionary sciences, I do not believe the God of this world is the God of the Bible but Satan, the great deceiver who uses worldly philosophy to undermine what God says no it is a prove fact that Psychology was not originally based on science, you say God has allowed psychologists, sociologists, and other researchers to discover things about the nature and development of human beings, This is not correct evolution has based on Human nature has evolved over billions of years this follows with behaviour and because of this we know the nature of man


6. Carl Jung is one of those people, as are many other known psychologists. God allowed Jung and others after him to study human beings. If some of the things that Carl Jung discovered are truth, then those truths are of God, regardless of who Carl Jung was. If some of the things about persons are discovered via the MMPI-2, then those truths about persons are of God.

Would you learn from an occultist or a satanist, who would get their knowledge from Satan??? Why can’t God use him to teach you ????

Much of it is Jungian Psychology disguised as occult theology.

Jung taught the theory of the “collective unconscious” he felt that everyone, regardless of religious background or nationality, had a genetic predisposition to symbolise human situations in certain ways. He called these symbols “archetypes,” and he believed that these archetypes are found in all the religions and mythologies of the world. He believed that each person has access to these archetypes.

Jung’s ideas contribute to some contemporary religious beliefs. One is the idea that we are a part of the Godhead after we become a Christian. This theology teaches that once we become a part of God’s family, then God will manifest His kingdom on earth through us. It carries with it the idea that we are little gods. This heresy had it’s rooted in the Garden of Eden. In Genesis 3:5, the serpent tells Eve, “For God knows that in the day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Jung resolutely rejected the Christian view that God transcends the creation. Instead, he embraced pantheism, with its god within. Moreover, Jung deemed himself a kind of liberator who would lead his followers out of the dead ends of Christianity and atheism into a richer spirituality. He viewed his version of psychoanalysis as something of a new religion. This is why Noll entitled his study, The Jung Cult. Jung was a very smart and mesmerising personality who was believed by his followers to have a charismatic authority and rare insights.

The following quote can be found on the link below

In The Jung Cult (1994), clinical psychologist Richard Noll amply documents Jung’s immersion in the paganism and occultism of German culture near the turn of the last century. Although raised in a Christian environment, Jung’s passion focused on the rediscovery of ancient mystery religions that emphasized occultic initiations and sun worship. He immersed himself in the study of mythology and archeology in the hope of finding a primordial wisdom that had been obscured and rejected by the Christian conquest of paganism. Jung resolutely rejected the Christian view that God transcends the creation. Instead, he embraced pantheism, with its god within. Moreover, Jung deemed himself a kind of liberator who would lead his followers out of the dead ends of Christianity and atheism into a richer spirituality. He viewed his version of psychoanalysis as something of a 
new religion. This is why Noll entitled his study, The Jung Cult. Jung was a highly intelligent and mesmerizing personality who was believed by his followers to have a charismatic authority and rare insights.

Mystical paganism was not mere history or theory to Jung. Noll reports Jung’s claim that experimentations he became a god through an extended visualization exercise based on the elements of the initiation rituals of the ancient mystery religions, especially Mithraism. Noll comments that it “is clear that Jung believed he had undergone a direct initiation into the ancient Hellenistic mysteries and had even experienced deification in doing so.”[iii] This was not an isolated event in Jung’s life.


7. Regarding the particulars of Personality. Through the years, more and more scientists of various kinds have studied what makes individual humans unique. One of the areas of uniqueness in people is personality. Just because there is limited teaching about personality does not mean it is not a true aspect of how God has created human beings.

What is the role of Scripture in helping us discover and understand various truths about God, God’s creation, and humanity?

I do not accept nor do I agree with Personality Profiling this is another way of trying to construct an individual for who he is rather than let God define a person uniqueness.

There are scientists who disagree with this; you can read up on that here Personality: Critical Concepts (Critical Concepts in Psychology).

Personality – Cary L. Cooper, Lawrence A. Pervin Psychology Press, 1998 – 1664 pages

I know that Personality psychology is a branch of psychology that studies personality and individual differences. In this a DISC assessment is used, again this is based on man defining who you are then letting God define you, this putting man in the place of God this is why it relies on the Humanistic school of reasoning.

8. As you know, not every area of truth is mentioned in the Bible. God has allowed people through history to discover many new things that are not referred to in the Bible at all. Scripture does not cover every topic or area of reality.

I disagree I would say that Jesus is an example of that, the Bible gives us what we need to know how we should live on a daily basis, “the fact of secular science” often conflicts with the Christian faith in my working experience this is so.

In other words finding the answers may require digging, waiting, asking, and paying attention, but God does respond to those who seek him diligently. “It is impossible to please God without faith. Anyone who wants to come to him must believe that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him” (Hebrews 11:6).

Having dug up questions myself, the Bible deals with the following areas.

Angels & Demons

Bible & Christian Belief

Christian Life

Church Life

The Cross – Crucifixion



Emotional Health

End Times

Family Matters – from abuse to Family History, depression, etc.


Heaven – Eternity

Holy Spirit Gifts

Homosexuality/Sexual sin

House Blessing

Jewish Issues

Marriage – Abusive Relationships etc

Money Matters

New Age

There are many more examples, I can go on, I believe the Bible gives us enough to live on as we live in this world.

Colossians 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances?

9. Thus, just because something is not mentioned or referred to in Scripture does not mean it isn’t true or worthy of our learning. There are many truths we have learned about medical science that aren’t mentioned in the Bible. Does that mean we don’t use antibiotics when we have an infection, and that can significantly help us medically? Certainly not. Are antibiotics mentioned in the Bible? No. But we use them.

Any form of science that deals with the Psychical such as Pharmacology, natural sciences, and mechanical science yes we learn from these things that experimentations from evolution no because these is a philosophy that sets its self against the Knowledge of God.

10. In regards to your study, whether Scripture gives detailed instructions for finding our gifts, discovering our personalities, etc., does not mean that it is not an area of truth that is worthy of our efforts. This brings us to the primary area of WISDOM. Knowledge is only one part of what we need. We also need wisdom. Much of Scripture teaches that it is important to have wisdom regarding our lives. God has taught the body of Christ through history (and yes, sometimes even used non-Christians) to show us what constitutes wisdom.

The Wisdom either comes from God or the World you can’t have both; God gives man knowledge either to use it against him or to glorify his name.
James 3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
11. Many theologians through history have noted that “Double Knowledge” – knowledge of God and knowledge of self – is one of the most important ways to grow in wisdom. Augustine and Calvin specifically called believers to grow in knowledge both of God and of oneself.
Yes, this is true Calvin did say that, but Calvin did not instruct us nor any example in the Bible to adapt anything that is satanic in nature such as Theosophy claims to be a science, but it promotes Occultism.
12. Thus, whether or not the early church found “finding one’s gifts” to be a problem or not is not all that relevant. There are many aspects of current life that do not have parallel situations to the early church. In certain ways, life is much more complicated than it was back during the days of the first Apostles.

This in no way applies to Psychological Sciences or Methods, it is a well-known fact even report by not only Psychologists but the BBC that much evil came out of experimentation in psychology where we get our understanding from,

The following is from secular media not a critique on Jung but, from Jung himself on video.

Little Albert – The Brain: A Secret History – BBC Four admits that the study of Behaviour was from the experimentation of fear.

Carl Jung On The Psyche – Gnostic

C.G. Jung & Gnosis


Jung Part 1, Sea of Faith – documentary television series, presented on BBC television in 1984 by Don Cupitt.

Jung Part 2, Sea of Faith – documentary television series, presented on BBC television in 1984 by Don Cupitt.

C.G.Jung Alchemy and how to predict the future


Carl Jung.
Psychology a link to Buddhism.

Jung had a total rejection of Biblical Christianity, this has led Jung into entering into philosophy he attempted to bridge and integrate psychoanalysis and Buddhism, Buddhism is one of the principle foundations of modern psychology, it is stated that many Psychotherapeutic systems in the West are derived from Buddha’s teaching. [Gautama Buddha the Unique Psychotherapist].

Wikipedia: British barrister Christmas Humphreys has referred to mid-twentieth century collaborations between psychoanalysts and Buddhist scholars as a meeting between

[T]wo of the most powerful forces operating in the Western mind today.”[f]

More recently, some traditional Buddhist practitioners have expressed concern that attempts to view Buddhism through the lens of Western psychology diminishes the Buddha’s liberating message.

Suzuki & Jung (1948)

Carl Jung wrote the foreword to Suzuki’s Introduction to Zen Buddhism, first published together in 1948.[g] In his foreword, Jung highlights the enlightenment experience of satori as the “unsurpassed transformation to wholeness” for Zen practitioners. And while acknowledging the inadequacy of Westerners’ attempts to comprehend satori through the lens of Western intellectualism,[h] Jung nonetheless contends:

The only movement within our culture which partly has, and partly should have, some understanding of these aspirations [for such enlightenment] is psychotherapy. It is therefore not a matter of chance that this foreword is written by a psychotherapist […] Taken basically, psychotherapy is a dialectic relationship between the doctor and the patient […] The goal is transformation.[7]

Referencing Jung and Suzuki’s collaboration as well as the efforts of others, humanistic philosopher and psychoanalyst Erich Fromm noted:

[T]here is an unmistakable and increasing interest in Zen Buddhism among psychoanalysts[8][i]

Suzuki, Fromm and other psychoanalysts collaborated at a 1957 workshop on “Zen Buddhism and Psychoanalysis” in Cuernavaca, Mexico.[j] In his contribution to this workshop, Fromm declares:

Psychoanalysis is a characteristic expression of Western man’s spiritual crisis, and an attempt to find a solution[9]

Fromm contends that, at the turn of the twentieth century, most psychotherapeutic patients sought treatment due to medical-like symptoms that hindered their social functioning. However, by mid-century, the majority of psychoanalytic patients lacked overt symptoms and functioned well but instead suffered from an “inner deadness”:

The common suffering is the alienation from oneself, from one’s fellow man, and from nature; the awareness that life runs out of one’s hand like sand, and that one will die without having lived; that one lives in the midst of plenty and yet is joyless” [10]

Paraphrasing Suzuki broadly, Fromm continues:

Zen is the art of seeing into the nature of one’s being; it is a way from bondage to freedom; it liberates our natural energies; … and it impels us to express our faculty for happiness and love.[11] […] [W]hat can be said with more certainty is that the knowledge of Zen, and a concern with it, can have a most fertile and clarifying influence on the theory and technique of psychoanalysis. Zen, different as it is in its method from psychoanalysis, can sharpen the focus, throw new light on the nature of insight, and heighten the sense of what it is to see, what it is to be creative, what it is to overcome the affective contaminations and false intellectualizations which are the necessary results of experience based on the subject-object split”[12]

Buddhist techniques in clinical settings

For over a millennium, throughout the world, Buddhist practices have been used for non-Buddhist ends.[k] More recently, Western clinical psychologists, theorists and researchers have incorporated Buddhist practices in widespread formalized psychotherapies. Buddhist mindfulness practices have been explicitly incorporated into a variety of psychological treatments.[18] More tangentially, psychotherapies dealing with cognitive restructuring share core principles with ancient Buddhist antidotes to personal suffering.

Mindfulness practices

Fromm [19] distinguishes between two types of meditative techniques that have been used in psychotherapy:

  1. auto-suggestion used to induce relaxation;
  2. meditation “to achieve a higher degree of non-attachment, of non-greed, and of non-illusion; briefly, those that serve to reach a higher level of being” (p. 50).

Fromm attributes techniques associated with the latter to Buddhist mindfulness practices.[l]

Two increasingly popular therapeutic practices using Buddhist mindfulness techniques are Jon Kabat-Zinn‘s Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction (MBSR) and Marsha M. Linehan‘s Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT). Other prominent therapies that use mindfulness include Steven C. HayesAcceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT),Adaptation Practice founded in 1978 by the British psychiatrist and Zen Buddhist Clive Sherlock and, based on MBSR, Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) (Segal et al., 2002).

Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR)

Kabat-Zinn developed the eight-week MBSR program over a ten-year period with over four thousand patients at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center.[20] Describing the MBSR program, Kabat-Zinn writes:

This ‘work’ involves above all the regular, disciplined practice of moment-to-moment awareness or mindfulness, the complete ‘owning’ of each moment of your experience, good, bad, or ugly. This is the essence of full catastrophe living.[21]

Kabat-Zinn, a one-time Zen practitioner,[m]

Although at this time mindfulness meditation is most commonly taught and practiced within the context of Buddhism, its essence is universal…. Yet it is no accident that mindfulness comes out of Buddhism, which has as its overriding concerns the relief of suffering and the dispelling of illusions.[22]

In terms of clinical diagnoses, MBSR has proven beneficial for people with depression and anxiety disorders; however, the program is meant to serve anyone experiencing significant stress.

It would be based on relatively intensive training in Buddhist meditation without the Buddhism (as I liked to put it), and yoga.[23]

Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT)

In writing about DBT, Zen practitioner[n] Linehan [24] states:

As its name suggests, its overriding characteristic is an emphasis on ‘dialectics’ – that is, the reconciliation of opposites in a continual process of synthesis…. This emphasis on acceptance as a balance to change flows directly from the integration of a perspective drawn from Eastern (Zen) practice with Western psychological practice.”[o]

Similarly, Linehan [25] writes:

Mindfulness skills are central to DBT…. They are the first skills taught and are [reviewed] … every week…. The skills are psychological and behavioral versions of meditation practices from Eastern spiritual training. I have drawn most heavily from the practice of Zen

Controlled clinical studies have demonstrated DBT’s effectiveness for people with borderline personality disorder.[p]

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)

ACT did not explicitly emerge from Buddhism, but its concepts often parallel ideas from Buddhist and mystical traditions.[26][27] ACT has been defined by its originators as a method that “uses acceptance and mindfulness processes, and commitment and behavioral activation processes to produce psychological flexibility.”.[28]

Mindfulness in ACT is defined to be a combination of four aspects of the psychological flexibility model, which is ACT’s applied theory:

  1. Acceptance (openness to and engagement with present experience);
  2. Cognitive defusion (attending to the ongoing process of thought instead of automatically interacting with events as structured by prediction, judgment, and interpretation);
  3. Contact with the present moment (attention to the present external and internal world in a manner that is flexible, fluid, and voluntary);
  4. A transcendent sense of self or “self as context” (an interconnected sense of consciousness that maintains contact with the “I/Here/Nowness” of awareness and its interconnection with “You/There/Then”).[28]

These four aspects of mindfulness in ACT are argued to stem from Relational Frame Theory, the research program on language and cognition that underlies ACT at the basic level. For example, “self as context” is argued to emerge from deictic verbal relations such as I/You, or Here/There, which RFT laboratories have shown to help establish perspective taking skills and interconnection with others.[29][30]

Most ACT self-help books (e.g.,[31]) and many tested ACT protocols teach formal contemplative practice skills, but by this definition of mindfulness, such defusion skills as word repetition (taking a difficult thought, distilling it to a single word, and saying it repeatedly out loud for 30 seconds) are also viewed as mindfulness methods.

Adaptation Practice

The British psychiatrist Clive Sherlock, who trained in the traditional Rinzai School of Zen, developed Adaptation Practice (Ap), the foundation of mindfulness, in 1977 based on the profound mindfulness/awareness training of Zen daily-life practice and meditation. Adaptation Practice is used for long-term relief of depression, anxiety, anger, stress and other emotional problems.

Cognitive restructuring

Dr. Albert Ellis, considered the “grandfather of cognitive-behavioral therapy” (CBT), has written:

Many of the principles incorporated in the theory of rational-emotive psychotherapy are not new; some of them, in fact, were originally stated several thousands of years ago, especially by the Greek and Roman Stoic philosophers (such as Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius) and by some of the ancient Taoist and Buddhist thinkers (see Suzuki, 1956, and Watts, 1959, 1960).[32][q]

To give but one example, Buddhism identifies anger and ill-will as basic hindrances to spiritual development (see, for instance, the Five Hindrances, Ten Fetters and kilesas). A common Buddhist antidote for anger is the use of active contemplation of loving thoughts (see, for instance, metta). This is similar to using a CBT technique known as “emotional training” which Ellis [33] describes in the following manner:

Think of an intensely pleasant experience you have had with the person with whom you now feel angry. When you have fantasized such a pleasant experience and have actually given yourself unusually good, intensely warm feelings toward that person as a result of this remembrance, continue the process. Recall pleasant experiences and good feelings, and try to make these feelings paramount over your feelings of hostility.[r]


One of the biggest influences to western psychology is Buddhism this says “The growing interest in the interface between Buddhism and Western psychology poses helping professionals a continual challenge—how to skillfully apply the Buddha’s teachings in the therapy room for themselves as therapists, and with their clients? In short, what happens if we encounter the Buddha in the therapy room? A Zen Buddhist would probably reply, “Kill him,” as the Buddha or Buddha-nature is already inside each of us. But for many of us less enlightened or less inclined to “violence,” his teachings could provide guidelines or a raft for therapists and clients to reach the “shore” of insight and self-understanding. In this paper, I explore the practice of meditation in Buddhism focusing on the aspect of mindfulness and discuss its benefits for therapists and clients”  Belinda Siew Luan Khong, Ph.D

The Indian Jurnal of Psychiatry states

Mid-twentieth century saw the collaborations between many psychoanalysts and Buddhist scholars as a meeting between “two of the most powerful forces” operating in the Western mind. Buddhism and Western Psychology overlap in theory and in practice. Over the last century, experts have written on many commonalities between Buddhism and various branches of modern western psychology like phenomenological psychology, psychoanalytical psychotherapy, humanistic psychology, cognitive psychology and existential psychology. Orientalist Alan Watts wrote ‘if we look deeply into such ways of life as Buddhism, we do not find either philosophy or religion as these are understood in the West. We find something more nearly resembling psychotherapy’.

Buddha was a unique psychotherapist. His therapeutic methods helped millions of people throughout the centuries. This essay is just an expression of what little the current author has understood on Buddha philosophy and an opportunity to offer his deep tribute to one of the greatest psychotherapists the world has ever produced!”

Buddhism and cognitive-behavior therapy principles

Buddhistic mindfulness practices have been explicitly incorporated into a variety of psychological treatments. More specifically psychotherapies dealing with cognitive restructuring share core principles with ancient Buddhistic antidotes to personal suffering.

Fromm distinguishes between two types of meditative techniques that have been used in psychotherapy: (i) auto-suggestion used to induce relaxation; and (ii) meditation “to achieve a higher degree of non-attachment, of non-greed, and of non-illusion; briefly, those that serve to reach a higher level of being”. Fromm attributes techniques associated with the latter to Buddhist mindfulness practices.[10]

Two increasingly popular therapeutic practices using Buddhist mindfulness techniques are Jon Kabat-Zinn’s Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction (MBSR),[17,18] and Marsha M. Linehan’s dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT). Other prominent therapies that use mindfulness include mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT)[19] and Steven C. Hayes’ Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT).[20]

Why would any Christian want to consider psychology in light of the facts and examples given in its root is demonically inspired, yes it cannot be denied that there are people who provide psychological services who really want to help people who are suffering for varied reasons others are simply in it to make money or to get a name for themselves, the problem is that psychology can only look at the symptoms and not provide a permanent solution to dealing with trauma, guilt or depression in different forms, in this day and age of increasing militant secularisation more people are looking for alternative answers that exclude God the root of psychology appeals to man’s rejection and denial of God, making the Bible all the more true 2 cor 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them, in essence, it is rooted in occult knowledge and oriental philosophy.

Psychology is very hostile to the God of the bible, many Christians are being sadly deceived, you cannot mix psychology into Christian living, this is not what the Bible calls worshipping God in spirit and in Truth, you cannot reconcile the two as it is diametrically opposite to Biblical Christianity and mix in the teaching in Psychology the Age of Aquarius, and his teaching that all religions are equally valid as expressions of the human Psyche, and all religious expressions and religious truths are simply psychological, Jung was a self-confessed practising astrologer, gnostic and an alchemist.

Anyone who makes excuses for trying to justify the use of psychology cannot accept the fundamentals of the bible, it is dangerous to ignore biblical instruction as mentioned in Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Mind alterations, changing our thought processes by worldly methods is not being transformed by what God says but to recreate man in the world’s image, Psychology is counter Biblical, leading many away from Christ and placing our trust in man’s explanation, rather than looking to the God of the Bible.

Miguel Hayworth, 2016

Comments are closed.

  • This is not a promotion of the Star of David, we give recognition, support to the Jewish people and for the nation of Israel.