Replies

I wonder if that's true about Sproul. 1994 is rather dated. Some preachers like John MacArthur will come up with some weird stuff now and then only to later make corrections down the road. Problem is, once you published a certain view then it seems to float around forever even though you might have retracted it.

I couldn't determine one way or another from Sproul's website if he really still holds this view. It won't stop me from reading his articles but it is a little disappointing.

A few things to keep in mind though.

First, Sproul is the Executive Editor of TableTalk. So though the article didn't appear without his approval, he wasn't the one who wrote it.

Second, the excerpts the author provides from the article don't explicitly state what the author says they do, so without the context of the quotes I can't draw a concrete conclusion about the truth or validity of the statements.

Third, I have read more than enough of RC Sproul to know that his view of Scripture is much higher than the author appears to give him credit for. Consider the following excerpt from the New Geneva Study Bible (of which Sproul was the General Editor):

The Authority of Scripture
The Christian principle of biblical authority means that God is the author of the Bible, and has given it to direct the belief and behavior of His people. Our ideas about God and our conduct should be measured, tested, and where necessary corrected and enlarged, by reference to the Bible. Authority is also the right to command. God’s written Word in its truth and wisdom is the way God has chosen to exercise His rule over us, and Scripture is the instrument of Christ’s lordship over the church. The work of the Scripture in the church is illustrated by the seven letters of Revelation (Rev. 2; 3).
Many Protestants regard the Bible as having its unique authority in its subject matter, or in the experience and insights of the human authors. The central assumption is that the Bible remains fundamentally a human book and not a divine revelation. The Bible is a guide for their religious experience, but it is not clearly distinguished from other sources, such as political movements and social forces. All too often, the Bible is displaced by voices that oppose it.
Historic Protestantism accepts the Scripture as the only written revelation of God. It is inspired, or “God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16), distinguishing it from all other words. As a result, the Scriptures are infallible and true in all that they affirm. They are sufficient, containing everything that is necessary to know for salvation and eternal life. They are clear, so that a person without special preparation can understand what God requires without the intervention of an official interpreter.
The canonical Scripture is the voice of God in the world. It has an authority, or right to commmand, corresponding to its divine Author. For this reason, we submit our thoughts and moral standards to the Bible. It was through the recognition that the Bible cannot be subject to any person or group, however exalted, that the Reformers freed their consciences from human traditions and authorities.
New Geneva study Bible. 1997, c1995 (electronic ed.) Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

I agree with the author to an extent regarding "Christian psychology." However, it is quite possible to study and apply psychology that remains true to Scripture. I happen to know at least one Christian psychologist who does exactly that.