It is often said within Christian circles that whoever blesses the nation or people of Israel will be blessed, and whoever curses the nation or people of Israel will be cursed. For that reason, supporting the modern nation of Israel—economically, politically, and militarily—is presented as a sacred moral obligation for Christians. To do otherwise, it is often implied or claimed, is “antisemitic.”

Modern Evangelicals—in contrast with the historic Christians, Mainline Protestants, Catholic, and Orthodox Christians—are the only group within Christendom (generally speaking) to embrace this idea, essentially due to a rather novel theology. The result is hundreds of millions of dollars donated annually to “bless Israel,” a nation that consistently ranks in the top 30 among the 193 nations and territories listed on the United Nations’ Human Development Index—alongside France and Spain. Meanwhile, Christians in Malawi, ranked 172nd, endure what they call the “hunger season” every year as they wait for the next harvest. Why is it easier to raise money for well-off Jews than for starving Christians? (Has Israel replaced the Church?)

After almost half a century as a Christian, and after 47 years in vocational ministry making a serious effort to understand and teach the Bible, I realize more than ever that all wrong Bible interpretation stems from ignoring biblical and historical context. You can make the Bible say almost anything you want to by isolating verses from their context.

For example, I could easily persuade any new Christian—using the Bible alone—to become a Universalist, a Calvinist, a false- or hyper-grace proponent, or a flaming legalist. In every case, all I would need to do is take advantage of the new Christian’s ignorance of the whole Bible and point out selected proof texts.

Let me share an example of a very common scripture passage that is misused by Christians of many stripes, often to support less-than-balanced doctrines:

A brief history lesson:

Before 509 BC, the world was ruled 100% by kings, pharaohs, and chiefs.

Between 509 BC and 27 BC, the world was ruled 95% by kings. Only two republics appeared during that period—Athens and the Roman Republic (which later became an empire under Augustus in 27 BC).

Between 27 BC and 700 AD, the world was again ruled 100% by emperors, kings, and caliphs.

Between 700 AD and 1800 AD, the world was ruled 98% by kings. Republics existed only in a handful of places at various times.

Note to readers: We published this short parable a few years back, but it seemed time for a republish! David
_____________

Once upon a time, there was a great king who ruled his kingdom in truth and righteousness. But there were enemies living within his kingdom who broke his laws, and whom he discovered were plotting to overthrow his rule.

The king laughed when he heard of their plot, knowing that his enemies were no match for his armies, and because his informants knew his enemies’ every move and intent. So he decreed that in ten days, all of his enemies would be rounded up and executed for treason.

He mercifully decided, however, to give all of them an opportunity to be pardoned. And he sent his messengers throughout his kingdom with this message: “The great king would like all his enemies to know that they have ten days to come to his palace, lay down their arms, and pledge their allegiance to him. If they will do that, he promises to fully and freely pardon them as a gift of his grace.”

Psychology is supposed to be the scientific (evidence-based) study of how people think, feel, and behave, as well as the biological, social and environmental factors that influence those processes. Unfortunately, what is claimed to be scientific is not always scientific. I recently read House of Cards: Psychology and Psychotherapy Built on Myth, by Robyn M. Dawes, who served for many years as head of the Department of Social and Decision Sciences at Carnegie Mellon University. Dawes exposes the fact that much of modern psychology is based on unproven theories.

This is not to say that all modern psychology is based on myths or that people haven’t benefitted from aspects of it that are evidence-based. But Satan loves to mix truth with error in order to deceive folks. So “let the buyer beware.” Followers of the Lord Jesus should be judging everything in the light of His Word.

Pop psychology, in comparison, is a perversion of academic/clinical psychology. Real psychologists roll their eyeballs when they hear pop psychology being purveyed. It oversimplifies the complexities of academic/clinical psychology and misuses its terms. Pop psychology can be found in abundance all over the internet, and it can be harmful to those who innocently employ it to self-diagnose. (See my previous article titled, “The Poison of Psychobabble.”)

The term “psychobabble”—found in the Oxford English Dictionary since 1984—was coined by a psychiatrist and writer named Richard Dean Rosen in his 1977 bestselling book titled, Psychobabble: Fast Talk and Quick Cure in the Era of Feeling.” It is a derogatory term for language that uses academic psychological terminology in a superficial, misleading, exaggerated, or meaningless way. It often sounds impressive and authoritative, but it lacks real substance, precision, or therapeutic value.

The word “psychobabble” is typically used to criticize pop psychology, self-help clichés, overly-simplistic explanations of complex human behavior, or the misuse of technical psychological terms by non-experts. Psychobabble has flooded social media, and it is the verbiage of TikTok therapists and Facebook life coaches. Pop “psychologists” use some of the same terms used by academic psychologists, but they pervert their meaning, misleading those who listen to them. Worse, some psychobabble has infiltrated even the ranks of clinical psychologists who employ therapeutic techniques that lack empirical support.^[1]

For that reason, psychobabble and its related pop psychology fallacies can be poisonous to those who partake. You may be surprised to discover that you have been unwittingly using some form of psychobabble in your own vocabulary, or have embraced some of pop psychology’s many myths. In this brief article, I want to point out some of the most common psychobabble phrases.

The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid again; and from joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field (Matt. 13:44).

There are many wonderful paydays for those traveling the narrow path to life (Matt. 7:14). The first one occurs at conversion, on the day of repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. On that day, the new believer’s former sins are all forgiven (2 Pet. 1:9). His spirit is reborn and he becomes a “new creation in Christ” (John 3:1-16; 2 Cor. 5:17). His body becomes a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19). God becomes his spiritual Father and he becomes God’s child (1 John 3:1). Eternal life now waits at the end of the narrow path (Rom. 2:6-7). And that is just the short list!

Of all the paydays enjoyed in the Christian life, that first one is perhaps the least appropriate to call a “payday” since the word implies a benefit that is earned. That initial payday is in no sense earned or deserved. Every component is a gift of God’s amazing grace. Yet, as Jesus’ Parable of the Hidden Treasure so paradoxically affirms, enjoying the benefits of God’s grace may cost a person everything.

Scripture identifies Satan as “the deceiver of the whole world” (Rev. 12:9) and the “father of lies” (John 8:44). He “disguises himself as an angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:4).

As a master deceiver, Satan often mixes truth with error to fool the unsuspecting.

Recall that, of the four specific claims he made to Eve, only one was a lie, namely, “You surely will not die!” (Gen. 3:4). That lie was followed by three truthful claims: “God knows that in the day you eat from it [1] your eyes will be opened, [2] and you will be like God, [3] knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:5). When the first couple ate the forbidden fruit, Scripture says, [1] “the eyes of both of them were opened” (Gen. 3:7) and God said, [2] “the man has become like one of Us, [3] knowing good and evil (3:22). One lie. Three truths.

Having considered in the previous lesson several sections of Jesus’ Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24-25; Mark 13; Luke 21), namely, the Parables of the Unfaithful Servant, Ten Virgins, and Talents, we are better equipped to properly interpret the concluding section—Jesus’ foretelling of the future judgment of the sheep and goats.

Recall that Jesus was speaking in His Olivet Discourse, not to the multitudes, but to four of His closest disciples—Peter, James, John and Andrew (Mark 13:3). Therefore, what Jesus said had application to them. That is undeniable.

The overriding general theme was that they should remain ready for the return of their Master—unlike the unfaithful servant, five foolish virgins, and one-talent slave—lest they suffer similar fates as they did. More specifically, they should remain ready by persevering in obedience so that, when their Master returned, they would be found doing His will. If they were not found faithfully serving Him, they would not only be denied access to the wedding feast (Matt. 25:10-12), but would be assigned “a place with the hypocrites” in “the outer darkness” where there “will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 24:51; 25:30).

Recall that the Jericho tax collector Zaccheus repented of two forms of greed:

He repented of transgressing God’s commandment regarding how he acquired money, namely, fraudulently through over-taxation—a common sin of Jewish tax collectors (see Luke 3:12-13). Zaccheus said to Jesus, “If I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will give back four times as much” (Luke 19:8b). Fraud is a form of theft and, on a broader scale, a violation of God’s commandments to love our neighbor as ourselves and to treat others as we want to be treated.

Zaccheus also repented of transgressing God’s commandment regarding his use of money, and he specifically repented of neglecting the poor. He said to Jesus, “Lord, half of my possessions I will give to the poor” (Luke 19:8a). There are plenty of commandments about caring for the poor in the Mosaic Law (Lev. 25:35-37; Deut. 15:7-11; Prov. 22:9), a law with which Zaccheus, as a Jew, was familiar. As we have also seen, Jesus spoke strongly and often about the importance of caring for the poor, and He practiced what He preached (see John 12:6; 13:29). Neglecting the poor, if one has the means to relieve their suffering, is a form of greed, and on the larger scale, it is a violation of God’s commandments to love our neighbor as ourselves and to treat others as we want to be treated.

This is all simple to understand.