The End of "Christian Psychology" [Paperback]

Martin Bobgan (Author), Deidre Bobgan (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: October 28, 1997

Martin and Deidre Bobgan contend that professional psychotherapy with its underlying psycholgies is questionable at best, detrimental at worst, and a spiritual counterfeit at least. So-called Christian psychology is comprised of the same confusion of contradictory theories and techniques as secular psychology. Professional psychologists who profess Christianity have simply borrowed the theories and techniques from secular psychology.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Martin Bobgan holds four college degrees, including a doctorate from the University of Colorado, and is the president of PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries. Deidre holds an M.A. in English from the University of California at Santa Barbara and is a member of Phi Beta Kappa. They have coauthored numerous books and articles.

Product Details

• Paperback: 290 pages
• Publisher: Eastgate Publishers; 1st edition (October 28, 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0941717127
• ISBN-13: 978-0941717120
• Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.1 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,053,117 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

14 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Great Book on Psychology's harm on Christianity, January 11, 1999

By 

[e-mail] (Detroit, Michigan) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The End of "Christian Psychology" (Paperback)

This book shows how Psychology does not satisfy even the basic requirements of science yet it is accepted as if it were. It also explains the various absurd teachings that "Christian" psychologists are choosing from. Psychology is such a non-science that anyone can take just about any position and still practice psychology from those assumptions. Urges Christians to outright reject psychology in their lives.

15 of 20 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Essential Facts and Insights, January 6, 1999

By A Customer

This review is from: The End of "Christian Psychology" (Paperback)

No one who has any interest in psychology (for self help or help of others or professionally)can ignore the facts presented here. The truth is that psychology of whatever sort is bankrupt of true solutons to human problems. Don't think otherwise until you have read this and fully dealt wtih the facts of research, mostly from psychologists themselves.

Tremendous and essential book!

1 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Unhappy with God's love?, May 7, 2011

By 

mlungu - See all my reviews

This review is from: The End of "Christian Psychology" (Paperback)

Someone gave me this book because he was very concerned that as a Christian I thought that Christian psychology might have something to offer. Although I discovered that neither author has any formal training in either theology or psychology I kept an open mind, maybe they would have something useful to say.

This particular book in the extensive Bobgan product line does not set out many arguments that Christian psychology is unBiblical. Instead it relies on argument by assertion to claim that Christian psychology is unBiblical. Its actual aim is to attack the idea of a loving God who long for personal relationship with us. It does this by trying to claim that the idea of a loving God is the product of Christian psychology, and that Christian psychology is the product of secular psychology.

Its troubling that other reviewers spoke of proof since it seems that they misunderstand the idea. The book doesn't contain much proof. Instead the authors deploy a rhetorical technique as follows. They quote from a secular theorist such as Jung, then they quotes a Christian writer such as Yancy, then they claim the two quotes say the same thing, often the two quotes don't say the same thing at all but sometimes they do. The authors, engaging in the post hoc ergo proper fallacy, conclude that this means that the Christian must have reached that conclusion because of influence by the secular theorist.
This is particularly absurd when deployed in respect of Jung since Jung drew on Christian sources so its not surprising if Christians drawing on those same Christian sources sometimes say something similar. But the rhetorical technique is intended merely to pave the way for the next move. Claiming to have undercut the credibility of Christian authors such as Yancy through the guilt by association technique they then use that as the basis for an attack on their real target; statements by Christian authors that portray God as loving and desiring a personal relationship with us.