Question: I have enjoyed your books and also your column in The Berean Call. There is a phrase, however, that you use regularly that I feel is not exactly a proper use. The phrase is “Christian psychology [1]” or “Christian psychologist.” I am not splitting hairs. I think this is theologically and biblically incorrect. If you can have a Christian psychologist, why can’t there be a Christian prostitute? Or, why not a Christian automobile? There can possibly be a psychologist who is a Christian, but using the phrase “Christian psychologist” gives biblical support or acceptance to psychology [1], does it not? Without being dogmatic, I ask you to consider this carefully.

Response: I have so often said that there can no more be a “Christian psychologist” than a “Christian Hindu,” that I am surprised that you would now suggest that I believe the contrary! Which only shows how careful we must be with not only what we say but exactly how we say it. Usually I put quotation marks around the phrases “Christian psychology [1]” or “Christian psychologist” to show that they are misnomers. However, editors like to keep quotation marks to a minimum. So I may have acquiesced and allowed the quotation marks to be dropped in some cases. Also, I may have used these phrases because they are so well accepted today and expected that what I said about psychology [1] would make it clear that I was not giving them any legitimacy. Thank you for reminding me to be more careful both with what I say and how I say it.