Integrationists, Neo-Integrationists, and Proto-Integrationists
In current biblical counseling discussions, some are saying that using common grace findings, even when they are assessed by God’s all-sufficient Word, is indicative of moving from “true biblical counseling,” to “integrative counseling.” A new, extra-biblical term has been coined: “neo-integrationist.” This term is being used to characterize fellow biblical counselors as “new, modern integrationists” who are accused of using the biblical, Reformed doctrine of common grace to sneak extra-biblical information into counseling.
Since Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920) lived and died before the current counseling discussions began, he could not be a “neo-integrationist.” So, perhaps the (false) charge or (mis) characterization would be that Kuyper is a “proto-integrationist.” “Proto” is a prefix that means “first” or “original.” It comes from the Greek word prôtos. Is Abraham Kuyper the original integrationist—the proto-integrationist?
I have penned similar posts:
John Calvin: “Integrationist”? Cornelius Van Til: “Zombie-Infected”?
In those posts, like today’s post, I use primary source quotations taken in context, to show how Calvin, Van Til, and Kuyper understood and applied the biblical theology of common grace in such a way that they valued and availed themselves of extra-biblical information.
No. Kuyper Is Not a Proto-Integrationist
For the
To continue...read the full-length post originally published on this site.
