Bhagavad Gita B 95
turns to Krishna, his friend and charioteer who is God in
disguise, for answers to the great questions of life.
" Imagine! A man we can all identify with is in dire straits, at
a crossroads, brought to his knees by the great pressures
and complexities of life, shakily reaching out. And his best
friend, an incarnation of God, takes his hand and walks
him through the answer – explaining step-by-step the
most profound secrets of all ages (Hawley, 2001: xxiv).
The Gita is thus the story of a psychological war we all
wage within, and the answers given teach us how to live so
as to win God’s grace. Chapters two and twelve are the
most significant in their messages to humanity.
The Gita’s Essential Wisdom
In Chapter 2, Arjuna is bent down with worry and re-
morse, not wanting to begin the battle that will cause the
bloodshed of so many of his family and mentors. In
response, Krishna teaches him that (1) we must each do
our duty, (2) the death of the body is not the death of the
person because the soul (Atman) lives on (with a descrip-
tion of the doctrine of re-incarnation) and (3) to be an
instrument of the Divine is to be in union with God. This
third point is the essence of the wisdom of the Gita. When
we surrender to God, and dedicate all our actions to the
Divine One, then we can get beyond our own egos and
allow God to take over. We must: ‘‘Let go and let God’’ (as
this same thought is reworded in the 12-step programs for
recovery from addictions today).
To accomplish this vital surrender to God, we must let
go of our personal desires, and we must leave the outcome
in God’s hand. This leads to equanimity, when we neither
relish the praise, nor cringe under accusations and blame,
that may accompany the outcome of our actions.
" The central points of issue, Arjuna, are desire and lack of
inner peace. Desire for the fruits of one’s actions brings
worry about possible failure – the quivering mind
I mentioned. When you are preoccupied with end results
you pull yourself from the present into an imagined,
usually fearful future. Then your anxiety robs your energy
and, making matters worse, you lapse into inaction
and laziness. . . .
Work performed with anxiety about results is far inferior
to work done in a state of calmness. Equanimity – the
serene mental state free from likes and dislikes, attractions
and repulsions – is truly the ideal attitude in which to live
your life (Hawley, 2001: 20f).
This spiritual wisdom has profoundly beneficial results
in psychotherapy today. It is, of course, counter-culture in
the USA to talk of desirelessness and relinquishing the fruits B
of our labors, but anxiety disorders can be ameliorated by
psychoeducation with this ‘‘wisdom of the East’’ in mind.
God’s Most Beloved Devotees
In chapter twelve of the Bhagavad Gita Krishna teaches
Arjuna that God especially loves those who are genuinely
devoted and surrendered to Him, those who love and
serve others, and those who are possessed of equanimity.
In the expression of particular love, Krishna in the Gita
teaches humankind how to live in harmony with God’s
Will. He states that he loves most:
" He who hates no being, who is friendly and compassion-
ate to all, who is free from the feeling of ‘I and mine,’ even-
minded in pain and pleasure and forbearing.
Ever content, steady in meditation, self-controlled and
possessed of firm conviction, with mind and intellect
fixed on Me, he My devotee is dear to Me (Chidbhava-
nanda, 2000: 658).
This is a profound statement of how to live a spiritu-
ally-oriented, values-based lifestyle, as valid today as it
was thousands of years ago when the Bhagavad Gita was
written. In a recent, more Western translation, Krishna is
also saying:
" I love those who do their worldly duties unconcerned by
life. I love those who expect absolutely nothing. Those
who are pure both internally and externally are also very
dear to Me. I love devotees who are ready to be My
instrument, meet any demands I make on them, and yet
ask nothing of Me.
I love those who do not rejoice or feel revulsion, who do
not yearn for possessions, are not affected by the bad or
good things that happen to and around them and yet are
full of devotion to Me (Hawley, 2001: 112).
Sai Baba (q.v.), a contemporary Avatar in India tea-
ches that the wisdom of the Gita provides guidance for all
humans who live today. He summarizes:
" The great teaching of the Geetha is: ‘Put your trust in God,
carry on your duties, be helpful to everyone and sanctify
your lives.’ Dedicate all actions to God. That is the way to
experience oneness with God. God is in you. You are in
God. This oneness is the basic truth. Chant the name of
the Lord and render social service in a spirit of selflessness
and devotion to God (Sai Baba, 1995: 235).
96 B Bible
Oneness with God has long been the aim of the
mystical traditions of all religions. These small clues
on how to attain that sense of union are vital for all
spiritually-oriented clients in psychotherapy or spiritual
direction. To dedicate one’s daily actions to God is a
profound spiritual practice with beneficial results in
both the psychological and spiritual dimensions of life.
See also: > Atman > Avatar > Hinduism
Bibliography
Chidbhavananda, S. (Ed., & Trans.). (2000). The Bhagavad Gita.
Tirupparaithurai, India: Sri Ramakrishna Topovanam.
Hawley, J. (2001). The Bhagavad Gita: A walkthrough for westerners.
Novato, CA: New World Library.
Sai Baba. (1995). Sathya Sai speaks (Vol. XXVIII). Prashanti Nilayam,
India: Sri Sathya Sai Books & Publications Trust.
Bible
Jeffrey B. Pettis
The Bible (Greek, ‘‘the little books’’) constitutes a collec-
tion of writings understood to be sacred and essential
for the life and worship of Judaism and Christianity.
Most of these works are compilations of various oral
and literary traditions ranging from the second millenni-
um BCE through the second century CE. They reflect the life
and narrative of various groups and socio-political con-
texts of a monotheistic religion taking on distinct qualities
and notions of ritual and worship. The Book of Genesis
evidences many of the themes which permeate the Bible as
a whole. The account of the creation story (Gen.1–3) sets
forth the creative powers of the Divine to bring about life
ex nihilo (‘‘out of nothing’’). This is a YHWH who is
mighty and receives sacrifices from patrons to appease
his temperament and persuade his actions in the mortal,
material world: ‘‘And Noah built an altar (Hebrew, mzbch)
unto the Lord. . .and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
And the Lord smelled a sweet savor; and the Lord said in
his heart, I will never again curse the ground any more for
man’s sake’’ (Gen. 8.20–21). Compare Isaac’s altar at
Bersheba (Gen. 26.25), Jacob’s altar at Shechem (Gen.
33.20), Moses’ altar at Rephidim (Ex. 17.15), Solomon’s
altar at Giben (1K. 6.20; 8.64). The notion of ‘‘revelation’’
also occurs as a central theme in Genesis and other texts,
the purpose and needs of the Divine being made known to
the heroes of the Jewish people. Abraham has a revelation
that his people will become a great nation (Gen. 12.1–4)
and that God is with him as a ‘‘shield’’ (Gen. 15.1). At
Bethal Jacob has a dream of angels ascending and des-
cending a ladder and awakens afraid, knowing that he has
been encountered (Gen. 28.10–22). His son Joseph
dreams and interprets dreams through which the divine
purpose becomes realized (Gen. 37–50; cf. 1 Sam. 3; 1
Sam. 28; 1 Kings 9; Isa. 6.1). Compared to the Canaanite
religion of that time, the notion of afterlife in the Jewish
Scriptures is minimal. Covenantal existence with God in
the present world through faithfulness to Torah receives
the primary focus. To be in right relation with YHWH is
to experience the goodness and blessing of a full life:
‘‘Blessed is the one who does not walk in the counsel of
the ungodly. . . but delights in the law of the Lord. . . He
shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that
bring forth fruit’’ (Ps. 1.1–3). It is not until the Book of
Daniel (168–165 BCE)—the latest writing of the Jewish
scriptures—that any clear notion of resurrection and life
after death occurs (Dan. 12; cf. Ezek 37; Isa. 24–27).
Embraced by Jewish groups such as the Pharisees and
the Essenes, it is this belief which becomes central for
early Christian communities and its writings. Paul writes
how Jesus died, was buried, and was raised on the third
day according to the scriptures. Jesus then ‘‘became man-
ifest’’ (ōphthē) to Cephas, then the twelve disciples. Then
he appeared to more thane five hundred brethren at one
time’’ (1 Cor.15.3–6). Paul himself had a theophanous
experience while traveling to Damscus. The event leads
to his conversion to Christianity as one of its strongest
advocates (Acts 9.1–22; 2 Cor. 12.1–5; 1 Cor. 9.1; cf. 1 Cor.
15.5–7). His understanding that a person is justified
through faith and not through the works of the Law
(Gal. 3.10–14) points to the cultural and political conflict
over religious identity and the issue of Gentile (non-
Jewish) membership in Jewish Christianity. Jesus as the
‘‘Son of Man’’ (Matt. 16.27–28, 10.23; Mark 10.45; cf.
1Tim. 2.5–6; Eph. 5.2; Titus 22.13–14), may be under-
stood to continue the Son of Man in Judaism and occurs
in the Book of Daniel (Dan. 7.13–14), a writing itself part
of apocalyptic tradition especially rooted in the Maccabe-
an Wars (168–65 BCE) and the Jewish resistance to the
oppression of Antiochus Epiphanes the Seleucid King of
Syria (Dan. 7.8; 8.9; cf. 11.31; 12.11). He is the central
figure who points to the anticipated ‘‘new age’’ of divine
justice and redemption, where those who have suffered
and died for the sake of their faith will be restored to new

life (cf. 1 En. 46–48; 4 Ezra 13.3, 51f.; 1 Cor. 15.37–50).
According to Jung, in Christian Gnosticism the Son of
Man is the Original Man, a visualization of God as Arch-
anthropos, and the real organizing principle of the un-
conscious (Jung, 1969, 203). As an apocalyptic and
visionary, Jesus as the final sacrifice (John 6.53–54) is
presented in the Gospels expecting a dramatic change of
world-order. In Matt.1.15 he declares: ‘‘The time is ful-
filled (peplērōtai ho kairos) and the kingdom of God is
near’’ (cf. Matt. 4.17, 16.28; Luke 4.19). Christ is both
Messiah and ‘‘Lord’’ – an apocalyptic identification which
is unique to early Christianity and its reading of sacred
text (see Ps. 110.1; cf. 11QMelech). Paul too anticipates
the return of Jesus and new world-order: ‘‘For the Lord
himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command,
with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trum-
pet of God’’ (1 Thes. 4.16; cf. 1 Cor. 13.12, 15.1–6; 2 Cor.
3.18). For Paul, the new age begins with Christ’s resurrec-
tion and will conclude with is return. The Book of Reve-
lation, the last book of the Bible and dated around the end
of the first century CE presents this age as the ‘‘new heaven
and new earth’’ (Rev. 21.1). However, by the third gener-
ation of Christianity the immediate return of Christ and
notions of millennialism lessen as the church focuses
(necessarily) more on the manifest practice of its beliefs
in the present world. Implicit within this shifting is an
interest in evangelism and personal witness which roots
Jesus’ life and resurrection in real time. Unlike Paul’s
inward mysticism and his notion of the ‘‘spiritual
body,’’ the Gospels present the fleshly resurrected Jesus
(John 21.24–31) who appears for the salvation of the
outward world: ‘‘Go tell the disciples and Peter that he
goes before you into Galilee; there you will see him, as he
told you’’ (Mark 16.7). The Jesus of the Gospels have a
missionary emphasis and a focus upon faith in the apos-
tolic tradition. This more material-world orientation
becomes a foundation for the formation of the ‘‘church’’
in concrete terms. The Book of Acts is a good of example
of the story of the church establishing itself in the Greco-
Roma second century world. Other writings such as the
Epistle of James, 1 Peter, and 1 Timothy show this reli-
gio-social shift from Pauline interiority and the numi-
nous to the outward and literal orientation. In this way
the unconscious processes and content of religious expe-
rience in Christian and Jewish scriptures is becoming
conscious and formulated. This includes the instituting
of rituals such as the Eucharist and baptism, and codes of
behavior, dress and diet.
See also: > Christ > Christianity > Genesis > Jesus
> Judaism and Psychology > Resurrection
Biblical Narratives Versus Greek Myths B 97
Biblical Narratives
Versus Greek Myths B
Kalman J. Kaplan . Matthew B. Schwartz
Fifty years ago, Dr. Eric Wellisch, medical director of
Grayford Child Guidance Clinic in England, called for a
Biblical psychology, arguing that:
" The very word ‘‘psyche’’ is Greek. The central psychoana-
lytic concept of the formation of character and neurosis
is shaped after the Greek Oedipus myth. . . . In ancient
Greek philosophy, only a heroic fight for the solution but
no real solution is possible. Ancient Greek philosophy has
not the vision of salvation . . . There is need for a Biblical
psychology (Wellisch, 1954: 115).
Religious leaders in traditional societies often performed
the function of applying the psychological wisdom im-
plicit in the Biblical religious traditions to the particular
life problems of members of their flock. Rabbis, priests
and pastors used Biblical wisdom to help people with
concrete real-life problems. The contemporary situation
is very different. The therapist is largely ignorant of if not
antagonistic to religion, often in a manner incongruent
with the patient’s own orientation.
Several studies for example, have found that over 90%
of patients believe in a transcendent God, compared to
only about 40% of clinical psychologists. This is a huge
disconnect! Most mental health professionals avoid refer-
ence to, or recognition of their patients’ religious beliefs
and the deep influence of these beliefs on patients’ lives.
Few mental health professionals fully incorporate a
patient’s religious beliefs into a treatment plan.
There are a number of possible reasons for the resis-
tance toward religion on the part of mental health profes-
sionals, and for the resistance of religious leaders to the
insights and findings of the mental health field. For one,
the fields of religion and mental health have historically
been in conflict with each other with psychology/psychia-
try allying itself to science and medicine. Second, psychol-
ogy/psychiatry often has approached issues of spirituality
in a superficial manner, treating spiritual development as
something foreign to the development of the individual
personality. Third, issues regarding life meaning are too
often relegated to the theological realm alone. Fourth,
much of the biological cause of mental illness has been
relegated to psychology and psychiatry. Finally, much of
traditional psychotherapy has been based on classical
98 B Biblical Narratives Versus Greek Myths
Greek rather than Biblical foundation models. For exam-
ple, traditional psychoanalysis has focused on Greek foun-
dation stories such as Oedipus, Electra and Narcissus
rather than on respective Biblical alternatives such as
Isaac, Ruth and Jonah.
In a series of books on religion and mental health, we
(Kaplan, Schwartz and Markus-Kaplan, 1984; Kaplan and
Schwartz, 1993; Schwartz and Kaplan, 2004; Kaplan
and Schwartz, 2006; Schwartz and Kaplan, 2007; Kaplan
and Schwartz, 2008) have delineated ten important con-
trasts with regard to mental health between classical Greek
and Biblical thinking: (1) the primacy of God versus
nature; (2) the harmonious relationship of body and
soul, (3) cyclical versus linear conceptions of time, (4)
the relationship between self and other, (5) the relationship
between man and woman, (6) the relationship between
parent and child, and (7) sibling rivalry and its resolution,
(8) the relationship between freedom and suicide, (9) the
question of rebelliousness versus obedience, and finally
(10) a tragic versus therapeutic outlook on life. Let us
briefly describe each of these Hellenistic biases in mental
health and suggest a biblical alternative.
God and Nature
Hesiod’s Theogony portrays Earth and Sky mating and
giving birth to the titans, in particular Cronus, who later
begat the Gods. In other words nature exists before the
gods and creates them. The family pathology commences
immediately, as the Sky father shoves the children back
into the Earth mother. Such action of course breeds reac-
tion and Earth repays Sky, by plotting with their son
Cronus to castrate his father. The father-son conflict
becomes ingrained as a law of nature foretold by Earth
and Sky.
The Biblical story of creation sees God as creating
heaven and earth. In other words, God exists before na-
ture and creates it. (Gen. 1:1). God then proceeds to create
order out of chaos. First, light is divided from darkness
(Gen. 1:24). God then divides water from the land (Gen.
1:9). Then, God begins to prepare this world for the
entrance of man. First, He has the earth bring forth
vegetation (Gen. 1:11). He places living creatures in the
sea and fowls in the air (Gen. 1:20). Now God places living
creatures on the earth – cattle, creeping things, and other
beasts (Gen. 1:24). The world is now ready for people, and
God creates them, His ultimate handiwork, in His own
image and gives them dominion over all that He has
created. (Gen. 1:27–29). There is no irreconcilable conflict
between people and God, between man and woman, or
between parent and child.
Body and Soul
Plato sees the relationship between body (soma) and soul
(psyche) as conflictual and unfortunate. The soul is a
helpless prisoner in the body, compelled to view reality
only indirectly and unclearly (Phaedo, 82d). Plato, per-
haps following Orphic teachings, called the body a prison
of the soul, and others with comparable ideas called it a
tomb (The Oxford Classical Dictionary, 1970: 895).
In Biblical thought, the human body and soul are both
sacred, both created by God. They can and must function
in harmony to fulfill God’s purpose in the world. Emo-
tion, intellect and body are all integral components
of a human being, and there is no opposition between
body and soul or flesh and spirit (Urbach, 1979).
Conceptions of Time
The pervasive Greek view of time is cyclical, mirroring the
seasons of nature. A man rises up only to be overcome by
hubris (pride) and cast down into nemesis (retribution),
the nadir of the circle.
The Biblical view of time is linear, freeing itself from
the cyclical seasons of nature. History begins in God’s
creation, continues with His ongoing revelation to man,
and ends in God’s messianic age. The book of Ecclesiastes
distinguishes the cyclical view of time regarding natural
events: ‘‘The sun riseth, and the sun goeth down.’’(1:3–7)
from the developmental view embedded in human events
‘‘To everything there is a season, and a time for every
purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a
time to die’’ (3: 1–8).
Self and Other
Greek thought sees self and other as fundamentally
opposed. One wins at the expense of another losing.
The legend of Narcissus is prototypical in this regard.
The earliest sources of the myth of Narcissus have long
since been lost. Our most complete account from antiquity
is from Ovid’s Metamorphosis (ca. 43–17 CE). Although
physically beautiful, Narcissus leads a life full of precari-
ous oscillation between self-absorption and infatuation
with another, which turns out to be his own reflection.
He ends up in his psychotic attempt to integrate self and

other, and he suicides (Ovid, 1955: 3; Conon, 1798: 24)
‘‘Alas! I am myself the boy I see. . . I am on fire for love
of my own self.’’ The Apollonian side of Greek culture
relies totally on a walled-off and disengaged intellect.
The Dionysiac side of Greek culture portrays an enmesh-
ment which destroys individual boundaries.
Biblical thought sees self and other in harmony. Jonah
avoids the polarities of disengagement and enmeshment.
When he runs away to Tarshish, (Jonah 1: 1–3). God acts
as a protective therapist, saving Jonah from suicide on
several occasions: first with a fish (2: 2–11), and then with
a gourd (4: 6). Jonah finally learns the message of divine
mercy (4: 9–11) and that he can reach out to another
without losing himself. In the words of the Jewish sage,
Hillel, ‘‘If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am
for myself only, what am I?’’
Man and Woman
Greek narratives portray men and women in basic con-
flict. Pandora, the first woman, is sent by Zeus as a
punishment to man because Prometheus has attempted
to steal fire for man to make him autonomous. Pandora is
given many gifts to entice man, but, ultimately, is seen as
responsible for man’s destruction and as a block to his
autonomy. She opens the box she has brought to Epi-
metheus containing all the evils of the world, leaving
only hope left locked inside and unavailable to humanity
(Hesiod, 1973: 60–96).
Biblical narratives portray men and women as differ-
ent, but in basic harmony.
Eve is sent as a blessing and partner, a ‘‘helpmeet oppo-
site,’’ not as an instrument of punishment. Together she and
the man are seduced by the serpent to eat of the fruit of the
tree of knowledge, and while this leads to their expulsion
from Eden, they do not die but build a life together with
divine help and hard work (Genesis 2 and 3).
Parents and Children
Fathers and Sons: Laius/Oedipus vs. Abraham/Isaac: The
Greek story of Oedipus portrays the father (Laius) and
the son (Oedipus) in basic conflict. The father is told by
an oracle that his son will kill him and marry his (the
son’s) mother. Such a conflict is originally portrayed in
the Greek theogony discussed above, and describes a
pattern where the father feels the son is trying to dis-
place him and the son feels the father is trying to block
Biblical Narratives Versus Greek Myths B 99
him. The story begins with Laius trying to kill Oedipus
and proceeds with Oedipus killing Laius and marrying
his mother, Jocasta (Sophocles, Oedipus Rex). This con- B
flict is resolved in Freudian thinking through a fear of
castration. This is the basis of the introjection of the
superego for the son, and thus it is fear-based (Freud,
1923a, 1923b, 1924).
The Biblical story of Isaac portrays the father Abraham
receiving the gift of a son, Isaac, late in his and his wife
Sarah’s lives. Abraham then receives the command from
God to sacrifice this son that he loves to God. However,
this is only a test, and Abraham demonstrates his loyalty
to God, Who sends an angel to stay Abraham’s hand,
preventing child-sacrifice which had been so prevalent
in surrounding cultures. The blessing of Abraham will
continue through Isaac. (Genesis, 22) Covenantal circum-
cision can be seen as a non-injurious alternative to castra-
tion, transforming the father into a teacher and the son
into a disciple. The father wants the son to both succeed
and surpass him. The mother is not a seductress but a
harmonizer. The basis of morality is thus not fear but
a covenantal relationship between God, father and son.
The son does not need to rebel against the father because
he already has his father’s blessing.
Mothers and Daughters: Clytemnestra/Electra vs. Naomi/
Ruth: The Greek story of Electra portrays a basic antag-
onism between mother (Clytemnestra) and daughter
(Electra). Clytemnestra accuses Electra of preferring her
father, Agamemnon. Electra accuses Clytemnestra of being
unfaithful to her father. She and her brother Orestes mur-
der their mother (Aeschylus, Agamemnon, Euripides,
Electra). This story of Electra has been used by Jung as a
term for a ‘‘feminine Oedipus Complex’’ (Jung, 1961:
347–348).
The Biblical Book of Ruth tells of the relationship
between the Moabitess Ruth and her mother-in-law,
Naomi. Even when Ruth’s husband dies, she refuses to
abandon Naomi. Naomi does not try to block Ruth and,
indeed, facilitates her marriage to Naomi’s kinsman Boaz,
who is impressed by Ruth’s kindness to Naomi. Naomi is
brought into the household as a nurse to their son Obed
who is described as the father of Jesse, who is father of
David. There is no hint of the antagonism between moth-
er and daughter implicit in the Electra complex.
Siblings and Family
The Hebrew Scripture contains many stories of sibling
rivalry: Cain and Abel, (Genesis 4), Isaac and Ishmael
(Genesis 17–25), Jacob and Esau (Genesis 25–27) and
100 B Biblical Narratives Versus Greek Myths
Joseph and his brothers (Genesis 37–50). The greater
incidence of sibling rivalry in narratives in Genesis than
in Greek mythology is misleading. It is a function of the
underlying purpose of the biblical family – the sons com-
pete to inherit the covenant of the father. The father’s
blessing can help resolve this rivalry, as with Jacob’s bles-
sings to his sons, each given uniquely given the blessing he
needed to suit his own personality and his situation
(Genesis 49).
The Greek family is purposeless. The father is not a
source of inheritance but an impediment. Sibling rivalry is
initially masked by the threat of the father to the sons,
who must band together to protect themselves: Uranus
versus his sons (Hesiod, 1973: ll. 155–210), Cronus versus
his sons (ll. 453–725), Zeus versus Heracles and Iphicles
(Hesiod, 1914: ll. 35, 56 and 80)., and Oedipus versus
Polynieces and Eteocles (Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus;
Aeschylus, The Seven Against Thebes). However, this
bonding is shallow and will disappear as the paternal
threat recedes. This pattern is expressed tragically in the
curse of the weakened and blinded Oedipus to his two
sons to slay each other at the gate of Thebes. (Sophocles,
Oedipus at Colonus, ll. 1386–1394; Aeschylus, The Seven
Against Thebes, ll. 879–924).
Freedom and Suicide
Like many Greeks both historical and mythological,
the Stoics clearly approved of suicide. The Roman Stoic
Seneca, for example, saw suicide as freedom. ‘‘You see that
yawning precipice? It leads to liberty. You see that flood,
that river, that well? Liberty is housed within them. You
see that stunted, parched and sorry tree? From each
branch, liberty hangs. Your neck, your throat, your heart
are so many ways of escape from slavery. . . Do you in-
quire the road to freedom? You shall find it in every vein
of your body (Seneca, De Ira, 3.15.3–4). Indeed, for Plato,
philosophy is ‘‘preparation for death.’’
Biblical thought is clearly opposed to suicide as no
better and perhaps worse than homicide. ‘‘For your life-
blood too, I will require a reckoning’’ (Genesis 9. 5). The
human being is commanded to choose life: ‘‘See, I have
put before you today life and death, blessing and curse,
and you shall choose life so that you and your seed shall
live.’’ (Deuteronomy 30.19) Freedom is seen not in sui-
cide, but in life following God’s commandments. ‘‘Read
not harut (carved) but herut (freedom). One is not free
unless he devotes himself to the study of Torah’’ (Avot,
6.2). Indeed, Hebrew thought sees the Bible as a ‘‘guide
for living.’’
Rebelliousness Versus Obedience
A great deal has been made of the clash of Islamic
and Western (European, American and Judeo-Christian)
civilizations. Yet there is a more profound line of demar-
cation between those cultures that view rebellion and
rebelliousness as the highest form of development (e.g.,
Albert Camus) and those that view obedience to the
divine will as the highest goal. The underlying message
of the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals after the
Second World War was to mock the defense ‘‘we were just
following orders.’’ Thus the mantra of the west came to be
a distrust of authority per se (i.e., parents, community and
religious leaders, and law and system of morality) rather
than of a particular authority. Yet the Bible criticizes
the Israelites, newly freed from Egypt, for building a
golden calf. (Exodus 32). The question of rebelliousness
versus obedience is complicated. In Greek mythology,
Zeus cannot be trusted. Prometheus must rebel against
him to help human beings. Prometheus steals fire for
men, who are then punished by Zeus by means of the
woman Pandora. In Biblical thinking, in contrast, God
can be trusted and indeed must be trusted. According to
Talmudic interpretation of the Biblical story of creation,
God has provided the means for Adam to invent fire
(Midrash Genesis Rabbah, 11:2). Thus the serpent
is tempting Eve with the siren call of disobedience, but
in Biblical teaching, this act is sinful. In short, one must
know who one’s god is. If it is Zeus, one should rebel: if
it is the Biblical God, one should obey. This does not
mean we should not question a particular authority.
However, this is different than questioning the very idea
of authority.
Tragedy Versus Therapy
Bruno Snell (1935) has argued that the differences in the
respective orderings of God and nature are not just chrono-
logical, but logical and psychological as well. The Classical
Greek view is deterministic and the essence of the tragic
vision of man; the Biblical view is intrinsically open to the
possibility of change and transformation and lies beneath
the idea of genuine psychotherapy. Before the Biblical God,
nothing is impossible: He can cancel the natural order of
things, alter it in any number of ways, or, indeed, create
something out of nothing, just the way He created nature.
A Greek god is confined to acts that may show his power but
that cannot truly transcend natural law or defy fate. Lev
Shestov (1966) argues very much the same thing, insisting
that the Biblical God is not subordinate to Necessity. The

Greek view of tragedy and the Biblical view of therapy can
be contrasted in two main points. First, bad family back-
ground is impossible to overcome in the Greek tragic
vision: ‘‘But now, I am forsaken of the gods, son of a
defiled mother, successor to his bed who gave me my
own wretched being.’’ (Sophocles, Oedipus the King, ll.
1359–1361). However, a bad family background can be
overcome in the Biblical therapeutic vision: ‘‘Cast me not
off, neither forsake me, O God of my salvation. For
though my father and mother have forsaken me, the
Lord will take me up’’ (Psalms 27:9–10).
There is a profound difference between the Greek and
Biblical vision with regard to the efficacy of prayer and a
general sense of hopefulness. For the Greeks, prayer is
useless in this determined world: ‘‘Pray thou no more; for
mortals have no escape from destined woe’’ (Sophocles,
Antigone, l. 1336). The Bible believes in the efficacy of
prayer, even in the most hopeless of situations.
Acknowledgment
Dr. Kaplan is currently teaching an online course in a
Biblical Approach to Mental Health. Sponsored by the
John Templeton Foundation (see www.rsmh.org).
See also: > Bible > Biblical Psychology > Christianity
> God > Myth
Bibliography
Apollodorus. (1976). The library (M. Simpson, Trans.). Amherst, MA:
University of Massachusetts Press.
Avot D’ R’ Nathan. (1987). S. Schechter (Ed.) Vienna: n.p.
Conon. (1798). Narrationes quinquaginta et partheniee narrationes
amatoriae. Gottingae: J. C. Dietrich.
Freud, S. (1923a). The ego and the id. In J. Rivere (Ed., & Trans.),
Standard edition of the complete works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 19,
pp. 12–59). London: Hogarth Press.
Freud, S. (1923b). The infantile genital organizations: An interpolation
into the theory of sexuality. In J. Strachey (Ed., & Trans.), Standard
edition of the complete works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 19, pp. 141–
148). London: Hogarth Press.
Freud, S. (1924). The dissolution of the Oedipus complex. In J. Strachey
(Ed., & Trans.), Standard edition of the complete works of Sigmund
Freud (Vol. 19, pp. 173–179). London: Hogarth Press.
Hesiod. (1914). The shield of Heracles. In H. G. Evelyn White (Trans.),
The Homeric Hymns and Homerica. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Hesiod, & Theognis. (1973). Theogony and Works and days (Hesiod)
and Elegies (Theognis) (D. Wender, Trans.). England: Penguin
Classics.
The Holy Scriptures. (1917). (2 vols.). Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication
Society of America.
Biblical Psychology B 101
Jung, C. G. (1961). The collected works. Volume 4: Freud and psychoanaly-
sis (R. F. C. Hull, Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Kaplan, K. J., & Schwartz, M. B. (1993). A psychology of hope: An antidote
to the suicidal pathology of western civilization. Westport, CT: B
Praeger.
Kaplan, K. J., & Schwartz, M. B. (2006). The seven habits of the good life:
How the biblical virtues free us from the seven deadly sins. Lanham,
MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Kaplan, K. J., Schwartz, M. B., & Markus-Kaplan, M. (1984). The family:
Biblical and psychological foundations. New York: Human Sciences
Press.
Kaplan, K. J., & Schwartz, M. W. (2008). A psychology of hope: A biblical
response to tragedy and sucide. Ground Rapids, MI: William B. Eerd-
mans Publishing Company.
Midrash Rabbah (Hebrew). (1971). (2 vols). Jerusalem.
Oates, W. J., & O’Neil, E., Jr. (Trans., & Eds.). (1938). The complete Greek
drama (2 vols). New York: Random House.
Ovid. (1955). The metamorphoses (M. Innes, Trans.). London: Penguin
Classics.
The Oxford Classical Dictionary (2nd ed.). (1970). N. G. I. Hammond &
H. H. Scullard (Eds.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Plato. (1954). The last days of Socrates (including Euthyphro, The apology,
Crito, Phaedo) (M. Tredennick, Trans.). Middlesex, England: Pen-
guin Classics.
Schwartz, M. B., & Kaplan, K. J. (2004). Biblical stories for psychotherapy
and counseling: A sourcebook. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Pasto-
ral Press.
Schwartz, M. B., & Kaplan, K. J. (2007). The fruit of her hands: A
psychology of biblical woman. Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Seneca, L. A. the Younger. (1971). Seneca. (R. Gunmore, Trans.).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shestov, L. (1966). Athens and Jerusalem. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
Snell, B. (1982/1935). The discovery of the mind. New York: Dover.
Urbach, E. E. (1979). The sages: Their concepts and beliefs (2nd ed.)
(I. Abrahms, Trans.). Jerusalem: The Magnes Press of the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem.
Wellisch, E. (1954). Isaac and Oedipus: Studies in biblical psychology of the
sacrifice of Isaac. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Yerushalmi, Y. (1991). Freud’s Moses: Judaism terminable and intermina-
ble. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Biblical Psychology
Jeffrey H. Boyd
Mindfulness, a Buddhist view of human experience, is
widely employed in psychology today. Every major reli-
gion offers a view of human experience, i.e., a spiritual
psychology. The most popular is the biblical view.