Biblical counseling spectrum?

[arapahoepark]

Thinking about this since a thread a started earlier, I am wondering what is the spectrum of Biblical counseling? What is recommended or does it depend on the person counseling? I have profited from CCEF in my own life but am unsure about others. Many say CCEF is too beholden to psychology while others like ACBC are said to be too confrontational. What are your thoughts on respective organizations and their philosophy ranging from nouthetic to integrative?

 

[Stephen L Smith]

I like the approach of CCEF. I think they avoid two extremes. There is the danger of the secular approach which denies humans are sinners. But I am equally uncomfortable with many aspects of the nouthetic approach which downplays the problem of mental illness (eg, autism spectrum, schizophrenia etc).

There is a clear link between brain health and mental illness. I think a balanced approach will take seriously BOTH brain health and the reality of sin.

An insightful work on the reality of someone suffering with schizophrenia is 'Broken Pieces and the God who mends them' I appreciate the balanced discussion on mental illness in this book.

 

[retroGRAD3]

I like Jay Adams. I think there is way too much sin explained away as mental illness, but I do not deny that mental issues do occur.

I have always thought CCEF is weak.

 

[Stephen L Smith]

I have always thought CCEF is weak.

Why?

 

[Polanus1561]

I do like the https://www.biblicalcounselingcoalition.org/
But the best approach is to read widely across the spectrum and agree to disagree.

 

[No Other Name]

I like Jay Adams. I think there is way too much sin explained away as mental illness, but I do not deny that mental issues do occur.

I have always thought CCEF is weak.

I second the query into further clarification.

I love Jay Adams, and am learning about CCEF but my query would be mostly curious if there is a problem inherent within the system itself or are there instances where it was misapplied by practitioners that may call for a specific amendment to adjust as time goes on?

 

[Blood-Bought Pilgrim]

I think a true "integrated" approach, at least as it has been taught to me, is far too quick to misidentify sin as mere mental issues and ignore the spiritual and supernatural. However, I do agree that there are things we can learn from modern psychology as long as we are careful to put all things through a biblical filter. I've loved CCEF's stuff and also the things I have encountered from ACBC.

 

[dsanch1120]

I was taught nuothetic by an elder at my church, and was turned off to it. Things that were said to me, such as a denial of "all truth is God's truth," "psychology is built on evolution, therefore anything it says can be tossed aside," and "brain chemistry imbalance is false, therefore there isn't anything wrong with the brain" I disagree with.
I believe there are aspects of it that are good and necessary, but I strongly believe that an integrated approach is correct. Nuothetic seems to deny any possibility of the brain not physically functioning properly, while purely secular psychology doesn't recognize the role that sin plays in the vast majority of our problems, though I would argue that they do make many correct observations about the brain and human behavior, even if they attribute the source of said behaviors falsely. Thus, I think an integrated approach is best. Sin problems should be dealt with alongside issues with the brain and body. I have a friend who was diagnosed with ADHD. Was there a sin problem? Yes, and he's worked through that. Does the ADHD medicine help him focus and work better? Absolutely. Speaking as someone who is not a pastor or seminary educated, I feel like there is a time and place in counseling to refer congregants to a known and trusted psychologist/psychiatrist.

 

[retroGRAD3]

I second the query into further clarification.

I love Jay Adams, and am learning about CCEF but my query would be mostly curious if there is a problem inherent within the system itself or are there instances where it was misapplied by practitioners that may call for a specific amendment to adjust as time goes on?

Just in case I wasn't clear Jay Adams and CCEF are not the same thing, they are like opposites. I think CCEF is weak because they lean too heavily on worldly psychology and give too much grace where repentance is what is actually needed so grace can truly come in. My understanding is we are giving our opinions here, no need to agree with mine, I was just stating them.

 

[No Other Name]

I think CCEF is weak because they lean too heavily on worldly psychology and give too much grace where repentance is what is actually needed so grace can truly come in.

This was all I was looking for. Specifically why you thought CCEF was weak. I love Jay Adams' books and I am only now learning CCEF. I cannot agree or disagree yet.

 

[retroGRAD3]

I was taught nuothetic by an elder at my church, and was turned off to it. Things that were said to me, such as a denial of "all truth is God's truth," "psychology is built on evolution, therefore anything it says can be tossed aside," and "brain chemistry imbalance is false, therefore there isn't anything wrong with the brain" I disagree with.
I believe there are aspects of it that are good and necessary, but I strongly believe that an integrated approach is correct. Nuothetic seems to deny any possibility of the brain not physically functioning properly, while purely secular psychology doesn't recognize the role that sin plays in the vast majority of our problems, though I would argue that they do make many correct observations about the brain and human behavior, even if they attribute the source of said behaviors falsely. Thus, I think an integrated approach is best. Sin problems should be dealt with alongside issues with the brain and body. I have a friend who was diagnosed with ADHD. Was there a sin problem? Yes, and he's worked through that. Does the ADHD medicine help him focus and work better? Absolutely. Speaking as someone who is not a pastor or seminary educated, I feel like there is a time and place in counseling to refer congregants to a known and trusted psychologist/psychiatrist.

The thing about ADHD though, as far as I can tell from researching on the internet and from one of my nephew's, is that there is no physical proof of anything that is wrong in the brain. Like there is nothing to see. So, I don't think you can criticize Nuothetic counseling for that one or instances like that. I have not gotten the impression that they deny actual brain defects or injuries that might cause behavioral issues. If they do, then I would agree with your assessment of that aspect of the counseling being in error.

However, with disorders like ADHD, I believe being suspect of it is has some merit. Have you looked lately at how many child are diagnosed with it and put on some drug at a young age? All of the symptoms appear to be what happens when parent's decide not to disciple their children or just general bad behavior (e.g. Often fails to give close attention to details, Often has trouble holding attention, Often does not seem to listen when spoken to, Often does not follow through on instructions, Often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to do tasks that require mental effort (lazy?), etc.). And again, there appears to be no proof of anything physically wrong or different with the brain.

 

[ZackF]

In a sense, CCEF includes all of the aforementioned people including Jay Adams. ARBC is a rebrand of NANC of which Adams was later associated also. ARBC and CCEF have many people associated with them. Despite the drive to find the perfect TR tribe, counseling is probably better evaluated at the individual level than corporately. Some counselors may even be better on some kinds of issues yet come up short in others. The all or nothing template forces out critical thinking about the proper care of individual souls (and physical maladies).

 

[retroGRAD3]

In a sense, CCEF includes all of the aforementioned people including Jay Adams. ARBC is a rebrand of NANC of which Adams was later associated also. ARBC and CCEF have many people associated with them. Despite the drive to find the perfect TR tribe counseling is probably better evaluated at the individual level than corporately. Some counselors may even be better on some kinds of issues yet come up short in others. The all or nothing template forces critical thinking about the proper care of individual souls (and physical maladies).

Yes, I would agree with this. There are individual subjects and authors that are better than others even within CCEF. Similar to a Bible commentary series where multiple authors contribute, there are going to be some that are very high quality and others than don't achieve the same heights.

 

[CovenantPatriot87]

The thing about ADHD though, as far as I can tell from researching on the internet and from one of my nephew's, is that there is no physical proof of anything that is wrong in the brain. Like there is nothing to see. So, I don't think you can criticize Nuothetic counseling for that one or instances like that. I have not gotten the impression that they deny actual brain defects or injuries that might cause behavioral issues. If they do, then I would agree with your assessment of that aspect of the counseling being in error.

However, with disorders like ADHD, I believe being suspect of it is has some merit. Have you looked lately at how many child are diagnosed with it and put on some drug at a young age? All of the symptoms appear to be what happens when parent's decide not to disciple their children or just general bad behavior (e.g. Often fails to give close attention to details, Often has trouble holding attention, Often does not seem to listen when spoken to, Often does not follow through on instructions, Often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to do tasks that require mental effort (lazy?), etc.). And again, there appears to be no proof of anything physically wrong or different with the brain.

I still have ADHD and I was never given any medication. Diagnosed at age 20. Why do adhd symptoms have to be a result of bad parenting? I know adult men that are still like those "oftens" you have described in their 40s-70s. Many of them church officers. There is nothing wrong with someone that has ADHD. If anything it should teach a grown up patience and longsuffering in the way an individual learns, and not the need to chastise a child to get the behavior they want. Even Pavlovs dog works in reformed Christian culture. Yet God never commanded parents to treat kids like dogs.

I find Jay Adam's teaching to be identical to behavioralism. The man always addresses the behavior and not the whole person. I also find the consolidation of power over the soul to belong to ministers ridiculous. Even heathen are wise as to minister to the ailments of the soul as well as the body since even for this the law of God is written on the heart addresses that as well. Adam's and his nouthetic movement can take a hike.

 

[retroGRAD3]

I still have ADHD and I was never given any medication. Diagnosed at age 20. Why do adhd symptoms have to be a result of bad parenting? I know adult men that are still like those "oftens" you have described in their 40s-70s. Many of them church officers. There is nothing wrong with someone that has ADHD. If anything it should teach a grown up patience and longsuffering in the way an individual learns, and not the need to chastise a child to get the behavior they want. Even Pavlovs dog works in reformed Christian culture. Yet God never commanded parents to treat kids like dogs.

I find Jay Adam's teaching to be identical to behavioralism. The man always addresses the behavior and not the whole person. I also find the consolidation of power over the soul to belong to ministers ridiculous. Even heathen are wise as to minister to the ailments of the soul as well as the body since even for this the law of God is written on the heart addresses that as well. Adam's and his nouthetic movement can take a hike.

I did say "or". I am glad to hear you don't take medication and have handled it, but I continue to wonder, how do you know you have ADHD? What testing has been done to prove it? Where is the physical defect?

Also, before you decide to dismiss someone's entire life's work, I would be interested to know which of his books you have actually read and what specifically you disagree with. It seems pretty dismissive to just say, he is the same as "behavioralism". If confronting someone in their sin and calling them to repentance is behavioralism, then I guess Jesus is a behavioralist as well. I think you are very off on this.

Definition: https://nouthetic.org/about/what-is-nouthetic-counseling/

 

[jwithnell]

I can only offer practical observations as a pew-dweller, but I did meet Jay Adams and knew a few of his students. He was highly influential in a church plant I attended as a young believer

Not so long ago, no-one really knew of the virus that causes stomach ulcers. That didn't mean severe stomach pain didn't exist. Rather, the medical community didn't fully understand the source of patients' symptoms and told them to eat a bland diet and slow down; that partially helped some people but far from all.

Even if we can't directly test for all disorders, loving pastoral care, valid physical treatments, and behavioral changes can help. Doctors have noticed, for example, that a medication that is used to treat high blood pressure in the "normal" population can help the sleep problems of non-neurotypical folk. An anti-seizure medication can quell the aggressiveness in people who have no physical diagnosis for seizures. The medicine can stabilize a chaotic situation buying time for a family to get help. In both cases, I suspect these treatments may one day help diagnose and treat ADHD, spectrum disorders &etc. In the meantime, families can use all the help they can get. They will not get the most crucial care within the church if greeted with cold stares and mumblings when parents struggle with what could be multi-faceted problems or if they are criticized for seeking medical interventions for their young ones.

Are there lousy parents out there? Sure. We're also a fairly lousy society when it comes to telling little boys to sit still. Rather than poor parenting, we are often dealing with a society that is willing to sacrifice the security of a home and a mother's care so the parents can get ahead in their careers. (I find it interesting that the early home schooling movement and one of the best state academic systems worked on the principle that children do better when given the chance to grow up a bit before being tossed into a formal learning environment.)

I absolutely get that psychology is suspect with its origin in the primordial muck of materialistic evolution. Jay Adam's lasting legacy is his willingness to warn the church away from adopting this humanistic approach. People -- and sometimes even pastors -- have been shredded, though, when others find a spiritually-deficient boogeyman behind every struggling individual. I'm also concerned with the model -- adopted by many Christian counselors -- that puts an individual in a room alone with a practioner to discuss problems rather than dealing with the whole person in the context of her family and church.

My goal in stating all this is to encourage a multi-faceted approach that takes the whole person into account and the multiple opportunities to get help physically and spiritually. Despite labels and devotees, no single approach will help all.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

I've been reading through "Thoughts on Religeous Experience" by Archibald Alexander, and the book provides such helpful insights into the workings of the human soul and heart. Richard Baxter and other Puritans had really insightful things to say re: melancholy, our experiences and how bodily infirmities can affect. We are all poor and weak folk! And yet the Lord so graciously receives, helps, and loves us.