A Catalyst…

X (formerly Twitter) is a catalyst. It challenges me to think deeply about the complex relationship between traumatic suffering and our embodied-souls. For my recent research on this, see:

• 161 Free Resources for Counseling the Whole Person: Soul Physicians of Embodied-Souls.
• The Gospels, Traumatic Suffering, and the Embodied-Soul: 50-Page Free PDF Resource.

A Recent X Post 

Omri Miles recently posted the following on X.

“It will be interesting to see if any of the clinically-informed crowd even attempts to interact with Dale and Francine’s material in this series. The research is incredibly thorough and the case being made for the exclusion of trauma-informed drivel is compelling. Check it out!”

Omri was referencing this tweet on X by ACBC:

“In this new series, Dr. Dale Johnson and Francine Tan sit down for a discussion focused on answering the question ‘does the body keep the score?’ https://ow.ly/PIRs50WAfy2 In the coming weeks, this series will explore the myths proposed by trauma-informed theory. Stay tuned!”

I Watched the Video: 2 Main Points 

I watched the ACBC video and read the transcribed manuscript. I discerned two main points in the 18-minute conversation:

1. The Bible provides the foundation we need to understand suffering and how to minister to sufferers.

2. Extra-biblical information on trauma is both wrong and unnecessary.

Every biblical counselor I know, including every clinically-informed biblical counselor (CIBC), agrees with #1.

The real question relates to #2 about extra-biblical information.

Is all extra-biblical literature on trauma wrong and unnecessary? If it is not all wrong, then it would be helpful to see specific ACBC citations of positive science/neuroscience on the impact of trauma on the body.

Is there no valid use for extra-biblical information? If there is no valid use for extra-biblical information, then I would want to know how Omri responds to INC: Informed Nouthetic Counseling, which documents the 50-year history of the modern nouthetic movement using extra-biblical information… 

Wading In…Wise or Unwise??? 

Lately, I have chosen to be more selective in my engagements on these biblical counseling debates. Sadly, I rarely find that the interactions end up being very productive.

However, I chose to wade in this time. Wise or unwise?

If nothing else, my engagement can be food for thought—for me, and hopefully for you.

Responding to Brother Omri

Here are my responses to Omri (with some updates and edits).

A few responses, Omri, from someone who is not clinically-informed. For my approach, see, 6 Biblical Counseling Convictions.

1. “Crowd” is an interesting word. I suppose it is better than “cabal,” “ilk,” or “tribe,” or “camp.”

2. Your commentary, such as, “even attempt,” “incredibly thorough,” “trauma-informed drivel,” and “compelling” seems as if you have already drawn your conclusion that there is no possible rebuttal to any of this amazing series. If so, are you truly interested in their interaction?

3. Not all clinically-informed biblical counselors claim the label “trauma-informed.” This link shows how several leading CIBCers are not aligning themselves with “trauma-informed:” 15 Resources About Clinically-Informed Biblical Counseling (CIBC). Congealing the two groups into one is not accurate.

4. Those CIBCers who are doing trauma research do not necessarily align themselves with The Body Keeps the Score, and certainly not with everything in that book. Though the book did include nearly 1,000 separate citations, many from peer reviewed journals/research. (I am not an apologist for The Body Keeps the Score; I am a proponent of solid academic research.) I also am sure that CIBCers would want to exclude all “trauma-informed drivel.” They may, however, choose to include, under the authority of Scripture as their evaluative lens, trauma-informed validated research. In other words, they prefer validated research to drivel research.

5. Those CIBCers who are doing trauma research also are doing a great deal of research on what the Bible says about the impact of suffering on the body, the impact of the soul on the body, the impact of the body on the soul, and the interrelationship between body/soul—embodied-soul. So, while they may or may not use the lingo of “the body keeping the score,” they will follow the Bible’s teaching on the complex interaction and ongoing impact of our fallen world on our embodied-soul.

6. The stated focus of the ACBC series seems potentially problematic from a fair and balanced research perspective. They say:

“This series will explore the myths proposed by trauma-informed theory.”

First, the conclusion is pre-drawn. The presupposition is that trauma-informed research is myth.

Second, the research hinted at in this first podcast is co-belligerent research—only citing research that is anti-trauma. Are there zero neuroscience research studies that support trauma-informed theory? Fair and balanced research would address research that aligns with and supports trauma-informed material, as well as research which is anti-trauma-informed. As a Bible college, seminary, and grad school professor, I would never accept a paper, even from a first year student, that already drew its conclusion, and that only used co-belligerent research.

I say “hinted at” because there are zero actual research citations in this podcast, but plenty of nebulous comments about the proposed lack of credibility of trauma-informed research. So, Omri, in what sense is “the research” in this podcast “incredibly thorough” for “the exclusion of trauma-informed drivel”? Will there be research other than co-belligerent research?

7. I would be interested to know why you accept and promote co-belligerent research from unsaved, non-redeemed, totally depraved researchers impacted by the noetic effect of sin. Is the impact of sin somehow minimized when people agree with your conclusions? If so, that seems a powerful argument for common grace.

8. I would be interested to see if any of the modern nouthetic counseling “crowd” even attempts to interact with this material (which uses primary source quotations from Adams, Bettler, Powlison, Gifford, Lambert, etc.) on the history of nouthetic counseling being “informed” by multiple secular sources. INC: Informed Nouthetic Counseling.

9. A major focus of this first ACBC YouTube video in the series is the assumption that Christians (counselors and counselees) are running after these psychological myths because they don’t trust the Scriptures. Why would we assume that counselees who are redeemed, regenerated, renewed, reconciled, justified saints are focused on immediate healing and duped into following myths? The Christian counselees I minister to have no instinct to integrate. Rather, they desire to avail themselves of all God-given resources, including God’s sovereign, God-glorifying common grace, assessed under the authority of God’s special revelation. As they yield their whole being—embodied-soul—to Christ, they are the most Christ-dependent people I have ever met.

Why would we assume that fellow Christian biblical counselors are running after psychological myths because they don’t trust God’s Word? Just as this ACBC podcast aligns with common grace anti-trauma research, so some biblical counselors affirm some common grace pro-trauma research.

More Interaction 

Emily E. Stahly then weighed in on the discussion, with these words.

The problem is that many TIC treatments are not supported by rigorous research (see Everharts jbsc essay) & a too strong of desire to end suffering in this life opens one up to pseudoscience or, in some cases, straight up new age/occultic practices disguised in scientific terms.

I Waded In Again… 

I then engaged with Emily on X:

Emily, I guess we run in different circles. None of my Christian counselees have “too strong a desire to end suffering in this life,” nor do they open themselves “up to pseudoscience.” My current focus is pro-bono counseling for pastors—some of whom are ACBC certified counselors. They are suffering. They desire comprehensive embodied-soul biblical counseling. Like Jesus in the Garden, and like Paul in Corinthians, they pray for the end of suffering in this life—nothing at all unbiblical about that desire. But, like Jesus and Paul, they yield to God’s will. But they still seek whatever strength, healing, wisdom, and grace to help that is available in this life, while they cling to their eternal hope. These pastors and biblical counselors that I counsel are finding great hope in combining all the traditional “spiritual/soul” interventions along with embodied-soul physical interventions. Their astute theology gives them no qualms about whether or not addressing the body is biblical.

Emily Responds Again 

Emily then shared,

That’s great. But there is a whole host of people in the church being taken advantage of and paying lots of money for illegitimate treatments because they are told trauma is stored in the body and these treatments will release it.

My Follow-Up with Emily

I then engaged again with Emily.

Emily, some follow-up questions for you, for Omri, for Dale, for Francine… Since your argument seems to be that suffering does not have lasting impact on the body:

1. Biblically, what do you think Scripture says about what suffering (trauma, being sinned against, being abused, living in a fallen world) does to the body, to the embodied-soul?

2. Do you think suffering has no ongoing impact on the body? If you believe that the Bible teaches that suffering does impact the body (the embodied-soul), then could you describe specifically how your view is different from the concept that the body “stores” trauma, and different from the view that “the body keeps the score”?

3. Do you think that soldiers who have had to kill others in warfare, who have had to be on constant high alert, who have seen their buddies killed, who have faced life-threatening battles, have no lasting embodied impact?

4. Do you think that a little girl who has been repeatedly sexually abused has no ongoing lasting impact of those sins against her on her embodied being? Do you think that a woman who has been repeatedly domestically abused, has no ongoing lasting impact of those sins against her on her embodied being?

5. Does Jay Adams’s concept of habituation of the flesh have any application to the issue of the ongoing impact of suffering on the body?

6. Do you think there are zero legitimate physical interventions for the embodied-soul? Do you think there are any physiological interventions that, alongside traditional soul/spiritual interventions, might help the traumatized person as an embodied-soul? ? If so, could you share any examples of legitimate biblical counseling physiological interventions?

7. How would you develop a biblical counseling theology and methodology for us as soul physicians of embodied-souls? 560 Biblical Passages on Embodied-Souls. I’ve been building my approach to embodied-soul biblical counseling on these 560 passages.

8. Is there any role, other than co-belligerent anti-trauma research, for scientific research into the effect of suffering/trauma on the body? If so, could you share any specific examples of positive science/neuroscience research that affirms trauma’s impact on the body?

Will There Be Fair and Balanced Engagement?

Omri wondered whether anyone would even attempt to interact about the ACBC podcast interviews with Dale and Francine. I have made an attempt. I’ve interacted. I’ve asked specific questions. I’ve provided specific resources.

Will my interactions be ignored? Mocked? Mischaracterized?

Or, will my interactions be engaged with in an iron-sharpening-iron manner? Will there be humble, respectful reflections and ponderings?

If the engagement is not fair and balanced, then perhaps that could explain why some folks chose not to respond to Omri…

Addendum # 1

Sadly the interaction lacked engagement with the specifics of this post. Instead, on X, Omri simply labeled my response “antagonistic.” He also said that any ACBC certified counselor who came to me for biblical counseling should inform ACBC that they are no longer aligned with ACBC—because they would choose to see me for soul care.

Addendum #2

I have now engaged with Part 2 of the ACBC series. You can read that post here: A Biblical Counseling Evaluation of ACBC’s “A Biblical View of Trauma, Part 2.”

I have also summarized a dozen questions that biblical counselors can be asking about trauma. You can read that post here: 12 Catalytic Trauma Questions for Biblical Counselors.