An Alternative History
Have you read any “alternative history” books? Maybe it’s a book that imagines what might have happened if the North had lost the Civil War. What would life in America be like ten years later? What would it be like now? Maybe it’s a book that imagines what might have happened if Germany had won WW II.
An Alternative History of the Launch of the Modern Nouthetic Counseling Movement
Let’s do a little alternative history of the modern nouthetic counseling movement. To do so, let’s enter a world I enjoy immensely—science fiction.
Imagine that you invented a time machine. Back in 2018, you sent David Powlison back to 1960. He arrives before Jay Adams’s launch of the modern nouthetic counseling movement. David arrives with all his mature knowledge and experience from his years of leadership in the modern biblical counseling movement.
Imagine that instead of Jay Adams inventing nouthetic counseling in the late 60s and early 70s, that David Powlison launched the modern biblical counseling movement in the 60s and 70s.
A Time Travel Thought Experiment
Here are some questions to ponder in our little time travel thought experiment…
- Big Picture Question: How might the modern biblical counseling movement be different today if David Powlison had launched it rather than Jay Adams?
- Relational Style Question: How might the “relational style/tenor/tone” be different in Powlison’s approach from Adams’s approach?
- Evangelical Reception Question: How might the larger Evangelical world have received Powlison’s approach and style compared to how they received Adams’s approach and style?
- Christian Integrative Counseling Reception Question: How might relationships with the Christian integrative counseling world be different if Powlison were the founder versus if Adams were the founder?
- Theology Question: In what specific, pertinent ways would Powlison’s mature 2018 theology of biblical counseling be different from Adams’s 1970s nouthetic model? How would our theology of biblical counseling be different today if the past sixty years had been built on Powlison’s theology of the personal ministry of the Word?
- Embodied-Soul Question: How might the modern biblical counseling movement address matters of the body and embodied-soul differently today had Powlison launched the movement in the 60s with his 2018 theology/methodology?
- Emotions Question: How might the modern biblical counseling movement address matters of the emotions differently today had Powlison launched the movement in the 60s with his 2018 theology/methodology?
- Suffering Question: How might the modern biblical counseling movement address matters of suffering, traumatic suffering, and being sinned against differently had Powlison launched the movement in the 60s with his 2018 theology/methodology? How might the modern biblical counseling movement address matters of grief and loss differently had Powlison launched the movement in the 60s with his 2018 theology/methodology? How might the modern biblical counseling movement address matters of abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, domestic abuse, and spiritual abuse differently had Powlison launched the movement in the 60s with his 2018 theology/methodology?
- Counselor/Counselee Relationship Question: How might the biblical counselor/counselee relationship be different today had Powlison launched the movement in the 60s with his 2018 theology/methodology/relational style?
- Methodology Question: In what specific, pertinent ways would Powlison’s mature 2018 methodology of biblical counseling be different from Adams’s methodology of nouthetic counseling? How would our methodology and style of counseling be different today if the past sixty years had been built on Powlison’s methodology?
- Relational DNA Question: How might the “relational DNA” (the way BCers relate to other BCers, the way they related to Christian integrative counselors) be different today had Powlison launched the movement in the 60s with his 2018 theology/methodology/style/tenor/tone?
- Name Question: If Powlison had launched “the movement,” instead of nouthetic counseling, what might the movement be called today—parakaletic counseling, biblical counseling, heart-focused counseling, soul care, Christian soul care, pastoral care and counseling, one-another ministry, the personal ministry of the Word, soul physicians, shepherding, mentoring, one-to-one discipleship, discipleship counseling, Scripture-shaped care, truth-and-love ministry, encouragement, something else?
- Other Questions: What other questions might you add to this list?
Notice Something: All Questions; No Answers
Surely you’ve detected that all I am doing is raising thought-provoking questions. I am not providing any answers.
I’ve designed this post to help us to ponder how imperfect human individuals impact imperfect human organizations.
As I said at the beginning of the post: this is a thought experiment. So, let’s think. Let’s think about one of the questions and some possible answers…
Question 1: Big Picture Question: How might the modern biblical counseling movement be different today if David Powlison had launched it rather than Jay Adams?
Again, I provide no answer; just the question. Anyone could respond however their convictions lead them.
- Maybe someone might say, “The modern biblical counseling movement might be much smaller and less influential if Powlison launched it instead of Adams.”
- Or, perhaps another person might think, “The modern biblical counseling movement might have more quickly been taken over by neo-integrationists because Powlison was too nice.”
- A third person might respond, “The modern biblical counseling movement might be more compassionate and comprehensive because that is how Powlison taught.”
- Someone else might counter, “I could outline half-a-dozen ways that Adams’s approach would be better, half-a-dozen ways it would be less helpful, plus half-a-dozen ways Powlison’s approach would be better, and half-a-dozen ways it would be worse.”
- Another person might suggest, “Perhaps if we integrate Adams and Powlison together then we might have something better than either one alone.”
The options are almost endless. So what’s the point? Keep reading…
So What?
Of course, we should not base our approach to soul care on David Powlison or on Jay Adams. That’s not the point of today’s thought experiment.
The point is to remind all of us that:
The modern nouthetic counseling movement is man-made—made by one man, influenced by his life and times; the nouthetic movement is in the image of its founder, flowing from the DNA of its progenitor.
The modern nouthetic counseling movement was built in recent history by one primary man using one primary word (noutheteo) used just eleven times in the Bible.
Some of you may love nouthetic biblical counseling. Some of you may love Jay Adams. Some of you could write a blog post outlining a dozen-plus benefits of Adams being the founder of nouthetic counseling.
Still…we all ought to admit that:
We don’t base our beliefs on the sufficiency of Jay Adams.
We don’t based our scriptural approach to counseling and embodied-soul care on the sufficiency of the modern nouthetic counseling movement.
Nouthetically Confronting Our Loyalty to Nouthetic Counseling
The next time you’re ready to criticize a fellow biblical counselor, stop. Remember. Ask:
“Am I demanding that my fellow Christian must follow a man-made model of Christian soul care that was invented by one man just fifty-plus years ago?
“What if the ‘modern movement’ were launched by another leader like a David Powlison, would I have the same criticisms? Would I have the same critical spirit?”
“Regardless of who invented the modern nouthetic movement, am I demanding that my fellow Christian must fit into my allegiance to a man-made system of counseling invented in the culture of the 1960s and 1970s?”
“Regardless of who invented the modern nouthetic movement, am I demanding that my fellow Christian must fit into my little box, my man-made boundaries, my human tradition of what constitutes true counseling and Christian embodied-soul care?”
“Am I demanding that my brother or sister in Christ must have the same loyalty that I have to this man-made movement?”
“Am I forgetting that I don’t believe in the sufficiency of the modern nouthetic counseling movement, but that I am supposed to believe in the sufficiency of Scripture?”
We Are Not of Adams; We Are Not of Powlison; We Are of Christ!
Paul summarizes perfectly the intent of today’s thought experiment. We are not of Adams. We are not of Powlison. We are of Christ. Fallible human leaders create fallible human organizations. Our loyalty is to Christ, not to the modern nouthetic biblical counseling movement.
My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? (1 Corinthians 1:11-13).
Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans? For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings? What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow (1 Corinthians 3:1-7).
