A Sabbatical from the BCW: Biblical Counseling Wars 

About a month ago, I began a sabbatical from engaging in the public debates between biblical counselors. I explained why here:

I’m Taking a “Sabbatical” from the Biblical Counseling “Wars.” 

5 Reasons for an Extended Sabbatical 

It didn’t take long at all for me to realize that I will make this an extended sabbatical. There are many reasons for my decision to extend my sabbatical indefinitely by disengaging in these public debates about what makes biblical counseling truly biblical. Here are five of those reasons…

Reason #1: Restful and Peaceful  

It’s been so relaxing, invigorating, refreshing…to stay out of all of this mess. I’ve said my piece; now I’m ready for peace.

During my sabbatical from the “biblical counseling wars,” I have come to really appreciate the X/Twitter mute button. It cleanses my timeline.

Muting and blocking on Twitter/X is biblical; avoiding the divisive person is biblical:

Titus 3:9-11; 2 Timothy 2:23; Romans 16:17-18; 1 Timothy 6:4-5; Proverbs 6:16-19; Jude 1:16-19; James 3:13-18; 1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 2 Timothy 3:3-5; 1 Corinthians 15:33.

It is also biblical to engage with, follow, and be influenced by peacemakers who are encouragers:

Hebrews 10:24-25; Ephesians 4:1-6; Matthew 5:9; Romans 12:16; Romans 12:18; Romans 14:19; James 3:17-18; Hebrews 12:14-15; Proverbs 15:1; Ephesians 4:29; Acts 4:36; 1 Thessalonians 5:11; Hebrews 3:13; Romans 15:4-6; 1 Corinthians 12:25; 1 Thessalonians 5:15.

So…I’m going to continue to rest. I’m indefinitely extending my sabbatical from the biblical counseling wars.

Reason #2: Conviction Versus Wiring 

While I’ve sense a “call” or a “conviction” to speak into these debates/wars, I am not “wired” for warfare. I like to get along. I love peace. I love to build bridges. I love to present the positive beauty of biblical soul care. I don’t like people “hating on me.”

Some people sure seem wired to love conflict, to love to fight, to love disputes. Not me.

Some people are called to be “prophets on the wall” calling out every perceived error. Not me. I see myself more as a “shepherd in a hospital” encouraging the hurting. I see myself as a “coach” equipping, mentoring, and discipling other soul care givers and soul physicians.

So…I’m going back to my wiring—shepherding and coaching, soul care and equipping. 

Reason #3: Nothing’s Changed 

The “prophets on the wall” are convinced that it is their calling to call out everyone who deviates from their prescribed norms for the modern nouthetic biblical counseling movement. Some have suggested that ignoring attacks would make the attacks stop. I’ve never understood the theology/psychology/thinking behind that assumption. I know one month and one person is not much of a test case. However, nothing has changed.

Over the past month, the vitriol in the biblical counseling wars has only increased. I have not responded, but I have read the attacks—on Twitter/X, Facebook, podcasts, blog posts, journal articles, etc. They are unending. They are repetitive. They are constant. The negative attacks on others seem to outweigh the positive presentation of biblical counseling by 10-to-1.

So…I will continue to disengage from these biblical counseling battles because my gifting and energy can be better used elsewhere.

Reason #4: Nothing’s Likely to Change in the Nouthetic DNA…Apart from the Work of God… 

It might be helpful to understand that my primary purpose in speaking into these debates has not been to change the minds of those who are speaking against fellow biblical counselors. I wish it were different, but there seems to be an entrenched pattern of refusing to engage in discussion, of refusing to be persuaded by counter views, of seeing only negatives and no positives in the views of others, of seeing everything as either/or—either all right (their view) or all wrong (the views of others). They would call it “conviction.” Others might consider it stubbornness, or being intractable or obstinate.

This sabbatical has given me time to reflect on what I’ve come to describe as “the nouthetic DNA.” Read David Powlison’s dissertation/book on the history of the modern nouthetic counseling movement, and you will see copious primary source documentation of the argumentative, combative nature of the early nouthetic counseling movement—and their repeated failures to handle conflict well.[i] That was David Powlison’s perspective.

My perspective is that the DNA Powlison highlights continues today. Current biblical counseling leaders talk about a second generation or third generation of biblical counseling. Those generations, like all offspring, still have the genetic markers of their founder/founding. The very essence of the nouthetic worldview is to relentlessly confront perceived errors in others.

The DNA of the modern nouthetic biblical counseling movement is quarrelsome argumentative, and combative (1 Timothy 3:3; 2 Timothy 2:23-25; Titus 1:7), and handles relational conflict poorly (James 1:19-21; James 3:13-18; James 4:1-8; 2 Corinthians 6:11-13).

Until this is recognized, acknowledged, addressed, repented of, and changed by the Holy Spirit, these intramural biblical counseling attacks and battles will never cease.

Add to that the “spirit of the age” in American culture, and you have a recipe for continued, unabated warfare. I talk to fellow biblical counselors in Europe, in South America, in Canada, in Asia, in Australia, and in Africa, and they are shocked by the vitriol and venom that they see in American politics, in American Evangelicalism, and in American biblical counseling. There is little both/and thinking. Everything is either/or, black/white, I’m all right/you are all wrong. There is little humble willingness to learn from others. There is little humble willingness to look at the speck or log in our own eye, as we point out speck after speck in the eyes of others.

The combativeness of the modern nouthetic biblical counseling movement is, sadly, a part of the world entering the church—the American world of angry, fuming, livid attacks on those considered to be outside the right tribe.

I’m not naïve. People did not like Powlison’s documentation of Jay Adams’s combative nature. People won’t like what I’ve just shared. Of course, if people obstinately respond to being nouthetically confronted about being obstinate…that could prove the point…

I pray that the soldiers in these current biblical counseling battles might search their hearts and consider any specks or logs in their eyes.

So…at least for the foreseeable future, I do not believe that my speaking into these debates will change any minds. I believe I’ve said what has needed to be said.

Reason #5: Passing the Baton

I entered these discussions for two primary reasons. First, to defend fellow biblical counselors who I believe are being mischaracterized. I’ve not wanted these brothers and sisters in Christ to experience what the Apostle Paul experienced,

“At my first defense, no one came to my support, but everyone deserted me” (2 Timothy 4:16).

I’ve been encouraged over the past two years by dozens of biblical counseling leaders thanking me for defending them and their biblical counseling convictions.

Second, I entered these discussions to provide a biblical counter-narrative. I believe people are hearing one-sided presentations on topics such as common grace, the Creation Mandate, research, neuroscience, embodied-souls, emotions, empathy, etc. I’ve been encouraged over the past two years by literal 1000s of people thanking me for providing these counter-narratives.

However, it is time to pass the baton of defense and counter-narrative to others. Those being accused of not being biblical counselors have the wherewithal, both in terms of platform/audience, and in terms of theological acumen, to defend their views and to present counter-narratives about what makes biblical counseling truly biblical.

Many prominent biblical counseling leaders have not been accused, nor have they accused others of unfaithfulness to the movement. They also have yet to enter these conversations. I am passing the baton to them. I pray that they will privately engage with fellow biblical counselors about the combative DNA of the movement. I pray that they will publicly defend fellow biblical counselors who are being publicly mischaracterized. I pray that they will publicly promote positive counter-narratives about central issues such as common grace, embodied-souls, physiological interventions, abuse, suffering, emotions, etc.

So…I’m passing the baton.

Where Does That Leave Me?: Biblical Soul Care and Christian Soul Physician 

Previously, I documented my 50 Years of Publicly Encouraging the Biblical Counseling Movement to Speak the Truth in Love. I noted that I have been associated with the nouthetic counseling movement since its inception. From age 14 to 24, I would have described myself as a nouthetic counselor.

Then, at Grace Theological Seminary, I did an independent study class on nouthetic counseling. I read everything that Jay Adams had written up to 1983. I produced a fifty-page paper, outlining what I thought the strengths and weaknesses of Adams’s model were. At the same time, I began to study the history of Christian soul care. I came to see that the nouthetic approach, with its focus on confronting behavioral sin, was much more limited than the biblical/historical (church history) approach of sustaining and healing parakaletic soul care for suffering and reconciling and guiding spiritual direction for sin and sanctification. Also during this time, I researched and wrote my Th.M. thesis on Hebrew Anthropological Terms as a Foundation for a Biblical Counseling Model of Man. Once again, I saw that the biblical understanding of people was much more robust than the nouthetic model.

This generated a significant change.

In the mid-1980s, because of my study of the Bible, theological anthropology, church history (historical Christian soul care), and Jay Adams’s writings, I ceased to describe myself as a nouthetic counselor.

Instead, I began to describe myself as a biblical counselor. I began to use terms from church history like soul care, spiritual direction, soul physicians, sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding.

When I would speak at biblical counseling events, teach at biblical counseling schools, equip one-another ministers in churches, and write about biblical counseling:

• I’d highlight parakaletic soul care for suffering as a much needed expansion of the focus of the modern nouthetic counseling movement—focused on hearing people’s earthly story through lingering listening and emotional lament.
• I’d address a robust theological anthropology that understood people as spiritual, social, self-aware, relational, rational, volitional, emotional, and physical beings—again, a much needed expansion of the focus of the modern nouthetic counseling movement.
• I’d teach on topics, that at that time were rarely being addressed in the nouthetic world: sexual abuse, spiritual abuse, domestic abuse, suffering (a biblical “sufferology), grief, anxiety, soul care in the African American church, etc.
• I’d emphasize the need for an intensely relational approach to soul care—that highlighted empathy, compassion, and collaborative engagement between the counselor and the counselee.
• I’d equip people through lab-based, small group training in “the 4Cs” of: biblical content, Christlike character, counseling competency, and Christian community—expanding beyond mere head knowledge.
• I’d interact about areas of weaknesses, while providing positive encouragement and equipping to strengthen those areas. See, for example, Consider Your Counsel: Addressing Ten Mistakes in Our Biblical Counseling. See also, Why Some Biblical Counseling Is Only Half Biblical. See also, Shepherds Please Think, “Protect Well.” Please Stop Saying, “Suffer Well.”

For the past forty years, I have used multiple descriptions for my approach: one-another ministry, the personal ministry of the Word, soul physician, soul care, spiritual direction, spiritual friends/spiritual friendship, biblical counseling, etc. More recently, I have summarized my approach as:

Christ-Centered, Theologically-Saturated, Relationship-Focused, Church History-Informed, Research-Aware Soul Physician of Embodied-Souls.

Given the current battles in the nouthetic biblical counseling world, given the ingrained combative DNA of the modern nouthetic biblical counseling movement, and because of my study of God’s all-sufficient Word and church history, I now prefer to describe my ministry with words such as:

• Biblical soul care.
• Christian soul physician.
• Providing biblical soul care as a Christian soul physician.
• Providing biblical soul care through historic sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding as a Christ-centered, theologically-saturated, relationship-focused, church history-informed, research-aware Christian soul physician of embodied-souls.

In using phrases like soul care and soul physicians, I’m not going “back to the future,” I’m going “back to the past.” Prior to the rise of modern secular psychology and modern secular counseling, the church used words and phrases like cure of souls (cura animarum), spiritual direction, pastoral care, and soul physicians. Counseling is a modern secular label placed on an ancient pastoral task. See: 18 Resources on the History of Pastoral Care, Soul Care, and Biblical Counseling.

Recently, some have been using titles like “traditional biblical counseling,” or “historical biblical counseling.” However, historically, the church practiced soul care for centuries without calling it “counseling.” See: What Is “Historic,” “Classic” Biblical Counseling? This post documents the recent, modern nature of “nouthetic biblical counseling.” True “classic/historical” care is 2,000 years old, not fifty years young.

Where Will I Focus Now? “Retired from Making Money” 

What will I be doing instead of engaging in these biblical counseling debates? A lot, including:

• Providing free biblical soul care at the Southern Baptist church where Shirley and I are members.
• Providing free consulting/supervision for the pastoral staff at our church.
• Continuing to be an active part of our church in Sunday morning worship, small group involvement, fellowship, and other ministries.
• Providing free biblical soul care via Zoom for pastors, counselors, educators, and missionaries around the world.
• Providing free consulting in biblical soul care for Christians around the world.
• Continuing to research and write on my RPM Ministries blog site—with a focus on a positive presentation of biblical soul care and being soul physicians of embodied-souls.
• Perhaps writing a book on Soul Physicians of Embodied-Souls. Perhaps writing a book on Common Grace. Perhaps writing a book on Traumatic Suffering.
• Promoting the writings and ministries of individuals and organizations who I believe are providing positive biblical one-another ministry.
• Overseeing and moderating the large, active, growing Facebook group: Gospel-Centered Biblical Soul Care.
• God has given us all things richly to enjoy (1 Timothy 6:17; 4:4): Enjoying the wife of my youth (we have been married for forty-five years now), enjoying our adult children and our grandchildren, enjoying our extended families, enjoying our friends, playing pickleball, swimming in our lanai pool and enjoying our spa, visiting nearby Florida beaches, taking walks with Shirley, hosting friends in our home for parties, hosting friends for week-long stays (come and visit us and stay in our guest rooms), playing board games with friends and family, enjoying playing fantasy baseball, enjoying watching Chicago sports’ teams and the Indiana Hoosiers, “stay-cationing,” vacationing around Florida, the US, and the world……

I like to say that I have “retired from making money.” However, I am not retired from serving the Lord, ministering to His people, and enjoying the good gifts He has blessed us with.

Notes

[i] The Nouthetic DNA According to David Powlison—The Instinct to Be Stridently Offensive: In The Biblical Counseling Movement: History and Context, David Powlison explicitly states, “Adams was wrong to claim—in fact, to proclaim, in strident tones—that he was the biblical answer to a briar patch of thorny intellectual, historical, social, and practical problems. He was wrong to announce, in fact to pronounce, sententiously—that all others in the field were benighted” (185-186, emphasis in the original). Sententious means to communicate in a way that is pompous, overly moralizing, judgmental, and self-righteous. Powlison also asserts that “Adams’s manner was obstreperous” (186)—a word that means clamorous, marked by unruly and aggressive noisiness. Powlison writes of “the offensiveness of Adams’s tone. He frequently claimed novel insights while dismissing all other thinkers as benighted” (186). Powlison continues: “There is no doubt that Adams’s manner aggravated controversy into hostility” (186). “He would not grant others even a modicum of professional respect” (186). “Other readers, both pastors and laity, were frequently repelled by the stinging tone and totalitarian message of Adams’s rhetoric. They described him in terms such as belligerent, brash, abrasive, bombastic, argumentative, strident, polarizing, angry” (186). “What Adams termed clear convictions were widely perceived as censorious, divisive, and arrogant” (186). “The grating effect of Adams’s style compounded the offense generated by his concepts” (186). Powlison summarizes his assessment of Adams by affirmingly quoting Christian counselor Gary Collins saying, “I think Jay Adams’s approach to counseling is more a reflection of Jay Adams’s personality than anything else. He tends to be a somewhat confrontational type guy, and he’s a confrontational counselor” (186). Powlison then concludes this section by noting “Adams’s own belligerence and intransigence” (188). Clearly, according to David Powlison, Adams’s approach to people he disagreed with was to monologue—to talk at and teach at them from an assumed position of superiority. He personified an instinct to instruct, an instinct to nouthetically, aggressively confront his peers in a manner that was argumentative, strident, belligerent, intransigent, sententious, and obstreperous.