Some Background 

As some of you know, I have been on a “sabbatical from the biblical counseling wars.” You can read about it here I’m Taking a “Sabbatical” from the Biblical Counseling “Wars.”  and here Passing the Biblical Counseling Baton.

By “taking a sabbatical,” I meant that I would seek to stay out of the online debates between factions in the modern movement. I never meant that I would not write about biblical counseling, embodied-soul care, or biblical soul care. It remains my passion to equip God’s people to speak and live God’s truth in love for the glory of Christ and the maturity of Christians.

Sci-Fi and BC! 

So, two days ago, I crafted a post that combines two of my greatest joys: church history and Sci-Fi! I wrote, Sci-Fi, Time Travel, and Nouthetic Counseling.

That post asked a “baker’s dozen” (13) questions about how the modern nouthetic counseling movement might have been different if Dave Powlison had launched it instead of Jay Adams. Here’s how I worded it:

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. Here are some questions to ponder in our little time travel thought experiment…

I wrote that post:

• To help biblical counselors to ponder how people impact movements.
• In the hopes that biblical counselors would unite not around people/personalities, but around biblical principles. 

An Invitation to Interact 

When you read the thirteen questions, you’ll quickly detect that I did not answer any of the questions. I did not choose sides. I did not say, “I am of Adams.” Nor did I say, “I am of Powlison.” Instead, I saw the post as an opportunity to do a “thought experiment” in thinking about how different people influence movements differently.

Readers could freely interact about those questions based upon their convictions. In responding to each question:

• Some might surmise that the modern nouthetic counseling movement was better off with Adams launching it—and present their reasons.
• Others might opine that Powlison would have had a net positive effect on the launch of the movement—and share their thinking.
• Still others might argue that an integrated combination of Adams/Powlison would have been best for the movement—perhaps then and now.

Nick Responds on X

Despite the fact that I did not answer the questions in favor of Powlison or Adams, Nick Sevier on X, concluded that my post lacked “humility and thanksgiving to God” for Adams. In a second post (I guess he’s thinking a lot about my post, which is something every blogger is thankful for), Nick had a suggestion of his own, one that I like a lot:

“Here’s a thought experiment for you—an alternative history. Imagine if Bob Kellemen was not the first Executive Director of the Biblical Counseling Coalition. I’d be willing to bet that clinically-informed counseling would not have the foothold it has today.”

Nick did answer his own question. He’s willing to wager that despite the fact that I am not a clinically-informed biblical counselor (CIBC) (see, Why I Don’t Call Myself a “Clinically-Informed Biblical Counselor”), someone other than me would have prevented CIBC from gaining “the foothold it has today.”

I won’t use this post to debate that, because doing so would lead us right back to the biblical counseling wars. Instead, once again I want to use this post as another thought experiment in how different people influence movements differently.

Nick Goes Back to the Future

I like Nick’s time travel alternate history thought experiment so much that I’m writing this post about it!

What if Bob Kellemen had not been the founding Executive Director (ED) of the Biblical Counseling Coalition (BCC)? 

For this post to be comparable with my post from three days ago, we need an alternate founding BCC ED. Since Nick raised the question, let’s propose that 2026 Nick gets in my time machine, goes back to 2010, and becomes the founding ED of the BCC—instead of me.

Now the question becomes:

How might the Biblical Counseling Coalition and the biblical counseling movement be different today if Powlison and Patten had chosen someone from the “far right” of NANC/ACBC—someone like Nick Sevier—to be the founding Executive Director of the BCC?

Enter Nick Sevier 

To answer that question, we need a bit of context about Nick. I’ll try to provide a fair summary of where Nick fits in the modern nouthetic biblical counseling world—from my perspective and from Nick’s published statements and public alignments. Nick self-identifies as:

1. A classic, historic nouthetic biblical counselor.
2. Anti-clinically-informed biblical counseling.
3. Anti-trauma-informed biblical counseling.
4. Aligning with the perception that empathy is sinful or often toxic, and that many Evangelicals choose identifying with others over truth-telling.
5. Perceiving emotions like fear, anxiety, and OCD as always sinful.
6. Labeling the BCC, ABC, and CCEF as having left the classic, historic nouthetic convictions.
7. Aligning with the need to publicly guard the walls of the purity of classic nouthetic counseling, including the need for public exposure of the “neo-integrationists” in the biblical counseling movement.
8. Aligning with the view that common grace insights should not be incorporated into biblical counseling.
9. Being opposed to the use of neuroscience research and descriptive psychology research in biblical counseling.
10. Being opposed to physiological interventions in biblical counseling.

Based on his statements and alignments, it seems fair to say that Nick self-identifies as being on the “far right” of the “classic” modern nouthetic counseling movement.

Note: If Nick would like to share his own summary of where he fits in the movement, I am happy to add his wording.

Some Context…The Conception of the BCC 

Let’s time travel back to the early 2000s. In 2009, as in the 1970s, as in 2026, a great deal of tension existed between the various groups, organizations, churches, and individuals in the nouthetic biblical counseling movement. At a dinner with half-a-dozen biblical counseling leaders, an influential pastor looked at all of us and said, plaintively,

“Why do I have to choose between NANC, CCEF, ABC, and the alphabet soup of biblical counseling groups? Why can’t you all get along with each other? You have to do something about all of this divisiveness, all of this, ‘I am of Adams, I am of NANC, I am of CCEF.’” 

His voice trailed off…

His pointed statement birthed the conception of the Biblical Counseling Coalition.

Some History…Why the BCC?

We launched the BCC with twin goals, organized around Ephesians 4:15 and “speaking the truth in love”:

• Create Robust Biblical Counseling Resources: Sharing the truth of God’s Word related to the personal ministry of the Word.
• Nurture Collaborative Christlike Relationships: Ministering together as biblical counseling leaders in humble, loving, iron-sharpening, mutually-respectful, collegial relationships.

The BCC ED’s job description was to unite dozens of individual biblical counseling leaders, 100s of biblical counseling churches, all existing biblical counseling educational institutions, and all existing biblical counseling organizations around these twin themes.

Not. An. Easy. Task.

More History…What About Bob? 

If Nick is “far-right ACBC,” then where was Dr. Bob Kellemen in 2010-2016 when David Powlison, Randy Patten, and other NANC Fellows/NANC Board Members asked him to be the founding ED of the BCC?

• I was beginning to speak at NANC conferences every year.
• I was speaking at the Faith Biblical Counseling Training conference every year.
• My books had been, were being, and would continue to be endorsed by multiple NANC Fellows and Board Members.
• At that point, I had also worked in an official role with the Association of Biblical Counselors (ABC).
• I also was doing consulting with CCEF and would begin speaking at CCEF conferences.
• I also had launched the Biblical Counseling Forum for the AACC.
• During those years, I would be the keynote speaker at an IBCD annual conference, at a Reigning Grace Biblical Counseling Ministry annual conference, and at many other leading biblical counseling conferences throughout the United States and the world.

If you put all of those roles together, then I was not “far-right NANC.” In David Powlison’s mind, I was right at the center of the movement. As he said in the meeting at CCEF where he and others asked me to consider being the BCC ED,

“Bob, you’re exactly the right fit. If people can’t read your materials, hear you speak, talk to you one-to-one, and see that you are at the center of the biblical counseling movement, then they won’t fit in the BCC.”

In 2010-2016 (and still today), I wasn’t “the far-left” of the movement. I wasn’t “the far-right” of the movement. For more about this “Bob guy and the BC movement,” see this link.

Some Additional History…The BCC ED Profile

David, and the rest of the leaders gathered together in the CCEF conference room, made it clear what they were and were not looking for in an Executive Director. They were looking for:

1. A bridge-builder, not a wall builder, not a bridge-burner.
2. A relational and organizational connector, not a silo-builder.
3. Someone who could work respectfully with the wide spectrum of the biblical counseling world, not just with one biblical counseling group.
4. Someone committed to biblical counseling, not just committed to one biblical counseling organization, group, tribe, or wing.
5. Someone experienced in conflict management and relational reconciliation.
6. Someone experienced in building and shepherding collaborative, collegial relationships.
7. Someone with successful pastoral experience, academic-educational experience, para-church leadership experience, biblical counseling ministry experience, and writing/editing/publishing experience.

The BCC BOD thought it best if the founding ED was not solely or primarily aligned with any one biblical counseling organization like NANC, or CCEF, or ABC. The final “C” in the BCC is “Coalition”—a gathering with unity in diversity, with the unity represented by a mutual commitment to the BCC Confessional Statement. The BCC ED was not to “represent” or “promote” any one group. The BCC ED was to represent and promote a positive presentation of the beauty of biblical counseling, and of the beauty of the unity of biblical counselors.

Pulling It All Together 

Considering who Nick is, who Bob is, why the BCC was launched, the purpose of the BCC, and the ministry description of the BCC ED, when you think about the questions that follow, picture it like this:

Imagine if Bob Kellemen, who David Powlison, Randy Patten, and other NANC Fellows and Board Members perceived to be in the middle of the BC movement, was not the founding ED of the BCC. 

Instead, imagine that someone like Nick Sevier, who openly positions himself as staunchly classic, historic ACBC, was the founding ED of the BCC. 

Our Specific Questions 

1. Big Picture Questions: a. How might the Biblical Counseling Coalition be different today if Nick Sevier (or someone similarly aligned) had been the founding Executive Director rather than Bob Kellemen? b. How might the biblical counseling movement be different today had Sevier been the founding ED of the BCC instead of Kellemen?

2. Relational Style Questions: a. How might the “relational style/tenor/tone” of the BCC have been different throughout its sixteen year history if Sevier (or someone similarly aligned) had launched it rather than Kellemen? b. How might the creation of robust biblical counseling resources and the nurturing of Christlike relationships have been different if Sevier had launched the BCC instead of Kellemen?

3. BCC Board of Directors (BOD) Questions: The original BCC BOD consisted of half-a-dozen strong, diverse biblical counseling leaders, with connections to various biblical counseling organizations: NANC, ABC, CCEF, IBCD, etc. The BCC ED was a member of the BCC BOD. The BCC ED’s job description included: a. maintaining healthy relationships with each BCC BOD Member, b. overseeing the collaborative leadership of the BCC, c. setting the agenda for, organizing, and facilitating BCC BOD meetings, d. seeking to establish consensus among the BCC BOD, and e. carrying out the decisions of the BCC BOD. Questions: a. If Sevier—someone who represents the staunch, classic, far-right NANC/ACBC world—had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might the relationship with the BCC BOD have been different? b. How might the shepherding leadership of the BCC BOD been different? c. How might the outworking of joint decisions have been different? 

4. BCC Council Board (CB) Question: The original BCC CB consistent of approximately three dozen members from every major nouthetic biblical counseling organization. The BCC ED was responsibility to recommend CB members to the BCC BOD, interview and vet every CB member, recruit every CB member, maintain healthy relationships with every CB member, and assure annually that every CB members continued to affirm the BCC Confessional Statement. Questions: a. If Sevier—someone who represents the staunch, classic, far-right NANC/ACBC world—had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might the composition of the BCC CB have been different? b. How might the continuity and collegial relationships of the BCC CB have been different? 

5. BCC Confessional Statement (CS) Question #1: The BCC Confessional Statement required the united, collaborative work, over the course of nine months and ten drafts, of three dozen diverse, opinionate, strong-willed biblical counseling leaders. (See: A First-Hand, Documented History of the Collegial Development of the Biblical Counseling Coalition’s Confessional Statement. Question: If Sevier (or someone similarly aligned) had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might the relational process of uniting these three dozen diverse biblical counseling leaders to collaboratively craft the BCC CS have been different?

6. BCC Confessional Statement (CS) Question #2: The BCC Confessional Statement produced a concise, precise, Scripture-founded, theologically-saturated document presenting biblical counseling convictions on twelve core areas of the personal ministry of the Word. (Again, see: A First-Hand, Documented History of the Collegial Development of the Biblical Counseling Coalition’s Confessional Statement. Question: If Sevier (or someone similarly aligned) had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might the end product of the BCC CS have been different?

7. BCC “Trilogy” Book Project Question: In order to unite the twin goals of collaborative relationships and robust resources, the BCC ED oversaw the process of dozens of diverse biblical counseling leaders uniting to write three comprehensive and foundational books: Christ-Centered Biblical Counseling, Scripture and Counseling, and Biblical Counseling and the Church. Combined, over 100 authors had to be recruited, shepherded, and edited. Question: If Sevier had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might the process and product of the BCC “Trilogy” have been different?

8. Annual BCC Leadership Retreat/Summit: Every year over three dozen (eventually nearly six dozen) diverse biblical counseling leaders from every leading biblical counseling organization and academic institution gathered together to build face-to-face, iron-sharpening-iron relationships. Leaders met together in small groups for prayer, accountability, and reconciliation—when needed. Each year a “controversial topic” in the biblical counseling world was chosen to discuss. In civil, cordial, respectful ways, rather than talking behind each other’s backs, biblical counseling leaders talked face-to-face. Question: If Sevier (or someone similarly aligned) had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might the relational iron-sharpening-iron process of the BCC Leadership Summit have been different?

9. BCC Blog Posts and Resources Question: From 2011-2016, the BCC produced six blogs every week, produced numerous book reviews, and collated hundreds of free resources. All of these were garnered cooperatively from 100s of diverse biblical counseling leaders associated with 100s of biblical counseling churches, para-church groups, organizations, and academic institutions around the world. Question: If Sevier had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might first six years of BCC collaborative resources have been different in process and product?

10. BCC Facilitation of Organizational Unity Question: As noted above, the biblical counseling world was experiencing disunity in 2009. Many have noted in writing that from 2010-2016, the biblical counseling world experienced greater unity because organizational leaders from NANC/ACBC, CCEF, ABC, IBCD, and others, were talking candidly and respectfully to each other, rather than talking about each other. The BCC ED was responsible to facilitate these organizational relationships. Several times the BCC BOD tasked the BCC ED with leading conflict resolution and interpersonal reconciliation among biblical counseling leaders—both individually and organizational. Questions: a. If Sevier (or someone similarly aligned) had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might biblical counseling organizational unity have been different? b. If Sevier had been the BCC’s founding ED rather than Kellemen, how might biblical counseling conflict resolution and interpersonal reconciliation have been handled differently?

11. Evangelical Reception Question: From 2010-2016, BCC leaders spoke at numerous Evangelical conferences in the US and the world, spoke on numerous Evangelical campuses, spoke at ETS meetings annually, and helped to establish several biblical counseling coalitions in other nations around the world. Question: How might the larger Evangelical world have received the BCC based upon Sevier’s approach and style compared to how they received the BCC under Kellemen’s approach and style?

12. The BCC and Clinically-Informed Biblical Counseling Question: Sevier opined (or “bet”) that “clinically-informed counseling would not have the foothold it has today” if Kellemen would not have been Powlison and Patten’s choice to be the founding BCC ED. Questions: a. Who is defining “clinically-informed biblical counseling”? b. Where does CIBC “have a foothold” and what does it mean to “have a foothold”? c. Is it good or bad that CIBC has a place at the table among the modern biblical counseling world? d. Would a BCC Leadership Summit on CIBC be a valuable, face-to-face, iron-sharpening-iron focus? e. As far as anyone can determine, CIBC was not used from 2010-2016 when Kellemen was the BCC ED, so how would Kellemen’s early leadership of the BCC have had any influence on the “foothold” that CIBC may or may not now have? f. Since CIBC was not used until several years after 2016, if Sevier (or someone similarly aligned) had been the founding BCC ED from 2010-2016, how might he have had any influence on the “foothold” that CIBC may or may not now have? 

13. Other Questions: What other questions might you add to this list? 

That Time Machine… 

I was prompted to craft this post when I read Nick Sevier’s tweet about my post: Sci-Fi, Time Travel, and Nouthetic Counseling. As a reminder, Nick tweeted:

“Here’s a thought experiment for you—an alternative history. Imagine if Bob Kellemen was not the first Executive Director of the Biblical Counseling Coalition. I’d be willing to bet that clinically-informed counseling would not have the foothold it has today.” 

To Nick’s thoughts about CIBC, I have added another dozen questions. As with my post from three days again, I have not answer any of these questions. You, my readers, are totally free to answer each question according to your understanding of and convictions about biblical counseling. Some of you may conclude that someone like Nick Sevier as BCC ED would have led to a more effective BCC and a better biblical counseling movement today. Others might come to different conclusions. Some might see where someone somewhere between Sevier and Kellemen might have been a better founding BCC ED.

I enjoy thought experiments. I enjoy Sci-Fi. I’d love to time travel.

I wish there was a time machine. If I had one:

I’d love to see how Nick Sevier, or any similar staunchly “classic/historic” NANC/ACBC individual, might have “herded the cats,” surmounted the obstacles, and built iron-sharpening relationships in the biblical counseling movement in 2009-2016.

I’d love to see how Nick or others might have tried to: 1. manage the launch of the BCC, 2. set the relational tone of the BCC, 3. shepherd the BCC BOD, 4. recruit and minister to/with the diverse BCC Council Board, 5. oversee the collaborative process of crafting the BCC Confessional Statement, 6. produce the twelve-point BCC Confessional Statement, 7. recruit and oversee scores of biblical counseling leaders writing three BCC books, 8. organize the healthy, respectful iron-sharpening meetings of the BCC Leadership Retreat, 9. manage the blog/resource ministry of the BCC by working harmoniously with 100s of diverse biblical counseling leaders, 10. facilitate organizational unity among biblical counseling groups, 11. grow the respect of the biblical counseling movement among the wider Evangelical world in the US and abroad, and 12. address issues of potential concern and/or conflict, like the eventual rise of CIBC (as one example of many)?

Launching and Leading: Humbled and Honored 

It is one thing to start your own organization. I did that with RPM Ministries. It is one thing to oversee a united organization, such as CCEF.

It is quite another matter to launch and lead an organizational tasked with unifying a group of leaders who have had a fifty-year history of disunity.

It is quite another task to facilitate the Christlike collaborative relationships and the production of robust biblical counseling resources among scores of diverse leaders with a history of silo-building and mischaracterizations.

I thoroughly enjoyed my time as the BCC Executive Director. I enjoyed passing on the ministry leadership to Garrett Higbee, who passed it on to Curtis Solomon, who passed it on to Kevin Carson.

I’m humbled to have been asked by David Powlison and other biblical counseling leaders to be the founding Executive Director of the Biblical Counseling Coalition. I’m honored to have served in that role and to have built lifelong collegial relationships with 100s of biblical counseling leaders from around the world.

Thank You, Lord.

The post Sci-Fi, Time Travel, and the Launch of the Biblical Counseling Coalition appeared first on RPM Ministries.

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…

1. Big Picture Question: How might the modern biblical counseling movement be different today if David Powlison had launched it rather than Jay Adams?

2. Relational Style Question: How might the “relational style/tenor/tone” be different in Powlison’s approach from Adams’s approach?

3. 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?

4. 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?

5. 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?

6. 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?

7. 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?

8. 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?

9. 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?

10. 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? 

11. 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?

12. 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? 

13. 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).

The post Sci-Fi, Time Travel, and Nouthetic Counseling appeared first on RPM Ministries.

Discipling Parents to Disciple Their Children 

On X (Twitter), I recently read a discussion about the validity and effectiveness of youth ministry. I am not at all against youth ministry, or children’s ministry, or youth pastors. However, the discussion on X/Twitter did remind me about how we approached youth ministry when I was a Sr. Pastor. Here’s a summary…

A Church Without a Sr. Pastor 

When I was a “Sr. Pastor,” I actually called my position, “Congregational Discipleship Pastor.” I saw my biblical calling to be overseeing, along with our Elder Ministry Team, the discipleship of our entire congregation.

A Church Without a Youth Pastor 

Because of this philosophy, the first hire we made as our church tripled in size was “Family Discipleship Pastor” rather than “Youth Pastor.” We wanted this person/position to focus on discipling the parents to disciple their children/teens. The person/position also involved assessing, overseeing, and shepherding all of our ministries to families (couples, parents, children, youth).

A Somewhat Unpopular Decision 

Honestly, it was not an entirely “popular” decision, as about 30% of the parents with teens were unhappy that we were not hiring a “Youth Pastor.” This was after our EMT (Elder Ministry Team) spent half-a-year seeking to educate/equip the church regarding the role of Pastor-Elder as equippers. So, it is not an easy or popular decision to focus on discipling the whole church and discipling parents, rather than hiring a Youth Pastor to do the discipling of teens.

Research or Revelation? (Or Both?) 

We made this decision not because of research (though we did our homework and read the studies), but because of our scriptural convictions. As someone who has done a lot of research, and who believes in being research-informed, even after reading material like the resource you mention, I am not convinced that we can easily separate influences. Can we really slice/dice information to determine what factors had the most long-term impact on faith development and persistence? Think of the complexity of that sentence: “…to determine what factors had the most long-term impact on faith development and persistence.”

A Biblical Wisdom Issue 

Again, I am not against a church hiring a “Youth Pastor,” especially if the clear ministry description is to equip the parents to equip their children/teens. My own Youth Pastor, Pastor Ron Allchin, had a tremendous impact on my spiritual life. I was not from a Christian home. He mentored and discipled me. He also did all he could to impact my family. I vividly recall one Thursday evening when he spent four hours with my Mom, older brothers, and younger sisters answering question after question they had about Christianity.

He did all of this, while also leading the Youth Ministry. A high percentage of the young people from that small church are now, decades later, retiring from a lifetime of vocational ministry (retiring from making money, but not retiring from serving the Lord). Many of them, like myself, did not grow up in a Christian home. Our Youth Pastor was the primary factor that God used in our lives to disciple us to go on to be disciple-making pastors, Christian school teachers, seminary professors, missionaries, and people who served the Lord regardless of whether we were in “full-time Christian vocational ministry.”

How Did We Do It? 

Someone on X/Twitter, asked me,

“Do you have any resources on how you guys went about discipling the parents to disciple their children / teens?”

Here’s my response…

The “5Ds” of Biblical Parenting 

We didn’t have any one curriculum, but we did use a biblical parenting model/approach that I developed from Deuteronomy 6, Ephesians 6, and the rest of Scripture. That model eventually became this booklet:

Raising Kids in the Way of Grace: 5 Practical Marks of Grace-Focused Parenting.

This biblical parental approach highlights “5 Parental Ds”:

1. Parental Dedication,
2. Parental Discernment,
3. Parental Devotion,
4. Parental Discipline, and
5. Parental Discipleship.

5 Marks of GRACE-Focused Parenting 

These “5Ds” summarize a broader “GRACE” model of parenting:

1. G—Mark 1: God-Dependent Parents—Parental Dedication
2. R—Mark 2: Revelation-Based Parental Wisdom—Parental Discernment
3. A—Mark 3: Affectionate and Affirming Grace Relationships—Parental Devotion
4. C—Mark 4: Care-fronting Our Children’s Heart—Parental Discipline
5. E—Mark 5: Equipping Our Children for the Race of Life—Parental Discipleship

Some Specifics 

Some of the ways we discipled parents to disciple their children included:

• We had seminars on GRACE Parenting and the “5 Parental Ds.”
• We had classes and small groups on GRACE Parenting and the “5 Parental Ds.”
• We provided biblical parental/family counseling.
• We preached on GRACE Parenting and the “5 Parental Ds.”
• Everyone, 5th grade and up, was in the Worship Service. We also had special Sundays when everyone of all ages were in the Worship Service together.
• We designed our small group ministry to be across the age spectrum, so that younger parents were in groups with older parents and grandparents.
• Our men’s ministry and women’s ministry focused on equipping men and women to equip the next generation.
• We provided biblical resources for parents on their own Christian maturity.
• We provided biblical resources for parents on marriage.
• We provided biblical resources for parents on discipling their children.

Strong Marriages 

We also believed that strong marriages were a key to strong parenting, so we provided marriage seminars, marriage classes, marriage small groups, preached on marriage, and provided biblical marriage counseling.

Parent-Led Youth and Children’s Ministry 

Since we did not have a Youth Pastor, our Family Discipleship Pastor equipped parents to lead the youth ministry. Yes, we did have a youth ministry—parent-led.

Since we did not have a Children’s Pastor, our Family Discipleship Pastor equipped parents to lead the children’s ministry.

In Summary 

Our approach focused on a Deuteronomy 6 “as you walk in the way” model. So, for example, while we encouraged (and equipped parents to lead) family devotions, even more than that we encouraged Christlike living in the home.

A Focal Point 

We said the following again and again:

“Children and teens need godly parenting more than they need counseling, more than they need youth ministry, more than they need children’s ministry.”

We did provide biblical family counseling, biblical youth ministry (parent-led), and biblical children’s ministry (parent-led), but the focal point was:

Discipling Parents in Christlikeness.

“The student is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like their teacher” (Luke 6:40).

The post Should Churches Hire a Youth Pastor? appeared first on RPM Ministries.

A Case Study: “Kathy” and Her Tempted, Troubled, Tender Conscience

This case study invites us to consider how patient, compassionate, wise biblical soul care might help a troubled believer find hope, holiness, and peace. It encourages us to reflect on how historic, Christ-centered shepherding might guide our responses to a tempted and troubled soul seeking assurance and victory.

“Kathy” is a young Christian mother in her early thirties. She has scheduled an appointment with you after months of hesitation. Kathy is deeply committed to Christ and actively involved in the life and ministry of the church where she and her husband are members. Her spiritual disciplines are consistent, and those who know Kathy describe her as tenderhearted to the Word and spiritually conscientious.

When she arrives, Kathy is visibly exhausted and ashamed. She avoids eye contact. After a long silence, Kathy shares, “I love Jesus. I read Scripture daily. I’m active in my church. But something is terribly wrong with me.” She begins to cry.

After a long pause, Kathy continues. “Sometimes when I’m holding my toddler, sexual thoughts flash into my mind. I hate these thoughts. They are completely opposite of who I want to be in Christ. They feel horrifying and unwanted, and I recoil from them. I’ve never acted on them, not even close. They make me sick. I immediately resist them. I confess them to God, and I repent of them instantly. I seek to renew my mind in Christ and His Word. I memorize Scripture as I seek to take every thought captive. I’ve asked my husband to keep me accountable. I pray until I’m exhausted, but these unwanted thoughts keep coming back…”

As you continue to listen, this young mother describes intense shame, persistent guilt, and fear that God must be disappointed in her. Kathy explains that she worries that she may not truly belong to Christ. “I feel filthy. I feel like God must be disgusted with me. I wonder if I’m even saved.”

Kathy asks you quietly, soberly, “What should I do? Do I need to repent more? Try harder? Am I a monster? Am I even a Christian?” Her voice trails off… Kathy looks at you not with defiance, not with self-justification, but with desperation, deep shame, and a longing for biblical help and holiness.

What would your Christ-shaped biblical shepherding look like as you minister to this young mother with a tempted, troubled, tender conscience? How would you provide Kathy with biblical soul care for what church history might have called scrupulosity, what psychology might describe as OCD, and what the Word might describe as a tempted, troubled, tender conscience? 

Reflective Questions for Christ-Shaped Biblical Soul Care 

Before answering Kathy’s questions and ministering to her further, pause to consider the person who sits in front of you. This young Christian mother clearly hates the thoughts she is battling. She sincerely seeks holiness, is deeply troubled in her soul, and longs for hope in Christ.

If this were someone in your church sitting across from you right now, what would faithfulness to Christ look like in your theology, your tone, your thoughts, your reflections, your care, and your first words? How could  you biblically shepherd someone like Kathy in these early moments as she awaits your caring counsel?

1. Christological Imagination: If Kathy fell at the feet of Jesus describing her struggle, what tone do you imagine in His first words to her? Do you imagine alarm, distance, correction, exhortation, compassion, comfort, understanding, or something else? Why? Biblically, how do you picture Christ interacting with Kathy? What Gospel passages might inform your answers to these questions?

2. Biblical Soul Physicians and Diagnostic Humility:What additional information would you desire to learn from Kathy? What careful, wise, compassionate, clarifying follow-up questions would you be wanting to ask—about the nature of her troubling, unwanted, resisted sexual thoughts, about her doubts about her salvation assurance, and about additional relevant issues? What stands out most about this young mother’s posture toward her struggle, toward unwanted thoughts, toward temptation, and toward God? What evidence in Kathy’s story might help you to distinguish between a hardened conscience and an overly burdened one? How would you discern the difference biblically…and what difference would that make?

3. Lightening the Conscience with Grace, or Loading the Conscience with Guilt, or Anchoring Her Conscience in Christ’s Finished Work: How might your first response either deepen Kathy’s shame or create safety for honest discipleship and compassionate biblical soul care? In the first five minutes, would your predisposition be to address her shame with Christ’s grace, intensify her sense of guilt, or anchor her in Christ’s finished work? Describe your biblical pastoral reasoning for your initial response.

4. Thinking in Biblical Categories: What theological categories might help you to interpret Kathy’s experience? When a Christian is tormented by unwanted thoughts: a.) How do you differentiate between indwelling sin, chosen sin, willful rebellion, spiritual warfare and resistance to temptation, rejection of unwanted thoughts, repentance of unwanted thoughts? b.) How do you differentiate between internal temptation from the flesh and external temptation from Satan? c.) How do you differentiate between conviction from the Spirit and satanic condemnation? d.) How do you differentiate between rejected unwanted thoughts and attraction? Which biblical passages would guide your discernment? Which passages might you bring into the conversation first, and why those before others? What biblical categories do you have for what others might call “scrupulosity,” or “OCD,” or “unwanted, intrusive thoughts,” or “a tender conscience,” or “a bruised reed”?

5. Church History-Informed Care and the Tender Conscience: Throughout church history, wise shepherds distinguished between a seared conscience and a tender conscience, between hardened rebellion and a bruised reed, between temptation that assaults the believer and sin embraced by the will. For example, the Puritans sought to discern between the hardened conscience (which required a response of loading the conscience with guilt) and the tender conscience (which required a response of lightening the conscience with grace). In all cases of conscience, they sought to anchor the conscience in Christ’s finished work. In humility, how might your awareness of this historical Christian soul care approach impact how you minister to Kathy?

6. Church History-Informed Care and the Tempted Conscience: Throughout church history, Christian soul physicians offered theological clarity and Christian charity as they refused to diminish the seriousness of indwelling sin, while equally recognizing that not every unwanted thought reflects a chosen desire or settled intent and consent of the will. They acknowledged that even our first inward stirrings reveal our continual need for Christ’s grace, while also recognizing that believers may be assaulted by thoughts they neither welcome nor cherish. In humility, how might your awareness of this historical Christian soul care mindset impact how you minister to Kathy?

7. Church History-Informed Care and the Troubled Conscience: Historic biblical soul care givers neither minimized moral categories nor softened scriptural language about sin. Instead, they sought to apply biblical truth with loving precision in order to instruct and comfort the conscience with the gospel, rather than overwhelm the conscience with accusation and condemnation. Gospel-shaped soul care has held two biblical convictions together: a sober realism about sin’s depth, and a careful refusal to ascribe guilt when the believer’s deepest inclination is resistance rather than consent. Historic Christian soul care has required more than moral exhortation; it has necessitated careful discernment shaped by Scripture, humility, and the gentleness of Christ toward the weak. In humility, how might your awareness of this historical Christian soul care perspective impact how you minister to Kathy?

8. Embodied-Soul Care: Historical soul physicians such as Richard Baxter, Charles Spurgeon, and Timothy Rogers believed that issues such as anxiety, depression (melancholy), and scrupulosity often included physiological factors. They understood that God designed us as embodied-souls (Genesis 1-2), and that we are now residing in fallen, groaning bodies (Romans 8). For example, Baxter asked and answered the question of the cause of scrupulosity like this, “Question: What are the causes and cures of this excessive and misguided sorrow and guilt? Answer: With many individuals, much of the cause is to be found in physiological disturbances, physical diseases, and general weakness.” Baxter, Spurgeon, and Rogers, each recommended embodied interventions along with care by a physician. Their attention to bodily factors did not replace spiritual shepherding; it simply acknowledged that Christ redeems whole persons who desire, think, choose, feel, and struggle within embodied, groaning lives. As you minister to Kathy, how might you conceptualize the possible contribution of her body, brain, and embodied-soul to her struggles? What role, if any, might physiological interventions play in your care for and counsel to her? Do you perceive any potential validity for medication as part of a comprehensive treatment plan for Kathy? Why or why not? 

9. Research-Aware Biblical Soul Care: Historical soul physicians such as Richard Baxter, Charles Spurgeon, and Timothy Rogers were “research-aware.” They availed themselves of the extra-biblical knowledge of their day—examined under the authority of Scripture—as part of their approach to caring for people struggling with anxiety, depression, and scrupulosity. What value, if any, might you see in becoming aware of research into scrupulosity, OCD, and unwanted, intrusive thoughts? 

10. Shepherding a Troubled, Scrupulous Conscience: How do you biblically shepherd someone who fears that their thoughts define their identity? If this young Christian woman’s greatest struggle is not permissiveness, but overwhelming shame, how might calls to “repent more” actually deepen her bondage when repentance is already present but assurance is collapsing? In ministering to Kathy, what might it look like to frame issues of holiness within the context of grace? Within the context of progressive sanctification? Within the context of Romans 8:17-27 and groaning in a fallen body in a fallen world? 

11. Comprehensive Pastoral Care: How could you care both for Kathy’s holiness and her fragile conscience? How could you address her struggles in a way that points Kathy toward hope in Christ? What dangers might arise when spiritual counsel focuses primarily on increased effort without addressing despair? How could you minister like Jesus who was full of grace and truth (John 1:14)?

12. Christ-Like, Gospel-Centered Care: What does it look like to help someone who keeps returning to the cross but still feels condemned? How could you apply Romans 8:1 in a way that is neither dismissive nor minimizing? How could you convey the message of Hebrews 4:14-16 to Kathy so that she holds firmly to her faith in Christ, runs to her sympathetic High Priest, and approaches the throne of grace with confidence so that she can receive mercy and grace to help in her time of need? Hebrews 5:1-10 explains that as we reflect Christ, we are able to deal gently with fellow strugglers because we know we, too, are subject to temptation, weakness, suffering, and sin. What unwanted, difficult-to-defeat spiritual struggles do you deal with that might help you to understand something of the struggles this young mother is facing? 

13. Leading and Leaving with Grace: Imagine this young woman leaving your office. How might you have interacted with Kathy so that she would walk away more convinced than ever before that Jesus is gentle and lowly toward those who are heavy-laden, weary, and burdened (Matthew 11:28-30)? How might you have interacted with Kathy so that she would walk away confident that she is not beyond the hope of Christ’s grace (John 8:1-11)? What could it look like for Kathy to leave her time with you with both a serious view of holiness and a deeper experience of Christ’s compassion and grace? (Gospel comfort is never a retreat from holiness; it is the soil in which genuine repentance and Spirit-formed obedience quietly grow.) What kind of hope-giving homework might you suggest, not as pressure to perform, but as pathways toward rest in Christ? How could you encourage her to experience personal communion with Christ and safe connection within the body of Christ? In short, how would you help Kathy leave not merely with more strategies, but with renewed hope that Christ is near to the ashamed, gentle with the weary, and powerful to help all those who cling to His grace?

14. Returning with Hope: Imagine that you scheduled a follow-up meeting with Kathy one week later. During those intervening days, what would occupy your prayers and shepherding reflections? Which Scriptures or theological themes might you revisit during the week to deepen your own wisdom for shepherding a tender, burdened conscience? As you prepare for a second meeting, where would you hope to focus: clarification, comfort, practical rhythms, assurance, conscience, means of grace, exhortation, exposing sin, deepened repentance, Christ’s forgiving grace, learning more of Kathy’s history and story, or something else? Why?

Shepherded Together by the Good and Gracious Shepherd 

As you reflect on this shepherding case study, may your shepherding be marked by the same wisdom and tenderness you have received from Christ Himself. He is the One who does not break the bruised reed or quench the faintly burning wick (Isaiah 42:1-4; Matthew 12:15-21). As you walk with troubled souls like Kathy, may you be drawn again to the throne of grace, where the Chief Shepherd meets both the counselor and the counselee with mercy for their weakness and grace sufficient for their every need (1 Peter 5:1-4). Together, may we learn to discern carefully, speak truthfully, and apply the gospel lovingly, so that weary believers encounter biblical clarity and the lovingkindness of their Savior (Ephesians 4:15-16).

Addendum: Additional Resources 

For additional resources, see:

55 Resources for OCD and Scrupulosity.

The post Scrupulosity, OCD, and a Tender Conscience: A Case Study in Christ-Shaped Biblical Soul Care appeared first on RPM Ministries.

Why I’ve Equipped Christians in Biblical Empathy for Forty Years 

For over 40 years, I’ve studied the Bible and church history regarding empathy. Five years ago, I collated some of that material into a free 42-page PDF:

Empathy Is Biblical.

Because I’ve written on biblical empathy, and because of current discussions about empathy, I’ve been asked questions like,

Do you see a problem of counselors or pastors disregarding truth because they are empathizing with people’s emotions.

I’ll answer that question in two ways:

• The biblical/theological answer.
• A practical/equipping answer.

The Biblical/Theological Answer: Emphasizing What the Bible Emphasizes 

In our evangelical Christian world, we continue to see writings that warn against “untethered empathy” and the “sin of empathy.” I disagree with the emphasis of these writings for several reasons, especially because: 

• They reverse the Bible’s emphasis on speaking the truth in loving empathy.
• They reverse the Bible’s emphasis on rebuking the error of untethering truth from loving empathy.

The Bible consistently rebukes truth untethered from love, from suffering with, from mourning with, from compassion, from empathy, from sympathy, from gentleness, from understanding, from comfort, from groaning with, from humility, from grace, and from a host of additional relational competencies.

Or, said positively:

The Bible consistently commands that we always tether truth to love, compassion, comfort, tender care, and empathy—like Jesus.

Let’s put our emphasis where the Bible does—on rebuking the error of untethering truth from love.

Don’t take my word for it. Take God’s Word. Follow the link below to reflect on three dozen biblical passages and theological truths about untethered truth:

The Sin of Untethered Truth: Truth Without Loving Empathy Is Sin.

Yes, of course, truth is essential, vital, foundational. Yes, of course, love is essential, vital, foundational. Yes, of course, truth and love/care/compassion/empathy must be tethered together.

Within the contexts of church shepherding leadership and the context of daily Christian relationships, the Bible emphasizes warnings against the danger of untethering truth from love, compassion, comfort, care, concern, and empathy.

A Practical/Equipping Answer: Equipping Where the Need Is Greatest 

Again, here’s the question:

Do you see a problem of counselors or pastors disregarding truth because they are empathizing with people’s emotions.

My shorter answer:

I see a problem of Evangelical pastors, counselors, and lay people disregarding love in our truth-telling. 

My longer answer:

In 40 years of teaching, training, equipping, and supervising literally 1000s of pastors/counselors/lay people in training (students, lay people in churches, pastors, already certified counselors, professional licensed counselors), I have not seen biblical empathy causing pastors/counselors to abandon biblical truth.

Perhaps that is because I’ve worked for 40 years in Evangelical circles where truth is, rightly, held so very high. I’ve taught as a professor or as an adjunct in over a dozen Evangelical seminaries/Bible colleges in the US and around the world. I’ve equipped lay people to counsel in half-a-dozen churches. They do not struggle with truth-telling.

Instead, here’s what I have repeatedly witnessed:

The counselor or pastor disregarding the life, the story, the experience, and the emotion of the counselee/parishioner, and racing in with confrontation before they even have listened well to the counselee’s story. I’ve found a consistent tendency toward Job 16 “miserable comforters” type of shepherding.

How do I address a biblical “balance” of truth and love, of listening to the earthly story of suffering and listening together to God’s eternal story? I teach a biblical/church history model of Christian sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding. All aspects of pastoral care are included in it. See,

Gospel Conversations: How to Care Like Christ.

The reconciling aspect includes exposing and confronting sin. The 1000s of Evangelical pastors/students/lay counselors I’ve trained have an affinity to race to reconciling:

Seek a sin; spot a sin; confront a sin.

We need more help truly hearing people’s story: their story of suffering, and their story of sin. When we hear the story of sin, Evangelical trainees need more help enlightening people biblically to grasp Christ’s grace and wonderful forgiveness.

What have those 1000s of trainees consistently been poor at?

They are ill-equipped at sustaining empathy, Christlike compassion, biblical care, and Christian comfort.

Modern American Evangelicals are good at truth-telling, but poor at biblical empathy.

That’s why, long before people started writing about the sin of empathy or toxic empathy, I was writing about and equipping people in the beauty of Christlike empathy.

It’s also why, when this empathy issue pops up again and again, I post my free PDF on Empathy Is Biblical.

People are hearing a lot about toxic empathy. They are not hearing a lot about biblical empathy. As Evangelical pastors, biblical counselors, theologians, professors, and church members, we need to hear about and learn how to live out Christlike empathy.

In summary,

Biblical empathy is a life-long passion of mine because far too many of us as Evangelicals fail at speaking/embodying truth in Christlike loving empathy—which is what the Bible emphasizes.

The post Evangelicals and Empathy appeared first on RPM Ministries.

“Then Job answered and said: ‘I have heard many such things; miserable comforters are you all’” (Job 16:1-2).

Mark #1: Miserable Counselor/Comforters Are Defensive and Aggressive

What happens when a suffering counselee pushes back on counseling that confuses lament with sin, and that blames suffering on personal sin?

“Then Zophar the Naamathite replied: ‘My troubled thoughts prompt me to answer because I am greatly disturbed. I hear a rebuke that dishonors me, and my perception compels me to reply’” (Job 20:1-3).

The miserable, defensive counselor, rather than empathizing with their counselee, and listening to their pain, doubles down by rebuking the counselee for daring to disagree with their miserable counsel.

The victim is revictimize in the “counseling” session. First, the miserable counselor shames you for feeling/lamenting. Second, they shame you for disagreeing with them. The counseling becomes abusive.

Mark #2: Miserable Counselors/Comforters Are Empty of Empathy 

Ironically (or, hypocritically), miserable comforters are more concerned about their own perceived wounds, and their perception of being dishonored, than they are about the actual wounds that their counselee is enduring. “I hear a rebuke that dishonors me, and my perception compels me to reply” (Job 20:-3).

Miserable comforters, non-empathetic counselors, display the capacity for only one type of empathy—“self-empathy.” They empathize with their own perceived dishonor, but they are bereft of the capacity to empathize with the suffering of their own counselee.

Mark #3: Miserable Counselors/Comforters Are Fueled by Fury 

Ironically (or, hypocritically), miserable comforters are experts at confronting others, but are novices at receiving confrontation. Chapter after chapter, day after day, they confront Job—blaming his suffering on sin and calling his emotional lament sinful complaining. Yet, when Job pushes back, they go ballistic.

“My disquieting thoughts make me respond, even because of my inward agitation. I listened to the reprimand which insults me, and the spirit of my understanding makes me answer” (Job 20:2-3, NASB).

Mark #4: Miserable Counselors/Comforters Insist on Lingering Speeches, Instead of Offering Lingering Listening to Lingering Lament 

Earlier, Job describes the tactics of miserable comforters, and shares what to do instead.

“Then Job replied: ‘I have heard many things like these; you are miserable comforters, all of you!’” (Job 16:1-2).

How do miserable comforters sinfully counsel? Instead of listening, they give long speeches.

“Will your long-winded speeches never end? What ails you that you keep on arguing?” (Job 16:3).

Job becomes a soul physician, diagnosing the sinful soul of miserable counselors—out of the abundance of their ailing, sick, sinful heart, they keep on arguing, keep on speaking, never listening.

Even earlier, Job confronts these miserable counselors for their failure to listen, even calling them worthless (soul) physicians.

“You, however, smear me with lies; you are worthless physicians, all of you!” (Job 13:4).

Job’s three “friends” constantly condemn his laments, judge his feelings, and blame him for his suffering. What should they do instead? They should listen, listen, listen.

“If only you would be altogether silent! For you, that would be wisdom” (Job 13:3). (They felt a compulsion to speak perils of wisdom, but their words were filled with foolishness. For them, silent empathetic listening to lament would have demonstrated true wisdom.)

“Hear now my argument; listen to the pleas of my lips” (Job 13:5). (Job has to plea for them to hear his pleas.)

“Keep silent and let me speak; then let come to me what may” (Job 13:5). (Job has to fight to get a word in, instead of being invited to share his soul. Miserable counselors are the opposite of the apostle Paul who was delighted to share his own soul with those he shepherded (1 Thessalonians 2:7-8).

“Listen carefully to what I say; let my words ring in your ears” (Job 13:17). (They were so tone-deaf to Job’s words, that he has to beg his “counselors” to listen to him.)

It’s a sad counseling session when you have to plead four times with your counselor to listen to your lament…

Miserable counselors love to hear themselves speak. Sadly, their words are meaningless mottos and maxims.

“Your maxims are proverbs of ashes; your defenses are defenses of clay” (Job 13:12). (They thought their pithy, pious proclamations were clever. They were wrong.)

Mark #5: Miserable Counselors/Comforters Are Filled with the Wrong Fuel: Toxic Non-Empathy

Returning to Job 16, we see that miserable counselors are empty of empathy but filled with condemnation.

“I also could speak like you, if you were in my place; I could make fine speeches against you and shake my head at you” (Job 16:4).

What would Job do instead of making fine speeches and shaking his head in shame at sufferers? He would provide parakaletic soul care: coming along side others compassionately with comfort and encouragement.

“But my mouth would encourage you; comfort from my lips would bring you relief” (Job 16:5). (Miserable counselors demean the natural desire for relief. Unlike them, the Divine Counselor groans with us until glory in a sympathetic desire for relief from the horrific effects of the fall—Romans 8:17-27.)

Alas, miserable comforters do not have the capacity for compassion. They scorn tears, exhort away emotions, and condemn lament.

“My friends treat me with scorn as my eyes pour out tears to God” (Job 16:20).

Even while Job is sobbing uncontrollably, his miserable counselors scorn him uncontrollably and unceasingly. They label his suffering sin and his lament libel.

Mark #6: Miserable Counselors/Comforters Have Foolish Beliefs About God 

What does our ultimate Soul Physician think about miserable soul physicians? What does the Father of compassion and God of all comfort think about miserable comforters?

The LORD God is angry with miserable counselors/comforters. Miserable counselors fail to understand people compassionately because they fail to understand who God is. God calls miserable counselors “fools.”

“After the Lord had said these things to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Temanite, ‘I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has. So now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and sacrifice a burnt offering for yourselves. My servant Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly. You have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has.’ So Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite did what the Lord told them; and the Lord accepted Job’s prayer” (Job 42:7-11).

The inability to comfort, empathize, offer compassion, and suffer with/weep with others is not simply a lack of training. Rather, it is due to a lack of intimate, accurate knowledge of God and His love (“you have not spoken the truth about me”). If we know God and His love, then we will love our brothers and sisters.

“Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love…. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us (1 John 4:7-8, 11-12).

Repent, Return/Renew, Reconcile, and Make Restitution 

What does the miserable counselor/comforter need to do? They need to: repent, return to comforting/empathizing soul care, and make restitution.

“All his brothers and sisters and everyone who had known him before came and ate with him in his house. They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought on him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring” (Job 42:11).

Notice that this verse is not only about Job’s brothers and sisters. It is also about “everyone who had known him”—which would include Job’s three friends.

These miserable counselors repented.

They changed their ways, renewing their capacity to care, and returning to the God-designed role of comforting/consoling soul care givers.

They reconciled with Job. They humbled themselves before Job, obviously acknowledging their sin to Job by taking their burnt offering to Job and allowing Job to pray to God for their forgiveness.

They also made restitution: bringing Job silver and gold.

Miserable Counselors Today 

Have we labeled lament libel?

Have we called the legitimate expression of painful emotion sinful?

Have we blamed them for their suffering?

Have we failed to listen long to lingering lament?

Have we rushed counselees through the process of lament, racing them at an inhumane pace so that we could get our chance to talk?

Have we share our pithy, pious proclamations before truly hearing and entering their story of suffering?

Have we been defensive when they have pushed back and asked us to slow down and truly hear them and their hurt?

Have we been aggressive, confronting them for daring to confront our miserable comforting?

Has our counseling been relationally abusive?

If any of this is true, then we should repent, renew our capacity for compassionate empathy, reconcile with, and make restitution to any counselee, parishioner, friend we have sinned against by being miserable comforters.

The post 6 Marks of Miserable Counselors/Comforters appeared first on RPM Ministries.

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.

The post Passing the Biblical Counseling Baton… appeared first on RPM Ministries.

Use Your Imagination  

In the spirit of positive, iron-sharpening-iron interactions in the biblical counseling world, which of the following 90-minute interactive biblical counseling discussions (not debates) would you most like to hear?

Imagine that you could listen in on any of these conversations? Which would be your top three to hear?

(Imagined) Biblical Counseling Conversations 

1. Jay Adams and David Powlison discussing the differences between their approaches to biblical counseling. (This would be a particularly healthy and holy conversation since it would take place in heaven between two glorified saints!)

2. The biblical counseling faculty of SEBTS (Nate Brooks, Kristin Kellen, Sam Williams, Nate Cockrell, Brad Hambrick) and the biblical counseling faculty of MBTS (Dale Johnson and Samuel Stephens) comparing and contrasting the strengths and weaknesses of “Redemptive Biblical Counseling” and “Traditional Nouthetic Biblical Counseling.”

3. Bob Kellemen and Dale Johnson discussing what makes biblical counseling truly biblical: a theology and methodology of biblical counseling.

4. Bob Kellemen and Heath Lambert discussing the history of biblical soul care and what constitutes historic biblical counseling/historic Christian embodied-soul care.

5. Greg Gifford and Jason Kovacs discussing the strengths and weaknesses of clinically-informed biblical counseling.

6. Ed Welch and Sean Perron discussing whether or not fear is sin, along with a practical theology of emotions for biblical counseling.

7. Donn Arms (Jay Adams’s “right-hand man”) and Heath Lambert discussing to what extent “second generation nouthetic biblical counseling” is aligned with “first generation nouthetic counseling.”

8. Darby Strickland, Julie Ganschow, and Eliza Huie discussing biblical counseling and trauma.

9. Jeremy Lelek and Francine Tan discussing physiological interventions for embodied-souls in biblical counseling.

10. Nate Brooks, Keith Evans, and Jared Poulton discussing common grace, Cornelius Van Til, Herman Bavinck, and biblical counseling.

11. Charles Hodges and Stephen Ganschow discussing the Creation Mandate and the role of science, neuroscience, and research in biblical counseling.

12. Leaders of major biblical counseling organizations (Kevin Carson with the BCC, Jonathan Holmes with CCEF, Jeremy Lelek with ABC, and Dale Johnson with ACBC) comparing and contrasting their organizational purpose, comparing and contrasting and their philosophy of biblical counseling, and discussing how they could build bridges toward each other.

13. Curtis Solomon and John Babler discussing addressing PTSD from a biblical perspective and from a research perspective.

14. Ernie Baker and Jeremy Pierre comparing and contrasting two approaches to public biblical counseling interactions: a.) interacting as a “prophet on the wall” who focuses on calling out errant biblical counseling views, or b.) interaction focused on a positive presentation of the beauty of biblical counseling.

Join the Conversation 

Which three of these biblical counseling conversations would you be most interesting in hearing?

What other biblical counseling discussion topic would you like to hear, and what biblical counseling leaders would you like to have discuss that topic?

The post Positive Iron-Sharpening Interactions in Biblical Counseling appeared first on RPM Ministries.

The Creation Mandate 

In Gospel-Centered Counseling, I defined the Creation Mandate as:

The God-given, repeated command that image bearers subdue and rule the earth as God’s vice-regents, under-shepherds, and under-scientists. God’s mandates that we be good stewards of His creation by studying it and learning from it. 

Biblical Conviction #1: The Creation Mandate is a primary scriptural catalyst for studying science and neuroscience related to embodied-soul illness and wellness.

I believe that God’s special revelation (His all-sufficient written Word) teaches us what we can learn from His general/natural revelation. From general/natural revelation, we not only learn about God; we also learn life lessons from observing and studying God’s creation.

• We are to learn about God by observing and studying God’s creation—the fingerprints of God. We are to learn from creation about God, God’s goodness, God’s power, God’s affectionate sovereignty, God’s care, and God’s providence. See: Genesis 1:26-28; Genesis 9:1-3; Genesis 9:7; Genesis 9:12-17; Job 38:1-41; Job 39:1-30; Job 40:15-24; Job 41:1-34; Psalm 8:1-4; Psalm 19:1-6; Psalm 24:1-2; Psalm 65:5-13; Psalm 74:12-17; Psalm 89:1-18; Psalm 95:3-5; Psalm 97:6; Psalm 103:24-28; Psalm 104:1-35; Psalm 136:1-26; Psalm 145:1-21; Psalm 147:7-9; Psalm 148:1-14; Isaiah 40:21-26; Romans 1:18-25.

• We are to learn life lessons from observing and studying God’s creation—observational wisdom. God calls all of us to be wise observers of His creation who use our redeemed minds to learn life lessons and wisdom principles from His creation. See: Job 12:7-12; Proverbs 6:6-8; Proverbs 30:24-31; Ecclesiastes 1:12-13, 17; Ecclesiastes 5:18; Ecclesiastes 7:25, 27-29; Ecclesiastes 8:9-10, 16-17; Ecclesiastes 9:1, 11-18; Matthew 6:25-27; Matthew 6:28-30; Luke 6:43-45; Luke 12:22-26; Luke 12:27-31. (Note: For more about observational wisdom, see: Two Very Different Ways of Looking at Life: What Does Ecclesiastes Teach Us About How We View Traumatic-Suffering?).

God calls some people to fulfill His Creation Mandate by being research scientists and neuroscientists. God calls some of us at least to “research the research.” God calls all of us to observe creation wisely and to learn from it.

Biblical Conviction #2: The Creation Mandate Is Fulfilled by Cooperative Engagement

I believe that a large part of fulfilling the Creation Mandate is cooperative engagement between theologians, pastors, educators, counselors, psychiatrists, doctors, neuroscientists, scientists, researchers, etc., looking for embodied-soul diagnosis and embodied-soul treatment of issues impacting the finite (and now) fallen body in our (now) fallen world. Engagement does not equal capitulation—Christians are to use their God-given, redeemed reasoning capacities/wisdom in submission to God’s all-sufficient Word to assess extra-biblical information. Likewise, engagement does not mean outright rejection, instead it means a humble openness to learning from Creation-Mandated-extra-biblical information. (See, Powlison on Biblical Counseling and Secular Psychotherapy: Informed Biblical Counseling.)

Biblical Conviction #3: The Creation Mandate and Embodied-Soul Illness and Wellness

I believe that had humanity, throughout history, done this cooperative, comprehensive work in submission to God, then long ago we would have identified many embodied-soul causes and cures for many physical ailments and for many issues we label as mental illness. Had this “history-long-process occurred, then perhaps today we might even describe these issues as embodied-soul weaknesses effecting our “jar of clay” embodied-souls that “groan until glory.”

Biblical Conviction #4: The Ongoing Creation Mandate

I believe that God continues to call us to be His under-shepherds and under-scientists, advancing His sovereign plan in submission to His sovereign will, in alignment with His holy love. I pray that we would still engage in this type of Creation Mandate cooperative, comprehensive, compassionate, constructive embodied-soul work of descriptive diagnosis and prescriptive care and cure.

A Word from Bob

This is a first draft of my thinking. I am open to constructive, cooperative feedback…

Addendum #1: Two Vital Questions 

In considering if, when, how, and why Christians might engage with non-Christian researchers, there are two vital questions. My post today is addressing the first question:

Question #1: What Does the Bible Call Humanity to Do (The Creation Mandate)? 

The Creation Mandate addresses what God calls humanity to do. We are to:

Subdue and rule the earth as God’s vice-regents, under-shepherds, and under-scientists. God’s mandates that we be good stewards of His creation by studying it and learning from it.

Question #2: What Does the Bible Say about Extra-Biblical Information? What Does the Bible Teach About How to Assess Extra-Biblical Information? How Should Christians Engage with the Research/Thinking of Non-Christians?

These questions address theological issues like total depravity, the noetic effect of sin, the noetic effect of God’s sovereign common grace, the sufficiency of Scripture, natural/general revelation, a biblical view of science, etc. I believe that many times we skip question #1—related to the Creation Mandate.

I believe it is a mistake to ignore the Creation Mandate when we ponder the nature of Christian engagement with non-Christian research.

Here are three resources (out of scores of sources) where I address the issue of the Christian’s use of the Bible to assess extra-biblical information:

• The Sufficiency of Scripture and Extra-Biblical Information. This links you to a free twenty-seven-page PDF that explores how the Bible is sufficient to equip us to engage with, evaluate, and potentially employ extra-biblical information.
• Common Grace and Biblical Counseling: Wisdom from Reformed Theologians. This links you to a free 114-page, 44,500-word PDF document on common grace and biblical counseling. Read it to see how Reformed thinkers addressed this second vital question: What does the Bible say about extra-biblical information.
• Two Very Different Ways of Looking at Life: What Does Ecclesiastes Teach Us About How We View Traumatic-Suffering? In this post, I contrast how Solomon observed life from two very different lenses—one wise, the other foolish. This post helps us to ponder how the Christian might engage with non-Christian observations and interpretations of life.

Addendum #2: The Creation Mandate and God’s Sovereign Common Grace 

No one is exempt from the Creation Mandate. It is a central part of the imago Dei—the image of God.

Unbelievers will suppress their awareness of and accountability to the Creator. Nevertheless, they will reflect on, observe, and make interpretations about creation (Romans 1). Unbelievers will not fulfill this mandate with a conscious awareness of their accountability to God as stewards. Nevertheless, they will reflect on, observe, and make interpretations about creation (Romans 2). Because of God’s sovereign common grace, in His providence He uses unbelieving researchers to advance His purposes.

Abraham Kuyper rightly taught that the instinct to investigate continues today even in the lives of unbelievers—because of God’s sovereign providence. Mouw explains Kuyper’s Reformed theology of the Creation Mandate and Common Grace:

“The capacity for cultural formation was not lost in fallen humanity. Scarred, yes, and even seriously distorted and corrupted. But the impulse toward cultural activity deeply implanted in human beings by God continues. And common grace sees to it that good things are produced, even where rebellious spirits are in charge” (Common Grace, Vol. 1, xxvii).

Kuyper taught that to diminish the Creation Mandate and God’s sovereign common grace in the life of the unbeliever is to diminish God’s glory.

“The doctrine of common grace is an idea deduced directly from the sovereignty of the Lord, a doctrine that is and remains the root conviction of all Reformed people. If God is sovereign, then his lordship must extend over all of life, and it cannot be restricted to the walls of the church or within the Christian orbit. The non-Christian world has not been handed over to Satan, nor surrendered to fallen humanity, nor consigned to fate. God’s sovereignty is great and all-dominating in the life of that unbaptized world as well” (Common Grace, Vol. 1, xxxvii).

Denying God’s all-encompassing common grace in the life of the unbeliever is saying that God has surrendered the non-Christian world over to Satan.

Kuyper maximizes God’s glory as he maximizes the extent of God’s common grace which fulfills God’s Creation Mandate.

“Common grace extends over our entire human life, in all its manifestations. There is a common grace that manifests itself in order and law; there is a common grace that manifests itself in prosperity and affluence; there is a common grace that becomes visible in the healthy development of strength and heroic courage of a nation; there is a common grace that shines in the development of science and art; there is a common grace that enriches a nation through inventiveness in enterprise and commerce; there is a common grace that strengthens the domestic and moral life; and finally there is a common grace that protects the religious life against an excessive degeneration. As for the latter, we only have to compare Islam with the service of Baal Peor (see Numbers 25) to sense immediately what a powerful functioning of common grace is active in the religious realm in Islamic counties. And if we want to get a clear picture of the difference in the effect of common grace in another area, compare then, for example, what we are told of the Egyptians in the days of Moses and the Batavians in the days of Claudis Civilis. Among the Egyptians we see a high development of wisdom, as well as skill in various areas of art and business enterprise” (Common Grace, Vol. 1, 497-498).

You can read more in, Every Square Inch of Human Existence: Kuyper on God’s All-Encompassing Common Grace.

The post 4 Convictions about the Creation Mandate, Mental Health, Physical Wellness, and Embodied-Souls appeared first on RPM Ministries.

A Brief History Lesson 

If you’ve read my blog over the past eighteen months, then you know that the modern biblical counseling world has been at war. Sadly, warfare between biblical counselors and Christian integrative counselors is nothing new, nor is it new to experience warfare among biblical counselors. David Powlison documented this long history in The Biblical Counseling Movement: History and Context. I also outlined some of those in-house disagreements here: Is It Biblical for Biblical Counselors to Disagree Publicly?: A History Lesson, and also here: Heath, Jay, and Donn…And Mischaracterizing Fellow Biblical Counselors.

The newest series of skirmishes began almost two years ago when Heath Lambert posted his now famous zombie-infected biblical counselor podcast. I waited and prayed for about a week, and then decided to wade into the conversation. You can find a summary of my engagement with Heath here: “What Makes Someone a Faithful Biblical Counselor?” 

Since May of 2024, the skirmishes have turned into relentless open warfare. Others—like Sean Perron, Dale Johnson, Greg Gifford, Omri Miles, and Francine Tan, to name just a few—have joined Heath in accusing fellow biblical counselors of not being biblical counselors.

To date, I’ve rarely been a target of the bombardments. And, of the 200-ish posts I’ve posted in the past couple of years, I’ve only “defended” myself three times (that’s about 1.5%, if my middle-school math is correct). Most of my engagements in these clashes have focused on my seeking to defend fellow biblical counselors who I believe are being falsely accused and grossly mischaracterized.

A “Truce”

The end of the Apostle Paul’s life has been a major motivator for me to speak up. Paul notes that, “at my first defense, no one came to my support, but everyone deserted me” (1 Timothy 4:16).

Back in 2016-2017, when Lambert made similar accusations against Eric Johnson, I spoke out in defense of Dr. Johnson privately, but not publicly. This time I have chosen to publicly defend my fellow biblical counseling brothers and sisters. It is certainly biblical to publicly defend ministers of the gospel and to publicly challenge public mischaracterizations: Proverbs 31:8-9; Esther 4:14; Galatians 2:14; 1 Timothy 5:20; 2 Timothy 4:16-18; Titus 1:10-13; Ephesians 5:11; Ezekiel 3:17-18; Nehemiah 5:6-9; Proverbs 22:10; Titus 3:9-11; Romans 16:17-18.

However, after much prayer, reflection, and consultation (Proverbs 15:22), I believe it is time for me to “call a truce”—at least on my part (Romans 12:18). When I privately and publicly asked for counsel about this, I had three types of responses:

1. If your soul needs a sabbatical, and the Lord is leading, then by all means, take a sabbatical.
2. If at all possible, please don’t stop speaking into this. We need your public voice.
3. Perhaps it is time for a sabbatical—on both sides—as it seems everyone has spoken…repeatedly.

I’ll continue to “monitor” the conversations—they come up on my social media feed whether I want them to or not. But, for some yet-to-be-determined amount of time, I plan to be an observer, not a participant.

I plan to keep doing all the other “free retirement ministry” I’ve been doing:

• Providing pro bono counseling to pastors and biblical counselors.
• Researching and writing, especially on issues like embodied-souls, traumatic suffering, and common grace.
• Blogging about the positive beauty of biblical counseling.
• Providing pro bono biblical counseling consulting to churches and para-church organizations.
• Being actively involved in my church.
• Being actively involved in my community.
• Enjoying the wife of my youth, our extended family, and our friends.
• Playing pickleball!

What will I do with my “extra” time during my sabbatical?

• Gaze on the beauty of the Lord (Psalm 27:4).
• Be still and know that God is God (Psalm 46:10).
• Sit at Christ’s feet listening to what He says through His Word and His indwelling Spirit (Luke 10:39).
• Let the peace of Christ rule in my heart and let the Word of Christ dwell in me richly (Colossians 3:15-16).
• Seek to walk by the Spirit, be led by the Spirit, filled with the Spirit, guided by the Spirit, and live out the fruit of the Spirit (Romans 8:14; Galatians 5:16; Ephesians 5:18; John 16:13; Galatians 5:22-23).

A Word to My Friends Who Are Experiencing Attacks 

A few thoughts, friends…

1. To Defend or Not to Defend? 

A biblical case can be made for publicly defending your gospel ministry against public attacks. Paul spent much of the Corinthian epistles defending himself and his ministry. While lesser known as a defense of his ministry, 1 Thessalonians 2 is another example of Paul documenting the veracity of his ministry. You are free, under the leading of God’s Spirit through His Word, to publicly defend your ministry, or, to remain silent in the face of mischaracterizations (1 Peter 2:19-23). 

2. God Has Your Back

Earlier, I quoted Paul at the end of his life grieving that “no one came to my support, but everyone deserted me.” Though it is incredibly painful when we lack all human defense, we can take that pain to the God who has our back.

“But the Lord stood at my side and gave me strength, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. And I was delivered from the lion’s mouth. The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom. To him be glory for ever and ever. Amen” (2 Timothy 4:17-18).

Trust that your heavenly Father will rescue you from every evil attack. Trust that He stands at your side and gives you strength. Know that through your biblical counseling the message of the gospel is spreading. Know that you minister to God’s glory.

3. Keep Searching Your Heart and Keep Progressively Growing as a Biblical Counselor

Each one of us must have hearts open to the conviction of God’s Word and God’s Spirit. None of us have perfect models of biblical counseling. Let us all live humbly in alignment with the spirit of these words from the Introduction of the Biblical Counseling Coalition’s Confessional Statement:

“We confess that we have not arrived. We comfort and counsel others only as we continue to receive ongoing comfort and counsel from Christ and the Body of Christ (2 Corinthians 1:3-11). We admit that we struggle to apply consistently all that we believe. We who counsel live in process, just like those we counsel, so we want to learn and grow in the wisdom and mercies of Christ.”

A Word to My Friends Who Are Accusing Other Biblical Counselors 

A few thoughts, friends…

1. Consider a “Truce”

To me, it seems as if the accusations have been relentless for almost two years now. Podcasts, blog posts, journal articles, social media posts, conferences, etc. You have gotten your point across. Perhaps if you took a breath, people might be able to slow down and digest what you’ve said—and perhaps even listen and change where that may be needed.

As part of such a “truce,” perhaps consider what some of us have suggested—a biblical counseling conciliation summit. See here: A Proposal: A Biblical Counseling Conciliation Summit.

2. Consider Searching Your Own Heart

To me, there has been a lot of “speck hunting” and not so much “log looking” (Matthew 7:1-5). Perhaps this is a time for judgment to begin at home (1 Peter 4:17). Perhaps this is a time to assess your own heart and your own model of counseling.

The same week that these newer biblical counseling wars erupted, Shirley and I move into our new, idyllic home in Port Charlotte, Florida. We have loved almost everything about our new community. There is one thing we have not loved, and it relates to a person who I’ll name “Maximillian.” Max is a contrarian. While he has never spoken about or against me, he has spoken, ad nauseum, against our HOA BOD. If the BOD says, “The sky is blue,” then Max screams, “No! It’s green!” If the BOD says, “The sky is green,” then Max counters, No! It’s blue.”

Max does not have much self-awareness. When others recently pushed back on him, sharing that perhaps he is a large part of the problem, Maximillion responded with,

“My intention is not to tear anyone down but instead to provide loving, helpful feedback. In the process, this may ruffle some feathers because sometimes the truth is hard to hear.”

I believe that Max identifies as a Christian. Based on his quote, he seems to believe that he is speaking truth in love. However, other than a few of his compatriots, the vast majority of the residents of our community see neither truth nor love in Maximillian’s comments to and about our HOA BOD. He repeatedly mischaracterizes them in an angry, disrespectful manner.

To my friends who are accusing others, I know you believe you are speaking truth in love. Perhaps it would not hurt to read the feedback that others are providing you, search your heart, and ask whether you are being consistently truthful and consistently loving…

3. Consider a Positive Focus on the Beauty of Biblical Counseling

We know what you are against. You’ve told us…again, and again, and again.

Now, tell us what you are for. Equip us.

Let’s get back to the days of Randy Patten’s leadership of NANC (now ACBC) when, with a shepherd’s heart, Randy led NANC with a focus on sharing the positive beauty of biblical counseling.

Perhaps if you called a truce, you could expend your energy, time, focus, podcasts, conferences, blogs, newsletters, and journal articles equipping us to speak the truth in love so we all can grow up together in Christ.

A Word to My Friends Who Have Remained Silent 

I know many biblical counseling leaders who have strong views about these public accusations. Some of you have remained silent, even in private. Some of you have been publicly silent, but privately seeking to promote peace.

A few thoughts, friends…

1. Consider that Silence Is Not the Only Biblical Option 

From much interaction with many of you, you seem to perceive and present the idea that silence is the more biblical approach. Biblically, I believe there to be a range of Christlike options, including speaking out publicly (Proverbs 31:8-9; Esther 4:14; Galatians 2:14; 1 Timothy 5:20; 2 Timothy 4:16-18; Titus 1:10-13; Ephesians 5:11; Ezekiel 3:17-18; Nehemiah 5:6-9; Proverbs 22:10; Titus 3:9-11; Romans 16:17-18).

While it is true that when they hurled their insults at Christ, he did not retaliate (1 Peter 3:22), it is possible to speak out against public insults without retaliation, but rather in a spirit of truth. The four Gospel are ample evidence that Christ often publicly combatted the lies that people said about Him. And, as noted above, Paul frequently publicly defended the veracity of his gospel ministry.

Sometimes silence in the face of mischaracterizations can emboldened unending mistruths…

2. Consider Searching Your Own Heart Motivation Related to Your Public Silence

My motives in speaking out publicly may be pure. But that has not stopped me from searching my heart and seeking counsel from others.

Your motives in not speaking out publicly may be pure. But that should not stop you from searching your heart and seeking counsel from others—about your public silence.

The biblical counseling movement has become known for several categories of “heart searching.” Perhaps those categories might be helpful here.

• People Pleasing: We might ask ourselves, “Is my public silence possibly motivated by a desire to be seen as ‘a nice guy,’ to be known as ‘a peacemaker and bridgebuilder’?” “Am I perhaps motivated by a distaste for and unhealthy avoidance of conflict?” “Am I saying, ‘peace, peace,’ when there is no peace?”
• Fear of Man: We might ask, “Is my public silence possibly motivated by my fear of retribution—my fear of getting on the wrong side of this very vocal, very powerful group of biblical counseling leaders?” “Am I so afraid of being ‘canceled’ or experiencing some other negative consequences, that my fear is what is prompting my public silence?”
• Idol of the Heart: We might ask ourselves, “Have I perhaps made the modern biblical counseling movement such an idol, that I will protect it publicly rather than come to the defense of people being falsely accused?” “Have I made my preferred organization (perhaps ACBC) such an idol, that I don’t want to say anything publicly that is negative, even if it means that some fellow biblical counselors might continue to be publicly victimized?”

We ask our counselees to ask these types of searching heart questions. There’s no reason for us to be defensive and refuse to consider asking ourselves these heart questions.

During my sabbatical from these conflicts, I plan to (as I’ve been doing) ask myself a series of heart questions—using God’s Word to search the motives of my heart.

3. Reconsider Your Thinking on Responding to Public Mischaracterizations

Some silent ACBC leaders have said to me that no amount of engagement with conflict-oriented ACBC leaders is going to change their minds because they are set in their ways and not willing to listen.

Therefore, don’t engage with them. The first sentence may be true. The second sentence misunderstands the reason for engagement. I’ve not sought to change the minds of ACBC leaders. That’s God’s sovereign prerogative (2 Timothy 2:24-25). As I’ve stated many times, I engage in these conversations:

• For the Benefit of Mischaracterized Biblical Counselors: To biblically, theologically, and logically support fellow biblical counselors who are being publicly mischaracterized and maligned.
• For the Benefit of the Wider Biblical Counseling World and the Wider Evangelical World: To present a counter-narrative that shares a biblical model of relating to others with grace and truth, and shares a biblical theology of embodied-souls, common grace, the Creation mandate, physiological interventions, science, and research.

Others have quoted Proverbs 26:20 in an attempt to convince people that if we would stop responding, ACBC leaders would stop mischaracterizing people. “Without wood a fire goes out; without a gossip a quarrel dies down” (Proverbs 26:20).

First, that verse talks about gossip. It is not gossip to publicly present truth that contradicts public lies. It is truth telling. Isn’t truth telling a core tenant of nouthetic counseling?

Second, another core tenant of nouthetic counseling is that our response to people may impact/influence people, but never controls people—we are all responsible for our responses. So, it is anti-nouthetic and, more importantly, anti-theology to say that contradicting mischaracterizations forces people to keep mischaracterizing.

So Long, Farewell… 

In The Sound of Music, they sang about “so long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, adieu, goodbye, goodbye, I leave….”

At least for now, I say, “Adieu” to these counseling conflicts.

Farewell.

Fare well.

Be well.

The post I’m Taking a “Sabbatical” from the Biblical Counseling “Wars” appeared first on RPM Ministries.