Interview with Dr. Jay Adams
|   |   |   |
(The above are Amazon affiliate links.)
Last week I had the opportunity to talk with Dr. Jay Adams and Rev. Donn Arms on the telephone about a range of topics. These included the history and present state of biblical counseling, underlying philosophical and theological principles (such as the unity of truth and sanctification), and a mix of methodological and practical questions (including counseling unbelievers and the role of counseling ministries outside of church oversight).
Part one (30 mins) focuses mainly on the biblical counseling movement and foundational ideas.
Part two (19 mins) delves mostly into methodological and practical matters.
A few random observations
- If conducting interviews is anything like preaching, I’ll have to do this about 100 more times before I get half good at it! (Have I lowered your expectations sufficiently?)
- Dr. Adams has been involved in this area of ministry (as well as many others) for longer than I’ve been alive. So it’s with reluctance that I say the unity of truth problem doesn’t seem to be adequately answered in the interview. Perhaps [amazon 1889032409] explains better what I was unable to grasp during our talk.
- I believe Dr. Adams’ approach to counseling has strengths that continue to commend it strongly even though there are many (“non-integrationist”) biblical counselors today with slightly different approaches who are doing excellent work. These strengths include the following:
- A crystal clear understanding of sanctification that leaves believers with no doubt about what they are responsible to do about sin problems in general (provided they are willing to understand what to do)
- A high view of Scripture and it’s power to speak to the vast majority of problems we tend to think of as counseling issues today
- A skepticism toward Freudian and post-Freudian (but equally godless) approaches to human nature and problems
- A firm conviction that sin problems are best handled in a local church context
- A passionate belief that regeneration (and the blessings that go with it, such as the indwelling Holy Spirit) form the only basis for deep and abiding solutions to sin problems
I haven’t read Dr. Adams for years, but I had what I thought was a basic understanding of nouthetic counseling… that is, until I read this thread. :)
So I went to the http://www.nanc.org/About_Us/Standards_of_Conduct.aspx] NANC website and read the Standards of Conduct, where I saw the following:
So I went to the http://www.nanc.org/About_Us/Standards_of_Conduct.aspx] NANC website and read the Standards of Conduct, where I saw the following:
…I don’t see a problem with this- the SoC may be brief and general, but it seems sensible to me in light of what the Scripture teaches about how the body, mind, and spirit interact and affect each other.
4. The biblical counselor recognizes the need in many instances for early medical evaluations to determine whether the counselee’s behavior may result from organic dysfunction.
5. The biblical counselor recognizes the total health needs of the counselee. He will cultivate a knowledge of professional internal medicine and general medical practitioners and health care specialists and centers.
11. The biblical counselor recognizes the need for internal medicine for physiological disorders but will seek to help a counselee refrain from taking drugs that lead to dependence or that substantially affect or alter the mind or behavior. The biblical counselor recognizes that there are occasional circumstances where medication that may alter behavior is required.
It is to be regretted that this thread quickly become dominated by one or two self-discrediting individuals who seem to have way more time on their hands than most of us. I would have enjoyed hearing reaction to the acutal interview.
For anyone interested, we have posted several articles on our website, by Dr. Adams, that address all this. They include:
The Physician, the Pastor, Psychotherapy, and Counseling
The Biblical Perspective on the Mind-Body Problem
The Christian Approach to Schizophrenia
They can be found at: http://www.nouthetic.org/resources/from-the-pen-of-dr-adams/grist-from-…
You may also be interested to know that Dr. Adams writes a daily blog, included on the SI blogroll, that can be found here: http://www.nouthetic.org/blog/
For anyone interested, we have posted several articles on our website, by Dr. Adams, that address all this. They include:
The Physician, the Pastor, Psychotherapy, and Counseling
The Biblical Perspective on the Mind-Body Problem
The Christian Approach to Schizophrenia
They can be found at: http://www.nouthetic.org/resources/from-the-pen-of-dr-adams/grist-from-…
You may also be interested to know that Dr. Adams writes a daily blog, included on the SI blogroll, that can be found here: http://www.nouthetic.org/blog/
Donn R Arms
Donn,
Thanks for the links.
I would encourage you to participate in the discussion about the ideas. The reaction you have read is about the stuff in the interview. Drive-by posting such as you are doing doesn’t help us further understand your position or Dr. Adams position as expressed in the interview, nor the doubts about it, implications of it, etc. When the people whose ideas are being questioned don’t defend and explain it, those who misunderstand are not helped.
I don’t think it reasonable to expect the interview not to have any critics. Perhaps with your experience, you could help further our understanding and clarify or correct where you think people are misunderstanding.
Thanks for the links.
I would encourage you to participate in the discussion about the ideas. The reaction you have read is about the stuff in the interview. Drive-by posting such as you are doing doesn’t help us further understand your position or Dr. Adams position as expressed in the interview, nor the doubts about it, implications of it, etc. When the people whose ideas are being questioned don’t defend and explain it, those who misunderstand are not helped.
I don’t think it reasonable to expect the interview not to have any critics. Perhaps with your experience, you could help further our understanding and clarify or correct where you think people are misunderstanding.
I took the class at DBTS entitled “Pastoral Counseling” under Dr. Doran. We definitely did not use any text book in the class per se. We had to do some outside reading from a variety of sources including several that we strongly would disagree with. I think that is called education! I have about 100 pages of typed notes from Dr. Doran. In the first section Doran compares the integration approach with the non-integration approach. Doran argues for non-integration and particularly examines the weakness of Larry Crabb’s approach and the damage done at Grace Seminary. The second section of notes lays out the theological foundation for biblical counseling. This section is a virtual systematic theology on God, man, sin, sanctification. The final section consists of a series of well-done biblical approaches to worry, depression, marriage issues, the will of God, guilt, etc. I didn’t even notice a reference to Adam’s book in the notes, though there may be an occasional reference. The notes are a compilation of work from a variety of sources run through a strong systematic theology grid.
Pastor Mike Harding
I wish to thank Donn R. Arms for his post with links to the Nouthetic website. I am getting old and forgot all about it. All one need do is go to the sight and read their article on Schizophrenia. Then compare what they say to what Dr. Laura posted earlier on this sight and then also go to the NAMI website and find links on the subject. They are still advocating the same view of Schizophrenia, the most severe of Brain disease, that they held in the 1970s.
My case evidence rests.
Now let me explain that within the general diagnosis of Schizophrenia there are several sub catagories that greater define an individuals problem. Within that there is a category of “short term Schizophrenia.” The person developes it during the last formation of the frontal lobe but it goes away after a completion time. One study indicates it may go away helped by medication which signals the body to alter chemical balance to the brain. The case they cite of a Paranoid Schizophrenic with certain symptoms appears to be such a case. Also, Schizophrenia will often become less in the thirties as the body changes and may subside completely in the forties or fifties. However, in many cases it is a life long struggle. Keep in mind that Donn and Jay Adams have no medical degrees. They are at the mercy of their own observations. Which of you would take your child to a person with no medical training for a problem that has a good chance to be medical. Their website makes the case for my not advocating Nouthetic counseling.
Now for my credentials: I have degrees in liberal studies, theology, and law. I have taught at New Testament and theology at Talbot school of Theology of Biola University and Law at Western State College of Law, Fullerton. I have practiced law and handled some cases and research involving mental illness. I have been a Pastor for over 25 years. In 1976 my wife and I were on the way to a church conference when we were involved in a head on auto collision. My wife was three months pregnant with our youngest son. He had some problems at birth but growth appeared normal. He appeared to start to exhibit some very mild symptoms of possible autism. Lack of eye contact etc. That went away. He started school and all went normally. In junior high he was tested and cinsidered a gifted child intellectually and the school system wanted him to attend a special school. He refused. After high school he started college. He started to exhibit some odd behavior. Later we found hundred s of hand written pages on various subjects. This is called “journeling.” The writing became smaller and smaller -almost unreadable. It also made less and less sense. He turned in a term paper at college that was totally without any logic or sense. When I saw it and asked hima about it he became indignent as it made perfect sense to him. About this time he began to use a lot of big words in speaking. He always had a good vocabulary. However, the words started to be used out of place in the sentence. Soon you could not understand much of what he said. This is called “word salad.” He began to look at us funny. He would want to talk to us but made little sense. Then one day as we were at church he left home. He took no clothes. He was just gone. About a week later we received a call from a male psychiatric nurse from a hospital in a city about 200 miles away. Our son had been taken into custody under CA. 51.50. This is a non arrest custody when a person is a danger to themselves or others. He was held 72 hrs. and released and then taken in a second time. They found my card in his wallet. We went up to get him. He was dirty and disoriented. Like a street person. He had abandoned his car on a street and forgot he had one. He had been wondering the steets of the city. At first he was pestering merchants asking for work. The second time he was take in he was at a Starbucks yelling at people that they were sinners and needed to repent.
We got our son home but had to have emergency intervention as he could not be controlled. He has spent time in hospital Psych words more than once. He has attacked me twice. Never deadly intent. He is now age 33 and has mellowed. He will now take his meds fairly regularly and things have been better the last three years. He went to a local Bible church regularly. However, he felt isolated and would no longer go. He knows he will never be able to marry or be accepted by many people. He experiences constant rejection if nayone knows he takes Psych meds. Never rude but just withdrawel from him. They call it the lonely disease. He tries to therefore keep it confidential. He now has a part time job delivering Pizza. A job he does well as he is by himself in a car and not just trapped in a work place. He has a somewhat good mind and now reads very technical books on economics and theory and wants to go back to school. However, he is not ready for that yet.
It has now been thirteen years since diagnosis. He is treated through the county mental health system. He gets reasonable care considering their overload and slim budget.
I have become a prolific reader and researcher on this subject. I have interacted with Psychiatrists when possible including one Christian one mentioned in a prior post. Some Psychiatrists will say that caretakers often become the real experts. This of course is an exaggeration ststed with tongue in cheek. We attend NAMI meetings and have constant contact with other mentally ill and their families. Psychologists (Those who have PHDs) do not treat the genuinly mentally ill. It is considered a medical problem requiring a Psychiatrist to be involved. So you can understand my great concern and passionate resistance when I see a bunch of guys with minimal hands on experience, and degrees in some sort of biblical counseling methodology from a seminary making dogmatic statements about mental illness and its causes and treatment. I do not believe in Chiropractic, Naturopathy, or other forms of non medical intervention in medical problems. I also do not believe a Noutheropathic practitioner is capable of speaking intellegently on these issue. I have fairly extensivly looked at this from several sides. I was an ardent embracer of all that was anti Psychology and anti psychiatry throughout my ministry. I was a Fundamentalist!! In the last thiteen years i have become enlightened. I became ashamed of my former dogmatism of something really I knew nothing about. I have read books. articles on the internet and pestered Mental health workers. I ahve attempted to read the pertinat medical journals avaible at the not too far UCLA library. I have interacted with three professors there.I have a need to know on this subject.
Psychiatry is far from perfect. it has many bad ideas and has had some real kooks in the field. As Dr. Laura indicated in her post, things have changed.
I am still a Biblical counselor. However, because of certain misinformation and dangerous opinions I do not advocate Nouthetic Counseling. I gave you my academic background so that you will understand I am a somewhat well trained researcher and able to separate the wheat from the chaff. I have some confidence in that. Some may think I have been arrogant on this thread. Possibly rightly so. I have a confidence in my present viewpoint on this subject that comes from having been wrong in the past and having practice in separating the wheat and Chaff.
My frustration on this thread is with the fact that, as in all internet discourse, people are too full of wanting to be right. We all do. But please stop explaining away or ignoring evidence. Now, it is my hope that all of you will go to the website offered by Don R. Arms and click on Schizophrenia and see the present position of Nouthetic Counselors on Schizophrenia. They do not attribute all to a physiological cause. They sow doubts that hurt the mentally ill. Medicine, even allowing for possible misdiagnosis, indicates all Schizophrenia is a Brain disease. One clinic of a “Dr. Amen” (thats his real name) in central California does Brian scans of all patients and does treatment on the basis of comparative scans on the patient. It is a whole new world in mental illness in the 21st century. Nouthetic counseling and their anecdotal evidence from unqualified interpreters are in the 1950s and 1960s (but stated by them first in the 1970s),
To Larry, sorry for any insults to you or your alma mater or Dave Doran. Doran first insulted me by accusing me of a false accusation even though he was not sure if the book has been used. I did not accuse you of lying. My contingencies attached to Doran’s posts to you were because I had no direct communication with him which is normal. His posts , passed on by you, were nothing but personal attacks. Not too classy, yet he was indefinite on the use of the book. If he thinks I over stated, fine. That an opinion not a rebuttal of fact. So forgive me if you feel I was indiscreet. I am ending my discourse on that here.
My case evidence rests.
Now let me explain that within the general diagnosis of Schizophrenia there are several sub catagories that greater define an individuals problem. Within that there is a category of “short term Schizophrenia.” The person developes it during the last formation of the frontal lobe but it goes away after a completion time. One study indicates it may go away helped by medication which signals the body to alter chemical balance to the brain. The case they cite of a Paranoid Schizophrenic with certain symptoms appears to be such a case. Also, Schizophrenia will often become less in the thirties as the body changes and may subside completely in the forties or fifties. However, in many cases it is a life long struggle. Keep in mind that Donn and Jay Adams have no medical degrees. They are at the mercy of their own observations. Which of you would take your child to a person with no medical training for a problem that has a good chance to be medical. Their website makes the case for my not advocating Nouthetic counseling.
Now for my credentials: I have degrees in liberal studies, theology, and law. I have taught at New Testament and theology at Talbot school of Theology of Biola University and Law at Western State College of Law, Fullerton. I have practiced law and handled some cases and research involving mental illness. I have been a Pastor for over 25 years. In 1976 my wife and I were on the way to a church conference when we were involved in a head on auto collision. My wife was three months pregnant with our youngest son. He had some problems at birth but growth appeared normal. He appeared to start to exhibit some very mild symptoms of possible autism. Lack of eye contact etc. That went away. He started school and all went normally. In junior high he was tested and cinsidered a gifted child intellectually and the school system wanted him to attend a special school. He refused. After high school he started college. He started to exhibit some odd behavior. Later we found hundred s of hand written pages on various subjects. This is called “journeling.” The writing became smaller and smaller -almost unreadable. It also made less and less sense. He turned in a term paper at college that was totally without any logic or sense. When I saw it and asked hima about it he became indignent as it made perfect sense to him. About this time he began to use a lot of big words in speaking. He always had a good vocabulary. However, the words started to be used out of place in the sentence. Soon you could not understand much of what he said. This is called “word salad.” He began to look at us funny. He would want to talk to us but made little sense. Then one day as we were at church he left home. He took no clothes. He was just gone. About a week later we received a call from a male psychiatric nurse from a hospital in a city about 200 miles away. Our son had been taken into custody under CA. 51.50. This is a non arrest custody when a person is a danger to themselves or others. He was held 72 hrs. and released and then taken in a second time. They found my card in his wallet. We went up to get him. He was dirty and disoriented. Like a street person. He had abandoned his car on a street and forgot he had one. He had been wondering the steets of the city. At first he was pestering merchants asking for work. The second time he was take in he was at a Starbucks yelling at people that they were sinners and needed to repent.
We got our son home but had to have emergency intervention as he could not be controlled. He has spent time in hospital Psych words more than once. He has attacked me twice. Never deadly intent. He is now age 33 and has mellowed. He will now take his meds fairly regularly and things have been better the last three years. He went to a local Bible church regularly. However, he felt isolated and would no longer go. He knows he will never be able to marry or be accepted by many people. He experiences constant rejection if nayone knows he takes Psych meds. Never rude but just withdrawel from him. They call it the lonely disease. He tries to therefore keep it confidential. He now has a part time job delivering Pizza. A job he does well as he is by himself in a car and not just trapped in a work place. He has a somewhat good mind and now reads very technical books on economics and theory and wants to go back to school. However, he is not ready for that yet.
It has now been thirteen years since diagnosis. He is treated through the county mental health system. He gets reasonable care considering their overload and slim budget.
I have become a prolific reader and researcher on this subject. I have interacted with Psychiatrists when possible including one Christian one mentioned in a prior post. Some Psychiatrists will say that caretakers often become the real experts. This of course is an exaggeration ststed with tongue in cheek. We attend NAMI meetings and have constant contact with other mentally ill and their families. Psychologists (Those who have PHDs) do not treat the genuinly mentally ill. It is considered a medical problem requiring a Psychiatrist to be involved. So you can understand my great concern and passionate resistance when I see a bunch of guys with minimal hands on experience, and degrees in some sort of biblical counseling methodology from a seminary making dogmatic statements about mental illness and its causes and treatment. I do not believe in Chiropractic, Naturopathy, or other forms of non medical intervention in medical problems. I also do not believe a Noutheropathic practitioner is capable of speaking intellegently on these issue. I have fairly extensivly looked at this from several sides. I was an ardent embracer of all that was anti Psychology and anti psychiatry throughout my ministry. I was a Fundamentalist!! In the last thiteen years i have become enlightened. I became ashamed of my former dogmatism of something really I knew nothing about. I have read books. articles on the internet and pestered Mental health workers. I ahve attempted to read the pertinat medical journals avaible at the not too far UCLA library. I have interacted with three professors there.I have a need to know on this subject.
Psychiatry is far from perfect. it has many bad ideas and has had some real kooks in the field. As Dr. Laura indicated in her post, things have changed.
I am still a Biblical counselor. However, because of certain misinformation and dangerous opinions I do not advocate Nouthetic Counseling. I gave you my academic background so that you will understand I am a somewhat well trained researcher and able to separate the wheat from the chaff. I have some confidence in that. Some may think I have been arrogant on this thread. Possibly rightly so. I have a confidence in my present viewpoint on this subject that comes from having been wrong in the past and having practice in separating the wheat and Chaff.
My frustration on this thread is with the fact that, as in all internet discourse, people are too full of wanting to be right. We all do. But please stop explaining away or ignoring evidence. Now, it is my hope that all of you will go to the website offered by Don R. Arms and click on Schizophrenia and see the present position of Nouthetic Counselors on Schizophrenia. They do not attribute all to a physiological cause. They sow doubts that hurt the mentally ill. Medicine, even allowing for possible misdiagnosis, indicates all Schizophrenia is a Brain disease. One clinic of a “Dr. Amen” (thats his real name) in central California does Brian scans of all patients and does treatment on the basis of comparative scans on the patient. It is a whole new world in mental illness in the 21st century. Nouthetic counseling and their anecdotal evidence from unqualified interpreters are in the 1950s and 1960s (but stated by them first in the 1970s),
To Larry, sorry for any insults to you or your alma mater or Dave Doran. Doran first insulted me by accusing me of a false accusation even though he was not sure if the book has been used. I did not accuse you of lying. My contingencies attached to Doran’s posts to you were because I had no direct communication with him which is normal. His posts , passed on by you, were nothing but personal attacks. Not too classy, yet he was indefinite on the use of the book. If he thinks I over stated, fine. That an opinion not a rebuttal of fact. So forgive me if you feel I was indiscreet. I am ending my discourse on that here.
Bob,
Thank you for your openness and candidness. I have followed this thread and read each post as has my wife (she does not invest her limited free time in online discussions and debate on these or related issues seeing she is tasked by the government with responsibilities that demand her full attention and attendance with significant travel and time, but because of her professional background and constant interaction with military policy makers where she and her peers are regularly involved in evaluation, assessment and military policy development that includes the evaluation, assessment and determination of arguments and cases and relevant personnel, I asked her to read through this and tell me her thoughts) and we have both come away with the observation that the issues people have taken with you are by and large truly unrelated to the substantive issues you have raised and generally are either personal or related to circumstantial statements of secondary issues.
You have not personally commented on Adams nor have you failed to acknowledge where he might have something valid by way of observation. And it seems your critics, those critical of your criticisms, seem to believe that anything valid Adams may have discovered or observed is somehow a justification for his career long ignorance, mistreatment or simply contention and denial of certain realities of psychiatry and brain disease.
Hopefully someone will come along and instead of attacking your person or finding fault with anecdotal references, imprecise recall, tertiary issues or seeking to limit your responses, they will consider Adam’s blind side and fairly discuss it. It does seem that the poster named Dr. Laura did rather lightly address the possibility of this lack of appreciation by Adam’s but she too seemed to use his strengths to counter or minimize this. However, right now it appears for most here he either does not have one, it is so minimal it need not be discussed or “all the good” he does makes this glaring misstep ok.
Thank you for your openness and candidness. I have followed this thread and read each post as has my wife (she does not invest her limited free time in online discussions and debate on these or related issues seeing she is tasked by the government with responsibilities that demand her full attention and attendance with significant travel and time, but because of her professional background and constant interaction with military policy makers where she and her peers are regularly involved in evaluation, assessment and military policy development that includes the evaluation, assessment and determination of arguments and cases and relevant personnel, I asked her to read through this and tell me her thoughts) and we have both come away with the observation that the issues people have taken with you are by and large truly unrelated to the substantive issues you have raised and generally are either personal or related to circumstantial statements of secondary issues.
You have not personally commented on Adams nor have you failed to acknowledge where he might have something valid by way of observation. And it seems your critics, those critical of your criticisms, seem to believe that anything valid Adams may have discovered or observed is somehow a justification for his career long ignorance, mistreatment or simply contention and denial of certain realities of psychiatry and brain disease.
Hopefully someone will come along and instead of attacking your person or finding fault with anecdotal references, imprecise recall, tertiary issues or seeking to limit your responses, they will consider Adam’s blind side and fairly discuss it. It does seem that the poster named Dr. Laura did rather lightly address the possibility of this lack of appreciation by Adam’s but she too seemed to use his strengths to counter or minimize this. However, right now it appears for most here he either does not have one, it is so minimal it need not be discussed or “all the good” he does makes this glaring misstep ok.
Thanks Bob, for your gracious conclusion.
You didn’t offend me. It takes a whole lot to do that, and I can’t imagine that happening in an internet forum of impersonal debate. I have no problem with people who disagree with me.
My original thought when I read your comments about DBTS (and the other seminaries) was that “discredited” was way over the top, even if they actually used the book (which I do not recall, and apparently neither does Dave or Mike Harding). I am not sure where you got that from. I think that was Dave’s point, that “discredited” was way out of line. I don’t know if the “false accusation” is the charge that the book was used or the charge that the seminary was discredited because of its supposed use. I think he only communicated through me because he is not a member and I am.
Enough said.
You didn’t offend me. It takes a whole lot to do that, and I can’t imagine that happening in an internet forum of impersonal debate. I have no problem with people who disagree with me.
My original thought when I read your comments about DBTS (and the other seminaries) was that “discredited” was way over the top, even if they actually used the book (which I do not recall, and apparently neither does Dave or Mike Harding). I am not sure where you got that from. I think that was Dave’s point, that “discredited” was way out of line. I don’t know if the “false accusation” is the charge that the book was used or the charge that the seminary was discredited because of its supposed use. I think he only communicated through me because he is not a member and I am.
Enough said.
Alex,
Two points.
1. Not all of those taking issue with Bob’s statements are justifying anything about Adams. I for one said I don’t know much about him. On the other hand, I have taken issue with some very substantive issues that Bob has raised, such as the cause of brain disease, the dynamic between the material and immaterial part of man, the failure of psychiatry to address all possible causes and issues, the lack of a coherent anthropology in modern psychiatry, and other issues as well. None of that had to do with Jay Adams, and they are all substantive in nature.
2. You say that Bob has “not personally commented on Adams.” I am not sure what you mean by “personally commented.” Grammatically, it sounds like you are saying that Bob’s posts were written by someone else since Bob didn’t “personally comment.” It may be that you mean that Bob did not make personal comments about Jay Adams. Yet Bob said that he views “J.E. Adams as a seriously ignorant and dangerous person”(post #5). That sounds like a personal comment. These types of comments were repeated many times, not only about Jay Adams but also about others.
Perhaps you should go back and reread the thread.
Two points.
1. Not all of those taking issue with Bob’s statements are justifying anything about Adams. I for one said I don’t know much about him. On the other hand, I have taken issue with some very substantive issues that Bob has raised, such as the cause of brain disease, the dynamic between the material and immaterial part of man, the failure of psychiatry to address all possible causes and issues, the lack of a coherent anthropology in modern psychiatry, and other issues as well. None of that had to do with Jay Adams, and they are all substantive in nature.
2. You say that Bob has “not personally commented on Adams.” I am not sure what you mean by “personally commented.” Grammatically, it sounds like you are saying that Bob’s posts were written by someone else since Bob didn’t “personally comment.” It may be that you mean that Bob did not make personal comments about Jay Adams. Yet Bob said that he views “J.E. Adams as a seriously ignorant and dangerous person”(post #5). That sounds like a personal comment. These types of comments were repeated many times, not only about Jay Adams but also about others.
Perhaps you should go back and reread the thread.
[Larry] You say that Bob has “not personally commented on Adams… It may be that you mean that Bob did not make personal comments about Jay Adams. Yet Bob said that he views “J.E. Adams as a seriously ignorant and dangerous person”(post #5). That sounds like a personal comment.Thanks and you are right, the wording is less than clear, I did mean to say Bob did not make comments about Adams’ person. As to the comment you noted I do not view this, nor do many others, as a personal comment rather a comment about his expertise and effect on the matter, not one about his person.
I did read your responses as I stated both my wife and I read the thread thoroughly. Your grasp of both the content and intent of Bob did not strike either of us as impressionable. Sorry. Certainly this is just the opinion of two people and others may disagree.
It is hard to imagine how “seriously ignorant and dangerous person” is not a comment about his person.
As for impressionable, no need to apologize. It doesn’t affect me. I think there are a lot of people who don’t grasp the deep theological and anthropological implications of this discussion. It quickly becomes a blur to them. I would certainly give it some more thought, particularly in light of revelation. There are some very serious ministry implications. If we are going to truly give people hope, we are going to have to do it from a thoroughly biblical perspective. Anytime this discussion comes up, it seems that so many want to pit the Bible against medicine as if it is one or the other. It isn’t.
As for impressionable, no need to apologize. It doesn’t affect me. I think there are a lot of people who don’t grasp the deep theological and anthropological implications of this discussion. It quickly becomes a blur to them. I would certainly give it some more thought, particularly in light of revelation. There are some very serious ministry implications. If we are going to truly give people hope, we are going to have to do it from a thoroughly biblical perspective. Anytime this discussion comes up, it seems that so many want to pit the Bible against medicine as if it is one or the other. It isn’t.
Well, this thread went wrong just about every way it’s possible for a thread to go wrong (OK, there are actually three for more ways). I never cease to be amazed at how hard it can be sometimes for folks to step back and look at something with even a teeny bit of objectivity. I guess we tend to not realize it when we’re failing to do that. But when others gently tell us we are failing, that is often a clue. We should step out of combat mode and honestly look to see if there isn’t something we ought to concede or retract.
Anyway, I hope we can have a better discussion on these subjects somewhere down the road.
(Some of you did an excellent job of focusing on the facts and reasons here without recourse to distortions and equivocations. I much appreciate your discipline!)
Anyway, I hope we can have a better discussion on these subjects somewhere down the road.
(Some of you did an excellent job of focusing on the facts and reasons here without recourse to distortions and equivocations. I much appreciate your discipline!)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Discussion