Sufficiency or No Sufficiency?
During my years of teaching at Pillsbury Baptist Bible College (1978-1985), I was asked to teach several courses in the area of counseling. I had never had a counseling course in college or seminary. Where would I begin? What resources were available to help construct meaningful courses in various aspects of counseling?
I had come out of seminary convinced of the doctrine of the sole authority of Scripture. I knew that without such an authority, nothing was worth preaching. I spent the first ten years of my ministry anchored to this important truth. There was no doubt in my mind but that the Bible had all the answers for life and living.
Nevertheless, as I planned my courses I began to question the degree to which the Bible actually spoke to this issue. Distracted by the cacophony of voices coming from the psychological world, I found myself being drawn toward some of the more popular psychological systems—especially that of Maslow. It seemed to me that there was at least some validity to what he and other secular psychologists were saying.
Given my earlier commitments, why was I so easily convinced that another resource would give better answers than the Bible? Why have so many other pastors and theologians been so easily persuaded that the perspectives of psychology actually give true answers to the difficult questions of the soul of man?
Part of what motivated me was a striving to become knowledgeable in my field of study and experience. The academic world pushes intellectual mastery, and to stay “alive,” one has to excel. I saw what happened to those who did not excel intellectually, and I was not interested in that!
Also, my personal experience seemed to confirm Maslow’s observations. His perspective seemed valid. It was not difficult to find examples in the Bible that seemed to fit his system. That was the beginning of my journey into the combination of biblical teaching with psychology. This combination is known as “integrationism.”
I will forever be grateful for Dr. Bill Goode, the pastor of Faith Baptist Church in Lafayette, Indiana, who visited our campus and stopped in one of my classes. That day in class, I lectured about how the Bible supported Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Following that class, Dr. Goode commended me for the counseling emphasis that Pillsbury had developed. Then he asked why I was using Maslow. He suggested that if the Bible did actually support some of what Maslow was saying, then I could teach it as well from the Bible as from Maslow. That was the beginning of my journey into actually using the Bible as the sole authority for faith and practice.
A second experience at Pillsbury College was also pivotal. I was the dean of students, a job which brought me into contact with troubled lives and wounded spirits. Students came from all over the United States and from all kinds of backgrounds. Some had recently come to Christ and were struggling with the residue of their past sins. Others came from sound Christian homes and churches but struggled with growing and changing inwardly to become more like Christ.
At the completion of a fall semester, students were preparing to leave for Christmas vacation and time with family and friends. One young woman ended up in my office due to some chaotic behaviors that centered on compulsivity. I wanted to help! I wanted to believe that the Bible had answers for her deep and frightening questions. The truth is, however, that I did not know how to help her.
Shortly before this episode, I had become aware of the Christian Counseling and Educational Foundation in Pennsylvania. This girl’s home was in the Philadelphia area, so I connected her with the CCEF. Dr. Wayne Mack was gracious in meeting several times with this girl. She came back changed following the Christmas break.
I was impressed, but I was also convicted. I contacted Dr. Mack and asked if he would share with me how he helped my student, which he was happy to do. What he did made good biblical sense. He helped to reaffirm my conviction that the Bible really is sufficient. This episode also pushed me to seek further training in biblical counseling—and yes, it was at Westminster and CCEF.
Let me go back to my original question. Why was I so easily moved away from a doctrine (i.e., the sufficiency of Scripture) in which I so strongly believed? The answer lies in my own life experiences. The doctrine did not seem to work its way down to the day-by-day issues of life.
In my observation, many fundamental pastors face the same difficulty. Thus, they find some other voice for their people when they are challenged with complicated issues like the one that my student faced. This equivocation is tragic at the least and destructive at the most. If the sufficiency of Scripture is only a lofty doctrine to which we give lip service, but then easily set aside when difficult issues present themselves, then we do not believe in the sufficiency of Scripture at all. The Bible becomes just another book alongside of psychology. We actually have become practicing integrationists.
I have come to believe that the Bible really is sufficient. It brings us real answers even for the most complicated problems of life. I will always be grateful for key people in my life who challenged me with regard to what I said I believed versus what I actually was willing to teach and practice. They helped to keep me from destroying people’s lives.
Their help was timely. It is not too late for you to practice what you say you believe regarding the Bible as your sole authority for faith and practice. God, in all His wisdom, has given us a phenomenal book—it is the sufficient Word of God.
Penitentiall Hymns. I.
Jeremy Taylor (1613-1667)
Lord, I have sinn’d, & the black number swells
To such a dismal sum,
That should my stony heart and eyes,
And this whole sinful trunk, a flood become,
And run to tears, their drops could not suffice
To count my score,
Much less to pay:
But thou, my God, hast blood in store,
And art the Patron of the poore.
Yet since the Balsam of thy Blood,
Although it can, will do no good,
Unless the wounds be cleans’d with tears before;
Thou in whose sweet but pensive face
Laughter could never steal a place,
Teach but my heart and eyes
To melt away,
And then one drop of Balsam will suffice. Amen.
Dr. Thomas Zempel served as a youth pastor for the first ten years of his full-time ministry before moving to Pillsbury Baptist Bible College to teach in the Bible department and serve as the dean of students. Following his six years at Pillsbury and his resident training at Westminster, he became the senior pastor in Windsor Locks, Connecticut. During his years as senior pastor, he had many opportunities to counsel people with a wide variety of needs. This experience helped to establish practical biblical skills which came out of the theological training he received in the area of counseling. It was this training that has allowed Dr. Zempel to head up the counseling department at Central Baptist Theological Seminary, hold seminars in several states, and teach and counsel in three foreign countries. Dr. Zempel is a member of the National Association of Nouthetic Counselors, and has been a NANC Fellow since January 1, 2008. Dr. Zempel and his wife, Jane, enjoy three children and six grandchildren. Jane joins Dr. Zempel in speaking at family conferences and ministering in the local church. He also enjoys music, travel, sports, gardening, fishing, hunting, and woodworking. Not every professor, student, or alumnus of Central Seminary necessarily agrees with every opinion that this article expresses.
- 18 views
ssutter…thanks for jumping into the conversation.
In our search for a more nuanced definition, let me add some clarity to what I may be been an over exaggeration on your part. Though I hold to a pretty strong sufficiency of Scripture view, I would not say “Scripture is sufficient so we can’t learn from psychology / ______ / ______.” We MAY be able to learn from some of the sciences of the brain…my understanding of sufficiency is that God’s Word is enough (sufficient) to teach us to live a life pleasing to God.
In our search for a more nuanced definition, let me add some clarity to what I may be been an over exaggeration on your part. Though I hold to a pretty strong sufficiency of Scripture view, I would not say “Scripture is sufficient so we can’t learn from psychology / ______ / ______.” We MAY be able to learn from some of the sciences of the brain…my understanding of sufficiency is that God’s Word is enough (sufficient) to teach us to live a life pleasing to God.
Senior Pastor, Harvest Bible Chapel, Fort Wayne, IN
To: RPITTMAN,
now that this website is winding down it would only be appropriate to find out your background. Aaron Blumer was asked his counseling training and gave the courtesy of an honest reply. You have stated you reject the “mental health model” and considered my statements as generalizations of that like a laymen, and sophomoric. I am not the least bit offended by that but that is an interesting opinion. It is my desire to only post what I know or what I have learned from those who do know and conclusions based on that. You also stated you agreed with Dr Laura’s post but later said you disagreed with her. You also stated that the “mental health model was no longer used and should realize that. If you are right I need to inform those Psychiatrists and workers at the L.A. county “mental health clinic.” I will also need to inform those of the Nationally known “National Alliance on Mental Illness” so they can change their website. And I am sure that those of us forming the “Christian Alliance on Mental Illness” will want to use a different term. What should we use? Given this approach it would be of value to know your professional background. I was endeavoring to present what I had seen and learned from others. You were evidently endeavoring to give that which were your own primary source research and conclusions. I wish to be able to appreciate your expertise.
What Medical school did you graduate from? Where did you take your Psychiatric training and residency? What is the source of your Biblical and theological training, if applicable? Do you have any Psychological training?
I will be sharing the posts from this thread with two Psychiatrists and some Christians who are caretakers of mentally ill at the next NAMI meeting. I am sure they will be interested in that information.
Thank you for the courtesy of a reply.
Bob T.
now that this website is winding down it would only be appropriate to find out your background. Aaron Blumer was asked his counseling training and gave the courtesy of an honest reply. You have stated you reject the “mental health model” and considered my statements as generalizations of that like a laymen, and sophomoric. I am not the least bit offended by that but that is an interesting opinion. It is my desire to only post what I know or what I have learned from those who do know and conclusions based on that. You also stated you agreed with Dr Laura’s post but later said you disagreed with her. You also stated that the “mental health model was no longer used and should realize that. If you are right I need to inform those Psychiatrists and workers at the L.A. county “mental health clinic.” I will also need to inform those of the Nationally known “National Alliance on Mental Illness” so they can change their website. And I am sure that those of us forming the “Christian Alliance on Mental Illness” will want to use a different term. What should we use? Given this approach it would be of value to know your professional background. I was endeavoring to present what I had seen and learned from others. You were evidently endeavoring to give that which were your own primary source research and conclusions. I wish to be able to appreciate your expertise.
What Medical school did you graduate from? Where did you take your Psychiatric training and residency? What is the source of your Biblical and theological training, if applicable? Do you have any Psychological training?
I will be sharing the posts from this thread with two Psychiatrists and some Christians who are caretakers of mentally ill at the next NAMI meeting. I am sure they will be interested in that information.
Thank you for the courtesy of a reply.
Bob T.
FWIW… in the interest of being understood (not so much agreed with), it might help to mention again that I’m not really all that interested in “integration” in the area of how it plays out in the counseling situation. My interest is philosophical (in the non-technical sense of that word).
It would be fine if the writers of books critical of psychology simply said “Most of this stuff is not useful to pastors counseling members of their churches… and counselors have relatively little to gain from reading it relative to what they gain from understanding Scripture.”
But instead, some (and I do say some) feel the need to go several steps further and take a position on psychology as a study that is really not compatible with the idea that God alone is the source of truth. If you want to get a better idea of what I’m reacting to, pick up a copy of Introduction to Biblical Counseling edited by MacArthur and Mack, and read Doug Bookman’s chapter on “The Scriptures and Counseling.” (p.63 ff).
(I’m a Doug Bookman fan, by the way, just think he’s off on this)
Anyway… to RPittman: the fact that we “are not thinking God’s thoughts after Him,” does not solve the problem. If we apprehend genuine truth at all in any sense by examining the creation, reasoning, and so forth, that truth has come to us from God. It cannot come from anywhere else. If it does, it is falsehood. The fact that our apprehension is imperfect and approximate, etc., doesn’t change the fact that every good gift and every perfect gift comes down from the Father of Lights. There is nothing good and nothing true that does not originate in Him and come to us by grace.
And as for unity, all that is true must agree with all else that is true or it is simply not true. I don’t personally see any way to reject that idea without redefining “true” into something pretty nonsensical. Of course, everybody’s free to use the term in his own way, I guess. But in the interest of clarity, when I say “true,” I mean—to put it really simply, “What God would agree is true if we were to get Him to comment.” Surely we can agree that everything God believes is true agrees with everything else God believes is true?
I would much, much rather see psychology redeemed that rejected. To do that, we have to separate how people have gone about studying it (and their conclusions) from the thing itself. I can be an idealist at times. I just think that Christians with biblical convictions about human nature ought to be the best pyschologists the world has ever seen.
It would be fine if the writers of books critical of psychology simply said “Most of this stuff is not useful to pastors counseling members of their churches… and counselors have relatively little to gain from reading it relative to what they gain from understanding Scripture.”
But instead, some (and I do say some) feel the need to go several steps further and take a position on psychology as a study that is really not compatible with the idea that God alone is the source of truth. If you want to get a better idea of what I’m reacting to, pick up a copy of Introduction to Biblical Counseling edited by MacArthur and Mack, and read Doug Bookman’s chapter on “The Scriptures and Counseling.” (p.63 ff).
(I’m a Doug Bookman fan, by the way, just think he’s off on this)
Anyway… to RPittman: the fact that we “are not thinking God’s thoughts after Him,” does not solve the problem. If we apprehend genuine truth at all in any sense by examining the creation, reasoning, and so forth, that truth has come to us from God. It cannot come from anywhere else. If it does, it is falsehood. The fact that our apprehension is imperfect and approximate, etc., doesn’t change the fact that every good gift and every perfect gift comes down from the Father of Lights. There is nothing good and nothing true that does not originate in Him and come to us by grace.
And as for unity, all that is true must agree with all else that is true or it is simply not true. I don’t personally see any way to reject that idea without redefining “true” into something pretty nonsensical. Of course, everybody’s free to use the term in his own way, I guess. But in the interest of clarity, when I say “true,” I mean—to put it really simply, “What God would agree is true if we were to get Him to comment.” Surely we can agree that everything God believes is true agrees with everything else God believes is true?
I would much, much rather see psychology redeemed that rejected. To do that, we have to separate how people have gone about studying it (and their conclusions) from the thing itself. I can be an idealist at times. I just think that Christians with biblical convictions about human nature ought to be the best pyschologists the world has ever seen.
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.
I just now pulled this off of the website of “The Institute for Nouthetic Counseling” under the window titled “Adams Answers.” The question to Jay Adams is “What should I do if I suspect the cause of my counselee’s problems is organic? This is the the first paragraph of the answer by Jay Adams:
by Jay E Adams
“By all means, you should refer him to a physician. But be careful that you don’t send him to a doctor who will then refer him to a psychiatrist or psychologist. You should know your physicians. Long beforehand, you should have located a physician who will work with you. Call around to find who will do the “body work” while you do the counseling. It is important to have a physician who will work in tandem with you in this way.”
This is the answer that young men have been giving who have been trained by Jay Adams or who come out of Masters College and Masters Seminary. There have been those who have stated I have unfair to Jay Adams as he has modified his position and acknowledged the legitimacy of mental illness and the need for Psychiatric intervention. However, the recent graduates from Adam’s programs and Masters do not reflect that. The fact is that they continue to steer the mentally ill away from Psychiatrists and view Psychiatry as illegitimate. This is where I would differ from the Psychiatrist Dr. Laura Hendrickson. If you will note, her post, transferred to this thread, indicates that the legitimacy of mental illness such as Schizophrenia is now a proven medical fact and requires a Psychiatrist but that Jay Adams had allowed for such and it was some of his followers who had mistakenly spoken against medication. I appreciated her post but it was puzzling to me because every NANCE trained graduate I have run into had taken a position against Psychiatric care and had a forty year old view of Psychiatric practice as Freudian and involving Psychotherapy (talk therapy) with weird ideas. There may be a few NANCE and CCEF that have modified ideas, but not the majority. David Powlison, Wayne Mack, and others from CCEF had helped John MacArthur set up the Masters college bachelors and Masters degree Nouthetic counseling programs. Wayne mack was the first head of their program. The graduates from there reflect the same aversion to the mental illness medical model and Psychiatric treatment. This opinion is reflected in the 1994 book “Biblical Counseling” of which John MacArthur is editor.
Often one will seek to defend Nouthetic Counseling by stating my opinion, or others, who speak against their anti mental illness model and aversion to Psychiatry is wrong. They will state they do now acknowledge mental illness, need for medication, and Psychiatric care, but then in the next paragraph or statement will throw out several caveats regarding over medication, ineffectiveness of medications, or all the medications do is “mask” a problem and not cure it. They may often say that the medications actually cause or aggravate the problem or soon become ineffective. Ed Blakely states these caveats as does Ed Welch. We have seen such caveats stated here by RPittman who even has tried to distance himself from Jay Adams while defending him on here. Then in one of his latest posts he states some Chemistry credentials but admits to two years training under Jay E. Adams. This may give the answer as to his defense which essentially reflects the NANCE talking points, so to speak.
From a Biblical viewpoint they often seek to set forth that the scriptures claim to sufficiency for all of the problems of our lives is inclusive enough to exclude the use of applying information from other sources to behavior problems. They also raise the issues of duty and and accountability. We are said to have a duty to please God and to be held accountable for behavior. This is said in a way to intimate that outside information may diminish and encroach upon the territory claimed by the scriptures. These are the general tenor of the arguments set forth by Doug Bookman in the book “Biblical Counseling.” This viewpoint is based upon a mis interpretation of some scriptural passages. The misinterpretation is most often solved by simple clear context. It is also based upon a misapplication of scripture that requires seeing it as second premise applied truth not first premise clear statement.
Just a couple days ago there was another shooting at a High school. This was in Littleton Colorado. According to the media and newspaper reports, the dad of the shooter stated his son had talked to himself for a long time but recently started yelling at some imaginary person. These of course are some classic onset symptoms of Schizophrenia. Families often witness such behavior but are confused and hesitant about what to do. This is because of a general ignorance about mental illness and importance of catching it early and seeking treatment and necessary intervention. At times Christians and churches can be a real hinderance to intervention. The view of Jay Adams seeks to find sin, point out responsibility, possibly family or the person themselves, and then create an aversion to seeking needed help from a mental health clinic or Psychiatric intervention team, or from law enforcement, or other. The stigma and wrong information among Christians are a real hinderance to compassion and needed burden bearing according to the Galatians 6 model.
Some Christians involved with the seriousness of caring for the mentally ill are righteously angry at the Christians and churches who live in a false world of ignorance and unrighteous judgment. Some cannot handle the scriptures properly. They may even arrogantly seek out issues to raise against one who may be mentally ill. One post on this thread raised the issues of over medication, doubts about the effectiveness of treatment, and misdiagnosis. The websites referred to were absolutely irrelevant to the issues of the legitimacy and needed treatment of mentally ill people. The website referral about over prescription was about ADD and ADHD, and indicated that the people overly prescribed had not received a mental health evaluation. First ADD and ADHD are not within the realm of real mental illness. Second, the wrong treatment was at the hands of Physicians who were not Psychiatrists. From what I have seen, Psychiatry acknowledges the gross over diagnosis of ADD and ADHD. These patients are never in the mental health clinics or Psychiatric wards. The website questioning effectiveness was dealing with specific medications, most of which have been shoved aside for newer and more effective treatment. Then the issues of addictions are raised. This appeared to be that which may lead to confusion and misinformation that makes it very difficult for the mentally ill and their families to be active in churches. They are unrighteously judged by some and that is enough. Some Christians will read a book on a doctrine of scripture and become an expert ready to argue with anyone about their newly learned view. Others never read anything about mental illness but are sure there must be sin somewhere for have we all not sinned according to scripture? Unfortunately, such mentality is more often in the Fundamentalist churches. We need to remember that some of us may some dat become mentally ill. They call it. Alzheimer’s. Those with life long onset mental illness are called mentally handicapped. Such are those with Down Syndrome or other birth abnormalities. However, some mental illness is just as genetic in cause but has onset in late teens or early adulthood and therefore we want to find all sorts of reasons to hold them accountable. The mentally ill are not the great sinners. Those in leadership and attendance at some churches are the ones in sin. Arrogance combined with ignorance (some willful) leaves sin crouching at the door. We need to love in such a way that we are graceful when we do not know, seek to find needs instead of sin, and learn the discernment that handles sin as God desires not as some counseling system recommends.
The teaching and effects of Nouthetic counseling still today involves opinions that gives reasons to avoid their viewpoint and look elsewhere for the training in Biblical counseling. This article on the sufficiency of scripture was applied to the place of psychology in Christian counseling. It raises good issues of the need to have discernment with regard to other sources of information. It appears to be an absolutist view with adequate further information needed. I would agree that the system of Maslow is not biblical, however I took a class that studied Maslow and his hierarchy of needs, among other things, and found it raising some issues that were insightful but with qualification where there was conflict with the scriptural viewpoint.
by Jay E Adams
“By all means, you should refer him to a physician. But be careful that you don’t send him to a doctor who will then refer him to a psychiatrist or psychologist. You should know your physicians. Long beforehand, you should have located a physician who will work with you. Call around to find who will do the “body work” while you do the counseling. It is important to have a physician who will work in tandem with you in this way.”
This is the answer that young men have been giving who have been trained by Jay Adams or who come out of Masters College and Masters Seminary. There have been those who have stated I have unfair to Jay Adams as he has modified his position and acknowledged the legitimacy of mental illness and the need for Psychiatric intervention. However, the recent graduates from Adam’s programs and Masters do not reflect that. The fact is that they continue to steer the mentally ill away from Psychiatrists and view Psychiatry as illegitimate. This is where I would differ from the Psychiatrist Dr. Laura Hendrickson. If you will note, her post, transferred to this thread, indicates that the legitimacy of mental illness such as Schizophrenia is now a proven medical fact and requires a Psychiatrist but that Jay Adams had allowed for such and it was some of his followers who had mistakenly spoken against medication. I appreciated her post but it was puzzling to me because every NANCE trained graduate I have run into had taken a position against Psychiatric care and had a forty year old view of Psychiatric practice as Freudian and involving Psychotherapy (talk therapy) with weird ideas. There may be a few NANCE and CCEF that have modified ideas, but not the majority. David Powlison, Wayne Mack, and others from CCEF had helped John MacArthur set up the Masters college bachelors and Masters degree Nouthetic counseling programs. Wayne mack was the first head of their program. The graduates from there reflect the same aversion to the mental illness medical model and Psychiatric treatment. This opinion is reflected in the 1994 book “Biblical Counseling” of which John MacArthur is editor.
Often one will seek to defend Nouthetic Counseling by stating my opinion, or others, who speak against their anti mental illness model and aversion to Psychiatry is wrong. They will state they do now acknowledge mental illness, need for medication, and Psychiatric care, but then in the next paragraph or statement will throw out several caveats regarding over medication, ineffectiveness of medications, or all the medications do is “mask” a problem and not cure it. They may often say that the medications actually cause or aggravate the problem or soon become ineffective. Ed Blakely states these caveats as does Ed Welch. We have seen such caveats stated here by RPittman who even has tried to distance himself from Jay Adams while defending him on here. Then in one of his latest posts he states some Chemistry credentials but admits to two years training under Jay E. Adams. This may give the answer as to his defense which essentially reflects the NANCE talking points, so to speak.
From a Biblical viewpoint they often seek to set forth that the scriptures claim to sufficiency for all of the problems of our lives is inclusive enough to exclude the use of applying information from other sources to behavior problems. They also raise the issues of duty and and accountability. We are said to have a duty to please God and to be held accountable for behavior. This is said in a way to intimate that outside information may diminish and encroach upon the territory claimed by the scriptures. These are the general tenor of the arguments set forth by Doug Bookman in the book “Biblical Counseling.” This viewpoint is based upon a mis interpretation of some scriptural passages. The misinterpretation is most often solved by simple clear context. It is also based upon a misapplication of scripture that requires seeing it as second premise applied truth not first premise clear statement.
Just a couple days ago there was another shooting at a High school. This was in Littleton Colorado. According to the media and newspaper reports, the dad of the shooter stated his son had talked to himself for a long time but recently started yelling at some imaginary person. These of course are some classic onset symptoms of Schizophrenia. Families often witness such behavior but are confused and hesitant about what to do. This is because of a general ignorance about mental illness and importance of catching it early and seeking treatment and necessary intervention. At times Christians and churches can be a real hinderance to intervention. The view of Jay Adams seeks to find sin, point out responsibility, possibly family or the person themselves, and then create an aversion to seeking needed help from a mental health clinic or Psychiatric intervention team, or from law enforcement, or other. The stigma and wrong information among Christians are a real hinderance to compassion and needed burden bearing according to the Galatians 6 model.
Some Christians involved with the seriousness of caring for the mentally ill are righteously angry at the Christians and churches who live in a false world of ignorance and unrighteous judgment. Some cannot handle the scriptures properly. They may even arrogantly seek out issues to raise against one who may be mentally ill. One post on this thread raised the issues of over medication, doubts about the effectiveness of treatment, and misdiagnosis. The websites referred to were absolutely irrelevant to the issues of the legitimacy and needed treatment of mentally ill people. The website referral about over prescription was about ADD and ADHD, and indicated that the people overly prescribed had not received a mental health evaluation. First ADD and ADHD are not within the realm of real mental illness. Second, the wrong treatment was at the hands of Physicians who were not Psychiatrists. From what I have seen, Psychiatry acknowledges the gross over diagnosis of ADD and ADHD. These patients are never in the mental health clinics or Psychiatric wards. The website questioning effectiveness was dealing with specific medications, most of which have been shoved aside for newer and more effective treatment. Then the issues of addictions are raised. This appeared to be that which may lead to confusion and misinformation that makes it very difficult for the mentally ill and their families to be active in churches. They are unrighteously judged by some and that is enough. Some Christians will read a book on a doctrine of scripture and become an expert ready to argue with anyone about their newly learned view. Others never read anything about mental illness but are sure there must be sin somewhere for have we all not sinned according to scripture? Unfortunately, such mentality is more often in the Fundamentalist churches. We need to remember that some of us may some dat become mentally ill. They call it. Alzheimer’s. Those with life long onset mental illness are called mentally handicapped. Such are those with Down Syndrome or other birth abnormalities. However, some mental illness is just as genetic in cause but has onset in late teens or early adulthood and therefore we want to find all sorts of reasons to hold them accountable. The mentally ill are not the great sinners. Those in leadership and attendance at some churches are the ones in sin. Arrogance combined with ignorance (some willful) leaves sin crouching at the door. We need to love in such a way that we are graceful when we do not know, seek to find needs instead of sin, and learn the discernment that handles sin as God desires not as some counseling system recommends.
The teaching and effects of Nouthetic counseling still today involves opinions that gives reasons to avoid their viewpoint and look elsewhere for the training in Biblical counseling. This article on the sufficiency of scripture was applied to the place of psychology in Christian counseling. It raises good issues of the need to have discernment with regard to other sources of information. It appears to be an absolutist view with adequate further information needed. I would agree that the system of Maslow is not biblical, however I took a class that studied Maslow and his hierarchy of needs, among other things, and found it raising some issues that were insightful but with qualification where there was conflict with the scriptural viewpoint.
Look, all I want to know is that I don’t have to call Bill Gothard when I can’t get to sleep and now and then can take a sleeping pill. :)
To RPittman:
This quote comes from the article you gave reference to on WEB MD:
Increasingly, however, psychiatrists in private practice spend their time with medication management and not psychotherapy. Other mental health providers usually do therapy sessions, and when they see a patient who could benefit from medication, they send the patient to a psychiatrist for an evaluation and possibly a prescription.
Before seeking to lecture or teach others please bring yourself up to date.
I have noted in other posts on the prior thread I have referred to that Psychiatrists in sole private practice have minimal to almost no experience with real organic caused mental illness. The mentally ill must usually go on SSI or SSDI and Medicaid in order to have treatment and medication paid for. The exception is the wealthy family. Insurance coverage is limited in coverage. The result is that the county or state mental health centers see a daily continues flow of patients who have been declared mentally disabled. Their staff or contracted Psychiatrists end up with all the experience with the mentally ill. A recently made friend of mine, who is a Psychiatrist in Anaheim, CA., is an outstanding Christian with a seminary degree as well as his professional training. He informs me that there is what is called two tiered practice. The Psychiatrists in the better income areas where a private practice can be sustained do Psychotherapy but are often able to diagnose and then have a Psychologist involved also. However, this is often in areas where the patients are private pay due to a high income level.
When my son was being first treated we wanted some Christian diagnosis and help. We called around and most all Psychologists stated they do not deal with Schizophrenia. Finally , one connected with the Biola U. Rosemead graduate school would see him but bluntly said she does not take private insurance and does not deal with medicaid or medicare. We were learning enough though that we came to realize that Psychotherapy was of no real value and just let the county licensed social workers or Psychiatric nurse do whatever practical followup was needed. They can listen and talk as well as anyone. Do to budget they only follow up by a call every so often. Since our son has signed a permission form they are allowed to talk and discuss with us. If we have a problem then our son may get an immediate doctor visit. They also have intervention teams for emergency intervention and the local Sheriff dept. is part of L.A. county sheriffs and have a special team consisting of an officer (deputy) and a Psychiatric nurse. If a patient is violent or threatening they may take them and admit them to the hospital. The greatest problem with the mentally ill (by far the greatest) is getting the patient to regularly take their meds. A few days of low or no dosage and extreme anger and violence may occur. The medication is the lifeline. Without the present meds we would be back where we were 50 years ago with the state hospitals bursting at the seams.
What you don’t seem to know is that my wife and I have dealt with this daily for over ten years. We have attended NAMI meetings twice a week for that time. We have talked with many many caretakers and gone to several seminars. As one Psychiatrist stated; “the caretakers become the real practical experts.” I have had a personal library of over 10 thousand books (excluding law). As an avid reader, I have added about 150 books related to mental illness, Psychology an Psychiatry. I consider books as friends and have been lectured by many friends. Your attempts to inform may be sincere but to my wife and I find some of the posters who seek to inform on here very unimformed, having misconceptions, and constantly confusing real organic mental illness with other problems such as even depression, Bipolar (that is not psychotic Bipolar) and ADD or ADHD as being in the class with organically caused mental illness that brings disability.
In your reply regarding the Adams quote you state he is not denying medical treatment. that is obvious from the post and not the point. He is seeking to avoid medical treatment by a Psychiatrist. Thats the obvious point. Your reply states the following:
“Bob, you are making an artificial distinction here between psychology and psychiatry. I have repeatedly pointed this out but you have chosen to ignore it. The psychiatrists use the same DSM - 5 (http://www.psych.org/) that psychologists use for diagnosis. There’s no dichotomy between the two world-views. Jay Adams is not denying medical treatment but he is opposing the psychotherapy and unsupported drug therapy for emotions and behavioral control. He’s right. Adams does not deny the existence or medical treatment of organic brain disorders (tumors, injury trauma, strokes, dementia, etc.) I am afraid that your bias has hindered your understanding”
1. Your claim Psychiatrists and Psychologists are the essentially the same is problematic. It is apparently not held by Jay Adams, not held by the Psychiatrist Dr, Laura in her post, not held by state licensing agencies, or any Psychiatrist or Psychologist that I am aware of. It is not held by the Rosemead school of Psychology of Biola University. You are attempting to lecture me about something you may be mistaken about?
2. You state that Adams does not deny treatment for organic brain disorders and then name “tumors, injury, trauma, strokes, strokes, and dementia, etc,” This naming of those certain problems by Adams, other Nouthetic counselors is always the same. There are the omissions of other disorders such as Schizophrenia and Psychotic Bipolar. I believe you also named only these disorders with the same omissions in a prior post. Please answer the following:
(1) Do you consider Schizophrenia an organic Brain disease that is not that caused by the Schizophrenic?
(2) Do you believe that a Schizophrenic must be treated by a Psychiatrist?
This is important because the majority of patients treated by Mental health clinics are diagnosed as Psychotic bipolar or some kind of Schizophrenia.
The bottom line here is that I gave a quote from Jay Adams that may be termed as res ipsa loquitur.
This quote comes from the article you gave reference to on WEB MD:
Increasingly, however, psychiatrists in private practice spend their time with medication management and not psychotherapy. Other mental health providers usually do therapy sessions, and when they see a patient who could benefit from medication, they send the patient to a psychiatrist for an evaluation and possibly a prescription.
Before seeking to lecture or teach others please bring yourself up to date.
I have noted in other posts on the prior thread I have referred to that Psychiatrists in sole private practice have minimal to almost no experience with real organic caused mental illness. The mentally ill must usually go on SSI or SSDI and Medicaid in order to have treatment and medication paid for. The exception is the wealthy family. Insurance coverage is limited in coverage. The result is that the county or state mental health centers see a daily continues flow of patients who have been declared mentally disabled. Their staff or contracted Psychiatrists end up with all the experience with the mentally ill. A recently made friend of mine, who is a Psychiatrist in Anaheim, CA., is an outstanding Christian with a seminary degree as well as his professional training. He informs me that there is what is called two tiered practice. The Psychiatrists in the better income areas where a private practice can be sustained do Psychotherapy but are often able to diagnose and then have a Psychologist involved also. However, this is often in areas where the patients are private pay due to a high income level.
When my son was being first treated we wanted some Christian diagnosis and help. We called around and most all Psychologists stated they do not deal with Schizophrenia. Finally , one connected with the Biola U. Rosemead graduate school would see him but bluntly said she does not take private insurance and does not deal with medicaid or medicare. We were learning enough though that we came to realize that Psychotherapy was of no real value and just let the county licensed social workers or Psychiatric nurse do whatever practical followup was needed. They can listen and talk as well as anyone. Do to budget they only follow up by a call every so often. Since our son has signed a permission form they are allowed to talk and discuss with us. If we have a problem then our son may get an immediate doctor visit. They also have intervention teams for emergency intervention and the local Sheriff dept. is part of L.A. county sheriffs and have a special team consisting of an officer (deputy) and a Psychiatric nurse. If a patient is violent or threatening they may take them and admit them to the hospital. The greatest problem with the mentally ill (by far the greatest) is getting the patient to regularly take their meds. A few days of low or no dosage and extreme anger and violence may occur. The medication is the lifeline. Without the present meds we would be back where we were 50 years ago with the state hospitals bursting at the seams.
What you don’t seem to know is that my wife and I have dealt with this daily for over ten years. We have attended NAMI meetings twice a week for that time. We have talked with many many caretakers and gone to several seminars. As one Psychiatrist stated; “the caretakers become the real practical experts.” I have had a personal library of over 10 thousand books (excluding law). As an avid reader, I have added about 150 books related to mental illness, Psychology an Psychiatry. I consider books as friends and have been lectured by many friends. Your attempts to inform may be sincere but to my wife and I find some of the posters who seek to inform on here very unimformed, having misconceptions, and constantly confusing real organic mental illness with other problems such as even depression, Bipolar (that is not psychotic Bipolar) and ADD or ADHD as being in the class with organically caused mental illness that brings disability.
In your reply regarding the Adams quote you state he is not denying medical treatment. that is obvious from the post and not the point. He is seeking to avoid medical treatment by a Psychiatrist. Thats the obvious point. Your reply states the following:
“Bob, you are making an artificial distinction here between psychology and psychiatry. I have repeatedly pointed this out but you have chosen to ignore it. The psychiatrists use the same DSM - 5 (http://www.psych.org/) that psychologists use for diagnosis. There’s no dichotomy between the two world-views. Jay Adams is not denying medical treatment but he is opposing the psychotherapy and unsupported drug therapy for emotions and behavioral control. He’s right. Adams does not deny the existence or medical treatment of organic brain disorders (tumors, injury trauma, strokes, dementia, etc.) I am afraid that your bias has hindered your understanding”
1. Your claim Psychiatrists and Psychologists are the essentially the same is problematic. It is apparently not held by Jay Adams, not held by the Psychiatrist Dr, Laura in her post, not held by state licensing agencies, or any Psychiatrist or Psychologist that I am aware of. It is not held by the Rosemead school of Psychology of Biola University. You are attempting to lecture me about something you may be mistaken about?
2. You state that Adams does not deny treatment for organic brain disorders and then name “tumors, injury, trauma, strokes, strokes, and dementia, etc,” This naming of those certain problems by Adams, other Nouthetic counselors is always the same. There are the omissions of other disorders such as Schizophrenia and Psychotic Bipolar. I believe you also named only these disorders with the same omissions in a prior post. Please answer the following:
(1) Do you consider Schizophrenia an organic Brain disease that is not that caused by the Schizophrenic?
(2) Do you believe that a Schizophrenic must be treated by a Psychiatrist?
This is important because the majority of patients treated by Mental health clinics are diagnosed as Psychotic bipolar or some kind of Schizophrenia.
The bottom line here is that I gave a quote from Jay Adams that may be termed as res ipsa loquitur.
[Alex Guggenheim] Look, all I want to know is that I don’t have to call Bill Gothard when I can’t get to sleep and now and then can take a sleeping pill. :)Alex, how come you are not calling Bill daily to check in and get orders? Aren’t you a Fundamentalist? :)
To RPittman:
In your post #52 you stated the following to me;
“Bob, you are making an artificial distinction here between psychology and psychiatry. I have repeatedly pointed this out but you have chosen to ignore it. The psychiatrists use the same DSM - 5 (http://www.psych.org/) that psychologists use for diagnosis. There’s no dichotomy between the two world-views.”
My reply was to transfer the following quote from the Website article you referred me to as evidencing your point of no difference between Psychologists and Psychiatrists, the article does clearly state:
“Increasingly, however, psychiatrists in private practice spend their time with medication management and not psychotherapy. Other mental health providers usually do therapy sessions, and when they see a patient who could benefit from medication, they send the patient to a psychiatrist for an evaluation and possibly a prescription.”
Now you allege that I am contradicting myself in this matter. What is clear is that my assertion, based on the present reality, and supported by the post by Psychiatrist Dr. Laura, is that Psychiatrists are practicing using a different (medical) model as sole or primary. Psychologists practice using Psychotherapy which is not based on a medical model. They are different in their practice. You then come and accuse me of contradicting myself because I used the written evidence you supplied to show that the article contradicted your assertion. The DSM you referred to does not indicate treatment. Their worldview involves more than their practice. The Christan Psychiatrist may have a differing world view than the non Christian Psychiatrist, Both will use the medical model for treatment. It is necessary that the mentally ill be treated by the Psychiatrist. This again was the opinion of Dr, Laura.
It would be of value if you answered the two questions in my prior post # 55.
1) Do you consider Schizophrenia an organic Brain disease that is not that caused by the Schizophrenic?
(2) Do you believe that a Schizophrenic must be treated by a Psychiatrist?
Your yes or no with any brief explanation you wish may bring some clarity and finality to this discussion.
In your post #52 you stated the following to me;
“Bob, you are making an artificial distinction here between psychology and psychiatry. I have repeatedly pointed this out but you have chosen to ignore it. The psychiatrists use the same DSM - 5 (http://www.psych.org/) that psychologists use for diagnosis. There’s no dichotomy between the two world-views.”
My reply was to transfer the following quote from the Website article you referred me to as evidencing your point of no difference between Psychologists and Psychiatrists, the article does clearly state:
“Increasingly, however, psychiatrists in private practice spend their time with medication management and not psychotherapy. Other mental health providers usually do therapy sessions, and when they see a patient who could benefit from medication, they send the patient to a psychiatrist for an evaluation and possibly a prescription.”
Now you allege that I am contradicting myself in this matter. What is clear is that my assertion, based on the present reality, and supported by the post by Psychiatrist Dr. Laura, is that Psychiatrists are practicing using a different (medical) model as sole or primary. Psychologists practice using Psychotherapy which is not based on a medical model. They are different in their practice. You then come and accuse me of contradicting myself because I used the written evidence you supplied to show that the article contradicted your assertion. The DSM you referred to does not indicate treatment. Their worldview involves more than their practice. The Christan Psychiatrist may have a differing world view than the non Christian Psychiatrist, Both will use the medical model for treatment. It is necessary that the mentally ill be treated by the Psychiatrist. This again was the opinion of Dr, Laura.
It would be of value if you answered the two questions in my prior post # 55.
1) Do you consider Schizophrenia an organic Brain disease that is not that caused by the Schizophrenic?
(2) Do you believe that a Schizophrenic must be treated by a Psychiatrist?
Your yes or no with any brief explanation you wish may bring some clarity and finality to this discussion.
Others have quit responding to you and I should have quit too. Well, I removing myself because this thread is going nowhere. Long ago, it ceased to be a profitable exchange of views and ideas. It’s a waste of time and bandwidth. I will not respond to your future posts. I’m outa here…………………RPittman,
Actually, it wasn’t Bob’s view that caused me to stop responding, it was more your nouthetic dogmatism against brain diseases such as Schizophrenia that encouraged me to stop posting. I realized that it wasn’t any use discussing this as a profitable exchange of views and ideas because you had a nouthetic answer for everything. And I’ve had these same conversations with nouthetics before and it goes nowhere. The sciences that prove that there is a mental illness such as Schizophrenia and people’s experiences in dealing with it are usually disregarded with proof-text verses such as Jer. 17:9.
For example, when I brought up my experiences with those who were homeless, living under bridges because of their paranoia, your explanation went back to blaming them (their alcoholism, etc…) for triggering it in the first place. Yes there are homeless people under the bridges and living in makeshift shanties and cardboard boxes that are also drug and alcohol addicts, but my experiences have also seen many homeless that did not fit this description. They were living life normally and then suddenly around 18 or 19, their brain broke. This is a consistent pattern among those who are truly Schizophrenic. And the homeless that did have drug and alcohol issues, it often happened after their family and church didn’t know how to deal with them. They turned to drugs and alcohol to deal with the pain (I am not excusing them for their addiction sins, by the way).
“Schizophrenia” is like alot of other conditions out there:
a. There are real cases and fake ones
b. There are correct diagnoses and false ones
c. There are cases where the condition causes the behavior and cases where the behavior causes the (apparent) condition
The complexity of the definition makes it easy to abuse.
From Wikipedia (not exactly authoritative, but at least shows I’m not making this up)
“There is a spectrum of disorders that share similarities with schizophrenia but which are diagnosed as separate conditions, including schizophreniform disorder, schizoaffective disorder, schizoid personality disorder and schizotypal personality disorder (related to the concept of schizotypy). Paranoid personality disorder is also generally considered to be related.”
And the definition is not completely standardized… (same source)
“The most widely used standardized criteria for diagnosing schizophrenia come from the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, version DSM-IV-TR, and the World Health Organization’s International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, the ICD-10. The latter criteria are typically used in European countries, while the DSM criteria are used in the United States and the rest of the world, as well as prevailing in research studies. The ICD-10 criteria put more emphasis on Schneiderian first-rank symptoms, although, in practice, agreement between the two systems is high.”
But do some people hear voices, see things that aren’t there, etc. due to something wrong in their brain chemistry? I know of no biblical reason to assert that zero do. But given how easy it is for bad choices and bad thinking to mess up perceptions, its wise to be skeptical about these things. (For example, the fact that people often “hear” and “see” what they want to hear and see—or fearfully anticipate hearing or seeing—is well documented. And the fact that what we believe and think affects “emotions” like fear, etc. is pretty easy to see by self examination)
So I’ll go so far as to say that the main problem w/mainstream psychology and psychiatry is that they do not—indeed cannot—account for the soul/spirit factor. (But cognitive behaviorism at least explores how what we believe and think affects the rest of body and mind, so these systems are not all equally weak in this area)
a. There are real cases and fake ones
b. There are correct diagnoses and false ones
c. There are cases where the condition causes the behavior and cases where the behavior causes the (apparent) condition
The complexity of the definition makes it easy to abuse.
From Wikipedia (not exactly authoritative, but at least shows I’m not making this up)
And the definition is not completely standardized… (same source)
But do some people hear voices, see things that aren’t there, etc. due to something wrong in their brain chemistry? I know of no biblical reason to assert that zero do. But given how easy it is for bad choices and bad thinking to mess up perceptions, its wise to be skeptical about these things. (For example, the fact that people often “hear” and “see” what they want to hear and see—or fearfully anticipate hearing or seeing—is well documented. And the fact that what we believe and think affects “emotions” like fear, etc. is pretty easy to see by self examination)
So I’ll go so far as to say that the main problem w/mainstream psychology and psychiatry is that they do not—indeed cannot—account for the soul/spirit factor. (But cognitive behaviorism at least explores how what we believe and think affects the rest of body and mind, so these systems are not all equally weak in this area)
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.
This is the same quote as in the prior post by RPITTMAN. It depends on which part you wish to highlight. Please note the dates. The initial study was 1975 and other studies in the 1980s.
Quote:
“Many clinical and epidemiological studies prove that alcoholics often suffer from an additional psychiatric disorder such as depression, personality and anxiety disorder (Hesselbrock et al. 1985; Hirschfeld et al. 1989;Hasin et al. 1989; Roy et al. 1991a,b; Schuckit 1986a, b). A possible correlation between substance abuse and schizophrenia has long been suspected. In his 1975 review Freed reported prevalence rates for alcohol abuse in schizophrenia ranging from 3 to 63%. More recently, several authors (Alterman et al. 1980-1982; Test et al. 1985, 1989; Mueser et al. 1990) further emphasized this issue and reported a high comorbidity of alcohol or drug abuse and schizophrenia. Open questions concerning this topic have been addressed by Kesselmann et al. (1982) and Pulver et al. (1989) who pointed at the lack of valid epidemiological and clinical data on the prevalence of alcohol and drug abuse in schizophrenia, the temporal relationship between the onset of schizophrenia and an additional abuse as well as the specific psychopathology in “dual diagnosis” patients. Both clinical and epidemiological studies suggest that drug, especially cannabis, as well as alcohol abuse might be a risk factor for developing psychosis (Knudsen and Villmar 1984, Tsuang et al. 1982, Tien and Anthony 1990, Eikmeier et al. 1991). [emphasis added] “
Today, some 35 years away from the initial study, and 26 years from the last mentioned, we have very definite and clear evidence from studies indicating the genetic cause and birth trauma connection with mental illness. There is an internet 55 page handbook available from the Canadian mental health that is a good summary. The connection with substance abuse is still not completely clear. Alcoholics and drug addiction certainly does lead to Psychotic episodes after a course of time. There is a theory that the abuse of alcohol or drugs may also trigger mental illness such as Schizophrenia. Some say it does so in those already having a genetic factor and merely hastens the episode. However, from my discussion with two different Psychiatrists at the L.A. county Mental Health Dept., their personal experience, and that of the department, is that the vast majority of Schizophrenics have onset independent of any abuse. Some they are seeing may later get involved in alcohol abuse but that is small. Some use Cannabis (Pot) after the fact as it takes away anxiety. However, it can trigger an episode.
It all comes down to the fact that when a person is diagnosed as mentally ill the only course is to seek to alleviate the disease by medication. Failure to do so usually means the person will become worse over time and in some cases violence does occur. My son took no drugs or alcohol before onset and was attending a conservative Bible teaching church where he was active in short term missions work to mexico and had grown spiritually. The vast majority of the mentally ill and their caretakers that we have encountered at meetings over ten years were not involved in alcohol or Drugs. However, some caretakers have testified of their being occasional Pot involved after the fact that has concerned them. The biggest problem by far is getting the mentally ill to take their medication regularly.
If some Christians want to place blame on the mentally ill as doing it to themselves, fine, do so and then help them and recognize the first help is probably going to be medication and they need to be under a Psychiatrist for the proper diagnosis and treatment. All the mentally ill need spiritual counsel once their condition is under control. However, such counsel is of no value or effect as long as the medical treatment does not bring their condition under control.
As can be seen on this Fundamentalist thread, there may be an unfortunate tendency among some Fundamentalists to want to have accountability and that they do so by selective use of any type of research or statements that will diminish the concept of their being mental illness. Some see those so diagnosed as the victims of wicked and worldly Psychiatry or Psychology. They confuse Psychology and Psychiatry, often fail to acknowledge the more objective model used in Psychiatry, and seek to avoid referring anyone for Psychiatric care. This is the general viewpoint and practice of those being graduated from the programs at Masters College and Seminary. It appears to be the continued viewpoint of other Nouthetic counselors. It is still the viewpoint of Jay Adams as can be seen on the website of The Institute for Nouthetic Counseling.
In all the years of their functioning they still have not worked out the theology of the label “mental illness.”
Don Aarms of the Institute for Nouthetic counseling posted on that last thread seeking to correct me. He stated there can be no such thing as mental illness as the mind is immaterial. He had to be reminded that those who accept the fact that in the Bible the word mind refers to an immaterial aspect of the soul also accept that “mental” by definition refers to a process which is the result of the mind and Brain together and that since the organ of the Brain can be effected by disease, it is proper and clear to use the term “mental illness.” AMAZING! That would seem basic and that the use of the term should not be a problem at all. But it appears to still be a problem to the Nouthetic counselors. It appears to be such a problem to them as they do not want to acknowledge that anyone can really be the victim of the onset of disease that effects the behavior of individuals and cannot be changed by their spiritual counsel. To many of them this would be contrary to their view of the sufficiency of the scriptures .
There are some genuine Bible believing Christians who know better than to avoid the facts and problems of mental illness. Bible believing Christians should acknowledge the duty to bear one another’s burdens and include the genuinely mentally ill in that responsibility. Brain disease is more than just tumors or other obvious physical damage. It involves Schizophrenia, Psychotic Bipolar, Autism, and other such disease involving the Brain.
As we form the CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS, we hope to make some small contribution that will help Christians and churches in this. We hope to be able to involve even some professed Fundamentalists in this.
Fundamentalism eventually became aware of the abuses and unscriptural teachings involved with Bill Gothard. Perhaps they will also see the problems with Nouthetic Counseling.
Quote:
“Many clinical and epidemiological studies prove that alcoholics often suffer from an additional psychiatric disorder such as depression, personality and anxiety disorder (Hesselbrock et al. 1985; Hirschfeld et al. 1989;Hasin et al. 1989; Roy et al. 1991a,b; Schuckit 1986a, b). A possible correlation between substance abuse and schizophrenia has long been suspected. In his 1975 review Freed reported prevalence rates for alcohol abuse in schizophrenia ranging from 3 to 63%. More recently, several authors (Alterman et al. 1980-1982; Test et al. 1985, 1989; Mueser et al. 1990) further emphasized this issue and reported a high comorbidity of alcohol or drug abuse and schizophrenia. Open questions concerning this topic have been addressed by Kesselmann et al. (1982) and Pulver et al. (1989) who pointed at the lack of valid epidemiological and clinical data on the prevalence of alcohol and drug abuse in schizophrenia, the temporal relationship between the onset of schizophrenia and an additional abuse as well as the specific psychopathology in “dual diagnosis” patients. Both clinical and epidemiological studies suggest that drug, especially cannabis, as well as alcohol abuse might be a risk factor for developing psychosis (Knudsen and Villmar 1984, Tsuang et al. 1982, Tien and Anthony 1990, Eikmeier et al. 1991). [emphasis added] “
Today, some 35 years away from the initial study, and 26 years from the last mentioned, we have very definite and clear evidence from studies indicating the genetic cause and birth trauma connection with mental illness. There is an internet 55 page handbook available from the Canadian mental health that is a good summary. The connection with substance abuse is still not completely clear. Alcoholics and drug addiction certainly does lead to Psychotic episodes after a course of time. There is a theory that the abuse of alcohol or drugs may also trigger mental illness such as Schizophrenia. Some say it does so in those already having a genetic factor and merely hastens the episode. However, from my discussion with two different Psychiatrists at the L.A. county Mental Health Dept., their personal experience, and that of the department, is that the vast majority of Schizophrenics have onset independent of any abuse. Some they are seeing may later get involved in alcohol abuse but that is small. Some use Cannabis (Pot) after the fact as it takes away anxiety. However, it can trigger an episode.
It all comes down to the fact that when a person is diagnosed as mentally ill the only course is to seek to alleviate the disease by medication. Failure to do so usually means the person will become worse over time and in some cases violence does occur. My son took no drugs or alcohol before onset and was attending a conservative Bible teaching church where he was active in short term missions work to mexico and had grown spiritually. The vast majority of the mentally ill and their caretakers that we have encountered at meetings over ten years were not involved in alcohol or Drugs. However, some caretakers have testified of their being occasional Pot involved after the fact that has concerned them. The biggest problem by far is getting the mentally ill to take their medication regularly.
If some Christians want to place blame on the mentally ill as doing it to themselves, fine, do so and then help them and recognize the first help is probably going to be medication and they need to be under a Psychiatrist for the proper diagnosis and treatment. All the mentally ill need spiritual counsel once their condition is under control. However, such counsel is of no value or effect as long as the medical treatment does not bring their condition under control.
As can be seen on this Fundamentalist thread, there may be an unfortunate tendency among some Fundamentalists to want to have accountability and that they do so by selective use of any type of research or statements that will diminish the concept of their being mental illness. Some see those so diagnosed as the victims of wicked and worldly Psychiatry or Psychology. They confuse Psychology and Psychiatry, often fail to acknowledge the more objective model used in Psychiatry, and seek to avoid referring anyone for Psychiatric care. This is the general viewpoint and practice of those being graduated from the programs at Masters College and Seminary. It appears to be the continued viewpoint of other Nouthetic counselors. It is still the viewpoint of Jay Adams as can be seen on the website of The Institute for Nouthetic Counseling.
In all the years of their functioning they still have not worked out the theology of the label “mental illness.”
Don Aarms of the Institute for Nouthetic counseling posted on that last thread seeking to correct me. He stated there can be no such thing as mental illness as the mind is immaterial. He had to be reminded that those who accept the fact that in the Bible the word mind refers to an immaterial aspect of the soul also accept that “mental” by definition refers to a process which is the result of the mind and Brain together and that since the organ of the Brain can be effected by disease, it is proper and clear to use the term “mental illness.” AMAZING! That would seem basic and that the use of the term should not be a problem at all. But it appears to still be a problem to the Nouthetic counselors. It appears to be such a problem to them as they do not want to acknowledge that anyone can really be the victim of the onset of disease that effects the behavior of individuals and cannot be changed by their spiritual counsel. To many of them this would be contrary to their view of the sufficiency of the scriptures .
There are some genuine Bible believing Christians who know better than to avoid the facts and problems of mental illness. Bible believing Christians should acknowledge the duty to bear one another’s burdens and include the genuinely mentally ill in that responsibility. Brain disease is more than just tumors or other obvious physical damage. It involves Schizophrenia, Psychotic Bipolar, Autism, and other such disease involving the Brain.
As we form the CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS, we hope to make some small contribution that will help Christians and churches in this. We hope to be able to involve even some professed Fundamentalists in this.
Fundamentalism eventually became aware of the abuses and unscriptural teachings involved with Bill Gothard. Perhaps they will also see the problems with Nouthetic Counseling.
This study is of a small a sample but does indicate some things we already know. Some Mentally ill are effected by their environment as all people are.
The persistence of Nouthetic counselor RPittman to attempt to dig up something that may mitigate the medical evidence we now have concerning the victims of mental illness indicates the mentality that exists among these Nouthetic counselors. Anyone who has familiarity with the various aspects of mental illness understands there are variables. We also understand the effects of environment. Autistic children are also highly effected by environment and other factors that can effect the course and outcome of their disease. That there is reference to non Psychotic mental illness does not confuse the term. Autism, Alzhiemers, and dementia are considered as generally non Psychotic and also mental illness. Some Schizophrenics will outgrow the Psychotic episodes but may still have other symptoms.
What RPittmen has again confirmed by this last post is the fact that Nouthetic counselors will not recognize the true nature of mental illness and will ignore the vast majority of studies and evidence while seeking to make unfounded conclusions on anything they can find to back their prejudices. RPittman has shown on here why Nouthetic counseling is to be avoided.
Most all Conservative Evangelical Institutions are not involved with Nouthetic Counseling. The exception is Masters. It is time for other institutions to follow truth and stop seeking to set forth a false concept of the sufficiency of scripture.
What i have written on here against Nouthetic counseling is not meant as an attack on Thomas Zempel. His article uses the example of a Psychological system that is contrary to scripture as opposed to the sufficiency of scripture. There is validity to that. He may consider himself a Nouthetic counselor and yet endorse the validity of mental illness and the need to refer to a Psychiatrist. It may be that some other Nouthetic Counselors also do. However, most appear to avoid the facts of the issues and pursue avoidance of Psychiatry. It did raise the larger issues involved with the sufficiency of scripture.
Perhaps one of my alma maters, Central Baptist Seminary, Plymouth MN., where Thomas Zempel teaches, will consider modification from at least some aspects of the Nouthetic counseling label. They are in the process of merging with Faith Seminary and Bible College. I do not know where Faith stands with regard to Nouthetic counseling.
The Nouthetic counselors coming out of Masters College, and most graduates of Masters Seminary, hold the position presented in the book “Biblical Counseling,” edited by John MacArthur. Also, as has been posted and evidenced on here, the position of Jay Adams and The Nouthetic Counseling Institute is essentially unchanged and avoids the term mental illness and the medical model. There is referral to a Physician but avoidance of the Psychiatrist. There is a misunderstanding of the present practice of Psychiatry and a confusion that seeks to find no difference between the M.D. Psychiatrist and the PHD Psychologist. Most of this was also revealed on this thread by some who posted here. I generally expect such resistance and hostility when posting on a Fundamentalist site. While I would consider myself a Classic Fundamentalist, it is sad to see the prejudices and unenlightened aspects that do exist in some corners of Fundamentalism.
From my perspective, and the perspective of many family and friends of the mentally ill, it is a battle against the protective prejudice of some. In the Fundamentalist Christian realm it is like battling the misinformation and prejudices against equality that existed in the south even through the sixties and among some Fundamentalist Christians even through the eighties. There appears to be a prejudice against truth from non biblical sources that are viewed as threatening to our exclusive dogmatic view of truth gained from the Bible. Some Fundamentalists have taken second premise truth which applies to the application of scripture and made it the same as first premise truth which is a direct statement of scripture itself. From there they erect an expanded doctrine of the sufficiency of scripture and of man’s accountability to please God and seek His will. This becomes dogma that must be defended at all cost. Thus we see the ignoring of major medical studies and grasping at any statement or study that will help maintain their position against the onslaught of truth from sources that are not even Christian and therefore must be wrong.
This has been a needful and revealing discussion. It is stimulating for this 70 year old. May we all be mindful of the need for God’s grace in pursuing His truth.
The persistence of Nouthetic counselor RPittman to attempt to dig up something that may mitigate the medical evidence we now have concerning the victims of mental illness indicates the mentality that exists among these Nouthetic counselors. Anyone who has familiarity with the various aspects of mental illness understands there are variables. We also understand the effects of environment. Autistic children are also highly effected by environment and other factors that can effect the course and outcome of their disease. That there is reference to non Psychotic mental illness does not confuse the term. Autism, Alzhiemers, and dementia are considered as generally non Psychotic and also mental illness. Some Schizophrenics will outgrow the Psychotic episodes but may still have other symptoms.
What RPittmen has again confirmed by this last post is the fact that Nouthetic counselors will not recognize the true nature of mental illness and will ignore the vast majority of studies and evidence while seeking to make unfounded conclusions on anything they can find to back their prejudices. RPittman has shown on here why Nouthetic counseling is to be avoided.
Most all Conservative Evangelical Institutions are not involved with Nouthetic Counseling. The exception is Masters. It is time for other institutions to follow truth and stop seeking to set forth a false concept of the sufficiency of scripture.
What i have written on here against Nouthetic counseling is not meant as an attack on Thomas Zempel. His article uses the example of a Psychological system that is contrary to scripture as opposed to the sufficiency of scripture. There is validity to that. He may consider himself a Nouthetic counselor and yet endorse the validity of mental illness and the need to refer to a Psychiatrist. It may be that some other Nouthetic Counselors also do. However, most appear to avoid the facts of the issues and pursue avoidance of Psychiatry. It did raise the larger issues involved with the sufficiency of scripture.
Perhaps one of my alma maters, Central Baptist Seminary, Plymouth MN., where Thomas Zempel teaches, will consider modification from at least some aspects of the Nouthetic counseling label. They are in the process of merging with Faith Seminary and Bible College. I do not know where Faith stands with regard to Nouthetic counseling.
The Nouthetic counselors coming out of Masters College, and most graduates of Masters Seminary, hold the position presented in the book “Biblical Counseling,” edited by John MacArthur. Also, as has been posted and evidenced on here, the position of Jay Adams and The Nouthetic Counseling Institute is essentially unchanged and avoids the term mental illness and the medical model. There is referral to a Physician but avoidance of the Psychiatrist. There is a misunderstanding of the present practice of Psychiatry and a confusion that seeks to find no difference between the M.D. Psychiatrist and the PHD Psychologist. Most of this was also revealed on this thread by some who posted here. I generally expect such resistance and hostility when posting on a Fundamentalist site. While I would consider myself a Classic Fundamentalist, it is sad to see the prejudices and unenlightened aspects that do exist in some corners of Fundamentalism.
From my perspective, and the perspective of many family and friends of the mentally ill, it is a battle against the protective prejudice of some. In the Fundamentalist Christian realm it is like battling the misinformation and prejudices against equality that existed in the south even through the sixties and among some Fundamentalist Christians even through the eighties. There appears to be a prejudice against truth from non biblical sources that are viewed as threatening to our exclusive dogmatic view of truth gained from the Bible. Some Fundamentalists have taken second premise truth which applies to the application of scripture and made it the same as first premise truth which is a direct statement of scripture itself. From there they erect an expanded doctrine of the sufficiency of scripture and of man’s accountability to please God and seek His will. This becomes dogma that must be defended at all cost. Thus we see the ignoring of major medical studies and grasping at any statement or study that will help maintain their position against the onslaught of truth from sources that are not even Christian and therefore must be wrong.
This has been a needful and revealing discussion. It is stimulating for this 70 year old. May we all be mindful of the need for God’s grace in pursuing His truth.
Featured Resource
Discussion