Nouthetic Counseling in Baptist Schools

Go to the top of this page and find the icon entitled "START TOPIC". Click on the icon and you will be directed to a page which has a form for titleing a new topic and writing an opening paragraph or asking an opening question to begin the thread.

 

“Such as?”

Mental and physical problems not addressed in Scripture (these are the problems that good psychology attempts to address)

“Actually, physicians refer patients with problems that they believe are mental.”

Exactly! They refer patients to others because the mental and spiritual is not their expertise. The mental is the expertise of the psychologists and the spiritual is the expertise of the Christian minister. I would prefer a Christian psychologist that can counsel both to the mental and the spiritual. Why should be abandon counseling of the mind to the secularists? We then lose the chance to witness to the lost and guide them to Christ.

“I absolutely agree. The spiritual fad that should be rejected is integrationism ... the minimization of the Bible to the mere level of human psychology. The Bible has a much higher position than that. We should not cause people to suffer by offering solutions that don't really work in the long run.”

Really the negative integrationism that is being applied by many is a Platonic view of the self (as opposed to the Biblical model) that was perpetuated by many of the Apostolic fathers, Augustine included. Many of these men of God were not necessarily minimizing the Bible but, instead, were trying to explain the Biblical principles to a pagan world by using Greek philosophical principles, much like how John uses the Logos in his Gospel. Did they go too far at times? Oh yes, and their followers took it even further down the road to heresy. There were other Apostolic fathers who went the other route and wanted to show the world the diametrically opposed Kingdom of God. These men of God were not necessarily isolating the church from the world with which they were supposed to be witnessing but they occasionally went too far and some their followers certainly went too far. There is definitely a balance that must be maintained.

Solutions to sin can only be found in Christ as found in the Scriptures. But problems that are not sin can be dealt with by other means, means that work both in the short run and in the long run. Will psychological methods cure the problem of sin? No.

 

“I guess that depends on what you mean by "work." Do you want real solutions or not?”

Solutions to sin: nouthetic. Solutions to physical and mental problems that do not come under the umbrella of sin: well?

“Autism is not a problem treatable by counseling. The other things you mention all have biblical solutions, if we will pursue them.”

Actually autism can be treated with counseling.
Many of the other problems I mentioned are caused by more than just one cause. Some are biological (neurological, genetic), others are behavioral (social, etc.), others are spiritual.

“Some of these are not really behavioral problems per se. You are mixing some things up here. We need to make valid distinctions between behavioral disorders such as ADD or ADHD (which is dealt with by the biblical discpline of self-control) and things such as sleep disorders (which can stem from a number of issues including an unbiblical approach to worry and stress), amnesia (which has nothing to do with behavioral issues), etc. Some of these are genuine medical issues and some are not.”

“Behavior” is defined as “a way of conducting or acting.” The behavioral sciences (sociology, psychology, etc.) study human behavior.

AD/HD, again, has both biological (neurological, possibly genetic) and psychosocial causes.

Yes, sleep disorders can be caused by unbiblical approaches to worry and anxiety but not always. The question is if the problem is not an unbiblical approach can or should a Christian counselor use other methods?

Sometimes problems are physical and sometimes problems are mental and sometimes problems are spiritual. We shouldn’t look at man through the eyes of Plato and Descartes.

One talks about integration … Here is the real integration. The church has adopted a secular view of man.

The world views man as totally material. The Bible teaches that man is also spiritual. The world tends to divide man into the physical-material and the psychological-material. They see psychology as addressing psyche (the soul) which they view as the mind which they view as material and unspiritual. The church responds correctly that man is more than just material but incorrectly assents to the world’s view of assigning all “unphysical” problems to the realm of psychology.

The secular world equates spiritual problems with mental problems and attempts to address both. While these two are not mutually exclusive, neither are they identical. Secular Psychologists are unequipped to deal with spiritual matters. Now the contemporary view of nouthetic counseling is attempting to ill-equip Christian counselors to deal with both mental and spiritual problems. What will happen? People with both mental and spiritual problems will go to secular psychologist for help. We are ceding a whole discipline by being misinformed by the world about the nature of man.

“There are no good people. One of hte problems of modern pscyhology is the misdiagnosis that there are good people. All are sinners and we live in a sin cursed world. All of these problems stem from that to be sure. But a lack of self-control is always a lack of the fruit of the Spirit. That is the root cause.”

I meant good as a relative term, but I’ll rephrase my statement: Bad things happen to righteous people.

Not everyone who cannot control an aspect of his self is lacking the fruit of the Spirit. (Autism, Tourette's syndrome, learning disorders, etc.)

“Having a proper view of God and life will not make the bad things go away, but it will enable the individual to deal with those bad things in a biblical way. Your last statement sums up the issue that you have seeminly argued against. When you know Christ and understand him, there are answers to these problems. It doesn't cure medical issues to be sure; no one should claim that it does. But it does deal with the spiritual side of man, which is where most counseling problems come from.”

You said “most counseling problems come from the spiritual side of man.” I agree, but not all problems come from the spiritual side of man. Some problems are mental and others physical. My issue is whether or not we can treat mental problems that are not sinful in nature and whether or not Christian counselors should be trained by Christian colleges and seminaries to do so. I think they should. I prefer Christian doctors, Christian mechanics, Christian lawyers, and Christian psychologists. Whether or not we have physical and psychological problems we still need the peace of God. And if we find the peace of God that doesn’t mean we can ignore our physical and mental problems.

“Some of these types of books are misuses of hte Bible. But with respect to the last part, much of the problem in modern psychology comes from teh denial that man was the special creation of God in his own image.”

True, much modern psychology denies Biblical truths. Much modern medicine denies Biblical truths. Much modern sociology really denies biblical truths. What then do we do? Cede the entire discipline to the world, including those truths of that discipline?

“I completely believe this and that was my point to begin with. When we lower its value to a mere commentary on history, rather than that which equips us for every good work, then we have lost its value.”

I agree.
It’s “good” to treat cancer but the Bible doesn’t tell us how to do so. It’s “good” to fix my Windows XP but the Bible doesn’t tell me how to do so. If we say that the Bible is indirectly equipping us to treat cancer and fix Windows XP then we can say that the Bible is also indirectly equipping us to use the psychology to treat problems that the Bible doesn’t directly address. If we say that treating cancer and fixing Windows XP is not the “good” that is being expressed by the Bible then these disciplines, as well as psychology, fall out of the purview of the Scriptures.


I like you Pastor Larry. You are making excellent points. You are really challenging me to think and rethink about my views on this subject.

 

The posts have gotten longer and longer...I hope I can offer a simple answer. God said that He has left us with His word so that "the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped to every good work" (2 Tim. 3:17). The word translated "complete" in that verse could've just as easily been translated "lacking nothing." In other words, God's Word is not only completely inerrent, but it is completely sufficient to treat all the maladies of the human soul. The problem with secular psychology (which is most definitely grounded in an atheistic worldview) is that it often wants to put a label on man's refusal to adquately confess and deal with his sins before a holy God. I can remember one such teenage girl I counseled with while I was a Youth Minister. She had been told by several different psychologists that she had one disorder after the next, the most serious being schizophrenia. After spending just a brief amount of time with the young lady, it was quite clear what her real problem was - she didn't feel loved by her father (who was a hard man), and so to get his attention she consistently rebelled against his authority. My friends, that is not a psychological problem, that is a spiritual problem. Rather than diagnosing a plethora of pills for her to take (which the psychologists did), I instructed her to discover who she was in Christ. This would give her all the joy she could possibly handle and encourage her to be submissive to her dad's authority. She didn't like my advice though - popping a pill and paying $100 an hour to talk to a shrink was much easier.

As for those with serious medical conditions that affect their behavior (such as someone who has suffered brain trauma or some other tragedy), I certainly recommend that they see a physician. Those with such medical conditions obviously need the TLC of a medical professional, but my contention is that way to many psychologists and others are far too eager to prescribe Prozac, Ritalin, and a host of other medications because it is simple and because, let's face it, it's a money maker. The statement "the Bible is not a counseling handbook" is complete erroneous! If it is the Word of God (and it is), and if it is sufficient to make a man of God complete (and it is), then it should be our only counseling textbook for the soul. And if a man is lost, well then there's not much that can be done for his spiritual condition until He's willing to come to Christ is there? But even God's Word has an answer for such a person: "Ye must be born again" (John 3:3). If a person is physically sick, let them see a physician, but let them always seek the face of the Great Physician.

 

Again, I agree the Bible is sufficient for healing the soul/spirit and solving sin. No question. But there are aspects the self that do not fall within the areas of physcian or Christian minister and these aspects are picked up by psychologists.

Hey, doctors are going to misdiagnose patients, both medical and psychological. And yes, secular psychologist will definitely misdiagnose issues of the spirit. All the more reason to train Christian counselors in modern psychology so they can help cure both mental and spiritual problems. I have know of a person who had a seizure in a church and church-goers misdiagnosed the situation and tried to cast out her demons.

You say the Bible is "a counseling textbook for the soul." Yes, the Bible is the counsel for sin and the spirit but can the Bible counsel someone to solve a learning disability? If so, how? How about autism? Dissociate Identity Disorder? Chemical embalances? Etc.?

You say the Scriptures are "sufficient to make a man of God complete or lack nothing." So the Scriptures are our guide to curing the flu? Curing polio? Rehabilitating someone whose paralyzed? Jesus did all that. Why then do we need to see a doctor then? "Well, those are physical matters," you say. Yes, but there are many physical problems dealing with the mind that medical doctors don't treat. Only psychologists are so trained. I suppose in a perfect world all medical doctors would treat all physical problems but that's not the case. The question is whether or not Christian colleges and seminaries should train counselors with the skills to deal with spiritual as well as mental problems.

Yes, a person can go to a medical doctor and cure his physical problem. Yes, a person can go to a psychologist and cure his mental problems. And, yes, a person can only be cured by his spiritual problems from God. In fact, I suggest that all our physical problems are solved by God by directing history to raise up the medical profession. Can an atheist physician cure a broken leg? Can an athiest psychologist cure a learning disability? Even atheists do good things. God works with atheists for His glory whether they acknowledge Him now or in glory.

Again, the question is whether Baptist schools should teach Christian counselors in modern psychological methods. I say that we should not cede the discipline to the world.

 

Anleifr,
You quote Pastor Larry's responses and seem to agree with them, yet you still seem to have a disagreement with him. So far, I don't understand what point you are trying to make. Let me ask two questions Hopefully they will help you clarify what you mean.

What are some modern psychological methods (or tecniques) which you see as valuable which you feel are not being utilized by nouthetic counselors?

What, specifically, are some human problems with which psychologists can deal that nouthetic counsellors cannot?

Honestly, if your answers to these questions are not persuasive, it is difficult to justify the teaching of psychological methods in Christian schools.

(BTW, for clarity in your Baptist Board posts, it is helpful when you quote other posters to put their words in a "quote box". To do this, use the "Instant UBB Code" buttons below. Specifically, copy the other poster's quote, hit the quote button, and paste the quote between the "quote" code boxes which will appear in the typing field. This will make your posts easier to follow)

 

Anl, You act as though psychology is a science that is just as sure as physiology or biology or chemistry, etc. The only problem I have with that assumption is that there are some 170 different forms of recognized psychotherapy, and the psychologist is left to determine which of them he/she is to use to help treat a "mental" patient. The aforementioned forms of psychotherapy range from primal scream therapy to womb therapy to inkblots, and nearly all of them require the prescribing of unproven medications. And you believe such forms of psychotherapy are sufficient to cure the "mental" ills of those who are seeking to find a cure? I'm sorry, I'll place my trust in the Word of God and trust all physical maladies to careful physicians, and most of all to the Great Physician.

 

Thanks for the info on BB quoting. Let me try and more effectively give my opinions regarding the questions asked.

I agree with him that the Bible is sufficient for dealing with problems of sin. I disagree with him that all problems that come under psychology are matters of sin.
I agree with him that much psychology is bunk, but I would disagree that all of psychology is bunk. I would certainly disagree that we should dismiss all of psychology because of some bad apples. It would be like a person denying the authenticity of the faith because a televangelist has a public scandal. That’s some people’s excuse.

The Nouthetic counselor is supposed to limit his counsel strictly to that which may be found in the Bible.

Psychotherapy deals with influences of the social, behavioral, cognitive and emotional, biological, and, if the psychologist is a Christian, spiritual.

The problem is that all of these influences can cause all different types of psychological problems. The difficulty is finding which influence is causing the particular problem.

Psychology provides many methods of diagnosing causes. Without psychology, one would not know what these problems were. “Is he schizophrenic or demonized?” “Is his problem caused by his sin or a chemical imbalance?”

Here are a very few psychological methods:

Dissociative amnesia can sometimes take therapy focusing on the retrieving of memories. Where in the Bible does it teach one how to retrieve forgotten memories?

Learning disorders vary. Sometimes one has to teach new cognitive methods to both student and teacher. Much of this comes under educational psychology which is a sub-discipline of psychology. [This is not directly a counseling point, but psychology has taught us much about various learning methods (audio, visual, etc.), and various personality types.] Where in the Bible does it teach how to make one how to teach more effectively to a variety of different learning and personality types?

Schizophrenia can be dealt with by developing social skills, self-care, vocational skills, and teaching patients and family to understand the disease and the symptoms.

Then there are many mental disorders that need drugs. These can be physical problems that only psychologists are trained to do. If Christian counselors only teach nouthetic methods then those suffering from neurological disorders will have to go to a psychologist anyway. If the problem is both spiritual and neurological (which can be the case) then the person would have to go to two counselors. Since the most important problem is sin, then why can we not train Christian counselors in methods of dealing with sin and neurological/chemical/psychological problems?

Then there is the teaching of skills to compensate for lost abilities. Also, psychologists teach families how to relate to people with certain mental disorders. Where in the Bible does it teach how to counsel families to deal with an autistic child?

learning disabilities, schizophrenia, autism, Rett’s disorder, childhood disintegrative disorder, Asperger’s disorder, delirium, Tic disorders, dissociative disorders (amnesia, fugue, identity disorders (MPD)), obsessive-compulsive, sleep disorders, stuttering, etc.
Again, I think Christian counselors should deal with these problems. I just believe that the Bible does not address these issues.

Oh, no. Psychology is a social science like anthropology, economics, and sociology. Any time one studies human behavior one is faced with a plethora of variables, making the outcome more difficult to predict than, say, chemistry, geology, and physics. Even these are never absolutely certain (ala Heisenberg), just ask a “young earth” creationists about the certainty of modern biology. Just ask a non-evolutionary creationist about the certainty of anthropology and biology. Sometimes ones biases effect the outcome of the science.

Yes, there are many kooks and kook theories in psychology. In fact, there are many kooks and kook theories in all sciences. But we always have to make distinctions between the fringe and the mainstream. For example, look at all the different recognized denominations and ways of practicing Christianity. Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, Unitarian, Lutheran, Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witness, Christian Science, Quakers, Presbyterians, Methodists, Fundamentalists, Baptists, just to name a few. The individual is left to determine which of them is orthodox and heterodox, which is more Biblical or less Biblical, and which fits God’s calling to their lives to cure their problem of sin. Some obviously don’t. Others do to a greater or lesser extent depending upon the individual church one attends in the denomination.

Again, my point has been that not all problems that are physical in nature come under the umbrella of medical physicians. Also, the reality of the human self is not a Cartesian dualism between spirit/body or mind/body. It is more complicated. It’s more of a body/mind/spirit in a unified whole. Some spiritual problems affect the mind and body. Some body problems affect the mind and spirit. Some mind problems affect the body and spirit. It’s not as clean cut as we would like.

Even so, one could make an argument that we should never visit a medical doctor ever by using James 5:14-16 as a proof text. Some Christians have made this argument. Does this verse mean never to see a physician or does it mean that we should have elders pray and see a doctor?

 

I will not comment in depth here, but this false dichotomy is a huge part of the problem. It is false to think that the Bible doesn't deal with behavioral, cognitive, and emotional issues. It does. It gives many answwers to them.

For instance, you later reference OCD. That is addressed by the biblical injunctions about self-control and controlling what we think. That is a mind problem that needs to be brought under the obedience of Christ.

I don't accept your dichotomies becuase I don't see Scripture supporting them. So many behavioral and emotional issues are spiritual issues. We need to address them that way. The nouthetic counselor has the timeless teaching of God's word to address and give real hope to the individual with the struggles.

BTW, a true neurological issue is a medical one. Remember, man only has two parts: material and immaterial. If the problems are not found in the first, they are found in the last. And they must be treated as such to give real hope.

 

Again, I am not saying that the Bible does not touch on these issues. The Bible touches on physical problems. Why then do we need to visit physicians? Medical doctors are unscriptural. Don’t we only need James 5:14-15 to solve all our medical problems?

The Bible teaches about controlling what we think. Does the Bible teach about what we are unable think because of a mental illness?

You say the Bible “gives many answers to them.” You did not say “all.” Do you mean all? You say “So many behavioral and emotional issues are spiritual issues.” Are all behavioral and emotional issues spiritual issues?

Can you support by Scripture that man has only two parts? If so, why do you assume that the Bible is supposed to deal with all immaterial problems? Why does the Bible not deal with all material problems? Is a learning disability material or immaterial? Is amnesia a material or immaterial problem?

Scripture views man in his wholeness and sees sin as affecting man in his wholeness. The terms flesh, spirit, body, and soul in the NT may seem to assume a dichotomous or trichotomous view of man, but actually this is not the case. Each term describes the whole man from its particular perspective. Each term is highly serviceable in the analysis of man or for emphasis of some aspect of his self or being, but this never becomes a complete dichotomy or trichotomy.

This parallels current usage in psychology, where various terms are used in the analysis of the person, but where these distinctions never become absolute. So a person can be analyzed in terms of reason, emotion, volition, or “flesh.”

Is reason a spiritual or non-spiritual phenomenon? Apes can reason. Do apes have a spirit?

You quoted this quote:

This quote comes directly from the National Association of Nouthetic Counselors. Even Nouthetic counselors say that one trained only in nouthetic counseling is only supposed to deal with nouthetic issues. Ergo, if the problem is not nouthetic (i.e. if it does not come under the purview of Scripture), then the nouthetic counselor shouldn’t counsel the problem. What I am saying is that Christian schools teaching counseling should not only teach nouthetic counseling but also teach non-nouthetic counseling as well because not all counseling problems are nouthetic in nature.

 

I take the above statement as un-informed or ill-informed. As a psychologist, I ask you to name a single psychological approach that is not founded upon an evolutionary premise. As a Bible-believing Christian, I find psychology to be antithetical to my Biblical creationist beliefs.

Good psychology? What is good psychology? There are more than 600 psychological therapies or systems or variations of same in the USA alone. These therapies radically contradict one another. Yet, all therapies seem to have about the same success rate which is approximately the same as spontaneous remissions. Does this say something to you? Think! Furthermore, drug therapies have about the same success rate as talk therapies. Please define the good psychology.

BTW, the success of therapy is judged by patient survey. It is based on opinion, testimonials, and emotions. Do you feel that the therapy has helped you? Very scientific (dripping sarcasm)! Success is based on belief, faith if you please, in the therapy. In other words, psychology is a placebo.

I will be very happy to debate this issue with you but please be sure that you have a good technical understanding of the subject. After all, it is my field and I am a SKEPTIC.

 

Nonsense! Psychologists are not medical doctors—they cannot deal with the physical. You are confusing psychologists with psychiatrists! Psychology and psychiatry are separate disciplines. Furthermore, your analogy is wrong. The so-called “mental illness” is in no way comparable to the flu. This analogy is wrong. If you are saying that “mental illness” is physical illness you are wrong—it is not. Furthermore, it is not even a biochemical disorder (I stated in a previous post that I am a psychologist but I was a real scientist, a biochemist, before delving into pseudo-science). There is absolutely no hard scientific data that mental problems are biochemically based. Cite the scientific paper and I’ll read it. The biochemical basis of behavior is an unproven and largely unsupported hypothesis. I know—I’ve read the literature, both psychological and nouthetic, and made an informed opinion. Have you done the same? Your assessment of nouthetic counseling appears shallow, naïve, and uninformed. It's dangerous to offer uninformed opinions that may influence others who are badly informed.

My suggestion is to read and learn a little more of the nouthetic approach. I highly recommend Jay Adams, Bob Smith (a medical doctor), Ed Welch, and NANC publications.

 

You stated that you are a psychologist and were a biochemist, before delving into pseudo-science. Could you clarify this? You say you are a psychologist but appear to dislike psychology. That’s like an evolutionists not believing in evolution. I hope you see where my confusion lies.

Well, as a Bible-believing (inerrantist) creationist who does believe in evolution, we may have to just disagree on that issue. No problem.

But before I answer your question I think I need to know what you mean by “founded upon an evolutionary premise.” Do you mean the idea that life gradually changes over time or specifically that man and ape evolved from the same species or something else?

So do religions. So do denominations. Because religions radically vary are all religions false or is one true (i.e. Christianity)? Because all denominations vary should we throw them all out or distinguish between the good, the bad, and the moderate?

Oh, yes, many psychological disorders have been known to cure themselves. What this says to me is that these problems are not sin. If they were sin then they would not spontaneously remiss. Can sin spontaneous remiss? You’ve proved my point.

Yes, because some problems can be cured by drugs and others by talking them out and understanding the problem. But only God can cure sin.

See my previous posts.

Again, psychology is a behavioral science like sociology. Whenever one deals with human behavior there will be both subjective and objective aspects. It can be both a science and an art, like interpretation and translation.

Because we are dealing with behavior then we can only make observations. We know when someone is cured by their fruits. “Have they ceased their unwanted or abnormal behavior?”

That’s like Paul Tillich who was a Christian theologian but was skeptic about whether or not Jesus ever existed.

Well, I cannot claim to be a psychologist. For what it’s worth, I have taken psychology classes in high school, college, and at seminary, from both Christian and non-Christian professors. And I have continually read up on the subject, but never majored in the field. I guess I’m an amateur. So I have no reason to doubt that you, being a psychologist, may know much more than I about this subject.

Then again, Paul Tillich probably knew more about theology and philosophy than I ever will, but I believe in Jesus and he didn’t.

As you know, psychology is the broad umbrella under which we have psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, marriage and family therapists, psychiatric social workers, clinical psychologists, counseling psychologists, experimental psychologists, and educational psychologists. And there is a great deal of overlap.

Yes, a psychiatrist is a doctor of medicine while a psychologist undergoes no medical training. But they collaborate closely with each other. Clinical and counseling psychologists conduct research into the causes and treatments of psychological disorders. They need to know what the cause of a psychological disorder is whether physical, mental, or spiritual.

Some psychological problems are caused by physical problems. Read my previous posts on this subject.

Well, you know that depression and anxiety can be caused by disease in the endocrine system. Hypothyroidism, or Cushing’s Disease, which affects the adrenal cortex, leads to excessive secretion of cortisol. Cortisol is called a stress hormone because it is elevated during stressful life events. A biochemical disorder can cause a psychological disorder.

Gibbons, J. L. (1964). Cortisol secretion rates in depressive illness. Archives of General Psychiatry, 10, 572-575.

Gold, P. W., Goodwin, F. K. & Chrousos, G. P. (1988). Clinical and biochemical manifestations of depression: Relation to the neurobiology of stress. New England Journal of Medicine, 319. 348-353.

Krishnan, K. R., Doraiswamy, P. M., Venkataraman, S., Reed, D., & Ritchie, J. C. (1991). Current concepts in hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal axis regulation. In J. A. McCubbin, P. G. Kaufmann, & C. B. Nermeroff (Eds.), Stress, neuropeptides, and system disease (pp. 19-35). San Diego: Academic Press.

Ladd, C. O., Owens, M. J., & Nemeroff, C. B. (1996). Persistent changes in corticotrophin-releasing factor neuronal systems induced by maternal deprivation. Endocrinology, 137 (4), 1212-1218.

Sapolsky, R. M. (2000) Glucocorticoids and hippocampal atrophy in neuropsychiatric disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 57, 925-935.

Sapolsky, R. M., & Meaney, M. J. (1986). Maturation of the adrenal stress response: Neuroendocrine control mechanisms and the stress hyporesponsive period. Brain Research Review, 11, 65-76.

Weller, E. B., & Weller, R. A. (1988). Neuroendocrine changes in affectively ill children and adolescents. Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics of North America, 17, 41-53.

Yes.

But seriously, are you saying that the only individuals who are allowed to give an opinion on this issue are psychologists and nouthetic counselors, preferably the latter? If so, then those who are neither psychologists nor nouthetic counselors who previously posted views about psychology and nouthetic counseling have uniformed and, therefore, invalid and dangerous opinions. Anyway, my opinions, even if they are false, must be somewhat convincing or they would not be considered dangerous. Regardless, people will read the discussion and arrive at their own conclusions.

 

Hey, thanks. It appears that we have a serious debate. At least, you are able to cite some references for your argument. Give me a few days to read and get back with you. I commend you for arguing with substance. Most just get emotional.

For sake of argumentation, we may need to differentiate between depression-like symptoms produced by a definable medical condition and clinical depression that has no demonstratable medical etiology. Furthermore, the causal relationships between the symptoms and medical conditions are debatable. I am willing to stipulate that various organic conditions do produce certain concomitant symptoms. The point is, however, that you treat the underlying medical condition, not the symptom. I will address this more fully later.


Again, thanks for citing references.

 

I think this needs to be challenged. A biochemical disorder (medical sickness) is just that. Depression that results from chemical imbalance is a symptom, not a "disorder."

Furthermore, those things are testable. There are no medical tests for "clinical depression." It is "diagnosed" once the actual medical causes are ruled out. This is why the nouthetic counselor's first homework assignment for the counselee is to go get a physical checkup.

 

Please allow me to modify my assessment. I was wrong. You do not appear as ill-informed as I thought even though I disagree with you. I stand by my other statements. Many posters on this board, unfortunately, shoot off their mouth without understanding. It devolves into an emotional diatribe. It appears that you are different. At least, you are willing to generally confront the questions and answer rationally.

On the other hand, you are wrong that I think only professionals or experts should post. I despise worshipping at the shrine of the experts. I only contend that one should know what he is talking about before he speaks. In other words, do your homework.

So, post away!

 

As you know, psychology is the broad umbrella under which we have psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, marriage and family therapists, psychiatric social workers, clinical psychologists, counseling psychologists, experimental psychologists, and educational psychologists. And there is a great deal of overlap.

Yes, a psychiatrist is a doctor of medicine while a psychologist undergoes no medical training. But they collaborate closely with each other. Clinical and counseling psychologists conduct research into the causes and treatments of psychological disorders. They need to know what the cause of a psychological disorder is whether physical, mental, or spiritual.

[snip] </font>[/QUOTE]I wish you had quoted your first statement and it would have been obvious that you were confusing the two. Your explanation is insufficient. Psychologists do not deal with medical or physical problems. I am disappointed, since you were to rational on other points, that you didn't just say you were wrong. Don't use weasel words!

 

Are you saying that there is a depression disorder (whether mental or spirtiual) and a disorder (physical) with depression like symptoms? If so, then I think we agree.

When it comes to causality ... There is a tricky subject. Does the sin cause a physical problem or does a physical problem allow someone to be more inclined to commit a sin? If the latter, are we supposed to treat just the sin or the sin and the physical problem. And if both causes must be treated then does the Christian psychologist treat just the sin or should he/she be able to treat both? Now the nouthetic counselor treats only the sin problem. Should Christian colleges and seminaries (seminaries which are starting colleges to teach secular history and secular literature) also teach Christian psychologists how to treat both the nouthetic and non-nouthetic treatments? I say that they should and that has been my point.

Again, I do not believe I am "weaseling." I have simply been using psychologist in its broadest sense because we have been dealing with psychology as a field of study in its broadest sense. I think if you read my previous posts this will become apparent.

For example: if I was discussing the revelancy of theology to someone predisposed to thinking all such theological speculation about the Bible as bunk and unncessary to the Christian life then I would speak about theology in such a broad term. Throughout the discussion I might mention OT Studies, NT Studies, Textual Criticism, Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion, Biblical languages, Hermeneutics, etc. Now someone might argue that a philosophy and a theology are two separate disciplines. And that's true. But a theologian deals with philosophy just as much he deals with biblical languages. There is a lot of overlap. In fact, just as all these theological disciplines come under the school of theology so do all of the psychological disciplines come under the school of psychology. Does this clarify my thinking on this matter?

Nevertheless, your statement that psychologists, in the strictest sense of the word, "do not deal with medical or physical problems" runs counter to everthing that I have learned in every level of my studies in psychology. Every textbook I own on psychology, both Christian and non-Christian, says otherwise. I think we are two ships passing in the night on this. Probably, somewhere, we maybe both saying the correct thing but looking at the other with different lenses. Since you are the psychologist then I'll assume it is I who is looking through a glass darkly. Where do you think I have gone wrong?

(Side note) Also, what do you mean by "do not deal"? I am using deal in the sense of "to have to do with", i.e. "a scientists deals with facts." I had thought earlier that some of the unecessary, though illuminating discussions with other posts, maybe due to different understandings of "to deal."

 

Somehow we’re not communicating or you’re arguing by picking on minutiae. Every graduate-level professional psychology course that I’ve taken has emphasized that we’re not practicing medicine—i.e. we’re not dealing with medical problems or the physical. There is, of course, the psycho-somatic connection but psychologists professionally refer medical problems to doctors. It’s that simple. Psychologists function differently from the psychiatrists who operate from a medical model. Do not extrapolate my argument to make it say something that I didn’t say. In doing a basic psychological assessment, we usually require a physical exam by a doctor, a vision test, hearing test, etc. This is referral to other professionals in their fields. We may even request a neurological examination by a neurologist but psychologists are not dealing with medical issues or the physical. I stand by my original statement.

BTW, I can be picky too. Scientists do not deal with facts. Scientific knowledge is tentative. It changes as our knowledge increases. Just how do you define a fact? Science deals with concepts, hypotheses, and theories. It is an over-generalization and over-simplification to say science deals with facts. HOGWASH!

But, I do like your attitude about this whole business. You seems very fair-minded and open. Kudos on having a good spirit.



RETAKE
Upon re-reading your post (I scanned and began typing ), I think we arguing about words. For the psychologiist, however, it is very important to distinguish between psychology and psychiatry. We do not prescribe drugs, diagnose medical conditions, etc. This distinction is essential in order that psychologists don't get into trouble for practicing medicine. Nuff said.