Paradigm Shifts, Modern Psychology and Nouthetic Counseling

One great problem that faces post modern evangelicalism is the proliferation of information and the cognitive structuring of ideas. Because communication and the means by which we transfer information is growing and diversifying, more evangelicals than ever before are able to construct various models of reality by which others can shift their thinking in order to effectively preach the Gospel. While this in of itself is another example of the fantastic times in which we live as believers proclaiming the gospel, this proliferation of cognitive structuring can cause (ironically enough) severe communication problems. Too many evangelicals have biases they were born into and which they appear either unable or unwilling to negate in the effort to proclaim the gospel. Such biases typically hinge on how their childhood perception of reality was initially structured. Such perception structures may or may not be accurate to one degree or another but, regardless of anything else, it is certainly not complete. For the individual (either believer or unbeliever) to break through this preconceived structure is a Herculean task that most never attempt, let alone, successfully complete. For most, to break or transcend these structures is tantamount to castrating one’s father. This is not a casual metaphor. Most of our preconceived conceptions of reality come from our fathers, both earthly and heavenly. And honoring both fathers is essential to the Christian faith, as most of us would agree. However, the way in which we honor our fathers is subject to debate. First, our earthly fathers are humans and inherit the same flaws as every other man. To continue these flawed ways of thinking for the sake of a supposed Biblical commandment is to negate the true intention of the commandment. Secondly, our first conception of God the Father is not necessarily the correct conception of God the Father. Furthermore, we do not exhaust God the Father in our years of life. God is infinite and there are many aspects of Him that might at first seem contrary to our initial concepts but, over time, can be seen as either harmonizing or correcting such preconceived notions. Recall how the first disciples of Jesus had years of continual paradigm shifts as they continued to grow spiritually and as God reorganized their thinking and conceptions of reality. Beginning with Jesus and continuing with the Holy Spirit, God began to teach them of the Kingdom of God. Jesus in particular was able to successfully contextualize the Kingdom of God within stories, parables, allegories and mashals so that the people could understand these truths within their cultural context. Thus, just as Jesus and the apostles contextualized the Gospel within ANE and Greco-Roman cultures, so Christian missionaries of today attempt to contextualize the gospel within various foreign cultures that are devoid of “Christian” influence. What is more, with both the proliferation of religious liberty and the influx of Eastern and African cultures, Western society is becoming less and less “Christianized”. There are fewer and fewer Westerners who have a basic understanding of Christian terminology in order to comprehend the Gospel message. Therefore, we have the Emergent churches whose specific modus operandi is to create churches in America and Western Civilization as Western Christian missionaries would create churches in Africa, Asia or the Middle East. They are called “missional churches” and they are using the exact methods missionaries have successfully applied for the last hundred plus years. Of course, the usual suspects are highly critical of the Emergent Church movement as they simultaneously send out missionaries to China and Egypt to do the same thing. Why are they critical of Emergent Churches? 1) They do not understand Emergent churches just as they do not understand foreign missions and church planters. If any SNC leader knew what was taught at the average SBC seminary about how to contextualize the gospel, they would swear that liberalism had snuck back into the convention. 2) They are cultural and ethnic supremacists. They assume that American and Western Christianity is the only way of practicing the faith and every other method must be wrong. 3) They really dislike the fact that they and their Christian practice are becoming increasingly irrelevant and outdated. They themselves refuse to change in order to witness to the world; they would rather change the world instead. Thus, when they see contemporary and Emergent churches being highly successful it is like salt in their open wounds. Nevertheless, the old is fading away and those who can see the horizon because they have both the ability to and willingness to look only have to be patient to see their beliefs and methods vindicated. I mean really, who appears more confident: fundamentalists and their close evangelical kin who are falling back into defeatism because they suspect the Great Tribulation around the corner or the progressives who see abundant evidence of God’s victory as He patiently carves out the future.

All this being said, please allow me an attempt at contextualizing modern psychology in a manner which conveys the truth of the matter with the language of the plebs.

One of the current debates among evangelicals is the legitimacy of modern psychology.

Since the early eighties, many evangelical Christians have become dissatisfied with many of the excesses of modern psychology and have attempted to find alternatives to physician help.

Perhaps one of the more notorious examples of alternative medicine is the nouthetic counseling fad. I call it a fad because it is a new phenomenon that has just reached much of contemporary evangelicalism and because it resembles all the other evangelical fads of the last few decades (i.e., “everyone must get on board or you’re not right with God.”)

All behavioral disorders are caused by sin and thus can only be cured by faith (i.e., the Bible). The Scriptural basis for this umbrella idea comes from 2 Timothy 3:16-17:

“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”

While much modern psychology believes that most behavioral disorders are psychological in nature, many modern nouthetic counselors believe that all such disorders derive from sin in the life of the individual. Thus, since sin is in the purview of the pastoral sphere, nouthetic counseling can cure behavioral disorders and modern psychology will do no good whatsoever.

Now there is so much wrong with the thinking in the nouthetic counseling movement that it is only the shear ignorance of the average evangelical that keeps this boat afloat.

Here is a short run down of some of the problems:

1) An overly broad interpretation of 2 Timothy 3:16-17. What’s new here?

2) The evangelical acceptance of modern and naturalistic (some would say “atheistic”) conception of the nature of man. The irony is that while they believe they are ridding themselves of modern and naturalistic conceptions of the nature of man, they have, in fact, unknowingly adopted modern psychological views.

3) Not every behavioral problem is caused by sin. Many evangelicals read in the Scriptures about the sin of having no “self control” and assume that anyone who cannot control an aspect of themselves has some sin causing it.

4) Many evangelicals who are pastors or want to be pastors hold to a strong view pastoral authority and ministry. Thus, many believe that a church must have one supreme pastor who manages all pastoral duties. In this case, many pastors and would–be pastors dislike modern psychology because it would mean that a pastor would have to have a degree in psychology in order to council. Of course, a pastor already should. Many larger churches already have psychologically trained pastors who handle such counseling. Of course, they can afford to do so.

5) Many evangelicals have a misconception of what the Bible is. They see the Bible as not just a book concerning the relationship of God and Man but a history text book, a science text book, a dieting book, a health and wealth manual, a psychology book, and any number of other books on the subject they themselves wish it to be. In fact, the only type of book it is not it a literary book.

To sum up all these problems, many modern evangelicals are ignorant of modern psychology and, most embarrassingly, are ignorant of Scripture.

But I have made all of these points before. Here is the new point:

Let us make the statement that many of the psychological disorders that modern psychology treats is indeed caused by sin in the life of the individual. Let us make that statement and identify it as fact. Thus, a particular sin has caused a psychological disorder.

Now, flipping to the other side, let us make the statement that many physical disorders that modern medicine treats is indeed caused by sin in the life of the individual. What are some example? Drunkenness can cause cirrhosis of the liver, sexual immorality can cause diseases, anger can cause a heart attack, etc. Thus, a particular sin has caused a physical disorder.

Now a person can sin, get a physical disorder and then repent of that sin while the physical disorder remains. Most times, the individual must continue to see a medical doctor in order to treat the physical disorder long after the sin has been repented.

Think of psychological disorders similarly. A person can sin, get a psychological disorder and then repent of that sin while the psychological disorder remains. Most times, the individual must continue to see a psychologist in order to treat the psychological disorder long after the sin has been repented.