The Crucial Issue I landed on from the six was number three: “We need to clarify how
human responsibility and suffering relate to one another” (Powlison 2010, 241). This
happens to be the exact concept that I am currently debating in my Interdisciplinary
Research class. This concept intertwines the disciplines of the Old Testament and
Psychology.
This crucial step requires the counselor to satisfy their need to introduce sin and
introduce it to the counselee for analysis of the issue they are seeking counseling.
Christian counselors must not fear secular counselors or their secular education
(Powlison 2010, 278). By the example of Moses, Daniel and Paul, secular theory must be
used to counter and prove the words and meaning of the Bible. Sin is ultimately the
problem in anything, but how it is understood is what leads a counselee to a Christian or
secular base for therapy (Powlison 2010, 289-292). In the world of secular counseling,
“elaborate systems that rationalize sin by making people fundamentally victims
determined by forces outside their control” (Powlison 2010, 246), take away the need for
the counselee to take responsibility for their moral choices. These contemporary victim
theories “ground our sins in our pain and our ‘needs’” (Powlison 2010, 247). What sin
does to man is that it “exerts a systematic distorting effect on thought and practice
(Powlison 2010, 278).
Nouthetic counseling pulls from the theory of man being both responsible for their moral
actions and a sufferer from sin (Powlison 2010, 247). As Adams quoted: “Sin is the
product of flesh.” (Powlison 2010, 248) and is cast upon man as a curse from God (Gen.
3:17-19). God then delivered man by grace through Jesus Christ (John 3:16). Secular
viewpoints allow man to be a victim and give credibility to the excuses for negative
actions. While nouthetic theory gives “context within which both human responsibility and
Christ’s power to set free operate” (Powlison 2010, 248). According to the term
describing the counseling style, the difference between Biblical Counseling and Christian
Counseling is precisely focused. The counselor must decide if they advocate for the full
authority of the Bible or counsel within a Christian aspect versus word for word from the
Bible. The literal or the insinuated by Christ is what they must answer (Powlison 2010,
274).
The other five crucial steps are essential to biblical counseling. I feel that step three is
the root of biblical counseling. If a counselee is Christian or not has no bearing on the
introduction of sin. While a Christian counselee immediately relates and understand the
introduction to sin, a non-believer or secular counselee who is genuinely seeking help,
opens to understanding why to root of the problem is sin; or any other term they may
use in place of sin, i.e., karma, needs to be further explored to dive deeper into the root
of their problem. This provides an open dialog between counselor and counselee that
pushes immediate defensiveness to the side. In return, this allows the counselee to be
more comfortable and open to the “two-fold solution” (Powlison 2010, 102) of Adams’
counseling method.
SCHOLARLY ARTICLE REVIEW ON INTEGRATION
2
A crucial issue “in contemporary biblical counseling is to articulate the full biblical view
of both man and man’s situation in all its power, realism, compassion, and subtlety.
Then, by the grace of God, we must mature in wisdom to practice counseling in the light
of such truth” (Powlison 2010, 249).
References
Powlison, David.
The Biblical Counseling Movement.
Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press,
2010.
