c From Powilson’s (2010) “Crucial Issues in Contemporary Biblical Counseling”, I believe the
most significant and urgent issue is point four, the need to further investigate the counselor-
counselee relationship. Nouthetic counseling’s formula for change is through evangelism and
sanctification, which establishes Scripture as the authority for truth and faith in Jesus for
everlasting healing. Sometimes, the client’s problems manifest from misalignment of values to
biblical teaching so the counselor sees his function as the facilitator of correction. Yet, Jesus warns
in Matthew 7:1-5 that it is easier for one to see the shortcomings in someone else without noticing
his own sin. The counselor needs humility as a peer to be receptive to correction. Thus, there
needs further development for counselor adjustment between the roles of authoritative shepherd and
wise peer.
c c c c c c c c c By understanding the position of the counselor-counselee relationship, additional insights
are made available to address points two and three (Powilson, 2010). The client’s motivation is
essential for sustaining change so the counselor’s modulation between the role of authoritative
shepherd and wise peer should be done to optimize motivation. If the counselor is too
authoritative, he risks pushing the client toward behavioral change without fostering personal
motivation to keep up the behavior after counseling ends. However, assertive confrontation may be
highly effective if the client is resistant to taking responsibility for personal sin. Sometimes,
problems result from external circumstances. Then it is more appropriate to act as a wise peer by
offering empathy and encouragement to motivate the client to manage his suffering. He may even
go a step further to improve his situation despite not having caused his predicament.
c c c c c c c c c Powilson’s (2010) other issues affect Nouthetic counseling on a more general and
academic level than the issues mentioned above. These points are important and deserve immediate
attention but do not fit the criteria for urgency as these will require a series of smaller
improvements over time through a culture shift. I agree modifying how Adams’s view is
communicated is necessary for progress toward acceptance in the secular and academic spheres.
Reframing the concepts with scientific terminology without compromising the theological essence
of Nouthetic counseling, that God is sufficient to heal all who accept His grace through faith, will
start closing the gap between Christians in ministry and in professional counseling. Adams never
implied psychology was unhelpful as it does not follow “[t]hat Scripture is ‘sufficient’ to transform
us never means that the Bible is ‘exhaustive’” (Powilson, loc. 8550). There is much in agreement
when one scratches beneath the surface of Adams’s perspective which has been polished by
unjustly by reductionism. With patience, these myths can be chipped away to reveal the richness
and depth of Nouthetic counseling.
Reference
Powlison, D. (2010). The biblical counseling movement history and context [Kindle iOS]. New
Growth Press. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08MTP9FWZ
