Earlier this week TGC reposted a blog by David Murray from 2012. Murray’s words demonstrate that there has been tremendous progress in the biblical counseling movement since its inception forty years ago. Once upon a time Christian Counselors were content with their label which described their attempt at Christianizing psychology. The progress has forced all of us to consider whether or not our methods and sources for counseling wisdom are biblical. His affirmations of biblical counseling demonstrate the achievements of many who have labored for scriptural necessity in the care of souls. My goal, however, is to interact with three concerns raised by Murray in an attempt to defend the use of the term “biblical” in biblical counseling.
The Question of Authority
First, what do we mean by the term biblical? Murray suggested that we change the name of biblical counseling, or at least to transform the understanding of what we mean by the term “biblical.” I agree that clarifying the term will prove beneficial, but the purpose of clarity would be to distinguish the plethora of approaches existing under the broad umbrella of biblical counseling, since it is obvious that we do not all interpret the idea of “biblical” in the same manner. I do not think, however, the answer is to relax the term for the purpose of inclusivism. The term is intended to communicate a demarcation of Scripture as authoritative, sufficient, and necessary for the counseling task.
Seldom in our day do we consider something authoritative if it is not exhaustive. If the Bible is not authoritative in all matters because it lacks exhaustive information of a subject, then I submit that this should include spiritual matters as well. This argument is made often to justify the use of extra biblical material by claiming the Bible is not authoritative because it is not exhaustive. If we apply this same standard to spiritual matters, since the Bible does not exhaustively answer all our curiosities in this realm either, we purchase a ticket aboard a train bound to dismiss the Bible’s authority altogether. Thankfully, pastoral care and counseling is being rescued from Paul Tillich’s theology and we are not interested in returning to it.
It may very well be that the question at hand is what resources are necessary for the counseling task? What is necessary for God honoring human change? If we expand the term biblical to include secular discoveries as necessary, then the authority and necessity of Scripture are compromised. Where then becomes the threshold of Scripture’s authority and sufficiency? Man becomes the ultimate authority, discerning the limitations and vitality of sufficiency, while validating other sources of authority as on par with special revelation. Acting as if the Bible is lacking in what is necessary for the human condition leaves us to our own wisdom in discovering the missing pieces to make men whole.
The Question of Dualism
Second, we tend to limit the usefulness of Scripture to matters of spirituality. In Murray’s claim, biblical counselors create this unnecessary dualism between the Word and the rest of the world because we claim the Bible to be fully sufficient. However, are there aspects of life that are not under a spiritual domain? The implication behind this claim is that there are more complex problems for man than understanding the depth and breadth of sin’s effects upon man, especially in regards to human suffering. From my vantage point Murray’s argument actually creates an unnecessary dualism in suggesting that there are parts of man that are spiritual and parts of man that are not. This limits the sufficiency of Scripture to the domains of our own categorizations. If God’s redemption, which is spiritual, encompasses the material world, then this dualism is an unhelpful distinction. Our bodies are material; however, the body is not divorced from spiritual consequence as evidenced by suffering, decay, and death. Bodily actions strain and influence the inner man. Likewise, sinful heart desires affect the body. We can’t understand the decay of our biology apart from the curse of sin upon the world. As believers we are called to present our bodies as a living sacrifice to God which is our spiritual service of worship (Romans 12:1). All that man does and endures is spiritually appraised. Even though we have a body, we do not fight against flesh and blood, but principalities and powers (2 Corinthians 10:3; Ephesians 6:12). The body and soul are not intended to be viewed as a distinct dualism, but as a unified whole.
Everything we think, say, and do makes a statement about God. Human activity is spiritual by design. For the believer, we will be spiritually judged on every idle word. For the unbeliever, their actions in the body are storing up condemnation for themselves. Consider Jesus’ response to temptation in Matthew 4:4, “Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.” Jesus is not creating a dualism of spiritual things and non-spiritual things. He is not saying that the Word is for spiritual stuff in life and then there is sustenance given outside of the spiritual realm. Paul guards this unnecessary dualism by making spiritual the bodily necessity of eating and drinking in 1 Corinthians 10:31, “Whether then you eat or drink do all to the glory of God.” The physical task of eating is not separated from spiritual responsibility in relation to God. Our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. So to say that our bodies exist outside of spiritual significance in order to create a category to which the Scripture does not speak is to promote an unnecessary dualism within humanity.
The Question of Redemptive Grace
Third, God has certainly demonstrated his kindness toward man in common grace, but that is not the same as general revelation. In short, general revelation is God’s revelation of himself to all through creation. In this case, to search for revelation beyond this limitation seems to stretch and warp its scope and intention. As has been said publicly by others, and I will affirm here, that there is true information that comes from outside of Scripture. God does provide grace through creation, but not in a truly redemptive sense. It is true that fig leaves, in a literal sense, covered Adam and Eve’s nakedness. But, in truth, they remained bare before God. Our deliverance comes from the Lord. All other forms of deliverance are but a shadow of full redemption. One danger is our hurried acquiescence to what has been termed “creation grace” as an equal revelation to Scripture in order to claim that man can be made whole without Jesus Christ. May we not grow faint or weary in our patience for full deliverance from every sin and suffering. The Scripture grants the grace and wisdom to take heart as we patiently wait by faith. Without faith it is impossible to please God, therefore, it follows that any source of wisdom that I rely upon, other than Scripture to quiet the disturbed soul, is to replace the clothing of imputed righteousness with fig leaves (Hebrews 11:6). This is not redemptive grace, but shifting shadows not sturdy enough to bear the weight of the restless heart.
Would we call the knowledge compiled by unbelievers creation grace? It is certainly gracious that God allows knowledge of any sort for humanity, but we must not neglect the source of the two wisdoms according to Scripture and the consequence of each. The source of true wisdom and knowledge is Christ without caveat or condition (Colossians 2:3) and the consequence leads to life and not captivity (Colossians 2:8). Human wisdom leads to blindness and destruction. Wisdom in the later sense is not true wisdom, but foolishness to God. It is not grace but condemnation in the form of a slippery place that makes the fool fall to ruin. In contrast, redemptive grace from the Scripture prepares one’s heart for the hope and deliverance to be revealed in the day of the Lord.
So when we say “biblical” in biblical counseling we mean, at minimum, that the Scriptures are authoritative, sufficient, necessary, and not surpassed nor equaled by worldly “wisdom” for the counseling task.
