Talk:Nouthetic counseling

2007 discussion
I attempted to add notability information to the article. Can anyone tell me if it is sufficient to allow this article to remain? Humble Learner 12:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)Humble Learner
 * Sorry it has taken so long for someone to answer your question. You've done a great job. I've made a few changes, I hope you approve. Please drop me a note at my user page if or when you get back to Wiki. I'd love it if we could expand this page. Important topic, let's help people have access to it. :) Alastair Haines 17:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

re: Nouthetic counselors who don't believe in mental illness. CCEF's Ed Welch has written a great book on the topic titled "Blame It On the Brain?". He wrote it to help counselors help counselees discern whether problems are mostly medical/biochemical, sinful/mental/emotional/behavioural, or a combination of both. A bottom line is that Psychiatrists work to deal with both medical and sinful issues, even if they don't recognize the sin. I've heard from somebody who practices "Experimental psychology" (a Wikipedia Category) which appears to actually work as a science. He says it's clear in his field that DSM (Diagnostics & Statistics Manual, Psychology's 'Bible' which has no statistics but had to be invented in order to get paid medical insurance) is a fraud and that most psychiatric drug prescriptions and electro-shock treatments are either neutral or harmful. But is it any better to tell hurting people that none of these problems have any medical component to them? God has clearly ordained that we live our entire lives in fallen, biochemical bodies. Should we have 'Sola Scriptura' counselors blaming people's medical problems on their sin? Roger604 (talk) 08:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality
The section which compares the two forms of counseling seems very biased. It is filled with phrases like "These theories are contrary to what the Scriptures teach us..." These statements are not neutral and promote one viewpoint over another. If no one else can clean up this section soon, I'll try to take a shot at it. SU Linguist (talk) 18:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Copied and Pasted
This article is copied and pasted from http://www.nouthetic.org/nouthetic-counseling/what-is-nouthetic-counseling.html Kristamaranatha (talk) 08:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * So it seems. In my opinion a major rewrite is in order, preferably including some opposing views to the practice. Jonas Liljeström (talk) 22:52, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

citation for neutheteo
I don't have time to do an edit, but the translations given for neutheteto match up with the definitions in my Greek lexicon for that entry.

Here's the bibliographic information:

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature Third Edition, Copyright © 2000 by The University of Chicago Press

Revised and edited by Frederick William Danker base on the Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments un fer frühchristlichen Literatur, sixth edition, ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous Enlish Editions by W.F.Arndt, F.W.Gingrich, and F.W.Danker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olcharkuk (talk • contribs) 17:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * This page explains some of the reason why NANC changed from "nouthetic" to ACBC (biblical counseling). "Nouthetic" is cumbersome and too narrow.Patrick Fisher 07:32, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Lack of third party content
This article is sourced solely to advocates of Biblical counseling. Worse, it offers no input from mainstream psychology. As such it fails WP:Notability (which requires siginficant independent coverage), WP:DUE (and thus WP:NPOV). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * A search of pubmed.gov (a federal website) has many articles on religious counselinbg. Also see http://www.healthieryou.com/mhexpert/exp1121001a.html  Prsaucer1958 (talk) 01:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That material is already covered at Christian counseling and similar articles. This is a particular subset of that topic, developed by Jay E. Adams, and also known as "nouthetic counseling". HrafnTalkStalk(P) 09:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge articles? Basileias (talk) 17:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


 * That's certainly the way I'm leaning. However, I wanted to test the water, and give a chance for other opinions/alternatives, before making a formal merger proposal. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 18:52, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Not sure merging would be best. Some folks, like Jay Adams and Paul Trip would see biblical counseling as different that Christian counseling since the former does not rely on Psychology, whereas most who call themselves Christian counselors see the two terms as synonymous and including a mixture of Christian religion and psychology.  However, defiantly agree with secondary sources and view points.Wikiofwiki (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * What would you favour as an alternative merge target? Jay E. Adams is the obvious one, but it seems more than a little thinly-sourced to provide a stable home. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:33, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Biblical conseling is larger than Jay Adams now, I don't think it should be moved there. Actually, I am newer to Wikipedia, could you help me understand better why it should be merged?  Is it the lack of greater secondary sources and the small amount of content?  I can add a significant amount and a broader viewpoint if that is the issue.  I am familiar with Christian conseling and the more specific versions of Biblical counseling.Wikiofwiki (talk) 18:23, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The standard for survival as an independent article is WP:GNG: "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Lacking significant coverage, the alternatives are merger or deletion. I would also point out that the article is currently lacking any (not just "greater") third-party sources. And lacking such sources, adding new material would be original research, and thus impermissible. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 18:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the guidance. BTW, for new material, I meant material from third-party sources.Wikiofwiki (talk) 00:18, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Title Change
This article either needs to be properly titled "nouthetic counseling" or the nouthetic principles within need to be removed and a new "Nouthetic Counseling" article needs to be created. Biblical counseling is too broad of a term for what this article is actually about. For example, both Master's seminary and Dallas seminary have biblical counseling programs but there are drastic differences between the principles that each hold to. Master's seminary hold's to a biblical counseling that is nouthetic in practice (this article) while Dallas seminary holds to a biblical counseling which is Christian counseling integrated with general secular psychological principles. Summary:
 * Nouthetic Counseling - The Bible alone is used
 * Biblical Counseling and Christian Counseling - This could be any type of counseling with any varying level of Christian influence. In actually most mainstream Christian/Biblical counseling is governed by general Freudian, Kantian, Jungian, etc principles with some level of added Christian perspective.

Nouthetic counseling developed as a reaction against general biblical/Christian counseling. For this reason, you can't group them together, because they both adamantly oppose one another.

DTS and WTS should be cited and included in the Christian Counseling article, not this one. These schools are adamantly against Nouthetic Counseling and adhere to integrated counseling. Buytruth (talk) 11:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Unless third-party sourcing establishing notability can be found, I'll be re-proposing a merger, most probably to Pastoral care. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:53, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Buytruth: if an article on "Nouthetic counseling" is desired, then significant third party sourcing on that topic is required. As it is, such sourcing is almost entirely non-existent, with most of the article sourced to Adams, and to organisations and individuals promoting the topic.
 * Novaseminary: I would point out that the number of 'Merge' !votes, combined with the number of 'Keep; !votes that were directed at Biblical counseling, mean that the AfD cannot be taken as establishing that Nouthetic counseling is notable.
 * I was with you for a while. i just removed the tags to make it cleaner if there is future discussion. Anyway, does this help establish notability for you? It seems to be a good RS and treats the subject objectively (from a quick read). It also cites other works that criticize Nouthetic. Even if a crock (or best thing ever), if it is a crock (or best thing ever) that has been discussed and criticized in RSs it meets WP:N, doesn't it? Novaseminary (talk) 07:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Novaseminary: I have no problem with this article continuing to exist as long as third-party sources exist, and are used in the article. I've added Collins et al to the article for a general historical-and-viewpoint overview. Further use of it may be helpful for expanding Nouthetic versus integrative/synthetic Christian counsellors' view of each other. Such a source (even just one of them -- though the more the merrier of course) provides a far better basis for an article than all the affiliated sources put together. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 08:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree 100%. I also found a number of gNews archive hits in mainstream newspapers, but the one I saw (quickly) were behind paywalls, so I didn't link. But the article.defimitely meeds more third-party secondary sourcing. Novaseminary (talk) 14:26, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Association of Certified Biblical Counselors (formerly National Association of Nouthetic Counselors), Biblical Counseling Coalition

 * Possibly someone more qualified could add information pertaining to ACBC (NANC) or the Biblical Counseling Coalition.Patrick Fisher 07:29, 13 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishepat000 (talk • contribs)
 * I made an attempt at this under the Organizations section that I just added, but I'm fairly inexperienced with Wikipedia edits so it may not pass muster. --Nhoj (talk) 18:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Update, please
This type of counseling started in the 1970s. The experts, (Clinton and Ohlschlager), who disagree with Adam's approach, (and even his group has backed away from his approach, thankfully), disagreed on 2000. 20-some-years later.

It's 20-some-years later again. That would make those two sections historical now. How has it changed since?

(I honestly don't know, which is why I came to read it in the first place.) 2600:4040:7EDC:6400:E4F8:D548:B5A9:4DF9 (talk) 15:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)