I found out some GREAT news! I can still get NANC certified because I can do the training at home!
NANC is the National Association of Nouthetic Counselors. What is that?
While the name is new, the sort of counseling done by nouthetic counselors is not. From biblical times onward, God’s people have counseled nouthetically. The word itself is biblical. The New Testament was written in Greek, from which the noun nouthesia (verb: noutheteo) comes. It is a term used largely by the apostle Paul which is sometimes translated “admonish, correct or instruct.” The term, which best describes biblical counseling, occurs in such passages as Romans 15:14: “I myself am convinced about you, my brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, and competent to counsel one another.” In that passage, the apostle was encouraging members of the Roman church to do informal, mutual counseling, something that all Christians today should learn, as well. On the other hand, the leaders of a congregation are to counsel nouthetically in a formal manner as a part of their ministry: “Now we ask you, brothers, to recognize those who labor among you, and manage you in the Lord, and counsel you.”
Because the New Testament term is larger than the English word “counsel,” and because it doesn’t carry any of the “freight” that is attached to the latter term, we have simply imported the biblical term into English. In that way, the full force of the biblical concept of counseling may be set forth while avoiding the many contradictory connotations surrounding the English one. The three ideas found in the word nouthesia are Confrontation, Concern and Change. To put it simply, nouthetic counseling consists of lovingly confronting people out of deep concern in order to help them make those changes that God requires. By confrontation we mean that one Christian personally gives counsel to another from the Scriptures. He does not confront him with his own ideas or the ideas of others. He limits his counsel strictly to that which may be found in the Bible, believing that “All Scripture is breathed out by God and useful for teaching, for conviction, for correction and for disciplined training in righteousness in order to fit and fully equip the man from God for every good task.” (2 Timothy 3:16,17) The nouthetic counselor believes that all that is needed to help another person love God and his neighbor as he should, as the verse above indicates, may be found in the Bible.
By concern we mean that counseling is always done for the benefit of the counselee. His welfare is always in view in biblical counseling. The apostle Paul put it this way: “I am not writing these things to shame you, but to counsel you as my dear children.” (1 Corinthians 4:14) Plainly, the familial nature of the word noutheteo appears in this verse. There is always a warm, family note to biblical counseling which is done among the saints of God who seek to help one another become more like Christ. Christians consider their counseling to be a part of the sanctification process whereby one Christian helps another get through some difficulty that is hindering him from moving forward in his spiritual growth.
By change we mean that counseling is done because there is something in another Christian’s life that fails to meet the biblical requirements and that, therefore, keeps him from honoring God. All counseling — biblical or otherwise– attempts change. Only biblical counselors know what a counselee should become as the result of counseling: he should look more like Christ. He is the Standard. Biblical counseling is done by Christians who are convinced that God is able to make the changes that are necessary as His Word is ministered in the power of the Spirit. It is their hope to help every interested church develop a nouthetic counseling program that will be a blessing to all of the members of that congregation. The importance of such counseling in churches is underscored by the words of Paul as he described his ministry in Ephesus: “Therefore, be alert, remembering that for three years, night and day, I didn’t stop counseling each one of you with tears.” (Acts 20:31) The regularity and intense nature of Paul’s counsel during his three-year ministry at Ephesus is emphasized by these words. If Paul found it necessary to counsel nouthetically for that entire period, as he said, surely our churches need it, too.
I began the certification process in 2005, but had to stop when I left North Carolina. Now, I may actually be able to complete the process! The materials cost $245, so it will be awhile before I can actually do it, but at least there is hope that I can finish. 
Wow, that’s fantastic! May God help you save that money quickly.
I’m glad you’re glad. Can’t comment further until I’ve read more of the articles on their website. I’m finding some of them a little scary, but that’s probably not surprising.
Not surprising at all.
But then, you shouldn’t be surprised that I’d go for this.
I’m not surprised - I keep finding myself thinking of it as the Answers In Genesis of psychiatry, and then remembering your views on that…
Having read a few more articles, my main concerns with nouthetic counselling are:
1) It’s a “directive” style of counselling, which to me seems worryingly akin to brainwashing.
2) It places relationship with God over mental wellbeing. Unless the counsellee is themself focused on this goal, this seems like a betrayal of trust.
3) It’s a cottage-industry alternative to mainstream psychiatry. I can find no evidence of critical analysis or testing of these techniques - they’re just one man’s opinion writ large.
Obviously your mileage on #1 and #2 will vary - is it still brainwashing if it’s done in God’s name? However, #3 may be meaningful to you.
Is it worth paying that much for Dr* Jay Adams’ personal opinions on the subject of counselling? What evidence is there that his approach is any more effective than yours? Is this just a really expensive way of boosting your own counselling self-confidence? What good will it actually do you or your counsellees?
* Adams’ major was in Greek, and his professional area of expertise was speech. He’s not a medical doctor.
When it comes to the Bible, degrees really don’t mean all that much. What do they mean? They mean that academically you know the Bible. But that’s not what knowledge of the Bible is about. Christians don’t know the Bible for the sake of knowing Scriptures. We know the Bible in an effort to make ourselves more like Christ. For a Christian who takes what he reads to heart, the Bible will promote change.
How is it brainwashing if you have a choice? All this counseling does is teach what the Bible says on the subject. It’s up to you to believe that teaching and change your life to live by it.
And it doesn’t place your relationship with God over wellbeing. It’s more that we (Christians) believe that a Christian’s mental wellbeing is directly tied to your relationship with God.
Perhaps I should note that nouthetic counseling is a waste of time on someone who isn’t a believer, therefore if a counselee does not already know Christ and doesn’t come to know Christ in the first few sessions, then sessions are discontinued. And before you cry discrimination or shout that isn’t fair… people who sign up for biblical counseling generally know what they’re going for.
Fair point about the degrees. I’m probably just over-sensitive about use of “Dr” - a lot of quacks try to make themselves look better by flaunting irrelevant qualifications.
How is it brainwashing if you have a choice?
Consensual brainwashing is not an oxymoron. For example, many Scientology conversion techniques are considered to be brainwashing. If someone goes to you for psychological help, and you abuse this lowering of their defenses to persuade them to believe in body thetans, that’s brainwashing.
Equivalently, I’d say that, if someone came to you asking for general psychological help, and you used the opportunity to push them to stronger reliance on God, that could be brainwashing. It would depend on the details of the situation.
This is just my personal opinion - I don’t know enough about the psychology of brainwashing to be authoritative here.
And it doesn’t place your relationship with God over wellbeing. It’s more that we (Christians) believe that a Christian’s mental wellbeing is directly tied to your relationship with God.
Which is why I mentioned that your mileage may vary. From where I’m standing, it seems to be possible to have a strong relationship with God and still be stark raving bonkers. However, I’m certainly not an expert on what such a relationship would look like.
Did you have any comment on my third point?
No, because I know you well enough to know that you would disagree with anything I could possibly say.
I’ve seen this training in practice, and I also know firsthand how well it works.
What I haven’t said that you may be interested in (and have probably already figured out) is that I don’t put any stock whatsoever in psychiatry or psychology.
No, because I know you well enough to know that you would disagree with anything I could possibly say.
Hey, I only disagree with the bits I think are wrong. Anything else and I’d just confuse myself
I’ve seen this training in practice, and I also know firsthand how well it works.
How big is your sample size here? And, very importantly, what was your control group?
Remember, it’s not just a question of whether nouthetic counselling works; it’s whether it works better than any other form of counselling. For example, I have anecdotal experience of success with hypnotherapy - how does nouthetic counselling compare with that?
What I haven’t said that you may be interested in (and have probably already figured out) is that I don’t put any stock whatsoever in psychiatry or psychology.
I had indeed guessed that
To be honest, I don’t put much stock in them either, although I haven’t done the background reading on this. Mostly they seem disgustingly fuzzy. One thing I did agree with on the NANC website was:
I had a minor argument with a parent earlier about precisely this point in relation to Myers-Briggs Type Indicators. But, again, it isn’t sufficient for nouthetic counselling to point out weaknesses in mainstream counselling; it also has to show that it does better. Otherwise, how is it worth your money?
I have to pick my jaw up off the floor because you agreed with a semi-fundamentalist group on something!
In thinking out my reply to you, I almost think I should devote an entire post to this. But I won’t, so you’ll have to muddle through this lengthy reply.
I don’t expect you to ever agree with me on this issue because you aren’t a believer.
But when you start trying to compare biblical counseling with psychiatry, you are really comparing apples to oranges.
What is the primary goal of psychiatry? “The relief of mental suffering associated with symptoms of disorder and improvement of mental well-being.”
What is the primary goal of Biblical counseling? (This is actually a question I have to answer for the certification).
These goals are plainly not the same.
And often, psychiatry applies a “band-aid” to a problem that has a deeper spiritual cause. Biblical counseling seeks to find the root sins and problems and use the Bible to show the counselee how to change to be like God in those areas.
This is not to say that mental illness doesn’t exist. Biblical counseling is not a solution for mental illness. But not everything diagnosed as mental illness from the psychiatrist’s secular perspective is necessarily mental illness.
As far as it being worth your money…the only money that is exchanged is what the counselor pays for certification. All NANC counseling is done free of charge.
I’m trying to avoid my usual stunt of responding to everyt single line. Tell me if there’s anything important you think I’ve missed.
I don’t expect you to ever agree with me on this issue because you aren’t a believer.
Fair enough. The fun part, though, lies in separating out the things that are true and meaningful regardless of whether one is a Christian or not.
Obviously there are some conclusions that apply to both of us. For example, I’d imagine that you don’t like having your foot trodden on either. I’d argue that at least some of the points I’m raising fall into that category.
But not everything diagnosed as mental illness from the psychiatrist’s secular perspective is necessarily mental illness.
I think I read an article on NANC.org that mentioned that. But it then went on to say that the correct explanation is sin, which would appear to be a classic case of descriptive ability dressing up as diagnostic ability…
The thing I personally don’t like here is that it’s not just saying psychiatry is unsupported; it’s saying that it’s actively wrong. That shifts the burden of proof onto NANC.org’s shoulders, and I don’t think they meet that burden. If I said nouthetic counselling was wrong with as little evidence, you’d quite rightly laugh me off the blog.
As far as it being worth your money…the only money that is exchanged is what the counselor pays for certification.
That was the money I was referring to. Is there any reason to think that the course actually conveys $245-worth of improvement in your counselling skills? Or will it just improve your self-confidence, placebo style? If the latter, I’d say you’re better than that.
I HATE WORDPRESS! It just ate my own comment. Trying again…
The fun part, though, lies in separating out the things that are true and meaningful regardless of whether one is a Christian or not.
But this isn’t going to happen when it comes to the Bible. “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Cor. 2:14)
But it then went on to say that the correct explanation is sin, which would appear to be a classic case of descriptive ability dressing up as diagnostic ability…
But more often than not, the problem is sin. That’s a diagnosis, not a description. It then enables the counselee to see what needs to be changed and how. It’s not, “Here’s your problem, take a pill.” It’s, “Here’s your problem, here’s how you fix it.”
Remember, biblical counseling is counseling believers–people who understand sin and its ramifications. If, for example, you came to me with a problem and wanted counseling, I wouldn’t counsel you because you’re not a Christian and I know that it would really be a waste of time to try and get you to see the biblical perspective.
As far as the money spent…
I would, in all honesty, encourage every Christian to go through the 30 hours of training, if nothing else. I’ve completed the first 10 hours (though I have to repeat them since so much time has lapsed), and I learned more about the Bible and who I’m supposed to be as a Christian in that time than I had learned in the previous 5 years of church attendance and Bible study. It’s not about improving my counseling skills. It’s about understanding the nature of the human condition. It’s about knowing the Bible and where to go in the Bible to find solutions for relevant issues. NANC shows you that.
Is it worth it? Absolutely.
But this isn’t going to happen when it comes to the Bible.
Of course not. Equally, it won’t happen when it comes to the stated goals of NANC. However, its effectiveness at achieving those goals is well within our shared scope.
But more often than not, the problem is sin. That’s a diagnosis, not a description. It then enables the counselee to see what needs to be changed and how. It’s not, “Here’s your problem, take a pill.” It’s, “Here’s your problem, here’s how you fix it.”
Even for something like ADHD? That’s the sort of thing that really worries me: that “sin” will be used as a diagnosis for pretty much everything that’s wrong with a person.
In the case of ADHD, for example, twins studies and heredity studies show that genetics is a factor in about 3/4 of cases. NANC’s writings about this don’t seem to even be aware of these studies, instead claiming that the idea of genetic causes is just a result of “nonbiblical presuppositions”.
If a kid really can’t help themself, labelling that behaviour “sinful” would appear to just add a huge dose of guilt to an already challenging situation.
I’ve completed the first 10 hours (though I have to repeat them since so much time has lapsed), and I learned more about the Bible and who I’m supposed to be as a Christian in that time than I had learned in the previous 5 years of church attendance and Bible study.
In which case I waive my concerns about its being worth the money. The question remains as to whether nouthetic counselling, as applied by a counsellor to others, really does what it says on the tin.
Even for something like ADHD? That’s the sort of thing that really worries me: that “sin” will be used as a diagnosis for pretty much everything that’s wrong with a person.
More often than not. That does give room for biological and genetic factors.
The issue with ADHD, though, is that parents often (not always) use it as the catch-all excuse for their child’s bad behavior. Rather than working with the child and the problem to correct behavior issues, anything goes. I even saw this with one of the children of a former pastor. His child was, for lack of a better term, a little hell beast. Because the parents blamed everything on the “disease” and there was no discipline or accountability. Biblical counseling seeks to bridge that gap.
Let me add one more thing. This isn’t just an issue with ADHD. It’s with everything. It’s become quite the norm in our culture to blame everything but yourself when things go wrong. Biblical counseling seeks to stop blame-shifting and increase personal accountability.
More often than not. That does give room for biological and genetic factors.
How much room? The articles at NANC.org suggest that the kid would just be told, via Bible verses, to sit still dammit. I saw no recognition of how physically difficult this may be for an ADHD individual.
Biblical counseling seeks to stop blame-shifting and increase personal accountability.
So does every other form of counselling that I’ve come across. I’ve had personal experience with two forms: hypnotherapy* and conventional counselling**. Both stressed that the individual, and only the individual, was responsible for their behaviour. The only caveat is that saying “you’re accountable” is only treated as a first step, not a complete solution.
As far as accountability is concerned, nouthetic counselling would appear to be bridging a gap that doesn’t exist. Actually, I’d argue that the directive style of counselling deprives people of responsibility for their actions - after all, they’re just doing what the counsellor told them to. Conventional counselling puts the counsellee in the driver’s seat.
* I had ultra-acute arachnophobia. This is even less fun than it sounds. Incidentally, the hypnotherapy worked like a charm, although of course this is only anecdotal.
** I was a Mentor (volunteer student counsellor) at secondary school. Sadly, we only got a few hours of training before being loosed on the world, so I only know the broadest of principles.
So does every other form of counselling that I’ve come across. I’ve had personal experience with two forms
So all this boils down to is your perspective vs. mine. You’ve had experience with secular psychology that holds a personal accountable and I’ve had experience with secular psychology that doesn’t.
Amanda,
Who are you getting your training through that you can do it at home to meet the education requirements for NANC?
I just got back from the National Conference at Birchman Baptist. It was truly a blessing.
Joel