Fallen Soldiers March®

Site Name

Fallen Soldiers March® 501 (c) (3) non-profit

Site Name

Fallen Soldiers March®

Tagline

A 501 (c) (3) Non-Profit Dedicated to
Providing Biblical Counseling,
Service Dogs, and Veteran Advocacy

Psychology’s Neutrality: An Obscurity for Plurality and Integrationism in the Counseling Room

Psychology’s Neutrality: An Obscurity for Plurality and Integrationism in the Counseling Room

by David Frazier, MABC, Th.D.c

If you’ve been in or around counseling circles, you may have heard the terms psychology and integrationism echoing here and there. You’re probably also aware that the context and usage of all terms play vital roles in how we understand them. That being said, what do we mean by psychology and integrationism, and how should we as biblical counselors understand them?

Before we go on, let us establish a crystal clear definition of what we mean by integrating worldly psychology with biblical Christianity.

The field of psychology may be divided into at least two major elements:

A) That which relates to pure science or what may be considered as the biological/material functions. To expand, this element of psychology includes speech, minute muscle movements, glandular secretions—in short, every detectable or potentially detectable action or reaction of the individual.
—Winfred Hill, Psychology: Principles and Problems (New York: J.B.Lippincott, 1970).

B) That which seeks to explain the whole of man, including his physical, mental, social, religious, and transcendental relationships to life.

As long as we remain in the arena of genuine science, theology and psychology have no fundamental polarizing issues. However, as soon as psychology begins to cross its sound scientific lines of demarcation, it immediately comes into direct conflict with theology. In the book Psychological Seduction, Kilpatrick writes this:

Psychology as a science has a legitimate part to play in our society. It is another matter, however, when it wants to play every part and direct the drama as well.
—William Kirk Kilpatrick, Psychological Seduction (New York: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983), 13–14.

Dr. Dennis D. Frey, Th.D. writes,

That psychology has, in fact, moved far beyond its scientific parameters to become a competing philosophy with theology cannot really be doubted, even by reason of a cursory examination. Psychology, in contrast to Biblical counseling by very definition, can neither explain nor adequately deal with man as God created him, much less as the redeemed man is intended to be through Christ living in him. Science can deal with such things as nutritional deficiencies or chemical imbalances in the brain, but it has nothing to say about the mind, which is nonphysical.
— Dennis D. Frey, Th.D., Biblical Directionism: A Biblical Approach to Counseling Methodology (Newburgh, Ind: GMA & Inspiration Press, 2003).

Spiritual problems call for spiritual solutions. How can a non-physical entity (which the mind and soul indeed are) get sick or become diseased? We cannot be reduced to simply creatures with brains! No, we are human beings with souls. Soul care is a spiritual issue, and spiritual issues require spiritual tools. The New Living Translation words it clear and precisely,

We are human, but we don’t wage war as humans do. We use God’s mighty weapons, not worldly weapons, to knock down the strongholds of human reasoning and to destroy false arguments.
2 Corinthians 10:4, NLT

Question to ponder: Do secular psychology, psychotherapy (which is implicit in all false religions), and the like align themselves more with God’s mighty weapons, or worldly weapons?

Dr. Frey continues with this final elegant statement, one that this author could not improve upon:

Psychology not only pretends to bring "science" to bear on problems which it cannot even define, much less solve (virtue signaling), but it claims to meet needs that the Bible says it alone can provide. Thus, psychology is in the fullest sense a rival religion that can never be wedded to Christianity.
— Dennis D. Frey, Th.D., Biblical Directionism: A Biblical Approach to Counseling Methodology (Newburgh, Ind: GMA & Inspiration Press, 2003).

The term integrationism refers to the seemingly happy marriage of secular motifs and biblical theology into its overarching counseling model for Christians. Typically, we will see this labeled "Christian counseling," but never will we see it labeled as "nouthetic" or "biblical counseling" because the two are not the same, nor are they "just semantically different." They, in fact, are diametrically opposed to each other.

How do we define nouthetic counseling?

Nouthetic comes from the root word nouthetéō (new-the-TAY-oh).

          The Koine Greek:

Nouthetéō — "I admonish, I warn, I counsel." To admonish through instruction; appealing to the mind by supplying doctrinal and spiritual substance (content). This exerts positive pressure on someone's logic (reasoning), which urges them to turn to and choose God’s best.

 

From noús— "mind" and títhēmi— "to place" (setting the mind by warning or admonition).

Plain terms:

It is that counseling model that believes, holds steadfast to, appeals to, and applies the all-sufficiency of God’s Word as the solution to all problems of life. 

 

 

Arguments and Appeals

 Integrationism’s argument appeals to secular humanism ("as long as it works, brings relief, or makes you happy"). It argues that since we have new modern problems that the Bible doesn’t necessarily contain or speak to, we need and are open to new solutions and ideologies that offer help and assistance to these new problems of life. Again, "as long as it helps" is the mantra. Talk to the person now addicted to heroin, they’ll tell you it sure felt like it was helping, bringing relief, and making them happy—in the beginning! The "as long as it works" argument breaks down when logic and critical thinking are introduced. Therefore, it is nothing more than shifting sand, exactly what our Savior Jesus Christ warned not to build a house upon.

This author’s argument against integrationism appeals to biblical theology, based solely upon the attributes of God (theology proper): Since God created life, He alone would also know how to solve all of life’s problems. If there’s one problem God cannot solve, then He could not be God.

The ontology of God (His very essence and being) proclaims God is good, righteous, holy, full of agape love, immutable (cannot and does not change), and all-knowing (omniscient). Since God, who created life, is also good and all-knowing, He therefore must possess all the solutions to all of life’s problems for all humanity and for humanity’s entire span of existence from beginning to the very end. Therefore, if He did not reveal those solutions to us in a fixed and settled way, He could not be good because that would make Him a withholding God.

Since God has chosen to reveal Himself to us through the written Word and through His Son Jesus Christ, the Word Incarnate, He would also see to it that we must be able to find all solutions to all of life’s problems in the exclusively in His Word. The Bible itself explicitly claims there are no new revelations to man outside of His Word and His Son.

On many past occasions and in many different ways, God spoke to our fathers through the prophets. But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe. Hebrews 1:1–2, Berean Study Bible, italics mine

Here we see the Hebrews author, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20–21), clearly proclaims Christ Jesus (The LOGOS, The Word of God Incarnate) to be the final revelation to man. This surely encompasses a void of needing newly revealed solutions to life’s problems. God’s Word is either all sufficient or non-sufficient; we cannot marry the two ideas.

The Hebrews author continues to demolish all ambiguity about what he’s radically proclaiming:

The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word.

Hebrews 3:3, Berean Study Bible, italics mine

How many things did he say are upheld by His powerful Word? The Holy Spirit sounds off, "All things!" We might rebut, "Does that include PTSD? Does that include drug addiction? Does that include sociopathic narcissistic rage? I don’t see those in the Bible." The Holy Spirit would simply repeat, "All things!" 

The apostle Paul writes to the Corinthians that all the problems they are facing are common to mankind. In other words, there are no new problems! This is full of beautiful encouragement because it assures us His Word is able to speak authoritatively to and solve anything and everything we may face.

No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful.
1 Corinthians 10:13, Berean Study Bible italics mine

 

Surface Problems vs. Root Issues/Causes

What most people believe are their worst problems are really only symptoms of the real root issue(s) causing the symptomatic behaviors (surface problems). For instance, a guy comes to me and says, "Hey, I have a terrible problem." I ask him what it is, and he answers, "This persistent cough!" Is coughing really his problem? Or is that a symptom of his real problem, its root (he has a severe lung infection)? He could go out and buy OTC cough meds and other things that help his cough and bring much needed relief, but if he doesn’t deal with and eliminate the root issue—his lung infection—the cough will come back, and worse, perhaps even eventually take his life.  

Another parallel: you could go out in your garden and pull weeds all day and it will look great, but if you don’t kill the root, they will all grow back and often with a vengeance.

God’s Word is not interested in weed-pulling. God’s Word is interested in cutting through the surface (presentations problems), cutting through the calloused layers of pride and unbelief in our hearts, and getting to the root where we can have real and lasting victory over our life-dominating issues and sinful behavior patterns. 

For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it pierces even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow. It judges the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
Hebrews 4:12, Berean Study Bible

The Word of God alone is able to speak to every real problem (those hidden root issues) of life.

Integrationism says we need extra-biblical solutions for the new problems of modernized society, but we’ll appeal to the Scriptures for things like salvation. This inescapably introduces the idea of questioning the sufficiency of God’s Word. Is this not a drop of the same venom spewed from that ancient serpent of Eden, where he said, "Has God really said . . .?" The first thing he did to tempt Adam and Eve to sin against God was get them to question God’s Word and its sufficiency.

Integrationism says there are problems of life the Bible cannot speak to. According to theology proper, this introduces the notion that God has withheld vital help from us, which leads always to seeking enlightenment and/or help from another source or sources.

Is this not exactly what Lucifer did right after he got them to question God’s Word? We read in Genesis 3 that the enemy of our souls flipped the script to make God out to be the withholding tyrant deity, and immediately they reached out to an alternative source (Satan) that seemed good for obtaining wisdom, enlightenment, and becoming like God. But that can happen only through Christ, His Son, and trusting in the sufficiency of His Word.

"God knows that on the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil." When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and pleasing to the eyes, and that it was desirable to obtaining wisdom, she took the fruit and ate it. She also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it.
Genesis 3:5–6

Again, notice it seemed right and good to reach for another source other than God and His all-sufficient Word to meet their needs. As we have learned, one of the key fundamentals of integrationism is that we need another way, a new human-invented answer, an alternative solution to those missing problems the Bible doesn’t cover. Like somehow God didn’t conceive of and foresee man’s modern problems. Was God’s telescope too short? With integrationism, man becomes his own co-savior. Man has something to add that God either missed, didn’t provide, or just plain wouldn’t provide. Satan tempted man with the same thing, which caused his own fall, and that was self-sufficiency (see Isaiah 14:12–14). 

There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.
Proverbs 14:12, Berean Study Bible

The idea of "We need another source for help with these ‘new behavior issues’" not only defies what the Bible itself claims, as we have seen in the multiple examples laid out so far, but also opens itself up to deceitful spirits and endless doctrines of demons,

The Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons.
1 Timothy 4:1, Berean Study Bible

Remember in Genesis 3, at the beginning of the conversation Satan questioned the teaching of God. Then as they continued their discourse, he substituted his own "new" teaching for God’s.

Integrationism welcomes the doctrines (teachings) of humans and champions its "open-mindedness" when dealing with the human mind and its treatment. It cloaks itself in this seemingly noble concept—"As long as it works." This in reality is nothing more than what is properly called neutrality and plurality. "Neutrality is nice; singularity is solemn." Oh, how this caters to the smorgasbord mentality of humanity. We love our options and variations so much we will welcome them where they were never to be welcomed, into the very hearts of our churches, teachings, and counseling rooms.

 

Neutral Is Nice?

Psychology champions its neutrality ("as long as it works for you"), yet this is purely relative and no less than a façade behind which greater deviants thrive. More than this, it is in fact a pernicious delusion to claim such. Objectively, there is no such thing as a "neutral counseling model." Even the counseling practicum that endeavors to sterilize the amusement of all "value systems" (God, religion, mysticism, etc.) exists under the pretense of helping the patient find some value in life. It may look like this: "My only value is to value nothing" (the nihilist). Nevertheless, this value-sterile methodology is far removed from any factual evidence of neutrality. I may even reach as far as to say that to be truly neutral is to be truly dead, or truly duped.

On a side note, a brief WWII history lesson can bring further support to the argument of this article. Edwin Reischauer states, "To be neutral you must be ready to be highly militarized" (Emerson Chapin, "Edwin Reischauer Diplomat and Scholar Dies at 79," New York Times, September 2, 1990).

In other words, to fight for nothing is to fight for something! We would learn that every "neutral" country during WWII eventually bent under heaping weight of evidence mounted against them from breaching the rules of neutrality by supplying bias intelligence to aid a chosen belligerent (fighting side). Ion Marandici writes,

The one solution in order to avoid unnecessary contradictions and deepen at the same time the relations with NATO would be to interpret the concept of permanent neutrality in a flexible manner.

Ion Marandici, Moldova’s Neutrality: What is at Stake? (LVIV: IDIS-Viitorul and the Center for European Studies, 2006).

 

Neutrality is Anything But Flexible

That is just the point. Neutrality, in its proper meaning and by its own claims, is absolute—it must not be flexible, else it forfeits its own concept. Secular psychology’s fallacious claims to neutrality, and "in order to avoid unnecessary contradictions and deepen its relations," have only one mode of escape: They must be interpreted in a flexible manner. The crux of it is such: "I am neutral, because I am flexible; I am flexible because I am neutral." At the same time, neutrality must not choose a particular side; therefore, it is anything but flexible and becomes more rigid and absolute than the "absolutes" it purports to oppose.

My argument is this: Any claim to neutrality is just a clever euphemism of obscurity—a secret garden for the harvesting of the fruits of postmodernism/pluralism. Consider what Douglas R. Groothuis writes:

Postmodernists claim that any comprehensive and authoritative worldview is forever out of reach and that to claim otherwise is an arrogant pretext for dominating those with whom one disagrees. They claim the objective truths of the Christian worldview are unwarranted and lead to the oppression of non-Christians, and must be abandoned. No worldview holds any objective authority over another.

Douglas R. Groothuis, How Should a Christian Understand Postmodernism?

 

Absolute Truth Is Absolutely Not True!

Postmodernism gives refuge to pluralism, which hides behind the euphemism of neutrality. It claims that there is no objective/absolute truth. Therefore, aware of its contradictory dilemma of being called a worldview and then by its self-claims defeated, postmodernists have created their own "solution to escape its contradictions." They do not claim to be a worldview at all, but rather just a primordial stew of ideals gathered into one melting pot. This certainly has the appearance of making up all the rules as they go along to cater to their own favored "view of the world." Postmodernists condemn rule-makers yet inescapably make more rules.

The whole mindset—along with all its spin-offs—is self-refuting. With conundrum, the evolutionist religiously clings to his abandonment of religion. The secular psychologist stirs up the acute awareness of "how the patient feels" and immediately sets him forth to "quit feeling" everything through repetitive numbing treatments and medications. The postmodernist becomes the very thing he sets out to condemn, an absolutist.  

Moreover, the Christian counselor (integrationist) sets himself in a position of great secular pressure to adhere more strongly to psychological pragmatism rather than succumb to being dubbed a "nothing butterist" (nothing but the Bible). And rather than holding firmly to the infallible Scriptures as absolutely authoritative, he defects to the peer pressure. The neutrality-driven temptation to integrate two opposing worldviews becomes his "one solution to avoid contradictions and deepen his relations." At the end of the day, his own form of pluralism ("more than one way") is adopted, and through this compromise comes also its resulting conflict, both inwardly and outwardly.

Even in the discussions of world religions, the pluralist claiming neutrality suggests that all religions are just as efficient and beneficial for arriving at the same destination. However, if there is more than one way, then why hold to any way? The answer is the belief that reasons a certain particular "way" to be significantly exclusive or more favorable (inclusive) than its counterparts.

The moment one conforms to the neutral and pluralistic claims of religious or worldview equality, that person immediately diminishes his own worldview down to a mere personal taste (relative subjectivism), with about as much weight as drinking a cup of coffee. I personally would desire never to synthesize a counseling regime from such a trivial foundation.

Here is an apologetic: If God is a God of peace (and He is), and the different religions are merely different approaches fundamentally shaped by social and linguistic constructions, then the logical conclusion would be that these differing (relative) "truths" should also be able to coexist in peace. On the contrary, they are not and they cannot! In fact, they are at enmity with one another, both socially (horizontally) and theologically (vertically).

Pluralism fails in that it makes any absolute concept of God or truth to be "absolutely" false. It also fails in that it makes God cease to be infallible by His seeming inability to convey His divine paths consistently and congruently. The topic that religions at war with one another could not stem from an omniscient God of peace and love as their harmonious source is beyond the scope of this paper.

It proceeds as such: Any way is the right way as long as it brings favorable results. Again, say this to the homeless heroin addict, and he may profoundly respond, "That’s the thinking that helped me get where I am today!" If every way is the right way, then no way is the right way because there is no absolute standard in which to juxtapose. Friedrich Nietzsce said, "There is no truth, only interpretation." My reply is, "Then I interpret there is no truth in your statement either, sir."

We see that the mere attempt to destroy absolutes is an absolute endeavor and results in self-refutation. Neutrality (agnosticism being an example) gave a great go at this logical absurdity, until it embarrassingly realized that by refusing to choose any particular view, it saw itself in an absolute condition of "absolutely not!" Pluralism (not choosing one side, but welcoming and tolerating many) happily exists in fairy tales only, as E.W. Bullinger portrays so well:

Where there are more wills than one, there can be no peace, no rest. There must necessarily be conflict and confusion. This is the secret of all disturbances in families, parties, and nations. We sometimes hear of a dual control, but it is a fiction. It exists only in words, not in reality! This is the secret of rest for the heart now—"One will." As long as there are two wills there can be no peace. As long as our will is not subject to God’s will, we cannot know what rest is. 
E. W. Bullinger, Numbers in Scripture, chapter I: "One God, One King, One Will."

Every counseling model is built upon some worldview, as it is either deception or delusion to claim otherwise (or probably both). It is folly to say that all ways are equal, but mine is the better. Every human being holds fast to one worldview or another and is inescapably shaped by its physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual influences. I would be hard pressed to discover one rational human being who has not pondered the following questions: What is a human being? Where do I come from? Why do I exist? What is truth? What is good? What is evil? Why are there pain and suffering in the world? Where are we going as a race of people? How do I reach enlightenment? How do I reach salvation from my condition? How can I find joy and happiness?

It is as counterintuitive to imagine the possibility of not possessing these questions personally, as much as it is to attempt to circumnavigate them professionally in the counseling room. Answers to these questions are impossible without holding to a worldview and are essentially what the counselee is searching for. Therefore, the endeavor of neutrality is counterproductive to any personal benefit and exists as purely subjective.

In addition to this argument against the false claims of neutrality is the regime that the counselor favors—whether secular psychologist, Christian counselor, or nouthetic counselor. Even the integrationist that advocates his superimposed methodology will lean toward his preferred methodology.  

Secular psychology, heralding its postmodern premises of pluralism and neutrality, comes like a salesman knocking on society’s door with his friendly, flexible presentation and pitch. Cloaked with the smile of a cunning con artist, he knowingly misdiagnoses you with a life-long stigmatism.

We continue to label patients schizophrenics, manic-depressives, and insane . . . we have known for a long time that our diagnoses are not reliable or useful, but we nevertheless continue to use them.  
Dr. Rosenhan, professor of psychology and law at Stanford University; Richard Ganz, PsychoBabble.

Secular psychology is presented so charmingly, it gets millions to buy its product. It successfully sells its constantly changing and completely unstable product to pocket-emptying victims, all the while promising to change their instabilities. It successfully sets the worldview of God, Christianity, and the Bible up as a straw man. It plants the seed of its deceit: "The Bible and its God is an evil malefactor thriving in intolerance, absolutes, and inflexibility. I am your friendly, tolerant, and flexible benefactor. Choose me!"

Again, this is a replica of the event in the biblical account of the fall of man in the first garden. The will of God was made to be unsavory and cruel in the eyes of the first Adam, while the serpent cunningly made himself to be the benefactor, offering to man what he too coveted—autonomy. The independent self-will was dubbed the true way to knowledge and happiness.

Pluralism under the guise of neutrality, as this author has presented, is a harbor for the vessels of war to take anchor. As the biblical proverb reads, "There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death" (Proverbs 14:12). Pluralism sells itself by the false notion of neutrality that seems to be good by its flexibility. First, as we have already learned, this is a contradiction in and of itself. Second, it is the enabling factor for conflicting worldviews to continue in conflict rather than the solution to their qualms.

Last, when concerning the entering into any counseling motif, the counselee comes searching for solutions to life’s most dominating problems. Solutions are like guardrails at the edge of a cliff; they can keep us from falling over. The last thing we need is for the guardrails to be flimsy and flexible. I do not know about you, dear reader, but I want my guardrails to be firm, unmovable, and fixed, especially when I bump into them as I am walking along life’s mountain roads.

Psychology is ever changing and shifting. Each new edition of the DSM is different and clashes repeatedly with doctrines and diagnoses written as set-in-stone in previous editions. God’s Word never changes; it is as immutable and omnipotent as He is.

Your word, O LORD, is everlasting; it is firmly fixed in the heavens.
Psalm 119:89, Berean Study Bible

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away." 
Luke 21:33, Berean Study Bible

Jesus Christ, our wonderful Savior, said with zero wavering and quite unambiguously,

"And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not act on them is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain fell, the torrents raged, and the winds blew and beat upon that house; and it fell—and great was its collapse!"
Matthew 7:26–27, Berean Study Bible

In conclusion, the integrationist basically put it this way in so many words: "The Bible is for godliness; psychology is for life issues. That’s why we must integrate the two." At first glance, this may seem wise and sensible. But what does God’s Word, the final word, say?

His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through the knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.
2 Peter 1:3, Berean Study Bible

Notice it says explicitly that He, through His exclusive divine power, has given us everything we need for life and godliness. The two are not separated in dichotomy but joined as equal results. Notice also it says has given. The Koine Greek word (dedōrēmenēs) translated as "has given" is in the perfect tense, which is crucial in proper exegesis of Scripture. The perfect tense emphasizes that the past action is now complete. The main reason for doing that is because the results of that past action are still relevant.

The perfect tense of "has given" forbids any notion or proposition of God revealing new things pertaining to both godliness and life in later increments or as the needs presented themselves in modern history, as the integrationists try so hard to convince us. And if this isn’t enough, Peter the Apostle followed with the word "everything" in order to eliminate all ambiguity as to what he was proclaiming God has already given. And last, I ask rhetorically, where do we find these things he has given us pertaining to both godliness and life? Are we to look to man and his supposedly new brilliant ideas . . . or are we to look where we as Christians were commanded to look all along, in the all-sufficient God-breathed Word?  The two cannot be married.

Let this author close with one final juxtaposition to highlight the absolute incompatibility of psychology and biblical counseling: As biblical counselors, one of our key theological hinge-points is hamartiology (the doctrine of sin). To be clear, we are not sick, brain-damaged creatures; we are sinful souls. Sin, not sickness, is man’s fundamental problem.

What psychology calls addictive, compulsive, or sick behavior (aka the disease model) —said to have a biological or genetic cause although never substantiated—the Bible calls habitual sinful behavior. In the sin model, the heart is the center of behavior. The heart, which is biased against God and for self, is the source of the problem. It is not an outside force that has invaded a person’s body, or chemicals gone haywire; it is the person’s own desire. The problem is not God or the circumstances; it is the individual himself. Sin, not biology or genetics, is the principal issue.

On the absolute contrary, the idea of the doctrine of sin being the problem is anathema to psychology. Psychology’s distrust, dislike, and disdain for the idea of sin cannot be dismissed or denied. Therefore, biblical counseling in Christianity and psychology cannot be wedded just on this diametrically opposed fundamental alone.

God has given us all things everything we need for living godly lives as well as for all life issues by His divine power and His Word alone—just as it claims. He was so thorough as to warn us in His Word to refrain from these seemingly integrable but opposing worldviews and philosophies of man when Paul exhorted the Colossians who were attempting to add worldly ideologies to theology,

See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human tradition and the spiritual forces of the world rather than on Christ.
Colossians 2:8, Berean Study Bible, italics mine

Let us honor Him and "see to it."

Who is the man wise enough to understand this? To whom has the mouth of the LORD spoken, that he may explain it? Why is the land destroyed and scorched like a desert, so no one can pass through it? And the LORD answered, "It is because they have forsaken My law, which I set before them; they have not walked in it or obeyed My voice. Instead, they have followed the stubbornness of their hearts and gone after the Baals, as their fathers taught them." Therefore this is what the LORD of Hosts, the God of Israel, says: "Behold, I will feed this people wormwood and give them poisoned water to drink."
Jeremiah 9:12–15, Berean Study Bible

. . . . .
 
If you are Veterans or a friend/family member of a Veteran and would like request our counseling, please use the link below:

Request Biblical Counseling

If you are a counselor and would like to join our network, please use the link below:

Join the FSM Biblical Counselor Network

If you like what you've read , sign up to receive quarterly newsletter articles and updates via email!

Email Newsletter Signup Form

_____________________________________________

Footnotes:

Translations utilized as Scripture references in this article are as follows:

  1. Berean Study Bible -- Copyright © 2021 Berean Study Bible. All rights reserved.
  2. New Living Translation -- Holy Bible: New Living Translation. Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2015. 

This author gives special recognition to the following books:

  1. Biblical Directionism — Frey, Dennis D.Biblical Directionism: a Biblical Approach to Counseling Methodology. GMA & Inspiration Press, 2003. 
  2. Psychobabble — Rosen, Richard Dean.Psychobabble. Avon, 1979. 
  3. Psychology: Principles and Problems — Hill, Winfred F.Psychology Principles and Problems. Lippincott, 1990. 
  4. Psychological Seduction — Kilpatrick, William Kirk.Psychological Seduction. T. Nelson Publishers, 1983. 

 

 

 

 

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 24th, 2021 at 4:07 pm and is filed under Featured, Newsletter, Spotlight. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.



Comments are closed.



© 2020-2021 Fallen Soldiers March®. All Rights Reserved • Website Design by Visionary Design Group