1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Which Seminaries Have Programs in "Biblical Medicine"?

Discussion in 'Baptist Colleges & Seminaries' started by RandR, Aug 22, 2005.

  1. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Convicted

    Overall your post was enlightening. However, this paragraph did have the same feeling as the rest.

    If I can realize that a dog hit by a car will bite me if I try to help it, why would you say that a woman suffering from brain trauma was only letting the real self out? I would take it that she was reacting to the pain of the injury ...

    PS: Most of the patients that I have dealt with do NOT express anger. Some elderly patients do express anger.
     
  2. paidagogos

    paidagogos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    I’m glad that you mentioned Oden’s book. Old Oden is the classic milk-toast stereotype of the old fashioned liberal masquerading as an orthodox Christian scholar. He’s as dry and dull as a dead man’s bones and just as dead wrong as Wrong-way Corrigan. (His writing style has improved a little in the past thirty years but his thinking is still as mistaken and antiquated as ever.) He holds the old classic liberal naivety and hope of amalgamating psychotherapeutic principles with pastoral care. He fails to comprehend either field, much less both. Thomas Oden is utterly void of originality but those accustomed to swallowing pabulum consume his sorry pottage as good stuff.

    Contrary to your post, Oden did not show “that psychology was used by church leaders long before the advent of modern psychology.” What the old boy did do was a psychotherapeutic reinterpretation of Gregory’s pastoral writings. The thing is an artifact—something that Oden created. Oden's interpretation could have never been made before the advent of modern psychotherapy. It seems that Oden’s one approach to pastoral care is the psychologizing of theology. In the introduction, he wrote: “We will first set forth a fundamental principle of theological dialogue with psychotherapy: The empathic acceptance that is implicitly presupposed in effective psychotherapy is made explicit in the Christian witness to revelation. This hypothesis, which we first stated over two decades ago, remains a key premise of the ensuing discussion.”

    Furthermore, it is ironic that an eminent scholar should base his appeal to personal experience. The validity of the hypothesis is the commonality of personal experience rather than revealed truth or rational argumentation. T. Oden said: “It is appropriate to explain how I have journeyed from that preliminary hypothesis to the more vexing problems of this book. The argument could have been stated without any window at all into my own personal history. Yet it may be useful to show how and why I have now come full circle to a fundamentally revised set of questions and how they mesh with the present dilemmas of pastoral care. Every time I tell something of my personal story, I find to my amazement that others mention with great feeling that they too have experienced something analogous and that my story has helped them see what has happened to them.” IMHO, it is precisely this personal appeal in an intellectual aura that makes the book appealing to pastors rather than the closely defined reasoning of a scholar and thinker. I can find no cogent, compelling reasons to buy Dr. O’s hypothesis.
    If you think this is heady stuff, then may I interest you in some nice beachfront properties in AZ?
     
  3. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    I've treated a lot of patients with "mental illnesses". I'd have to say that the vast majority of them probably would be good candidates for biblical counseling as opposed to just medication right off the bat.

    There are however patients who do fit the bill as far as real "mental illness" The best examples of this are severe depression and schizoaffective disorders. These patients clearly have abnormal brain function and would benefit most from a combination of counseling and medications.
     
  4. PatsFan

    PatsFan New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    454
    Likes Received:
    0
    He’s as dry and dull as a dead man’s bones [/QB][/QUOTE]
    _______________________________________________

    Like I said, I just picked up Oden's book. Thanks for the feedback. I'm looking forward to reading it.
     
  5. Convicted by the Spirit

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Honestly this has been one of the hardest things for me to accept in the teaching of Noutheic Counseling. I was hit hard with this the first week in class and I almost quit the class. My professor spoke of the following ... "Why does a person recovering from a stroke get snappy, angry and sometimes violinet when in fact his entire life has not shown much of anger or bitterness? Why does a person with alzheimers or a brain injury react the same? To find the reason to these questions you must get information by asking questions to yourself about the person with the brain problem. The purpose to asking questions would be to distinguish between spiritual and physical symptoms. Questions such as when did this start, why,how, what medications has this person been taking since then. I have read about a few people who have been diagnosied with alzheimers and the main problem ended up being that the medication they were taking actually caused the problem. There is no doubt that some people will need medication after suffering brain injurys, alhiemers or strokes. I do not doubt this. What I do doubt is when people say that a bump on the head caused a person to act in an angry way, or suffering a stroke will cause a person to lash out in anger against the ones whom they have shown only love before the stroke. Before the stroke the man was able to keep the thoughts and emotions in his heart to himself because his mind was sound and his body was near perfection. But when the body and mind waste away the heart is revealed and what is on the heart comes out.(2 Cor 4:16)Some people can hide what is in their hearts very well and no one knows that they are angry, bitter and fearful all at the same time ...others like myself when I am angry I show it very much and can't hide a lick of my heart. I don't doubt that people will disagree with this teaching, so I only say to those who doubt to read the book listed below and then decide for yourself.

    Dogs and animals only have one nature and that is the animal nature God gave them. They react and act based off this nature. When my animals die they are not going to heaven or hell, because they don't have a spirit. Animals do tend to learn from humans if they are around them long enough. A pack of wolves learn from other wolves ...eat and kill! So it is unfair to compare humans to animals ... unless you are of the evolution camp.


    I recommend a book by Edward T. Welch called "Blame it on the brain?" He details all that I have spoken of and can say it a whole lot better. The book is a little boring a first, but after chapter 2 it takes off and you learn a lot about why people with brain problems tend to act as they do.
     
  6. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    I would recommend reading Eccl. 12
     
  7. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    Eccl. 12:6,7, "Remember Him before the silver cord is broken and the golden bowl is crushed, the pitcher by the well is shattered and the wheel at the cistern is crushed; then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it."
     
  8. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Convicted

    I suggest you spend some time ministering to those in a nursing home.

    Please go with a pastor friend that can guide you as you deal with those less fortunate than you.
     
  9. Major B

    Major B <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    The mistake you make is to equate medical science and psychology--they are not the same, which is why a Psychiatrist can prescribe medications (and, for that matter, so can a Family Practice Physician), but a Psychologist may not prescribe medications.

    Psychology is an attempted study of the soul, something that is beyond the competence of secular science, which usually denies the existence of a soul, soul/spirit, or soul and spirit. It was the invention of a small group of mostly atheistic, unscientific men, many of whom had "issues" of their own.

    Then there is medical science, a completely distinct discipline. While drugs can help with many disorders, the best of the psychiatric community is only guessing as to the real nature of mental illness. My son is rather severely schizophrenic; the doctor who diagnosed him, a leading man in the field, told me the following (after obtaining my promise to not attribute this to him by name).

    He said (at the time), "In diseases of the heart and circulatory system, it is 2003. In treatment of cancer, it is 2003. We are making great progress in genetic diseases. However, in mental illness, it is about 1830. We don't know for sure how the brain works, let alone how to fix it. We prescribe medicines that we think will help, and often they do, but we are only guessing as to why they help."

    Secular psychology disagrees with itself on most issues (a panel of six psychologists, presented with a case study, will usually yield seven answers, depending on how many of them are "MPD"), it has little in the way of concrete diagnostics for most mental illnesses, and it is dead wrong on almost all of its conclusions about human nature. We have encountered many instances of some fairly weird conclusions being set forth by licensed, PhD psychologists. My son is required to see a secular counselor in order to stay on his medication program. His first counselor's advice was quite interesting: "Your problem is bad Karma. You need to be hypnotized so you can discover what you did in a previous life and work out your bad Karma now."


    Several times, "Christian Psychologists" in our area have given blatantly anti-Biblical instructions to counselees who have later sought help with our ministry and have found the help they need.

    People who need medical help with an organically-based problem need a doctor; people who have problems with their souls need help the Lord and His Word. I can't see the contradiction nor the hypocrisy in that stand.
     
  10. paidagogos

    paidagogos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    Eccl. 12:6,7, "Remember Him before the silver cord is broken and the golden bowl is crushed, the pitcher by the well is shattered and the wheel at the cistern is crushed; then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it." </font>[/QUOTE]What does this have to do with mental illness?
     
  11. paidagogos

    paidagogos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not quite sure of your point addressed to Convicted. I have ministered to those in the nursing homes. You are right that there are many pitiful cases in such places. All the folks in nursing homes are not elderly. Some younger people, who have debilitating experiences that have rendered them helpless, are interned there. Compassionately, I have observed the range of emotions and responses to their conditions.

    These people are not necessarily less fortunate than us. We are all getting older and heading in the same direction regardless of our circumstances in life. Furthermore, some of these folks did actions or behavior that brought them to their sorrowful condition. I would not call someone less fortunate who lived a debauched life and ended in a wretched state.

    Even people who have lived godly lives will express wrongful attitudes and bitterness as their will and control weakens. It is there inside all of us—we are sinners by nature. Yet, some elderly folks have maintained sweet Christian spirits until the end. Sin is present in the very old and the very young. None are exempt and there is no excuse.
     
  12. paidagogos

    paidagogos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please define mental illness for me. Is it organic? What hard scientific data do we have?
     
  13. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    Paidagogos,

    I agree that mental illness is a tough term. It is difficult to quantify and diagnosis is inherently subjective.

    Most of the larger studies involving medical treatment for depression and other disorders report outcomes in terms of quality of life scores - again quite subjective.

    The above-mentioned examples of Alzheimer's disease provide at least an example of how organic brain dysfunction can cause behavioral problems. I think it is quite reasonable to postulate that those with what we recognize as mental illnesses may in fact have slight abnormalities in neural chemistry. Indeed studies have shown that brain activity in patients with "mental illness" does follow particular patterns which deviate from that which would be considered normal (changes in glucose uptake in various subcortical nuclei etc). This could however also be due to acquired behaviors which have become "patterened".

    Regarding Szasz - I don't think he really has a large following these days. It's probably less than when he came out with his theories 20 or 30 years ago. And I think one of his points was that these people who are different than our desired "norm" are given a label and a diagnosis without adequate scientific demonstration that they have any real pathology.

    When all is said and done I tell you that many people do have better quality of life using antidepressants and antipsychotics. I don't know that all of them are truly "ill"; perhaps many are just eccentric (like me).
     
  14. paidagogos

    paidagogos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good honest statement. Now, we can dialogue.

    Agreed—a fair assessment. This is not necessarily bad except that it may be masking the real problem. I would say this is symptomatic treatment, which is not always a bad thing if it relieves the pain and discomfort without horrible side effects.
    No disagreement on the research but I prefer the differences to be explained by the habitual behaviors affecting the brain chemistry and activity patterns. IMHO, this is a crucial point in determining one’s approach. Habitual patterns offer hope for change without invasive chemical remedies. Furthermore, it brings responsibility and individual choice.
    It is a valid point, IMHO. However, we need to go beyond this and look at the concept of mental illness, which has outlived its usefulness. We must be willing to abandon the old models and terms when their usefulness is gone.

    We are agreed, I think, that the problems exist but our approaches and understandings are different. It is a matter of whether it is a software problem or a hardware problem. I think it is software.
     
  15. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    This topic seems to come up frequently. As we discussed this IS a fuzzy issue. I also think it is an issue approached with a large degree of presupposition.

    Certainly most psychiatrists regard religion as just an aspect of human culture. They assume, by default, that any argument appealing to a real specific spiritual basis for mental illness is ridiculous.

    Unfortunately I find the "other side" just as presupposed, and often less knowledgeable. I don't know how many times I have heard antidepressants referred to as "mind control". These people usually have heard someone else's rant against "humanist psychology" and perhaps have heard (thereby) of someone like Thomas Szansz and are thus now experts. Indeed there are many on this board who espouse such a position.

    It is clear that antidepressants and antipsychotics do improve quality of life (as subjectively reported). That does not prove that the patients were diseased but rather that the biochemical effect of the drugs had some measurable outcome. These classes of drugs (unlike benzodiazepines, barbiturates, or narcotics) are neither euphoria-inducing nor habit-forming and are hardly mind control.

    Consider Mr. Joe Schmo (obviously fictitious name), a patient whom I have seen. He has schizophrenia and when off of his medications carries around an imaginary pet chicken and has a pocket full of money. He travels by means of invisible elevators. When appropriately medicated he sustains reality-based thought. When talked to about religion during a psychotic episode he begins to fixate on himself being Jesus (and also the president from time to time).

    Patients of his ilk have been shown to respond to antipsychotics and have been shown to have abnormal findings of metabolic brain scans indicating altered patterns of activity in various areas of the brain. Stereotactic radioablation of these areas in animal brains reproduces similar behaviors (as well as can be discerned). Thus there is a reason to suspect that an organic problem is producing abnormal behaviors, a paradigm well described in research animals.

    Now...

    I perceive that many fundamentalists, based on their reading of certain Bible passages, choose to believe that mental illness does not exist. Most of them do not have a knowledge of psychology, medicine, or otherwise - but yet feel free to expound confidently on that which they do not know. This can have disastrous consequences if the ignorant person is a pastor "counseling" a person battling severe depression or a schizoaffective disorder.

    Thus I generally view with disdain the position that mental illness does not and cannot exist. While I must concede that psychiatric medicine, being inherently subjective, is less precise than general medical science, I find a fairly strong body of evidence that structural or functional brain problems can have behavioral and cognitive consequences. As such the idea of psychiatric medicine has SOME scientific basis.

    While I strongly believe that God can and will (as He promised) help those battling what many would call mental illness, I do not accept the idea that this precludes the possibility of "mental illness".
     
  16. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    Let me add that I have no problem with biblical counseling as an initial approach to those with depressive or anxious symptoms.

    What I reject is the stance that the Bible precludes "mental illness".
     
  17. paidagogos

    paidagogos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
  18. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    The use of psychotropic drugs, on the other hand, inhibits the body from functioning as it should. It is that use of medicine that we deplore.

    This is an overgeneralized statement and as such is supported by the evidences (as a GENERAL statement).

    Several paragraphs down the page he spoke of organic problems (such as brain tumor) causing psychiatric symptoms.

    So a physical entity (a tumor) can cause psychiatric symptoms but other physical problems (abnormal brain chemistry) are automatically excluded.

    This site's approach, while certainly having some merit, is a selective interpretation of the facts. I would posit that these counselors approached the "data" with their minds already made up based on their understanding of certain biblical passages.

    Thus while not disavowing their approach as a whole (focusing of spiritual issues) I do not accept their critique of psychiatry/psychology as being an accurate interpretation of the facts.
     
  19. Major B

    Major B <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree that there are extremists in the Biblical Counseling arena, but there are also many in secular and "Chrisitan" psychology (and who have the education to know better) who espouse a lot of either ridiculous, weird, or immoral ideas. For example, one psychologist who works for the state told a young man that his problem was that he had built up bad karma in a previous life, and that he needed to be hypnotically treated to erase the bad Karma. Several couples we have dealt with are happily married today who were told by previous counselors (including some "Christian") that they needed to get a divorce. There are no shortage of quacks.

    The answer must be in eclectic and needs-based counseling. We are here to help people cope. If they need legal advice, we have Christian attorneys available for referral. If they have problems with money, we refer them to Christian accountants or investment advisors.

    The methodology we use is this:

    1. We make plain up front that our counseling is Biblical, and that we are not psychologists. We analyze each person's needs individually.

    2. If the person has been diagnosed with an organically based mental illness of any kind and is being treated by a competent physician, we encourage that treatment, and proceed to use Biblical Counseling techniques to help the person cope with the spiritual fallout and attendant difficulties.

    3. Often, we run across people who have been prescribed psychotropic drugs by their family practice physician (which doctors often have very limited training in psychology or psychiatry), and often, these medications seem to make things worse. In those cases we always refer counselees to a physician we know who is actually qualified in this area, and in 100% of the cases, the physicians trained in this area have helped make drastic improvements in the counselees' cases.

    4. We commonly refer people for medical checkups, and often find an organic basis for the problems the people have.

    The sum of our approach is that we "render unto physicians," what is theirs, and we render unto God what is His.
     
  20. paidagogos

    paidagogos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    Parodied
    I will defend this statement as reasonable and accurate in the context and purpose for which it was given. The article was a succinct summation of a viewpoint. Jay has written over 80 books, most of them expounding his position. This was intended as a general statement for the layman. We do err to hold it to rigorous technical definition or blanket coverage of all cases.
    No argument here.
    Charles, you do overstate your case. Chemical imbalance is not automatically excluded but it is excluded because there is only supposition without evidence. The presupposition of a chemical imbalance is of no more weight than the prejudice that you attribute to the Biblical counseling movement.
    Then your hypothesis is wrong. I can as easily say the traditional psychotherapists are equally prejudiced by their education and practice. It would be hard for them to change after a life’s investment in education, writing and practice. I posit that you are defending traditional psychotherapy because you were taught this and have a vested interest (i.e. bias) in protecting this traditional approach.

    On the other hand, the Biblical counseling movement is the real innovation. These people from various backgrounds have been willing to break out of the fixed mindset to find a better way. This is not an ignorant, knee-jerk reaction by a few unlearned Bible thumpers. Jay taught and worked in the traditional pastoral counseling milieu until he because convinced of its bankruptcy. He did post-docs in a mental institution. My own background was scientific before doing work in psychology. My understanding and competencies in psychology are solid. Yet, I’m willing to think in a new paradigm when the old is untenable. There is an irreconcilable tension between traditional psychotherapy and Christian theology. IMHO, traditional psychotherapy, talk therapy or drug therapy, is bankrupt and fraught with pitfalls and problems. Take it from a biochemist; the chemical theory of mental dysfunction is unproven and very doubtful. I am working on different explanations for certain functions.

    What evidence do you have for making the charge of prejudice? This is a common ploy when one doesn't have the arguments to refute his opponents. Does it bother you to have equally well qualified and intellectual people who disagree and contest your position? Do you dismiss your bothersome opponents by hanging a charge of bias around their necks? Charles, you have a very simplistic view of Biblical counseling. We are persistent and will not be dismissed by a wave of the hand. You have not grappled with our basic theses nor even your own. It is a conflict of basic beliefs.
    On the other hand, I do not accept unproven/unprovable theories of mental illness and/or chemical imbalance without further strong evidence. Much of the current chemical imbalance propaganda is as spurious as the homosexual gene. These theories are dictated by philosophy, not science.

    Biblical counseling is still in its infancy after only a few decades of development. A lot needs to be learned and articulated here. A number of doctors, including some psychiatrists, are working on ideas in Biblical counseling. Theologians and pastors are doing other development. Jay is still productive. It takes time.

    [ September 16, 2005, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: paidagogos ]
     
Loading...