5. What is data gathering? Why is it important?
Data gathering is investigating observable behavior (halo data)[1] and question responses (core data) to obtain facts about the counselee’s problems. The counselor must be deeply concerned about gathering data either through completed questionnaires, homework assignments,[2] or personal notes so that he/she has tangible information to use to consider the directions the counseling sessions should take. It is important that the counselor have good detailed notes that he/she can use to re-visit ideas brought up from other sessions, refer a counselee to what they actually said (by writing quotes), and so that he/she can pray and study for the greatest needs of the upcoming sessions.
This data gathering is important because the counselor must ask, “what do I know… what do I need to know… and what can I continue to investigate regarding the current significant data?” If hermeneutics is the study of discerning what the Scriptures mean by what they say, then data gathering is the study of discerning what the counselee’s problem is by what they portray. Initial data must first be gathered through questionnaires or questioning that would include, “What is the problem… what have you done about it… what do you want us to do?” You can initially use this to help them sort out their responsibilities (as basic, simple, surface level issues are sure to arise within minutes of questioning). But eventually, you want to get to the heart of the matter. This might not always be easy as fallen man has a tendency to hide (Gen. 3:8, 10). Probing is an essential questioning method to go deeper. The counselor may probe systematically where he/she covers breadth of problems topic by topic or he/she may probe symptomatically covering depth by going deeper into surface level problems. The counselor must decide among the two based on the intensity and clarity of clues. Some good questions to ask are, “How long have you been like this… what has brought relief… under what circumstances do you feel that way?” Among these, the counselor will want to plunge further into the motives of a counselee by asking, “What for…?” “The wise counselor will ask for specific supporting data for every generalization”.[3] Examples include, “Precisely how did you… I didn’t quite understand that, would you mind running through it again”? Regardless of the types of questions asked, the counselor must ask and rephrase responses in question form until the true message is clear. He/she ought to be noting hot spot areas or problem patterns. The counselor must be willing to ask the difficult and/or uncomfortable questions because it is unlikely those topics have been outwardly expressed anywhere else.
While more will be said on halo data (observable data) in answer 12, it should at least be noted that much data can be gathered by the body language, facial expressions, and gestures the counselee portrays. The Lord correctly connected Cain’s fallen countenance to his anger (Gen. 4:5-6). Though we are not omniscient as the Lord is, we are still able to often determine the possibilities of deeper sin issues based on emotional expressions such as grimaces, rolling-of-eyes, sighing, etc.. As already mentioned, to truly know is to ask and probe further to see if the assumptions may be true before giving an answer (Prov. 18:13). Though emotions are not the problem counselors must address (as the secularists often do), they are useful tools in indicating how the counselor should proceed with homework, questioning, and teaching to handle the real underlying heart issues of sin.
[1] More on this topic in the response to Counseling question #12.
[2] More on this topic in the response to Counseling question #6.
[3] Jay Adams, The Christian Counselor’s Manual, p. 257-293
This data gathering is important because the counselor must ask, “what do I know… what do I need to know… and what can I continue to investigate regarding the current significant data?” If hermeneutics is the study of discerning what the Scriptures mean by what they say, then data gathering is the study of discerning what the counselee’s problem is by what they portray. Initial data must first be gathered through questionnaires or questioning that would include, “What is the problem… what have you done about it… what do you want us to do?” You can initially use this to help them sort out their responsibilities (as basic, simple, surface level issues are sure to arise within minutes of questioning). But eventually, you want to get to the heart of the matter. This might not always be easy as fallen man has a tendency to hide (Gen. 3:8, 10). Probing is an essential questioning method to go deeper. The counselor may probe systematically where he/she covers breadth of problems topic by topic or he/she may probe symptomatically covering depth by going deeper into surface level problems. The counselor must decide among the two based on the intensity and clarity of clues. Some good questions to ask are, “How long have you been like this… what has brought relief… under what circumstances do you feel that way?” Among these, the counselor will want to plunge further into the motives of a counselee by asking, “What for…?” “The wise counselor will ask for specific supporting data for every generalization”.[3] Examples include, “Precisely how did you… I didn’t quite understand that, would you mind running through it again”? Regardless of the types of questions asked, the counselor must ask and rephrase responses in question form until the true message is clear. He/she ought to be noting hot spot areas or problem patterns. The counselor must be willing to ask the difficult and/or uncomfortable questions because it is unlikely those topics have been outwardly expressed anywhere else.
While more will be said on halo data (observable data) in answer 12, it should at least be noted that much data can be gathered by the body language, facial expressions, and gestures the counselee portrays. The Lord correctly connected Cain’s fallen countenance to his anger (Gen. 4:5-6). Though we are not omniscient as the Lord is, we are still able to often determine the possibilities of deeper sin issues based on emotional expressions such as grimaces, rolling-of-eyes, sighing, etc.. As already mentioned, to truly know is to ask and probe further to see if the assumptions may be true before giving an answer (Prov. 18:13). Though emotions are not the problem counselors must address (as the secularists often do), they are useful tools in indicating how the counselor should proceed with homework, questioning, and teaching to handle the real underlying heart issues of sin.
[1] More on this topic in the response to Counseling question #12.
[2] More on this topic in the response to Counseling question #6.
[3] Jay Adams, The Christian Counselor’s Manual, p. 257-293
6. Explain the need for homework. Also explain the need for specific, concrete homework in contrast to general, vague homework.
Homework is needed in between
counseling sessions for several reasons.
First, time with the counselor is not the “magic hour”. A believing counselee has access to the Lord
all the time. Prayer patterns and Bible
assignments must be established to encourage the counselee to spend time with
the Lord multiple times a day every day to work on his/her heart issues. In the span of one week, the counselee might
spend one hour with the counselor but through the means of homework the Lord becomes
the Counselor for many hours on many of the days. The counselor can use this homework to simply
re-direct or further encourage the counselee to continue to seek the Lord’s
counsel between the times that they meet.
The counselor can use the completed homework assignments for discussion topics,
assessing the counselee’s progress and motivation towards repentance, and discern
what concrete suggestions to provide.
Consider Jesus’ instructions to those who were stumbling, “"If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell” (Matt. 5:29-30). In addition, consider Paul’s instructions on what a changed heart looks like, “He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need” (Eph. 4:28). In both cases the instructions are very specific. He is saying to remove and/or replace the specific problem with the specific need. Christ isn’t saying that someone ought to harm themselves physically. Rather, He is saying that drastic measures are worth it if it removes a stumbling block and they must attack the specific problem. We aren’t told to remove our eye if our hand causes us stumble. We aren’t told to start telling truth if thievery is a life-dominating sin. Those are changes that will eventually need to occur but the immediate remedy must be specifically focused on moving the counselee away from the particular sins towards the opposing righteous behaviors. In each example the call is to do specific work to the specific problem. If we relate this to homework, we can see how a thief would need to focus a lot of time on what the Scriptures say about thievery and giving. The put off/put on principles of Ephesians chapter 4 teach us that we need to begin to focus our changed hearts in the direction of specific, concrete actions and behaviors that glorify the Lord. The homework assignments themselves could vary from Scripture reading, Scripture memory, books, pamphlets, audio messages, journals, creating lists, and more. But regardless of the method, the homework must be carefully planned to aim at the person’s conscience by using the word of God to bring conviction about the specific sins that he/she is struggling with. Vague and/or general homework that is not pointed enough to hit the counselee on a personal and specific level fails to clearly expose the offensive of his/her personal rebellion against the Creator. The ultimate goal is to identify their surface level sin issues and address those specifically through concrete, challenging homework that will make them use God’s word every day in order to penetrate their heart and bring the conviction that leads to repentance for His glory.
Consider Jesus’ instructions to those who were stumbling, “"If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell” (Matt. 5:29-30). In addition, consider Paul’s instructions on what a changed heart looks like, “He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need” (Eph. 4:28). In both cases the instructions are very specific. He is saying to remove and/or replace the specific problem with the specific need. Christ isn’t saying that someone ought to harm themselves physically. Rather, He is saying that drastic measures are worth it if it removes a stumbling block and they must attack the specific problem. We aren’t told to remove our eye if our hand causes us stumble. We aren’t told to start telling truth if thievery is a life-dominating sin. Those are changes that will eventually need to occur but the immediate remedy must be specifically focused on moving the counselee away from the particular sins towards the opposing righteous behaviors. In each example the call is to do specific work to the specific problem. If we relate this to homework, we can see how a thief would need to focus a lot of time on what the Scriptures say about thievery and giving. The put off/put on principles of Ephesians chapter 4 teach us that we need to begin to focus our changed hearts in the direction of specific, concrete actions and behaviors that glorify the Lord. The homework assignments themselves could vary from Scripture reading, Scripture memory, books, pamphlets, audio messages, journals, creating lists, and more. But regardless of the method, the homework must be carefully planned to aim at the person’s conscience by using the word of God to bring conviction about the specific sins that he/she is struggling with. Vague and/or general homework that is not pointed enough to hit the counselee on a personal and specific level fails to clearly expose the offensive of his/her personal rebellion against the Creator. The ultimate goal is to identify their surface level sin issues and address those specifically through concrete, challenging homework that will make them use God’s word every day in order to penetrate their heart and bring the conviction that leads to repentance for His glory.
7. Define guilt Biblically. Is "false guilt" a biblical concept? How do you deal with guilt in the context of counseling?
(This response was graciously provided by Joseph Whiting since he answered it accurately and clearly his first submission and I did not.)
The idea of false guilt is not biblical in its presuppositional worldview. Therefore, it is not a legitimate concept. False guilt is a Freudian concept. Freud basically said that false guilt is a result of the conflict between the Id and Superego1. Freud left no room for the notion of sin in his worldly philosophies because he was a God hater. One can pick up just about any biography about Freud and determine this fact. Freud’s concept of false guilt seeks to separate guilt from guilty feelings. No true biblical counselor can legitimately mix Freud’s notions and Scripture’s truths while remaining faithful to God’s Word (Matt.12:30; Col.2:8).
In contrast to Freud’s false philosophies Scripture defines guilt as a legal liability and culpability to punishment before God which all men are deserving of (Rom 3:9-18, 23; James 2:10). There are no feelings of guilt without the presence of guilt because of the universality of sin. However, because our hearts are so wicked and good at self-deception, it is possible for guilt to be present without any feelings2. Again, the term “guilt” speaks of the fact of liability and not the feeling that accompanies it. For example; a man can have a habit of speeding through a school zone at 55mph and feel guilty –indeed he is guilty. This man could choose to succumb to his guilty feelings and slow down to 35mph in order to sooth his conscience, but he would still be guilty because the school zone speed limit was 15mph. The man did not feel guilty even though he was, in fact, still guilty3.
In the case of this man the counselor would need to explain to him that he is not the determiner of whether or not he is actually guilty, but it is God who determines guilt. He would need to be informed that he is not the judge of his own guiltiness or innocence, but that God makes the determination, and that his sin is serious because God is a Holy Judge (Rom.1:8; 2:5-6). The counselee would need to be admonished to repent of his prideful minimization of his sin4.
On the other hand, there could be a man who drives 12mph in a 15mph school zone and feels guilty. The man could have been raised all his life to believe that it is not safe to drive any faster than 10mph in a school zone, and thus it is sinful to go any faster regardless of the speed limit. If that man feels guilty in his conscience for driving 12mph his guilt is not false guilt because he is sinning against his conscience. Romans 14:21-23 tells us that anything we do that does not proceed from faith is actually sin on our part. If that man believes that he is sinning against God, or even might be sinning against God, and he proceeds with his course of action despite his conscience condemning him then he is actually sinning against God. The counselor would need to guide the man in this scenario to repent of his rebellious attitude against God. Afterward, the counselor could discuss with the man whether his self-imposed standard is biblical or not. Either way our conscience, which is only as good as it is biblically informed, is not our guide. God’s Word is our guide and the counselor ought to steer the counselee in this direction.
1 Snowden, Ruth, Teach Yourself Freud (McGraw-Hill: New York City, 2006), 105–107.
2 Jer.17:9; Prov.14:12; 16:25
3 Adapted from Dr. Stuart Scott, Pastoral Counseling PM711 (Sun Valley: TMS), 29.
4 Matt.7:3-5.
The idea of false guilt is not biblical in its presuppositional worldview. Therefore, it is not a legitimate concept. False guilt is a Freudian concept. Freud basically said that false guilt is a result of the conflict between the Id and Superego1. Freud left no room for the notion of sin in his worldly philosophies because he was a God hater. One can pick up just about any biography about Freud and determine this fact. Freud’s concept of false guilt seeks to separate guilt from guilty feelings. No true biblical counselor can legitimately mix Freud’s notions and Scripture’s truths while remaining faithful to God’s Word (Matt.12:30; Col.2:8).
In contrast to Freud’s false philosophies Scripture defines guilt as a legal liability and culpability to punishment before God which all men are deserving of (Rom 3:9-18, 23; James 2:10). There are no feelings of guilt without the presence of guilt because of the universality of sin. However, because our hearts are so wicked and good at self-deception, it is possible for guilt to be present without any feelings2. Again, the term “guilt” speaks of the fact of liability and not the feeling that accompanies it. For example; a man can have a habit of speeding through a school zone at 55mph and feel guilty –indeed he is guilty. This man could choose to succumb to his guilty feelings and slow down to 35mph in order to sooth his conscience, but he would still be guilty because the school zone speed limit was 15mph. The man did not feel guilty even though he was, in fact, still guilty3.
In the case of this man the counselor would need to explain to him that he is not the determiner of whether or not he is actually guilty, but it is God who determines guilt. He would need to be informed that he is not the judge of his own guiltiness or innocence, but that God makes the determination, and that his sin is serious because God is a Holy Judge (Rom.1:8; 2:5-6). The counselee would need to be admonished to repent of his prideful minimization of his sin4.
On the other hand, there could be a man who drives 12mph in a 15mph school zone and feels guilty. The man could have been raised all his life to believe that it is not safe to drive any faster than 10mph in a school zone, and thus it is sinful to go any faster regardless of the speed limit. If that man feels guilty in his conscience for driving 12mph his guilt is not false guilt because he is sinning against his conscience. Romans 14:21-23 tells us that anything we do that does not proceed from faith is actually sin on our part. If that man believes that he is sinning against God, or even might be sinning against God, and he proceeds with his course of action despite his conscience condemning him then he is actually sinning against God. The counselor would need to guide the man in this scenario to repent of his rebellious attitude against God. Afterward, the counselor could discuss with the man whether his self-imposed standard is biblical or not. Either way our conscience, which is only as good as it is biblically informed, is not our guide. God’s Word is our guide and the counselor ought to steer the counselee in this direction.
1 Snowden, Ruth, Teach Yourself Freud (McGraw-Hill: New York City, 2006), 105–107.
2 Jer.17:9; Prov.14:12; 16:25
3 Adapted from Dr. Stuart Scott, Pastoral Counseling PM711 (Sun Valley: TMS), 29.
4 Matt.7:3-5.
8. Write a paragraph or two on the problem of eclecticism in counseling and your position in reference to it.
Defined by Noah Webster’s 1828 dictionary, the eclectic person selects “from the various systems such opinions and principles as he judged to be sound and rational”.[1] This view of picking and choosing what we believe to be useful has created many different types of “Christian counseling”. The radical separation approach is followed by people who believe that Christians have no expertise or credentials to help people with emotional problems. This view states that secular counselors are the only competent and qualified people to help others’ life problems; not the theologians. As our culture has become increasingly psychologized, the integrationist approach has increased in popularity. This view is often promoted by Christians who happen to be psychologists. In their churches, they are the most qualified and competent people to handle emotional problems. This is done with a hybrid of psychology and Scripture. Another approach is the synergism view. This view creates the notion that “all truth is God’s truth” and since some things in psychology can be useful, they claim to use Scripture to critically examine the findings of psychology.[2] They believe the best of psychology is truth that God meant for us to use in counseling. Finally, there is true Biblical counseling that focuses on Scripture alone (Sola Scriptura) as the sole and sufficient authority in counseling (2 Tim. 3:16).
With exception to the last view of counseling, they all share a common problem. Their system is built around an extra-biblical concept. Used nouthetically, the Bible confronts people to repent for Christ’s glory. Always used humanistically, psychology focuses on the self to help people find tolerable outlets for behavior modification. These two counseling strategies use different authorities, have different views of man and God, different ideas on how to find peace, and as a result they are diametrically opposed to one another.[3] These are just a few differences. The main problem is that any form of counseling that looks to other sources than the Scriptures is essentially saying that Scripture is not sufficient. It’s to say that we need something else. In every case, the “something else” is a theory, belief, or tradition of man. It is a belief that wants fallible practices to supplement that which is infallible. They are views that deny God’s power.
Since part of this response is to give my personal opinion I will first give credit to secular counseling by noting that for the most part I believe that they mean well and have the best intentions for people. I believe that psychology can be helpful descriptively and psychiatry can be useful when people need help with biological diseases of the brain and for people who struggle with real experiences of believing things to be true that are not (psychosis). With that said, psychology should not prescribe remedies because their view of the Gospel is inaccurate. The Gospel is the power of salvation (Rom. 1:16). Without an understanding of the Gospel people will trade current idols that harm them for other idols that bring them contentment – which is essentially what psychology promotes. Most diagnoses in psychology have no root in a biological issue. People suffer because they are not Biblically dealing with their sins (Ps. 32:3). To use psychology is to make lovers of self who will do all things for the sake of their feelings. It will teach them to blame-shift their sins on their label. We know that nobody can obey two opposing masters at the same time (Matt. 6:24). How can we expect our counselees to follow what God says about denying themselves daily to live for the glory of Christ when it is mixed with a worldview that teaches the opposite? The only true Christian counseling is Sola Scriptura.
[1] Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Search App, “Eclectic”
[2] These terms are from p.2-4 of The Basics of Biblical Counseling syllabus, Jim Newheiser, www.ibcd.org.
[3] See response to Theology questions #1 and #2 under Anthropology for more on this topic.
With exception to the last view of counseling, they all share a common problem. Their system is built around an extra-biblical concept. Used nouthetically, the Bible confronts people to repent for Christ’s glory. Always used humanistically, psychology focuses on the self to help people find tolerable outlets for behavior modification. These two counseling strategies use different authorities, have different views of man and God, different ideas on how to find peace, and as a result they are diametrically opposed to one another.[3] These are just a few differences. The main problem is that any form of counseling that looks to other sources than the Scriptures is essentially saying that Scripture is not sufficient. It’s to say that we need something else. In every case, the “something else” is a theory, belief, or tradition of man. It is a belief that wants fallible practices to supplement that which is infallible. They are views that deny God’s power.
Since part of this response is to give my personal opinion I will first give credit to secular counseling by noting that for the most part I believe that they mean well and have the best intentions for people. I believe that psychology can be helpful descriptively and psychiatry can be useful when people need help with biological diseases of the brain and for people who struggle with real experiences of believing things to be true that are not (psychosis). With that said, psychology should not prescribe remedies because their view of the Gospel is inaccurate. The Gospel is the power of salvation (Rom. 1:16). Without an understanding of the Gospel people will trade current idols that harm them for other idols that bring them contentment – which is essentially what psychology promotes. Most diagnoses in psychology have no root in a biological issue. People suffer because they are not Biblically dealing with their sins (Ps. 32:3). To use psychology is to make lovers of self who will do all things for the sake of their feelings. It will teach them to blame-shift their sins on their label. We know that nobody can obey two opposing masters at the same time (Matt. 6:24). How can we expect our counselees to follow what God says about denying themselves daily to live for the glory of Christ when it is mixed with a worldview that teaches the opposite? The only true Christian counseling is Sola Scriptura.
[1] Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Search App, “Eclectic”
[2] These terms are from p.2-4 of The Basics of Biblical Counseling syllabus, Jim Newheiser, www.ibcd.org.
[3] See response to Theology questions #1 and #2 under Anthropology for more on this topic.