faculty_blog_header_summer

Written by Bryan Maier Friday, 01 November 2013 00:00

I am finally entering the 21stcentury.  

In a moment of weakness during one of those never-ending negotiating moments with my son, I agreed to sign up for Facebook. My son gave me a brief tutorial and after a few moments I was emerging from my relational cave into the world of communicating with thousands of people online.

What a rush!

It was so encouraging to see immediately that ten people were requesting to be my “friend”, until I realized that my son has over 100 friends on his page and that is low for a guy his age. Anyway, after a week of swimming in the deep water of social media, here are some things I have learned.

  1. No event is too mundane for Facebook. Part of the reason I signed up for Facebook was to provide a salve for my existential loneliness.  But within the first day, I had received recipes, gardening tips and a detailed narration of someone’s trip to the mall. Really?
  2. People talk in sound bites (lots of them). Communication is really different on Facebook. Most posts are one or two sentences. Maybe we should require some politicians to communicate only on Facebook.
  3. Many of our counseling graduates are thriving (Praise God!).  It is such an encouragement to reconnect with them and to see where they have landed and how they are living out the gospel in many different settings.
  4. Some of my relatives must have barren lives (See #1).
  5. The term “friend” has to be seriously redefined. It has nothing to do with knowing or being known. Rather I think it means that they can free-associate on your page and you can return the favor.
  6. If your Dean includes a photo of a man and woman in bed together in his Biblical blog on sex, that photo will end up on your Facebook page (even if you have not “friended” him yet!).
  7. My first date in middle school does not remember our date.  This is too painful to elaborate on.
  8. Facebook can be addicting. At least cigarette smokers limit themselves often to a pack (20 cigarettes) a day.  Things I never cared about a week ago suddenly occupy way too much of my frontal lobes.
  9. My son is much more skilled in Facebook that I ever will be.  On the one hand this is exciting to think that at least someone in our family understands how people communicate in the 21stcentury. On the other hand it makes me feel old. Very old.
  10. Facebook can be a great tool (used properly).  Overall, I think will be a good learning experience for me.  Now run to your computer and friend me so I can have as many friends as my son.


Bryan Maier, Psy. D. is an Associate Professor of Counseling & Psychology in the Masters of Arts in Counseling Program at Biblical. He maintains a private practice at Diane Langberg & Associates. 

 

Written by David Lamb Monday, 28 October 2013 00:00

healthcare

Currently I am on no prescription medicine.  A year ago, however, I was on three separate meds and they seemed to make me feel worse.  So my various medical professionals (at one point, I was seeing seven of them) kept switching my prescriptions to find the right cocktail.  Eventually, God healed me, but it seemed to be in spite of the drugs. 

 

 

 

 

Psalm 41 offers a different prescription for health.  I’m going to look at just the first three verses.

  • Psalm 41:1 To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David.
  • Blessed is the one who considers the poor!
  • In the day of trouble
  • the LORD delivers him;
  • 2 the LORD protects him
  • and keeps him alive
  • he is called blessed in the land;
  • you do not give him up to the will of his enemies.
  • 3 The LORD sustains him on his sickbed;
  • in his illness you restore him to full health.

According to Psalm 41, people who consider the poor are blessed.  What does it mean to consider the poor?  The Hebrew verb here could be translated literally as “cause to prosper” (the Hebrew verb is a hiphil) which sounds more than just thinking about them, or even giving them a handout.  Considering would involve cash, food, education, health care—anything they would need to prosper. 

Notice, however, the text here does not command its readers to care for the poor (although Scripture does that repeatedly elsewhere: Exo. 22:25; 23:11; Lev. 19:10; Deut. 15:7, 11; Matt. 19:21; Luke 14:13; etc.).  It is merely saying that those who consider the poor will be blessed.  So, if you don’t feel a need for divine blessing, you can stop reading this blog post. 

I, for one, am always looking for ways to get blessed.  But perhaps some of you have too much blessing already?  

How will the ones who consider the poor be blessed?  Over the next few verses the psalm lists seven blessings for those who consider the poor.

  1. God delivers them during times of crisis.
  2. God protects them.
  3. God keeps them alive.
  4. They are called blessed in the land.
  5. God doesn’t give them up to their enemies.
  6. God sustains them on their sickbed.
  7. God restores them to full health.
  8. The seven blessings can be grouped into three categories.

First, blessing involves deliverance

God delivers, protects and keeps alive the ones who help the poor.  What is the day of trouble?  Financial?  Spiritual?  Emotional?  From the end of verse 2 it sounds like it is military.  Being given into the will of enemies.  Notice, here that the pronoun switches from God as third person (“the LORD” = YHWH) to God as second person (“you”).  A similar switch happens in Psalm 23:4.  In the midst of this enemy related crisis God is being spoke to directly as a sign of his presence. 

Second, blessing involves health

God sustains the consider-er of the poor on their sickbed and restores them to health fully. As someone who’s struggled a lot physically this past year, my ears perk up to this language. My doctors were quick to prescribe a litany of medications. I’d love to hear a doctor prescribe caring for the poor as part of a prescription for health. There is something wonderfully therapeutic and healing about caring for another person in need. I don’t fully understand it, but I believe it. As we bless others, God blesses us.

Third, blessing involves blessing

They are called blessed in the land. Yes, one of the blessings is blessing. I know that sounds circular. But the psalmist places this 4thblessing in the middle of the seven apparently for emphasis. Do you need a blessing? This listen to the words of this psalm.

Is this supposed to be like a magic formula for success?

Put your penny in the gumball machine (help the poor) and out comes your gumball (deliverance, healing, blessing).  Not really. 

Jesus considered the poor more than any other person on the planet and God gave him into the hands of his enemies.  Just a few verses later in 41:9 the psalmist speaks of being betrayed in a way that foreshadows Jesus’ betrayal: “Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me” (see also John 13:18).

So, let’s not view this psalm in a mechanistic manner, but in general, God still promises that blessing does come to those who consider the poor.  Bless the poor, and God will bless you. 

My wife Shannon is better at considering the poor than I am. Several times a year, she signs up our family to prepare dinner for and sleep overnight with families who are temporary homeless at a nearby church. Usually, I finagle my way out of it. (“I won’t sleep well on those thin mattresses, and I need to be fresh to teach the Bible the next day” - hmm, that sounds suspiciously like the priest or Levite in the parable of the Good Samaritan: Luke 10:31-32). Last month, my finagle failed, so Shannon and I spent a delightful evening hanging out and telling stories with a young family and their two year-old daughter. 

I didn't sleep well that night, but the Sunday school class I taught the next day still went fine.  And God blessed me through the experience.

How have you been blessed by considering the poor?

(If you’d like me to write a blog post on a particular psalm tell me a comment or an email.) 


David Lamb is Associate Professor of Old Testament at Biblical. He’s the husband of Shannon, father of Nathan and Noah, and the author of God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist?He blogs regularly at http://davidtlamb.com/. See also http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/david-lamb.

 

   

Written by Derek Cooper Friday, 25 October 2013 00:00

Throughout the history of the church, commentators on the epistle of James have variously reconciled the author’s view on the doctrine of justification with the apostle Paul’s by explaining that they were either referring to two different circumstances or that one’s works perfected or illustrated one’s true faith. Certain interpreters in the sixteenth century, however, opposed the reconciliation of James and Paul. Martin Luther’s largely negative remarks on James, for instance, were both widespread and enduring.

     Although post-Reformation Protestants adopted many of Luther’s views—most significantly, the doctrine of justification by faith alone,which asserts that people are justified before God by faith and not by anything they do—they did not reject the canonical authority of James as Luther had done. This is especially the case for Puritan interpreters. Those in the Puritan tradition, such as the English biblical commentator Thomas Manton, collectively regarded the letter of James as apostolic (written by an apostle), canonical (correctly included in the canon as “Scripture”), and even theologically significant (since it demonstrated the importance of works after salvation).

Beginning with the post-Reformation commentators, Puritan interpretation of James 2:14-26 focused on two interrelated themes: the analogy of faith and scope, which allowed for the reconciliation of Paul and James. First, the “analogy of faith” became a cardinal doctrine within Reformed biblical interpretation. This is especially apparent in troublesome passages like James 2:14-26, which appeared to contradict theologically fundamental statements of Paul’s such as, “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law” (Romans 3:28, ESV). In short, the analogy of faith restricted what any given passage of Scripture could mean since no passage could signify something contrary to the cardinal articles of the faith. In the case of James 2:14-26, the Puritans believed that Romans 3:28 prohibited that James 2:14-26 could mean that a person could be saved before God by works.

Second, the primary way for Puritans to interpret James 2:14-26 in accordance with the analogy of faith was by carefully recognizing the “scope” of both James and Paul, with the term “scope” referring to the endpoint of any given passage (John Calvin, for instance, argued that the “scope” of all Scripture was Christ). According to Puritan interpreters like Manton, the error of theologians like Martin Luther was their failure to correctly identify the “scope” of Romans and James. Rather than appealing to the biblical canon itself, for instance, Luther appealed to another authority—namely, the principle that Scripture is only correctly so called if it preaches Christ. The Puritans, by contrast, appealed directly to Scripture, and thus interpreted James in light of Paul in a way that reconciled the two according to the analogy of faith. Puritan interpreters believed that the “scope” of Romans was justification. The “scope” of James, therefore, was not justification—at least not justification before God. The Puritan mindset can be formulated as follows:

  1. The analogy of faith determines that Scripture coheres (and accords with the fundamental articles of faith).
  2. Apparent discrepancies in Scripture are to be resolved not simply theologically but exegetically—by noting the “scope,” “drift,” “proposition,” “argument,” or general point of each book and each section.
  3. The scope of Romans is justification before God.
  4. The scope of James is not justification before God.
  5. Thus Paul and James do not contradict each other.

Although the modern-day architect of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, Martin Luther, would not have disagreed with each of the Puritans’ propositions, he never would have formulated them in this way. In fact, even the very first article—that the analogy of faith determines that Scripture coheres—indicates a difference between Luther and the Puritans. Given the fluidity of the canon during the early part of the sixteenth century, interpreters like Luther developed other interpretive methods when adjudicating the relation between Paul and James. As mentioned above, Luther developed the hermeneutic that all canonical books must preach Christ (and certainly not works); if they did not, they were not properly called “Scripture.” Since Luther believed that James did not preach Christ, Luther relegated James to a secondary canonical status; the Puritans, by contrast, reconciled it with the “scope” of Paul’s thought: justification by faith alone.

Despite the Puritans’ sharp disagreement with Luther over the canonicity of James and his use of “scope,” they nevertheless fully agreed with him that Paul’s Letter to the Romans is the lens through which to interpret James. Justification is by faith and not by works, in other words, and Paul’s clear words on the subject determined the interpretation of James’s less clear (that is, divergent) words. And although a strand within Protestantism—represented by the Anglican Bishop George Bull—argued vigorously that James’s clarity on the subject of justification should interpret Paul’s obscurity, both “faith alone” and the “analogy of faith” won the day, indeed, the centuries.

The result of this victory, however, has meant that subsequent interpreters have so meshed James’s theology into Paul’s that it is virtually impossible for a modern interpreter on James to not begin his or her comments on the letter without a reference to either Paul or Luther. Whether or not Bull is correct to interpret Paul through the lens of James, one wonders what would happen if interpreters presupposed that the “scope” of James 2:14-26 was true justification and then interpreted Romans or Galatians according to the “analogy of faith.” Whatever the case, the Puritans’ robust disagreement with Luther about his interpretation of James reveals how easy it is for even theologians of similar theological traditions to read the same Bible in opposing ways on account of their different systems of interpretation.
 

Dr. Derek Cooper is assistant professor of world Christian history and director of the Doctor of Ministry program at Biblical. He is the author of several books. For those interested in learning more about the Puritans in general or about how Martin Luther interpreted the book of James, check out Dr. Cooper’s book Thomas Manton: A Guided Tour of the Life and Thought of a Puritan Pastor. His faculty page can be found at http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/derek-cooper.

 

 

   

Written by Kyuboem Lee Wednesday, 23 October 2013 00:00

[The following is the Foreword I wrote for The Urbanity of the Bible: Rediscovering the Urban Nature of the Bible and What it Means for Today, by Sean Benesh, an upcoming publication from Wipf & Stock Publishers. Used by permission.]

Jerusalem

The writer of Hebrews pictures God as the builder and architect of the city that he has prepared for his people (11:10, 16)—God is the Urban Planner par excellence. The corresponding portrait of New Jerusalem is the culmination of God’s redemptive and creative work—a place of beauty, human flourishing, and joyous community where men and women eternally live in righteousness, justice, and peace with each other, as well as in worship, love, and obedience under the rule of their God and King; a place where God dwells forever with his people finally redeemed from sin and death; the place where the hopes and dreams of all creation are realized at last. This city is “the joy of the whole earth” (Ps 48:2). Through his urban planning and building activities, God himself has prepared the habitation, garden, and tabernacle that he always had in mind for us his creatures. It awaits those who seek God’s country—they will one day arrive at their destination, and finally say, “We are home.”

As God’s image bearers, the children of Adam and Eve have been planning and building cities from the very beginnings of the biblical story. Because of human sin and the resulting fall from shalom, however, the cities that we have built experience and promulgate corruption, unbelief, injustice, and death. On the other hand, because of God’s good urban plan, the city also gives refuge, nurtures creativity, enhances human flourishing, grants a more abundant life, and glorifies the divine Urban Planner after whose image we engage in city-building.

But I am getting ahead of the action. In the following pages, author Sean Benesh will be your able guide to this ages-old, ongoing story of the city. He will narrate the urban story of the Bible. He will make a convincing case that today’s astounding urbanization around the globe is part of the outworking of God’s urban mandate for his image bearers. He will connect the everyday work of the citizens for the common urban good to God’s desire to create an urban society that is just and compassionate, a city that is a refuge to those who are strangers and aliens. He will argue that the missio dei finds its context squarely within the divine urban design.

His voice is a welcome one. Christians in North America have long failed to see the city as a good place. Many joined the flight out of dirty, crime-ridden, impoverished and impersonal gothams that they deemed irredeemable. Those who did choose to serve in cities thought of rescuing the city dwellers out of urban conditions. Missing was a biblical vision of God’s good design for the city.

Now, in the early twenty-first century, the tide has turned on the public perception of the city. For young gentrifiers and hipsters moving into lofts in post-industrial neighborhoods, the city has become a desirable locale to live in. Churches, seeking to court them, have also moved into formerly struggling inner-city communities. But, often out of the newcomers’ sight, former residents who were unable to join the former flight out of cities because of their socioeconomic standing are being displaced, making room for coffeeshops and quirky eateries. Globalization and its attendant migration patterns have also brought floods of new immigrants from every corner of the world into the cities—endowing the urban communities transnational identities. Zooming out, we also note that we have recently crossed a vital milestone; there is now more people living in the cities around the globe than there are people living in rural areas. We live in an urban world.

In the midst of these great urban transitions, we wonder whether God’s people have developed a robust urban theology that will sufficiently shape and invigorate their witness among the nations in the city. There is much to catch up on and learn about how the Lord is moving his mission forward in our global, urban world, and how his church is called to witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ in our new urban context. Sean Benesh will help us to do just that. As a minister of the gospel living, working, and learning in a rapidly transitioning community in Portland, Oregon, his is a unique vantage point to perceive the ongoing missio dei. My prayer is that the Lord who has prepared a city for his people will use this book to edify and direct their conversation and ministry in the cities around the world today and into the future, until the culmination of history when we will at long last reach the city that is the joy of the whole earth. May the urban communities of our day reflect more and more that city of joy, and may the church seek that city in our urban neighborhoods today with more and more of all that the Lord has given us, to God’s glory.


Dr. Kyuboem Lee serves as Adjunct Faculty at Biblical Seminary. He is the founding pastor of Germantown Hope Community Church in Philadelphia, and the General Editor for the Journal of Urban Mission.

   

Written by Dave Dunbar Monday, 21 October 2013 00:00

Dr. Dave Dunbar

OK, I admit it:  I have shamelessly borrowed most of the title of Robert Pirsig’s 1974 novel, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. As you may have heard from our new President, Dr. Frank James, I recently retired from the president’s office to the blessed, carefree life of a Biblical faculty member.  As part of my retirement, my wife allowed me to purchase a motorcycle and now I am driving on two wheels for the first time in over 45 years.  And yes, October was created with motorcyclists in mind.

Getting back into “biking” has made me freshly aware of the multi-cultural reality of contemporary America.  The motorcycle culture has its own distinct qualities of dress, values, life-style, etc.  And for the most part this cultural reality possesses little in common with Christian practice or world-view.

But as a Christian who is now coming into contact with aspects of the “biking” culture, I am thinking more about how my Christian life and my “riding life” might intersect.  Recently the local cycle shop had a special weekend devoted to store-wide sales, free seminars on cleaning and maintaining your bike, and just having an enjoyable gathering of the community (like church?).

A member of our church works at the shop, and he invited me to stop by on Sunday for their “chapel” service. It seems that members of a local chapter of a Christian motorcycle club regularly come to this event on Saturday and Sunday to give out tracts and have a Christian presence.  As part of their activities they have a chapel service at the dealership early Sunday morning.

I didn’t attend the festivities on Sunday morning (although I did drop by on Saturday).  However, my friend’s invitation got me thinking about this basic approach to evangelistic outreach which is fairly common among evangelical Christians.  It is the approach of creating parallel organizations and inviting non-Christians to join.  My observation is that usually the people who join are already Christians.  I don’t know if that is true of the Christian motorcyclists, but I suspect it might be.  And even if it is true, I still appreciate the effort that is being made to present the gospel in a cultural context where Jesus has little visibility apart from profane expressions.

Of course there are other possibilities for bringing Christian witness to the various subcultures around us. Rather than develop parallel Christian organizations we might consider a program of infiltration.  This has been illustrated for me by two friends who are pastors. Both of them are cyclists—that was part of the rationale I gave my wife when I got back into the sport—and both of them ride with secular biker clubs.  Both men have developed deep friendships within the cycling community, regularly pray for and with club members, have given counsel and even conducted funerals for some of the members. On the strength of these relationships one of the pastors hosts a “biker Sunday” at his church once a year that features an outdoor service, a barbeque, and afternoon bike tours—they get a couple hundred bikers to the event.

Now I am not suggesting that these two approaches are mutually exclusive . . . if you had time, you could do both. It seems to me, however, that evangelicals have tended primarily to employ the first approach which is “safer” but probably less effective if we want to bring the gospel to other cultures. The second is more challenging and even threatening, but in talking with my pastor friends, it sounds much more interesting!


Dave Dunbar served as President of Biblical for 27 years before transitioning to the role of Professor of Theology at Biblical on July 1, 2013. He has been married to Sharon for 44 years. They have four grown children and seven grandchildren.

   

Written by Phil Monroe Friday, 18 October 2013 00:00

Dr. Phil Monroe

Those of us who teach others exert tremendous power with our words. With words we name things into categories, what is good and bad, right and wrong. With words we dismiss some ideas and baptize others. Even those of us teachers who want to be known for our Socratic methods must admit that our choice of questions may wield the same power as those who teach by divine fiat.

Counselors too exert this same power over clients. If we are honest, we tend to provide empathic validation of feelings when we agree with our clients and silence when we do not. We offer “insight” to name our clients neuroses.

A few days ago I ran across notes I took from a presentation made by Paul Wachtel, professor at CUNY. He pointed out how therapists use words to make power grabs in session. When a client is having a negative reaction to our words and work, we can distance ourselves with “pseudo-neutrality” by saying something like, “I’m wondering if your defensiveness to me right now is because…”  Such words imply that the event is merely happening within the client. Such words deny our own responsibility for all or part of the problem. Wachtel suggests that using the words, “Isn’t it interesting that you see/believe/think…” illustrates another power grab. It defines the therapist as the all-knowing seer and the client as some naïve child. These kinds of statements form a put-down even when that is not our goal. Even when the client does not feel judged, it is likely that they will not feel energized to change.

Is there a solution?

I do not advocate that teachers stop teaching or that counselors stop offering wisdom and insight. Nor is it always wrong to name things as right or wrong. Rather, I think we must consider how we teach and counsel. What words best help our students and counselees activate into critical thinking, evaluation, and action?

Acceptance before judgment, describing instead of telling

Before offering assessment, it may be better to enable students/counselees to accept what is in front of them—feelings, beliefs, and realities. Now, acceptance sounds like valuing. But by acceptance I mean to describe and acknowledge prior to judging whether something is good or bad. Consider these examples from Paul Wachtel to a client who keeps missing sessions,

You want someone to pursue you… OR It feels good when someone pursues you.

Or consider his examples with a client who says, “This counseling is superficial. I want to go deeper.”

You say you want to go deeper, but when I try to do it, you don’t want to… OR You want to go deeper into your experience, but it’s also frightening.

Notice that both name the thing that is happening but one offers blame while the other offers an invitation to accept a reality.

Notice the difference between the first option (telling) and the second (validation/acknowledgement). Which one might encourage more active response by the client? Paul suggests that when we accept a client’s perception, it offers an opportunity to stop defending self and to explore what may have been unacknowledged.

A corrective for Biblical counselors?

One stereotype of Biblical counselors is that they spend too much time naming sin. While not a fully fair stereotype, counselors may want to examine how Jesus works with the most vulnerable of sinners. Do we tell them what is wrong and the path forward, or do we engage them at their level of experience? John 4 depicts Jesus’ interactions with the woman at the well. This woman is of ill repute. She is at the well to avoid the judgments of her neighbors. She runs into a Jewish rabbi who chooses not to avoid her but to ask her for help. Instead of engaging in dismissive interpretations or debates about Samaritan versus Jewish worship practices, he offers her something she desperately wants. Then, he does tell her something about her history, but only after she has opened the door.

Or consider Jesus’ interaction with the woman caught in adultery (John 8) and how he does not directly name the sin but protects first, asks her to notice what is happening, and then encourages her to act in a new way regarding her sexual behavior.

On the flip side, consider Jesus’ interactions with the religious leaders of the day (Luke 11). Notice that he does not refrain from making some rather harsh judgments. Here’s the question I want you to consider: Does Jesus make these pronouncements in the hope that it will produce change? I think not.

None of these stories form a doctrine of counseling but may they encourage us to consider how we join our counselees first rather than stand above using words of assessment and judgment.

Phil Monroe is Professor of Counseling & Psychologyand Director of the Masters of Arts in Counseling Program at Biblical. He also directs Biblical’s new trauma recovery project. You can find his personal blog at www.wisecounsel.wordpress.com.

   

Written by Phil Monroe Wednesday, 16 October 2013 00:00

Phil Monroe Office

I’ve just moved my office here at the seminary after having been in the same office for 10 years or so. Several months ago I began the move process by weeding my library and paper files. But even as I moved this week into my new digs (for graduates, the counseling department is in the old development office building next to the main building), I am still sorting stuff and deciding whether to keep or throw the various and sundry items I’ve collected over the years.

Here are some of the items I’ve come across for the first time in a while:

  • A plastic box full of my raw data from my doctoral dissertation
  • Notes from classes I’ve taken some 20 years ago
  • Cassette tapes of my first professional conference presentations
  • Miscellaneous articles I’ve read and thought, “wow, that would be good to use in a class”
  • A briefcase of articles and writing drafts on Multiple Personality Disorder back in 1993

Are these treasures or trash? And maybe the most important question is why I feel the urge to keep these old obsolete items. Some of these items (my dissertation raw data and cassette tapes) represent massive portions of my life as I was working to accomplish the goal of getting the position I now have.  Others hold little sentimental value but trigger that little portion of my brain that say, “Maybe I might use this in the future.”

As I have been contemplating my choices, I’ve also considered how this might be a life lesson.

Let Go!

What do you hold on to in your life that may need a good heave ho? We all carry some old baggage from yesteryear: shame, guilt, bitterness, or fantasies of the life we thought we would live?  There are times we create symbolic monuments that serve only to weigh us down and heap discouragement on our souls. Maybe for you, a memory keeps coming back from your past, a memory that reminds you of a failure. And when that memory comes back you repeat a well-rehearsed story line ensuring that you will continue to use that failure to define you present life.

Might it be possible to toss that storyline and practice a new one that is in closer keeping to God’s story about you? Imagine the Israelites continuing to remember their failure to avoid idolatry in this manner: “We’re the people who served idols and wandered in the desert for forty years. We’re the people who forgot God and were carried off by the Babylonians.” Although true, this storyline is not the whole truth. The whole truth includes a new narrative, “We’re the people God has pursued and rescued.” Period. End of story.

Keep It!

Some of the stuff we don’t use anymore still may serve a good purpose. When I look at pictures of my wife on her wedding day I remember the 23 years of God’s faithfulness. Even a pile of useless dissertation material reminds me how God saw me through a doctoral program and paved the way for a great job here at Biblical. It is easy to forget these mercies and gifts. So, feel free to keep a few Ebenezers to remind you of God’s handiwork in your life.


Phil Monroe is Professor of Counseling & Psychologyand Director of the Masters of Arts in Counseling Program at Biblical. He also directs Biblical’s new trauma recovery project. You can find his personal blog at www.wisecounsel.wordpress.com.

   

Page 5 of 23

Blog Mission

The purpose of this blog will be to expand the influence of our faculty, maintain contact with our graduates, and invite other friends to think with us about important biblical and theological ideas.

Biblical's Faculty

Biblical’s Faculty:

We are committed to ongoing engagement with culture and the world for the sake of our witness to the Gospel, and to continual learning from Christians in other cultural settings.

Latest Blog Entries

Written on 19 September 2014 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 22 August 2014 - by Philip Monroe
Written on 01 August 2014 - by Susan Disston
Written on 18 July 2014 - by Charles Zimmerman
Written on 11 July 2014 - by Bryan Maier
Written on 09 July 2014 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 04 July 2014 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 02 July 2014 - by David Lamb
Written on 23 June 2014 - by Philip Monroe
Written on 20 June 2014 - by Philip Monroe

Previous Blog Entries

Follow Biblical

Follow us on the following sites and receive notifications on upcoming events and blog entries:

Follow Biblical on facebookFollow Biblical on Twitterg+_64_black

Contact Admissions

800.235.4021 x146

215.368.5000 x146

215.368.4913 (fax)

 

admissions@biblical.edu

Stay Connected with Biblical

Follow us on the following sites:

Follow Biblical on facebookFollow Biblical on TwitterFollow Biblical on YouTubeg+_64_black
Or simply call us at...
800.235.4021 x146 or 215.368.5000 x146

Support Biblical by Giving

800.235.4021 x162

215.368.5000 x162

215.368.7002 (fax)

 

development@biblical.edu

Home

Site Login