Apologetics and Counseling

Following Christ the Center episode 205, we kept the recording running and spoke with Dr. K. Scott Oliphint about counseling, apologetics, and the doctrine of God. Throughout the discussion, Dr. Oliphint and the panelists reference CCEF, the Christian Counseling and Educational Foundation, in Glenside, PA.

Participants: , , ,

We will occasionally post special discussions to this podcast. These are usually recordings or clips that do not fit with our other programs. Browse more episodes from this program or subscribe to the podcast feed.

Jeff Downs

8 years ago

During a pastoral counseling class with Dr. Scipione a few years ago, I commented, this is simply presuppositional apologetics applied.

Jack Miller

8 years ago

Amen to your comment, Jeff.

Theology always directs practice, or… what we truly believe and depend on as true will set the direction for how we live, i.e. what we do. In my mind this is a core principle of biblical counseling.


Scott Johnson

8 years ago

This was interesting and timely for me, as I just finished reading and discussing with a church member Powlison’s “Seeing with New Eyes.” Van Til’s apologetic and Powlison’s biblical counseling are both based on the sufficiency of Scripture – amen!

I enjoy the programs – keep up the good work!

Scott Johnson
Pastor, Grace OPC
Wasilla, AK


8 years ago

Thanks for this episode. I think the apologetic and theological seriousness of the CCEF is something we all appreciate. I think there is still some work that needs to be done, though. I’ve been reading through some of the literature in the movement (Powlison and Welch in particular, such as Welch’s book Blame it on the Brain) and it seems to me that there is a lack of philosophical sophistication in these authors, especially when it comes to the philosophy of mind/cognitive science and moral philosophy.

For instance, I’m worried that these authors do not avoid substance dualism, and they do not have the criticisms of that view that one finds in Reformed systematics like Bavinck and Horton recently. They also seem to have a naive view of moral responsibility, that one is either responsible or not like an on-off light switch and one without a principled criterion for determining when and why someone is morally responsible. Has anyone else thought the movement a little weak when it comes to philosophy?


Email Newsletter


Reformed Forum
115 Commerce Dr., Suite E
Grayslake, IL 60030

+1 847.986.6140

Copyright © 2020 Reformed Forum