Dr Bob Smith and Responding to Heath Lambert’s Long-Form Essay

A storm hit the biblical counseling world when Heath Lambert released his new long-form essay Priests In The Garden, Zombies In The Wilderness, and Prophets On The Wall. Using an analogy of priests, zombies, and prophets that he partially developed for a talk David Powlison asked him to discuss with the faculty of CCEF, Heath shared a strongly worded warning to biblical counselors of potential compromise, related to how biblical counselors functionally view the sufficiency of Scripture. Toward the end of the essay, Heath writes:

Likewise, it is far worse that a counselor would lead others away from Scripture and toward secularism than it is for a fictitious priest to suffer from a mythological zombie bite. … Today, the future of the biblical counseling movement depends on you recognizing the zombies.

And there’s just one last thing. I don’t believe for a second that Jesus Christ took any delight in the necessary declaration that some people are wolves. I take no joy in declaring the existence of infected priests. The opposite is the case. I know many of these people. They are my brothers and sisters in Christ. We have served together, spent time together, and I love them. I also believe they pose a serious threat. I know they will be upset by this warning and so I want to close with an appeal from my heart to all the infected priests disturbing the tranquility of the biblical counseling garden.

He warns that some in the movement of biblical counseling could be an infected priest, meaning they have unknowingly accepted a false understanding of common grace which functionally undermines the sufficiency of Scripture.

The question for all of us who read this warning: How do we respond?

Dr Bob Smith and Responding to Criticism

Medical doctor, author, and long-time biblical counselor, Bob Smith and I discussed responding to criticism from those in and out of the biblical counselor world many times. For many years, he and I, alongside his wife Leona, had developed a deep friendship. We discussed many issues related to his life and views. He both taught with me and for me at both Baptist Bible College and Theological Seminary as well as Faith Bible Seminary. As part of my Spiritual Formation and Self-Counsel course at Faith, he would come each year and spend two hours with my students discussing life and ministry. In these sessions, he would explain to students his view of responding to criticism from inside and outside the biblical counseling movement.

The Bob Smith I Knew

Before I explain his view, let me tell you about the Bob Smith I knew. Thankfully, we all have opportunities to grow in sanctification. I say this because the Bob Smith I knew and loved was not the same Bob Smith that others early in the movement had debated. In the early years of the biblical counseling movement, Dr. Bob developed a strong friendship with his pastor Bill Goode, Jay Adams, and many of the earliest leaders in the BC world. He became a member of NANC, now ACBC, wrote articles for the Journal of Pastoral Practice (now the Journal of Biblical Counseling), wrote books, and trained thousands around the world.

If you had known him in those early days, whenever anyone challenged his view on anything, his goal was not simply to explain his view but to win the argument. He primarily defended his position rather than listen, engage, and consider what was being said. With his strong personality, quick wit, and analytical mind, he could quickly dispose of those who critiqued him without ever having to really consider the charge. Many times this was done, in what we might call, less than Christlike responses. I never witnessed this; I am only going by his own stories and testimony to me.

That was not the Bob Smith I knew. By the end of his life, this had changed.

Responding to Criticism in a Christlike Way

Although he never grew fond of criticism (like most of us), the Dr. Bob I knew and loved did not shun it. In fact, he accepted criticism inside the sovereignty of God. With a strong view of Romans 8:28-29, he understood that God allowed individuals to criticize him in order to give him the opportunity to grow in his own Christlikeness, to help him consider areas where he may have missed something, and to provide him an avenue to exercise humility. He would regularly remind me and the students of his starting point with a few questions. His first, “What would a good, sovereign God, Who only has my best interest in mind, want me to learn or consider?”

He often explained it in the following ways:

• Criticism is a God-given opportunity for you to pause and consider carefully what is being said. As someone challenges your perspective, writing, position, or understanding, this comes under the sovereign and providential hand of God. God is providing you the opportunity to listen, think, consider carefully, and respond slowly.
• It does not matter what you believe or don’t believe about the critic or the critic’s motive. Often, in fact, we can only assume the motive of the other person criticizing us. We do not always get a direct statement as to one’s motive; even then, the critic may say his or her motive is one thing when it may be another. However, the other person’s motive is not the most significant thing.
• The critical element of hearing a critic is your goal, not the other person’s. When someone offers a critique, your goal matters more than the other person’s. What are you wanting in this moment? What is your goal? Possible goals include to defend myself, to get out from under the microscope, to save my reputation, to not be embarrassed, and to win. The better goals of course include to honor Christ, to love my neighbor, to promote unity in the body of Christ, and to carefully listen to what is being said.
•  The opportunity by God to consider your position and respond in a godly way exists whether or not your critic is a friend who agrees with you or someone who is not a friend and disagrees with you. Essentially, the critic can be someone who is just like you and challenges something small or the opposite where it feels like an absolute attack. How you feel about the person, the substance of the criticism, or the manner of the criticism is a matter of self-counsel more than an issue of whether or not you should pause, listen, consider carefully, and respond humbly to what is being said.
• Humility is key. While receiving criticism, we may not like the voice, the tone, or the substance; however, we want to listen for the glory of God and our own sanctification. When anger seems like a good response – especially righteous anger – then we need to consider carefully. Anger and frustration may be good indicators that additional work needs to be done inwardly before I respond outwardly.

How do we respond to Heath Lambert’s essay?

Let’s allow the Apostle Paul to direct our thinking and response from Ephesians 4:1-6. Even if I am convinced that Heath did not follow Ephesians 4:1-6, that does not allow me to veer off the road and miss this path. Depending on each of our personal perspectives, regardless of whether or not Heath approached this criticism correctly, we cannot defend our position for biblical counseling in a less-than-biblical way. Think of the irony of defending our biblical position while doing so in a nonbiblical, non-Christlike manner.

First and foremost, as a matter of godliness, in all humility. I must immediately guard against my own flesh and pride. Even if I believe Heath considers me an infected priest, I still cannot move outside humility. I cannot allow my own sense of rightness, insight, and superiority to move me more than humility. Philippians 2:1-10 applies to me as much as it applies to Heath – but I am only responsible for how it applies to me.

Further, I need to respond with all gentleness. “But what about…?” Still, gentleness. Self-control. Maybe James 3:13-18 helps us here or Galatians 6:1-5 or Ephesians 4:29-32. What I touch in my response should not leave a mark. It should encourage the one who hears me or sees me take the next step toward godliness.

He continues by insisting we respond in patience and forbearance, literally putting up with another person in love. “Even if we are convinced Heath got it wrong?” Yes. “Even if we believe he thinks we are the infected sheep?” Yes. “But I’m not an infected sheep. Heath is wrong.” Still then. Take a moment to read, consider, and think carefully about his warning. What is he saying that we need to consider? Look past the places where his manner or word choice offends you and listen to what he is trying to say. This is a sign of spiritual maturity for all of us. Those who criticize us do not always get it right – either in manner or in substance. However, I can’t let choking over the manner keep me from considering the substance.

Why do we commit ourselves to these things? Because in striving to walk worthy of the Gospel, we want to protect the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. “But what if Heath didn’t?” Even if Heath did not protect the unity of the Spirit in his manner of criticism, we still have an obligation to respond toward unity. Could we be angry? defensive? grumpy? critical with a poor spirit? Yes. And, even if you are convinced Heath sinned in his warning, you nor I have license to sin in return.

Therefore, I thank God for this opportunity, because in it I have the opportunity to walk worthy of the Gospel while preserving the unity of the Spirit on my part.

One more important question: What if we believe Heath got it all right? How should we respond then? The same applies. In humility, gentleness, patience, forbearance, and endeavoring to protect the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

Your Counselees, Parishioners, and Other Christians Need Us to Step Up

People watch. People listen. Even though my voice may only be a small voice, people still listen to it. Other believers and nonbelievers see how I respond to criticism. Our brother and friend Heath Lambert has challenged each of us to consider if perhaps we are infected priests, somehow bitten through our efforts to reach the Zombies in the world. We can like the way he did it or not like it. We can discuss whether or not his analogy works or does not work. We can even argue against his substance. But, at the end of the day, how we respond to criticism is what we each are accountable for. We are not responsible for what Heath said; instead, we are responsible for how we respond in our own hearts before the Lord and our own positions.

Back to Dr. Bob

He would tell me, “Kevin, when you get older, more experience, have taught many people, and have written many words, it gets harder. If I’m not careful, I will defend all those things instead of listening, learning, and growing, especially when I’ve been criticized. I may determine my position was right the whole time, but even if I were, a good God knew I needed the opportunity to grow in humility and Christlikeness.” For many of us in the field of biblical counseling, these are challenging words. Thanks, Dr. Bob!

Leona, Doc, Nan, and David Powlison (from family)

Doc, Bill Piatt, and I

Doc, Dale, and I

Doc Smith, Jay Adams, Pastor Bill Goode (from Steve Viars)