A Christian wife should endure abuse by an unbelieving husband the same way a missionary endures persecution, according to John Street, chair of the graduate program of biblical counseling at The Master’s University and Seminary (TMUS) and an elder at John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church (GCC).
Street makes this claim in a series of lectures on “advanced biblical counseling” posted online in 2012 by TMUS.
His teaching is especially relevant in light of recent exposés by The Roys Report, revealing that John MacArthur shamed and excommunicated Eileen Gray for not allowing her child-abusing husband, David Gray, back into her home. Evidence shows that GCC leaders knew that David Gray was abusing his children before Eileen’s excommunication and that a GCC pastor had urged Eileen to submit to the abuse. Street’s lectures likewise suggest that encouraging victims to remain with their abusive spouses is a matter of policy at MacArthur’s institutions.
In the lectures, Street claims the “abused victim is the key player in reaching and changing the abuser.” So, just like a missionary risks harm to himself and his family, an abused spouse should do the same.
Street also criticizes secular and “integrationist counseling,” which combines psychology and biblical principles, for focusing on physical safety of abused persons as a primary goal.
Your tax-deductible gift helps our journalists report the truth and hold Christian leaders and organizations accountable. Give a gift of $30 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you will receive a copy of “Hurt and Healed by the Church” by Ryan George. To donate, click here.
“If saving the body is the ultimate goal in counseling, to be consistent, we would have to make that the ultimate goal of Christians across the board,” Street said in the 2012 lecture.
“So that would mean, a lot of our missionaries who are in locations around the world, where they are under bodily threat, we’re going to have to pull them home and put them in a protective situation because husbands, wives, children are under bodily threat. What does that say about Christians in countries like China where the church is openly abused and physically harmed?”
Rather than ultimately seeking to prevent harm, the goal of biblical counseling “is to seek to glorify God in order to win the abuser over to righteousness,” Street teaches, and “to be God’s kind of person, even in the midst of your trial.” He adds, “Jesus Christ did not come to help us escape all the hardships of life. In fact, through those hardships, this is where we learn to obey.”
In another online lecture, Street also claimed it’s wrong for a Christian wife with an unbelieving husband to separate from her spouse because of abuse. The only exception would be if the wife believes she is in imminent danger of being killed.
“Is it wrong for a wife to separate from her husband, or for that matter a husband to separate from an unbelieving wife? Yes, if her goal and purpose is to just simply get out of the trouble, I think it’s wrong,” Street said.
“Her goal must be first to please God,” he continued. “She needs to be with him, or he needs to be with her, in order to win their spouse over to righteousness. Sometimes it means hardship. Sometimes it means abuse. This is always the risk. . . .”
However, Street offers one exception: if a husband has convincingly shown he is “out to kill” his wife and the church government has been “brought in to play.” In that case, Street allows separation, noting, “A dead testimony is no testimony at all.”
When it comes to an abusive situation where both spouses profess to be believers, as was the case with David and Eileen Gray, Street teaches that church leaders and members should rely first on church processes to hold the abusive spouse accountable. Church leaders should call in police only if those processes fail or if there’s imminent danger of death.
“If he’s unwilling to change, then formal church discipline is the key here, or as we said before we may have to bring in civil authorities in this situation,” Street said.
Diane Langberg, a psychologist and leading trauma expert, said what Street teaches in the lectures “does not look like Jesus Christ.”
Jesus, she said, regularly focused on care for the vulnerable and “did all sorts of things to protect them and welcome them.”
When a husband abuses his wife, she said, “it’s dragging her down into hellish things.” And allowing the abuse to continue—as Street teaches—does “terrible damage” to the abuser’s soul as well as the victim’s, she said.
“They’re helping to damn the man,” she said.
Street chairs the Master of Arts in Biblical Counseling program at TMU, where John MacArthur is chancellor. Street joined the TMU staff in 1999 and preached about counseling at GCC as early as 2001, church sermon archives show.
In 2002, Street presented two seminars on counseling during the church’s Shepherds’ Conference just months before GCC excommunicated Eileen Gray because she wouldn’t take back her abusive husband David Gray.
Also teaching on counseling that year were Carey Hardy and Bill Shannon—GCC staff pastors who were later written up by Los Angeles police over their alleged mishandling of David Gray’s abuse.
Today, Street is one of two faculty members profiled for the graduate program and the university’s doctorate in biblical counseling, and is an author of three of the seven books TMU recommends to its counseling students. He’s also president of the board of trustees of the Association of Certified Biblical Counselors and a former adjunct professor at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS), the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention.
It’s unclear whether the 2012 recordings reflect material students still learn at TMU. Current program information doesn’t list a class with the same title as the recordings, and Street did not respond to detailed questions TRR sent in an email.
‘Secular people . . . are going to take over’ if police are called
In the first recorded lecture, Street upholds church discipline as the first mechanism for dealing with domestic abuse and local authorities as a last resort.
Street states that “churches without a strong membership policy will never—let me insist upon this, never be able to deal with abuse in the home because proper church discipline really cannot be enforced.”
Street doesn’t mention alerting police until after more than 40 minutes of instruction. And at the end of the session, he describes calling police as an option “if worse comes to worst.”
In the second lecture of the series, Street tells students they are not legally required to report spousal abuse to police “unless, of course, you are aware that there is some imminent danger. . .so that it doesn’t result in somebody’s death.” But he said, “Beyond that, it’s up to our conscience what needs to be reported.”
Street also warns that biblical counselors “run some risk” in reporting to authorities “because secular people with secular minds are going to take over and they’re not going to handle things in a biblical way.”
Street also alleges that women’s shelters, which he characterizes as “very feminist and very anti-marriage,” cause more harm than good because they teach women to take steps that make reconciliation with a spouse less likely.
He says the shelters show graphic films of abuse to women and children, “literally scaring them to death. And what they end up doing is elevating the fear of man to almost a panic level. . . . They’re heavily invested in not seeing that marriage work.”
He adds that the shelters also teach women to get a job, which requires leaving their children in daycare centers.
In response to Street’s teaching, Langberg pointed out that all government is secular by nature. “Do we disobey all the laws?” she asked rhetorically.
And it’s even more important to separate from an abusive spouse in a home with children to prevent harm to the kids, she said.
“Children are obviously little people in formation,” Langberg said, and when they see one parent abusing the other, “they’re being terrified, they’re being traumatized over and over and over again.”
“Love does not put up with evil,” she added. “It doesn’t just submit to evil.”
Street claims boundaries result in violence
Rather than encouraging abused women to set boundaries and protect themselves, Street encourages them to “submit” to their abusers.
Street is very critical of domestic violence shelters, which teach women to set boundaries. Street calls this approach “assertiveness training.” Elsewhere in the lecture, he says setting boundaries can exacerbate the cycle of violence.
“When the secular abuse literature talks about a woman regaining control, translated, that means she’s got to take control of the home and the kids and the finances,” Street says in the lecture. “And if she remains in the home, that counsel is going to cause all kinds of strife to escalate, which results in either divorce or death by one of them.”
Street also says that when a woman sets boundaries with an abusive husband, such as by moving out and keeping her location secret, it just enrages her abuser and “precludes any kind of restoration.”
The situation often “becomes so violent” couples can’t live together, he says. Then couples grow apart while separated and reunification becomes less likely.
Street also claims that separation doesn’t increase the safety of abused persons because just as many women are killed by a partner they’re separated from as by a partner with whom they’re living.
Street cites statistics from the University of Washington as a basis for his claims but does not name the study.
The Roys Report asked Street for the name of the study, but he did not respond.
A 2006 Washington state review of domestic fatalities states victims of domestic violence are at greater risk when they try to separate. It cites statistics showing about half of domestic homicides happened while a victim of domestic violence was trying to leave or after the victim had already left.
However, the study concludes that domestic violence victims are still at risk when separating from their abusers partly because separation doesn’t always mean they cut off contact with abusers.
In addition, “communities do not adequately hold abusers accountable or prevent their ability to abuse again,” according to the review.
In contrast, a 2018 study of domestic incidents where police were called found that former spouses were less likely than current spouses to assault their victim. Former spouses were more likely to stalk the former spouse or violate a protective order, according to the study.
That study also found that victimized ex-spouses were less likely than current spouses to be visibly injured or shaken up.
‘Christ did not come to help us escape’
Street claims in the third lecture that an abused wife, by submitting to her husband, can lead him to Christ.
“The way you win your husband over is not by putting repent in the bottom of his beer can,” he says after reading from 1 Peter 3:1. “It’s without a word. You don’t win him over by lecturing him into righteousness. That’s not the way you win him over. And within context here, the context is a husband, an unbelieving husband, that is being harsh and mistreating his wife.”
Street also repeats his counsel that spouses should submit to abuse.
“We learn his faithfulness through all those hardships . . .” he says. “In most abuse counseling you don’t hear that, because most abuse counselors will be very quick to get that person to escape and not teach them God’s faithfulness or the importance of their faithfulness in living out Christianity even in the midst of severe affliction.”
Later, Street describes a man he counseled whose wife was so violent that under normal circumstances, “that spouse would’ve been in jail a long time ago.”
But Street apparently never counseled the man to report his wife to police—even though she was a social worker, according to Street.
Street’s view that Christian woman should submit to abuse contradicts standard counsel among Christian survivor advocates. However, Street’s teaching is in line with Jay Adams, the founder of biblical counseling.
According to Adams, the Bible doesn’t permit an abused wife to separate from or divorce her abuser because “even in those rare cases, where violence was not provoked, one is not told to leave but to endure without fear.”
Author and advocate Rebecca Davis has written several books examining Scriptures that are sometimes used to condition Christians to accept abuse.In an email to The Roys Report, Davis claimed that Street is mischaracterizing how Christians respond to persecution. She also noted that missionaries and other Christians facing peril regularly leave places that become too dangerous.
“Yes, there are martyrs, those who give up their lives on the mission field or in their native land because of their testimony of Christ,” Davis acknowledged, and she added martyrs should be honored for that. “But if they have the opportunity to escape, are we saying that they should not? That goes against both history (so many examples!) and the Bible.”
To support his interpretation, Street quotes Psalm 119:71, which states, “It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I may learn your statutes.”
But the psalmist David was literally fleeing King Saul when he penned that, Davis said.
“Trying to keep oneself safe from a maniacal abuser can be a terrifying experience,” Davis added. “It sure would be nice to have help with it. David did, with his group of mighty men and even Saul’s own son, Jonathan.
“But in the modern-day Jay-Adams-style ‘Biblical counseling’ world, a Christian woman and her children would not have any help to escape and stay safe, because that would only be ‘saving the body.’”
Langberg also pointed to Scripture she said contradicted Street’s teaching.
“When you look at the Gospels and what Jesus did and said, ‘let the little ones come and don’t get in their way’—an abusive husband is getting in the way of his wife, who is vulnerable, and keeping her from her Lord,” said Langberg.
By failing to put an immediate end to a spouse’s abusive behavior, Street’s approach teaches the spouse that what they’re doing isn’t really that bad, after all, she said.
“Part of what their training does is help a bad man be bad,” Langberg said. “It isn’t going to fix the problem. It increases it.”
UPDATE: TRR has discovered that John Street preached a sermon at Grace Community Church on July 12, 2020, in which he urged spouses in abusive marriages to be “a missionary in that marriage.” Street also praises Sarah Edwards, wife of 18th Century theologian Jonathan Edwards, for pledging to stay in the marriage even if her husband “should horsewhip me every day.” And Street disparages author Leslie Vernick, author of The Emotionally Destructive Marriage, for urging wives to set boundaries when husbands abuse them and their kids. Street says Edwards’ wife, who vowed to take abuse, was focused on glorifying God, but Vernick was focused on merely “protecting self.” Street says there’s a “theology for escape,” but adds that when to leave a marriage “takes a lot of wisdom” to discern. Street says the only grounds for divorce are unrepentant adultery and abandonment of a spouse.
This story has been corrected to accurately describe Street’s past affiliation with SBTS. Street taught a D.Min seminar at SBTS in 2018-2019 but is no longer employed by the seminary.
Julie Roys contributed to this report and freelance journalist Josh M. Shepherd provided technical assistance.
Sarah Einselen is an award-winning writer and editor based in Texas.
English 
Spanish
126 Responses
I noticed Justin Peters recently posted an interview with MacArthur on YouTube. Haven’t been able to bring myself to watch it yet. Is he on a damage control tour?
let me save you some time on watching justin peters video, in it he said john macarthur is/was the most influential preacher in all of church history besides the 12 apositles!, NO, thats not an exerageration.. then they said if you agree with macarthur you are a “Good guy” and if you disagreed with him you were NOT a “good guy”. then they spoke about how only macarthur is “fighting for all these issues” ( culture wars) and he was being persecuted for the gospel.
Can you post time stamps for those comments?
I dont have the time stamps but the part about john macarthur being the most influential preacher since the apositles was in the first part where only justin was giving his intro before macarthur was interviewed. the last 2 points came during the interview.
I just watched the intro. I don’t want to spend my time going through the rest for the second quotation, but, James, you are correct on the first one.
Starting around 5:30 “…God has used him (MacArthur) in a greater way than any other single individual since the apostolic era…”
I suppose everyone’s entitled to his or her opinion…but that is a doozy.
This is a quote verbatim from that interview as he was introducing John MacArthur. I rewound it a couple times to make sure I got it right. The interview was very much the typical tactic of not addressing the issue but instead wanting to remind the world of how much “good” john MacArthur has done. And honestly I can say his teaching has deeply impacted my faith and my family’s. (I’m a graduate of TMU’s masters of biblical counseling program). But evil is evil, and how Eileen Gray was treated was horrific and warrants deep brokenness and repentance. Here’s the quote:
“I think the argument can be made that given the sheer size and the sheer scope of john MacArthur’s ministry and all that goes along with it it can be said that God has used him in a greater way than any other single individual Since the apostolic era.”Justin Peters
During a sermon on the resurrection of Jesus John MacArthur said there was no significance to women being first at the empty tomb. He said, mockingly, that sometimes things just happen the way they happen. Women were the first to herald the resurrection of Jesus. How can that be without eternal importance? Did God screw up on this?
How sad for MacArthur and his organizations to despise those Jesus loves and died for.
“ As father loves his children so the Lord loves those who fear Him”. May our great God and King direct His love toward those who are feeling crushed by corrupt churches and the frauds who run and are enriched through them.
Wow, if I were a spousal and child abuser, this would be the church for me.
Not sure if he still holds to these views but it is yet another example of why Christian leaders cannot be trusted in dealing with abuse and bullying in their churches.
Too often, the presiding leader dealing with such batters is an abuser himself, in that he wants control and obedience over and above what is the right thing to do.
Nowadays, I advise anyone wanting to report abuse to their leaders to follow church protocols BUT at the same time inform them that they have, or will be, reporting it to the relevant authorities.
I would dare to say he does. At the most recent ACBC conference he included two quotes side-by-side of different responses to domestic abuse. On the left, Sarah Edwards finding her security and happiness in God alone:
“If he (her husband, Johnathan edwards) should turn to be cruel to me and horsewhip me every day I should so hope in (God) that it should not touch (my heart) or diminish my happiness. I could still go in the performance of all aspects of my duty to my husband and my happiness remain whole and undiminished.”
On the right side a quote from Leslie vernick, “Integrationist LCSW:
If you live with a difficult and emotionally harmful husband:
“When you put your foot down and say, ‘I will not allow myself or the kids to be
treated this way anymore. It’s destructive
to me, to them, and to our marriage, ” you
are not going against God by speaking the
truth in love… But you refuse to pretend
and stay together at any cost, including
your own physical, emotional, mental health”.
Side by side under the heading “Christian Culture Has Changed” with the view that the integrationist view is wrong.
I was an attendee (virtually) at that conference and that exact session! When he put those 2 quotes up, my heart broke! I was actually and truly broken by his statement and comparison! I could not believe what I heard! My faith was actually shaken for a while until I was able to get comfort from my husband and a friend! Godly men MUST stand against this thinking! Church must and should be the safest place for women and children! I also find it ironic and sad and hypocritical that these men say abused wives should suffer like missionaries! What about Phil Johnson?? These men dont hold Phil Johnson to that same standard! He cant suffer like Christ when an article is written against him or GCC! He gets combative, snarky and sounds like a bully, but the leaders of GCC are expecting abused women to suffer??? Hypocrite!
Putting the two quotes side by side without considering the socio-cultural context of both quotes, and the options available to women in Edwards day as compared to now strikes me as shallow and sloppy.
It’s also the case that Edwards is speaking for herself, while the author of the second quote is offering guidance to others. It’s one thing for an individual to choose to remain and endure an abusive situation out of personal conviction and another altogether to tell someone else that they are not permitted to leave such a situation if there is an opportunity to do so.
Christian culture has changed
Yes, it has. And in many ways for the better.
In Jonathan Edwards’ day Christian people looked at white slave owners, like Jonathan Edwards, with great respect.
Yes, one of the “greatest American evangelists of all time” was a slave owner. He even was once so moved by God that he wrote a sermon….. coming home from buying a slave…on the back of the sales receipt for “a negro girl named Venus.”
Do we really think we should follow his view of the role of the wife in the marriage?
Carrie, thank you for sharing. Another commentator, Larry Bronisz, in this thread shared that this teaching was found not only in seminars and conferences, but also at the pulpit.
“Dr. Street used the Sarah Edwards “if he horsewhipped me” quote (first mentioned in this thread by CARRIE FOLDBERG APRIL 5, 2022) in a Sunday Sermons series message at Grace Community Church “The Emotionally Abusive Marriage” on 7/12/2020 which I listened to via their website today. Link: https://www.gracechurch.org/sermons/16791 at ~1:28:50 time mark.
So the “if he horsewhipped me” quote and the suffering missionary analogy have been promulgated not just in the seminary classroom or ACBC seminars, but also from the pulpit at GCC”
Yes, always, always. Romans 13 is the go-to passage here. In fact in our volunteer training we include the need for anyone witnessing a suspected criminal act to immediately summon the police via 911, and to secure the scene for evidential purposes, while taking steps for the safety of any affected.
You are right! They don’t realize they are inviting abuse to their church with this “spiritual” handling of the matter. They must have the same beliefs as liberals who think handing out free syringes helps drug addicts. Both lies come from the same source.
I think you have a little bias against “liberals” Tim. The reason for handing out “free” needles is that they are clean. It prevents the spread of Hep C and HIV if drug users aren’t sharing needles. It doesn’t “help” drug addicts as much as it helps society to not incur the horrendous costs of treating the catastrophic diseases caused by needle sharing.
Won’t dig too much into this, but a missionary witnesses to pagans and endures abuse from pagans. If the church wants to paint wives as missionaries, they must also paint abusive husbands as pagans. So, the wife gets abused, goes to the church, and the church excommunicates the husband.
What is cognitive dissonance is that a wife is abused by a man the church considers a Christian and refuses to discipline. Missionaries aren’t sent to churches to suffer abuse.
Right on, Mark. These pastor-teachers are reminiscent of the Pharisees written of in Matthew 23
Matthew 23:4-8
New International Version
4 They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
5 “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries[a] wide and the tassels on their garments long; 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; 7 they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.
8 “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers.
I want to point out that this counsel wasn’t contradicted the Bible it claims to represent (1st Corinthians 7. Paul said explicitly that staying with an unwilling spouse in order to win him (or her) to Christ was *not* a reason to stay — 1st Corinthians 7:15-16. This is not a case of Biblical literalism, it’s a case of wrong interpreting.
RUN! RUN FAR AWAY FROM THIS, AND ANY OTHER PLACE LIKE THIS! This, and others are no church of God. A place with so many people, to where the Lead Pastor doesn’t know their names or interact with each of them from time to time, IS NOT A CHURCH. More like Waco, TX. Take a look at the satellite radio station categories and see that Joel Olsteen, and some other church related stations is located under entertainment. This, is why so many DO NOT WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH CHURCH.
There are other, main line Churches who do not condone this sort of Taliban-like thinking.
WOW!, so we are supposed to endure abuse of every kind joyfully for God? hmmmm, as I recall GCC and john macarthur did not do this when the california government asked them to abide by the mask mandate, they disobeyed the government that God put in charge then sued in court the same government. NO forgiveness or grace was shown. in addition macarthur lied about not having covid that january when he did have covid. in another case a charismatic man interruped macarthurs sermon to protest his being a cessionist , the man was properly escorted out but was arrested and charges filed against him, WHERE was grace shown to this believer? where was forgiveness shown to this man?
“NO forgiveness or grace was shown.” I see what you did there! Brilliant!
This article points to a larger issue in Christian culture of individuals, and large platform teachers/leaders in particular, making theological statements completely void of their practical realities. This teacher doesn’t appear to actually be working with abuse victims, he is merely expressing an interpretation of scripture. Has he observed the real world impact of his interpretation? If a biblical interpretation is causing harm, why does the church continue to declare that those being hurt are doing it wrong rather than question the validity of the interpretation?
Good comment. The counselors are sitting in a place of safety. Instead of being agents of justice and rescue, they require women and children to lay down their lives and to carry the heavy loads. Padding life like this is unlikely to bring about any dawn of understanding on a complacent conscience.
“Has he observed the real world….” Probably not. He may have read stories at best. But even if he has seen it, hired Bible experts can be in a BUBBLE of thinking that is driven by pleasing men above them and below them. And they want to be “leaders” in the BUBBLE so they posture that they have the TRUE answers. It’s an arrogance thing.
https://baptistbulletin.org/the-baptist-bulletin-magazine/fellow-travelers/
“Why does the church continue….” The laity are probably ignorant of the issue. Those who know must be loyal to the leaders or get out. They don’t want to get out because their flesh feels secure there so they comply and accept the bogus answers given by leaders. Laity play the clergies driven role of dumb sheep very well. I used to. (The clergy divided from laity corruption has MANY collateral damages.) Jesus spoke of the “blind leading the blind and they both fall into a pit. Matthew 15:14. This situation proves Jesus knew this would happen today. The devil is the enemy. The leaders are blind victims of the devils deceptions leading others to be blind. The Lord grieves for this more than we do.
McArthurism gone mad. I always knew JM had a Pharisaical air about him with hating on Charismatics and hissing at women in leadership, not to mention his papal posture in the pulpit. But I always took into consideration the vast volumes of teaching and commentary he had produced and figured he deserved some respect. But now I am beginning to see that spilling volumonous tanks of ink on the Christian world can be nothing more than a self engrandizing dominance play. At the heart of it all is a bully who begets bullies.
Not to mention, the fact that he said that you could still repent, after you take the mark of the beast.
I thinking about this comment recently. When we are raptured as John believes I think it is reasonable that people left behind would get a hold of his teachings. Trusting what he said they take the mark believing one of America’s greatest bible teacher’s lie.
Why doesn’t John just admit he misspoke when he said this and then state that once somebody takes the mark they do lose their soul? This is very dangerous for him to not correct this. My guess is he is too proud to admit he made a mistake.
I’m against anyone in ‘leadership’. The church is led by the Spirit; we all have gifts and different responsibilities to serve. None of us is a ‘leader’. Such worldly hubris!
Brought to you by the seminary where nobody had heard of the Clery Act.
As an ex member of this church (2011-2013) this does not surprise me but does break my heart given my interactions with Dr. Street and some of his family as a young teen
I do not have words for how twisted and perverse this teaching is. Reading this fills me with disgust, but increases my respect for women like Eileen Gray, who saw through a fog of lies like this. She and others like her stand up to what amounts to double abuse-first within their own homes, then from the church.
Suffering for suffering’s sake isn’t redemptive. A marriage is not more valuable than the individuals in it. Children aren’t better off with two parents if one of them is violent. It’s really not that complicated.
Wow, just wow. It causes me to wonder if the water they drink out there in CA might just do something to their hearts and heads. Those are some crazy, mixed-up utterings that guy gives, with the apparent backing of the whole MacArthur apparatus.
Joe Miller
Ever since I read Rebecca Davis’ article on the problems with Jay Adams methodology, I’ve been wondering if it isn’t at the root of a lot of the problems currently being exposed at GCC. This article seems to confirm that my suspicions are accurate.
I think there’s more to the situation than just that, but I think it’s a huge contributor.
As someone who has read Jay Adams books and is currently studying Biblical counseling, I haven’t actually encountered this mindset. So far, I haven’t seen any situation where a spouse is encouraged to endure abuse from another spouse. I hear people say this is from Adams, but I seriously don’t think I’ve seen it. I think some, like the counselors at JM’s church, take what they want from it and don’t apply the rest.
Please know that there are PLENTY of biblical counselors out there that would not condone or encourage this. David Gray clearly should have been, at best, severely disciplined and reported to authorities, and at worst, excommunicated. This is exactly the approach I am learning in my studies, a lot of which is BASED on Adams and Paul Tripp. How the “biblical” counselors did not do this is baffling to me.
Thanks for the input Kevin. I appreciate the broader perspective. I have appreciated some of the work of Ed Welch, who is a biblical counselor, so there is that. I suffer from OCD and some of his writing has helped me when I was going through a hard time. I think, for me, a bigger problem that often seems to accompany biblical counseling is the rejection of any other sort of counseling or treatment. I’ve benefitted from various kinds of counseling and treatment.
Jay Adams did not teach “stay married no matter what.” His book on marriage, divorce, and remarriage was straight down the line traditional Presbyterian.
You need to read the Jay Adams article that is linked to in this article. In it, JA says that a woman should never separate and must endure abuse, except in the case where her life is in imminent danger.
Maybe Adams does espouse a traditional Presbyterian or traditional whatever view. I don’t know, and after reading what he wrote in the linked piece I don’t think it matters. What he said was wrong, dangerously so.
This piece prescribes an algorithm for “counseling” in cases of violent domestic abuse that explicitly trivializes the suffering of the wife and prioritizes the perceived salvation status of the perpetrator. Adams betrays a blithe ignorance of abuse dynamics, and mishandles the Bible to support his naive approach. And he wraps the whole in a coy disclaimer-he would like to be able to do it differently, of course, but he can’t because he’s so meticulously faithful to God’s word!
It’s unacceptable, full stop. Even if Adams taught other things that some have found helpful, that doesn’t excuse this. There are wise, compassionate, biblically literate approaches to counseling that don’t enable abuse. Why continue to propagate a philosophy that doesn’t clear even that low bar?
Thanks Carolyn. i appreciate this.
After reading the article, yes, I would certainly disagree with this part of Adams. As with any person that writes anything outside Scripture, we should always be wary.
What’s odd to me is how he misses 1 Corinthians 7:13 in his own quoting of it. The word “consent” means with full approval and agreement. When a husband is abusing his wife, I hardly think that means they’re in agreement. https://biblehub.com/greek/4909.htm
My concern in a lot of this is that we don’t react by violently swinging the pendulum the other way: “Well, Adams and others got a few key points wrong, so all ‘biblical counseling’ is bunk.” If that’s the response, then no one should listen to literally anything anyone else ever says in any context. Even Julie Roys has said that MacArthur material has helped her (as it did me).
It IS possible to hold in tension that someone can espouse things that are right and wrong. We do it all the time, every day.
I don’t have a reply link to Kevin Benedict, below. This is in response to his comment 4/6 @ 1023.
I agree, the (mis)interpretation of 1Cor7:13 was one of the instances of mishandling Biblical texts that I noticed. Another was 1Cor6:1-3. Applying a discussion about petty civil lawsuits to cases of “wife beating” (Adams’ words) is egregious.
As to a “pendulum swing”, I beg to differ. Much has been written about the problems with the nouthetic/Biblical counseling model (eg https://heresthejoy.com/2021/01/how-jay-adams-would-counsel-a-pedophile/).
I add this thought: If a model devalues principles the Bible emphasizes (eg protecting the vulnerable, meeting the physical needs of dependents and fellow believers), encourages unwise speech (eg giving advice on deadly serious matters where one is unqualified), and handles Scripture carelessly, in what sense is it actually biblical?
Amazing how old white men justify their actions and outcomes with the Bible. History has seen so much carnage attributed to God when it is just man abusing their positions of power to gain more power and rationalize their beliefs. The arrogance and pride of GCC, their staff, their Pastors is just one more reason why so many people are leaving the “church”. The “church” is corrupt from within and watching it devour itself is sad. Thank God we don’t need the church or the buildings or their leaders we just need a relationship with Jesus directly and not through proxy. Too many people think that holiness is bestowed by popular opinion and book sales. What a travesty.
Church leaders should call in police only if those processes fail or if there’s imminent danger of death.
What terrible, horrendous advice! How exactly is that determined?
“I know he threatened to kill you. But hasn’t he said the same thing every night for the last year?” Or, “I know he beat you up pretty badly tonight, and you thought he might kill you. But this has happened many, many times without it going that far, right?”
So do they call the cops at this point or not?
Call the cops if a crime is committed. End of story!
What this man is teaching here sounds very different than what John MacArthur teaches in his booklet, “Answering the Key Questions About the Family.” https://www.gty.org/library/articles/451018/answering-the-key-questions-about-the-family
I see that booklet has a current copyright date on it.
I wonder if that is still being taught in the university and the seminary. If so, there are certainly conflicting messages going out.
How would Street react if this was his daughter or granddaughter, in those same exact circumstances?
Common sense would tell you…he’d completely freak out, like any good Dad would and should. Would he dare treat his own family like those MightyMenofMacArthur treated Eileen?? You’d think the answer is no. But man, I don’t know.
Like someone mentioned above…it’s totally twisted and perverse. TOTALLY.
There is no way I can even begin express the disgust I feel for John MacArthur and GCC governess. The words that are flowing through my mind about this post and these barbarians who call themselves Christians could never be written here. I only can hope that this congregation will wake up and leave this place and find a church where the gospel of Jesus Christ is preached and the men and women who serve there really understand what Christian living is all about. One can only hope I suppose.
The article, and its writers, have issues with scripture, not the lessons or the speakers. TTR never looked in this direction until John MacArthur said ‘Go-Home” to a woman in sin and clear violation of scripture. This is muckraking, yellow, unbiblical journalism.
Are you saying Eileen was the one in sin and in clear violation of your version of Scripture?? Is that what you’re saying??
Dude. You’re a manipulative heart-stealing monster who is nothing but a clanging flipping cymbal.
Lord have mercy on me, a sinner.
Ad hominem attacks and accusations while not addressing anything about the substance of the article. Do better.
John, maybe you should join GCC and get beat up a couple of dozen times and see how you like the “counseling” they give you. Please let me know what doctrines you espouse and what church you go to so I can avoid them and warn others to do the same.
John Owen, there were other articles on Macarthur previous to this latest series. Nobody here has any problems with scripture; the problems are with how Macarthur and company interpret and apply scripture. Separating yourself and your children from a self-confessed abuser is not sin and not against the Bible: the sin lies with the abuser, who not only physically and mentally abused his wife, but physically and sexually abused his children. Or is that abuse okay with you? Why didn’t he face church discipline and expulsion?
Julie, you should listen to Gary Chapman’s broadcast from about three weeks ago, on which John MacArthur was a guest. He counseled a woman with an abusive husband to “stay because perhaps she was called to suffer. I was disappointed and disgusted.
Martha, do you by any chance have a link to that?
A lot of similarities here:
I’m twenty-one. It’s 2006 and I’ve spent almost three glorious years at The Master’s College.
… A stranger who I have met maybe once, sits by me at dinner and asks if he can get me a soda… Half an hour later I start to feel foggy. My words are slurring and I can’t move my legs….
My head is starting to clear now. I’ve been raped…
(My Resident Director’s) reaction surprises me. …Maybe this is all my fault. Maybe I have to marry him… (My) female Biblical counselor (said) “You know, marrying him will fix this whole thing.”.. She speaks of God’s will and joyful suffering..
I am meeting with Rick Holland… He asks me questions like: Where did he touch you? Where else did he touch you? What exactly did he do? How long did he do that? What were you wearing? Are you dating him? Did he turn you on?
Rick leaves the room several times to go talk to John MacArthur. He comes back with John’s ruling on the matter. Rick tells me that I need to be disciplined for doing drugs, drinking alcohol and almost dancing. He said the consequence for breaking the rules is that I will be kicked out of the college. He is angry at me for going to the police and the doctor. I should have let the church handle this without outside interference…
“You are ruining that young man’s life!” He says.
He tells me I have to go to the police and drop the charges or I will be brought in front of the church to be disciplined.
http://www.marcipreheim.com/2017/09/18/do-you-see-me/
I pray that the wrecking ball from hell itself comes and destroys that place for the sake of all of the good people that are there.
Joe Miller
This is absolutely and totally sick!!
The Scripture twisting on this is horrendous!!
My wife was once in a conversation with a female member of the family who kept marrying different men -some of whom were abusive. My wife asked her “Why do you keep marrying these men?” She answered “I don’t marry them -they keep marrying me” She felt it was something she was to do. My wife said to her “Marriage is not a mission field”
This guy is conflating marriage with the mission field. And it is horrible what he is saying.
This is such a perverted version on “wives submit to your husbands”. And yet there are those who say such things don’t happen or are not taught.
This type of thinking and gross literal reading of the Biblical text is what lead Christian theologians and pastors in the civil war era to argue, justify and defend slavery..
Thank you Roys Report for posting this. I am currently preparing to do a series at the church I pastor on Women and their place in the bible, home and church. I will be quoting from this article and making references to it.
So what will be the defense of this coming from John MacArthur’s people? Because I see no defense for this…none.
I hope you start with Galatians 3:28
Using Street’s logic concerning enduring abuse as evangelism, I really don’t see any basis for him to intervene when children are being abused either. This integrationist therapist wanted to throw up while reading the entire article. I wonder if he’s spent as much time thinking about what the abuser should and should not be doing.
It sounds like GCC does not have Matthew 18 in their Bibles or else they have a translation that goes something like this: “If your brother sins against you, eat it!”
John Street is still currently sheltering abusers. I recently (with the help of an alumna of TMU who was personally involved in our case) reached out to him for help when I found out my father, who brutally abused me and my siblings, was enrolled in the Biblical Counseling program at TMU. This was after we met with my father and urged him, if he truly was repentant, to disclose his transgressions to his congregation and his academic overseers, and he refused to do so.
I genuinely thought that I would find in Dr. Street a kind, protective person willing to listen to three hurting kids. Instead, our testimony was refused and referred to as hearsay. The testimony of the biblical counselor who had a record of the confessions of abuse was mocked and threatened. We kept all of the emails and have them on record.
What John Street, Jeff Jackson, and the leaders at GCC and TMU are doing is nothing short of evil. Their exploitation of innocent souls is surely not unnoticed by God.
I hope the Roys Report sees this comment and asks to do an article on your story! This is absolutely outrageous! Sort of reminds me of my ex-brother-in-law who abused my sister (emotionally, physically, and sexually) and her children (emotionally and physically), left her for another woman, got full custody of her three children (one of whom was not biologically his) by lying to the court, and regularly encouraged the children to hate our family and rebel. Later, he went and got a biblical counseling degree at Corban College in Salem, OR. It astounded us that they even let him in the program and that they couldn’t see his narcissistic, abusive personality. I’m sure getting that degree helped him to continue deceiving himself into thinking he was done wonderful Christian and justifying his abuse. Thankfully, I don’t think he ever used it to counsel anyone, but he did end up doing some preaching for a small church. :(
I would be very open to handing over our evidence as part of a follow up story showing that these men are still currently practicing this awful doctrine. Any institution that values itself and abusers more highly than victims needs to have a light shone on them.
Gotta love the expression “secular people,” which Mr. Street was quoted as using a few times in the article. That may tell us more about their mindset than any other two words in the article, apart from “endure abuse.”