Deletion of Biblical counseling

Comment: nbsp; Saying that a topic ''shouldn't'' be notable is an argument of the form, .&nbsp; It is only necessary to read the nomination to know that degrees are offered in this subject.&nbsp; Thus, the topic is notable.&nbsp; Overwhelming evidence is added in the AfD.&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: There is an extensive literature about biblical/Christian/nouthetic counselling.  The latter is just one school and so it makes sense to cover the topic in a more general way such as this.  There's a survey of the field in the ''Clinical Handbook of Pastoral Counseling'': http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=YDFTl16J-sQC&pg=PA27 Biblical Models and Programs.  The topic just needs improving from such sources per our |editing policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:IMPERFECT)

Comment: I'm unsure whether this particular strain of Christian Counseling is independently notable, even though I am familiar with Adams' work.  However, this is not the only thing to have ever been called "biblical counseling", and so I cannot see how a '''redirect''' to Christian counseling is inappropriate, even if none of this material is merged there.  To Hrafn's point, even if the sources listed don't establish independent notability, it is within the expectation of  to '''merge''' the verifiable content (and the sources discussed above seem able to meet V, if not establish notability) so that it can be covered in a broader context per 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD||WP:NNC)