Integrating Christianity with psychology has been an interest of mine for a number of years. I have benefited personally from the writings of those who have brought together the truths of both perspectives. As such, I looked forward to the opportunity to take a course on integrating the two subjects, and I was not disappointed. Studying various theories, concepts, and models of integration has changed my perceptions and challenged my beliefs about integrating psychology with Christian theology. The key concept that Entwistle (2010) proposes for integrating psychology and theology is the model of the “Two Books.” This model recognizes that there are two sources, or “books” for knowledge, the book of God’s word, the Bible, and the book of God’s works, or creation. Entwisle’s (2010) understanding “holds that both Scripture and the natural world have their origins in God’s creativity and revelation” (p. 136). Whereas I believed this perspective, Entwistle’s analysis would reveal biases I was not aware I held. Entwistle (2010) outlines five different models of integration. The “enemies” model, the first model, views psychology and theology as incompatible with each other. Those who hold this view will reject one perspective while accepting the other. Secondly, the “spies” model recognizes the potential benefits of religious belief and …show more content…
My theological interpretation allowed for divorce only in cases of adultery and abandonment. However, what would I do about situations of abuse within marriages? I am personally aware of and read about cases of severe abuse. As a Christian who desires to be a counselor, how would I handle this issue? Applying the colonialist model (unknowingly), I held to my theological commitment, viewing the Bible as the final authority. However, I continued to wrestle with reconciling my theological understanding with what experience in life had shown
This is David Entwistle 2nd edition book published in 2010 by Wipf and Stock in Oregon. Entwistle is a Christian and a licensed psychologist; he has affiliations with Molone University in Canton, Ohio serving as chair of the Psychology Department and has taught courses related to his licensed field. This book clearly is not written for any newcomers to religion. However, it was written for those interested in the integration of science and religion. The authors’ purpose for writing this book was to define the relationship between psychology and theology. There are three specific areas this book touched upon to help readers’ better approach psychology and Christianity in a personal and more professional manner: The context of philosophical issues and worldview, to help the readers become aware of assumptions or beliefs- making the reader a more critical evaluators, and to introduce and familiarize the reader with five paradigms for integrating psychology and theology.
David Entwistle’s (2010) is the author of the Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity. In the book Entwistle embarks on a journey to explore Psychology and Christianity. As the title suggests several approaches that are used to define the relationship of Phycology and Christianity. In the book Entwistle begins to takes us on shows that psychology and Christianity go in two different directions and meet up someplace in the middle. This allows them to provide different approaches to understanding and studying the human behavior. Entwistle, (2010) took a new approach that has rarely been used in other books that discussed the topic of integration. Entwistle, (2010) began to talk about the relationship of psychology and Christianity
This paper will be reviewing the book “Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: an introduction to worldview issues, philosophical foundations and models of integration, by David N. Entwistle. As the title states, this book discusses how to integrate psychology and theology. It also dives into why it is so important to be able to integrate the two. Entwistle explains that just because the two are different does not mean they should be separated, and that we have to use both our worldviews. “Weaving together perspectives from psychology and Christian theology can help us understand and appreciate humanity more fully than we could either perspective alone.”
Fowler, James W. Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for
Psychology, Theology, and Spirituality in Christian Counseling written by Mark McMinn and published by Tyndale House in 2011 notions towards the idealization that Christian counselors need to be privy in the most recent psychological methods as well as theological theories. “This is a book about counseling processes techniques” (McMinn, 2011, p. 150). McMinn also alluded that Christian counselors benefit from having a spiritual maturity. With having these attributes counselors are better prepared to take note of prayer, Scripture, sin, confession, forgiveness, and redemption. McMinn (2011) model flows in the direction of healing while equating to a more advantageous relationship with The Lord Jesus Christ as well as with other relationships (McMinn, 2011).
David Entwistle’s Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity David Entwistle's (2010) Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity is geared more towards Christians with conservative evangelical views and provides the reader with an outline to different worldview disputes and truth-seeking groundwork that surround the connection that underlies psychology and theology. In addition to analyzing the possible connection between psychology and theology, Entwisle discusses the consideration of integrating Christian faith with the practice of psychology. “Christian understandings of person-hood, the purpose of human life, our need for God, and the ethical teachings of Christian faith are integral to psychology, not merely parallel to it” (p. 199). Entwistle’s viewpoint on this matter is clearly stated. He believes that it is necessary for theology and psychology to be integrated in order to fully understand human nature.
Faw mentions two important questions that come up when psychology and Christianity is combined. The first being “the bible’s own claims to sufficiency” (Faw, 1995, p. 18) and the second questioning if nonbelievers can understand and learn the truth. The bible’s sufficiency says that no outside source can be used or relied on however; we still use technology and medicine as it keeps us healthy but if we do use it we should use it wisely and in the eyes of God and his Word. The second concern, that nonbelievers can not understand the truth, states that God is the only one who knows the whole truth and we are just made in his image. I believe that we are all taught something different determinant on how we are raised and this leads to everyone having different viewpoint and differing opinions. This can be a positive thing and can also relate to our views on knowing what is right and what is wrong. We all had a distinctive upbringings and if we were raised to believe one thing is right, someone else in the world may be taught that it is wrong. Even thought we all have differing views on many things, it does not mean that we should not hate, we should accept people for who they
Entwistle’s book explores the links and integration between psychology and Christianity. As the title explains this book paints a picture of the conflicting worldviews and philosophical foundations that people perceive about how they can be integrated. Entwistle provides research through scholarly reflection and various models that link both psychology and Christianity together. Entwistle remarked by saying “There are many events that raise both theological and psychological questions and such events serve as useful springboards to investigate links between Christian theology and other disciplines” (Entwistle, 2015, p. 8). This statement sets the stage for the readers to understand how some events throughout history have laid the
The Neutral Parties model views that psychology and Christianity are independent from each other and there is no need for integration of the two disciplines. Finally, the Allies model views that there is a “unity of truth” and that all truth comes from God’s therefore both psychology and Christianity are legitimate, but under God’s sovereignty (Entwistle, 2010, p. 182). After considering the evidence from all of the various models of integrations discussed above, it seems that the allies model of integration best presents the relationship of psychology and Christianity and is a preferred approach for the integration of
Systematic theology tends to relate in some ways to the world, which incorporates its historical background and the way it embraces culture (Berkhof, 1996). Its approach permits one to examine all that the bible says as regards an issue. This ensures a natural approach to Christianity, as against a fastidious approach. In AN evolving society, this approach is common in varied fields, in researchers. Indeed, the majority subjects tend to piece along varied theories and topics to return up with a unitary subject.
“Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity” (2010) is about the purposeful integration of psychology and Christianity. Entwistle, discusses the integration of scripture and nature, holding to historic orthodox Christianity that “Scripture and the natural world have their origins in God’s creativity and revelation” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 136). Theology clarifies the Word of God (Bible), and Psychology corresponds with the works of God. A working definition of integration is offered,
W. Andrew Hoffecker. Building a Christian World View, vol. 1: God, man, and Knowledge. Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., Phillipsburg, New Jersey : 1986.
Johnson, Eric L. (2007). Christ, The Lord of Psychology. In Daryl H. Stevenson, Brian E. Eck & Peter C. Hill (Eds.). Psychology Christianity Integration: Seminole Works that Shaped the Movement (pp. 42-57). Batavia, IL: Christian Association for Psychological Studies, Inc.
Goodwin, A. (1998). Freud and Erikson: Their Contributions to the Psychology of God-Image Formation. Pastoral Psychology, 47(2), 97-117. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Erik Erikson was a developmental psychologist known for his theory on psychosocial development. Unlike other theorists of his time Erikson’s theory focused on human development across the lifespan from birth to late adulthood. Erickson believed that development change occurs through out our lives in eight distinctive stages that emerge in a fixed pattern and are similar for all people. Erickson argued that each stage presents a crisis or conflict which results in either a positive or negative outcome (Feldman). In this essay I will identify incidents in my own life that demonstrate each stage of development according to Erickson that I have lived through. I will also interview my Aunt Tami who will share her experiences for the remainder stages of Erickson’s development that I have not gone through thus far.