Integrative Approaches To Psychology And Christianity Summary

Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity

David N. Entwistle is the author of Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity. In his book, he discusses many issues that are relevant and related to the integration of psychology and Christianity. In his book, he quotes Tertullian’s question about whether or not there is a relationship between Athens and Jerusalem and whether or not there is a relationship between science and faith. Tertullian believed psychology and Christianity could not be integrated. Entwistle (2010) then posed an important question, which is “what has psychology to do with Christianity?” (p. 10). Throughout the book, Entwistle answers this question by developing an argument for the integration of psychology

and Christianity.
Entwistle (2010) argues, “psychology and theology are both concerned with philosophical anthropology, which is the study of the character, disposition, qualities, and inclinations of humans beings” (p. 113). As a result, psychology and theology should be integrated so psychologists and theologians are able to have a better understanding of why a person acts and behaves the way they do. According to Entwistle (2010), “psychology and Christian theology can be of use to each other because we can gain a more complete view of humanity than we could from just one discipline” (p. 119).
In order to have a clear understanding of philosophical anthropology, a person needs to understand their worldview, which plays a role in whether or not they believe psychology and Christianity, can be integrated. Entwistle (2010) explains, “a worldview is a set of presuppositions, which we hold about the basic make-up of the world” (p. 56). He also goes on to say that a person will have one of several major worldviews, which are: animism, polytheism, pantheism, and monotheism as well as modern/atheistic materialism, postmodernism, and syncretism (Entwistle, 2010, pp. 57-59). The worldview one holds to will either support or oppose the integration of psychology and Christianity.
In addition to understanding philosophical anthropology, which is shaped by our worldview, a person also needs to understand epistemology, which is “the branch of philosophy that deals with the grounds and nature of knowledge” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 71). God has given humanity a desire to know and understand the nature of the world, “but our ability to know is contingent, limited, and fallible” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 91). God gives us enough knowledge to understand the nature of our world (cosmology) and the nature of reality (metaphysics). (Entwistle, 2010, p. 94).
After discussing worldviews, epistemology, metaphysics, cosmology, and philosophical anthropology, Entwistle (2010) spends a majority of his time discussing the five different models of integration: enemies, spies, colonialists, neutral parties, and allies (p. 135). Enemies are both secular and Christian combatants who reject the integration of psychology and Christianity. Spies are both foreign and domestic who are “more interested in uncovering the psychology of the religious system rather than holding on to orthodox theology” (Entwistle, 2010, p.141). Colonialists are those whose “primary allegiance is to his or her theological system and views psychology as valuable” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 144). Neutral parties live at peace with each other. Allies recognize the sovereignty of God and recognize we need to integrate both psychology and theology because they are both useful.
Entwistle (2010) closes his book by addressing the fact that we need to have an understanding of both “the contours of the Christian faith and the contours of psychology” in order to integrate psychology and theology (p. 246). He ends his book by talking about the difficulties we’ll endure on the road to integrating psychology and theology.
Concrete Responses
As I was reading Entwistle’s book, Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity, the event that jumped out to me from memory is when I learned about different worldviews in my Sunday school class at church, while I was a student in high school. The two worldviews I remember learning about specifically were polytheism, which is the belief there are many gods and monotheism, which is the belief there is only one God. After learning about the different worldviews, my Sunday school teacher encouraged us to shape our own worldview. As a young Christian, I realized I needed to shape my own worldview instead of leaning on my parents’.
Throughout high school, I focused on molding and shaping my own worldview, which would help me “understand the world and how one acts in the world” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 61). Going to church regularly and attending the Word of Life Bible Institute, where I was under biblical teaching everyday, helped me shape my worldview so I could have a better understanding of the world and why people act the way they do. Although I hold to a Christian worldview, I still wonder why there is much evil in the world, such as terrorist attacks like the ones that recently happened in Paris, Beirut, and Baghdad. Even though I may wonder, I believe God is sovereign and has a perfect plan for the world. I believe that because of the fall of man, “pain was multiplied, relationships were damaged, the ground itself was cursed, and death entered the world” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 64). I believe God sent His Son, Jesus into the world to die on the cross so we could experience eternal life with Him. I also believe God will create a new heaven and a new earth and our “redemption will be fully and completely consummated” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 66). As a result of my Christian worldview, I will be able to have a better understanding of the world in which I live so I can fully integrate psychology and Christianity.
Reflection
Entwistle does a great job in arguing the case for the integration of psychology and Christianity. He gives incredible insights on worldviews, epistemology, metaphysics, cosmology, and philosophical anthropology and how they each relate to the integration of psychology and Christianity. He also explains the history of psychology and Christianity and how they are related to science. Entwistle spends much of his time explaining the different models of integration and gives examples of those who are for and against the integration of both disciplines. One criticism of the book though is that it’s not entirely geared towards the average reader. This book is more for college and graduate students as well as pastors, counselors, and psychologists.
There are also positive and negative aspects of Entwistle’s book.

Although Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity is a great book, it is a difficult read which is a negative aspect of the book. One must read the book slowly so they will fully comprehend all the concepts within the book. If a person reads it too fast they will miss some of the points Entwistle makes regarding the integration of psychology and Christianity. One such point is, “the integration of psychology and Christianity emerged largely, though not exclusively, from the Christian liberal-arts tradition” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 16). This is an important argument Entwistle made in support of integration. Although Entwistle’s book is a difficult read, one of the most positive things about the book is that he takes his time developing each concept so we thoroughly understand them. He gives footnotes at the bottom of each page so we have other valuable resources. Another positive aspect is that Entwistle provides the views of those who disagree with him regarding the integration of psychology and

Christianity.
In addition to positive and negative aspects, Entwistle’s book also has many strengths. One of the strengths is that he builds on each concept by showing how they are related to one another. By the end of the book he shows how the integration of psychology and theology is possible whether it be in a professional or pastoral counseling setting. Another strength is the fact we are given practical ways in which we are able to apply the concepts within this book. Another strength of the book is it provides us information on how we are interact and work with those who are opposed to the integration of psychology and Christianity (Entwistle, 2010, pp. 261-62). Entwistle offers us valuable information, which will help us counsel those who directly oppose the integration of psychology and Christianity.
To be honest, I couldn’t come up with any weaknesses because each time I thought of one Entwistle addressed it.

A weakness I came up that was refuted by the book was that there were hardly any examples on how counselors who integrate psychology and Christianity are able to work with those who oppose the integration of the two disciples. As I was looking for illustrations I discovered Entwistle (2010) had covered this under ethics and the workplace (p 261). Another weakness I came up with that the book addressed was the fact there was little said about the protestant’s response to psychology but I was wrong. As I reading through the book I realized there were different segments of Christianity and that the book did indeed cover all Christian responses to psychology and psychotherapy. They were just broken into subgroups: Catholic, Liberal-Neo-orthodox, and evangelical responses (Entwistle, 2010, p.

45-49).
Entwistle answers many questions in his book except for three. How are lay helpers to apply the material within this book to their lay counseling ministries? Is it just for theologians and psychologists to apply? Are lay helpers able to apply this material into their lay counseling ministries?
Action
Some steps I can take to apply the book’s main points to my professional and personal life is through education. Educating myself on worldviews, epistemology, metaphysics and cosmology, as well as philosophical anthropology will help me understand the world in which I live and how people act the way they do. Another step I can take is strengthening my Christian worldview through reading the Word of God and observing His creation. God’s truth is revealed through His Word and works (Entwistle, 2010, p. 136). A final step I can take is utilizing the disciplinary models of integration: enemies, spies, colonialists, neutral parties and allies (Entwistle, 2010, p. 135). Not everyone I come in contact with will adhere to the same disciplinary model of integration I hold to so it is important for me to have a working knowledge of all five models. Taking these steps will help me become an effective counselor.
I will allow the main ideas of Entwistle’s text to affect my counseling in a positive way. I will utilize the models of integration, have a full understanding of the different worldviews potential clients will hold to, and acknowledge there are obstacles to integration such as, “human sinfulness and human finitude” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 250). I will also acknowledge I cannot counsel others on my own strength. I need to rely on the Lord because He alone is sovereign and knows all things and will give me the strength I need to help others. When I choose to acknowledge integration does not happen overnight and that it takes time, the main ideas of Entwistle’s text will affect my counseling in a positive way.
There are two personal changes I will implement in my life. I will first evaluate my worldview to make sure it lines up with God’s Word. Second of all, I will acknowledge I am a sinner saved by grace and God is the one who gives me enough wisdom and knowledge to understand the world around me. I will also share these changes with others.