'Integrative Approaches To Psychology And Christianity'

1493 Words6 Pages
Argument for Integration Integrative Approaches To Psychology And Christianity 4-MAT Review Krishunna Pearson Liberty University Online Summary Our text Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity by David N. Entwistle (2010) introduces an idea that psychology and Christianity are at odds with each another. The reader is challenged to compare and contrast the notion of theology and psychology existing together. Within the pages of the text, the reader is presented with different foundations for them both. One focuses on faith while the other focuses on truth. It is here that Entwistle makes a statement that sets the tone for the rest of the book “The interaction of psychology and theology is virtually inevitable due to…show more content…
Some of these will include a compare/contrast of Christianity and other forms of study such as Epistemology, Metaphysics and Philosophical Anthropology. Entwistle also describes five different disciplinary relationships: enemies, spies, colonialists, neutral parties, and allies (Entwistle, 2010). This is for the purposes of understanding the nature of how these relationship contribute to the understanding of the integration of psychology and Christianity. Antagonists, or enemies are secular or Christian because both hold an opposing the view that there is no integration of psychology and Christianity. Members of the Christian faith who have a background in psychology would be the Spies who are only interested in the “benefits of their own religious system” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 182). The Colonialists use what they find beneficial from both in order to support their own ideals and beliefs. Those who take a Neutral stand are indifferent to either side, they are neither for nor against integration between science and Christianity (Entwistle 2010). Lastly the allies it reject the notion that Christianity should be integrated with science or that faith should only be a “vehicle to express psychological truths and to foster psychological benefits” (Entwistle, 2010, p.…show more content…
I believe strongly in a person-centered approach to therapy. Because of this, I would develop a plan of action specific to each individual I would counsel. First I would ensure that the client receives my practice as Christian counseling. I would help them to understand that we would be looking at healing and recovery from a biblical perspective. Secondly, I would determine what disciplinary relationship the person represents; whether enemy, spy, colonialists, neutral or ally. This will help me determine how to approach care in a way that is relevant to the client, and would not present a barrier to building a connection between the two of
Open Document