Customer Reviews

Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: An Introduction to Worldview Issues, Philosophical Foundations, and Models of Integration

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

For the most part, psychology and theology have been considered to be enemies as both deal with the basic questions about life and the human experience from different approaches. Psychology places human experience (empirically) at the core of understanding and theology places God (our interpretation of His Word) at the center of understanding human experiences. Theology is faith based and includes a strong acceptance of the Bible as the basis of all truth. Psychology is empirically based and leaves little room for faith or acceptance of the supernatural. It is easy to see how the two disciplines can be viewed as enemies. However, Entwistle provides an in depth look at both and paves a way to model the two in such a way that they complement and complete one another.
According to Entrwistle, "Everyone has a worldview - a window through which he or she views the world, assumptions, and beliefs that color what he or she sees." (Entwistle, 2004, p. 67) The book begins by discussing in depth how our worldview affects our way of thinking about everything, including psychology and theology. As the author points out, our worldviews are not so much chosen as much as they are learned from our experiences, education, and culture. Most are not even aware that their views on everything are filtered through these windows, which both distort and clarify our interpretation of what we see.
In addition to the ways that particular worldviews shape our attitude about psychology and theology, we also approach the subject according to the models we have constructed regarding the two disciplines. Entwistle described 5 distinct paradigms of relational approaches to understanding the various models. Enemies, which include both secular combatants and Christian combatants, do not see any reconciliation between psychology and theology. Spies, both domestic and foreign, will hold allegiance to one discipline but selectively taking components from the other. Colonialists are described as those who claim territory they did not win, discover, or work for. Neutral parties tend to mind their own business and keep the two camps separate. Lastly, there are those who are like allies. Allies view both psychology and Christianity as belonging to God and seek to understand how the two are based on the same truth.
Based on Francis Bacon's description of two sources for learning, God's book of Words (the Bible) and God's book of deeds (written in creation through nature), Entwistle concludes the book with a discussion on finding balance in our responsibility to properly utilize the two books. He reminds us that when science disagrees with the Bible, the conflict always resides in our interpretation. Coming full circle, Entwistle returns to the issue of how our worldview, biases, presumptions, and experiences alter and skew the way we interpret data. He ended the book with a sentence worth remembering in our search for truth: "We will sometimes have to live with ambiguity and uncertainty, be we affirm that God is the author of all truth..." (p. 275).

I am currently in a graduate counseling program, and by far this is on my short list of favorite texbooks. Entwistle's arguement validates psychology as a science, the pursuit of truth, and the realization that psychology and Christianity do not have to be at odds with one another. Yes, this book is not an easy read, but Entwistle expertly addresses a debate that all counseling students of a religious background must grapple with.

David Entwistle lays the foundation for his book in the questions, "What is the proper relationship of faith and science? More specifically, what, if any, relationship should be posited between Christianity and psychology" (2004, p. 10)? In order to understand and have a complete appreciation for the depth of the arguments regarding the relationship between Christianity and psychology, Entwistle begins by examining the history of each as well as the worldviews that have resulted from this history. This leads us to explore the movement called integration and the search for a comprehensive definition. Using anecdotes from his years of building models, Entwistle demonstrates how two disciplines, that many feel must be completely separate, can be effectively integrated.

When we look at the relationship of psychology and theology, we are concerned with models based on models; that is we express our understanding of theology in various models, our understanding of psychology in different models, and we then conceptualize their relationship in yet more models (p. 160).

Entwistle makes a key point in laying the foundation of the integrative approach when he contrasts two divergent Christian beliefs. On one hand, some Christians maintain the created universe was the result of eons of cosmic evolution in order to fit with scientific theory. On the other hand, some Christians maintain a literal view of Biblical creation in that the world was created six days. Both views ". . . emphasize who did it while diverging on how it was done" (Entwistle, 2004, p. 121). According to Entwistle, one's view will determine how he or she will approach integration, or whether it is pursued at all (2004, pp. 121, 122).

A large portion of the book is taken up in the exploration of the various models used to understand the various views of integration. Entwistle compares and contrasts the various models and their authors, offering his own model which seems to creatively combine the best of the models put forth. Five paradigms are expounded upon to show the various camps in which Christians and psychologists "live." The first is the Enemies paradigm which is marked by antagonism and an inability to see value in the other's perspective. Two versions of the Enemies paradigm exist. First, the Secular Combatants in which religion is seen as the enemy of psychology and second, the Christian Combatants in which psychology is seen as the enemy of religion (p. 186). The second paradigm is the Spies who see some value in the other's perspective, but attach no corresponding belief in the underlying, usually religious, value system (pp. 208-213). They steal thoughts and ideas and use them as they may. The third paradigm is the Colonialists who see value in psychological ideas and then selectively take what meets their needs without buying into the underlying value of psychology as a discipline (pp. 214-218). The fourth paradigm is the Neutral Parties who believe in exploring the ideas of both psychology and theology without trying to see how either relates to the other (pp. 218-225). Finally, the fifth paradigm is the Allies As Subjects of One Sovereign. This best illustrates how both psychology and theology makes the most sense and best captures the true spirit of integration. Taken together, psychology and theology can illuminate the human condition better than either could individually (pp. 230-234).

One concern I have with Entwistle's book, however, is the very obvious deletion of the work of the Holy Spirit in the integration process. While much was said about God's two books, nothing was said about the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit and how the Holy Spirit can provide guidance, wisdom, understanding, and discernment in the therapy process. Throughout Scripture, but especially in the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is seen to provide guidance and understanding to Christians in a variety of areas. Because of what Jesus Christ has done for us, we as believers received the Holy Spirit who dwells within us (Ephesians 2:18). It is the Holy Spirit who guides us. Romans 8: 5 says, "Those who are dominated by the sinful nature think about sinful things, but those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit think about things that please the Spirit" (New International Version) In Ephesians 5:18 Paul says that we are to let the Holy Spirit fill and control us, and that when we allow the Holy Spirit to control our minds there is life and peace (Romans 8:6b). The Holy Spirit gives us hope and power, as well as the understanding of Scripture by guiding us into all truth.

In Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity David Entwistle (2004) discusses the integration of theology and psychology. One purpose of this book is to ground the discussion about this relationship in the context of worldview and philosophical issues that are prerequisite to integration, but which are rarely discussed in books of integration (Entwistle, 2004, 7). As one is able to see this book dives deeply into the principles of both theology and psychology. When one hears the word psychology more than likely they think of a secular science. This book illustrates that when psychology first began it was not founded on secular principles; it was later psychologist who created such secular theories. Wundt merely looked at how God had put the machinery of the mind together (Entwistle, 2004, 48). 'Freud's belief that psychopathology was caused by anxiety-motivated repression was popularly misconstrued as a tacit recommendation to rid ourselves of our inhibitions and unleash our darker impulses. Yet a fair reading observed in the free associations of his patients, rather than to sanction the contents as something to celebrate' (Entwistle, 2004, 49). The foundation of the book is to truly understand these two disciplines (theology and psychology) and to properly understand the integration.

Another aspect about this book is worldviews. Everyone has a worldview-a window through which he or she views the world, assumptions and beliefs that color what he or she sees (Entiwistle, 2004, 67). As one is able to see a worldview can alter one's perspective. The worldview helps the person to understand their perspective on how they choose to believe something. If one has a distorted worldview, then this will distort their thinking.

The book concludes by stating the chapter titled 'Truth and Two Books'. This title sounds almost unorthodoxy. Since our understanding will reflect theology and psychology rather than directly and perfectly reflecting scripture or creation, we must then look at the relationship between theology and psychology as interpretive disciplines (Entiwistle, 2004, 260). As one is able to see there is an extreme importance of the integrative of both psychology and theology. 'Finally, those who see integration as faithful reading believe that the origin of truth is in God's action in word and deed. Since our ultimate allegiance is to God, and since He is the author of both books, it is assumed that truth can be found through the study of the book of God's word and God's work' (Etiwistle, 2004, 275). This is basically stating that it is not enough for one to understand the word of God; it must be put to action. This book basically covers the integration of theology and psychology to be a mixture of two distinct disciplines which can be used to glorify God. In conclusion, one's worldview can also aid or distort one's perception of these two disciplines. Therefore it is imperative to have a sound worldview which has a firm foundation upon God's word in order to have the proper integration of theology in psychology.

(Written by Joy Mays)

Note: Another interesting development in psychology has been the provision of Online Counseling and Telephone Counseling. I have found this clinical guide to be very helpful: The Therapist's Clinical Guide to Online Counseling and Telephone Counseling: The Definitive Training Guide for Clinical Practice

I have read several books on the integration of psychology and theology and this was my least favorite.

Some of the issues I had with the book (the new 2010 edition of the text) include:

1. The author uses negative labels for anyone he disagrees with while using positive labels for those he agrees with (in an effort it seems to bias the reader). So Christians who try to base their counseling methodology on the Bible are labeled "Christian Combatants" while those that base their counseling on the Bible and use some psychology are called "Colonialists". A colonialist was someone that was a foreigner in another country and stole their resources, while Christian Combatants implies they are angry and mean. In the view he likes he calls it "Allies"

2. The author accuses several biblical scholars of misinterpreting Bible verses. His interpretation is weak and incorrect according to my (and almost all scholars). Entwistle on many, many occasions throughout the book denigrates those he disagrees with because he does not believe they are studying psychology enough. The author though has been trained and received degrees in only one field: psychology. He has a B.A. in psychology, M.A. (part of his Psy.D) in psychology, and a Psy.D (a non-research degree) in psychology. He has no degree or foundation in Biblical Studies or theology. The fact that he is bringing a Sunday School level of Biblical knowledge to his integration efforts is very blatant. Why does he denigrate Biblical Scholars for not studying psychology enough (according to him), yet he has not taken the time to become fluent in Biblical or Theological studies?

3. The author is extremely biased against Biblical Counselors. Here is just one Example from his book: He discusses Freud in the book (about a page) and gives many, many excuses for why Freud hated and was biased against Christianity (... Freud was picked on, etc. by Christians so Freud's behavior can be excused according to Entwistle). He NEVER explores how this hatred of Christianity might have negatively impacted his teachings and theories. A few pages later Entwistle begins his adhominem attack against John MacArthur (He focuses on MacArthur for about 5 pages). He attacks some of the things MacArthur teaches (which the author twists to prove his point) but then spends more than three pages of the book discussing a case where MacArthur's church was sued by the family of a man who committed suicide. Three pages on a court case that has little to do with integration issues all in an effort to paint MacArthur as a mean hater and by default Biblical Counseling. He does not conduct adhominem attacks against secular psychologists who hate Christianity and God, but does so against Biblical Counselors. (In the court case the church won the case. This case - Nally vs. Grace Community Church was more than two decades ago. The man (Nally) who committed suicide was on psych meds and had/was receiving secular counseling. The church recommend he be admitted to an inpatient hospital but the Nally and his Family declined). On a side note: this is the only case the author of this text could come up with in the last 40 years where a person receiving Biblical Counseling committed suicide. Each year there are more than 35,000 people who commit suicide in the United States (more than a million try). Of those 35,000 the vast majority at some point received secular counseling. The author says nothing about this in his effort to tar and feather anyone who disagrees with his viewpoint. The author is so biased in his views it is amazing (and I might add irritating).

4. The author believes in what is often called the 'two book' theory. This means that God has provided two sources of information: the Bible and the world and both are equal. For Entwistle the Bible is no more important or to be trusted than the "works" of God. Entwistle does not put enough emphasis on the important fact that the world ('Works of God') has fallen, been corrupted, and is full of sin. The secular Psychologists who are the "Fathers" of almost everyone of Psychologies main theories denied there is a true God. So Entwistle puts fallen men (in rebellion and opposed to God) who design theories (often based on biased research) on the exact same level as the Bible which was written by those who believed in and loved God and were guided and directed in their writing by the Holy Spirit.

I could go on for pages with all of the poor scholarship and arguments made by this author. If you are interested in a better book on integration I would recommend: "Psychology, Theology, and Spirituality in Christian Counseling" by Mark McMinn ([...] ), or Larry Crabb's "Understanding People."

I had to read this book by Entwistle on the concept of integrating psychology and Christianity for a graduate course at seminary. Entwistle has some good things to offer here in his very thorough historical descriptions of the developments of science and the field of psychology. He also does a thorough explanation of the different worldviews people have and how that affects everything they believe. However, I believe he himself is a victim of the inherent weaknesses of worldviews that he so often talks about in the book.

I see this book as basically an apologetic discussion by Entwistle to try to prove that the conclusions he has come to about integration through his own worldview are better than anyone elses. The fact that he labels people as "enemies" and "combatants" to the pursuit of integration of psychology and Christianity because they have an opposing view to his view bothers me. Just because someone has come to different conclusions as to what they believe is the truth should not assume they are somehow "at war" with people who have come to other conclusions. Pitting someone as your enemy because they have a different worldview is disrespecful to the integrity of that person's views.

I admit that as a Christian, my worldview is based on the superiority of the truths of the Bible over any human pursuit of truth. This is because, as Entwistle and most scientists would agree, any human scientific study has the possibility of being flawed by the very nature of the weaknesses and flaws of human beings. Has Entwistle ever stopped to think that maybe the reason so many people - both Christian and non-Christian - in so many different ways (as outlined in the book) have come to different conclusions than the "allies" approach to integration in which he so firmly believes because they're seeing some truths that he is blinded to?

I encourage anyone who reads this book to keep in mind that the author is writing from his own personal assumptions about things. He has some good things to offer to the discussion of integration. If nothing else, this book will help you identify and clarify what your personal worldview is, which I did in response to reading his book and which I think is a good thing.

I was required to read this book for a graduate course. I found this book to be too wordy and rather difficult to read. I believe the information could have been conveyed in a more simple fashion. If it wasn't for my instructor's power points, I'm not sure I would have really understood the content as well as I did.

Love this book. Balanced, smart, funny, intelligent and readable. Entwistle has done a terrific job of giving us the history of Christianity and how it relates to the development of Psychology. He also manages to give us a fair and humane view of the men of all churches that have opened, skewed, and/or manipulated for their own gain Christianity and Science. What an honor to read. Thanks so much Dr. Entwistle.

The first couple of chapters were enjoyable, but when the author went into so much detail, and never ending sequences and possablities I struggled with the reading. He has a lot to say and alot of great info, it is hard to muddle through it. Leslie

I am currently reading this book for my class Integration of Psychology and Christianity taught by none other than Dr. Entwitsle at Malone University. I find the book to be incredibly interesting and I have learned a lot already about the history of the relationship between the Church and psychology. It is definitely a challenging book, however, I do have the benefit of discussing every chapter with the author. I would definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in the Integration of Psychology and Christianity.