4-MAT Review and Response of Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity December 9, 2013 Summary of Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity In the book Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity by David N. Entwistle (2010) the reader is at first challenged with the idea of psychology and Christianity being at odds with one another. The idea is tossed around that it may indeed be impossible for theology and psychology to co-exist in the same area because of the nature of both: one is based solely on faith and the other is based on truth. Then Entwistle posed a brilliant idea when he stated “The interaction of psychology and theology is virtually inevitable due to their mutual interest in understanding the ambiguities and mysteries of human behavior, and healing human brokenness” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 51). In this one statement, Entwistle set the theme for the rest of the book: the idea that psychology and Christianity were not only not at odds, but were indeed able to be integrated and used together. To explain this more easily, Entwistle decidedly builds a case throughout history for the ways that the scientific and theological communities have interacted throughout the centuries so that the reader may have a greater understanding of the process and build-up of modern psychological thought in relation to Christianity and that the term integrated [emphasis added] should not be viewed as only a verb but as a noun as well, citing that “If Christ lays claim to all of life, then the work of integration becomes not just feasible, but imperative, as we attempt to understand the essence of unity” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 16). Using that understanding, Entwistle continues to explain how science and faith have conflicted throughout history because of the idea that science is in direct opposition to theological concepts and ideas. Entwistle (2010) agrees to this notion somewhat, but only in the context of a person’s presuppositions. If a psychologist were to understand that they do indeed have a faith bias going into their respective field of psychology, then it could be the case that, in understanding they have a bent toward faith, could view science as something of a proof of the genius of Christ (Entwistle, 2010). Further in the book we come to understand the different disciplinary relationships, to which Entwistle lists five: enemies, spies, colonialists, neutral parties, and allies (Entwistle, 2010). For the antagonists, enemies could be either secular or Christian, both opposing the view that there can be a co-existence of faith and science in the field of psychology. Spies would include members of the Christian community that have a reasonable background in psychology but are only interested in the “benefits of their own religious system” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 182). On the converse, spying could also entail someone of a secular bent observing the effects of faith on a person. Colonialists take the useful [emphasis a.

1. 4-MAT Review and Response of Integrative Approaches to
Psychology and Christianity
December 9, 2013
Summary of Integrative Approaches to Psychology and
Christianity
In the book Integrative Approaches to Psychology and
Christianity by David N. Entwistle (2010) the reader is at first
challenged with the idea of psychology and Christianity being at
odds with one another. The idea is tossed around that it may
indeed be impossible for theology and psychology to co-exist in
the same area because of the nature of both: one is based solely
on faith and the other is based on truth. Then Entwistle posed a
brilliant idea when he stated “The interaction of psychology and
theology is virtually inevitable due to their mutual interest in
understanding the ambiguities and mysteries of human behavior,
and healing human brokenness” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 51). In this
one statement, Entwistle set the theme for the rest of the book:
the idea that psychology and Christianity were not only not at
odds, but were indeed able to be integrated and used together.
To explain this more easily, Entwistle decidedly builds a case
throughout history for the ways that the scientific and
theological communities have interacted throughout the
centuries so that the reader may have a greater understanding of
the process and build-up of modern psychological thought in
relation to Christianity and that the term integrated [emphasis
added] should not be viewed as only a verb but as a noun as
well, citing that “If Christ lays claim to all of life, then the
work of integration becomes not just feasible, but imperative, as
we attempt to understand the essence of unity” (Entwistle, 2010,
p. 16). Using that understanding, Entwistle continues to explain
how science and faith have conflicted throughout history
because of the idea that science is in direct opposition to
theological concepts and ideas. Entwistle (2010) agrees to this
notion somewhat, but only in the context of a person’s

2. presuppositions. If a psychologist were to understand that they
do indeed have a faith bias going into their respective field of
psychology, then it could be the case that, in understanding they
have a bent toward faith, could view science as something of a
proof of the genius of Christ (Entwistle, 2010).
Further in the book we come to understand the different
disciplinary relationships, to which Entwistle lists five:
enemies, spies, colonialists, neutral parties, and allies
(Entwistle, 2010). For the antagonists, enemies could be either
secular or Christian, both opposing the view that there can be a
co-existence of faith and science in the field of psychology.
Spies would include members of the Christian community that
have a reasonable background in psychology but are only
interested in the “benefits of their own religious system”
(Entwistle, 2010, p. 182). On the converse, spying could also
entail someone of a secular bent observing the effects of faith
on a person. Colonialists take the useful [emphasis added] parts
of psychology in order to use them to their own ideals
(sometimes unknowingly) in accordance with their beliefs.
Neutral parties are indifferent to both the secular and
theological arguments for or against integrated psychology
while maintaining a segregation between science and
Christianity (Entwistle 2010). The allies model differs from the
previous in that it rejects the idea that theology be subservient
to psychology and that faith is only a “vehicle to express
psychological truths and to foster psychological benefits”
(Entwistle, 2010, p. 206).
The book concludes with the remaining portions dedicated to
understanding truth encapsulated within the psychological
mindset and that of the theological mindset as well. This is key
to setting up valid points made in the last chapter of the book
that discusses scenarios in which everything else discussed in
the book could come into play. In understanding psychology and
theology and how the two are similar and dissimilar, Entwistle
(2010) makes it clear that there can be a greater understanding
of human psyche and develop research and counseling

3. techniques that will be beneficial to future generations.
Concrete Response
I remember growing up and thinking that I had to do everything
I could in order to be someone. My father is a musician (and a
very, very good one) as well as my brother. Until I was around
13 years-old, I had not picked up or even been interested in an
instrument. I remember the day my dad looked at me and said “I
never thought you’d make a musician.” My heart was broken
and proud at the same time, because my dad had often praised
my brother for his musicianship. Because of that statement, I
felt like I had something to prove from then on out. I have done
a lot of things growing up to be rebellious and to make myself
out to be more than I am, including taking on as many
responsibilities as I could within the church to prove my worth.
I am ashamed to admit that when Entwistle (2010) was
describing the colonist, I completely identified. Up until taking
this course, I had never heard of anything quite like that before,
to which I am ashamed to say that I think I have been a
stumbling block for some of my friends and family.
To me, this is proof that God has a plan for everything. In
April, I have the privilege of marrying my best friend. Because
of this course I feel that now I will go into that marriage with a
better understanding of who God is and how God needs to be
integrated into my life ecumenically.
Reflection
Integrative Approaches to Psychology and
Christianity (Entwistle, 2010) introduces the significance of
understanding the correlation and non-convergence of
psychology and Christianity. The study of psychology (in
academia) is thoroughly addressed throughout the book, but
something that is not addressed as much (or referenced to be in
another text) is what the average Christian is to do with this
text. As it stands, this book is perfect for collegiate students
and professors to dissect, but what about the church pastor or
the layman that wishes to be more of a help than a hindrance in
his or her professional field or personal relationships? The

4. author has done a marvelous job in focusing so much attention
to the student of psychology that a portion of the text could be
focused on someone that is not as astute in psychological
meanings and backgrounds and still retain the context and
power as with without such a section. In all fairness, this is a
bit picky to point out, however, in many church settings this
could be a very useful tool.
Action
In a professional counseling practice, understanding the
different disciplinary models would be one of the most crucial
steps for the entire staff, especially a counseling psychologist.
Within the Christian community, it may not be common
knowledge of where a person lies within the five models
(enemies, spies, colonialists, neutral parties, and allies)
(Entwistle, 2010) and as to whether or not they are being a help
or a hurt because of the set of beliefs and understanding that
goes with that particular model. Understanding the models will
allow the psychologist and staff to personally and
professionally evaluate themselves and where they stand within
the models in order to make sure they are providing the best and
most adequate care they possibly can. The next step would be
taking an honest look at scientific models of psychology and
using the two in an integrative fashion that would benefit the
client the most. Understanding the options and techniques will
allow proof of God through science, which in turn helps create
disciples of Christ. After all, integration of psychology and
Christianity is much more than ideas and practices, but it is also
about the everyday way that we live our lives before God as an
example to each other (Entwistle, 2010).
Reference
Entwistle, D. N. (2010). Integrative approaches to psychology
and Christianity: An introduction to worldview issues,
philosophical foundations, and models of integration. Eugene,
Or: Cascade Books.