Integrating Faith and Psychology

Running head: PERSPECTIVE ON INTEGRATION BETWEEN
CHRISTIAN FAITH AND PSYCHOLOGY
1
Integration Between Christian Faith and Psychology
7
Liberty University
PSYC-420
Abstract
This paper will discuss psychology and Christianity: Two
disciplines that seem to be difficult subjects when discussing an
integrated approach. There are some people who believe that,
psychology has become one completely different subject than
Christianity and both at times have lost all connection with the
other. In addition, there are integrative models of disciplinary
that think psychology is strictly a science and Christianity is
solely based on faith and religion and the two cannot be
integrated together. After further review of evidence, it seems
that the integration approach for both disciplines are given by

God and that they both should be integrated to create a more
understanding of humanity. The focus of this paper is to
describe the Allies” model and how it relates to integrating two
disciplines; psychology and Christian faith. In addition, the
strengths and limitations of the Allies model will be discussed.
Also included are definitions of both subjects and views on
different approaches towards this matter. Scriptures will be
added that correspond with this approach, as well as, several
factors that lead to the integration process of both disciplines.
After further studies of the evidence of various disciplines, it
seems like the “Allies” model best fits the relationship between
psychology method and Christianity.
Integration between Christian faith and Psychology
Webster dictionary states that psychology is, “The science of
mind and behavior and the study of mind and behavior in
relation to a particular field of knowledge or activity”
(Merriam-Webster, 2017). Whereas, Christianity is defined, “A
religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth,
or its beliefs and practices” (Merriam-Webster, 2017). After
the evidence from various disciplines of study, it seems that a
person’s foundation is based on what we see and how we know.
This leads a person to believe that it is crucial for Christian
counseling to use both psychology and Christianity. There are
several different methods that psychological theory and science
use to gain knowledge. These are: “Logic,” “Empiricism,”
“Revelation,” and “Hermeneutic” (Entwistle, 2015. P. 97).
Whereas, experiments in psychology use deductive logic when
testing a hypothesis. Inductive reasoning uses experiments that
show a correlation by manipulating the variables. For instance,
we use science to find out if a statement is true or false. An
idea is a suggestion upon which an argument is based or from

which a conclusion is drawn. For example, Since the Bible
says, “All things are possible if we believe.” So, if a person
believes. Therefore, “All things are possible.” This scientific
logic is used to gain knowledge and can also be used in
Theology as well. I believe God is a faith God and we must
believe what he says is the truth.
Typically, two methods are used if a person wants to know
about the nature of God. The “Revelation” and “Hermeneutics”
methods are used when interpreting scriptures. Christian
worldviews use “Revelations” that come from God himself
(General) or from God’s divine word the Old and New
Testament scriptures (Special revelations) (Entwistle, 2015, P.
110). Sometimes, people understand and interpret the scriptures
the wrong way. Therefore, hermeneutics aids a person to
understand what scripture says, and not what they want to make
it say. Some limitations of these methods of knowing are that,
every person experiences limitations that affect our reasoning
capabilities, as well as, all human reasoning is imperfect and is
flawed. Scholars believe that Christian faith is its own
psychology and that Christianity is fundamentally psychological
in nature (Magnuson, 2017). Also, many people believe that all
truth is from God, whether it is from Christianity or science.
The Bible says that, “all scripture is God-breathed and is useful
for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every
good work” (2 Tim:3-16). Indeed, the Bible does speak the
truth and has everything necessary to fulfill a person’s Christian
walk, especially, Scriptures that direct us truthfully to him who
is the source of all goodness and mercy. However, after
everything it does has, it still does not mean that everything we
want to know can be found in the Bible, including everything
we want to know about human personality, sickness, disease and
other psychological issues (Johnson, 2010). Followers of Christ
are called to pursue knowledge in several areas, one of the most
vital being relationship with each other. And, since psychology
and Theology are both subject to God’s sovereignty and are

both God’s subjects. It is important to believe that, both are
significant and are a necessity of fellowship for growth in a
person’s Christian walk. Also remembering that God is
relational. And just like a marriage, instead of arguing and
having division amongst each other, he probably prefers and
enjoys seeing the two disciplines functioning harmonious
together as one.
A family member became ill and they sought out a
naturopathic doctor. He had a protocol that was staged in
various levels. The stages were to cleanse, replenish, and
restore the wound. However, he did use natural techniques but
on the other hand, he used scientific findings to discover the
cause. First, he drew blood and looked at it under a
microscope. Then, he took information from that and developed
a protocol to start the healing process. It was amazing at how
he used scientific reasoning and the healing power of the body
to address the whole person. His efforts of combining both
disciplines not only amazed everyone but, it started that person
on a journey of healthy positive attitudes towards their body,
and they gained knowledge on how the body heals naturally
(The way God intended). It also drew everyone closer to God,
as it humbly brought them to a proper relationship with him.
The Allies model does just that, it is a mixture of
psychology and Theology. They are two entities that work side
by side to achieve a common goal for a shared benefit. This
model believes that we are all subjects of one sovereign God
and that all truth is from him. This approach seeks to integrate
psychology and theology by discerning its underlying unity and
by using the truth for a Godly end (Magnuson, 2017). “The
Allies model is premised on the belief that God’s truths are
revealed in the book of God’s word (Scripture) and the book of
God’s works (creation)” (Entwistle, 2015, P. 247). It is like the
“Neutral model” in that it excepts both Gods works and words
as different domains but overall, they both give us knowledge
about human beings. However, the “Allies model” is different
than the “Neutral model,” because it believes they should be

integrated and not parallel to one another. Another approach
that the “Allies” model agrees with is the Rebuilders model.
The “Allies” model agrees that secular assumptions often taint
psychological theories and findings, but the they do not see the
entire field as in need of complete renovation (Entwistle, 2015,
P. 248). Jones describes Integrations as, “Our living out-in this
particular area-of the Lordship of Christ over all of existence by
our giving his special revelation-God’s true word-its
appropriate place of authority in determining our fundamental
beliefs about and practices toward all of reality and toward our
academic subject matter in particular” (Magnuson, 2017). The
“Allies” model has a few limitations and they are: Exactly what
assumptions establish a uniquely Christian approach to
psychology regarding faith, sin, creation and man? Another
common question is: How can we leave room for a divergence
of Christian opinion? Lastly, what are the nonnegotiable core
convictions that should guide our understanding (Magnuson,
2017). The “Allies” model believes that, Theology and science
both have a perspective on what it means to be human. Some
questions asked are: What is the purpose of human kind and are
humans the main reason for creation or just an afterthought?
Assumptions about how a person views human nature, are
shaped by our worldviews, epistemologies and by are
perspective on cosmology (Magnuson, 2017). Therefore, the
Allies model rejects the modernist view, and encourages
Christian counselors to use their worldviews as a starting point.
The “Allies” position seems strongest when counseling
others because, both disciplines are concerned for humanity.
They both give us a more complete and precise picture than
either could alone about the truths revealed by God’s work and
his words (Entwistle, 2015). An “Allies” approach is sovereign
over the contents of both disciplines as they discover the
wonders of his creation and his character as they are left with a
since of amazement and gratefulness.
Regarding Christian counseling, there are few guidelines to
follow. When a client chooses to see a Christian counselor,

they will have a choice whether they want the counselor to be
explicit or implicit with their counseling techniques. For
instance, the client will be given a questioneer regarding the
approach he or she would like the counselor to use. If they
choose an explicit approach they are open for prayer, scriptures,
and any other spiritual guidance. If they choose implicit they
are refusing prayer or opinions regarding religious affiliation.
Although a client can refuse spiritual guidance, the counselor
should be a mature Christian, realizing that spirituality is not
the same for everyone, so we should not force our ideas on
them. However, we can allow the Spirit to lead and guide the
session, allowing God to do what he wants to do in the client’s
life. Keep in mind that, there is not a check list for the client to
do to be a good Christian. If God wishes to change the client,
he will use the counselor, but in the end God will do the
miracle. Something to always remember as a servant of the
most-high God is that, we need to acknowledge Gods
sovereignty over all of life, respect everyone and to be his
faithful servant to the very end.
In conclusion, psychology has many various perspectives
not only because theorists differ about their assumptions, but
also because its subject matter is so complex. An appreciation
of this complexity leads to the conclusion that psychology’s
perspectives are more corresponding than incompatible
(Entwistle, 2013, P 155). Entwistle says that, psychology and
Theology complement each other and uses the instruments in an
orchestra as an example. Every instrument has their place and
together they make a beautiful melody. However, “Despite their
differences in their method, psychological and theological
perspectives on philosophical anthropology they have a
considerable degree of harmony” (Entwistle, 2013, P163). The
Bible explains that humans are the crowning achievement of
God, it also says that, his creation is very good. It is important
to believe this, but it is also worth knowing that nothing in life
is perfect because perfection was lost in the Garden of Eden.
However, the other side of this negative is to fully understand

and accept that life will never be perfect and neither will any
experience or relationship. This insinuation is that people will
always be pulled in opposing directions whether it be toward sin
by our culture, or toward righteousness by the Word of God.
However, our job is to determine the path to life through both
psychology and Theology. Which in the end, will bring peace
and understanding in human’s behaviors and why they do the
things they do.
References
Christianity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 6, 2017, from
https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/Christianity
Entwistle, D. N. (2015). Integrative approaches to Psychology
and Christianity: An introduction
to worldview issues, Philosophical foundations, and models of
integration (3rd).Eugene, Oregon: Cascade Books
Johnson, E. (2010). Psychology & Christianity: Five views.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press
Magnuson, C. (2017). Foundations: What we see and how we
know. Retreived from Liberty
University Presentation.
Psychology. (n.d.). Retrieved May 6, 2017, from
https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/psychology
Jessica Dunne
RE: Discussion - Week 2
COLLAPSE
Top of Form
NURS 6052: Essentials of Evidence-Based Practice
INITIAL POST
Using evidence-based practice (EBP) is an essential
tenant of nursing practice. Therefore it is imperative to develop
the skills necessary to gather, interpret, and evaluate

scientifically based data. To begin my research for this week’s
assignment, I first did a Google search of nursing research
topics to help myself generate ideas and narrow down a problem
that interested me. After considering several topics, I decided to
write about delirium in acutely ill patients. Acute Delirium is
something that I have a lot of experience with, both personally
and professionally. The aim of my research will be to find out
how non-pharmacological interventions compare to
pharmacological treatment of acute delirium.
Search Results Analysis
Once my topic was selected, I went to the Walden
library to search for evidence-based literature on delirium
management. According to Walden University (2018), the levels
of evidence pyramid determines the quality and amount of
evidence available. The top three sections of the pyramid are
referred to as filtered results. Filtered results are comprised of
systematic reviews at the pinnacle of the pyramid, followed by
critically appraised topics, and critically appraised individual
articles. The next three sections of the pyramid are referred to
as unfiltered results and include randomized controlled trials,
cohort studies, and case-controlled studies. Background
information and expert opinions make up the base of the
pyramid (Walden University, 2018).
I began searching for resources from the top of the
evidentiary pyramid, systematic reviews. I used the Joanna
Briggs Institute EBP Database, and then limited my search
results to systematic reviews, and set a date range of 2014 to
current. I used the keywords “delirium” and “interventions” this
search yielded four systematic reviews. When I search the term
“acute confusion” I found three results. I also utilized the
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and found two
systematic reviews by searching for “delirium” in the first text
box, and “nursing interventions” in the second text box, again
searches were limited to full text with a date range of 2014 to
current. I also used the Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database to
search for critically appraised topics. My search for “delirium

interventions” yielded just one result. However, when I
searched for “delirium” I found ten results. I also searched
those same terms on Guideline Central and found four critically
appraised topics results. Finally, I searched for critically
appraised individual articles using the Evidence Alerts
database, and the terms “delirium and acute confusion” this
search yielded 23 critically appraised individual articles.
Next, I searched for nonfiltered resources utilizing the CINAHL
Plus database. I first looked for randomized controlled trials by
searching for the terms “delirium” and “nursing interventions”
in the first and second text boxes respectively; this search query
yielded four randomized controlled trials. To find cohort
studies, I typed “delirium” in the first text box, “interventions”
in the second text box, and “cohort studies” in the third text
box, this search resulted in 27 articles. I searched for case
studies using the same search terms in the first and second text
boxes and limited the publications to case studies, this search
yielded 56 results. However, when I adjusted the filters to
include case studies published within the past five years, the
number of results reduced to 14 case studies.
Comparative Value
I found congruency between the evidentiary pyramid
and my search results; the further down the pyramid, the more
resources I found; but, the quality of the information decreased
concurrently. While the systematic reviews were not as
numerous, they are superior in terms of scientific rigor and
evidentiary support. Moreover, the information I found within
the systematic reviews were very consistent with my chosen
topic compared to information further down the period like
cohort and case studies. When search terms were altered, for
example, searching for “delirium” versus “acute confusion,” the
results remained more consistent when searching for the higher
level filtered results whereas alteration of search terms would
create a wide variation in results further down the pyramid, in
the unfiltered resources.
Polit and Beck (2017), contend that systematic reviews are the

best resources for EBP because they contained synthesized
information about a topic from numerous evidenced-based
studies. However, it is important to recognize that the quality of
evidence can vary significantly regardless of its position within
the evidentiary hierarchy (Pilot & Beck, 2017). Overall, I found
greater quality and consistency of information within the
systematic reviews and critically appraised topics and articles.
Nonetheless, I found several high quality randomized controlled
trials and cohort studies that provide high-quality information
for making a comparison between pharmacological and non-
pharmacological interventions for managing delirium.
Helpful Tips for Literature Reviews
I found the course guide for this discussion post
extremely helpful. I followed the guide to conduct my searches,
find my articles, and evaluate the information. I also like to use
Google Scholar because the search algorithm pulls a lot of
information, it does have some drawbacks, the main one being
that the articles are not always available in full text. But, it is
very user-friendly, and because it casts a wide net, I can easily
find pertinent information. If I see an article that peaks my
interest that is not available in full text, I copy the title or other
vital information and then plug that information into the Walden
University Library. I have always been able to find the article I
want using this method. I also find it helpful to organize my
search results within folders, and to tag my articles with the
types of studies. I also find that the National Center for
Biotechnology Information (2019) is a great resource for
locating free, full text, peer-reviewed, scholarly articles
(National Center for Biotechnology Information, 2019). If I find
a study I know that I definitely want to use in my work, I will
create a citation and save it in a word document. When I begin
writing, I can use my reference list that I started during my
literature review as a guide. I have found that this method of
source organization is both helpful and time-saving.
References

National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2019).
Retrieved March 4, 2019, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research generating
and assessing evidence for nursing practice. Philadelphia:
Wolters Kluwer.
Walden University. (2018). Evidence-Based Practice Research:
Levels of Evidence Pyramid. Retrieved from
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/healthevidence/evidencepyr
amid#s-lg-box-8700027
REPLYQUOTEEMAIL AUTHOR
Bottom of Form
1 hour ago
Tami Frazier
RE: Discussion - Week 2 - Initial Post
COLLAPSE
Top of Form
NURS 6052 – Essentials of Evidence-Based Practice
Week 2 Initial Discussion Post
Literature Searches
Nursing is a field filled with numerous policies and
procedures. To understand these policies and procedures, the
practice of research and knowledge acquisition is essential. The
method of incorporating proper research into daily practice is
called evidence-based practice (Polit & Beck, 2017). The goal
of using evidence-based practice is to move away from
traditions and ritual by incorporating tested research evidence
that supports clinical practices (Polit & Beck, 2017).
Summary of Article Search
Based on the evidence hierarchy by Polit & Beck
(2017), and the levels of evidence presented in class I was able
to evaluate research articles (Walden University, 2018). When

looking for specific research for my topic, I searched for the
highest level of evidence. There are three types of research
which are: primary, synthesized or secondary, and others such
as expert opinions or practice questions (Polit & Beck, 2017).
My PICOT question is: In patients with acute pain in
the emergency department, what is the effect of Ketamine use
for the reduction of pain compared to opioid medications during
their ED visit? To begin the search, I used the keywords
Ketamine, analgesia, sedation and emergency medicine. Using
these words, I was able to find 408 results. I further limited my
search to ten years which yielded 297 results. Finally, I used
systematic reviews, meta-analysis and randomized control trials
(RCTs) for my final search narrowing the articles to 111. Upon
examination of the articles, I found the articles based on
systematic reviews, meta-analysis and RCTs provided detailed
research including abstracts, methods of trials, results,
discussion, limitations, and conclusion. Each of these sections
specifies the purpose of the study in detail.
Using this framework for literature review ensures
relevant research is used to answer evidence seeking questions.
Davies (2011) comments, “detailed knowledge of the
frameworks enables the searcher to refine strategies to suit each
particular situation rather than trying to fit a search situation to
a framework” (p. 79). By using a timeframe such as the past ten
years, it is easier to see the relevance of the information to
clinical practice today. An active literature search will yield
the most appropriate information for the question being posed.
References
Davies, K. S. (2011). Formulating the evidence-based practice
question: a review of the frameworks. Evidence Based Library
and Information Practice, 6(2), 75-80. Retrieved from
https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/vie
wFile/97418144
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating
and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.).

Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Walden University Library. (2018). Levels of evidence.
Retrieved from
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/c.php?g=80240&p=52322
REPLYQUOTEEMAIL AUTHOR
Bottom of Form
CHRISTIAN FAITH AND PSYCHOLOGY
1
7
Melina Costa
Liberty University
PSYC-420
Abstract
This paper will discuss psychology and Christianity: Two
disciplines that seem to be difficult subjects when discussing an

integrated approach. There are some people who believe that,
psychology has become one completely different subject than
Christianity and both at times have lost all connection with the
other. In addition, there are integrative models of disciplinary
that think psychology is strictly a science and Christianity is
solely based on faith and religion and the two cannot be
integrated together. After further review of evidence, it seems
that the integration approach for both disciplines are given by
God and that they both should be integrated to create a more
understanding of humanity. The focus of this paper is to
describe the Allies” model and how it relates to integrating two
disciplines; psychology and Christian faith. In addition, the
strengths and limitations of the Allies model will be discussed.
Also included are definitions of both subjects and views on
different approaches towards this matter. Scriptures will be
added that correspond with this approach, as well as, several
factors that lead to the integration process of both disciplines.
After further studies of the evidence of various disciplines, it
seems like the “Allies” model best fits the relationship between
psychology method and Christianity.
Integration between Christian faith and Psychology
Webster dictionary states that psychology is, “The science of
mind and behavior and the study of mind and behavior in
relation to a particular field of knowledge or activity”
(Merriam-Webster, 2017). Whereas, Christianity is defined, “A
religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth,
or its beliefs and practices” (Merriam-Webster, 2017). After
the evidence from various disciplines of study, it seems that a
person’s foundation is based on what we see and how we know.
This leads a person to believe that it is crucial for Christian
counseling to use both psychology and Christianity. There are

several different methods that psychological theory and science
use to gain knowledge. These are: “Logic,” “Empiricism,”
“Revelation,” and “Hermeneutic” (Entwistle, 2015. P. 97).
Whereas, experiments in psychology use deductive logic when
testing a hypothesis. Inductive reasoning uses experiments that
show a correlation by manipulating the variables. For instance,
we use science to find out if a statement is true or false. An
idea is a suggestion upon which an argument is based or from
which a conclusion is drawn. For example, Since the Bible
says, “All things are possible if we believe.” So, if a person
believes. Therefore, “All things are possible.” This scientific
logic is used to gain knowledge and can also be used in
Theology as well. I believe God is a faith God and we must
believe what he says is the truth.
Typically, two methods are used if a person wants to know
about the nature of God. The “Revelation” and “Hermeneutics”
methods are used when interpreting scriptures. Christian
worldviews use “Revelations” that come from God himself
(General) or from God’s divine word the Old and New
Testament scriptures (Special revelations) (Entwistle, 2015, P.
110). Sometimes, people understand and interpret the scriptures
the wrong way. Therefore, hermeneutics aids a person to
understand what scripture says, and not what they want to make
it say. Some limitations of these methods of knowing are that,
every person experiences limitations that affect our reasoning
capabilities, as well as, all human reasoning is imperfect and is
flawed. Scholars believe that Christian faith is its own
psychology and that Christianity is fundamentally psychological
in nature (Magnuson, 2017). Also, many people believe that all
truth is from God, whether it is from Christianity or science.
The Bible says that, “all scripture is God-breathed and is useful
for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every
good work” (2 Tim:3-16). Indeed, the Bible does speak the
truth and has everything necessary to fulfill a person’s Christian
walk, especially, Scriptures that direct us truthfully to him who

is the source of all goodness and mercy. However, after
everything it does has, it still does not mean that everything we
want to know can be found in the Bible, including everything
we want to know about human personality, sickness, disease and
other psychological issues (Johnson, 2010). Followers of Christ
are called to pursue knowledge in several areas, one of the most
vital being relationship with each other. And, since psychology
and Theology are both subject to God’s sovereignty and are
both God’s subjects. It is important to believe that, both are
significant and are a necessity of fellowship for growth in a
person’s Christian walk. Also remembering that God is
relational. And just like a marriage, instead of arguing and
having division amongst each other, he probably prefers and
enjoys seeing the two disciplines functioning harmonious
together as one.
A family member became ill and they sought out a
naturopathic doctor. He had a protocol that was staged in
various levels. The stages were to cleanse, replenish, and
restore the wound. However, he did use natural techniques but
on the other hand, he used scientific findings to discover the
cause. First, he drew blood and looked at it under a
microscope. Then, he took information from that and developed
a protocol to start the healing process. It was amazing at how
he used scientific reasoning and the healing power of the body
to address the whole person. His efforts of combining both
disciplines not only amazed everyone but, it started that person
on a journey of healthy positive attitudes towards their body,
and they gained knowledge on how the body heals naturally
(The way God intended). It also drew everyone closer to God,
as it humbly brought them to a proper relationship with him.
The Allies model does just that, it is a mixture of
psychology and Theology. They are two entities that work side
by side to achieve a common goal for a shared benefit. This
model believes that we are all subjects of one sovereign God
and that all truth is from him. This approach seeks to integrate
psychology and theology by discerning its underlying unity and

by using the truth for a Godly end (Magnuson, 2017). “The
Allies model is premised on the belief that God’s truths are
revealed in the book of God’s word (Scripture) and the book of
God’s works (creation)” (Entwistle, 2015, P. 247). It is like the
“Neutral model” in that it excepts both Gods works and words
as different domains but overall, they both give us knowledge
about human beings. However, the “Allies model” is different
than the “Neutral model,” because it believes they should be
integrated and not parallel to one another. Another approach
that the “Allies” model agrees with is the Rebuilders model.
The “Allies” model agrees that secular assumptions often taint
psychological theories and findings, but the they do not see the
entire field as in need of complete renovation (Entwistle, 2015,
P. 248). Jones describes Integrations as, “Our living out-in this
particular area-of the Lordship of Christ over all of existence by
our giving his special revelation-God’s true word-its
appropriate place of authority in determining our fundamental
beliefs about and practices toward all of reality and toward our
academic subject matter in particular” (Magnuson, 2017). The
“Allies” model has a few limitations and they are: Exactly what
assumptions establish a uniquely Christian approach to
psychology regarding faith, sin, creation and man? Another
common question is: How can we leave room for a divergence
of Christian opinion? Lastly, what are the nonnegotiable core
convictions that should guide our understanding (Magnuson,
2017). The “Allies” model believes that, Theology and science
both have a perspective on what it means to be human. Some
questions asked are: What is the purpose of human kind and are
humans the main reason for creation or just an afterthought?
Assumptions about how a person views human nature, are
shaped by our worldviews, epistemologies and by are
perspective on cosmology (Magnuson, 2017). Therefore, the
Allies model rejects the modernist view, and encourages
Christian counselors to use their worldviews as a starting point.
The “Allies” position seems strongest when counseling
others because, both disciplines are concerned for humanity.

They both give us a more complete and precise picture than
either could alone about the truths revealed by God’s work and
his words (Entwistle, 2015). An “Allies” approach is sovereign
over the contents of both disciplines as they discover the
wonders of his creation and his character as they are left with a
since of amazement and gratefulness.
Regarding Christian counseling, there are few guidelines to
follow. When a client chooses to see a Christian counselor,
they will have a choice whether they want the counselor to be
explicit or implicit with their counseling techniques. For
instance, the client will be given a questioneer regarding the
approach he or she would like the counselor to use. If they
choose an explicit approach they are open for prayer, scriptures,
and any other spiritual guidance. If they choose implicit they
are refusing prayer or opinions regarding religious affiliation.
Although a client can refuse spiritual guidance, the counselor
should be a mature Christian, realizing that spirituality is not
the same for everyone, so we should not force our ideas on
them. However, we can allow the Spirit to lead and guide the
session, allowing God to do what he wants to do in the client’s
life. Keep in mind that, there is not a check list for the client to
do to be a good Christian. If God wishes to change the client,
he will use the counselor, but in the end God will do the
miracle. Something to always remember as a servant of the
most-high God is that, we need to acknowledge Gods
sovereignty over all of life, respect everyone and to be his
faithful servant to the very end.
In conclusion, psychology has many various perspectives
not only because theorists differ about their assumptions, but
also because its subject matter is so complex. An appreciation
of this complexity leads to the conclusion that psychology’s
perspectives are more corresponding than incompatible
(Entwistle, 2013, P 155). Entwistle says that, psychology and
Theology complement each other and uses the instruments in an
orchestra as an example. Every instrument has their place and
together they make a beautiful melody. However, “Despite their

differences in their method, psychological and theological
perspectives on philosophical anthropology they have a
considerable degree of harmony” (Entwistle, 2013, P163). The
Bible explains that humans are the crowning achievement of
God, it also says that, his creation is very good. It is important
to believe this, but it is also worth knowing that nothing in life
is perfect because perfection was lost in the Garden of Eden.
However, the other side of this negative is to fully understand
and accept that life will never be perfect and neither will any
experience or relationship. This insinuation is that people will
always be pulled in opposing directions whether it be toward sin
by our culture, or toward righteousness by the Word of God.
However, our job is to determine the path to life through both
psychology and Theology. Which in the end, will bring peace
and understanding in human’s behaviors and why they do the
things they do.
References
Christianity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 6, 2017, from
https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/Christianity
Entwistle, D. N. (2015). Integrative approaches to Psychology
and Christianity: An introduction
to worldview issues, Philosophical foundations, and models of
integration (3rd).Eugene, Oregon: Cascade Books
Johnson, E. (2010). Psychology & Christianity: Five views.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press
Magnuson, C. (2017). Foundations: What we see and how we
know. Retreived from Liberty
University Presentation.
Psychology. (n.d.). Retrieved May 6, 2017, from
https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/psychology
Runni

ng head: PERSPECTIVE
ON INTEGR
ATION BETWEEN CHRISTIAN FAITH AND
PSYCHOLOGY
1
Integration
Between Christian Faith and Psychology
Melina Costa
Liberty University
PSYC
-
420
CHRISTIAN FAITH AND
PSYCHOLOGY

1
Melina Costa
Liberty University
PSYC-420

Integrating Faith and Psychology

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from toddr4

More from toddr4 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Integrating Faith and Psychology