Integrative Approaches To Psychology And Christianity: 4-Mat Review

1238 Words5 Pages
Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: 4-MAT Review Summary This paper will review Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: An Introduction to Worldview Issues, Philosophical Foundations, and Models of Integration by David Entwistle. The book introduces the foundation for integration by exploring the historical tension that existed between faith and science. Historically, these two realms have viewed as enemies with tensions growing stronger since the Enlightenment. Throughout history the disciplines of psychology and theology have often been used in tandem to aid society, cure individuals, and advance knowledge to improve delivery of services. When looking at integration of psychology and theology,…show more content…
These models provide an important and informative framework for understanding how different individuals approach integration. Enemies are those who believe that integration is not possible. This is an antagonistic model that sees these two disciplines as an either/or position. The Spies model is also antagonistic, yet has the goal of appropriating whatever might be useful from psychology and theology that would help people. Spies come from both sides with similar goals for the information they spy out. Colonialists on the other hand seek to make psychology subservient to theology. They “…[place] the book of God’s Word over the book of God’s Works…” (Entwistle, 2010, p. 145). Neutral models isolate the disciplines, however at times allow for the interaction of select findings. In essence, the two disciplines are autonomous. Finally, the Allies model serves to properly integrate the two by the proper admixture of the book of God’s Works and the book of God’s Word. This model sees that “all truth is God’s truth” and understands that each discipline operates under God’s sovereignty. Those who seek to apply the Allies model to their life must develop competency in both disciplines, and learn how to properly view the two books (Entwistle,…show more content…
I graduated with my M.A. in Theological Studies, worked as an Asst. Pastor, and worked for an apologetics ministry as an email responder and writer. I was arrogant, prideful, and only those who agreed with me were right. My theology had been developed over the two years I had studied, and I found myself committed to Reformed theology. One of my idols was John MacArthur. If MacArthur said it, well, it must be right. How can “Johnny Mac” be wrong? I was a bit of a sycophant. I came to the Enemies chapter and could not believe what I was reading. Here was John MacArthur classified as one who holds to an enemies model, may it never be! I immediately texted my friend who knew me quite well that, for once, I disagreed with the great John MacArthur. Entwistle’s examination of MacArthur’s lack of exegesis on certain passages was shocking. I could see how MacArthur forced passages to mean what he wanted them to mean, and I suspected that MacArthur himself knew this. Leading up to this chapter, I could see how this book had begun to shape my thinking in a different way. A few years ago, I would have dismissed Entwistle’s argument entirely. Now, critical thinking skills engaged, I saw where MacArthur’s presuppositions had clouded his
Open Document