Entwistle summary

.docx

School

Regent University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

HSC-530

Subject

Psychology

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

14

Uploaded by sopchak66

Report
ENTWISTLE SUMMARY 1 . ENTWISTLE INTEGRATION SUMMARY CHAPTERS 8-11 Karen Sopchak School of Behavioral Science, Liberty University Author Note Karen Sopchak I have no known conflict of interest to disclose. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Karen Sopchak Email: Ksopchak@liberty.edu
ENTWISTLE SUMMARY 2 ENTWISTLE INTEGRATION SUMMARY CHAPTERS 8-11 Summary Entwistle focuses on varying aspects within his book  Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity; however , the chapters reviewed in the following highlight his six models of the relationship between theology and psychology. Reductionism is a term that Entwistle uses throughout his work, referring to the idea that complex phenomena can be explained by reducing them to their essential components or simplifying them. Regarding psychology, reductionism suggests that human behavior may be understood by breaking it down into its simplest elements and forms, such as genetics, brain chemistry, biology, and environmental factors. Following earlier outlines from Brian Eck, Carter, and Narramore, Entwistle builds upon their ideologies and constructs the six models discussed in the following paper: Enemies, Spies, Colonists, Rebuilders, Neutral Parties, and Allies (Entwistle, 2015). By using a spectacularly insightful analogy, the author parallels the concept of his model to the similarities and differences of a traveling train. Entwistle informs the reader, “It is not enough to know how a train works; you also want to know where the train is going.” (Entwistle, 2015, p. 168). He writes that even though trains work in the same manner and have many similarities, the final destination is different. While his six models will appear to have similar concepts, the  telos,  or end, is very different. The first model explored is the enemy model. As the name would indicate, this model assumes that psychology and theology are diametrically opposed, with no common ground. This model rose in popularity during the Enlightenment period, as Enlightenment thinkers moved away from the dominant ecclesiastical authority of the Middle Ages. Reason and logic were considered the quintessential sources of knowledge, placing value on individuality, liberty, and
ENTWISTLE SUMMARY 3 the right to self-determination (Entwistle, 2015). The perspective of the Enemies model takes a binary approach to understanding the psychology and theology of human beings. Those who adhere to the enemy model tend to adopt either a mechanistic or spiritual view, but not simultaneously. Proponents of the Enemies model typically employ methods that separate and isolate the elements between Christianity and science or Christianity and psychology (Entwistle 2015). One might disregard insights from the Bible or scientific observations, God’s word, and God’s works. This model branches into two forms: secular Combatants and Christian combatants. Secular combatants are devoted to the psychology field and uphold a worldview that counters religious beliefs. Seculars align with a modernist ideology that generally rejects authority, encompassing religious authority. Sigmund Freud and Albert Ellis could be umbrellaed under the secular combatant model due to their atheist views. The telos of the secular belief is to elevate the independent use of human reason (Entwistle, 2015). In contrast, Christian combatants exhibit suspicion toward human reasoning and prioritize safeguarding religious authority and its teachings from being influenced or distorted by human influence. Rene Descartes and Juan Luis Vives are two exemplary examples of combatants. The next model that Entwistle introduces the reader to is Spies. According to Entwistle, religious systems inherently include psychological elements. When people become entwined in communities of faith, social connections and bonds are made. Often, people find comfort through prayer and faith, and these beliefs and practices have significant psychological benefits. The potential psychological benefits of religious beliefs and practices are significant and attract considerable attention. Typically, these benefits are secondary outcomes of the religious system. At this point, religion becomes a tool for psychological benefits rather than
ENTWISTLE SUMMARY 4 solely a platform for doctrinal teachings. This approach can be likened to espionage, where people either reject or downplay many religious doctrines to emphasize how belief aids coping or provides happiness and prosperity (Entwistle, 2015,). Entwistle further explains this model by separating it into foreign and domestic spies. Foreign spies are “psychologists that pragmatically explore religious elements for psychological benefits” (Entwistle, 2015. P. 173). Domestic spies are “people who follow a diluted religious practice, emphasizing its psychological advantages” (Entwistle, 2015, p.173). Foreign and domestic spies prioritize uncovering the psychological aspects of religion over strict theological adherence. This model focuses on viewing religion as a source of psychological insight. It is not concerned with adhering to traditional religious beliefs, as it sees religion as a collection of valuable psychological truths. The concept of the colonist model stems from a historical context dominated by descendants of white Europeans. Emphasizing individualism and exalting the self over the community, believers in this model perpetuate myths contrary to indigenous psychology and view human nature as having fallen due to original sin or egotistical animal instincts (Entwistle, 2015,). The Colonist’s model believes the individual self is central and responsible for success and failure, and a hierarchy must be sustained to maintain order. Colonists will use psychology while adhering to conservative Christian theology. Followers see science as valuable but foreign in their theological bubble, prioritizing alignment over strict psychological adherence. This is a pragmatic approach, where psychology serves as a tool within the framework of the Christian religion. Entwistle’s colonist model is a perspective where Christianity represents the true revelation of God regarding human nature and salvation. When accurately understanding human
ENTWISTLE SUMMARY 5 issues, psychology can serve as a tool for what scripture conveys. Colonists possess a surface- level knowledge of psychological findings and do not actively explore the correlation between science and theology or how to express truth or mutually contribute an understanding of human behavior. The goal is to appropriate psychological methods that align with Christian views without delving into the more profound findings of psychology. In 587 BCE, after a 30-month siege, King Nebuchadnezzar II conquered Jerusalem. The Babylonians systematically destroyed the city and Solomon’s Temple. Years later, Artaxerxes allowed citizens to return to their homeland. Finding it in ruins and taken over by pagan practices, the returning citizens were forced to rebuild and reinstitute their religion (Entwistle, 2015,). Entwistle compares this story to the Rebuilders, the fourth model in his book. Rebuilders view psychology as a modality that belongs to God. However, they also believe modern psychology is at risk of slipping into idolatry. The risk lies in the heavy reliance on empiricism as the only means to discover truth, the rejection of divine revelations, and the alignment with modern views on human morality and self-determination (Entwistle, 2015,). The Rebuilders wish to establish a new psychology, incorporating God’s proclamations as the foundation. The neutral party allows psychological theories to stand on their merit. In strict separation, psychology and theology remain entirely separate. The goal is to prevent contamination between the two disciplines and maintain disciplinary independence. Theology and psychology are viewed as distinct perspectives, each offering ideologies without intersecting (Entwistle, 2015). Another version of the neutral parties model respects the independence of psychology and theology but permits comparing and correlating their separate findings. This approach allows aligning certain psychological and spiritual concepts without modifying the data
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help