Philosophy, Phenomenology And Comparative Approachs

The book Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity second edition by David Entwistle introduces the text by explaining how psychology can go in a direction, and Christian theology approach can lead in a different direction. He continued by stating the need for understanding and studying human behavior because people come from different walks of life and different expectations. It leads us to form unique perspectives to help give us an understanding of the individuals you encounter. The Entwistle 's book addresses the relationship between Christianity and culture, Christianity and science, and Christianity and psychology.

David Entwistle’s (2010) book, Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: An Introduction to Worldview Issues, Philosophical Foundations, and Models of Integration, is an in-depth examination of the integration of psychology and Christian theology. Entwistle (2010) provides insightful information as he explores the history, worldview issues, and philosophical foundations behind the integration of these two disciplines. The fundamental substance of the text is the presupposition that “both psychology and Christian theology provide useful perspectives through which we can study and understand human behavior, and together they can give us a more complete and accurate picture of human nature and functioning” (p. 3). Composing

Today, the integration of Christianity and psychology is becoming more increasingly recognized. The integration begins with understanding the sinful state of the human condition as viewed from a biblical perspective. It continues with being faithful to Christian stewardship and not only embracing theology but also the psychology of human behavior (Entwistle, 2015). A more accurate and complete understanding of human nature and function is provided through the integration of Christianity and psychology. The Allies model confirms that Christian theology and psychology are both subject to God’s authority, and exemplifies the best integrative relationship between Christianity and psychology (Entwistle, 2015). This paper will discuss the integration of Christianity and psychology through the Allies model. It will define integration, review reasons and explanations of why Christianity and psychology should be integrated. As well as look at different methods of knowing, the Allies model concept, and the two books idea along with strengths and weaknesses of this model.

Although there are criticisms to this view it is important one observes and responds carefully. God designed humans as mental, emotional, social and spiritual beings. Each aspect interacts with one another and it uncommon to find a problem that is entirely spiritual. It is important for one to evaluate and review in order to find the necessary resolution to the issue. Psychology is just another tool that allows Christians to praise God with their minds, not only their hearts. God created humans and God gave birth to psychology. Reason, revelation and scientific methods are all methods to discover the truth of humans. This helps to establish a unity of God and therefore a unity of truth. Because of this, it allows one to integrate truths from different sources with different methods. Our conclusions or assumptions

Durkheim’s primary purpose in Elementary Forms of Religious Life was to explain how the most “primitive and simple religion known” showcased “the elementary notions of the basis of religion.” Durkheim focused on the moral effects of religion in social life and behavior amongst aboriginals in Australia. Weber focused on the effects of religion on the economics of life and the development of capitalism through the lens of religious development. Durkheim argued that ritualized rites condition individuals, making individuals feel part of the collective group and behave more favorable for the society. As a result of this feeling, religion functioned as the moral basis of the society and unified society on a fundamental level. Religion therefore gives the group a feeling of purpose and a cyclic cycle of belief begins. Religion may have power over society but society also has power over religion. Durkheim believed that all religious imagery is a force created by society, to provide moral regulation and cohesion. Religion became the unifying power and solved the problem of isolation. When social structures such as religion break down, the stabilizing influence of society on individual inclination is no longer effective and individuals are left to their own devices. No longer are individual desires managed by the principals of right and wrong. As a result, individuals are left without moral guidance paired with their fundamental need to want to accomplish goals. In this, we see that in Durkheim’s theory the individual understands their importance in the grand scheme of society and is in agreement to be second to society. Each individual has a purpose to further push the achievements of society and not solely themselves. The continuous changing of the individual does not imply a moral weakness but a

In David Entwistle’s book, Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity (2010), he explores two potentially divergent disciplines: psychology and theology. He then considers whether integration of these two disciplines is attainable, desirable, or necessary

“Truth” can vary between the Christian view of psychology and the secular psychological view causing tension but there can also be similarities. Depending on what the idea is, some parts of psychology can be accepted by Christianity, but some have to be rejected, while others can be redeemed

“Religion is a ritualized system of beliefs and practices related to things defined as sacred by an organized community of believers.” (Basirico et.al. 379). Religion is an important element in the society because it influences the way individuals act and think. It has shaped the relationship and bonding among families as well as influenced the decision made in economics and politics. Religion in general has contributed to shape a society and a government structure which will influence the way the individuals under certain governmental structure behave. Sociologists are interested in religion mainly because religious belief is heavily rooted in individuals’ lives and it helps sociologists to interpret human’s actions, expression, and

Conversely, according to (Turner 23-109), Durkheim points out that religion is part and parcel of the society and that each society has religion. Emile Durkheim’s purpose was to assess the connection between particular religions in various cultures, and finding a common cause. Basically, he wanted to comprehend the three major aspects of religion; that is the empirical together with the social and the spirituality components. His definition of religion is that; it is a joining arrangement of beliefs together with practices in relation to sacred things. According to him, it is religion that establishes the contemporary society as

Emile Durkheim was a taught by a teacher and to add was a sociologist. Durkheim singularly developed sociology and is credited for expanding to academic discipline, social structures, social relationships, and social institutions, in attempt to understand human nature. Later Durkheim took these and applied them into religion. Durkheim focused on the importance of the concept of the sacred" and its relevance to the welfare of the entire community.

In an application to religion, the followers of the religion worship the best attributes of society that they want to see in themselves. I find this analysis of religion fascinating. Religion is the most complex human social behavior. There does not seem to be any real function to the worship of other worldly beings or some sore of supernatural force. Through Durkheim, I am able to understand the function of these behaviors. This is the most important and valuable aspect of Durkheim’s work. While many scholars had focussed on the individual function of religion, Durkheim looked to the true nature of religion as a societal act. Religion, in most cases, is a communal and social behavior that serves as a way to bring human beings together for what they believe to be a purpose greater than themselves. Durkheim is able to shed light on the purpose of these communal behaviors and the importance of them to the tribal nature of humanity.

Durkheim and Weber both had distinct theories as they expressed and conceptualized religion and it’s impact to society in quite different ways however, they somehow overall parallel each others theories. Durkheim observed religion in the context of the integrated society and recognized its place in affecting the reasoning and conduct of society.Max Weber saw religion as how it fortifies other social organizations. Weber suspected that the religious belief setup contributed a social system that SUPPORTED the improvement of other social organizations, like the economy. Weber is also addressing the shrinking hold of religion in modern society.”(Veugelers) This notionally theorizes that both philosophers acknowledge the importance of religion as influencing and supporting society. As indicated by Durkheim, people consider religion to be adding to the wellbeing

We all have some experience with religion. Whether our parents are religious, our own religious views, or others who try and convert you to a religion, we have all come in contact with a religion. But what do sociology and religion have to do with each other? The answer to this question is that religion meets sociology in the affects that it has on an individual or society (Schaefer, Richard T, 2009, pg 323).

Because Durkheim’s main interest was the ways in which society is bound together, he investigated the role and the origin of religion in various communities. He believed that a simpler society has a simpler religion. Durkheim claims that, “a religion as closely connected to a social system surpassing all others in simplicity may well be regarded as the most elementary religion we can possibly know” (Ritzer, 91). For instance Durkheim argues that totemism a religious system in which animal figures are regarded as sacred is among the simplest religious forms in the world. The totemic animal, Durkheim believed, was the original focus of religious activity because it was the emblem for a social group, “the clan” (Ritzer, 91). He thought the model for the relationships between people and the supernatural was similar to the relationship between individuals and the community. For him the function of religion was to make people willing to put the interests of society ahead of their desires. He also believed religion is an important part of society and that the functions of religion are to maintain the equilibrium in the society.

In order to truly assess the legitimacy of Durkheim 's functionalist definition of religion, his notion of Social facts, (upon which his theory is constructed) must be examined. Durkheim advocated that amongst the reputable fields of biology, psychology and history, Sociology also warranted a specific focus. It was, for him: a 'sui generis ' "something that had to be explained on its own terms". Sociology was not, for Durkheim, a field that should be susceptible to overlapping subject matter: he believed that there existed concrete social facts recognisable "by the power of eternal coercion" which they are "capable of exercising over individuals". This claim is an imperative one because it is the platform on which his functionalist