a a I disagree that “psychology is just sinful human beings sinfully thinking about
other sinful human beings” (Entwistle, 2015, p. 13). The injection of the word “just”
transforms the statement, which I deem as accurate, into a dismissive
reductionism on the development and contributions of psychology. As humanity is
corrupted by sin, all theoretical constructs inherit the limitations and flaws of
human rationality. Yet for centuries, people have turned these ideas into reality, to
which societies have embraced and thrived off of through engineering, medicine,
technology, and more. Psychology is no exception to this, so despite its roots from
“sinful human beings”, it is nonetheless useful. In practice, it has provided
systematic methods to effectively counsel and care for people as a demonstration
of love and service.
a a a a a a a a a I hold an integrative worldview that closely aligns to the “Colonialist”
paradigm (Liberty University, 2021). There is a hierarchy to the sources of my
presuppositions as they are prioritized according to my perception of their veracity
and reliability. I give full authority to the truth of the Bible because it is from God
who possesses perfect knowledge and is unchanging. Keeping in mind the effects of
sin on human thinking and the constant changes to current scientific theories, I
cautiously augment theoretical understanding with psychology’s discoveries and
conclusions, given that the findings have been carefully tested, well reasoned,
honestly interpreted, and noncontradictory to the revelation of the Bible.
a a a a a a a a a a One of the criticisms of the “Colonialist” perspective is its propensity to
“cherry pick” ideas from psychology. There is neither complete agreement nor
uniformity of assumptions across leading ideas in this field, so one must make a
subjective selection within the study itself. As it is acceptable to adopt subsets of
concepts within the field, the same liberty should be extended to do so across
fields as long as the logical consistency remains intact after the incorporation of
these concepts. Thus, I do not see much validity to this criticism.
a a a a a a a a a a In conclusion, there is much to gain when supplementing theology with
knowledge from psychology in the “Colonialist” manner since the small overlap
between them is addressed by yielding authority to the Bible. As C.S. Lewis
comments, “psychoanalysis itself, apart from all the philosophical additions… is
not in the least contradictory to Christianity. Its technique overlaps with Christian
morality at some points…but it does not run the same course all the way, for the
two techniques are doing rather different things” (1952, p. 89). My integration is
not about one versus the other but rather focused on enrichment of understanding
in my journey for truth and meaning.
References
Entwistle, D. N. (2015). Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity: An
introduction to worldview issues, philosophical foundations, and models of
integration (3rd ed.). Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Lewis, C. S. (1952). Mere Christianity (Rev. ed.). HarperSanFrancisco.
Liberty University. (2021, August). Watch: Models for Interdisciplinary Integration
[Video]. Kaltura. https://canvas.liberty.edu/courses/117651/pages/watch-models-for-
interdisciplinary-integration?module_item_id=13237353
