Authors: Lawson, David A.; Wilcox, David A.

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(3), Fall 2005, pp. 240-246

Abstract:

This article reviews and critiques the article, A Reformed Evangelical Approach to Developmental Psychology and the Bible, by Ebenezer A. de Oliveira. Although the authors agree with de Oliveira’s intent of clarifying definitions in integration literature, the authors contend that de Oliveira ultimately failed in his attempt and violated the same principles he attempted to correct. The authors attempt to clarify (1) de Oliveira’s critique of integration, (2) challenge his Reformed position within the Christian community and (3) expose the fallacies de Oliveira employed to defend his positions.

Author: de Oliveira, Ebenézer A.

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(3), Fall 2005, pp. 247-253

Abstract:

In this rejoinder to Lawson and Wilcox, I first summarize my 2004 article, “A Reformed Evangelical Approach to Developmental Psychology and the Bible,” and then I clarify five points raised by my interactants and demonstrate that we agree in that there is no hierarchy in sources, truths, or disciplines. What set us apart is my support to the Reformed view of Scripture as standing above all other media for organizing, expounding, and disseminating ideas on God and His creation (i.e., hierarchical view), and also my caution towards natural reason as a necessary and sufficient basis for integration, once one assumes neatly demarcated data sets (e.g., Bible, creation) and respective fields of study (e.g., theology, psychology).

Authors: Maier, Bryan N.; Glass, John H.

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(1), Spr 2005, pp. 46-50

Abstract:

This article critiques Beck’s (2003) assertion that the current integration enterprise is “out of balance.” Five concerns with Beck’s charge are identified. First, Beck does not support his claim that balance was the initial goal of the integration enterprise. Second, a clear definition of balance is not given. Third, without clear definitions, the charge of being unbalanced becomes very subjective. Fourth, views not favored by Beck are treated superficially and finally, Beck commits some of the same errors that he warns others about.

Author: Beck, James R.

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(1), Spri 2005, pp. 51-55

Abstract:

In reply to Maier and Glass in this issue of JPC, the author summarizes his original article (The Integration of Psychology and Theology: An Enterprise out of Balance [Beck, 2003]), interacts with issues raised by Maier and Glass, and suggests a way in which changes in terminology could help facilitate conversation among adherents of the various approaches now extant in the integrative enterprise.