Entwistle presents an argument in favor of integrating psychology and theology (2011). His argument starts with a definition of integration and a discussion on how to integrate. He differentiates between counselors who simply spew information vs. counselors who truly understand and apply spiritual concepts (p.32).

His argument starts with an historical perspective. He compares two ancient cities: Athens and Jerusalem. Athens represents reason, while Jerusalem represents spirituality (Entwistle, 2010). He argues, using the comparison of each city’s knowledge source, that “All truth is God’s truth” (Entwistle, 2010, p.13). Entwistle believes that both psychology and theology must be employed in a counseling setting because both are God’s truths. This thought process is the basis for the rest of the text.
In order to accept that all truth is God’s truth, and therefore accept that theology and psychology are both truths, Entwistle recommends examining our own worldview. Worldviews are not innate. The way in which we view our world is based on our experiences, education and culture. Our worldview greatly influences our ability to integrate the two disciplines (Entwistle, 2010). One must be secure in a solid base of spirituality before integration with psychology can occur. Again, Entwistle emphasizes God’s sovereign truth in both psychology and theology (2010). Entwistle then discusses five models of integration. Christ against Culture, or combatants, believe psychology has no place with theology. The Christ of Culture model presents a parallel universe of sorts. Spies use only parts of scripture that fit their needs, while Colonists use psychology with no research basis. The Christ and Culture in Paradox model separates science and faith, while the Christ above Culture model emphasizes neutrality and a complementary relationship between the two paradigms.