Integration, Biblical Counseling, and Hermeneutics

2021 ◽  
pp. 009164712199242
Author(s):  
William L. Hathaway

Some have claimed that the integration project has adopted a lower view of Biblical inspiration. Yet, both Biblical counselors and evangelical integrationists typically hold to a high view of the authority of Scripture and may share the same adherence to Biblical inerrancy. This article argues that difference between how Biblical counseling and integration tends to engage Scripture in their counseling approaches is due less to their doctrines of Biblical authority than to their secondary hermeneutical and related theological views. A review of the author’s model of integration as a form of interpretative activity is provided. Implications for the sufficiency of Scripture doctrine, theological interpretation of Scripture, and integrative interpretative competency in reading Scripture are considered. The evangelical integration movement is fully compatible with a robust embrace of the historic sola scriptura view of Biblical authority but not the innovation represented by a solo scriptura view.

2021 ◽  
pp. 009164712199242
Author(s):  
William L. Hathaway

This article provides an introduction to the special issue on the sufficiency of Scripture. The special issue examines the biblicist approach to the sufficiency of Scripture and offers alternative understandings or examples of the how the sufficiency of Scripture relates to counseling. The introduction notes the issue includes contributions from integrationist, theological, Christian psychology, and Biblical counseling perspectives that share both a commitment to a high view of Biblical authority and an openness to resources for counseling offered by the contemporary mental health professions.


Author(s):  
Gabriel A. Desjardins

"The present article explores the typological contributions to the inerrancy debate of David S. Dockery, the Chancellor of Trinity International University. Resulting from controversies in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) during the 1970s and 80s, Dockery provided a valuable typological framework for identifying a spectrum of positions in the inerrancy debate. Dockery’s frameworks provide a helpful lens for understanding the complexity of inerrancy. Some positions are more conservative and deductivist, and other positions are more liberal and inductivist. These distinctions often create a barrier, a presuppositional divide, which is difficult to cross in a debate context. Dockery’s variations provide a means of at least understanding the divide and the positions that differ from one’s own. To that aim, I present Dockery’s variations as a vital component for all attempts at dialogue in the inerrancy debate. Keywords: evangelicalism, biblical inerrancy, David S. Dockery, biblical authority, hermeneutics "


Author(s):  
Michael C. Rea

Chapter 3 is divided into three sections. The first attempts to clarify what might be meant in calling a text authoritative. The second draws distinctions between different things that might be meant by saying that a text is truthful. The goal in both of these parts is to arrive at some general conclusions about texts, rather than specific conclusions about the Bible. Consequently, the chapter refrains from making assumptions about (e.g.) biblical interpretation or about the truth of particular biblical texts. Indeed, for much of the discussion, the Bible is not even directly in view. The third section draws out some of the implications of the discussions in the first two sections for the question of how textual authority and textual truth are connected to one another. It also comments on the significance of these conclusions for discussions about the relation between biblical authority and biblical inerrancy.


1982 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Guy

A summary of the author's approach to the integration of psychology und theology is followed by a response to Lawrence J. Crabb's article. “Biblical Authority and Christian Psychology,” which appeared in (he Volume 9, Number 4 issue of the Journal of Psychology and Theology. In this response it is suggested that biblical inerrancy does not necessarily result in inerrant theological formulations. It is also suggested that the Bible's unique purpose, as described by Crabb, may not require that theology be given authority over psychology. Finally, it is pointed out that what Crabb refers to as the proportional form of the Bible may not eliminate errors in conceptualizing its revealed truth. A brief discussion of the implications of this position follows, with special emphasis upon affirming the diversity which exists today among Christian mental health professionals.


2007 ◽  
pp. 76-85
Author(s):  
Yuliya Kostantynivna Nedzelska

The concept of "personality" is multifaceted and multifaceted in its basis, and therefore, in science has always been a great difficulty in determining its essence and content. For example, in Antiquity, "personality" as such, dissolves in the concept of "society". There is no "human" yet, but there is a genus, a community, a people that are only quantitatively formed from the mass of different individuals, governed and subordinated to any one idea (custom, tribal or ethno-religious) espoused by this society. In other words, in such societies, the individual was not unique and unique; his personality (we understand - personality) was limited to the general, the collective. This is confirmed by the Jewish and early Christian texts.


Author(s):  
Elena A. Kosovan ◽  

The paper provides a review on the joint Russian-Belarusian tutorial “History of the Great Patriotic War. Essays on the Shared History” published for the 75th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War. The tutorial was prepared within the project “Belarus and Russia. Essays on the Shared History”, implemented since 2018 and aimed at publishing a series of tutorials, which authors are major Russian and Belarusian historians, archivists, teachers, and other specialists in human sciences. From the author’s point of view, the joint work of specialists from the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus in such a format not only contributes to the deepening of humanitarian integration within the Union state, but also to the formation of a common educational system on the scale of the Commonwealth of Independent States or the Eurasian integration project (Eurasian Economic Union – EEU). The author emphasises the high research and educational significance of the publication reviewed when noting that the teaching of history in general and the history of the Second World War and the Great Patriotic War in particular in post-Soviet schools and institutes of higher education is complicated by many different issues and challenges (including external ones, which can be regarded as information aggression by various extra-regional actors).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document