<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CRI &#187; Tony Robbins</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.equip.org/tag/tony-robbins/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.equip.org</link>
	<description>Equip, Christian Research Institute, The Bible Answer Man, Equip App</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 21:59:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Personal Power or Harmful Hedonism?</title>
		<link>http://www.equip.org/articles/personal-power-or-harmful-hedonism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.equip.org/articles/personal-power-or-harmful-hedonism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christian Research Institute</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christian Living]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Velarde]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tony Robbins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unlimited Power]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simonwebdesign.com/cri/beta/christian-living/personal-power-or-harmful-hedonism/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Trusting experts blindly is not well-advised. Don&#8217;t blindly accept everything I say, either!&#8221;1 &#8211; Anthony Robbins Standing at six feet, seven inches, Anthony &#8220;Tony&#8221; Robbins is an imposing figure. His overly large hands and feet, the result of a medical condition, make him appear somewhat awkward. But as he takes the stage, it is clear [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>&ldquo;Trusting experts blindly is not well-advised. Don&rsquo;t blindly accept everything I say, either!&rdquo;<sup>1</sup> </em></p>
<p><em>&ndash; Anthony Robbins </em></p>
<p>Standing  at six feet, seven inches, Anthony &ldquo;Tony&rdquo; Robbins is an imposing  figure. His overly large hands and feet, the result of a medical  condition, make him appear somewhat awkward. But as he takes the stage,  it is clear he is a confident individual, speaking clearly and with  conviction. Robbins talks of harnessing personal power, our innate  ability to do nearly everything we would like to do, and offers eager  audiences around the world simple steps for achieving unparalleled  success. A bestselling author and popular motivational speaker, Tony  Robbins began his rise to fame while still in his twenties. His first  book, <em>Unlimited Power: The New Science of Personal Achievement<sup>2</sup></em> (1986), further propelled his success, as did <em>Awaken the Giant Within</em> (1991). Grabbing media attention by including firewalking in his  seminars, Robbins soon turned his speaking engagements into a media  empire, adding motion picture appearances to his portfolio as well.<sup>3</sup> In addition, NBC announced early in 2009 a new television series, <em>Breakthrough with Tony Robbins</em>,  while his seemingly endless speaking schedule takes him from his  private Namale Resort in Fiji to Canada, Rome, Singapore, the United  States, and elsewhere. Conference titles include &ldquo;Date with Destiny,&rdquo;  &ldquo;Life Mastery,&rdquo; &ldquo;Wealth Mastery,&rdquo; &ldquo;Leadership Mastery,&rdquo; and &ldquo;Unleash the  Power Within.&rdquo; Robbins also is well represented online, where he has  more than a million followers on microblogging site Twitter4 as well as  his own website, www.tonyrobbins.com, where a variety of related  products and services are sold. </p>
<p>  Nevertheless, Robbins has faced his share of controversy. In 2001 his  fifteen-year marriage ended in divorce, with Robbins remarrying later  that same year. Some critics pointed to his divorce as an example of the  failure of his teachings, noting, for instance, that at the time of the  divorce Robbins was leading workshops on the subject of healthy  relationships. </p>
<p>  Another controversy involved accusations by financial &ldquo;guru&rdquo; Wade Cook,  who claimed that Robbins used material from Cook&rsquo;s book <em>Wall Street Money Machine</em>,  including specific terms and phrases, without permission. Cook filed a  lawsuit and, in 1998, was awarded more than $650,000 in damages. </p>
<p>  The National Council against Health Fraud, a private health agency, has  also questioned some of the health and dietary advice offered by  Robbins including dubious breathing techniques, &ldquo;misinformation&rdquo; about  combining foods, and more, noting, &ldquo;Robbins reveals his ignorance about  physiology as he misinforms readers about how the body rids itself of  metabolic wastes.&rdquo;<sup>5</sup> </p>
<p>  What is the substance behind the teachings that draw throngs of adoring  crowds to Anthony Robbins&rsquo;s events? Are his ideas compatible with  biblical theology? Are they logical and coherent? The remainder of this  article will address two key foundations of his ideas (pain/pleasure and  neurolinguistic techniques), as well as his views of truth, theism, and  his firewalking practices. </p>
<p><strong>IF IT FEELS GOOD&hellip;</strong> </p>
<p>The  two foundational concepts that form the basis of the ideas of Anthony  Robbins are his views on pain and pleasure and his ideas in relation to  neurology. We&rsquo;ll begin our assessment of his teachings by exploring his  views of pain and pleasure. </p>
<p>  Robbins is quite clear about his belief that success in life is  determined by our views of pain and pleasure. Indeed, changing our  perspective of pain and pleasure, according to Robbins, is key to  succeeding in life. Calling it &ldquo;the force that shapes your life,&rdquo;<sup>6</sup> Robbins explains, &ldquo;There is undoubtedly a single driving force behind  all human behavior. This force impacts every facet of our lives, from  our relationships to our finances to our bodies and brains. What is this  force that is controlling you even now and will continue to do so for  the rest of your life? <strong>PAIN and PLEASURE!</strong> <em>Everything you and I do, we do either out of our need to avoid pain or our desire to gain pleasure&rdquo;</em> (emphases in original).<sup>7</sup> He adds, &ldquo;The secret of success is learning how to use pain and  pleasure instead of having pain and pleasure use you. If you can do  that, you&rsquo;re in control of your life. If you don&rsquo;t, life controls you.&rdquo;<sup>8</sup> </p>
<p>  Are these claims true? Is everything we do motivated by pain and  pleasure? Robbins offers Donald Trump and Mother Teresa as examples of  being motivated by pain and pleasure. Despite their obvious differences  in goals&mdash; with Trump seeking accumulation of wealth and worldly success,  and Mother Teresa having sought to help the poor&mdash;Robbins claims they  are both, in fact, motivated by pain and pleasure.<sup>9</sup> However,  Robbins fails to factor into his assessment that in the case of a  Christian living biblically, motivations are not based on responses to  pain or pleasure but are instead rooted in God&rsquo;s love. As a result,  multitudes of Christians have endured pain and hardship for the sake of  Christ, rather than avoiding pain in order to seek pleasure. The gospel  of Christ has a way of turning our attempts at interpreting human  behavior upside down. </p>
<p>  Robbins&rsquo;s descriptions of pain and pleasure actually have much in  common with hedonism. Hedonism, as used here, does not refer to the  casual term associated with an exclusive emphasis on pleasure through  self-indulgence or even debauchery. Rather, as classically defined in  philosophy, hedonism is broadly concerned with maximizing pleasure and  minimizing pain. In a sense, this form of hedonism is <em>eudaemonistic</em>,  meaning that it views happiness, in this case resulting from pleasure,  as the highest good. Pleasure in hedonistic thinking is always good,  while pain is always bad. </p>
<p> What may be termed <em>psychological hedonism</em> places the emphasis on human motivations in seeking pleasure, with some  forms indicating that our foundational drive is to seek pleasure. <em>Ethical hedonism</em>,  however, while it may involve elements of psychological hedonism, is  more concerned with pleasure seeking as being morally right. </p>
<p> Hedonism has been criticized for various reasons. One interesting critique is known as &ldquo;the <em>hedonistic paradox</em>,  which may be put as follows. Many of the deepest and best pleasures of  life (of love, of child rearing, of work) seem to come most often to  those who are engaging in an activity for reasons other than pleasure  seeking. Hence, not only is it dubious that we always in fact seek (or  value only) pleasure, but also dubious that the best way to achieve  pleasure is to seek it.&rdquo;<sup>10</sup> In other words, at times  significant pleasures in life involve pain, but we do not avoid these  pains, and, in fact, often pursue them. </p>
<p>  Within the Christian worldview, Christ is our highest good and our best  pursuit, not our own pleasure. Christ told his followers not to focus  on themselves, but to deny themselves, take up their cross, and follow  Him (<a class="lbsBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Matt.%2016.24" target="_blank">Matt. 16:24</a>; <a class="lbsBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Mark%208.34" target="_blank">Mark 8:34</a>; <a class="lbsBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Luke%209.23" target="_blank">Luke 9:23</a>). &ldquo;Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it&rdquo; (<a class="lbsBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Matt.%2010.39" target="_blank">Matt. 10:39</a>).  This hardly sounds self-centered or in line with the avoidance of pain  and the seeking of pleasure. Christ did not promise &ldquo;success,&rdquo; as the  world defines it, but hardship that is worth enduring. </p>
<p><strong>NEUROLOGICAL NONSENSE?</strong> </p>
<p>Combined  with his views of pain and pleasure, Robbins&rsquo;s other key belief has its  roots in neurolinguistic programming (NLP). Although he now prefers the  term neuroassociative conditioning (NAC), for all intents and purposes  the terms are synonymous.<sup>11</sup> According to Robbins, it is not  enough merely to understand his perspective on pain and pleasure: &ldquo;If  you and I want to change our behavior, there is only one effective way  to do it: we must link unbearable and immediate sensations of pain to  our old behavior, and incredible and immediate sensations of pleasure to  a new one.&rdquo;<sup>12</sup> The intent is to be able to create nearly  instant change in any area of life, thus creating a changed &ldquo;state,&rdquo; as  Robbins calls it. Consequently, a problem that may normally take much  time and effort to address, such as a phobia, can supposedly be cured  rapidly by applying Robbins&rsquo;s NLP-inspired techniques. Robbins, in fact,  claims that &ldquo;all changes are created in a moment,&rdquo;<sup>13</sup> misquoting <a class="lbsBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/1%20Corinthians%2015.51%E2%80%9352" target="_blank">1 Corinthians 15:51&ndash;52</a> in the process (&ldquo;Behold, I show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep,  but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye  &hellip;&rdquo;).<sup>14</sup> </p>
<p>  Robbins, however, does not like the term &ldquo;programming&rdquo; in NLP, finding  it misleading: &ldquo;It suggests that you could come to me, I would program  you, and then everything would be fine.&rdquo;<sup>15</sup> Not wanting to  repeat the same &ldquo;mistake&rdquo; made by other motivational teachers, resulting  in minimizing personal responsibility and placing all the success on  the technique itself (as well as the teacher), Robbins opted to drop the  term &ldquo;programming&rdquo;: &ldquo;As a result of this new perspective, I decided to  change the metaphor for what I do. I stopped using the word  &lsquo;programming&rsquo; because while I continue to use many NLP techniques, I  believe it&rsquo;s inaccurate. A better metaphor for long-term change is  conditioning&rdquo; (emphasis in original).<sup>16</sup> </p>
<p>  How can NAC help change behavior and thus lead to success? NAC is  primarily concerned with perceived links between neurology, language,  body language, and resulting behavior. Prior to dropping the term  &ldquo;programming&rdquo; in favor of &ldquo;conditioning,&rdquo; Robbins defined NLP as  follows: &ldquo;NLP is the study of how language, both verbal and nonverbal,  affects our nervous system. Our ability to do anything in life is based  upon our ability to direct our own nervous system.&rdquo;<sup>17</sup> Modeling, a technique of NLP and NAC, is important. By emulating or  modeling someone successful, claims Robbins, we begin to condition  ourselves to succeed.<sup>18</sup> Changing &ldquo;states&rdquo; is also significant, with the goal being to foster empowering sates rather than disempowering states. </p>
<p>  There are a number of questions one might ask about NAC. Is it true  that, as quoted earlier, &ldquo;there is only one effective way to&rdquo; change our  behavior and that way is via the techniques of NAC? Certainly there are  other ways to change behavior. Robbins&rsquo;s hyperbole aside, what he  probably is suggesting is that the fastest and best way involves the  techniques he offers. But there are a number of competing theories of  human behavior. To state that his method is the best is somewhat na&iuml;ve  given the history of human psychology and the fact that techniques such  as NLP, which inspired NAC, have only been around some thirty years. </p>
<p>  Moreover, for the Christian, changing behavior is not about  reprogramming or reconditioning our neurology via language, but about  reliance on Christ and the indwelling Holy Spirit. Scripturally  speaking, we can do everything through Christ and the strength he  provides (<a class="lbsBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Phil.%204.13" target="_blank">Phil. 4:13</a>).  Robbins&rsquo;s approach also leaves out the concept of human sin and  depravity. If indeed we are sinful, fallen beings, then much of what we  think we want to succeed at in life is probably skewed by this  deleterious condition, meaning that much of the time, influenced by sin,  most of us don&rsquo;t really know what is best for us. Robbins leaves this  out of his technique entirely. </p>
<p>  In addition, the concepts promoted by Robbins are essentially presented  as quick fixes for some deep issues. Can we just snap our mental  fingers, as Robbins claims, and instantly change our behavior?  Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, which appears to be  seriously lacking in reference to neurolinguistic/neuroassociative  techniques. Furthermore, there are some &ldquo;states&rdquo; that we are better off  not changing instantly. For instance, God may wish to use pain, guilt,  remorse, and other circumstances in order to help us mature as  individuals, lead us to Him, and, in the long run, make us better people  rather than desiring us immediately to vanquish such feelings. </p>
<p>  Finally, the neurolinguistic/neuroassociative techniques Robbins  presents are suspect. As Stephen Barrett, longtime critic of  questionable alternative medicine practices, has written, &ldquo;Scientific  studies have demonstrated no correlation between eye movements and  visual imagery, reported thoughts, or language choices. A National  Research Council committee has found no significant evidence that NLP&rsquo;s  theories are sound or that its practices are effective.&rdquo;<sup>19</sup> </p>
<p><strong>TONY&rsquo;S TRUTH</strong> </p>
<p>  In addition to pleasure-pain theory and neurology, Robbins also makes  comments that touch on the philosophical. Specifically, some of his  remarks addressing belief systems relate to truth and epistemology  (knowledge). In <em>Awaken the Giant Within</em>, Robbins writes, &ldquo;The  question is: which one of these beliefs is the true belief? The answer  is that it doesn&rsquo;t matter which one is true. What matters is which one  is most <em>empowering</em>.&rdquo;<sup>20</sup> In other words, at least as  far as Robbins&rsquo;s template for success is concerned, truth is irrelevant.  Followed to its logical conclusions, then, if someone finds pantheism  empowering, then that&rsquo;s just fine. If another individual finds atheism  empowering, then that&rsquo;s fine, too. </p>
<p>  This sort of approach to truth results in logical contra dictions. The  pantheist claims that everything is divine, while the atheist denies  that anything divine exists. Yet within the epistemological framework  that Robbins has established, such contradictions don&rsquo;t really matter.  While this sort of ideology may help Robbins reach broader audiences  with his message, allowing him to avoid criticizing or excluding his  audience&rsquo;s beliefs or traditions, it is epistemologically untenable. </p>
<p>  How then do we fit truth into the ideas Robbins presents? He adds, &ldquo;We  can all find someone to back up our belief and make us feel more solid  about it. This is how human beings are able to rationalize. The key  question, again, is whether this belief is strengthening or weakening  us, empowering or disempowering us on a daily basis.&rdquo;<sup>21</sup> </p>
<p>  There are a number of problems with such a perspective. Who is to say  whether a particular belief is empowering, disempowering, strengthening,  weakening or not? The ideology lacks a foundation, not only in the area  of knowledge, but also in the area of ethics. </p>
<p>  Moreover, what if a terrorist were to adopt the advice offered by  Robbins? The implication is that the belief system of the terrorist,  regardless of whether it is true, is acceptable to follow to its  conclusions so long as the terrorist &ldquo;feels&rdquo; empowered. Granted, Robbins  nowhere endorses terrorism, but the concern here is the rational  implications and consequences of ideas. Given what Robbins has said  about truth, belief systems, and empowerment, there is nothing to stop a  terrorist from being empowered to continue to terrorize. </p>
<p>  Another consequence of Robbins&rsquo;s view of truth is the question and  significance of truth itself. Robbins summarily casts truth aside in  favor of empowerment. Rather than seeking to understand the nature of  truth and seeking to determine whether a particular truth claim  corresponds to reality or not, Robbins simply casts the matter aside and  moves on. But truth is not so easily ignored. Robbins&rsquo;s view of truth  is only valid if truth actually does not matter. Truth, however, does  matter, particularly in relation to explanations of reality. Indeed, the  consequences of the truth or falsity of worldviews such as theism,  atheism, and pantheism are metaphysically monumental. To ignore truth  claims of this magnitude and simply say, &ldquo;Whatever works for you is  fine,&rdquo; is to cast aside human intellect in favor of what may very well  be temporal pleasures that could result in dire eternal consequences. </p>
<p>From  a Christian point of view, Robbins&rsquo;s ideas in the area of truth could  very well lead people eternally astray. The truth claim, &ldquo;Jesus is  Lord,&rdquo; is either true or it is not. Whether it is &ldquo;empowering&rdquo; or not is  irrelevant to the question regarding its truth or falsity. </p>
<p><strong>SOFT THEISM</strong> </p>
<p>This leads to another question regarding Robbins. Is he a theist? </p>
<p>  Before addressing this question, it will be beneficial to offer a brief  definition of theism. In its most rudimentary sense, theism holds that a  personal God exists. Traditionally, theists also tend to hold that this  personal God created the universe, sustains it, is involved in it, and  is a loving being. By definition, theism rules out competing worldviews  such as atheism that denies that God exists, pantheism that denies that  anything else exists besides God, and deism that affirms that God exists  but denies that He is actively present in His creation or in human  affairs. </p>
<p>  Robbins does appear to be a theist, but a sort of &ldquo;soft&rdquo; theist who  avoids getting into specifics. For instance, Robbins refers to &ldquo;God&rdquo; on  occasion, as well as to a &ldquo;Creator,&rdquo; and acknowledges the power of  prayer, but not in any detail. Given his views on truth, as addressed  earlier, it would seem that if indeed Robbins is a theist he is of the  mindset that theism is not supremely important in one&rsquo;s worldview. If it  were, Robbins would not be so cavalier about the question of truth. </p>
<p>  Given the underpinnings of his teachings, asking whether Robbins is a  Christian seems an odd inquiry. However, given the soft theism mentioned  by Robbins, it is perhaps a valid one. While no one is in a position to  judge the salvation of another person, we are in a position to judge  teachings. Although there appears to be an undercurrent of theism in  what Robbins believes, it is indeed vague. Moreover, his teachings are  clearly at odds with biblical Christianity. </p>
<p>  In addition, while Robbins quotes from a variety of sources, including  the Bible, he also cites Buddhism, other religions and religious  figures, and, on a number of occasions, American transcendentalist  writers such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, and Walt  Whitman. Merely quoting such sources does not suggest explicit  endorsement of everything they believed, but, when taken as a whole, the  citation of non-Christian sources does not bode well for the exclusive  claims of Christ and Christianity. </p>
<p> For instance, when Robbins praises <em>A Course in Miracles</em>,<sup>22</sup> a book that is overtly at odds with the Christian message, it&rsquo;s  difficult, if not impossible, to fit such citations into the framework  of theism, much less Christian theism. </p>
<p>  Given the lack of emphasis on truth and the variety of citations from  contradictory religious sources, Robbins appears to be a religious  pluralist. This means that he is not concerned with the truth or falsity  of any particular religion, but instead seems to view all religions as  valid so long as they &ldquo;empower&rdquo; and &ldquo;strengthen&rdquo; the adherent. </p>
<p>  Robbins&rsquo;s primary emphasis, however, comes across as sympathetic to  Eastern religious ideas. Specific phrases and ideas are also reminiscent  of &ldquo;New Age&rdquo; spirituality such as when he writes, &ldquo;Your reality is the  reality you create.&rdquo;<sup>23</sup> One of his Twitter posts quotes Taoist  philosopher Lao-tzu: &ldquo;There are many paths to enlightenment. Be sure to  take one with a heart.&rdquo;<sup>24</sup> </p>
<p>  Ron Rhodes has written of Robbins: &ldquo;In his books he approvingly cites  Eastern and New Age types like Marianne Williamson, Bernie Siegel,  Deepak Chopra, Andrew Weil, Confucius, Mahatma Gandhi, Emmet Fox, and <em>A Course in Miracles</em>.  Other New Age indicators involve his use of Native American chants, and  his idea that mystical secrets locked in the right side of the brain  can be unleashed using his techniques.&rdquo; </p>
<p>  Robbins&rsquo;s religious eclecticism is also, as Rhodes observes, &ldquo;in  keeping with his New Age leanings. On a number of occasions, he  acknowledges many &lsquo;great teachers&rsquo;&mdash;including Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad,  Confucius, and Lao-Tzu.&rdquo;<sup>25</sup> </p>
<p><strong>TRIAL BY FIREWALKING</strong> </p>
<p>More  than any other teaching or practice, firewalking is what initially drew  the media to Tony Robbins. Does Robbins still promote firewalking? Yes.  During his &ldquo;Unleash the Power Within&rdquo; conferences, for instance,  attendees walk barefoot across a bed of hot coals that is some twelve  feet long (taking about five or six steps to complete). </p>
<p>  The term firewalking is itself a misnomer in that one does not walk  across literal flames, but hot coals. Critics are quick to point out  that walking across hot coals without getting burned is not a matter of  positive mental thinking or religious mysticism, but merely physics.  Just as placing your hand inside a hot oven will not burn you while  touching metal in the oven will indeed burn, the solution to safe  firewalking has to do with heat conductivity and thermal conduction.  There&rsquo;s also the factor of time. Firewalking over ten or twelve feet is  literally over within a matter of just a few seconds or less &mdash; hardly  enough time for hot coals to burn through the soles of the feet of the  average person.<sup>26</sup> </p>
<p>  Robbins, however, does not present the firewalking experience as  religious. Using his techniques, if someone is in the proper mental  state, then firewalking becomes a metaphor about being able to  accomplish the seemingly impossible. For Robbins, overcoming fear  through positive action is the purpose of the firewalk. Robbins  explains: &ldquo;The firewalk has fascinated the media to the point I fear its  message is getting lost. The point is not to walk on fire.&hellip;Instead, the  firewalk is an experience in personal power and a metaphor for  possibilities, an opportunity for people to produce results they  previously had thought impossible.&hellip;When I conduct a firewalk, it&rsquo;s not  part of any religious experience in the conventional sense. But it is an  experience in belief. It teaches people in the most visceral sense that  they can change, they can grow, they can stretch themselves, they can  do things they never thought possible, that their greatest fears and  limitations are self-imposed.&rdquo;<sup>27</sup> </p>
<p>For  the Christian, firewalking for religious or motivational reasons is  unnecessary. Our source of motivational ability is not within our own  fallen nature, but in Christ. </p>
<p>THE REAL GIANT WITHIN </p>
<p>Tony  Robbins comes across as an amiable, caring, and sincere individual. His  Twitter posts, for instance, often convey joy, encouragement, and a  delight in life. In addition, he is not a hoarder of his wealth, having  established a variety of venues to offer philanthropic assistance in  various forms. Neverthe less, good intentions, no matter how sincere,  are not enough to outweigh serious logical and theological deficiencies.  The foundational principles underlying his philosophy are on shaky  ground, to say the least. The purpose here, however, has not been to  attack Robbins as an individual, but to assess his ideas. As he himself  has said, &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t blindly accept everything <sup>I</sup> say, either!&rdquo;<em>28</em> </p>
<p>  Unlike human potential thinking that is often deeply self-centered,  Christianity calls followers to be Christ-centered and other-centered.  This does not mean neglecting ourselves, but rather placing ourselves in  the proper context of God&rsquo;s will. With God and others as our primary  focus, we can begin to become the kind of people God wants us to  become&mdash;not self-centered individuals seeking wealth and other forms of  worldly power, but instead humble individuals seeking to share the love  of Christ. There is nothing wrong with success, per se, so long as one  remains Christ-centered and pursues success with godly intentions and  within godly parameters, but wealth and an easy life are not guaranteed  for the Christian. Instead, we are told we will face hardships and  endure suffering for the name of Christ. </p>
<p>  Our power is limited, but God&rsquo;s power is not. We are flawed, fallen,  depraved beings in desperate need of radical redemption that is  Savior-centered, not self-centered. Being made in God&rsquo;s image, we have  the capacity for creativity and greatness, but we are also in dire  circumstances that only Christ can save us from. The real giant within  is not unbounded human potential, but our capacity to sin. What is the  solution to our serious problem? It is not in us, but in Christ. As Paul  wrote, &ldquo;What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of  death? Thanks be to God&mdash; through Jesus Christ our Lord!&rdquo; (<a class="lbsBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Rom.%207.24%E2%80%9325" target="_blank">Rom. 7:24&ndash;25</a>). </p>
<p><strong>Robert Velarde</strong> is author of <em>Conversations with C.S. Lewis</em> (InterVarsity Press, 2008) and <em>The Heart of Narnia</em> (NavPress, 2008), and coauthor of <em>Examining Alternative Medicine</em> (InterVarsity Press, 2001). He studied philosophy of religion at Denver  Seminary and is completing graduate studies at Southern Evangelical  Seminary. </p>
<p><strong>notes</strong> </p>
<p>1  Anthony Robbins, <em>Awaken the Giant Within: How to Take Immediate Control of Your Mental, Emotional, Physical and Financial Destiny!</em> (New York: Free Press, 1991), 90. </p>
<p>2  Anthony Robbins, <em>Unlimited Power: The New Science of Personal Achievement</em> (New York: Free Press, 1986). </p>
<p>3   His image appeared briefly in the film Men in Black  (1997), he shared a scene with actor Jack Black in Shallow Hal (2001),  and he is featured in The Singularity Is Near (2009). </p>
<p>4  As of August 2009. </p>
<p>5   William T. Jarvis, &ldquo;Anthony Robbins,&rdquo; available at  http://www.ncahf.org/articles/or/robbins.html. The NCAHF, co-founded by  Dr. Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch.org, is a private organization &ldquo;that  focuses upon health misinformation, fraud, and quackery as public health  problems&rdquo; (http://www.ncahf.org/). </p>
<p>6  Awaken the Giant Within, 52. </p>
<p>7  Ibid., 53. </p>
<p>8  Ibid., 54. </p>
<p>9  Ibid., 55&ndash;56. </p>
<p>10 James A. Montmarquet, in <em>The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd edition</em>, gen. ed. Robert Audi (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999), s.v. &ldquo;hedonism.&rdquo; </p>
<p>11  Robbins prefers to spell it &ldquo;Neuro-Associative Conditioning,&rdquo; complete  with a trademark symbol, perhaps to differentiate his approach from that  of NLP and provide marketing branding as well. </p>
<p>12 Robbins, <em>Awaken the Giant Within</em>, 123. </p>
<p>13 Ibid., 108. </p>
<p>14  Ibid., 107. Robbins leaves off the &ldquo;1&rdquo; in 1 Corinthians and also fails  to note that the passage encompasses verses 51 and 52 (he lists only  verse 51). More significantly, he fails to grasp the meaning of the  passage in context&mdash;Christians receiving imperishable and glorified  bodies, not neurolinguistic changes of states. Robbins misquotes the  Bible on several occasions (see, e.g., Ron Rhodes, &ldquo;Anthony Robbins and  the Quest for Unlimited Power,&rdquo; SCP Journal (Summer/Fall 1998): 56&ndash;58). </p>
<p>15 Ibid., 111. </p>
<p>16 Ibid., 111&ndash;112. </p>
<p>17 Robbins, Unlimited Power, 26. </p>
<p>18 Ibid., 29. </p>
<p>19  Stephen Barrett, &ldquo;Mental Help: Procedures to Avoid,&rdquo; available at  http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mentserv.html. As  evidence supporting his critique of NLP, Barrett references Daniel  Druckman and John A. Swets, eds., Enhancing Human Performance  (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1988). </p>
<p>20 Robbins, <em>Awaken the Giant Within</em>, 79. </p>
<p>21 Ibid. </p>
<p>22 Robbins, <em>Awaken the Giant Within</em>, 264. </p>
<p>23 Robbins, <em>Unlimited Power</em>, 67. </p>
<p>24 June 16, 2009; http://twitter.com/tonyrobbins </p>
<p>25 Rhodes, 55. Deepak Chopra, a monistic pantheist, is also a featured speaker at Robbins events such as &ldquo;Life Mastery.&rdquo; </p>
<p>26  See, for instance, a physics-oriented explanation of firewalking  offered by The Skeptic&rsquo;s Dictionary at  http://www.skepdic.com/firewalk.html. </p>
<p>27 Robbins, <em>Unlimited Power</em>, 14&ndash;15. </p>
<p>28 Robbins, <em>Awaken the Giant Within</em>, 90. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.equip.org/articles/personal-power-or-harmful-hedonism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
