Her and Eckhart Tolle's webinars on A New Earth attracted 2 million participants.
Never underestimate the power of an Oprah endorsement. Ever since she branded German-born spirituality guru Eckhart Tolle's A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life's Purpose the 61st Oprah Book Club selection in January 2008, the book has sold 3.5 million copies. Over the past several weeks Oprah and Tolle have hosted unprecedented free "webinars," on which Oprah-Tolle discuss a chapter from the book each week and field live questions from the online audience. That audience grew to 2 million people.
Tolle's message is based largely in Eastern spirituality, though he draws from Christian language and imagery (such as the book's title). Tolle defines the human problem as a false self - what he calls "egoic mind patterns," which can be overcome by acknowledging oneness with ultimate reality, or "God." Here's how Greg Boyd, senior pastor at Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, summarizes it:
Tolle espouses a rather typical Eastern metaphysics in which the true "you" is not the "you" that is distinct from other people, but the (alleged) "you" that is one with the universe. To grasp this, imagine waves on an ocean. Your individual ego is one such wave, but the true "you" in the Eastern religious worldview is the ocean itself - as it is for me and every other "wave." The wave-"you" is limited and temporary, but the ocean-"you" is unlimited and eternal.
Oprah's website reports that she and Tolle will be offering another webinar session beginning June 16.
Boyd aside, seemingly few evangelicals have taken the time to engage A New Earth and offer a thoughtful, biblical response - perhaps because, as Peter Jones, writing for Christian Science Monitor puts it, A New Earth's missteps are rather old:
For Tolle, "knowing self and knowing God become one and the same." The millions who've turned to Tolle might naturally conclude: I am the "I Am." Sound familiar? It should. According to the Bible, such "knowledge" springs from the oldest error of all: man's desire to be "as gods."
Stay tuned to CT for our upcoming analysis of the Oprah-Tolle craze in the next two weeks.
Related coverage:
Greg Boyd's review of A New Earth at his blog, "Random Reflections"
The Real Secret of the Universe | Why we disdain feel-good spirituality but shouldn't. (May 2007)
The Church of O | With a congregation of 22 million viewers, Oprah Winfrey has become one of the most influential spiritual leaders in America. (April 2002)
| Share this: |  |  |  |  |  |  |
share thisPosted by Katelyn Beaty on May 9, 2008 9:01AM
Comments
I attempted a gracious yet critical (and thorough) response to this book. It is called Blame It On Ego and can be found here. I usually wouldn't be so forward in drawing attention to this, but I truly believe that this may be helpful to some inquirers. Pastor Rich Vincent
Posted by: Rich at May 12, 2008
I read "The New Earth" and had a couple of interesting experiences and responses. It got the most responses from other people (at work) since I brought a copy of the Koran, though this was not from curious people but mostly from gushing people: "oh, that is so wonderful, what do you think?" I can believe the 2 million figure.
More disturbing still is the way the message is packaged. It is indeed an old message, one I'm familiar with ever since I studied Buddhism and Shirley Maclaine in seminary, but the use of pervasive Christian language is scary. It almost seems to innoculate against the Gospel: "Oh, you're a Christ-follower, me too! I never realized how Jesus taught us about the I Am inside of me!" It combines, however illogically, all the logic of Buddhism with the feel-good aspects of Christianity. All the perspective and personal power with none of the extinction of self that is central to philosophical Buddhism. I'm not a big "Satan is at work" kind of guy, but this is certainly one of the most clever non-Gospels I've seen in recent memory.
Posted by: Tom at May 12, 2008
What's the difference between Tolle's concept of the true and false self and that same language that occurs in the writings of those who sincerely practice meditative prayer?
What about Lectio Divina?
Posted by: jud at May 16, 2008
It has often been said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and assuming Ms. Winfrey's and Mr. Tolle's intentions are good I think they are paving a firmer road to just this end. Years ago, as a spiritual seeker not satisfied with my Baptist faith I read one of Mr. Tolle's books. It was a sugar coated introduction into occult thinking, as he relies heavily on occult resources as well as a mish-mash of world religions to come up with his thinking but presents them pop-lite. The insidious part of this in my opinion is the misuse of Christian concepts and vocabulary making it sound Christian while in fact twisting and redefining the Jesus of the Bible. These two (Winfrey and Tolle) talk about Jesus but they are really talking about a man made Christ, who didn't resurrect in body (just in spirit) and who is not fundamentally different than any other human being except in his degree of enlightenment. The teachings are anti-christian and studying them (and their foundations in Yoga, Hinduism, Buddhism and the occult book A Course in Miracles) and trying to apply them caused havoc in my life that only a humble return and repentance to the Christ of the Bible saved me from. I wish more Christians were aware of this insidious evil in our culture because it comes in sheep's clothing or more precisely, in the form of a small book with a pastel cover illustrated with pretty white clouds.
Posted by: Cynthia at May 21, 2008
There is an attempt by Christians who post discussions on "A New Earth" at Amazon.com to try to elucidate the danger to this work. The following has been acknowledged as one of the more thoughtful responses in subsequent replies by Christians and non Christians alike:
http://www.amazon.com/Intro-Could-Less-Controversial-isnt/forum/Fx2SNIYTQ5TEMOD/Tx30RD3A9DSCWOH/1/ref=cm_cd_ef_tft_tp?%5Fencoding=UTF8&asin=0452289963
Posted by: DLYNN at June 22, 2008
Why does this review cover only what others have to say about the book? Sorry but that doesn't sound very authoritative to me. Why not just quote directly from the book to refute it?
Posted by: Bob at November 26, 2008
Post a comment