I've been thinking a lot recently about personal transformation and how that works as a Christian, because G-d is supposed to be transforming us constantly. "How specifically does that work?" I've been wondering.
Say a friend says to you, "I am struggling with [X] which I really want to change," what do you tell them? To have more faith? To understand it more? To see a psychologist? A spiritual director? A doctor? To read the Bible more? To have a stronger will? To be more conscious? To pray, and somehow G-d will make it better (but we're not quite sure how that works, or when it might, if at all)?
The psychoanalytic approach is based on the concept that insight produces change. I think that can be valid to a point (self-understanding is good) but that it's unnecessary for insight to precede change.
To that end, I've spent a good deal of time being trained in a specific way of communicating and understanding others: Neuro Linguistic Programming. Yes, it's a mouthful and I feel clever when I say it, but the reality is is that it's given me the tools to help people facilitate change within themselves, without needing to go the psychoanalytic route or the "just have more willpower" route.
Here is the introduction by Richard Bandler (one of the co-founders of NLP) to his latest book, "Get the life you want" (forgo the cheesy title, please!). I'd welcome comments on this, particularly as he's presenting an alternative here to the "insight produces change" paradigm.
I think this is a vitally important conversation for those of us who work with others to have, helping them to better understand themselves and make changes for the better. If we're using an approach which feels good and helps others unpack their realities in a way to better understand them, but doesn't lead to any change (let along generative change!), then we may want to be open to wonder about other approaches which are more helpful for the client.
Here's Bandler:
THIS BOOK IS DESIGNED to be a guide for your behavior. It is a guide to help you make changes and avoid therapy-and avoid a slow, long process of change by helping you learn to change more quickly. One of the things I discovered in my work is that people acquire problems very quickly. It only takes one close call in an airplane for somebody to get an airplane phobia. After one bad accident, people can get a driving phobia. It takes bees to swarm once and people become phobic of bees. If people can learn to have fear in a short period of time, there's no reason why it should take a long period of time to learn anything else, so my policy has always been to use another approach to find a quick way to do things.
What exactly was this different approach I took? When psychologists wanted to study a particular difficulty, like phobias for example, they got together a bunch of phobics and tried to figure out why they were the way they were - effectively they looked at what made them tick. They tried experiments, like having the phobics face their difficulties and try to help them desensitize to their fear over time. The psychoanalytical approach of traveling back in time and reliving traumas, looking for deep, hidden, inner meaning was used. This idea was based on the concept that insight produces change.
This seemed like a wonderful idea! If you could understand your problems somehow or other, they would just disappear. Sigmund Freud started the concept and it was, at the time, a great innovation and has been tried for some 100 years in various forms. The suggestion was that understanding the psyche could produce change. The idea that you could help a person change verbally rather than physically was a promising insight itself. However, the idea of getting insight into your problems just does not work.
Over the years, people have used both psychological approaches and physical approaches. They've tried things like operant conditioning, conditioning people by rewarding them for good behavior and negatively reinforcing bad behavior. They would take smokers and give them a cigarette and shock the hell out of them. The problem is that most people who smoke for a while realize that it's not good for their health. They may even know why they started smoking - to look cool in front of their friends or to get over a nervous habit or to not eat so much-yet even though people know why they smoke, it doesn't make them stop.
Many people also know why they have fears. I had a client who very much understood her fears. When she was a young girl, she was attacked, not by one person but by a group of people. She was severely beaten. She was brutally raped and developed a fear of other people. She had a fear of going outside. In fact, she had a fear of almost everything. She'd seen a psychiatrist who treated her with therapy and drugs. I have to admit that taking valium made her more relaxed but, then again, taking narcotics makes heroin users more relaxed-but it doesn't deal with the real issue.
The real issue is they've developed a habit of being afraid when they don't need to be. They have learned to engage in a certain behavior that is, in and of itself, destructive. It destroys your quality of life. It destroys your freedom. It destroys the opportunity you have to live in a free society.
That particular girl didn't live in a terrifying place where bombs drop every day. She wasn't being attacked, and she hadn't been attacked in over twenty five years. Yet, every day she woke up afraid. Every night she went to sleep afraid. She was afraid to meet people, afraid to date, afraid to love, afraid to work, afraid of everything.
When she came to me after all the years of therapy, it was quite by accident. She enrolled in a course with over 500 people. I have people throw notes in the box on stage with questions they have, and she literally wrote down what had happened to her. She said she understood why she had a problem but still she didn't seem to be able to get away from it.
After I'd spoken to her privately, I brought her on the stage and explained to her the real truth-that I didn't need to understand how she became the way she did. I needed to understand how she kept being that way. It was pretty obvious why she was the way she was - something bad happened to her and she kept reliving it and everything in the world triggered that memory.
That wasn't based on what had happened. It was based on what she did with what happened. It was based on the fact that when she woke up she was asking the question What could go wrong? and the same answer came up every single time. She would imagine a life-size memory where she saw the bad thing happening to her over and over and over again.
It only took me a matter of twenty minutes to get her to stop doing this because I didn't have to find out why she did what she did, I just had to get her to stop it. Better yet, I had to get her to do something more important: develop a habit of feeling happy.
If you've been afraid most of your life, you may not have good examples of what "happy" is. In that case, you can build it in. That's what I do. You have to give people a really strong feeling of being relaxed, a really strong feeling of feeling good as a guide for their behavior. You do this so that, in the future when they wake up, they start asking, How much fun can I have today? How much freedom can I find? How much more can I do than I've done before?
When people start asking good questions, they make good pictures inside their heads. If you make good pictures, you will get good feelings. Then life becomes something that you feel more enthusiasm for. This girl is a good example of how you can go from having almost no life to having a rich, full life where things get better from the top to the bottom.
In order for you to turn your own life around, it's good for you to know how all these ideas came about so you can discover why they are so effective. When I first started out, I asked psychiatrists to name one of the toughest problems they faced, and they would tell me it was phobias. So my approach began by figuring out how to help people get over phobias, and the same approach turned out to work well for other problems too.
When I studied phobias, I didn't study the people who had them. I studied the people who got over them. I found a whole bunch of people who, without any kind of therapy, had gotten over them. These people had beaten their fears. I began to interview them methodically, using the tools I had developed in writing my earliest book, The Structure of Magic: Volume One. In this book, we discovered some of the secrets of the most successful therapists of the time and created a model of their skills. This was known as the Meta Model.
The Meta Model is a way to ask questions to find out how people process information at that time. It's not concerned with how they processed it in the past, or even how they will process it in the future, but what they do right now. How do they manifest their fear? How is it done as an activity? How is it done over and over again as an activity? Better yet, How did they get over their fear? What were the steps they took to overcome the phobia after being paralyzed for years?
A few of the people I talked to couldn't get on elevators. There were some with a phobia of bees. I had another person who had a phobia of dogs and several people who had a fear of driving. There were people with a fear of heights and a fear of open spaces. I even went to interview a few people who had agoraphobia, a fear of going outside of their home, and, suddenly, it was gone and they were able to go everywhere.
All of these people, as they told me their stories, shared certain things in common. One example was that they reached a point where they got so fed up they stopped thinking about what scared them. They started to look at themselves being afraid and started thinking, This is really silly. Elements like these, which they all shared in common, allowed me to develop the first "phobia cure." It wasn't really a "cure" so much as a "lesson."
It was at that point in time that the psychiatrist who I worked with sent me droves of people with different kinds of phobias so I could test the work I had developed. I took the mental process of people who successfully got over phobias and I undertook installation. Very simply, this is the process of teaching people to think differently. Thinking isn't a passive process unless you do it passively. Thinking should always be an active process where you think in a way that gets you the results you want.
This approach turned out to be applicable to almost all the other problems people had. If you can help people to think differently and actively, they can change their lives. If you're trying to motivate yourself and you're thinking about how hard it is, it will be hard. I always say to people, If you're lookingfor difficulties, you'll always find them. If you ask the question, What can go wrong? then something probably will. On the other hand, if you're asking the question, What works? then you can find it and, in this case, I did.
Starting at about 1974, right up to the present date, I have yet to have a single individual come in with a genuine phobia and walk out with it. Many people ask me about the amount of resistance I must have faced over the past thirty-five years, but I never did face very much of it for one simple reason. What I was doing was working!
When you learn how people think, you can teach them how to change the way they think. The process I learned from these people was something that could be recapitulated not just by me but by others. I could teach it to people in a short twenty-minute lesson. I've done it over and over again.
I made films back in the early 1980s where I took three people: one with panic attacks, one with a terrible phobia of leaving Huntington, West Virginia, and one with a fear of authority figures. Their phobias all disappeared. Each of them was treated slightly differently but each of them was taught a lesson about how to think of their fear in a new way.
When you think in a new way, you get to do new things and you get to feel new things. This whole book is about ways of thinking differently. Think about it as a lesson plan for future living. This is only one example of the things that matter when people want to make changes in their lives. You can take the process that is common to a bunch of people, apply a successful technique, and refine it down to something that can be taught to an individual.
We also did it with simple things like spelling. When people are good spellers, it turns out that they make pictures of the words, remember the pictures, and they check them with their feelings to make sure they're right. So, we developed an educational program where we taught kids to look at words and we made every single letter a different color.
After they'd looked at the words, we had them close their eyes and make a mental picture of them, and then we began to ask them questions like, What color was the third letter? What color was the last letter? The only way to answer those questions is to have a truly remembered image of the word, and we had them check it with their feelings. We'd show them the word spelled incorrectly so they got a bad feeling with that. Then we showed it to them spelled correctly so they got a good feeling with that. Mentally, they began to develop a process that worked.
When you see a word, you can encode the image of it. In order to remember things, you have to first encode the memory. If we teach children to properly encode the spelling of words, they'll be able to properly decode the spelling of words. The same thing is true about all memory tasks which is why the educational system has been affected by my work. If you check out Kate Benson's website Meta4Education, you'll find all kinds of information for teachers.
There are now many books on Neuro-Linguistic Programming for the field of education. There are books on NLP applications for sports athletes. We found golfing strategies telling how great golfers are able to go into an altered state and visually adjust their body. Prize fighters and football players also use NLP to improve their performance. All people can learn to do things better.
Every task has a mental component to it. A lot of what we call talent is when people stumble upon these strategies easily. Certainly, you can't beat a good set of genes. If you're seven feet tall, it's easier to be a good basketball player. If you like basketball, it's easier to practice. If you like playing guitar, it's easier to practice, but if you don't have the mental capacity of a great musician, you can begin to adjust it and to learn talent. Talent isn't just God-given. It's partially God- given; the other part is accessed by human beings insofar as they're able to teach each other.
Lessons aren't just about what to learn. Lessons should be about how to learn. It's not enough to show a child words and ask them to remember them. You have to tell them how to remember them. It's not enough to tell a phobic not to be afraid; you have to teach him what makes fear dissipate.
For almost four decades, I've gone through and I've studied everything about people with all kinds of problems. I've worked with people who were schizophrenic and have learned from people who weren't schizophrenic and were able to do specifically what a schizophrenic was unable to do.
One of my more famous cases was brought to me by a psychiatrist a number of years ago. This was a lady who couldn't tell the difference between fantasies and memories. Every time she would come in to the psychiatrist, she would cry and moan about having killed her parents. He would bring in her parents and she would chat thoughtfully with them, but when they left she would claim she had killed them.
Why she fantasized killing them isn't important. The fact is she couldn't tell which memories were real. So I turned to the psychiatrist and asked him how he knew which one of his memories was real and which ones were fantasies. I had them both make up a memory on the spot. They both made up a fantasy of how they got to my office and put in all the necessary details, and then I asked them both how they got there.
The psychiatrist answered me calmly. The patient screamed and moaned that it was one thing and then it was the other and then it was one thing and then it was the other. She couldn't tell them apart. It turned out that when I asked the psychiatrist how he knew, he told me that his fantasies had a black border around them and his memories didn't. This was a very precise way of knowing which images were created and which images were remembered. I'm sure he had no problems telling his fantasies from his reality.
I hypnotized this lady into a deep altered state and had her lift up her arm and go through the fantasies she had made up and put black borders around them. She had to do so with everything from killing her parents to any other fantasy, including the one she had made up in the room for me. I then told her that when her brain had gone through and recoded all this information, she could let her hand come down. When she opened her eyes, I asked her if she'd killed her parents and she calmly said no.
This approach is about being able to teach people as opposed to therapize them. The truth is that after all the years of giving people insight and change not occurring, the lesson to be learned was that insight was a great idea, it just didn't work. Communism was a good idea, but it didn't work in practice.
When ideas don't work, you have to put them out in the backyard with the square wheels because when something isn't working, it's just not working. So, what I've tried to do over the years is find the things that work in human beings-simple things, teachable things. Some of them are taught better in the waking state, and some of them are taught better in a hypnotic trance. To me, it doesn't matter which it is, it only matters that people get to where they want to go. It matters to me that they have the freedom to live, the freedom to be happy, and the freedom not to waste their time with bad habits. I believe the truth is that most ongoing problems are just a manifestation of having the same bad habit over and over again.
People with obsessive compulsive disorder have the bad habit of building rituals to try to stave off their anxiety. Every single ritual may give them a little bit more comfort, but in the end it continues to build more fear.
The more comfort you have to build, the more fear you need to have. It's a vicious cycle, and most stupidity works in this way. I'm not saying stupid in the sense that it's bad. If you discover something's stupid and you laugh at it and you stop it and build something more effective, life just gets better. I'm a firm believer that you can learn to get over your problems.
For thirty-five years, people have walked in my doorway miserable and walked out with more freedom. They have walked out happier and continue to walk out that way. People have always said, Well this phobia cure is good, but what if it comes back in six months? Simple: you just take another twenty minutes and you banish it again.
The truth is that it will only come back when you start doing the same things you did before and thinking the same things as you did before. Otherwise, it will stay gone forever. In fact, something wonderful will happen. You'll have more time to enjoy your life.
All of the time you spent feeling bad, you could be feeling good. That doesn't mean that bad things don't happen. People die. Horrible things happen. Sometimes people get into car wrecks or they go into debt. There are horrible things worth feeling bad about, but those are things worth doing something about so you get on with your life as quickly as you can and become the best person you can be. If you can look at yesterday and say you are a better person today, even if it's just a tiny bit, then you're still headed in the right direction.
This book is about how you do just that. The outline of the book is very simple. First, I have outlined an inventory, which will explain the basics and help you to take stock of the tools you have at your disposal.
Next, I will discuss many of the problems that you might face in your life. You'll learn about how to get over problems such as bad fears, memories, and relationships. You'll find out how to get through things like bad habits, recovery, and the times when you feel like giving up. You'll discover how to get to the things that make life worthwhile such as fun, love, sex, and making big decisions about your life.
Throughout the book, I'll be sharing certain stories and insights I have gained into working with each problem and challenge I deal with. You'll also find plenty of techniques and tips outlined in a step- by-step guide so that, as you read, you can change instantly. Again, it's critical that you follow the steps and you do them thoroughly.
I got a postcard one time from the Grand Canyon. When I first wrote the book The Structure of Magic, I didn't get too many postcards. However, when I wrote the book Frogs into Princes that laid out ways people could get rid offears and anxieties, I got a postcard from the Grand Canyon.
Somebody wrote me a postcard and it simply said the following:
"I'm hanging off the side of the Grand Canyon. I had a height phobia for many years. I spent lots of money on therapy. But for just $8.95, my problems disappeared. Thank you." When I decided to write this guide so people could get over their own problems, what I had in mind was something that would allow you all to write me a postcard.

Technorati Tags:
Roger Saner's blog: Journey
Graeme Codrington: Regeneration
NLP
Hey Roger,
I read your post with interest as I am also extremely interested in understanding personal transformation, both for myself and for others.
When I read Bandler's introduction I was led to think that NLP must be something amazing and that if the claims are true Bandler has developed a tool that could really help our fear-riddled and psychically challenged world. His successes sounded almost too good to be true.
I did a little reading, having no experience of NLP myself, and discovered that the ideas of Bandler and his co-founder are rather controversial. It seems they have been critiqued for making unsupported and sensationalist claims of NLP's successes and I started thinking that Bandler's introduction did come across as the cure-all therapy akin to Benny Hinns healing services. Now of course I have no first hand experience like you do and I can't really tell simply by reading a few articles and webpages on the net (see http://www.skepdic.com/neurolin.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming#History_and_fo... for examples of the criticisms).
Having said that, I feel that there are various therapies or approaches to change that are helpful. Each person is unique and I would be careful to assume that a one-size-fits-all approach to change is going to be effective for everybody. I also think we change more when we are committed to change and less when we have no real conviction or motivation to change. As far as models and methods go I hear Focusing (http://www.focusing.org/)is very helpful, but again I haven't spent much time with the model. I've enjoyed using the enneagram as a tool for self awareness but, with Bandler, I have to say that self-awareness doesn't necessarily lead to transformation - but in my case it has helped me remain aware of my motivations and in some sense this has helped me correct behaviour, or alternatively, accept behaviour that I had previously disliked about myself.
And now to go back on what I said previously about a one-size-fits-all approach to transformation; I do know one model that I would happily apply to everybody and one which I believe to be wholly effective whenever consistantly applied. The model is one I think you are probably familar with and is reffered to by Orthodox Christians as Theosis.
I honestly think Theosis is one of the major doctrines missing from both Catholicism and Protestantism and it's absence, especially in Protestant churches, is a major reason for the lack of transformation. Just to give any readers a brief explanation; Theosis is Orthodoxies doctrine of salvation and sanctification. It is understood by Orthodox Christians that through participation in the body of Christ, the sacraments of the church, worship, prayer, fasting and spiritual disciplines, the Christian partakes of the Divine Nature (2 Peter 1:4). Grace, in Orthodoxy, is not God's favour on sinners, or even a created blessing - Grace is God. Grace is part of God's energies. God's energies are uncreated and available to us through the Church (That would be the Orthodox Church). By partaking of God we are transformed into gods. It is the Orthodox understanding that this was Adam and Eve's destiny before they fell and the Incarnation of Christ was part of God's original plan for Creation. We were all made to partake of God and only through our partaking of the Divine Nature will be truly be transformed.
While NLP, Psychotherapy, The Enneagram, Focusing etc. etc. may help us in various ways, I think that unless our focus is on God and becoming transformed through our partaking of His Divine Nature, we will simply continue to be better functioning fallen sinners. But when we make partaking of God our primary focus, and then use these various therapies as additional ways to help us improve our lives, we have some powerful tools for healing.
Thanks for the reply,
Thanks for the reply, Jacques. Just a quick one before I go to sleep (more to follow): there is no question that Richard Bandler is as arrogant as they come (I have a DVD of him I can lend you, and you can get an idea of that) but the man is also a genius. Everything else aside, he did invent a phobia cure which works, and can be done in 20 minutes (gotta admire a guy for starting with the hardest thing for therapists to cure, and coming up with a quick, elegant solution).
Unfortunately, Bandler is also the biggest enemy of NLP. Tony Robbins was trained by him, and Bandler got upset with the amount of money other people were making off him, so in the 90's he sued just about everyone in the States who was associated with NLP. Although he lost (the judge ruled that it was now a field of study, and as such couldn't be trademarked) he scared everyone off and tainted the field, which has had serious repercussions. This is unfortunate, because much in NLP seems to work like magic. This had, again unfortunately and inaccurately, led some within NLP (like Bandler) to give the impression that it's a cure-all, and better than everything else out there. Also, NLP focuses on what works, and so (unfortunately) doesn't concern itself much with academic rigour (although that's changed recently, with increasing number of psychologists and Ph. D's adopting it), which has meant its not gained wide acceptance in academic circles (for instance, NLP posits that eye accessing cues can show what's going on in someone's mind; there is no experimental way of verifying this).
What I like about NLP is it answers the "how" question. When someone asks me, "HOW can I change?" I can now answer them, or better yet, I can give them the tools to do it for themselves. And I don't have to guilt them with "try harder" or "pray harder" or "have more faith" any more.
My experience with spiritual direction and therapy is that it doesn't answer the HOW question; therapy is excellent with structure building and uncovering, and spiritual direction is brilliant for learning to listen more deeply to our own lives and to God, but I'm unsatisfied with the "just spend more time with God" answer to practical problems that people are seeking solutions to.
I still think spiritual direction is valid, though - just spent this weekend with Richard Rohr talking about male initiation, and the space that they create in these times is deeply transformative, so this may be a modality I'll pursue further.
So my conclusion is knowing what the appropriate modality to use is:
- structure building and uncovering: therapy
- listening more deeply to your life and to God: spiritual direction
- experientially knowing your place in the universe: initiation, and being in nature
- living more wholistically: Integral Life Practice (from Ken Wilbur)
- solving a particular problem or creating generative change: coaching (and in my case, using NLP and Neuro Semantics (a child of NLP) for this)
Those are my conclusions at least - would like to hear how others define the usefulness of therapy and spiritual direction, and what other modalities you would recommend.
Is Theosis the same thing as
Is Theosis the same thing as "Divinisation"?
Yes, theosis is the same as
Yes, theosis is the same as divinisation, and both are akin to godliness, and are not unrelated to the Calvinist concept of sancrification, though a little further removed.
I don't want to be scary here, but about 15-20 years ago I took out of the Unisa library all the books on neurolinguistic programming I could find (there were quite a lot of them). I did it at the request of a user of my BBS, who had had this recommended to him as a therapy or something.
I read some of them and I found some of it quite interesting, though all I can remember now is stuff about not mistaking the map for the territory.
Not long after that, the guy had a blow-up on the BBS -- was flaming everyone, and getting quite irrational. Then he disappeared. I heard later he'd been taken to Weskoppies. I'm not saying that NLP contributed to his condition, but it doesn't seem to have helped.
Theosis as transformation
Hey Roger,
Thanks for the extra info on the history of NLP. I can see how some of the things you mention would cause some to look hesitantly at NLP, without necessarily knowing its’ value. Again, I'm all for anything that works. I think a key value indicator would be the long-term effect of the therapy. To use poor old Benny Hinn again, does the therapy/method (whatever approach is taken) lead to a "miraculous-on-stage-healing" only to have the person take up their crutch again a few hours/day later. Or does the approach have lasting effects that truly change a person at their core.
When it comes to the many approaches I must admit that my biggest obstacle is time. I come across a number of promising approaches/methods/therapies etc. but simply don't have the time to implement them or stay with them long enough to assess their true value. It sounds to me like NLP is something that you've encountered and integrated and the proof is in the tasting.
Personally I would love to explore Focusing further as the basic theory is attractive to me. The method is based on deep body awareness - listening to something called a "felt sense". The developers of the method discovered that all psychotherapy patients who actually got better were able to access this "felt sense" and that healing or change had very little to do with the actual approach/method employed by the psychologist or therapist. It was the person’s ability to hear this internal awareness and its’ direction that allowed them to overcome problems or approach challenges. Focusing then is designed to help you access your felt-sense and use this ability to process problems, interpret dreams, face daily challenges, hear God etc.
As to your question, Yes Theosis is Divinisation. I hear your frustration with the lack of HOW in many approaches to spirituality and therapy. I think spirituality especially suffers from this lack of clear direction. But again, I think this is especially true of the Western approach to spirituality because of its scholastic approach to the spiritual life. Both medieval Catholicism and Protestantism suffer from the exact same thing - A rational approach to Faith that teaches change through knowledge.
If we simply understand God and understand Christianity and understand that we are saved, then this will somehow automatically translate into transformation. Now obviously this is seldom stated in these exact terms and there are variying degrees of this in the different traditions, but I do think in one way or the other it affects a lot of our western approach to religion in general.
The East on the other hand, with their mystical theology, view salvation in very different terms. Salvation in the East is Theosis. And Theosis is the transformation of the human nature as it is infused with the Energies of God. The How is fully explained - but not necessarily rationally understood. As we partake in the full Life of the Church through all of its’ aspects we open ourselves to the Grace and Energies of God (which in the East are understood as God). If we do this the result is ALWAYS certain - We Will be Transformed.
Free will is vital to this process but sadly whether overtly or subtly western theology lacks the eastern emphasis on synergy. Because Protestants are allergic to any idea of "working" out our salvation we often blame God for our lack of change. I mean, if there is nothing I can do to change and only God can change me then it isn't my fault that I keep doing the same things over and over and over. Calvinism teaches that God acts without my consent, both to save me and change me, any lack of change is therefore on God's head.
The East takes a different approach. God always provides enough grace to change. Our lack of change is our refusal to work with God. The Orthodox Church as a whole is a training manual for transformation. Our fallen nature, our internal passions, the temptations of the world and the deceptions of the devil are the main obstacles to Theosis. The Church, through the direction of the saints, monastics and clergy, has the exact tools to aide us in our desire for healing and gives detailed instruction on overcoming each of the obstacles. But the reality is that this healing involves dying and this is seldom something we want to do. I speak here from personal struggle and a desire to honestly confront my own sins…All the things I’ve struggled and struggle most with are the things that I secretly still desire even though I understand that they are wrong – or worse I try to justify so that I don’t have to change.
I suppose it comes down to whether we believe that God enables us to do what He asks us to do or not. If the Bible and the testimony of the Church are true then through Christ and the Holy Spirit we now have what it takes to change.
Before I end this (way too long) reply let me just offer some necessary corrective on my thoughts. I’m not saying that this is easy, but only that it is possible. I’m also not saying that the process happens all at once, it takes a life-time. I believe that whatever we find helpful in this life, NLP, Focusing, Psychotherapy, etc. is good and can aide us in our Theosis. The reason I still focus on Theosis is that I believe that it is the only thing that will fully root out the corruption in our heart and turn us into the Full Image and Likeness of God. In the end are we talking simply about therapies that lead to a greater ability to live functionally well in the world – or are we talking about therapies that heal our fallen human nature and turn us into Sons and Daughters of God.
Getting Saved (in the Protestant sense) doesn’t “change/transform” anything - Theosis does. All other therapies can help us live functionally well in the world – Theosis will transform us into Children of God.
Just fix it?
Ever since going to an exorcist who wanted to deliver me from my struggles (!), I've been a little weary of quick-fixes in the realm of the psychological and spiritual. I just wonder whether there isn't a lot of value in the deep integration that takes place in slow, journey-type processes. I know you mention different processes for different issues and different contexts. Perhaps it says more about who I am, but I'm more drawn to long, integrative processes that take place in a trust relationship between myself and another and draw deeply on experiential encounters of God loving me unconditionally.