Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life
Understanding spiritual maturity really isn’t that difficult. In Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life, Donald Whitney describes the object of our struggle as godliness – and the Biblical injunction to discipline ourselves for the purpose of godliness as leading to naturally expressing Christ’s character through our own personality. Simple, and clear.
Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life was written by Donald Whitney while he was serving as a local church pastor. He served twenty-four years in local church ministry before becoming a professor at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. His work displays the heart of a pastor and the head of a professor. His concern for those in his care and his desire for the spiritual growth of the readers of this book is evident on every page.
Whitney leads his readers in examining the following disciplines; Scripture reading, Scripture meditation, Scripture application, prayer, worship, evangelism, serving, stewardship, fasting, silence and solitude, journaling, and learning. The loving presentation, practical orientation, and solid Biblical foundation make this a book worth reading. In fact, J.I. Packer recommended that the book be read three times by each of its readers.
There are a few times along the way where I think Whitney extrapolates beyond the text of Scripture in ways with which I am not comfortable. Nevertheless, I add my voice to Packer’s in suggesting that this is a book that will benefit those who would discipline themselves for the purpose of godliness.
__________
* There is also a Study Guide
__________
RELATED CONTENT
- Spiritual Growth, by Andrew Murray
- The Pursuit of God, by A. W. Tozer
- Matthew Henry’s Commentary on Ephesians 4:2-16
Unfortunately, I would have to disagree with you on Whitney’s book “Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life”. He is too much influenced by Dallas Willard and Richard Foster. Although I agree with him in many areas, when he teaches on ’spiritual disciplines’ I don’t think he is very biblical. See the recent article by Pastor Bob DeWaay regarding Whitney.
http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue111.htm
Michael, it would be helpful if you shared with me what I have said above with which you disagree?
I went to the link you provided and found this quote of Pastor Bob “Before I begin my critique, I want to place before you the areas where Whitney and I agree. Whitney has the gospel right and explains it (Whitney: 28).3 He is correct that it is the Holy Spirit who imparts a desire for holiness and does so for all Christians. He is correct that the purpose of sanctification is to conform us to the image of Christ. Some of the practices he endorses are valid means of grace (such as the Word of God and prayer). He cites in valid ways many orthodox teachers from church history. He understands that evangelism includes the call to repent and believe and that sharing the gospel constitutes “success” even if people refuse to listen (Whitney: 103). I appreciated his emphasis on the need to study the Bible in a scholarly way in his chapter about learning. And his thesis that we ought to make holiness a priority and take action to that end is a valid implication of his theme verse: “Discipline yourself for the purpose of “godliness” (1Timothy 4:7b). But I disagree with the manner in which Whitney uses Paul’s athletic metaphor in his applications. Paul implies neither asceticism nor sanctification by human effort.”
His final sentence seems to be similar to what I said above, “There are a few times along the way where I think Whitney extrapolates beyond the text of Scripture in ways with which I am not comfortable.”
As I said in my review, I can find several places where I don’t approve of Whitney’s exegesis. This book is flawed as are all books coming from the hands of men. But it would seem that the only real area where we seriously disagree is the on the point of whether this book is the gateway to asceticism or mysticism. I would certainly have to see more evidence for this argument that what I see in DeWaay’s article. He seems to employ a slippery slope argument that readers of Whitney will move on to Foster and Willard, and from there to hard mysticism. I don’t see that at all.
With what do you disagree with Whitney? Is there a specific teaching you do not like, or just the fact that he likes Willard and Foster? Can you provide a substantive answer as to why you say “I don’t think he is very biblical.”
Thank you for sharing your thoughts here. I am interested in what you have to say.
Kevin,
I’m sorry I haven’t responded before now. I found your site by accident one day and did not bookmark it. I came across Whitney’s website several years ago, also by accident. I didn’t know who he was at the time. At that time it was still called “Spiritual Disciplines” and not the current name “Biblical Spirituality”. I found that he had Chapter 10 from his book (Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life) posted on-line so one could read it. I did so and noted some problems with his use of Scripture, his teaching on ‘promptings’ and that he quoted Dallas Willard. I emailed him via his website and said that I had some questions as to what he taught in the on-line chapter, and asked if he was familiar with Dallas Willard’s ties to contemplative mysticism. I didn’t hear back. About a month later, I decided to go back to his website and read the chapter again. This time I noted that the Willard quotes and references at the end of the chapter had been removed.
Instead of addressing the entire book, let me address that one chapter (and not everything in the chapter either). Perhaps this will be representative of the problems I see with Whitney’s teaching in this book. In Chapter 10 Silence and Solitude, Whitney says
“There is something both appealing and transforming about silence and solitude. Other than Jesus Christ, perhaps the greatest men under each Covenant—Moses and Paul—were both transformed through years in virtual isolation in a remote wilderness. And there are moments in our pressure-cooker days when years of escape to some hidden place sounds wistfully compelling to the Christian spirit.” (emphasis mine)
I’ll try to keep this fairly short, but there’s no biblical evidence that either man spent years in virtual isolation, much less that this is what ‘transformed’ them. Exodus 2-3 tells us that when Moses fled Egypt, he went to Midian where he met the daughters of Jethro, and that he {Moses} was willing to dwell with the man {live with Jethro}. Jethro gave his daughter, Zipporah, to be Moses’ wife, and they had at least one kid. There is no indication in Scripture that Moses spent years alone before any of this happened. Apparently, Aaron, his brother joined him at some point in time, as God says that “your brother Aaron is coming out to meet you” in Ex. 4. Exodus 3 does say that Moses was pasturing the flock of his father-in-law, and he took the flock to the wilderness, so there could have been times when he was by himself, but this is a long way from saying that he spent years in virtual isolation. He was married, with a kid, and lived with his wife’s family. There is also no scriptural support to say that ‘isolation’ {i.e. silence and solitude} transformed Moses. True, he had gone from being Egyptian nobility, to shepherding goats or sheep, but nothing in Scripture indicates that he was practicing ‘silence and solitude’, nor that even if he did spend time alone, that this is what transformed him.
What about Paul? The author says that he spent years in virtual isolation {and was transformed by it}. What scriptural support do we have for this? In Acts 9, we have the conversion of Saul. This chapter says that after regaining his sight, he was with the disciples in Damascus for several days, and “immediately he began to proclaim Jesus, in the synagogues, saying ‘He is the Son of God’” {vss. 19-20}. It says that he kept increasing in strength and confounding the Jews in Damascus preaching that Jesus is the Messiah. The next verse says that after many days had elapsed, the Jews plotted together how to do away with him, so it sounds like he spent many days in Damascus. Where do we get the idea that Paul spent years in the wilderness? I wonder if it comes from a misreading of Galatians 1. Here Paul reminds the Galatians of his persecution of the church, and subsequent conversion. He says that he did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, {i.e. the Apostles}, but went into Arabia and then returned to Damascus. In the next verse, Paul says that after 3 years he then went up to Jerusalem. I think this is where the confusion comes in. Notice, he is not saying that he spent 3 years in isolation in Arabia, but that after 3 years of preaching, he finally went to Jerusalem. He went there to tell them what he had been preaching {something he wouldn’t have been doing if he were alone in the wilderness}. The Scripture no where says that Paul spent years alone in the wilderness. Paul no where says that spending time in solitude and silence transformed him. His point in Galatians is that he received his doctrine straight from the Lord, not from the other Apostles.
Another paragraph in the Chapter says “The Discipline of silence is the voluntary and temporary abstention from speaking so that certain spiritual goals might be sought. Sometimes silence is observed in order to read, write, pray, etc. Though there is no outward speaking, there are internal dialogues with self and with God. This can be called “outward silence.” Other times silence is maintained not only outwardly but also inwardly so that God’s voice might be heard more clearly.” (emphasis mine)
This is a very important paragraph. It tells you what the author is promoting and why. The Discipline of silence is not only to pray ‘silently’, {i.e. in your mind}, which let me point out, might be ‘silent’ to you, but it isn’t silent to God {as He can hear our thoughts}, but it also includes, times of inward silence. First, notice that the times of silence include ‘internal dialogues with self and with God’. This would include talking to yourself, {i.e. thinking}, meditating on Scripture {thinking about Scripture}, and praying to God in your mind. Now, I support getting alone to read, pray, and meditate on Scripture, but let me ask, is praying in your mind more spiritual than praying out loud? The author seems to imply this in this chapter, but he doesn’t stop there.
The author says that ‘silence’ can not only be maintained outwardly, but also inwardly. You may ask what is meant by this. The author hints at it, but from the context, it can only mean the cessation of “internal dialogues with self and with God”. If you stop the internal dialogue, then you cannot talk to yourself, or think on the words of Scripture, and you cannot pray with the mind. The result is that you will have to ‘still your thoughts’ {i.e. empty the mind}. Does this sound familiar? If you are familiar with contemplative mysticism, you will recognize this teaching is found among the Desert Fathers (Catholic mystics) and is used in a variety of contemplative mystical practices (also Transcendental Meditation). It does not come from Scripture. Why does one practice an ‘inward silence’? According to the mystics, it’s in this inward silence (emptiness) that we ‘meet with God and hear His voice’. Whitney says that we are to practice it to “hear God’s voice better”. I’ve since heard Whitney say that we are not to empty our minds; however, ~16 years ago, when he wrote this book he was obviously leaning in that direction. The problem is that he will not come out and say that he was wrong, but continues to promote the book and its teachings. Another paragraph says,
“One of the more obvious reasons for getting away from earthly noise and human voices is to hear the Voice from Heaven better. Biblical examples of this which come to mind include Elijah going to Mt. Horeb where he heard the gentle whisper of God’s voice (1 Kings 19:11-13), Habakkuk standing on the guard post and keeping watch to see what God would say to him (Habakkuk 2:1), and Paul going away to Arabia after his conversion so he could be alone with God (Galatians 1:17). “
This is another important paragraph, as he tells us a major reason to practice an inward and outward silence and solitude. According to the author, it’s so we can better hear the voice of God. The story in 1 Kings 19 is supposed to be a good example of this. In this story, we find that Jezebel has threatened Elijah, so Elijah, being afraid for his life, leaves and travels to Beersheba with a servant. He then goes another day’s journey alone, where he sits down and asks the Lord to take his life. An angel feeds him and he travels on for 40 days {something used by Rick Warren in his Purpose Driven Life book} to Horeb. Upon arriving at Mt. Horeb, Elijah lodges in a cave. It is here the Lord speaks to him and says “What are you doing here, Elijah?” There is nothing in Scripture to imply that this was some type of ‘internal’ voice. Elijah then complains to God that he is alone and there are none who stand with him for God. After making Elijah stand on the mountain, God passes by him, but then speaks to him in a quiet voice, asking the same question. Remember, Elijah was a prophet. God spoke to His prophets. This was not some type of prompting or inner voice. I ask, was Elijah closer to God on Mt. Horeb, than back in the area of Damascus? Could God speak to him better when he was alone and silent? Is the point that Elijah could hear God better when he was alone and ‘silent’? No. It’s not even a side point. Elijah learned that God was at work, even when he didn’t think that He was, and that he was to continue doing what he was commanded, {not run off and be by himself}.
What about Habakkuk? In chapter 1, Habakkuk has charged that God has allowed those who are more evil to swallow up his people. He says that he has cried out ‘violence’ and yet God has not saved. In Habakkuk 2, he says that he will stand on his guard post and station himself on the rampart and will keep watch to see what God will speak. Again, Habakkuk was a prophet. God spoke to him. Habakkuk no where says that he will go off by himself and practice silence and solitude so he can hear from God. He is using guard/soldier terminology to say that he is ready for God to speak to him, in order to reprove him. We have already addressed Paul supposedly spending years in the wilderness. None of these examples indicate that people practiced silence and solitude, so they could better hear God’s voice.
“Of course it isn’t absolutely necessary to get far away from noises and people in order to hear God speak, otherwise we’d never perceive His promptings in the course of everyday life, or even in peopled worship services. But there are times to eliminate the voices of the world in order to hear undistracted the voice of God. “
How do we hear from God? Does He speak to us through an ‘inner voice’ or through ‘promptings’? I know this is popular, but it’s not biblical. Today, God speaks to us in His word. Even during biblical times, God never spoke to people through ‘promptings’ or ‘inner voices’, so tell me where in Scripture does it say that He will do so now? It doesn’t. To practice a spiritual discipline so we can ‘hear God’, that is, have an unmediated experience with God, is at the heart of mysticism. It is to try and learn the hidden, that which God has not revealed. I’m not saying that God doesn’t guide us, but no where does Scripture teach that He communicates to us apart from His written word. This leads to a subjectivism regarding God’s direction.
“The worship of God does not always require words, sounds, or actions. Sometimes worship consists of a God-focused stillness and hush. Scriptural precedent for this includes texts like Habakkuk 2:20: “But the Lord is in His holy temple. Let all the earth be silent before Him,” Zephaniah 1:7: “Be silent before the Lord God!”, and Zechariah 2:13, “Be silent, all flesh, before the Lord.” It’s not just a silence that’s enjoined, but a silence “before Him,” “before the Lord God!”, “before the Lord.” That’s the silence of worship. There are times to speak to God and there are times simply to behold and adore Him in silence. “
These passages are not talking about some type of ‘silent’ worship. If you read Calvin’s commentaries on these passages, he clearly says that the ‘silence’ refers to the people not being able to rebel or answer against God’s power and will. It’s like when you tell your kids to not talk back, because you are the parent. God is all powerful and sovereign, and mankind will submit to His will. The ‘silence’ here then is submission to His authority. Note, for most, it will not be a willing submission {i.e. worship}, but they will ultimately submit.
“Everyone has a regular need for restoring the resources of both the inward and outward man. It was true even for those who lived most closely with Jesus.
After spending themselves in several days of physical and spiritual output, notice the means of replenishment Jesus prescribed for His disciples, “Come away by yourselves to a lonely place and rest a while” (Mark 6:31). “
Go back and look at the passage in Mark. The Lord did not tell them that each was to take off by himself, so that each could be replenished by practicing a spiritual discipline of silence and solitude. He said “Come away by yourselves to a secluded place and rest a while.” The Bible notes that because of the crowds, they didn’t even have time to eat. All 12, plus the Lord, got into the same boat and went to the same ‘secluded place’. The only isolation was to be from the crowds. Nothing in Scripture hints that they didn’t talk, much less practice some inward silence. They weren’t practicing some type of spiritual discipline. They were going to get away and rest. Also, in the story, the crowd followed and got there ahead of them, so they ended up not being able to rest. This verse has nothing to do with a spiritual discipline of silence and solitude. I heard the author in a March 2009 interview quote this verse and use it to promote the spiritual discipline of silence and solitude.
“Perhaps one of the most common reasons believers have a time of silence and solitude with God, at least on occasion, is to discern His will about a matter. Jesus did this in Luke 6:12-13 when deciding whom to choose as the disciples who would travel with Him: “And it was at this time that He went off to the mountain to pray, and He spent the whole night in prayer to God. And when day came, He called His disciples to Him; and chose twelve of them, whom He also named as apostles.”
Books have been written on God’s will and how we are to discern it. We know that God so orders the universe, including our individual lives, but does He reveal this ‘individual will’ {His specific will for each individual} to us? Does Scripture teach that He will do so? No where does Scripture teach that God will reveal His will for our individual lives, beyond what is written in Scripture. Scripture also does not teach that God will communicate to us outside of Scripture {i.e. promptings, inner voice, giving a message to a fellow Christian…}. I know it is popular to believe that God does this {see the recent ‘Christian’ movie “Defeating the Giants” or any of Henry Blackaby’s books}. Yes, we are to pray over these matters, but for us to practice some type of spiritual discipline so that we can get God to reveal the ‘hidden’ to us is more akin to divination. Deuteronomy 29:29 says “The secret things belong to the Lord, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law.” What has been revealed to us is in the Scriptures. It is here that you will find the will of God for your life. Otherwise, you will have to walk by faith, as did Joseph. Using our Lord as an example for us, in this regard, is to misuse Scripture. The Lord often knew what was going to happen, and what was in the hearts of people. He is God. Did He not say later to the Apostles, “Did I not choose you…?” Luke 6: 12-13 does not say that Jesus had to confer with the Father, so as to know exactly who to choose. These men already belonged to the Father {John 10, 17}. They were chosen in eternity past. But even if in His humanity, He did confer with the Father, He was the Son of God in His ministry naming His apostles. This was not a matter of which job to choose, or what house to buy.
“God often makes His will clear to us in public, but there are times when He discloses it only in private. To discover it requires the Disciplines of silence and solitude.”
We ‘discover’ God’s will by reading Scripture. We live our life by faith, being led by the Spirit. You don’t discover God’s will through some spiritual practice, expecting extra-biblical communication from the Lord. Whitney says that to discover God’s will ‘requires’ the discipline of silence and solitude. Where does the Bible teach this?
Kevin, these are only some of the points in Chapter 10 that I have a problem with. I know this doesn’t address the idea of spiritual disciplines and the overall theme of the book. Since this is so long, I will try to address that in another message. Let me end with this point, in the beginning of the book, Whitney says that the Lord requires (or ‘expects’) these spiritual disciplines from us. He has just listed a number of ‘spiritual disciplines’, a number of which cannot be shown to come from Scripture (i.e. spiritual direction, journaling…). This is the ‘spirituality without boundaries’ that DeWaay references. I don’t believe that the idea of ‘spiritual disciplines’ itself comes from Scripture.
Michael
Kevin,
To address something a little more recent (since Whitney wrote this book about 16 years ago). I had a pastor who attended a conference in 2008, where Whitney was speaking/teaching (actually the pastor was also speaking at this conference) tell me that he attended Whitney’s session on praying through Scripture. This pastor said that he did not believe what Whitney taught during this session was biblical. He said that what Whitney taught reminded him of lecto divina. He said that during the session, one of the other attendees asked Prof. Whitney why the method of reading/praying through Scripture that he was teaching, wasn’t taught in Scripture. He said that Prof. Whitney really didn’t have an answer for this. After the session, this pastor went up to Whitney and asked if he was familiar with lecto divina. He said that Whitney got this “caught with your hand in the cookie jar” look and immediately started protesting that he doesn’t promote mysticism. Interesting, since the pastor had only asked if he was familiar with lecto divina.
I say a little more recent, but Whitney continues to promote his book and to teach the things he wrote in it, so even though it was written 16 years ago, it is recent. I’ll address some other areas in the book in another message if you want me to.
Kevin,
You had asked what part of your review I didn’t agree with, and I had not addressed that. It is the part where you state that “…and the solid Biblical foundation make this book worth reading” and “…this is a book that will benefit those who would discipline themselves for the purpose of godliness.”
I’m not sure I can agree with those statements. I question the “solid Biblical foundation” of the book and the actual benefit it has for those who read it. I’m not saying that those who read it will automatically go to Foster or Willard, though if they have some interest or openess to this type of understanding, then it certainly doesn’t warn against Foster/Willard, and I’m not saying that everything Whitney wrote is wrong or bad. I think the book is a mixture. There is enough good treatment of Scripture that one might tend to overlook the misuse of Scripture; however, is it OK to misuse Scripture if we mean well? You must have moved on to more recent reviews and news, and I’ve typed enough on this, so I probably re-visit this page again. Thanks.