One thing that greatly irks me about many Southern Baptists is their unwillingness to learn from *anything* other than the most recent, often shallow SBC materials and from “Christian psychology” (James Dobson and such). Forget anything that is Baptist from the 19th or early 20th centuries. The Abstract of Principles? The London or New Hampshire Confessions? What are those? (I know that these are systematic theology documents– I’m just making a point about the ignorance and apathy of many Southern Baptists about their own theological history.)

*Definitely* don’t bring up anything from Lutherans, Anglicans (other than C.S. Lewis), Presbyterians, Methodists, charismatics of *any* stripe, and even the Catholics that some Protestants like (such as Augustine)! Anyway, I’m ranting now, so I’ll stop. I love my brothers and sisters in the Southern Baptist family. I’m one of them! Some of them frustrate me, but I do love them. I’m sure that I frustrate them too, being “Reformed” and all. (What would Charles Spurgeon or William Carey say about that, hehe?)

John’s comment is along the same lines that I was thinking. It seems to me that there has to be some ground work done so that people can understand what spiritual formation actually is. And that goes for me as well. I think I can tell you what it’s not. It’s not going through “Experiencing God” again. Or having early morning “quiet time”(the earlier the better). Or going to the next PK event. But can I cogently state what spiritual formation is? I’m not sure that I could. (My pastor seems to think that his preaching should be our primary source of spiritual formation but I have to respectfully disagree)

Once the “language” is taught and maybe a few paradigms(I know, overused word) shifted then maybe some actual practice can take place.

Maybe I’m making this harder than it is. If so, then help me out.

He is a scholar in Biblical Hebrew, and is a good writer as well. I like the fact that his commentary is under his translation of the Psalm. Makes for fascinating reading and meditating.

I think I see what mean about Whitney. I find him to be much milder and more accessible than the Puritans on the subject of assurance, however, and more biblically-centered than the typical SBC counsel.

Whitney aside, my original intent was to stress that until some of the leaders in the SBC step up to say that our practice (and theology) of assurance (and “rededication”) must be challenged, or at least discussed openly, we will have difficulty ever seriously approaching spir formation. Why? Because assur/red. become the automatic,two-headed answer to any and all barriers to growth: If spir. growth (“formation is not usually used)is not happening, then a person is either not saved or needs to rededicate. I know I am painting with a broad brush, but I do see this as a very pervasive culture in our SBC churches.

Dana

I think this would go a long way in preparing the people to be more receptive to other methods of spiritual formation. It’s a big first step, but a significant one.