September 14th, 2007 at 10:56 pm (Uncategorized)
The following are excerpts from an article by my friend Craig W. Booth on John Piper’s thesis of “Christian Hedonism”. To read the entire article, you can click herehttp://thefaithfulword.org/chfaqs.html Piper’s philosophy is very dangerous to the Christian life as its goal is to change your motives for doing everything. Christian Hedonism teaches that the REASON, the “why”, the heart-level motive for doing anything (including service for God) is to maximize your own happiness In God. As Piper states, “I do what I do because it will make me happiest in the long run.” He also said, “A Christian Hedonist is one who is devoted to maximizing his own happiness and who has learned how to do it from the Bible.”
Question 2.
Isn’t Christian Hedonism just another way of saying, “God rewards good behavior”? Answer 2. Christian Hedonism is not only about believing that doing-the-right-thing results in greater happiness than doing the wrong thing (all Christians believe this and have always believed this down though the centuries). Christian Hedonism is about changing the focus of your life from pleasing God because of His supreme status as God to the unrelenting chase after your own pleasure, in this case through the mechanism of service to God. The change in emphasis from loving God supremely to loving rewards supremely is the key to understanding Christian Hedonism. It must be noted here that Dr. Piper has written that Christian Hedonism is not about loving the rewards more than loving the rewarder. However, as the following quotes demonstrate, such an isolated statement is contradictory to the bulk of what he writes which demonstrates that in fact, achieving a pleasurable experience (the reward) is indeed the true goal of service and is even the goal of worship for a Christian Hedonist.Dr. Piper himself wrote a web article in which he identifies the chase after pleasure as being of higher priority than any other motive or human endeavor. In the web article, “Brothers, Consider Christian Hedonism”, he said, “By Christian hedonism … I mean that pursuing the highest good will always result in our happiness. But all Christians believe this. Christian hedonism says more, namely, that we should pursue happiness with all our might. The desire to be happy is a proper motive for every good deed, and if you abandon pursuit of your own joy you cannot please God.” (quoted from www.desiringgod.org on May 29, 2003, emphasis in original) Christian Hedonism, as defined by the one who coined the term, says that the philosophy is not about doing good so that happiness will result. It is that we “should pursue happiness with all our might.” If that sounds vaguely familiar consider this quote: “and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and will all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.” Since Dr. Piper as a Bible scholar uses that phraseology he may be trying to draw a purposeful comparison by implication. What is that comparison? I do not feel the comparison is favorable to hedonism.The highest priority for man in Scripture is to love God will all our might, because He first loved us, and as a result we will rejoice in God’s gifts. The highest priority of Christian Hedonism is to “pursue happiness with all our might”. In other words, to love pleasure and to chase after happiness is a higher priority than to love God.You can only do one thing “with all your might”. Which pursuit is the one God sanctions? To love Him with all your might. Which pursuit does Christian Hedonism offer? The “pursuit of your own joy” “with all your might”. Are these two “all your might” priorities at conflict? Yes, because you can only have one greatest priority that consumes all your might. If you choose to love God with all your might, how much strength do you have left over to chase your own pleasures? Logically, the answer is none because you have used it all up.
Conversely, if one uses all his strength to pursue his own joy, how much strength does he have left over to love God by “no longer living for themselves but for Him who died and rose again” (2 Corinthians 5:15)? The hedonist would have no strength left over to love God or live for Him because he consumed all his strength living for his own happiness.
We are compelled to conclude that Christian Hedonism is just exactly as Dr. Piper defines it, our highest calling to pursue our own joy and our own happiness “with all our strength”. Of course, that would explain why it is called hedonism in the first place.
The only resolution to the dilemma is to redefine the command to “love God with all your strength” to mean exactly the same thing that “pursue your own happiness with all your strength” means. If that were true, then you could say that by “loving God you are doing the highest good which will result in your greatest happiness.” May I point out that this is exactly what traditional Christianity has taught for 2000 years and this is exactly what Dr. Piper said Christian Hedonism is not.
It is not possible to have both as the highest priority. Either the pursuit of your own happiness and pleasure is a highest of all priorities that will consume all your strength, or, the pursuit of loving God with all your strength is your highest priority. This entire focus on which philosophy to make one’s highest priority is the very bedrock of imbalance and improper focus that is the hallmark of Christian Hedonism.
Which is the proper higher priority? The Bible says that love is the greatest. Nowhere does the Bible say to pursue pleasure. This should not be a difficult dilemma to resolve.
Question 9. If it weren’t called “Christian Hedonism” would you still have a problem with the philosophy? Answer 9. This question takes on many forms and has been directed to me times too numerous to recount. Most often what is meant is: “the only improper part of the doctrine (philosophy) of Christian Hedonism is that the word ‘hedonism’ is used, so we can just discard the name and keep teaching the doctrine.”So very many times I have been told that Dr. Piper only used the word hedonism for its shock value to ensure people gave attention to this books. He even says something very much like that in his own book when he says one reason he chose the word was for its “jolting effect” (Desiring God, Appendix 4, page 289, 1996 edition).This may be likened to a snack food company called Mann-Ore Inc. Mann-Ore decided to begin marketing a new convenience snack food and sought to give it mass market exposure quickly so that people would be talking about it everywhere, bringing the company from virtual obscurity to national attention inside one year. They sought free and widespread publicity on a limited budget, so they opted for a shocking name for their product. They called it “Dog Poop Snack Bars.”As it turned out, “Dog Poop” was an offensive name for a food product, but it caused the desired instant celebrity for the product that Mann-Ore desired. Kids ate it up, adults tolerated it. And it would have been a happy fairy tale ending, except. On the wrapper, in fine print, the ingredients were listed, “Primary Ingredient: Dog poop and other animal waste products.” In other words, the name was not just a clever marketing scheme, the name actually stood for what the product actually was. This is how it is with Christian Hedonism. Yes, the name may have been given for shock value, to draw in the public. A name rarely says much about the nutritional value of a food product and rarely says much about the substance of the doctrine behind it, witness “Calvinism” for example. That is, unless the name genuinely does characterize the doctrine, and is a truly accurate description of the philosophy.
Many times Dr. Piper has written that the name is a valid and meaningful label for his philosophy.
“Why call it Christian Hedonism? I am aware that calling this philosophy of life ‘Christian Hedonism’ runs the risk of ignoring Bishop Ryle’s counsel…Nevertheless I stand by the term for at least six reasons.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 287, 1996) What Piper writes after that is a six point defense stating: the dictionary definition is precisely what he means by the word (a living for, and a devotion to, pleasure), the Encyclopedia of Philosophy favorably (in Piper’s opinion) defines the word hedonism as a person seeking maximum pleasure for himself, C.S. Lewis once said that to enjoy God’s created world is to draw “no distinction between sensuous and aesthetic pleasures” which can properly be called hedonism, V. Eller and Clark Pinnock each used the term “hedonism” in one of their writings, the term has an “arresting and jolting effect”, that Jesus used the offensive term “thief” by which to describe the Lord’s soon return, and finally, because “the Bible teaches that man’s chief end is to glorify God BY enjoying him forever.”So, the content of the doctrine of Christian Hedonism is “hedonism”. Or at least this is what the individual who is marketing the product has put on the ingredients list. We can easily test this. Is Christian Hedonism really comprised of “hedonism”? Consider a few of Dr. Piper’s own statements defining the core belief of Christian Hedonism as meaning the pursuit of one’s own pleasure as a higher priority than any command in God’s Word or any personal priority that a person may have. “It is a general term to cover a wide variety of teachings which have elevated pleasure very highly.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 287)“Christian Hedonism does not put us above God when it makes the joy of worship its goal.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 85, 1996)“I came to see that it is unbiblical and arrogant to try to worship God for any other reason than the pleasure to be had in him.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 16, 1996 edition)
“To that end this book aims to persuade you that ‘The chief end of man is to glorify God BY enjoying him forever’.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 15)
“The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling.” (Piper, page 21, The Dangerous Duty of Delight)
“Maximizing our joy in God is what we were created for.” (Piper, page 16, Dangerous Duty)
“The aim of life is to maximize our joy.” (Piper, page 19, Dangerous Duty
Now, admittedly, the definitions and semantics become quite difficult to discuss since Dr. Piper’s use of some words might be considered a bit loose or imprecise. He seems to regularly interchange joy for pleasure, and happiness for joy, and delight for hedonism (the common use of the word hedonism in our culture usually means “the love of all kinds of pleasure”). From a doctrinal and biblical perspective this type of word-swapping endangers the meanings of the words themselves, the meanings the words have in the texts of the sacred Scriptures, and therefore the proper interpretations of those passages of Scripture. These words have their own meanings and they are not quite so interchangeable as Piper’s use of them in his writings. That, however, is a matter for a different FAQ.Suffice it to understand here that Christian Hedonism is a poor enough title for any Christian philosophy or doctrine. As offensive as it might be, however, it is at the least a very descriptive title for the core of the philosophy itself and is a meaningful label that reveals the substance of the underlying proposition. On this fact Dr. Piper and I both agree: The true core of Christian Hedonism is hedonism.
Question 10. Isn’t there a Bible verse that tells us what most glorifies God? Answer 10. No. There is no Bible passage of which I am aware that describes or defines what most glorifies God. Please read the following two articles for greater understanding. God Is Most Glorified…When?, and, Satisfied in the Lord, a Re-examination of the Motto.
Question 13. Every evangelical/fundamental pastor endorses Christian Hedonism, doesn’t that prove you are wrong to reject it? Answer 13. In truth, Christian Hedonism has been embraced by a staggering number of famous authors. However, some of those authors would admit they have not studied the ideas out in depth but have simply liked the general premise. In fact many local congregational pastors have rejected Christian Hedonism but have not bothered to attempt to go to press with rebuttals. If good doctrine were decided on the basis of popularity contests, then Christian Hedonism would be one of the best doctrines going today. For the serious Christian, however, good doctrine is decided on the basis of how well it matches up against the Word of God and how well it is derived from the Word of God; I do not find Christian Hedonism to be sufficiently sound to be classified as “good doctrine.” If this means I must stand apart in the company of but few others, then this is the price that I must be willing to pay to love and to please the Lord Jesus. You are invited to also read the article Dust Jacket Endorsements.
Question 15. What is the most frequent criticism you receive regarding your articles on Christian Hedonism? Answer 15. About half the comments I receive are positive or neutral, and about half are critical. By far, the most common complaint is, “Sure, you quoted Piper alright, but he does not mean in that quote what you say he means.” Many of those issuing complaints also have made comments which make me realize that sometimes we read, or assimilate, only what we want to believe and put out of mind those things which we wish had not been said in print. For example, one associate pastor with whom I talked a year ago, who supported Christian Hedonism, denied that Piper even wrote some of the actual sentences he actually did write in Desiring God. During the conversation the associate pastor refused me the opportunity to open the book and quote aloud the debated passages. On another occasion a young man, now a seminary student, was having a conversation with my wife and I and also denied that Dr. Piper wrote some of the material in the book Desiring God. When my wife picked up our copy to read some of the paragraphs which the young man staunchly affirmed were not actually printed there, he left the room quickly so as not to hear the quotations, loudly stating over and over, “I disagree, I disagree, I disagree…”Such situations continue to occur. Some have written stating that Dr. Piper never said that “pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling” (page 21, The Dangerous Duty of Delight), or that the “aim of life is to maximize our joy” (page 19, Dangerous Duty), or that worship is a feast of emotionalism because the goal of worship is to experientially feel joy and have pleasurable sensations in God (”Christian Hedonism does not put us above God when it makes the joy of worship its goal.” “I came to see that it is unbiblical and arrogant to try to worship God for any other reason than the pleasure to be had in him.” — Desiring God, bold emphasis added).It is one thing to disagree with how to interpret what someone else writes (a topic for a later FAQ) but is another thing to deny that what is written does indeed exist. To me, this is an odd type of apologetic. Dr. Piper clearly writes that Christian Hedonism is about the pursuit of one’s own pleasure with all one’s strength as one’s highest calling and chief end which is a prerequisite for salvation, yet, some who desire to adopt the general philosophy of hedonism find it uncomfortable to acknowledge some of its plainly stated tenets. It is possible that some feel that these more extreme statements of hedonism push the philosophy just slightly beyond the outside edges of orthodoxy and simply desire that they had not been penned, or, they desire them to be inaccurate representations of the philosophy. One Christian author wrote to me and explained that he felt the above statements, along with others I have quoted, while accurately quoted, were only hyperbole and purposeful exaggerations by Dr. Piper and that Dr. Piper did not mean them to be taken as summary statements of the philosophy. In his mind, this allowed Christian Hedonism as written in Desiring God to remain an acceptable philosophy and a set of doctrines in total without having to lend credence to the “hedonistic” aspects of Christian Hedonism.
In short, such folks prefer to think of Christian Hedonism as merely a reminder that God sometimes calls us to express joy rather than understanding Christian Hedonism to be hedonism, an actual call to elevate very highly the attainment of pleasure for one’s own benefit and to make pursuing pleasure “our highest calling”. Such an approach to “reading” Christian books and adopting new philosophies and doctrines is dangerously lacking in discernment.
“pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling” (page 21, The Dangerous Duty of Delight)“aim of life is to maximize our joy” (page 19, Dangerous Duty)“Christian Hedonism does not put us above God when it makes the joy of worship its goal.” …
“I came to see that it is unbiblical and arrogant to try to worship God for any other reason than the pleasure to be had in him.” — Desiring God, bold emphasis added).
I feel that the above quotes from Desiring God and Dangerous Duty, while certainly carrying shock value for their attention-getting appeal, are also meant by Dr. Piper as accurate representations of Christian Hedonism, though admittedly only in part. One must remember that hedonism by any name is still hedonism. This philosophy values the emotional experiences of pleasure as one’s highest calling. Even if this philosophy were called by another more mainstream name, perhaps such as Emotional Devotion, the statements of excess (excess meaning endorsing the pursuit of pleasure beyond what is called for in the Scriptures) would still be biblically inappropriate and would require the same red flag of warning.Criticism of my interpretations of Scripture would be one matter. But to level criticism that I take the words of Desiring God and Dangerous Duty to mean just exactly what they actually say is another matter entirely. Let us not close our eyes to what is written in the philosophy of Christian Hedonism and say “it isn’t really there”, rather, let us open the Word and ask, “is it really in there?”
Post a Comment