The end of the FAQ on Christian Hedonism

Dear friends,

This brings us to the conclusion of the Frequently Asked Questions on John Piper’s Christian Hedonism. I pray the weekly articles have been edifying and drawn you closer to our Lord Jesus Christ.

Please feel free to share the website www.ChristianHedonism.net with anyone who may be interested. There are many more articles on Christian Hedonism at http://www.thefaithfulword.org/cathedonism.html which may be freely browsed as well.

Please email me at tramsek@gmail.com if you have any questions or feedback. I’d love to hear what your thoughts are. May the Lord bless you all as you seek first His kingdom and His righteousness.

Tony Ramsek

Why don’t you folks at thefaithfulword.org website get it? It’s not ordinary hedonism, it’s hedonistic pleasure "in God".

Final Question.

Why don’t you folks at thefaithfulword.org website get it? It’s not ordinary hedonism, it’s hedonistic pleasure "in God".

Final Answer.

The "question" above is often stated as a comment but everyone knows precisely what the author intends. He means to ask, "Why don’t you get it? We aren’t talking about taking pleasure in the ordinary things of this world like sunsets, beaches, lakes, and Autumn leaves. That would be ‘ordinary hedonism’. We’re talking about taking pleasure in nothing else but God. Being satisfied in nothing else but God. Why can’t you get that?"

Perhaps C.S. Lewis already answered this question sufficiently when he wrote in letter number 17 in Letters to Malcolm:

I was learning the far more secret doctrine that pleasures are shafts of the glory [corporeal displays of the glory of God] as it strikes our sensibility. As it impinges on our will or our understanding, we give it different names–goodness or truth or the like. But its flash upon our senses and mood is pleasure. …

You notice that I am drawing no distinction between sensuous and aesthetic pleasures. But why should I? The line is almost impossible to draw and what use would it be if one succeeded in drawing it?

Lewis meant that finding pleasure with your senses, such as seeing sunlight through tree limbs and foliage of the canopy in a shaded forest with your eyes, feeling the sunlight on your face and the cool breeze on your hand, and sensing the aroma of wildflowers is no different than finding pleasure with your spirit in an aesthetic manner when you meditate about God. Most Christian Hedonists would refer to the forest experience as "sensuous pleasure / ordinary hedonism" and the meditation experience as taking pleasure "in God".

But this is not what Lewis meant. Please do not miss Lewis’ point. To Lewis there is no difference between experiencing pleasure in God (what he refers to as aesthetic pleasure) and experiencing pleasure in the world God created (sensuous pleasure). No difference.

How is this possible? It is revealed to us in the Word that God created the world. It is His footstool. He is present in the world as well as over the world. Christ alone holds the world together. There is no good thing in the world that He did not create. If we find the created world pleasurable, we are experiencing pleasure in God.

Lewis further goes on to explain to Malcolm that it is his intent not to go searching for more pleasure, but rather the opposite, "I have tried … to make every pleasure into a channel of adoration", adoration of God and what He has done. In other words, Lewis would come across a pleasurable experience, and he would consciously respond by saying, "what is God’s part in this?"

By contrast, Christian Hedonism requires man to actually pursue the pleasure itself "in God." But which pleasures? Aesthetic pleasures, or, sensuous pleasures; spiritual pleasures, or, common pleasures? According to Lewis there is no difference.

If there is no difference between taking pleasure in the lawful things of the world and taking pleasure in God, then when Christian Hedonism commands us to pursue our pleasures, it is equally acceptable to pursue the pleasure of fishing, of good dining, of prayer, or of giving. There is no difference.

If there is no difference between taking pleasure in the fact that God created a beautiful lake and taking pleasure in the fact that He is so loving as to save us, then what is the true meaning of "Christian Hedonism"? Which pleasure is it more biblical to pursue? All lawful pleasures are of God and in God.

Is a Christian "wrong" because he prefers to pursue the pleasure of God’s people at a picnic beside a babbling brook, compared to the believer who prefers to sit in his room and meditate on a difficult passage of Scripture? Is a believer in sin because he more enjoys singing in the choir while another believer more enjoys cooking dinner for her husband who is returning from a week long business trip?

"Christian Hedonism" loses all meaning when you understand the following:

• Taking pleasure in God’s divine qualities and in His works (such as salvation of mankind and His creation of this physical world), sensuously and aesthetically, is the same as taking pleasure "in God"
• All God’s attributes and good creations may be enjoyed by the believer
• God does not command us to "pursue pleasure" at all, though He does permit us to experience it, and whenever we do experience pleasure, we should remember from Whom this good has come

C.S. Lewis also wrote to Malcolm a deadly serious warning regarding the temptation to desire pleasure. He called it greed. "Greed. Instead of saying, ‘This also is Thou,’ one may say the fatal word Encore." Greed. The pursuit of pleasure for oneself. Demanding of God that we again and again get pleasure from Him or His world. C.S. Lewis was no advocate of pursuing pleasure, merely ascribing to God goodness for having provided pleasure on those occasions when he would come upon it.

C.S. Lewis also found that by focusing intently on pleasure in order to find God within that experience could lead to another human downfall: pride. Lewis wrote: "There is also conceit: the dangerous reflection that not everyone can find God in a plain slice of bread and butter, or that others would condemn as simply ‘grey’ the sky in which I am delightedly observing such delicacies of pearl and dove and silver." Not everyone will respond the same way to any given circumstance, and when this happens, the tendency of man and the hedonist will be to assume oneself to be superior over another who sees not a pleasure in an experience, but perhaps some other equally valid but unpleasant message (e.g. a rebuke for sin committed, a memory of a lost one resurfaced, a foreshadowing of an impending doom that escapes the notice of the one consumed with pleasure).

For this very reason, that often the sober warning of impending doom is a more proper message to be noted than distilling the pleasure out of every experience, the Scriptures tell us that the minds of fools reside in the house of pleasure. And because of pride, many men and women will wear a smile of supposed spirituality on the outside while their heart is being crushed from a weight of grief on the inside. Elevating pleasure to the point of a pursuit carries with it a wealth of condemnation and warning from the Word.

It is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of feasting, because that is the end of every man, and the living takes it to heart. Sorrow is better than laughter, for when a face is sad a heart may be happy. The mind of the wise is in the house of mourning, while the mind of fools is in the house of pleasure. (Ecclesiastes 7:2-4)

Even of this fact, C.S. Lewis once again acts as his own clarion claxon, warning no one to take his philosophy too far regarding finding ways to adore God through every small pleasure one might encounter. He knew the importance of not elevating pleasure to the level of a pursuit.

"One wants a great many things besides this ‘adoration in infinitesimals’ which I am preaching. And if I were preaching it in public…I should have to pack it in ice, enclose it in barbed-wire reservations, and stick up warning notices in every direction. Don’t imagine I am forgetting that the simplest act of mere obedience is worship of a far more important sort than what I’ve been describing (to obey is better than sacrifice). "

Lewis properly understood that authentic worship is "mere obedience" and that obedience is "far more important" than experiencing pleasure. He was genuinely concerned that someone might misconstrue or misrepresent his position as meaning that pleasure was in any way equal to or higher a calling than worship or obedience. Lewis’ cautions and warnings not to elevate pleasure are quite clear.

The desire to experience pleasure is a natural element of mankind. Yes, the desire for pleasure motivates us along with so very many other motivations. Which motivation is "holiest", "most pure", or most highly commanded? Only one: "pursue love" for there is no commandment greater that this (1 Corinthians 14:1, Mark 12:28-31).

In so much as "Christian Hedonism" requires the pursuit of one’s own pleasure as if this were a command from the Lord, "Christian Hedonism" is in error.

When "Christian Hedonism" attempts to differentiate what good things we "should" take pleasure in and which we should not, as if taking pleasure in every good thing was not entirely of God’s gifting to mankind, then "Christian Hedonism" mistakenly devalues God’s creation or certain attributes of God, and therefore God Himself.

Taking our pleasure in God, in Who He is, in what He has created, in what He has done, is a good and proper thing. Taking pleasure in any good thing is to take pleasure in God. Taking pleasure in God is what has been going on for thousands of years by the ancient believing Jews up through the contemporary Christian.

Taking pleasure in God as a natural response to His good gifts to man is an entirely different concept than to require a whole-hearted dedication to nothing but the pursuit of pleasure. This is where Christian Hedonism fails. It cannot offer one Bible verse that directly commands man to "pursue his own pleasure". Much more than that, it cannot find anywhere a preponderance of evidence suggesting that this "pursuit of pleasure" should be elevated to the rank of "greatest pursuit" or "highest calling" (as Dr. Piper calls it). And the pursuit of pleasure must become a man’s foremost pursuit if the name "hedonism" is to have any meaning whatsoever.

Since Christian Hedonism is a call to use "all our strength" in devotion to pleasure in God as our highest calling, and since it has no mandate from the Scriptures to issue this call, the philosophy is fully and wholly without meaning or substance, not merely the name of the philosophy, but the entirety of its content. Even more so is it without meaning given that pleasure in God can be found through our senses as we behold His creation; through our mind as we contemplate Him, His works, and His creation; and in our spirits as we are made aware that we have been regenerated by His Spirit.

Pleasure is not to be pursued. Pleasure is an experiential gift from God which He offers to us in all good things. As silly, arrogant, and greedy children might, we could demand more gifts of pleasure from God our Father, but we are not so commanded by His Word. In fact, we are often told to stop thinking of ourselves first, our comforts over those of our neighbors, and our selfishness. Seek first His kingdom and His righteousness and foremost of all that we do, pursue love for God.

Pursue our own pleasures as our highest calling and greatest priority as do the hedonists? No. Pursue love, fear God, seek to be righteous as He is righteous, those are our biblically commanded priority pursuits.

There is no such thing in the Bible as the distinction between "Christian Hedonism" and "ordinary hedonism". All good things can be gratefully received from the hand of God with thanks, and taking pleasure in any of these worldly (but lawful) and spiritual gifts is to experience pleasure "in God". Let us not be spoiled children and demand more pleasure from our Father, but let us instead unselfishly love Him as is His due as Father, God, Savior, and Creator. Our pleasures will take care of themselves with no purposeful attention given them at all if we focus the whole of our energy first on our obligation as children: love our Father with all our mind, body, and strength.

Is God Pleasure? (A question on the nature of God.)

Question 38.

Is God Pleasure? (A question on the nature of God.)

Answer 38.

God is pleasure, or so assert some pleasure-centric philosophers. Such is the ever increasing misconception on the nature of God; people have begun to override what Scripture says about God with what their philosophies say God "ought" to be.

• God is love (1 John 4:8, 4:16)
• God is holy (Leviticus 11:44, 19:2, Psalm 99:5)
• God is almighty (Psalm 47:8, Isaiah 13:6, 2 Corinthians 6:18)

God is love. Love is not present with God, rather, God is love itself. Where there is true love, there is God. All that God does is loving. It is His nature. They will know we are Christians by our love for one another (John 13:35). Love is not simply a tool or a reward that God manufactures, God Himself is love.

God is holy. Again, holiness is God’s nature. Holiness is not an aspect of God He can choose not to manifest. God does not become holy only to favored individuals, God is holy to all. God is holy.

God is almighty. God created all. God owns all. God rules all. His nature, His being, His title is ruler and creator. God is almighty.

Is God pleasure? Is it His nature to know only pleasure and to be incapable of experiencing anything unpleasant? No (Ezekiel 18:32, 33:11, Isaiah 53:3). Instead of it being His nature, pleasure is a tool that God uses to reward men, to draw them to Himself, to help men visualize one possible eternity. God also uses the tools of trials, suffering, and sorrow in much the same way, to motivate men to repent and to serve Him (Hebrews 12).

God is not "sorrow" by nature. God is capable of feeling both sorrow and pleasure, but God’s nature is neither comprised of sorrow nor pleasure. God can choose to exhibit and bestow sorrow, or He can choose to exhibit and bestow pleasure. Such are the choices He makes with His tools.

As God is love, He can act only in a manner that is loving. As God is holy, He can act in ways that are holy and can never choose to sin–in fact, He cannot even be tempted (James 1:13). As God is almighty, He can never select a new being on whom to place the glory of His kingship while He abdicates and walks away (Isaiah 42:8).

Perhaps this was why the miracle of God becoming a man was so significant. While God cannot be tempted to sin, the man Jesus was tempted though all the while remaining holy (Hebrews 4:15). While God cannot abdicate his glory as King of Creation, the man Jesus could temporarily put aside the glory of that title, though not the weight of its responsibility (Philippians 2:7). Jesus, the man of sorrows, became an example of the perfect man.

Unlike agape-love and holiness, pleasure exists, even apart from God.

What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have; so you commit murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight and quarrel. You do not have because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend it on your pleasures. You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. (James 4:1-4)

Pleasure is not god. God is not pleasure. Pleasure, when it becomes a desire of man, can become the source of lust and sin. How unlikely it is that pleasure is the essence of God’s very nature.

Psalm 16 refers to God as dispensing pleasure and joy from His right hand to the resurrected dead, not as being composed of pleasure itself.

For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.

You will make known to me the path of life; In Your presence is fullness of joy; In Your right hand there are pleasures forever. (Psalm 16:10,11)

In fact, a careful reading of Psalm 16:11 demonstrates that joy and pleasure are the reactions of the believer, the response of those who encounter God, who stand in His presence. It does not say that God’s nature is composed of joy and pleasure. Rather, joy and pleasure are the internal responses that the children of God will experience when placed into God’s presence eternally, following death and after the judgement.

Man’s response to God’s glory as King and Creator is often described as fear and awe (Psalm 89:7). This does not mean that God’s nature is fear and awe. Man’s response to God’s holiness is often sorrow and repentance (Hebrews 12). This too does not mean that God’s nature is sorrow and repentance. So it is with resurrected man’s response to God’s perfection and forgiveness, man responds with joy and pleasure yet it does not mean that God’s nature is joy and pleasure.

When discussing the nature of the Lord God Almighty, it is wise to be most careful with Scripture. The Word does not say, "God is pleasure." Rather it does tell us that resurrected man responds to God with both joy and pleasure having been saved from the decay of the grave forever. It is a mistake to characterize man’s happy response to God’s grace as if man’s responses were what composed the nature of God.

• God is holy.
• God is love.
• God is almighty.

Let us be awed and rejoice in the fact that someday we will be in His holy, loving, and mighty presence. Until that day, let us pursue holiness as He is holy.

————

You are invited to read more about God’s nature in the article:

Is God a Hedonist?

Is God a Hedonist?

Question 37.

Is God a Hedonist?

Answer 37.

Please read the article entitled:

Is God a Hedonist?

Isn’t the doctrine of the Trinity similar to Christian Hedonism in that it is a label and a doctrine not explicitly taught in the Bible but is nonetheless true?

Question 36.

Isn’t the doctrine of the Trinity similar to Christian Hedonism in that it is a label and a doctrine not explicitly taught in the Bible but is nonetheless true?

Answer 36.

Many people have compared the speculative philosophy of Christian Hedonism to the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. The comparison is born on the assumption that extra-biblical labels may be freely created to apply to biblically derived doctrines. This assumption is acceptable enough. The comparison then continues using the logic that since labels are acceptable inventions (albeit they are not found in the Word) Christian Hedonism must be just as acceptable a doctrine as the Trinity because both are loosely based on Scripture, and are therefore both biblical concepts described by "artificial" labels. It is here that the logic of comparison is faulty.

Use of the Trinity as an analogous situation for Christian Hedonism is a false analogy because the Bible very clearly and explicitly teaches us the doctrine of one God consisting of three persons who are also called God. These tenets of the Trinity are based on explicit Bible verses that individually teach us that God is One, the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. Three make the One, or, Three in One (Trinity).

In contrast to the doctrine of the Trinity, Christian Hedonism fails to find such specific Bible verses for its primary tenets: the pursuit of one’s own pleasure with all one’s might is an actual command of Scripture, the pursuit of one’s own pleasure is one’s highest calling, one must become a Christian Hedonist to see the Kingdom of God and be saved, and the very goal of worship is attaining the pleasure which is found while worshipping God.

Perhaps it can be said another way. The "Trinity" is a very polite label for a gathering of specific Bible verses. It is not a label for a general idea or philosophy. Whereas Christian Hedonism is a philosophy that is not built from specific verses but from a system of logic and assumptions based loosely on abstract interpretations of a wide ranging set of passages that do not actually state or directly teach the very tenets of hedonism.

The "Proofs"

To "prove" the doctrine of the Trinity, you need to demonstrate that the Bible calls God "One God" and not three gods. Then you need to demonstrate that the Bible calls the Father "God", the Son "God", and the Holy Spirit "God".

In fact, the Word does just that. The four tenets of the doctrine of the Trinity are:

Tenet One

: God is One, not Three; God alone is the Alpha and the Omega (the First and Last God)–there are no other Gods but He

"Jesus answered, "The foremost is, ‘HEAR, O ISRAEL! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD." (Mark 12:29)

"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me.’ " (Isaiah 44:6)

"…’I, the LORD, am the first, and with the last. I am He.’ " (Isaiah 41:4)

"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son." (Revelation 21:6,7)

"…My glory I will not give to another. Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last.’ " (Isaiah 48:11b,12)

Tenet Two

: The Father is God

"…the Father, God, has set His seal." (John 6:27b)

"…’I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’ " (John 20:17b)

Tenet Three

: The Son is God (the child who is born is actually God Eternal, the first and the last)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. … And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. … For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. (John 1:1,14, 17)

"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. … I, Jesus…", (Revelation 22:13, 16a)

For a child will be born to us, a son

will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this. (Isaiah 9:6,7)

Tenet Four

: The Holy Spirit is God; and He, as God, appoints gifts to the saints as He wills

"Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit.
And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord.
There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons.
But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good." (1 Corinthians 12:4-7)

But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. (1 Corinthians 12:11)

But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired. (1 Corinthians 12:18)

And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:28)

And perhaps the best summation passage that aligns the worship of the Father with Jesus being worshipped as the Mighty God Who has all authority, which then is aligned with the fact that all believers are baptized (made to identify with) the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit is Matthew 28:17-20.

When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

While the label "Trinity" may be a polite "made-up" label that describes a deep truth of plain Scriptures, each of the four tenets of the doctrine of the Trinity are expressly supported by direct Scripture. God says that only God is called "the first and the last", yet Jesus calls Himself by that title. We find that Isaiah calls the Son of God, who is born on the Earth, by the name Eternal Father and Mighty God. We read that God is the only One Who assigns the gifts as He desires, but we read that the Holy Spirit is the One who assigns the gifts as He wills.

This is not a game of logic or a philosophy lesson. The names God chose for Himself are equally applied to Jesus and the Holy Spirit in numerous verses that explicitly say these things. A person does not have to work at trying to find subtle connections between the Son and the Father, and it is not necessary to jump through loops of loosely tied threads of logic to see some minor insight that might lead in the right direction. Scripture spells out the doctrine plainly. God’s name is Eternal Father and His Son is to be called, Eternal Father. God is He Who gives out spiritual gifts, and God is the Holy Spirit who decides what person is to get which gifts. Each tenet of the doctrine is plainly corroborated by a very plain statement from Scripture.

Christian Hedonism Lacks Such Proof Verses

Now compare this to the philosophy of Christian Hedonism. To prove Christian Hedonism you need to demonstrate that the Bible calls devotion to pleasure the greatest pursuit and highest calling of mankind, and you must demonstrate that the Bible commands that one must be converted to Christian Hedonism to be saved, and that the worship of God is only valid when the goal of worship is to attain pleasure.

Tenet One of Christian Hedonism

: the pursuit of your own pleasure in God is a command from the Bible

Delight yourself in the LORD; And He will give you the desires of your heart. (Psalm 37:4)

[Note: nowhere in this verse are the words "pursue pleasure" found, nor is it proper to use logic to construe "delight yourself in the Lord" to infer a command to "pursue your own pleasure in God"--see

FAQ 29]

Tenet Two of Christian Hedonism

: the Pursuit of Pleasure is the greatest pursuit and highest calling of believers

"The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling." (Piper, page 21, The Dangerous Duty of Delight)

[Note: Christian Hedonism offers no Bible passages to support this tenet, so we offer this quote from Dangerous Duty.]

Tenet Three of Christian Hedonism

: one must be converted to Christian Hedonism to be saved

"Unless a man be born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)

"Could it be that today the most straightforward biblical command for conversion is not, ‘Believe in the Lord,’ but, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’?" (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)

"The pursuit of joy in God is not optional. It is not an ‘extra’ that a person might grow into after he comes to faith. Until your heart has hit upon this pursuit, your ‘faith’ cannot please God. It is not saving faith." (John Piper, Desiring God, page 69)

[Note: Christian Hedonism offers no legitimate Bible passages to support this tenet, so we offer these quotes from Desiring God.]

Tenet Four of Christian Hedonism

: the goal of worship is to attain pleasure in God

"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)

[Note: Christian Hedonism offers no legitimate Bible passages to support this tenet, so we offer this quote from Desiring God.]

In fact, the Word says none of those things, anywhere. You cannot even find one passage that acknowledges that there is such as thing as "the pursuit of pleasure", except where that pleasure is utterly lewd and detestable in the sight of God.

Given you cannot find even one passage that elevates pleasure to a valid pursuit of any kind, much less our greatest pursuit (hence the label "hedonism"), it is an even harder task to imagine a Bible verse–much less find one–that requires conversion to hedonism as a condition of salvation.

And finally let us consider the tenet of Christian Hedonism that states that the worship of God is only valid when the goal of worship is to attain pleasure for the worshipper. Again, the diligent Bible student will discover that worship is valid or authentic when it aims to be verbally edifying (1 Corinthians 14:26), calls others to repent from sin (1 Corinthians 14:23-25), and causes us to put our physical bodies into motion serving God and one another (Romans 12:1-13).

It should also be pointed out that worshipping God involves praising Him, and this is often called "shouting with joy to the Lord". Even some of our labors of worship are to be done with "cheer" and with "joy". Yet, what is the purpose or goal of worship: to experience joy and cheer, or, to praise God, edify the saints, and serve one another? The Bible states the goal of worship is to praise God, sometimes accompanied by the expression of joy; edify the saints, sometimes with the heart of cheerfulness; and to serve one another. The goal, according to plain Scripture, is never so that we can experience pleasure, experience joy, or experience cheer. Such experiences are attitudes that can accompany worship, but they are neither the goal nor the test for authenticating worship. Worship may be conducted in fear, in great sadness, or even in depression, and it will still be valid and God-honoring worship.

Consider Psalm 42. The Psalmist said his soul panted for God. Why? Because God had cut off His presence and His temple worship from His people when they were driven into exile by God for their sins. The Psalmist was not giving some romantic notion about his soul desiring a mystical rapturous pleasure of a hedonistic encounter with God as if that were some kind of normative event. The Psalmist was here worshipping God in deep depression that God had withdrawn Himself from him and the people because they had sinned. The Psalmist’s soul was panting for forgiveness from God, his desire was to quench his sorrow over his sins for which he cried night and day (verse 3). He longed to be able to go to temple again and to have his prayers heard and his sins covered by sacrifice again (verse 4).

Was the Psalmist in Psalm 42 worshipping God any less because his attitude was one of grief and sorrow instead of rapturous pleasure? No. In fact, Jesus, in a parable (Luke 18), said of the tax collector who worshipped in anguish at the temple that his worship caused him to be proclaimed righteous whereas the man who stood up in his self-righteous pleasure and worshipped in his zeal left still in his sin. Such men who worship to attain pleasure and to attain the pleasure of being seen ought to consider with wise discretion and discernment what Jesus said about those who seek their spiritual rewards while still on Earth (Matthew 6:1-6).

When we begin to think and to teach that the worship of God is so that we can attain heights of pleasing emotions we miss the point of worship entirely. It is true that sometimes pleasing emotions accompany or result from praising God or serving others, yet that is not why we are told to serve. God’s motives for giving us these commands is for the edification of others, for meeting the needs of others, for demonstrating to God our dependence and gratitude toward Him.

Worship is outward focused on those who are greater and more important than ourselves. When we get the silly notion that the worship is "for me" we begin quite literally worshipping ourselves.

Doctrine Comes From the Word, Philosophies Have No Such Burden

Christian Hedonism fails the biblical test on all four of its primary tenets. Unlike the doctrine of the Trinity, the philosophy of Christian Hedonism finds no evidential support in the Word. It is entirely a human idea based on human philosophy and human desires. It is made into a religion only when men give its secular foundation religious intent. They then run the risk of repeating the error of the Pharisees, which is elevating one’s own ideas to a level of importance even above the plain commands of Scripture, eventually becoming experts at this newly established "tradition" instead of experts at obeying the Word.

For a more in-depth exploration behind whether the philosophy of Christian Hedonism is read out from biblical passages (exegesis) or whether the ideas are read into the Scriptural text (eisegesis) you are invited to read FAQ 30.

If I just substitute the word “joy” for “pleasure” doesn’t Christian Hedonism become biblical?

Question 35.

If I just substitute the word “joy” for “pleasure” doesn’t Christian Hedonism become biblical?

Answer 35.

To test this hypothesis, compare the original published defining claims of Christian Hedonism to the same claim re-written as it would appear if “pleasure” and “happiness” were replaced by the word “joy.”

Original Claim	Same Claim Made for “Joy”
“Christian Hedonism answers: the pursuit of pleasure is an essential motive for every good deed. If you aim to abandon the pursuit of full and lasting pleasure, you cannot love people or please God.” (Piper, Dangerous Duty, page 39)	Christian Hedonism answers: the pursuit of joy is an essential motive for every good deed. If you aim to abandon the pursuit of full and lasting joy, you cannot love people or please God.
Christian hedonism says more, namely, that we should pursue happiness with all our might. (Piper, quoted from www.desiringgod.org on May 29, 2003)	Christian hedonism says more, namely, that we should pursue joy with all our might.
“The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling.” (Piper, page 21, The Dangerous Duty of Delight)	The radical implication is that pursuing joy in God is our highest calling.
“Christian Hedonism does not put us above God when it makes the joy of worship its goal.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 85, 1996)	“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.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 16, 1996 edition)	I came to see that it is unbiblical and arrogant to try to worship God for any other reason than the joy to be had in him.
“Unless a man be born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)	“Unless a man be born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
“Could it be that today the most straightforward biblical command for conversion is not, ‘Believe in the Lord,’ but, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’?” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)	“Could it be that today the most straightforward biblical command for conversion is not, ‘Believe in the Lord,’ but, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’?” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
“The pursuit of joy in God is not optional. It is not an ‘extra’ that a person might grow into after he comes to faith. Until your heart has hit upon this pursuit, your ‘faith’ cannot please God. It is not saving faith.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 69)	“The pursuit of joy in God is not optional. It is not an ‘extra’ that a person might grow into after he comes to faith. Until your heart has hit upon this pursuit, your ‘faith’ cannot please God. It is not saving faith.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 69)
“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)	Christian hedonism says more, namely, that we should pursue joy with all our might. The desire to be filled with joy is a proper motive for every good deed, and if you abandon pursuit of your own joy you cannot please God.

As it becomes clear from the above side-by-side comparison, all that happens by swapping the word “joy” in the place of pleasure is that one unprovable presumptive set of claims is replaced by another set of assumptions. In some instances, the claim does not change one bit. With every claim, there is not one concrete Bible verse by which to uphold and establish the claim. Christian Hedonism, whether it elevates joy or pleasure, is improper when it places “our pursuits” of joy and pleasure with all our might ahead of God’s commandment for men to instead pursue love “with all our strength.”

Now, it is true that joy is a fruit of the Spirit, whereas “pleasure” and “happiness” are not. By that single measure, the “pursuit of joy with all our might” appears closer to the standard of being biblical than did the expression “pursue pleasure with all our might”. Still, neither expression quite meets that standard.

As always, it is necessary to point out that several times the Word does tell us to be thankful to God for His gifts and His mercy and therefore to rejoice. Rejoicing as it is presented to us in the Bible is usually a mechanism of praising God, outwardly demonstrating our appreciation to God. The “pursuit of joy” as Christian Hedonism authors this odd precept, defines it as a taking in of pleasure, an attainment and internalizing of pleasurable feelings for the benefit of the rejoicer. So in the eyes of Christian Hedonism, pursuing joy is more focused on experiencing the joy as a pleasurable event and less focused on the act of praise as a way of showing gratitude. This is the very key to understanding why Christian Hedonism so often phrases it as one’s own “pursuit” instead of simply agreeing with Scripture that men ought to rejoice as a way to praise God for His works.

The Bible’s command to rejoice as a way of praising God is Godward directed. The Christian Hedonist command to pursue joy is a man-directed craving for good feelings and pleasurable sensations in God.

The “pursuit of joy” is still not an actual precept or literal command of Scripture. By way of comparison the expression “pursue love” and “love God with all your strength” are genuine commands, literal precepts, and overt statutes of the Word (1 Corinthians 14:1, 1 Timothy 6:11, Mark 12:28-31).

“Pursue love with all your strength” meets the standard of “being biblical” while “pursue joy with all your strength” remains speculative, a presumption which ought not to be imposed on man as if it were a command from God the Almighty.

Wasn’t Jesus motivated to redeem mankind because He was seeking His own joy?

Question 34.

Wasn’t Jesus motivated to redeem mankind because He was seeking His own joy?

Answer 34.

What was the motive that induced Jesus to sacrifice Himself for us? Was it really just for the sake of His own joy, as Christian Hedonism teaches?

Motive 1: for the profit of others

Paul teaches that his own motivation for ministry is based on imitating Jesus’ motive for ministry: the profit of the many.

Just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many, so that they may be saved. Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. (1Corinthians 10:33,11:1)

Motive 2: a servant’s heart of selflessness

Further, Paul teaches that Christ did not go to the cross looking only to please Himself by obtaining joy, but His going to the cross was not even self-pleasing but was selflessly motivated.

Each of us is to please his neighbor for his good, to his edification. For even Christ did not please Himself; but as it is written, The reproaches of those who reproached You fell on Me. Romans 15:1-3

Motive 3: a sense of duty toward God

Jesus taught us that he was motivated to minister and to die out of a sense of duty to God.

Jesus said

to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word." (John 8:42,43)

but so that the world may know that I love the Father, I do exactly as the Father commanded Me. Get up, let us go from here. (John 14:31)

Jesus said to them, "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me and to accomplish His work. (John 4:34)

And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, "My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will." … He went away again a second time and prayed, saying, "My Father, if this cannot pass away unless I drink it, Your will be done." (Matthew 26:39,42)

And He was saying, "Abba! Father! All things are possible for You; remove this cup from Me; yet not what I will, but what You will." (Mark 14:36, Luke 22:42)

Motive 4: Jesus was moved to action by a heart full of mercy

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior (Titus 3:5,6)

For He [Jesus] had been saying to him, "Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!" He said to him, "Go home to your people and report to them what great things the Lord has done for you, and how He had mercy on you." (Mark 5:8, 19b)

When he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out and say, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" And Jesus said to him, "Go; your faith has made you well." Immediately he regained his sight and began following Him on the road. (Mark 10:47, 52)

Mary prophesied in song regarding the motive behind why Jesus was to be born

: "AND HIS MERCY IS UPON GENERATION AFTER GENERATION TOWARD THOSE WHO FEAR HIM." (Luke 1:50)

Zacharia prophesied over Jesus also saying the two motives for Jesus’ life were mercy and to guide mankind into the way of service and peace:

"To grant us that we, being rescued from the hand of our enemies, Might serve Him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before Him all our days. And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; For you will go on BEFORE THE LORD TO PREPARE HIS WAYS; To give to His people the knowledge of salvation By the forgiveness of their sins, Because of the tender mercy of our God, With which the Sunrise from on high will visit us, TO SHINE UPON THOSE WHO SIT IN DARKNESS AND THE SHADOW OF DEATH, To guide our feet into the way of peace." (Luke 1:74-79)

Even the Apostle Paul said one of his motives for serving in the ministry was that he had received mercy from God, which is why he did not lose heart:

Therefore, since we have this ministry, as we received mercy, we do not lose heart. (2 Corinthians 4:1)

Motive 5: Compassion

When the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, "Why is your Teacher eating with the tax collectors and sinners?" But when Jesus heard this, He said, "It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick. But go and learn what this means: ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,’ for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners." (Matthew 9:11-13)

Jesus was going through all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness. Seeing the people, He felt compassion for them, because they were distressed and dispirited like sheep without a shepherd. Then He said to His disciples, "The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into His harvest." (Matthew 9:35-38)

When He went ashore, He saw a large crowd, and felt compassion for them and healed their sick. (Matthew 14:14)

Moved with compassion

, Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, "I am willing; be cleansed." (Mark 1:41)

When Jesus went ashore, He saw a large crowd, and He felt compassion for them because they were like sheep without a shepherd; and He began to teach them many things. (Mark 6:34)

Motive 6: Love

Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. (John 13:1)

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another. (John 13:34,35)

"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." (John 14:21)

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (John 3:16)

But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved) (Ephesians 2:4-5)

Even though Jesus did not come on His "own initiative", but was under orders from God, He did get the commandment from God that He had free choice as to whether to lay down His own life for the sheep. Out of love for the sheep and motivated by duty to the Father, Jesus laid down His own life and then took it up again.

"For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father." (John 10:17,18)

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)

Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:35,38,39)

Motive 7: Future Joy

fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:12)

A Motive "Beyond All These Things"

So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience; bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you. Beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity. (Colossians 3:12-14)

Certainly it is acceptable to be motivated in part by the anticipation that God will reward good behavior and that this will result in joy. But it would be silly and naïve to assume there is only one biblical motive behind all actions and thoughts. God was, and is, motivated by a rich diversity of reasons, affections, emotions, responses, and desires (love, compassion, mercy, duty). Men too are capable and blessed by similar, but imperfect, diverse motivations.

In truth, those who act only out of consideration for their own pleasure are to be pitied, for they are missing the vast array of affections and godly motives that swayed our Lord to act, and therefore, they are missing a tremendous number of opportunities to serve others and the Lord. Similarly, I confess to being angered by the teachings of some which contradict the Word when they claim that Christ had but one motivation and that we too should have only one motivation.

There is not generally much written in the Bible telling us to examine our motives. In those comparatively few instances where we are told to look within ourselves to determine why we do what we do, the motive most often cited as being "bad" and improper (so as to root it out of ourselves) is selfishness and literally hedonism, doing things for our own profit or pleasure. This is perhaps the ultimate irony: Christian Hedonism calls us to always act on the basis of seeking our own pleasure with all our strength as our highest motive, yet, the Scriptures do not often ask us to consider our motives, and when they do, hedonism (pleasure seeking) is the one thing that is most strongly condemned as an improper motive.

What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have; so you commit murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight and quarrel. You do not have because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend it on your pleasures. (James 4:1-3)

Weren’t C.S.Lewis and the Apostle Paul both Christian Hedonists?

Question 33.

Weren’t C.S.Lewis and the Apostle Paul both Christian Hedonists?

Answer 33.

It is somewhat insincere, and even a bit academically reckless to apply a label to a dead celebrity and thereby assume him into a modern special-interest community which did not exist during his lifetime. Imposing your label onto someone who is no longer able to speak for themselves is an inappropriate means of establishing a constituency.

“Christian Hedonism” as a philosophy did not appear until the publishing of a book a little over twenty years ago entitled, Desiring God–Meditations of a Christian Hedonist. At the core of the philosophy is the premise that God wants men to pursue pleasure in Him as their highest calling–pursuing that pleasure with all their might–and that the true goal of worship is the attainment of pleasure (“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).

So, was C.S. Lewis a Christian Hedonist who believed that pursuing pleasure in God was our highest calling and most important duty? C.S. Lewis did in fact use the word “hedonism” once when discussing the concept of pleasure in a personal correspondence (these correspondences have been published as a book called Letters to Malcolm). However, Lewis’ definition of hedonism was very different from the way Christian Hedonism uses the word.

In Letter Seventeen we read that Lewis found that it was sufficient in this life to simply happen upon a lawfully pleasurable experience and then to ascribe to God the honor for having generated that glimpse of glory for us. Lewis did not go looking for pleasurable experiences (as we will see later the idea of actually pursuing pleasure was repulsive to him) but he desired to trace each pleasure back to its source, God, so that he could imagine the experience to be a sort of “sensing” of the glory that is God. “I have tried … to make every pleasure into a channel of adoration” (Lewis, Letter 17, Letters to Malcolm). This ascribing to God glory and thanks for every pleasurable experience was what Lewis postulated might be a form of hedonism.

Lewis also found that all pleasure was “in God”. There were not sacred spiritual pleasures which were somehow different from worldly and sensual (sensory-based) pleasures. All pleasures of this Earth are “in God” and to attempt to differentiate between sensuous (corporeal) and aesthetic (spiritual) pleasures was pointless.

I was learning the far more secret doctrine that pleasures are shafts of the glory [corporeal displays of the glory of God] as it strikes our sensibility. As it impinges on our will or our understanding, we give it different names–goodness or truth or the like. But its flash upon our senses and mood is pleasure. …

You notice that I am drawing no distinction between sensuous and aesthetic pleasures. But why should I? The line is almost impossible to draw and what use would it be if one succeeded in drawing it? (Lewis, Letter 17, Letters to Malcolm)

All pleasures of this life, according to Lewis, are “in God”. This is the same understanding we take away from God’s Word. Every good thing is a gift from God, is not to be rejected, and is to be received with gratitude; every pleasure is from God and in God.

Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow. (James 1:17)

For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer. (1 Timothy 4:4,5)

C.S. Lewis did not stop there. He warned against pursuing pleasures as if they were goals. He feared Christians would become greedy and petition God for repetitive pleasures.

“Greed. Instead of saying, ‘This also is Thou,’ one may say the fatal word Encore.” (Lewis, Letter 17, Letters to Malcolm)

He was not opposed to happening upon a pleasurable experience and then ascribing to God adoration for that event, but he was against saying, “Encore, God give me that pleasure again and again.” In simple words, he did not believe it was right to pursue pleasure in God.

Deadly concerned that Christians would see the pleasure found in a simple event (like eating a piece of buttered bread) and ascribe to it a glimpse of God’s glory and then at the same time judge himself as a superior Christian because he has found God in a simple event while others do not even find the same experience overly pleasant, Lewis urgently warned against spiritual elitism which he called “conceit”. In his mind, focusing on lawful pleasures, no matter how well intentioned the act, makes one predisposed to pride when they begin to compare their experiences to others.

“There is also conceit: the dangerous reflection that not everyone can find God in a plain slice of bread and butter, or that others would condemn as simply ‘grey’ the sky in which I am delightedly observing such delicacies of pearl and dove and silver.” (Lewis, Letter 17, Letters to Malcolm)

Lewis was also very frightened that someone might use his concept (that all lawful pleasures can sensually show a bit of God’s glory no matter how tiny these pleasant experiences may be) and develop a philosophy around the pursuit of pleasures. He told Malcolm that there was in fact more to be pursued in life, more to be “wanted,” than merely seeking out these infinitesimally small pleasures. For this reason Lewis cautioned against turning the wanting of pleasurable experiences into a philosophy.

“One wants a great many things besides this ‘adoration in infinitesimals’ which I am preaching. And if I were preaching it in public…I should have to pack it in ice, enclose it in barbed-wire reservations, and stick up warning notices in every direction. Don’t imagine I am forgetting that the simplest act of mere obedience is worship of a far more important sort than what I’ve been describing (to obey is better than sacrifice).” (Lewis, Letter 17, Letters to Malcolm)

Since C.S. Lewis, in his own writings, was against pursuing pleasures (he called this greed) and was worried that focusing on pleasure would lead to pride (he called that conceit), and since he felt that experiencing pleasures in God was infinitesimally trivial in comparison to even the “simplest act of obedience” it is surely a leap of the worst kind of logic to imagine that Lewis would have adopted for himself the label of “Christian Hedonist.”

Finally, it is clear that Lewis did not see any difference between lawful pleasures “in God” and lawful pleasures “in nature.” This being true, with Christian Hedonism calling men to pursue pleasure in God as their greatest duty, this pursuit of pleasure could have been of any or all lawful pleasures–they are all the same. It is my opinion (and merely my own opinion) that Lewis would have found chasing pleasures as the chief end of life to be a distraction to the real business of worship (which is obedience), and for that reason he would have been morally opposed to “Christian Hedonism.”

Was the Apostle Paul a Christian Hedonist? Once again we wrestle with the tangible fact that he never called himself by such a label and that the very philosophy itself was not even in existence in his lifetime. Therefore, a more adequate question would be, “Did Paul in his writings ever endorse the statement ‘pursue pleasure’ as if it were a command?” And, “Did Paul ever state that Christians should pursue their own happiness with all their might?” Finally, “Did Paul leave any evidence that he believed that the goal of worship was to seek our own pleasure?”

Such quotes as would lend evidence to answer any of these questions in the affirmative are pointedly absent in any of his epistles. In fact, some of his inspired comments might actually be construed as being in conflict with the principles of Christian Hedonism.

For example, Christian Hedonism teaches that all “acts of virtue” have as their foundation the self-interest of the pursuit of pleasure as the driving motivation. Yet Paul seems to find such thinking selfish. He cares so little for his own self-interests when compared to his love that had it been possible he would have traded places with his Jewish countrymen and gone to hell in their stead so that they might have gone to heaven. This is pure love.

Paul’s Philosophy Statements	Christian Hedonism’s Philosophy Statements
On Love: I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons… (Romans 9:1-4a)	“[Love] is not a resolute abandoning of one’s own good with a view solely to the good of the other person.” (Piper, Dangerous Duty, page 45 )
On Self-Interest: “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.” Philippians 2:3,4	“Christian Hedonism answers: the pursuit of pleasure is an essential motive for every good deed. If you aim to abandon the pursuit of full and lasting pleasure, you cannot love people or please God.” (Piper, Dangerous Duty, page 39)
On the Pursuit of Pleasure: For even Christ did not please Himself; but as it is written, The reproaches of those who reproached You fell on Me. Romans 15:1-3	Christian hedonism says more, namely, that we should pursue happiness with all our might. (Piper, quoted from www.desiringgod.org on May 29, 2003) “The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling.” (Piper, page 21, The Dangerous Duty of Delight)
On the Goal of Worship: What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. (1 Corinthians 14:26) Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. (Romans 12:1)	“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)

Paul’s summary philosophy of all that the Bible teaches might have been expressed this way:

and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. (Romans 13:9b,10)

Paul felt the summary of all that God taught through thousands of years of history is that we must love God and love our neighbors–love is the fulfillment of the law, our highest calling. Paul nowhere allows that the pursuit of pleasure is even a valid pursuit much less elevating it to our highest calling as Christian Hedonism does.

While it is possible to lay claim to any dead person as if they were always a card-carrying convert to someone’s modern philosophy movement, in the case of C.S. Lewis and the Apostle Paul the weight of historical and written evidence argues against posthumously enlisting them into the ranks of Christian Hedonism.

So Piper pushed the pendulum back to the other side, away from dead unemotionalism, what’s wrong with bringing some emotional balance back to the churches?

Question 32.

So Piper pushed the pendulum back to the other side, away from dead unemotionalism, what’s wrong with bringing some emotional balance back to the churches?

Answer 32.

When this question comes up, and it comes up a lot, the Christian Hedonist most often explains to me that the only way to correct the dull, boring, dead, joyless church services of today are by energizing them with a new peppy philosophy of ministry and life. "Sure," they tell me, "Dr. Piper has taken liberties with certain Bible texts and invented a few new shocking phrases, but it is for the purpose of correcting the joyless attitude in churches today. In this case, an infusion of joy-seeking and pleasure-craving that will drive the church forward." They then tell me, "You see, it’s like a clock pendulum, it has swung all the way to the side of being anti-emotional and all Piper has done with hedonism is to swing it back to the other side."

Let us proceed with that analogy for a bit. If we were to go into a clock maker’s workshop and tell him:

"Hello. My grandfather clock runs quite rapidly and so it keeps poor time. Can you correct this for me?"

The clock maker congenially answers back:

"Well, yes, I can add a bunch of extra weight to the pendulum and that will really slow the thing down, heh, you won’t see it strike but 4 hours in any given day."

That’s not what we want at all! That’s not what anyone wants. We don’t want to add so much weight that the pendulum is unbalanced in the other direction. What we want is perfect balance. Precisely accurate time keeping. We only want to add what was missing, not force the pendulum to swing wildly back the other direction.

Hedonism is so extreme (pursue pleasure with all your strength) that it swings the pendulum of doctrine so hard the other way in such an unbalanced fashion that it fairly well smashes through the clock’s cherry cabinet and ruins the entire thing.

Theology is not a clock mechanism. Theology is not tuned by use of exaggerations and hyperbole. Exaggeration and hyperbole when made about Scripture are really just inaccuracies and falsehoods, unsound doctrine. One cannot correct the behavior or doctrine of the church universal by overemphasizing the need for some other quality because eventually it too will need correcting. And once bad doctrine becomes believed and entrenched, it is notoriously difficult to unseat, even with the best of teaching.

Accurate Bible exposition is required. Always. It is required by book writers, by pastors, by Sunday School teachers. If joy seems to be lacking in a congregation it cannot be "restored" or "balanced out" by inventing hedonism and imposing that philosophy as if it were just another run-of-the-mill doctrine. Christian Hedonism is an imprecise, inaccurate caricature of the doctrine of "rejoicing in the Lord." As such it can do nothing to bring real joy to the congregation and will ultimately lead to other imbalances and problems.

If joy seems to be sincerely lacking (and how would someone even know with any degree of certainty?) it becomes necessary to embark on a truthful and painstakingly accurate study of the concept of joy and emotions in the Word. What emotions are described in the Bible? How are emotions to be used? Why did God give us emotions? After such a careful and in depth study, and only then, should the congregation be more properly instructed. And when this occurs, the effects of legitimate study will be manifested because the Word, when correctly studied, accomplishes its mission and changes the believer from the inside out. The Word has power to change men for righteousness; hyperbole and exaggeration have the power to confuse and eventually destroy.

Has the pendulum swung too far in one direction? It cannot be corrected by overcompensating. It can only be repaired by precision balancing, adding back only that weight that was missing. So it is with doctrine and behavior. Poor behavior can only be rightly corrected with sound doctrine accurately taught from the very Word of God. Once precision has been restored the pendulum will not swing wildly to any one side or the other.

You quoted Dr. Piper’s writing well enough, but the quote does not really communicate what he really wanted to say.

Question 31.

You quoted Dr. Piper’s writing well enough, but the quote does not really communicate what he really wanted to say.

Answer 31.

This is similar to the often noted objection, "Dr. Piper did not actually mean what it appears he said", or, "he was actually just using hyperbole to make a point."

Some have told me Dr. Piper really did not mean that experiencing the pleasurable sensation of joy was really the goal of worship, though that is what he appears to have said. Others have told me that Dr. Piper did not really mean that one must become a Christian Hedonist to be saved, though that is what it appears he has written. Still others have told me that he does not actually believe that the pursuit of pleasure is man’s highest calling, even though his writing certainly says this.

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, those who would adhere to this philosophy of hedonism argue that its founding author did not understand English well enough to write just exactly what he meant by the term. Could it be that he did just miswrite all those concepts? I am unconvinced.

There is another possibility available to us. Perhaps the would-be adherents to hedonism are simply so embarrassed by the actual tenets of the philosophy that they wish that these comments had not been penned, and they simply and desperately desire them to be inaccurate representations of their adopted philosophy.

It must be kept in mind that the philosophy of Christian Hedonism is over 20 years old, and that there have been three re-printings of the book Desiring God (each with edits and new material added), and one publication of a condensed version of Desiring God called The Dangerous Duty of Delight (2001). If the above quotes were genuinely misstatements, written in error, and did not communicate what the author intended to say, they would most surely have been corrected by now.

The quotes stand, they mean what they convey. The philosophy is what it advertises itself to be. Dr. Piper must have meant and understood what he wrote.

If one is going to call themselves a Christian Hedonist, why not gladly embrace the above premises of the philosophy and be done with it? Why deny that the philosophy is what it is? And if one is inclined to feel that the above quotes are simply improper Christian doctrine, then why not gladly abandon the philosophy of Christian Hedonism?

Whatever the case, Dr. Piper wrote what he wrote, he has not modified his stand over the decades, his words are clear, and he has defined the philosophy as it is. Denying he means what he writes does nothing but a disservice to all individuals involved.