Christian Hedonism

[arapahoepark]

Though I loath the term to a degree, I am wondering what are your thoughts on Christian Hedonism, especially Piper's version?
Searching around the forums, many like the idea and many did not, specifically the ramifications. The latter seemed to conclude that it was introducing a different priority into the ordo salutis or making too much of experience but, admittedly I don't know too much about what makes Christian Hedonism so different.

 

[Joshua]

I'm agin' it.

 

[RamistThomist]

guys like Paul Helm have pointed out philosophical problems in the term "hedonism." It comes from utilitarianism, which requires some kind of moral calculus to determine the "rightness' of an act. So, like how many "hedons" is a Bible Study worth? Etc. Helm has some pretty damaging arguments against it.

Christian Hedonism: Further Thoughts

John Piper: The Pleasures of God Hedonism of whatever kind implies a calculus. In the case of John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism, the calculu...

paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com

 

[PezLad]

Whenever a non believer hears such a term, they will load all their presumptions into it, and so piper must then explain what it means, which destroys the purpose of using such a term in the first place; it means everything, and it means nothing. Still have to speak scripture; Psalm 16:11; in his presence is fullness of joy and at his right hand are pleasures forevermore. The absence of iniquity in the heart is the presence of joy in the soul, the joy of faith. I fully agree with what piper says, that joy and the glory of God together especially in suffering (sorrowful yet always rejoicing) is reality in the believers soul, yet the loci seams to be too much upon joy, as if joy becomes something in and off itself; pursue your greatest joy! Only the Spirit of Christ lifting up my human spirit up toward his Spirit and away from the spirit of animals (doggedness) can increase my joy, for Satan does try to pull us down to serpentry.

 

[TheInquirer]

I did my Master's thesis comparing Piper's Christian Hedonism to Augustine's Theology of Love. There are positives and negatives of Piper's system. I would have to get out my notes to remember all the points and nuances but putting joy as the central Christian ethic I think is a mistake. I do also believe his system reduces to a subjective experience (how much joy you are experiencing, similar to what Jacob is getting at). Also, I think he is just wrong in defining love in terms of joy (no one I could find ever did or does this). I think he also oversells the experience of joy/pleasure too much in this life (hence why so many prompted him to write "When I Don't Desire God").

However, I do think regaining the importance of joy in the Christian life is a real contribution along with his emphasis on the glory of God and desiring God as a central focal point. I am sure there are more positives I have forgotten.

If you know the problems with his system at the outset, you could benefit from it if you can filter. If not, I think it could lead to some real problems for those trying to evaluate their Christian life and mature according to the concept of hedonism.

 

[Jonathco]

I agree that the term hedonism is less-than-ideal, given the connotations; however, shorter catechism question #1 from the WCF does state:

Q. 1. What is the chief end of man?

A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, (a) and to enjoy him for ever. (b)

(a). Ps. 86:9; Isa. 60:21; Rom. 11:36; 1 Cor. 6:20; 10:31; Rev.
4:11(b). Ps. 16:5-11; 144:15; Isa. 12:2; Luke 2:10; Phil. 4:4; Rev.
21:3-4

Piper's Christian Hedonism is summed up as "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him" - is not shorter catechism Q1 similar to this in some ways?

 

[RamistThomist]

I agree that the term hedonism is less-than-ideal, given the connotations; however, shorter catechism question #1 from the WCF does state:



Piper's Christian Hedonism is summed up as "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him" - is not shorter catechism Q1 similar to this in some ways?

No. Piper's position means that God's glory depends on how much we are satisfied in him. As I pointed out, hedonism is a calculus for right acts. Act x = so many hedons. Christian hedonists cannot produce the necessary calculus their system requires.

 

[Jonathco]

No. Piper's position means that God's glory depends on how much we are satisfied in him. As I pointed out, hedonism is a calculus for right acts. Act x = so many hedons. Christian hedonists cannot produce the necessary calculus their system requires.

I'll have to go back and re-listen to some of Piper's talks on this; I guess I don't see that in it, but I will listen with a discerning ear for it.

 

[Jack K]

Piper's position means that God's glory depends on how much we are satisfied in him. As I pointed out, hedonism is a calculus for right acts. Act x = so many hedons. Christian hedonists cannot produce the necessary calculus their system requires.

It's been a long time since I read the book, and even then I didn't read it very closely, but I did not walk away with that impression. To me, Piper seemed to be refuting the popular idea that being a Christian means giving up certain joys. Instead, he says, Christianity is about pursuing joy because it is about pursuing God. That basic message seemed appropriate enough and probably helpful to some believers. It did not feel burdensome, like what you are suggesting, but I admit I did not read it through a theological-accuracy microscope, and surely not every reader reacts the way I did to that core message.

As for the title, book titles are more often chosen to be provocative or generate interest than they are chosen for their theological precision. If you view it that way, Christian Hedonism is intriguing and gets the main point across nicely.

 

[RamistThomist]

It's been a long time since I read the book, and even then I didn't read it very closely, but I did not walk away with that impression. To me, Piper seemed to be refuting the popular idea that being a Christian means giving up certain joys. Instead, he says, Christianity is about pursuing joy because it is about pursuing God. That basic message seemed appropriate enough and probably helpful to some believers. It did not feel burdensome, like what you are suggesting, but I admit I did not read it through a theological-accuracy microscope, and surely not every reader reacts the way I did to that core message.

As for the title, book titles are more often chosen to be provocative or generate interest than they are chosen for their theological precision. If you view it that way, Christian Hedonism is intriguing and gets the main point across nicely.

I understand that's not Piper's primary point, but that's where his logic inexorably leads.

 

[Jake]

I agree that the term hedonism is less-than-ideal, given the connotations; however, shorter catechism question #1 from the WCF does state:



Piper's Christian Hedonism is summed up as "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him" - is not shorter catechism Q1 similar to this in some ways?

By Piper changing the first question the WSC to show the second clause answering the first, he misses in part the flow of the WSC which develops from the summary in Q1. The further clarification is found in the following questions and not by changing the first catechism question to something it does not say.

We learn in Q1 man's chief end -- to glorify God and enjoy him forever

We learn in Q2 how we accomplish that end (the Scriptures)

We learn in Q3 about the Scriptures

We learn in Q4 what God is.

etc.