Joy vs Happiness?

[SkylerGerald]

I have often heard people put a distinction between joy and happiness. I myself have done that for the longest time merely in following the example. The distinction typically goes like a few of the following:

“Happiness is based on circumstances but joy is not”
“Happiness is fleeting but joy is eternal”
“Happiness is a feeling but joy is an estate of blessedness”

Though, I’ve recently become skeptical that such a distinction exists. It seems like a distinction without a difference, in fact, and the definitions are being imposed on the words unnaturally.

I first heard an argument against this distinction from Randy Alcorn on Desiring God (makes sense). He pulls at puritans using the two words interchangeably as well as the words showing up in OT poetic parallelism.

But what do you think? Is this a distinction warranted or is it a christianese saying that has been assumed as passed down as it was to me?

Edit: I should mention that there is a related thread from 2013 on the subject but it didn’t seem to address it well as it panned out though the prompt was well put

 

[Jack K]

Well, there is a legitimate difference people are trying to express when they use those terms that way. It's the difference between (1) a temporary happy feeling based on worldly circumstances and (2) a deeper, contentment-grounded happiness based on Christ and his promises. Of course, when you want to talk about that kind of topic it helps to assign each side just a word or two to describe it. If those words become accepted theological shorthand, they are useful for communication. The happiness-vs-joy distinction is one of these shorthands.

An example of another instance where we do this might be the difference between "worldly sorrow" and "godly sorrow." We could use many more words to explain each more thoroughly, but our shorthand (in this case drawn from one passage in Scripture) helps us communicate more easily once the shorthand is established.

In the case of the happiness-vs-joy shorthand, it has some weaknesses. The daily-life English usage of both words is broader than the theological shorthand usage; in ordinary speech those words have much more overlap than the theological shorthand usage allows. Also, Scripture doesn't give us a passage that sets out a clear distinction using just those two different words. This means we need to realize that our shorthand, though it may be useful when talking amongst ourselves, is not language we can always impose on Scripture. We should not read the Bible so that everywhere it says happiness we read it as "temporary happy feeling based on worldly circumstances" and everywhere it says joy we read it as "deeper happiness based on Christ and his promises." To read it that way, insisting on our theological-shorthand definitions of those words, would be to impose a semantic-range limit that simply isn't there.

So, there is a distinction between those two things. And it's an important distinction. And it helps to be able to put that distinction into just a few words. But if we have a theological-dictionary approach to reading the Bible, we'll be frustrated to find that the Bible's authors and translators haven't consistently consulted our dictionary. They've had the gall to use words more broadly than our neatly-defined definitions allow. This means that when reading the Bible, we will sometimes need to (gasp!) use context rather than narrow definitions to determine what the Bible is saying. And when making theological points, we will need to explain ourselves and remind people that the Bible's word usage might differ sometimes—which is the main reason I'm not a big fan of this particular shorthand.

 

[SkylerGerald]

Well, there is a legitimate difference people are trying to express when they use those terms that way. It's the difference between (1) a temporary happy feeling based on worldly circumstances and (2) a deeper, contentment-grounded happiness based on Christ and his promises. Of course, when you want to talk about that kind of topic it helps to assign each side just a word or two to describe it. If those words become accepted theological shorthand, they are useful for communication. The happiness-vs-joy distinction is one of these shorthands.

An example of another instance where we do this might be the difference between "worldly sorrow" and "godly sorrow." We could use many more words to explain each more thoroughly, but our shorthand (in this case drawn from one passage in Scripture) helps us communicate more easily once the shorthand is established.

In the case of the happiness-vs-joy shorthand, it has some weaknesses. The daily-life English usage of both words is broader than the theological shorthand usage; in ordinary speech those words have much more overlap than the theological shorthand usage allows. Also, Scripture doesn't give us a passage that sets out a clear distinction using just those two different words. This means we need to realize that our shorthand, though it may be useful when talking amongst ourselves, is not language we can always impose on Scripture. We should not read the Bible so that everywhere it says happiness we read it as "temporary happy feeling based on worldly circumstances" and everywhere it says joy we read it as "deeper happiness based on Christ and his promises." To read it that way, insisting on our theological-shorthand definitions of those words, would be to impose a semantic-range limit that simply isn't there.

So, there is a distinction between those two things. And it's an important distinction. And it helps to be able to put that distinction into just a few words. But if we have a theological-dictionary approach to reading the Bible, we'll be frustrated to find that the Bible's authors and translators haven't consistently consulted our dictionary. They've had the gall to use words more broadly than our neatly-defined definitions allow. This means that when reading the Bible, we will sometimes need to (gasp!) use context rather than narrow definitions to determine what the Bible is saying. And when making theological points, we will need to explain ourselves and remind people that the Bible's word usage might differ sometimes—which is the main reason I'm not a big fan of this particular shorthand.

You make a good point that I should have mentioned in that what is intended by the distinction is sensible. I think your comparison between this and "worldly sorrow" vs "godly sorrow" is a helpful one because I would personally enjoy setting up a distinction like that with happiness. That is, we should have the categories of "worldly happiness" and "godly happiness". The trouble I find is when people make a lot of hay out of the distinction. At that point it is less about "assigning each side just a word or two to describe it" (as you have said, which is a good explanation) and more about an actual distinction between the two things in essence. Seems to me that moving away from joy vs happiness to "worldly joy/happiness" vs "godly joy/happiness" is more helpful.

 

[RamistThomist]

Happiness in the classical sense is not the same as happiness in the teeny-bopper sense.

Boethius: a life made perfect by the possession in aggregate of all good things.

Aquinas: "happy is he who has all he desires," he added the words "provided he desires nothing amiss."

 

[TheInquirer]

I was taught the distinction early on in my Christian life and assumed it to be true but it isn’t. If you look up the definitions in an English dictionary of the two words (I once compared three), there is virtually no difference. I suspect Christians have passed down the distinction without ever having done any study. Alcorn‘s large book on the topic is worth reading and contains a lot of well researched sources and is quite convincing. The Puritans were quite happy to use “happiness“ freely and biblically.

Also, take a look at how the CSB translates Psalm 1 for example.

The important issue is where true joy and happiness are found.

 

[CovenantPatriot87]

I find the distinction between the two is man-made and unnecessary. Joy and happiness are the same. You can also interchange happiness with "blessed" in the scripture. Especially in the Psalms and particularly in the new testament, the beatitudes.

 

[SkylerGerald]

I find the distinction between the two is man-made and unnecessary. Joy and happiness are the same. You can also interchange happiness with "blessed" in the scripture. Especially in the Psalms and particularly in the new testament, the beatitudes.

That’s a good point! I’m glad you said that as it helped me recall that it was through teaching the Sermon on the Mount to my youth group that caused me to see this interchangeability of blessedness and happiness. Same thing even in 7.1 of the confession. That’s where this investigative journey began for me.

 

[CovenantPatriot87]

That’s a good point! I’m glad you said that as it helped me recall that it was through teaching the Sermon on the Mount to my youth group that caused me to see this interchangeability of blessedness and happiness. Same thing even in 7.1 of the confession. That’s where this investigative journey began for me.

Indeed brother! The greek word for "blessed" in the beatitudes, which is makarios, is the highest form of happiness or blessedness. Let us bask in it in his life and then forevermore in eternity!