Are there any Bible passages that actually counsel against hedonism or argue against the pursuit of pleasure?

If I reject the doctrine of Christian Hedonism, is there any spiritual condemnation in store for me?

At least two times in Desiring God the statement is made, "God threatens terrible things if we will not be happy." (pages 9, 289) What evidence is given, what Scripture is quoted, to support this allegation? If there is no legitimate Scripture to back up this frightening allegation, it amounts to little more than scare tactics and abusive attention-grabbing verbal stunts. Such approaches to Bible study are not edifying, not helpful, nor are they in compliance with the Word when it says to accurately divide the Scriptures.

On page 289 of Desiring God, we are told that those who will not be happy enough will suffer the curses described in Deuteronomy 28:47,28;

But is Desiring God quoting Deuteronomy 28:47,48 in a legitimate manner? Does Deuteronomy 28 really threaten believers with curses, "terrible things", and destruction if they are "not happy" enough?

No, bluntly stated, Desiring God does not properly quote, nor interpret Deuteronomy 28 in a manner that any Christian should find legitimate or proper. And nowhere in all the Bible is there a passage of Scripture, when quoted and interpreted in context, that says God will curse and destroy believers for not having sufficient gladness or happiness.

Deuteronomy 28, in context, actually says that the reason these Jews were going to be judged was because they did not "diligently obey the LORD your God, being careful to do all His commandments which I command you today" (28:1b) and "obey the LORD your God" (28:2b), and they did not "listen to the commandments of the LORD your God, which I charge you today, to observe them carefully, and do not turn aside from any of the words which I command you today, to the right or to the left, to go after other gods to serve them." (28:13b,14).

And since the people did break the Law and disobey the commandments: "But it shall come about, if you do not obey the LORD your God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes with which I charge you today, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you." (28:15)

The list of curses is quite lengthy, including wives being violated, children becoming slaves, and even the land being eaten by pests. Why such curses?

Good Bible study requires that we evaluate passages in context. From verse 1 of Deuteronomy 28 through the last verse, verse 68, the curses are given because the people "did not obey the LORD your God" (28:62b) and also "If you are not careful to observe all the words of this law which are written in this book, to fear this honored and awesome name, the LORD your God" (28:58). Notice well, the entire Law, all the statutes, all the commandments were to be followed because the Law was God’s gift to the Jews. When the Jews failed to uphold it, and when they purposely turned to "go after other gods to serve them" (28:14b), then God would curse them with all these plagues.

It is in this context that verses 46 and 47 reside. These are not verses that describe the nation being cursed because the people "would not be happy" enough, but it describes the nation being cursed because they broke the Law of God and followed after other gods.

Careful students of the Bible will see that in context (and quoted in full and not simply in part) that these verses rebuke the nation for grossly breaking the whole of the Law and for serving other gods instead of gladly obeying the entire Law and joyfully serving the true God. Put another way, service to the true God is a joyful duty, a light burden, an easy yoke by comparison with breaking the Law.

In other words which are more familiar to us, the more obedient we are the more blessed we are, and the more blessed we are, the more we can express our gratitude back to God with a glad and joyful heart (see Matthew 5:1-12). Happiness attends and follows obedience. Happiness attends and follows duty.

In Deuteronomy 28, if the people abandoned their duty and their obedience then they would be punished; if they threw off their joyful duty to pursue their pleasures and to chase after hedonism. Punished if they followed a false god. Then they were to be cursed.

It is all but impossible to read Deuteronomy 28 and conclude that the sin the people were cursed for was that they did not have sufficient happiness. Only someone who is blinded by devotion to a manmade philosophy will presuppose such a thing from a full reading of Deuteronomy 28. The people were cursed for breaking the Law and for chasing false gods to satisfy their own desires.

Since no legitimate passage of Scripture says that we will be cursed by God if we are not happy enough, one is all but forced to conclude that the book Desiring God uses the shocking statement "God threatens terrible things if we will not be happy" so that we will be intimidated into adopting the tenets of the philosophy of hedonism. Is this truly how God desired for us to make use of His Word? In fact, I wonder if it is not too strong a thing to speculate if that phrase ("God threatens terrible things if we will not be happy") amounts to a counterfeit commandment which only appears to come from God but indeed does not?

Why do you say that Christian Hedonism majors on the infinitesimally minor?

It is popular in Christian circles today to hear pastors and teachers ask their congregations to "major on the majors and minor in the minors." What they mean by this expression is that there are some extraordinarily important doctrines and responsibilities that predominate the whole of the Scriptures--these are the majors. There are also doctrines and practices that are mentioned but once or twice in the Word and which would seem to have little impact on achieving the grander visions God has ordained in His Word--these are the minors.

Personally, I am not much of a fan of the concept of "major in the majors and minor in the minors" yet I do understand the general concept of not making a bigger priority matter out of certain areas of life than what the Word would indicate they ought to be. "Sin no more", big matter; "men should not have long hair", smaller matter. Priorities help us decide where we spend time studying, meditating, and laboring.

To be considered a "major" or a "big matter", there must be a whelming wealth of Bible verses instructing us toward the major. If "do not sin" is a major, I ought to find this command and this principle everywhere in the Word, Old Testament and New Testament, epistles and gospels.

Regarding "pursue pleasure with all your strength", Christian Hedonism, where is the abundance of biblical commands emphasizing our emotional state over our obedience or even over our love? If Christian Hedonism and its command to pursue pleasure as our "highest calling" is not simply a "major" but THE major, the Bible must be replete with commandments to "pursue pleasure with all our strength" and the Bible must be overflowing with directives to put our feelings and our emotions ahead of duty, obedience, and love.

C.S. Lewis wrote (in letter 17 from the published work Letters to Malcolm) that experiencing pleasure and then attempting to see tangible hints of the glory of God in that pleasure was merely the "adoration in infinitesimals". To emphasize that the experience of pleasure was an infinitesimally small thing compared with the major themes of Scripture, Lewis further wrote to Malcolm that "the simplest act of mere obedience is worship of a far more important sort than what I’ve been describing" regarding pleasure because the Scriptures clearly tell us that "to obey is better than sacrifice". To Lewis obedience is the "far more important" major while experiencing pleasures are the infinitesimally small minor.

Historically, few if any Christians have found that the Bible puts feelings and emotions ahead of duty, obedience, and love. Pleasure was never thought to be a goal to be pursued but rather was thought to be a gift from God for a life of faithful devotion. Emotions have traditionally been found to occupy a more minor seat while love, obedience, and duty predominate as the major themes of Scripture and the priority for our lives. Now, suddenly, in the 1980s a new doctrine is published in a book by a single individual which claims that emotions and the pursuit of pleasure are our "highest calling" and chief duty, THE major of all majors.

As with any modern doctrine, one must ask, did God really wait around for 2000 years following the last recorded Scriptures before revealing His true will regarding human emotions and pleasure, and did He really select an extra-biblical philosophy book in which to publish this revelation to His people?

Everything we have needed for holy living, sound doctrine, worship, and Christian growth have been available to the church for 2000 years. So let us return to that standard. Where are the genuine tangible calls to seek pleasure for ourselves? Where are the passages that elevate enjoyment as a highest of all duties?

Honestly, and that is what I am seeking here, honesty, the Word is never focused on our emotions over our conduct. Where are the Bible verses that describe knowing we are saved based on our emotions? Not finding such an abundance, instead, I can find a wealth of Bible verses that tell us to evaluate our level of obedience to see if we are in the faith. For example, how often do we read the directive that He who loves Christ will keep His commandments?

The fact of the matter is, emotions are simply not esteemed in the Word as highly as are love, faith, hope, and obedience. Emotional responses are certainly discussed in the Word, but they are not given priority. Those who fight against that idea must invent "new Scripture" to make it sound as if emotions were highly important. One such example is when Dr. Piper wrote as part of a rhetorical question, "unless a man is born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God." If the Word had actually said such a thing even but one time anywhere in all the Bible Piper would not have had to bastardize a genuine Bible passage to make his point. This is a classic example of making "a major" (the doctrine of salvation) out of not just a minor, but out of a man’s imagination.

Nor would he have to use the one verse fragment, "delight yourself in the Lord," out of its context over and over and over again, most often erroneously calling this fragment of a promise a "command of God", if such genuine commands existed.

When legitimate Scripture makes something a priority, it is plain and evident when it does so. What is the greatest of all commandments? Everyone knows it is "love God" because the text of the Word says, "there is no commandment greater". No ambiguity, no need to invent pseudo-Scriptures.

When "love" is set against two other great elements of our religion, "faith" and "hope", which is the greater? Again, no guesswork needed. Plain text from 1 Corinthians 13 explicitly states that love is greater.

And just what is this love that the Bible refers to as the most major of all our commands and pursuits? Yes, even the youngest of children know because it is so often and plainly told us that to love God is to obey God. Again, due to the abundance and the straightforward language of the Word we know that love is the greatest of all commandments and that the primary definition of love is to obey God.

Where are the same indisputable and obvious Bible verses that say, "pursue pleasure", "convert to hedonism", "be thou devoted to the pursuit of pleasure", "terrible things will happen if you are not happy enough", "worship is only authentic when you are elevated in an emotional ecstasy above the working of your thinking mind"?

Since there are no such Bible verses you can be certain, absolutely certain, that God does not require such counterfeit commands to be placed onto His people, nor will He hold us accountable to live by them. For this reason the one who is converted to Christ away from sin but remains unconverted to the philosophy of Christian Hedonism is not imperiled in his Christian walk nor in his eternal salvation.

Had there been even a few Bible verses to establish the fundamental concept that God wants us to pursue pleasures at all, pleasure seeking may have been legitimately held to be a minor doctrine. Given that there are no commands at all in the Word that elevate the pursuit of pleasure "with all our strength" to be our highest calling (which would make the pursuit-of-pleasure into actual "hedonism") then we know that "Christian Hedonism" is not even a genuine doctrine of Scripture at all. Since "Christian Hedonism" is not a legitimate doctrine of the Bible, not to mention that it does not even qualify as a minor doctrine, permit me to ask this question: Why does the church tolerate this philosophy to be used in the Sunday School classroom as if it were a God-sanctioned doctrine?

Major in the majors. Fine. Minor in the minors. Fine. But why major in a philosophy that is not even qualified to be called a minor? There is little enough time on this Earth for man; let us redeem the time and redouble our efforts to love God, love our neighbors, fear God, and keep His commandments, for after all, is this not the entire duty of man?

Isn’t Christian Hedonism just a way of restoring joy to the church?

In order to make the concept of restoration meaningful, it must first be demonstrated that the essential quantity or quality of joy is lacking. When a piece of artwork is "restored" at a museum, the curator must first decide if the artwork has sufficiently degraded over time so as to justify the invasive procedures that the use of modern materials and tools will inflict on the nature of the artwork.

Such a decision is made on the basis of comparison to what the original "should" have looked like. Sometimes it is obvious because actual paint is missing from the present version. Sometimes the colors have so faded it is no longer possible to see details that once must have been distinct. At those times the decision to restore is simpler.

At other times it is not. Perhaps the curator does not like the depth of red in the painting, so he asks the restoration artist to deepen it. The restoration artist replies, "no, that is the true extent of the red that the artist intended, so I will not deepen it." Who is correct? Had there been a digital reference photograph to compare to, the debate would be over. Without it, the debate over whether to restore comes down to preference.

And so it is with the depth of "joy" in the church today. Many Christian Hedonists demand a demonstration of a higher level of joy within the church. That is their preference, so they have asked for a restoration project on the church. But is such a project truly restoration or the invasive imposing of their preferences onto the church using the modern tool of hedonism?

Our standard of conduct is the Word, not preference. Just as it would be possible to determine if artwork needed restoration to some original state by comparing it to a digital photograph, we can compare the church, and ourselves, to the Word of God and determine what needs to be repaired.

What is the optimum and perfect "level of joy" that the Bible requires of the church? No such standard is described. Instead, the Word defines joy as a fruit of the Spirit. An outcome of continued growth and sanctification. As such, we can assume it is all but absent at our re-birth and grows over time as we learn to obey God and perform His will as we are conformed to it.

To impose an arbitrary standard is to adulterate the Word of God with legalism. And at what level would this arbitrary standard be applied? At the heart level or at the external level? When the face smiles the heart can be sad, and when the face is sad the heart can still be joyful; so which standard is to be imposed?

Christian Hedonism would take the entire "restoration" to an odd extreme if it were permitted. Christian Hedonism requires that men pursue their own pleasures with all their strength. This standard of "personal level of joy" is nowhere found in the Word. In fact, that arbitrary preference is in conflict with those standards which are genuine, such as to love God with all your strength.

Rather than "restore joy" to the church, Christian Hedonism threatens to ruin the artwork entirely by painting over the original with a heavy topcoat of a just one color, hedonism, and mask all that the Master intended with His own strokes. Hedonism is not the restoration of joy to the church, it is the usurping of genuine Scriptural priorities, such as "love God with all your strength", with a new preference never seen or imposed on the church before in history. Let us thank God that He gave us His standard for what the finished Master Piece should look life for all human history.

Isn’t it true that non-hedonist Christians are really just dead, joyless, useless believers who displease God?

Someone who has intentionally assumed for themselves the label of "Christian Hedonist" subscribes to a certain philosophy. That philosophy requires them to pursue pleasure in God as their primary goal in this life and the next.

In turn, anyone who has not converted to the philosophy of hedonism may be judged by some hedonists as emotionally dead, joyless, and therefore useless to the kingdom of God. This judgment is based on a number of false assumptions about the Word and about the philosophy of Christian Hedonism.

The first false assumption made is that if someone is not pursuing their own pleasures as their primary goal then they must not have any joy at all. Such a person making this assumption is so mentally and visually focused on "joy" and "pleasure" as the purpose of life that he misses the chasm of separation in meaning between the terms "joyless" and "being consumed with nothing but my own joys and pleasure."

Joy is one of the things that brings hedonists pleasure, so they pursue it. By contrast, If a non-hedonist is motivated to act out of say, love, and not from a desire for personal pleasure (joy) then the hedonist accuses them of being "joyless".

Hedonism is blind to the fact that non-hedonists can be motivated by the entire spectrum of emotions, biblical reasons, and commandments. At any given time, a non-hedonist may be spurred to godly action by the fear of God, or by sympathy for a neighbor, or by a sense of duty, or by compassion. In fact, a non-hedonist believer is open to any form of godly influence by which to justify obedience to God and His Word.

Hedonists are narrowly restricted to act only on that which they feel will bring them pleasure. All motives and actions are measured by "will this bring me more pleasure in God than I had a moment ago?"

When one is spurred on to serve God from a selfless desire to please God he is never useless, dead, or joyless. Every Christian will grow in joy over time, for it is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. Sooner or later the bud of joy will begin growing and God will raise up such a one to experience the joy of the Lord, in His own good timing.

When that believer acts on his desire to please God, rather than to please himself, he becomes useful.

It is not pleasure-seeking nor joy that render a man useful and fruitful. Rather it is the qualities of moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly kindness, and love.

The absence of these qualities makes one blind or short-sighted and forgetful. Therefore, it is the one who concentrates on his own pleasures alone that is in more serious danger of becoming unproductive for the kingdom than the one who concentrates on duties instead of pleasure; duties such as self-control and love.

Joy and pleasure-seeking are not the qualities by which God judges usefulness and spiritual deadness. Those who do judge other believers on the basis of how much joy they display are themselves in danger of judgment:

Never have I known a believer, a servant of God, who is "dead" for God has granted such a one new life. Nor have I known a believer who is "joyless" for all believers sooner or later experience some level of joy in their Christian walk with Christ.

When a hedonist accuses traditional Christians and their churches of being "dead", "joyless", and "useless" they are actually saying, "they do not meet my own personal preferences for outward displays of joy and pleasure-seeking therefore I have no use for them." Such hedonists are to be pitied for they have missed a vital element of being a Christian; they have missed the unity in Spirit with all God’s children.

As a summary statement of the Bible, isn’t "pursue pleasure" more encompassing than "love God" (Matthew 22:37)?

Asked another way the question might be: "Isn’t Christian Hedonism just a summary statement of all the Bible teaches?"

In either case, the answer is still the same. No, the pursuit of pleasure and Christian Hedonism are not summary statements that in aggregate describe in single phrases everything that the Bible attempts to explain and teach.

This question has been asked to me and even stated at me as a "fact" many times. For anyone to think that the Bible adds up to one giant summation that means "pursue your own pleasure in God as your highest calling and most important duty" is to ignore what the Bible says of itself.

Of itself, the Bible says that there is one all encompassing summary statement that combines the intent of every law from the Old Testament and every precept uttered by a prophet in the New Testament.

The word "depend" means "to hang from", as a suspension bridge would hang from one of its two giant support cables. The bridge and the lives of all those who use it are completely reliant on those two cables for their support and usefulness of the bridge.

Every law and every word of the prophets are reliant on one of two summary statements:

• Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.
• Love your neighbor as yourself.

Paul understood well that love for God and love for your neighbor were the two summations of the Word.

Even the scribe who questioned Jesus came to understand that there was no higher summary of all that is written in the Word than to love God with all your strength and to love your neighbor with as much sincerity as you love yourself.

And what does it mean to love God? Many answers are possible, but one answer is predominant through the entirety of Scripture:

• "TO LOVE HIM WITH ALL THE HEART AND WITH ALL THE UNDERSTANDING AND WITH ALL THE STRENGTH, AND TO LOVE ONE'S NEIGHBOR AS HIMSELF, is much more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices" (Mark 12:33b)
• Samuel said, "Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams. (1 Samuel 15:22)
• "Only be very careful to observe the commandment and the law which Moses the servant of the Lord commanded you, to love the Lord your God and walk in all His ways and keep His commandments and hold fast to Him and serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul." (Joshua 22:5)
• If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. (John 14:15 )
• He who has My commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves Me…(John 14:21 )
• If you keep my commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in His love. (John 15:10 )
• …what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God. (1Cor.7:19 )
• …you received from us instruction as to how you ought to walk and please God…for you know what commandments we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus. (1Thes.4:1,2 )
• And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. (1John 2:3 )
• But whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. (1John 2:5a)
• By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments. (1John 5:2)
• For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome. (1John 5:3 )
• And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments. (2 John 1:6a)

There is no higher summary statement of the Word than the two which Jesus Himself delivered to us: Love God with all your strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. Everything written in the Word depends on these two summary statements. And what is love except that we fear and obey the Lord.

Is the goal of worship about getting pleasure, or is it something else?

What’s really the harm in emphasizing "the pursuit of pleasure"?

Isn’t the command to delight in God the same as saying we are commanded to "pursue pleasure"?

If I find a Bible verse that calls me to be joyful, haven’t I proven Christian Hedonism is correct?

Many times we are called upon by God in His Word to express joy and gratefulness to God for all He has done and for the salvation He has granted us. Expressing joy and gratitude is not hedonism. And being commanded to express joy is not a command to pursue hedonism.

Hedonists in order to get from a command to rejoice to a command to pursue pleasure put the logic together something like this:

• God tells me to rejoice in the Lord.
• Rejoicing is emotionally laden and fun.
• Because rejoicing is fun and pleasant, the command to rejoice is actually a command to have fun and to chase after pleasure.
• Since God commands me to have fun, pursuing my pleasures is a command from God.
• Pursuing my pleasures is now the highest calling of mankind and my greatest pursuit.

I am still unclear how the logic step is taken to get from "pursuing my pleasures is a command from God" to "pursuing my pleasures is now the highest calling of mankind and my greatest pursuit".

Suffice it to say that the hedonist’s logic is faulty and that God does not command us to "pursue pleasure" when He commands us to "rejoice in the Lord."

.

Why rejoice? Why "be full of cheer" (Gk: chairo)? In this case because Epaphroditus did not actually die and was able to minister to Paul, completing the ministry that the Philippians had left unfinished with regard to taking care of Paul. And rejoice that Paul is able once again to provide instructions that will safeguard the flock. So rejoice that the Lord’s church is thriving and that the Lord guides and protects.

This rejoicing is not a personal command for the Philippians to pursue pleasure. This rejoicing is to be an expression of positive gratitude (and relief) to God that Paul and Epaphroditus are well and working for the Lord. It is not a command to pursue pleasure so that they can be filled up with good sensations, it is a command to acknowledge that God is good.

What is the difference? The goal is different. "Pursue your own pleasure and happiness so that you feel good" is different than "rejoice in the Lord because Paul and Epaphroditus are able to do the Lord’s work." Not only are the goals different, but the outcomes are different. When one rejoices in order to feel good, he ends up focusing on himself, striving for ever more exciting feelings and sensations. When one rejoices for the purpose of praising God with thankfulness, the focus is on the Lord and the fact that the person may feel some pleasure in that is simply the natural human response. Since pleasure is not the goal, the celebrant is not so concerned about filling themselves up with ecstasy as they are on thanking God and pleasing Him.

While it is sloppy scholarship to equate "rejoice in the Lord" to "pursue your own hedonistic pleasures" it is unconscionable to equate "rejoice in the Lord" to "pursuing my pleasures is now my highest calling and my greatest pursuit."

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

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.

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?

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:

The clock maker congenially answers back:

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.

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

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

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?

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

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.

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

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.

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

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?

Is God a Hedonist?