What do you think?
Rate this book
Christian Hedonism?: A biblical examination of John Piper's teaching
Christian Hedonism?
Many people sense that there is something profoundly wrong with combining the Christian Faith with the philosophy of hedonism, but few people are able to explain why Christian Hedonism is a false doctrine. This short book sets out to evaluate John Piper’s teaching in the light of Scripture. We see how he amends the Westminster Shorter Catechism to say that ‘the chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying Him forever’. We see how Piper creates a new commandment, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’, from Psalm 37.4, and then tells Christians that the vocation of their life is to seek maximum pleasure in God. We hear how Piper extols the worldly worship of a Passion Conference. We learn of Piper’s new definition of love as ‘holy, divine Eros’. We note how Piper cleverly ‘digs up’ Scripture to find a ‘happy God’. We see how Scripture is twisted to make the claim that the apostle Paul and the Lord Jesus Himself were Christian hedonists. This book provides clear evidence that antinomianism is the underlying error upon which Christian Hedonism is built.
Many people sense that there is something profoundly wrong with combining the Christian Faith with the philosophy of hedonism, but few people are able to explain why Christian Hedonism is a false doctrine. This short book sets out to evaluate John Piper’s teaching in the light of Scripture. We see how he amends the Westminster Shorter Catechism to say that ‘the chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying Him forever’. We see how Piper creates a new commandment, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’, from Psalm 37.4, and then tells Christians that the vocation of their life is to seek maximum pleasure in God. We hear how Piper extols the worldly worship of a Passion Conference. We learn of Piper’s new definition of love as ‘holy, divine Eros’. We note how Piper cleverly ‘digs up’ Scripture to find a ‘happy God’. We see how Scripture is twisted to make the claim that the apostle Paul and the Lord Jesus Himself were Christian hedonists. This book provides clear evidence that antinomianism is the underlying error upon which Christian Hedonism is built.
84 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 10, 2017
20 people are currently reading
17 people want to read
About the author
E.S. Williams
25 books4 followersDr E S Williams was Director of Public Health for Croydon Health Authority for many years. He is the author of 'The Dark Side of Christian Counselling', 'Christ or Therapy?' and numerous research papers in medical journals.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
March 25, 2020
I thought the author started out nitpicking. He seem ,to me, to have finished with his strongest arguments. Piper is a Gnostic, that's why he is a Calvinist and hedonistic.
March 27, 2022
Mostly not that good. There are many weak arguments and at least one instance of misrepresentation, but there are also some strong criticisms of "Christian Hedonism" as well. Williams talks about how Piper came up with this idea (bad influences) and how it's unbiblical. He also breaks down Piper's apparent obsession with Psalm 37:4 and makes the case that Piper is antinomian, corrupting the youth while pretending to be in the reformed tradition.
This book is polemical and can be very nitpicky at times...
This book is polemical and can be very nitpicky at times...
March 16, 2019
Overall, this book isn’t bad. It does give readers a good understanding of Piper’s Christian Hedonism, the origins of this view, and a few problems with it. It explains how it connects to Piper’s view of the OT Moral Law and how it connects to his view of love. Because of these positives, I still recommend the book.
However, I do have two main complaints. Firstly, Dr. Williams takes the view that denying the continuity of the OT Moral Law is necessarily Antinomianism. While I’m sympathetic to the concern, and there are certainly some who do this who are Antinomian, some people still believe a Law of God is present that acts as a guide for the Christian life, and I believe Piper in one of these. It is even evident that this is where Piper stands within this book: he makes delighting in God a commandment and implies we must follow it, which is not an Antinomian view (it’s also evident in more recent controversies in which Piper made statements that caused other people to believe he was a Baxterian Neo-Nomian - the other extreme to Antinomianism). This caused Dr. Williams to take a harsher stance on Piper than I would be inclined to (and anyone who knows me knows I’m not a fan of Piper; I guess one could say that his harshness against Piper could be qualm 1.5, but I really think it is an extension of the Antinomian accusation).
Secondly, I think Dr. Williams could have expanded his refutation more. For example, his handling of Psalm 37 is adequate, but definitely could have been expanded into an even more full handling of the text. The same is true of his rebuttal of Piper’s view of love. One of the most glaring problems I noted in Piper’s view is that it is an affront to the Aseity of God, but the words “Aseity”, “Impassibility”, “Self-Sufficiency”, “Independence”, “Self-Existence”, etc. don’t even appear in the chapter. I could add more examples, but I think my point has been made.
This book, however, has many positives. I think it gives a helpful understanding of the origins and teachings of Christian Hedonism. I really enjoyed Dr. Williams showing how Piper’s Christian Hedonism informs his view of worship. I also found it helpful to show how Piper’s Christian Hedonism is rooted in his doctrine of God (which, as a Classical Theist, I have disagreements with).
Though it has problems, I still recommend the book, and think that it is helpful for anyone who doesn’t understand the problem with Piper’s Christian Hedonism. It helped show me how incompatible Christian Hedonism is with any form of Covenant Theology (especially as it relates to the Law) and the Classical Theist view of God (though Dr. Williams doesn’t reference Classical Theism, Aseity, Immutability, etc. in the book). I recommend reading the book, just do so in a way that is cautious and charitable (both towards Piper and Dr. Williams), and skip chapter 8.
However, I do have two main complaints. Firstly, Dr. Williams takes the view that denying the continuity of the OT Moral Law is necessarily Antinomianism. While I’m sympathetic to the concern, and there are certainly some who do this who are Antinomian, some people still believe a Law of God is present that acts as a guide for the Christian life, and I believe Piper in one of these. It is even evident that this is where Piper stands within this book: he makes delighting in God a commandment and implies we must follow it, which is not an Antinomian view (it’s also evident in more recent controversies in which Piper made statements that caused other people to believe he was a Baxterian Neo-Nomian - the other extreme to Antinomianism). This caused Dr. Williams to take a harsher stance on Piper than I would be inclined to (and anyone who knows me knows I’m not a fan of Piper; I guess one could say that his harshness against Piper could be qualm 1.5, but I really think it is an extension of the Antinomian accusation).
Secondly, I think Dr. Williams could have expanded his refutation more. For example, his handling of Psalm 37 is adequate, but definitely could have been expanded into an even more full handling of the text. The same is true of his rebuttal of Piper’s view of love. One of the most glaring problems I noted in Piper’s view is that it is an affront to the Aseity of God, but the words “Aseity”, “Impassibility”, “Self-Sufficiency”, “Independence”, “Self-Existence”, etc. don’t even appear in the chapter. I could add more examples, but I think my point has been made.
This book, however, has many positives. I think it gives a helpful understanding of the origins and teachings of Christian Hedonism. I really enjoyed Dr. Williams showing how Piper’s Christian Hedonism informs his view of worship. I also found it helpful to show how Piper’s Christian Hedonism is rooted in his doctrine of God (which, as a Classical Theist, I have disagreements with).
Though it has problems, I still recommend the book, and think that it is helpful for anyone who doesn’t understand the problem with Piper’s Christian Hedonism. It helped show me how incompatible Christian Hedonism is with any form of Covenant Theology (especially as it relates to the Law) and the Classical Theist view of God (though Dr. Williams doesn’t reference Classical Theism, Aseity, Immutability, etc. in the book). I recommend reading the book, just do so in a way that is cautious and charitable (both towards Piper and Dr. Williams), and skip chapter 8.
March 4, 2019
The core of this critique is that Piper has introduced a new commandment: "delight yourself in the Lord" (Psalm 37:4). Piper teaches that this delight constitutes the purpose of life and warns that God's wrath awaits those who fail to delight in the Lord. God, according to Piper, is divine "eros", a conception explicitly rejected as pagan by Williams.
Reading this book has made me appreciate the difficult position of the Reformed Evangelicals. Williams represents the dry, dogmatic and unsatisfying traditionalist Reformed tradition focused on stoically keeping commandments and singing the same old hymns from the pew every sunday.
Piper offers a startling vision of religion as an ecstatic experience, something fervent and filled with pleasure. He blends the Charismatic experience with Reformed theology. More importantly, he is addressing the very real problem of aridity in the spiritual experience of traditional Reformed Evangelical Protestantism.
As an Orthodox Christian, I see Piper's search for the divine eros as fundamentally good and a valid reaction against the dry intellectualism of Old Calvinism; however, William's alarm at the absence of repentance and the novelty of language in Piper's "Christian Hedonism" is well-founded also. I see the best of Piper's divine eros and William's repentance and conservatism blended in the spirituality of Orthodox elders such as Elder Porphyros in "Wounded by Love", a book I recommend as complementary to Williams' "Christian Hedonism?".
Reading this book has made me appreciate the difficult position of the Reformed Evangelicals. Williams represents the dry, dogmatic and unsatisfying traditionalist Reformed tradition focused on stoically keeping commandments and singing the same old hymns from the pew every sunday.
Piper offers a startling vision of religion as an ecstatic experience, something fervent and filled with pleasure. He blends the Charismatic experience with Reformed theology. More importantly, he is addressing the very real problem of aridity in the spiritual experience of traditional Reformed Evangelical Protestantism.
As an Orthodox Christian, I see Piper's search for the divine eros as fundamentally good and a valid reaction against the dry intellectualism of Old Calvinism; however, William's alarm at the absence of repentance and the novelty of language in Piper's "Christian Hedonism" is well-founded also. I see the best of Piper's divine eros and William's repentance and conservatism blended in the spirituality of Orthodox elders such as Elder Porphyros in "Wounded by Love", a book I recommend as complementary to Williams' "Christian Hedonism?".
December 7, 2017
When I first heard of John Piper's "Christian Hedonism", I thought it was just a very poor and unfortunate use of the word hedonism, and chalked it up to Piper's attempt to "be relevant" in today's culture. However, after reading this book by E S Williams, I am even more dismayed at Piper, and believe he should be avoided by Christians seeking to draw near to God. Although this book is not thick, it is well documented and the author is not guilty of taking things out of context. Piper has pushed his pet idea of pursuing pleasure, dressed up in Christian garb, and let that control his so-called ministry.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews