Loving God for the Sake of His Own

Rev. C. Sonnevelt, Alberta, Lethbridge

Some say that all love arises from self-love; and that it is impossible in the nature of things for any man to have any love to God, or any other being, but that love to himself must be the foundation of it. But I humbly suppose it is for want of consideration that they say so. They argue, that whosoever loves God, and so desires His glory or the enjoyment of Him, desires these things as his own happiness. The glory of God, and the beholding and enjoying His perfections are considered as things agreeable to him, tending to make him happy. He places his happiness in them, and desires them as things, which (if they were obtained) would be delightful to him, or would fill him with delight and joy, and so make him happy. And so, they say, it is from self-love, or a desire of his own happiness, that he desires God should be glorified, and desires to behold and enjoy His glorious perfections.

But then they ought to consider a little further, and inquire how the man came to place his happiness in God’s being glorified, and in contemplating and enjoying God’s perfections. There is no doubt but that after God’s glory, and the beholding His perfections, are become so agreeable to him that he places his highest happiness in these things, then he will desire them as he desires his own happiness. But how came these things to be so agreeable to him that he esteems it his highest happiness to glorify God? Is not this the fruit of love? A man must first love God, or have his heart united to Him, before he will esteem God’s good his own, and before he will desire the glorifying and enjoying of God as his happiness.

It is not a strong argument, that because a man has his heart united to God in love, and, as a fruit of this, desires God’s glory and enjoyment as his own happiness, that therefore a desire after his happiness of his own must needs be the cause and foundation of his love. It would be just as true to argue that, because a father begat a son, therefore his son certainly begat him. If, after a man loves God, and has his heart so united to Him as to look upon God as his chief good and on God’s good as his own, it will be a consequence and fruit of this that even self-love, or love to his own happiness, will cause him to desire the glorifying and enjoying of God; it will not thence follow that this very exercise of self-love went before his love to God, and that his love to God was a consequence and fruit of that. Something else, entirely distinct from self-love, might be the thing that first draws his heart to Him, and causes his heart to be united to Him, prior to all considerations of his own interest or happiness, although after this, and as a fruit of this, he necessarily seeks his interest and happiness in God. (...)

That kind of affection to God or Jesus Christ which does thus properly arise from self-love, cannot be a truly gracious and spiritual love, as appears from what has been said already: for self-love is a principle entirely natural, and as much in the hearts of devils and angels; and therefore surely nothing that is the mere result of it can be supernatural and divine, in the manner before described. Christ plainly speaks of this kind of love, as what is nothing beyond the love of wicked men: Luke 6:32, “If ye love them that love you, what thank have ye? For sinners also love those that love them.” And the devil himself knew that that kind of respect to God which was so mercenary as to be only for benefits received or depended on (which is all one), is worthless in the sight of God; otherwise he never would have made use of such a slander before God against Job, as in Job 1:9&10: “Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast not thou made a hedge about him, and about his house,” etc. Nor would God ever have implicitly allowed the objection to have been good, in case the accusation had been true, by allowing that that matter should be tried, and that Job should be so dealt with, that it might appear in the event, whether Job’s respect to God was thus mercenary or no, and by putting the proof of the sincerity and goodness of his respect upon that issue.

— Dr. Jonathan Edwards

For Reflection

The meditation for this issue of our church news has been taken from Jonathan Edwards’ book The Religious Affections (pages 166-167). We do not quote the well-known New England preacher (instrumental in the Great Awakening) because we agree with each and every word that he has written during his life. We do so because we wholeheartedly agree with what he writes on those pages. When reading this part of the book, I was touched by his words about loving God for the sake of His own. This has several reasons.

John Piper

For several years already, books of Dr. John Piper are being circulated among a wide readership. Although this renowned preacher calls himself Reformed, he has strong objections to the way God’s glory is made the center of everything in the Reformed tradition. For example, the famous Westminster Catechism (1647) begins with the question, “What is the chief end of man?” The answer says, “It is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.” Piper disagrees with this answer. According to him, it should have been, “To glorify God by enjoying Him forever.” God does not have to be glorified for who He is; He will be glorified if we simply delight in His salvation and presence. Dr. Piper wants us to focus on pleasure and joy in God, calling this a “Christian form of hedonism”(!).

Jean de Labadie

Many of us may never have heard of John Piper. Perhaps you wonder why his name should even be mentioned in a publication like this. The reason is, first of all, because a man forewarned is a man forearmed. We may hear more about Piper in the near future. In the second place, we hear Piper-like sounds in our church life today. Not too long ago, Rev. A. Moerkerken was severely criticized by a Dutch minister in a book about “the way leading to Christ.” That which the rector of our theological school in the Netherlands teaches about the steps in the life of grace was “exposed” as unscriptural and un-Reformed. Other ministers, too, were rebuked for teaching that God’s children “must be brought to a point where God’s honour becomes more precious than their own salvation.” The author calls this teaching a form of Labadism (Jean de Labadie was a notorious heretic in the days of the Further Reformation). It is very grievous to read such accusations, and it makes us concerned about the congregations which are so dear to us.

Jonathan Edwards

The passage quoted from Jonathan Edwards clearly shows that the accused brothers in the ministry do not have to apologize for their views. In fact, they are in good company. Dr. Edwards wrote his book to distinguish between false and true religious affections. In the first case, man will love God (or rather, believe that he loves God) because he has assured himself that God has done something for him: He has sent His Son to die for him, He has pardoned his sins, He makes him prosper in this world, He has promised him eternal glory, etc. In short, the love of such a person springs from self-interest. His love is basically self-love. In the other case, it is the opposite. The soul has seen something of God’s beauty (the beauty of holiness) and of the excellency of Christ and therefore loves Him.

Unnatural?

Someone may say, “But is that not unnatural? Will man ever seek God’s glory and serve Him unless he sees there is profit in doing so? What Jonathan Edwards says may be true, but it sounds so unnatural!” Yes, it does; we shall not deny that. However, is this not precisely the issue? The love of hypocrites is natural love, whereas the love of God’s upright people is spiritual love. Our nature should be changed—not accommodated or gratified. Instead of deceiving ourselves with natural emotions, we need a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. Only then will we become clay in the hands of the great Potter and a fit object for God’s free and sovereign grace in Christ. That is what God’s faithful servants have always taught. No, we do not teach that man must bring himself to that place (he cannot and he will not); yet, we maintain that—in true conversion—the Lord will do so.

Feel-good religion

There was a time that our church members, in general, were convinced of the truth. Surely, there were exceptions, but they were just that—exceptions. If I am not mistaken, this is slowly but steadily changing. More and more, people want to be included and encouraged when they come to church. The sermon should not be too long, too difficult, or too “heavy.” We are told that there is more emphasis on the love of God in other churches and that people are quick to welcome you as a brother or sister. That may indeed be the case, but is that what you seek? Be honest! What is more important—“feeling good” or seeking the glory of God and loving the Lord because He is so worthy to be loved? When the first thing is your aim, you are only one step away from turning your back upon the truth and leaving the church. Once again, a man forewarned is a man forearmed.

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen