Happiness and Joy, Part Two

This is part two of my rebuttal of Randy Alcorn’s assertion that happiness and joy are used synonymously in Scripture. In part one I explained why I think the difference between happiness and joy is an important one. In this post I will present my evidence that the Bible makes a clear distinction between the two words. In his article “Is There a Difference Between Happiness and Joy?” Alcorn makes the bold statement that, “An ungrounded, dangerous separation of joy from happiness has infiltrated the Christian community.” After citing an example of this “dangerous separation,” he says, “Judging from such articles… you’d think the distinction between joy and happiness is biblical. It’s not.” He is wrong; the Bible makes a clear distinction between the two.

First I want to explain why I will only use the New Testament in this argument. There is an important hermeneutical (interpretative) concept that demands we interpret a less clear passage with a more clear one. In this instance, Alcorn uses numerous Old Testament passages to support his argument. While I agree that we can learn much about God from the Old Testament, we must always use the New Testament to clarify the Old.

There are several reasons why the New Testament gives a better picture of God than the Old. The Hebrew language of the Old Testament is far less precise than the New Testament Greek. Also, the idea of progressive revelation leads us to understand that God revealed more detail about himself and his creation in the New Testament. Finally, God’s interaction with his people is significantly different after the Cross than before Calvary. Many of the errors that exist in the church today are a result of misunderstanding this important difference.

Second I want to explain why Alcorn’s argument about the English use of happiness and joy is irrelevant. The Holy Spirit inspired the writers of Scripture to use certain words, and I believe there is a reason for each and every choice. Neither Noah Webster nor any of the translators of English versions of the Bible can make the claim to be inspired by the Holy Spirit, so their opinions matter little. The New Testament Greek is a very precise language, far more precise than English in many cases, and the best Bible interpretation must take into account how the Greek handles any subject.

Third, I want to refute Alcorn’s argument that using happiness and joy in the same context proves they are synonymous. Quite the contrary, side-by-side use argues for a difference of kind or degree; it makes little sense to apply two words with identical meanings to a situation. This would be like saying the weather is wet and damp; that would be needlessly redundant. However, if one says the weather is cold and damp, the purpose of using two words is obvious. I believe this is precisely the reason for a Scriptural usage of both happiness and joy, even when they appear in the same passage.

Alcorn is correct to note that many modern translations use happiness and joy almost interchangeably. However, this is not reflective of the original Greek; the Greek has two different words with distinct meanings: chara (χαρα) for “joy” and makarios (μακαριοs) for what might be called “happiness.” Chara appears 59 times and makarios 50 times. The King James Version (KJV) does the best job of maintaining this distinction. The KJV translates chara as joy or a cognate of joy 55 times and gladness three times. Of the 50 occurrences of makarios, the KJV uses “blessed” 44 times and “happy” or a cognate the other six. In other words, the translators of the KJV recognized the difference between the words and rendered them as different.

It is noteworthy that the KJV used “blessed” for makarios. The English word “blessed” well reflects the Greek sense of makarios. One cannot have blessed (hear how strange that sounds). One can only be blessed; it is a reflexive verb. When circumstances outside a person are pleasant, the person is blessed; the person may feel happiness. Curiously, happiness is also a type of word that requires something to happen outside one’s self. Happiness results from good happening. Read any of the verses in the New Testament where makarios appears, and you will find precisely this type of situation. (eg. Matthew 5:11-13; James 1:25; Luke 11:27-28)

Because of the reflexive nature of the verb makarios, it is patently obvious that it cannot be commanded. It is illogical to suggest that God would command his people to have circumstances that would bring about happiness. God in his sovereignty can do such a thing, but humans are often powerless to change their situations. In fact, God has been known to do just the opposite. Consider Moses on the “backside of the desert,” or Jonah inside the whale, or Paul with his “thorn in the flesh.” It may be uncomfortable for Alcorn and others like him to admit, but God does not always orchestrate things for our happiness. God’s strength was shown in Paul’s unhappiness; Nineveh repented due to Jonah’s unhappiness; the Israelites discovered a strong leader following Moses’ unhappiness. God will be glorified with or without human happiness; it is his choice, not ours.

Chara or joy on the other hand can be commanded, and it is. I said in my previous post that I hesitate to call joy an emotion because I believe it is a spiritual state, and emotions reside in the soul, not the spirit. Certainly our joy can bubble over into an emotion, since our human condition is inseparably and mysteriously connected soul with spirit. But the strange irony is that we humans can experience sorrow and joy simultaneously. When my 33 year old sister succumbed to cancer and left a husband and four children behind, her funeral was heart-wrenching, yet we were peaceful and occasional laughter was heard as we rejoiced in the fact that she had been relieved from her suffering and was with Jesus.

Read the Bible verses that contain the word joy and you will see that it is not anything that could be called happiness. Peter and James admonish believers to have joy knowing that trials and suffering will be inevitable. It would be sick on the level of psychotic to say that we should be happy to suffer unless we recognize the joy that awaits our patience. Suffering does not bring happiness; knowing we can suffer and be carried through the suffering by the power of the Spirit and our hope in God brings joy, but not happiness. Even secular psychologists caution against seeking happiness indiscriminately, warning of a “shallow, self-absorbed or even selfish life.” This sounds very much like Solomon’s estimate of such things as vanity.

It is ironic that Alcorn advocates for an emotional experience from the platform of Eternal Perspective Ministries. The true eternal perspective eschews emotional experience in favor of the spiritual. Perhaps Alcorn does not recognize the difference between the spirit and the soul, much as he ignores the difference between joy and happiness. This mistake is not insignificant. The web page touting his book, Happiness, says, “Christians are supposed to be happy…. this book is a paradigm-shifting wake-up call for the church and Christians everywhere.” His book does indeed shift the biblical paradigm; it shifts it from truth to falsehood.

It is unkind and unbiblical to claim as Alcorn does that God wants his people happy without qualification. God created the universe perfect and placed his human vice-regent in charge. Sadly, Adam rejected his proper role in that perfect world where happiness would have been the normal state and cast all humanity into the state of sinful unhappiness we now know as normal. Until Eden is restored, happiness is transitory and dependent on things mostly out of our control. Certainly we can have moments of happiness, but the Sovereign God dictates when those moments occur; we can only do what we are required to do and hope for the best on earth while sharing our joy with men of good will. Once heaven is realized, happiness and joy will be co-eternal for all God’s chosen.

Happiness and Joy, Part One

Here I am again, finding myself in a dispute with a well-known Christian author over an issue that many people would call trivial; some would even say it’s pointless. Being the semantic purist that I am, I naturally disagree. Words mean things, and Scripture word meanings have eternal consequences. In this case the dispute is whether happiness and joy are the same thing as far as the Bible usage is concerned. Randy Alcorn thinks so; I think not.

The publisher’s blurb for Alcorn’s latest book goes like this: “In God’s Promise of Happiness, bestselling author and noted theologian Randy Alcorn shares select passages and scripture from his latest hardcover release, Happiness, that provide insight, wisdom, and proof positive that God not only wants us to be happy, he commands it!” My dispute with this assertion centers on Alcorn’s conflation of two distinct words, two separate concepts within Scripture: joy and happiness. In interviews posted on his web site, Eternal Perspective Ministries (EPM), Alcorn has repeatedly stated that he believes the two words are interchangeable. I disagree.

Before I refute Alcorn’s “proof positive” that joy and happiness are the same, I will explain why this is not just a trivial argument over the translation of a couple words. The Great Commission calls us to bring the light of the Gospel to a dark world. In bringing this light to a post-modern culture that doubts the very existence of truth, it is imperative that we relate the truth revealed in Scripture with extreme care. Sloppy exegesis leads to inaccurate portrayals of God’s eternal truth. There is no passage in the Bible properly translated that suggests God wants people happy, let alone that He commands it. Telling people they must be happy is not only misleading, it is cruel.

The question arises how Alcorn, an otherwise responsible Bible expositor, can make such an erroneous claim. He can make such a claim because he fails to distinguish between two different Greek words used throughout the New Testament for joy and happiness. God does desire that His people have joy; it is one of the benefits of grace, also called a fruit of the Spirit. Nowhere does Scripture command believers to have happiness or to be happy. Even in our English language it is easy to see why happiness cannot be commanded. Happiness is a result of circumstances; happiness happens to one rather than one having happiness. We can have joy, but we are made happy; it is a reflexive type word, something done to us or for us rather than something we possess.

The Greek use of these two words in the New Testament bears this out completely. The word for joy (chara) appears 59 times in the Greek Testatment; the word rendered happy by modern translators (makarios) appears 50 times. The Greek makarios is translated “blessed” 44 times by the King James Version (KJV). This older usage is closer to the Greek meaning than our modern “happy.” To be blessed (again note the reflexive nature of the word) is to have something done to us. It is the result of things happening outside ourselves. Chara, on the other hand, is a state of being; it is something a person can possess. Chara is never rendered as “happy” by the KJV, nor should it be.

I mentioned that misconstruing happiness for joy is cruel. I say this because happiness results from our circumstances which are very often completely out of our control. It would be cruel to tell a young mother who has lost her husband that she must be happy. Being happy in that situation would be entirely unexpected (unless the husband was abusive). However, that suffering mother can have joy in her time of loss because she knows there is a greater purpose for her life, and there is a greater goal than happiness in this world. Here we reach the crux of the issue.

The bottom line to me is that these two words have different meanings in the original language of Scripture as inspired by the Holy Spirit. It clouds the understanding of God’s Word to make two different words synonymous. For my part, I believe that happiness is an emotion that results from positive circumstances and resides in the human soul. It is healthy, and our loving Father desires that we attain it when appropriate. Joy, on the other hand, is a spiritual concept (I hesitate to use “emotion”) which exists deeper within the “inner man,” and it is not dependent upon outside circumstances. The Spirit gives us inner joy in all circumstances; happiness is dependent upon that which occurs around us.

In my next post I will go into greater detail to refute Alcorn’s assertion that joy and happiness are synonymous. At this point I would simply say that confusing happiness with joy and then expecting it of all believers is akin to the prosperity preachers saying that God wants every believer healthy and wealthy. There simply is no proof of that in Scripture. (For more on this see Abraham's Promises.) Quite the contrary, we are commanded to be content in whatever circumstances we find ourselves, rejoicing, having joy, even in our want (Philippians 4). That sounds like a distasteful message to foist on a needy world, but the truth is that joy is eternal; happiness lasts only for the moment. For Randy Alcorn and Eternal Perspective Ministries, that appears to be ironically unimportant.

To read Part Two of my response, follow this link:

https://whammonline.blogspot.com/2015/12/happiness-and-joy-part-two.html

A Route 66 Adventure

Trip Log: Twin Lake, Michigan to Mesquite, Nevada.

We left Twin Lake in the rain and dark about 8:00 a.m. on Monday, December 14. After a quick stop at McDonald’s for breakfast, we hit the highway. It continued to rain off and on all day, and the wind picked up out of the southwest eventually blowing hard on the nose – so much for the fuel mileage. We slid across 80-94 in Indiana to I-65 south.

Being Good Sam Club members, we have a substantial discount when we use the Flying J/Pilot fuel card, so we were planning the trip around that brand as much as possible. The first fuel stop was in Dimwiddie (cute name), Indiana so that we would have enough fuel to make it across Illinois. At Roselawn we left the “big road” behind to cut across to Kankakee, Illinois. There we grabbed I-57 south to Champaign, and then I-70 west. We had chosen not to take the time to find Route 66 in Illinois, although there are a number of interesting sounding sites. We wanted to get to a spot where we could hook up the trailer and de-winterize in preparation for living aboard.

We spent the first night shivering in Cahokia, Illinois (suburb of East St. Louis) at an “urban” campground nestled among freight yards and commercial properties. It was colder on our first night out than when we left Michigan. (This would be a portent of worse to come.)  I wouldn’t recommend Cahokia RV Parque as a destination, but the Sawmill BBQ restaurant on-site is fabulous. We shared a half-rack and a couple sides and were very pleased: yum! If I am ever driving through the area at mealtime in the future, I would make this stop again just for the ribs. It’s really easy-off easy-on from the Interstate.

After a side-trip to a park where we could snap a picture of the Arch, we headed across the Mighty Mississippi into St. Louis, Missouri. We chose to skip a number of downtown Route 66 options in favor of a west side beginning. We connected with Route 66, “The Mother Road” in the suburbs and found it underwhelming for many miles – the Route 66 corridor is four-lane stop-and-go commercial for miles and miles. Nothing to see here, so at Gray Summit we reconnected with I-44 and skipped down to Cuba, MO.

The town of Cuba has some really neat murals on many buildings and a fully restored Phillips 66 station. Taking a left onto the Route again, we went to Fanning for a look at the world’s largest rocking chair (according to Guinness – the record book, not the stout). There’s also a neat mural on the shop there.

From the giant chair we continued down Route 66 into St. James. We had hoped to visit the wine museum at Rosati, but they were closed for the season. The winery/tasting room at St. James was open, however, and we found two cool Route 66 hats to add to the collection (there may have been a bottle or two of wine purchased as well).

Because the sun was getting low, we jumped back on I-44 and boogied down to Sarcoxie, MO for a stop at the Beagle Bay RV Park. We got in after the office was closed, but the owner gave us all the help we needed over the phone, so we set up for the night. We considered a fire under the stars, but the bed sounded better, so we packed it in for night two.

Day three may be one of my favorites. From Joplin, MO we took the Mother Road into Kansas, the state with the dubious distinction of having the fewest miles of Route 66. They may be few, but they are loaded with interesting attractions. My favorite was the town of Galena. The people have embraced their 66-ness in a big way. Besides having a quaint downtown restored to 30-ish style, there is a gas station on the outskirts with the truck that inspired film-maker, John Laseter, to create Tow Mater for the movie CARS.

The very friendly owner of the coffee shop in town told us that Baxter Springs, just down the Route, was the inspiration for CARS’ Radiator Springs and a local character who can turn his feet completely backwards gave Lasseter the idea to have Tow Mater run in reverse much of the time. He also told us to look for the Field of Dreams ballpark built for that movie when we headed into Oklahoma.

Because we were headed for a lakeside campground for the night, we wanted to get in early enough to enjoy the sunset (at four-something), so we bypassed the Route and made our way down I-44 to the 66 cut-off into Arcadia, Oklahoma. The City of Edmond keeps a really nice campground on Lake Arcadia where we pulled into a shoreline site just in time to watch the sun set over the lake while enjoying a couple adult beverages.

Night four in Arcadia was our first time without a full hook-up site, so I attempted to fill the water tank on our way in. As it happens, this was the first time we tried to use the on-board water supply, and I proved myself not up to the task. I connected the hose to what I thought was the filler and pumped away merrily until I thought we had enough for the night. When we switched the pump on, however, it spit and sputtered nothing but pink foamy winterizing antifreeze. This was fitting in a way since the temperature was dropping fast outside.

Thinking something was wrong with the system, we called a Shasta dealer in Oklahoma City in the morning and arranged for a service stop. What I learned was embarrasing; I had connected the water hose to the black water flush-out instead of the fresh water fill. Once they actually filled the tank, the system functioned perfectly. Looking back, my stupidity may have saved us a broken water line because there was heavy frost on the windshield that morning. Water in the trailer lines might have frozen overnight had they been filled. I often repeat the saw that God watches over fools and Englishmen, and I am both.

Leaving Okla City, we took I-40 to Elk City, Oklahoma where the National Route 66 Museum is located. Our guide book said this was a must-see, and we agree. Whereas every hamlet and town along the Route claims some kind of museum, the one at Elk City is worth the price of admission ($4 for seniors). They have four different subject specific buildings and a restored (transported) town square from the Mother Road heyday. If it hadn’t been snowing (that’s right, snowing), we would have spent more time. As it was, we wanted to get on the road and find the warmth we were snow-birding for.

With time and distance in mind, we climbed back on I-40 and headed for Amarillo, Texas. Worried about freezing water lines (again), we wanted a full hook-up site to get heat in the trailer to protect the lines. I ran the generator outside with a space heater under the trailer and furnace cooking inside, so we made it through the night. For dinner we ate at The Big Texan, following the theme of “giant alerts” in our guide book. As a bonus, they had a shuttle that took us right from our site in Amarillo RV Ranch to the restaurant. Everything there was big, including the prices, but the food was excellent, and the atmosphere was worth a couple extra bucks. (If you can eat 72 ounces of steak and all the trimmings in one hour, they will give it to you for free.)

 But what a disappointment: here we’re in Texas and freezing. The forecast for our next stop in Albuquerque was still sadly cold, so we shelved the Route 66 plans and decided to make a run for the thaw. We hit the road on that fifth day around 8 a.m. and I drove pretty much straight through until 2 a.m. Saturday when we hit Kingman, Arizona and temperatures above freezing. Because Route 66 parallels I-40 very closely, we did see a number of the sites mentioned in our guide book right from the Interstate. This was not exactly what we planned, but then neither was the temperature.

We slept in the Petro Truck Stop until 8 a.m. and had breakfast at the Iron Skillet; as truck stop restaurants go, this isn’t too bad in my experience. With breakfast over and a souvenir cactus garden in hand, we fueled up and headed up Arizona  Route 93 to Las Vegas, Nevada. We had to leave the remainder of Route 66 for another trip, since our final destination was calling us “home” for the winter. We slid past Hoover Dam and Las Vegas in a final run to Mesquite, Nevada, and pulled into Desert Skies RV Resort around 2 p.m. Mountain Time (we think).

 We are on the Time Zone and state border; Arizona is Mountain Time and Nevada is Pacific. The park we are in is literally ON the border of Arizona and Nevada, so we are setting our clocks to Pacific time to coordinate with the town where we will be shopping and dining  when Karen says the menu reads “Reservations.” As I write this, the clock says 4:20 (no jokes, please) and the sun is setting. We had a great adventure on the Mother Road, but missed enough to make another attempt worth trying. Maybe next year.

What Price Freedom?

Something floated across my Facebook wall the other day that scared me. It was an image of two women in burkas with a caption that read, “This has no place on American soil.” There are several ways to take that statement, but only one rings true for me. If the person who wrote the caption means that no women in America should be subjected to repressive behaviors, I can agree. No person anywhere in the world should be demeaned, diminished or degraded by an oppressive element in society. If the message was supposed to be about the freedom on the human spirit, I say amen.

That was not the first message that came to my mind. In the climate surrounding the Syrian refugee crisis and another Islamic terror attack in the US, I would wager that most people who saw the image of Muslim women in traditional dress thought otherwise. The first thing I thought was that radical Islamic ideology has no place on American soil. This led me to consider just what “radical” means when applied to religious ideals.

The burka represents one facet of Sharia law, a widely held system of rules which regulates Muslim behavior. Sharia is understood to be divine guidance for life on earth drawn from the Quran and other Islamic holy writings.  In America we have a similar situation with people who take biblical instruction about life more radically than others: the Amish – the Hassidic Jews. The only difference I can see is that there are no factions of Mennonites or Jews vowing to destroy America and create a world-wide religious government like the Islamic Caliphate.

I think we need to be very careful how we react to radical religious practices no matter what system they are based on. We would do well to remember the words Martin Niemöller, a Christian pastor who lived during the Nazi period in Germany:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— 

Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— 

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

The ruling by the Supreme Court to legalize gay marriage has placed many believers in a tough spot. Our belief that marriage is intended by God to be the union of a man and a woman has become “radical” according to many in America. Preaching the biblical injunction against homosexual behavior has been labeled hate speech. Teaching chastity until marriage is considered outdated by most of society. The biblical injunction to apply corporal punishment to our children has effectively been outlawed in some jurisdictions. Bible-believing Christians are slipping gradually into the “radical” class in America.

If America is to remain the bastion of religious freedom it has been for over two centuries, we might have to get used to seeing burkas as long as the religion that they represent is not violating anyone’s fundamental rights. Protecting the Muslim right to practice their faith protects my right to do the same. I don’t necessarily like it, but I don’t see any other way. Freedom for all, or freedom for none.