(upbeat music) - Austin Fisher is the author of a new book titled Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed. It's a book-length critique of you, Pastor John, and Jonathan Edwards, and neo-Calvinism. And on his blog recently, Kevin DeYoung has written a fairly lengthy review, so there's no need to do an in-depth review of the book here, but there is something in the book, a specific critique of you that I want you to address here on Ask Pastor John, and it comes on page 58 of his book, where Fisher says your emphasis on God's glory negates a proper emphasis on God's love.

He says that you've made God into a needy, glory-monger, trying to suck praise out of us, and this, he says, has shrouded the beauty of God's self-giving, his love to us. In Fisher's own words, he says this, quote, "God's love is an end in itself." And here I find a radical departure from Jonathan Edwards, John Piper, and the self-glorifying black hole of neo-Calvinism.

Edwards claimed that the ultimate aim of God in creating the world was the full manifestation of his glory, i.e. his self-glorification. Love is just a cog in the bigger glory machine, end quote. Pastor John, how do you respond to this type of criticism? - Well, first of all, Tony, thanks for the question.

I am reading the book, I have it here in front of me. I don't know that I'll read the whole thing, and people will see why. I might not finish it before I'm done here, but let me start with that phrase, the self-glorifying black hole of the neo-Calvinism, which I suppose I would represent even though I'm an old guy.

That phrase, self-glorifying black hole, implies that God is like a cosmic vacuum cleaner, I suppose, with endless need. And guess what it's implying? Because later, Fisher says, quote, "God doesn't love us in order to take something from us," glory, worship, praise, like he's a vacuum cleaner sucking up glory, worship, praise, and they're all disappearing into a black hole.

"God doesn't love us in order to take something from us. That's what needy, greedy human loved us." So he's portraying Jonathan Edwards' view of God's pursuit of his glory as like needy, greedy human vacuum cleaners do, black holes do. Now, Tony, that is absolutely an appalling misrepresentation of Jonathan Edwards.

I mean, he should be ashamed of that. To give the impression that Edwards' massive vision of the end for which God created the world teaches that God as needy or taking, like a greedy human is either ignorance on his part or deceitful. Over and over, Edwards stresses that God's self-glorification and self-communication are one.

Here's a couple of quotes. I just read these recently from a sermon that was published in the Yale edition. "God's end," this is Edwards, "God's end in the creation of the world consists in these two things, to communicate himself and to glorify himself. God created the world to communicate himself not to receive anything." Okay, that's the way Edwards talks.

Here's another one. "These two things ought not to be separated when we speak of God's end in the creation of the world. Indeed, God's communicating himself," that's one, "and glorifying himself," that's two, "ought not to be looked upon as though they were two distinct ends, but as what together makes one last end, as glorifying God and enjoying God make one chief end of man.

For God glorifies himself in communicating himself, and he communicates himself in glorifying himself." That's end quote from Edwards. So what Edwards teaches, and what I teach, and what we see in the Bible, is that God seeks to magnify and display and uphold his glory, that is, the fullness of the beauty of his manifold perfections in all things, and he does this in communicating himself to his creatures for their enjoyment, and in their enjoyment, they are glorifying him.

That's what we teach. That's what Edwards taught. In our receiving, receiving, receiving, receiving, not dumping and dumping onto God, but in our receiving more and more of God as he communicates more and more of himself, we receive it with joy in it, and our joy, Edwards teaches so explicitly, is the glorifying of God, so that all this talk about God being a black hole, or God being this cosmic vacuum cleaner, or God taking and taking and being greedy like a man is simply ridiculous misrepresentation of everything Edwards taught.

We glorify God precisely by receiving. I just read this morning, Psalm 50, where God gets on the case of his people by making sacrifices because he says, "I don't eat the meat of bulls, "or drink the blood of goats. "I own the cattle on a thousand hills. "Call upon me in the day of trouble.

"I will deliver you, and you will glorify me." That's exactly what Edwards is saying. God gets glory. You will glorify me when I meet your needs, not you meet my needs. So to this representation of a black hole thing is really an unworthy kind of misrepresentation. But here's another problem, probably a deeper problem, a methodological problem.

It appears that the objections that are in that part you read and others to Edwards is owing to an approach to the Bible that speaks in generalities and hovers above the biblical text rather than pressing down into the warp and woof that make the fabric of meaning what it is.

So maybe I could get at this by just a couple of textual examples, and then we'll have to let it go because the limitations on this. Let's just take two texts. One, Romans 15, eight and nine. "I tell you that Christ became a servant "to the circumcised in order that," I'm skipping over a phrase, just jumping straight to the "in order that," "in order that the Gentiles might glorify God "for his mercy." Okay, now, what's the inner textual logic of the relationship between mercy, which is a form of love, and glorifying God?

And the answer is, he sent Christ to serve us, and in serving us, he showed us mercy, and in showing us mercy, he does it, quote, "in order that we might glorify God for his mercy." Now, to argue against the fact that God loves us in order to be glorified for his loving us is clearly contrary to this text, and that's the kind of thing I hear.

Those generalized statements that love is an end in itself and therefore cannot be performed by God as a means for himself to be glorified. That's contrary, the opposite of what that text says, even though I would go back and say, the glory that God gets is precisely in our enjoying the love that he shows us.

It's not like they're two separate things. Here's a second text, last one. This is Romans 9, 22 to 23. "What if God, desiring to show his wrath," desiring to show his wrath, "and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the vessels prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for the vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory?" Now, God's wrath and God's power are in this text, and he is desiring to show them, and he's doing it in order to make known the riches of his glory on vessels of mercy.

In other words, in order to display more fully and enhance our experience more deeply of his arriving mercy. So mercy and love are the end or goal of God's holy wrath, and just wrath on some. It's a means of maximizing the glory of undeserved mercy to others. So when Miroslav Volf says, "We don't have to give up on the idea that God seeks God's own glory.

We just need to say that God's glory, which is God's very being, is God's love," I want to ask, "Is he allowing for what Paul says?" That God not only shows love, but wrath. And in such a way, he shows wrath in such a way that it's more loving to show wrath so that the vessels of mercy experience their mercy more deeply.

Does he get into the warp and woof of the logic of the apostolic word enough to stop talking in just mere generalities about God's love being a giver, which would leave you thinking, "Well, I guess there's no place for hell then." Well, there is, and hell or wrath or power behind wrath are, Paul says, "In order to make known the riches of his glory to the vessels of mercy." So my concluding point there methodologically is to simply say, "Let's get down into the threads of the texts and see how they are woven together to make the meaning of the Bible." - That's very rich, Pastor John, thank you.

And one book that gets to the heart of God's love and glory is a book by Jonathan Edwards and by you, Pastor John. It's titled "God's Passion for His Glory," which includes the full text of Edwards' foundational book, "The End For Which God Created the World." Pastor John, you wrote the first 100 pages, and then Jonathan Edwards wrote the last 150 pages, in a sense.

It's not an easy book to read, but it is essential if you wanna look into these themes with greater depth, and you'll find almost 400 mentions of love in the book, showing just how important love is for understanding the ultimate purpose behind God's act of creation. And because we have such faithful donors supporting the ministry, you can download the entire book free of charge at desiringgod.org, click on books, and then look for the title, "God's Passion for His Glory." We will return Monday.

Until then, I'm your host, Tony Reinke. Have a great weekend. (upbeat music) (upbeat music)