Only God Is an “End in Itself” (But That’s Not the Whole Story)

Last updated on: April 9, 2015 at 7:27 am by Roger E. Olson

Only God Is an “End in Itself” (But That’s Not the Whole Story) 2015-04-09T07:27:52-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I put “end in itself” in quotation marks to indicate a technical phrase; I am not implying that God is impersonal. “End in himself” would be more correct. But people often talk about something as an “end in itself” meaning “for its own sake.” “Art for art’s sake” is a motto of the National Endowment for the Arts. However, many people regard certain activities, products, persons, organizations, etc., as existing “in and for themselves” meaning they do not need any justification; their value is intrinsic if not self-evident.

What is a Christian to make of this mindset or attitude? Can anything be an “end in itself” in the sense of not serving a purpose higher than itself? Does anything exist in and for itself—from a Christian perspective?

I will dare to argue not—except God who is not a “thing” but being and goodness themselves—the perfect telos of all beings, activities and products insofar as they have value at all.

“What is the chief end of man? The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.” The first question and answer of the Heidelberg Catechism. No statement so succinctly and clearly expresses the Christian life and worldview insofar as it bears on humanity. But I would argue that “The chief end of anything that has value is to glorify God and be enjoyed by him and by us.”

Therefore nothing has value “in and for itself” except God. If God exists, how could it be otherwise? How can any creature give value to God or make God dependent on it for value? Such a being, whose reason for being is outside itself/himself, could not be God.

This is not to say that God cannot share his glory with others, with creatures. He can and does. Second century church father Irenaeus famously said (paraphrasing): “The glory of God is man fully alive.” In other words, Irenaeus meant, God glories, exults in, enjoys making fully alive (deifying) his human creatures made in his own image and likeness.

But it is to say that even humanity is not God’s end, telos, purpose, reason for being. As Karl Barth wrote (CD II/1) God is the “one who loves in freedom.” God is love but does not have to love anyone or anything outside himself. But his love of his human creatures is a self-determining act of freedom: a paradox.

All this is classical Christianity, but how many Christians know it or think this way? How often do we Christians succumb to the secular habit of elevating ourselves or things to “ends in themselves” apart from God? God, then, becomes a thing alongside all the other things we possess or want to possess for the value they can give us. This is Christian idolatry—making God an instrument of our own self-fulfillment, a means to our own ends. This is illustrated more clearly than anywhere else in extreme versions of the so-called “Prosperity Gospel,” the “Gospel of Health and Wealth” which is based more on New Thought than on Scripture or Christian tradition. It is a betrayal of “minimal Christianity”—the basic, underlying, foundational core of the Christian life and world view.

All that is true and incontrovertible from a biblical perspective. (Which is not to say no Christians disagree! Of course they do, which is a serious problem.) However, everything I have said up until now is according to the “order of nature”—metaphysics. It is “legal theology”—bare fact devoid of gospel. The gospel does not contradict it but adds a dimension to it that is equally important. God, who is his own end and the end (telos) of all things, condescends by grace to make us mere humans objects of his love and concern, ends for him. We are not “ends in ourselves,” but God freely, out of love, makes us ends, finding fulfillment, enjoyment, blessing in creating and redeeming us. This is according to the “order of grace” and “gospel theology.” Nothing about it contradicts the first set of truths (viz., that nothing but God is an “end in itself”). But it adds to that that God chooses not to be God without us and out of sheer grace (so not by nature) enters into covenant relationship with us such that he benefits from our loving, worshiping and obeying him. Our love, worship and obedience does not add anything to his being-ness or character, but they do add something to his experience, his blessedness, his enjoyment and satisfaction.

One of my favorite theologians, Reformed theologian James Daane, who taught at Fuller Theological Seminary, wrote a magisterial essay entitled “Can A Man Bless God?” (published in God and the Good, eds., Clifton Orlebeke and Lewis Smedes [Eerdmans, 1975]). His answer was “Yes!” I completely agree. God chooses not to be an “uncarved block,” a “windowless monad,” an island complete unto himself. While maintaining his eternal perfection and fullness of being, his metaphysical self-sufficiency, God chooses to be God for us and that “for us” means something even for God. This is the good news of the gospel—that the Creator for whom we exist, our ultimate end, goal and telos, the ground of our being who is the ground of his own being, not dependent on anything or anyone outside himself, freely chooses to let us be his own source of fulfillment, joy and satisfaction.

Both truths are necessary to a full orbed, holistic Christian understanding of existence. Unfortunately, one “side” or the other tends to take over in Christian thinking. This is where theology is necessary; left to themselves even the most devout and sincere Christian tends either to regard God as so transcendent as to be unapproachable or as so personal as to be dependent on us and even, perhaps, at our disposal. Only theology, rooted and grounded in Scripture and Christian tradition, preserves both truths together.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

April 7, 2015

Where Does Theology Really Matter?

Next Post

April 12, 2015 Thoughts about Detente with Cuba

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: The entire city of Nineveh repented after Jonah preached to them.

Select your answer to see how you score.

FALSE TRUE