Means and Ends

Usually when we talk about the means to an end, we are discussing the means. How do we get there? Have you ever noticed how little we talk about the ends?

In the Westminster Shorter Catechism Question 1 is "What is the chief end of man?" Right off the bat we're talking about the end. The question is not "What do we do while we're here?" but "Why are we here?" And the question is essential if you think about it. Having a variety of means is all well and good, but you won't know what means to use if you don't know the end you're shooting for. So what is the chief end of man? Why are we here? The catechism answer is "Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy Him forever." Now, see? If that is the reason you exist, wouldn't that have a serious effect on how you live? Means are a way to get to an end, but knowing the end will determine what means you use and how you use them.

Take, for instance, eating. Eating is not, in itself, an end. It is a means to an end. What that end is will determine a lot about how you use eating. If the end is personal pleasure, then you will eat a lot of the wrong stuff because, face it, the wrong stuff often tastes so good. "Diet" is simply "die" with a "t" at the end. If the end is fitness, then you will eat a lot of stuff aimed at being healthy and fit. But you won't eat a lot of tasty foods because, as everyone knows, healthy foods are not tasty foods. (Oh, I know, you fitness buffs will disagree, but if you are honest, you will admit that finding healthy food tasty is an acquired taste.) Others will see eating as a means to fuel the body for further purposes, and that will have a different effect on what you eat. The end to which you eat will determine what you eat.

Take, for instance, sex. (Oh, now I have your attention, eh?) God designed sex. He designed it for a purpose. You may or may not have that purpose--those ends--in mind. If you approach sex as a means to pleasure, clearly your sexual processes will have a certain direction. You will do what appeals to your own pleasure. You will seek experiences and events that tickle your own fancy. You will ... use people for your own enjoyment. Oh, sure, maybe that looks like abusive sex or maybe it looks like generous sex because, after all, there are people who get their biggest enjoyment from giving pleasure, but in either case, it is using people because the end is your own pleasure. Or the end could be more biblical. If the aim is procreation, for instance (which is clearly one of God's intended purposes for sex), that changes what you do with sex. If the aim is to give to your spouse (because married sex is the only God-given good sex), then it will certainly change what you do. Remember that Paul warned, "The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does." (1 Cor 7:4). How many genuine, Bible-believing followers of Christ take that approach? How many see "giving my body to my spouse" as an actual end in sex? Because the single most common purpose in sex is "my pleasure" and most of us in this sex-saturated society have a really hard time thinking of it as anything but "my pleasure". So for most of us it is "I don't want to so, since it's about my pleasure I won't" or "I want to so, since it's about my pleasure you must." And what we do in the bedroom will generally be determined by "my pleasure". But the biblical, God-given purpose of sex is reproduction, intimacy (see Song of Solomon), and giving yourself to your spouse (1 Cor 7:4). The ends change the means and how you use them.

In a materialist worldview, the answer to the purpose of life is ... nothing. No end. No reason. No purpose. Now, given no "chief end of man", what do you do? Well, it doesn't really matter because you're not working toward anything. You have a variety of means at hand but nowhere to go with them. The end gives no direction to the means. So in an atheist worldview, a well-mannered, caring, considerate, altruistic life is as moral as a serial murderer since the ends justify the means and the ends are personally defined.

Consider, however, the Christian ends. Take our two examples--eating and sex. You see, the Bible isn't silent here. In 1 Corinthians Paul writes about both eating and sex. After talking about food sacrificed to idols, Paul concludes, "Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God." (1 Cor 10:31). Pleasure or fitness or fuel? Maybe. But Paul says the ultimate purpose of eating is "the glory of God." Would it change your views of what you eat if you were eating for the glory of God? And in the sixth chapter he writes about sexual sin, concluding, "For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body." (1 Cor 6:20). Could it possibly not change your approach to sex if you viewed it as a means to glorify God? I mean, do you even have an inkling of what it means to glorify God in sex?

They say that the ends justify the means. Maybe. In some cases. Perhaps. More likely not. But certainly the ends determine the use of means. What you do with what you have will be determined by what you're trying to accomplish. If you're trying to accomplish the glory of God, that certainly will touch every single means you have, every method and choice you make, every aspect of your life. Are you considering the purpose of what you do? God is.