Josh Benner

Category: Bible

  • Americans have more reverence for being in the presence of the queen of another country than being in the presence of God

    37157637_1763229653764760_162213862433619968_n.jpg
    President Trump visited the United Kingdom this week. I saw a few posts and articles this morning in regards to the president’s meeting with Queen Elizabeth II.

    Many are complaining about the president breaking protocols with the monarch. For instance, there is a tradition that people walk slightly behind the queen. At one point, the president was in front of the queen during her ceremonial inspection of the guard at Windsor Castle.

    Oh the humanity!

    The comments online talked about how this was an embarrassment, a sign of disrespect, and a president who lacked manners.

    There are all of these protocols for meeting a royal.

    Men are supposed to bow, women are supposed to curtsy. You’re supposed to walk behind her. You’re not supposed to turn your back to the queen. On first meeting, the queen is supposed to be addressed as “your majesty.”

    And as we saw with President Trump breaching some of these protocols, there was criticism.

    And that’s just for meeting a person. Think about the respect that Americans have for the queen of a different country. There is an expectation of this reverence for the queen. There’s this expectation of following the rules.

    Yet we often have a very casual view of what it would be like to be in the presence of God. God is righteous, holy, set apart. He is awesomely mighty and glorious. And being in his presence also has its own protocols. You don’t just approach the King in any way you want. You approach God on his terms, not yours.

    God requires perfection to enter his presence. It takes holiness to be with a holy God. We bristle at that, thrash against that, complain about that. But that is God’s standard.

    We are not worthy of that.

    You wouldn’t just go to Buckingham Palace and demand an audience with the queen. We don’t approach God on our terms.

    It is faith in Jesus who gives us access to God. We are unholy, but Jesus makes a person holy. We are unrighteous, but Jesus makes a person righteous.

    The Prophet Isaiah reports one of the great heavenly visions of the Bible in chapter 6.

    In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple. 2 Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called to another and said:

    “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;

    the whole earth is full of his glory!”

    4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke. 5 And I said: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!”

    -Isaiah 6:1-5

    The presence of God is always depicted as being an awesome and overwhelming experience. As people realize their unworthiness, it’s often a terrifying experience to be in the presence of this holiness.

    The good news of the gospel is that Jesus brings us in.

    Josh Benner is the associate pastor at Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church in Fergus Falls, Minnesota and has a Master of Divinity from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He enjoys writing about faith and culture. He lives with his wife Kari in Minnesota.

    Connect with me!
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Instagram

  • Can a loving God allow hell to exist?

    42504671_3b368de9f5_o
    Photo courtesy of Flickr Creative Commons

    Originally published: November 14, 2016

    Hell is a tough doctrine.

    In his book the Problem of Pain, CS Lewis sums up what I think many would agree with: “There is no doctrine which I would more willingly remove from Christianity than this, if it lay in my power. But it has the full support of Scripture and, specially, of our Lord’s own words; it has always been held by Christendom; and it has the support of reason.”

    We’re fine with the idea of a loving God, but we’re less accepting of a God who judges.

    With the idea of hell, It can seem unfair. We can feel tempted to justify why hell doesn’t exist. Or maybe we think that hell is really just for people who are really, really bad. (more…)

  • The first rule of accountability

    photo-1483428400520-675ef69a3bc4.jpeg
    “Accountability” is one of those popular words that I hear in the church.

    People form accountability groups where they answer questions in regards to lust. People tell friends that they “need to be held accountable” for a certain area of sin in their lives.

    Accountability is a good, wise, and Biblical practice. James calls us to accountability: confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working (James 5:16).

    But accountability is only as good as a person’s willingness to be held accountable. In a moment of struggle, there can be a renewed commitment to changing your life and calling people to hold you accountable. But what about a few days, a few weeks, a few months later when the same old temptations come creeping back? An initial reaction can be to want to hide, to withdraw, to say “I’m fine” when you’re not fine. All of these make accountability worthless.

    It’s good when we hold one another accountable. But more important than someone else’s commitment to holding you accountable is your commitment to actually being held accountable, to being willing to be held accountable when the going gets tough, and a willingness to be vulnerable before you’ve fallen back into an area of struggle.

    Accountability must be accountability in practice, not in theory. It’s more impo

    Josh Benner is the associate pastor at Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church in Fergus Falls, Minnesota and has a Master of Divinity from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He enjoys writing about faith and culture. He lives with his wife Kari in Minnesota.

    Facebook
    Twitter
    Instagram

  • The best commentaries on Matthew (in my opinion)

    photo-1520099078215-db50d947d060.jpegLike many pastors, I’m a commentary nerd.

    Bible commentaries are scholarly books which give a verse by verse analysis of a book of the Bible. There are commentaries on every book of the Bible. Over the last 20 years, there have been hundreds of new commentaries that have been released. Commentaries are helpful to me in my studies of the Bible as I prepare sermons, Sunday school lessons, youth group lessons, and small group discussions. They’re a huge blessing to me and my ministry.

    If you’re looking to study a book in depth, which commentaries should you read?

    I’m starting a new series where I give my opinions on some of the best commentaries I’ve encountered for various books of the Bible.

    Today, we start with the Gospel of Matthew. It’s my favorite book of the Bible to study. I’ve also preached more from Matthew than any other book and I’m familiar with all of the major commentaries.

    Matthew has many great commentaries. I would put it right up with Romans as being the New Testament books with the best literature.

    1. Grant Osborne – Zondervan Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament (2010). Osborne was a professor at my seminary but I never actually had him for a class (so many great professors, it was difficult to get ’em all). I love his writing. Commentaries can be very dense and intellectual but Osborne’s commentaries (and he’s written one on every book of the New Testament) are written in an approachable manner, while still being academically rigorous.
    2. R.T. France – New International Commentary of the New Testament (2007). The late R.T. France actually wrote two commentaries on Matthew. He wrote one the New International Commentary of the New Testament (NICNT) and the Tyndale New Testament Commentary on Matthew. The NICNT commentaries can at times get highly academic, but, like Osborne, France writes with great clarity. Every time I read France’s observations of Matthew’s gospel, I feel that there is something fresh and interesting he has gleaned from the text. The Tyndale commentary is still very solid, more condensed than the NICNT, and a bit more approachable for the lay person, but still very solid.
    3. Leon Morris – Pillar New Testament Commentary (1992). Unlike any other commentator I’ve read, Morris could write with brevity while feeling like he fully captured the idea of a verse. Truly a gift. A solid Evangelical scholar.
    4. D.A. Carson – The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (1984). This is my favorite commentary in the Expositor’s Bible Commentary series. Carson is my favorite New Testament scholar. As with anything Carson does, excellent exegesis and explanations of the text. One of the things I most appreciate about Carson is his ability to explain a passage while seamlessly connecting it to the rest of the context of the passage and within the overarching book.
    5. Craig Blomberg – North American Commentary (1992). As a critique (and not so much a direct criticism of Blomberg because there are often restrictions from publishers on how long a book can be), but at times, I feel like his exposition can be too brief, and leaves me wanting more. But what he gives you in his commentary of Matthew is first rate. Blomberg approaches challenging subjects in a gentle manner.

    What’s your favorite commentary on Matthew?

    Josh Benner is the associate pastor at Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church in Fergus Falls, Minnesota and has a Master of Divinity from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He enjoys writing about faith and culture. He lives with his wife Kari in Minnesota.

  • Tim Keller Tweets about the incarnation: disagreement ensues

    36315657_572647029858388_5034138606524956672_n.jpg

    Pastor and theologian Tim Keller made a Tweet in regards to the incarnation of Jesus this week. Keller said: “The God of the universe became a wiggling baby in order to get close to you.”

    James White, another theologian, was critical of Keller’s comment: “No sir, the second person of the Trinity took on a perfect human nature first and foremost to bring glory to the Triune God in the redemption of a completely unworthy people upon whom the Triune God had decreed mercy and grace in eternity past. That’s not getting ‘close to you.”

    I’m a huge fan of Keller, but I also really enjoy White’s work, but I disagree with the criticism that White is raising here. Both men are in the Reformed camp, and one of the great strengths of Reformed theology is its emphasis on the glory of God. As part of this idea, everything that God does is for his own glory. I affirm that belief.

    However I do think that people in the Reformed camp can sometimes emphasize the glory of God to the point where I feel that it can also undermine the love of God and that God is relational. It’s because God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish (John 3:16). Yes, God is glorious and we need to live to glorify God.

    I feel like we can treat glory almost like a utilitarian idea, that glory is the only thing that matters to God, and we act like the things that God does which happen to benefit humanity have nothing to do with God’s love for humanity. But we can’t reduce the attributes of God. Everything that the Lord is, the Lord is always, and to the superlative decree. So it’s not that God is sometimes glorious, sometimes loving, sometimes more or less loving, sometimes powerful. But it’s that everything God is, God always is.

    I’m not suggesting that White has a low view of the love of God.

    I do think that staunchly Reformed Evangelicals can communicate theological ideas which very much give that impression.

    Yes, Jesus came into the world to bring glory to God. But he also came so that everyone who believes in him can be with him. That’s the heart of the gospel. The God who created the world came into the world to save the world.

    Why go to theological battle over that?

    It’s not an either/or. It’s both/and.

    Josh Benner is the associate pastor at Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church in Fergus Falls, Minnesota and has a Master of Divinity from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He enjoys writing about faith and culture. He lives with his wife Kari in Minnesota.