Josh Benner

Category: Theology

  • Catholic priest uses wrong word for 26 years. Baptisms invalidated

    Catholic priest uses wrong word for 26 years. Baptisms invalidated

    A Catholic priest in Arizona used the wrong word when performing baptisms for over a quarter of a century. Now his diocese is saying that the baptisms are invalid. 

    The issue is that the priest, the Revered Andres Arango was saying “we baptize you” when he was supposed to say “I baptize you.” The Catholic teaching is strict to their exact wording and because he say “we” instead of “I,” they are viewing these baptisms are invalid. 

    Baptism is a subject where there is a vast array of beliefs across Christendom. There are opinions on what baptism accomplishes, when a person can be baptized, who can do the baptizing, how a person is baptized, what is said when a person is baptized, the necessity of baptism. And then there are procedural questions. Are they sprinkled or dunked? If they’re dunked is it once, or is it three times (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)?  And there are many other questions. 

    Because baptism is such an important part of the Christian faith, there have been many views over the centuries. 

    For the record, my view is that baptism is an outward action that is a public display of an inward faith. True baptism is done by the Holy Spirit for a person who is regenerated. That is the actual cleansing of the human soul, and this cleansing is symbolized with water through baptism. And so in my view, I don’t take the rigidity that Catholics have on baptism where it can be nullified by a person unwittingly saying one wrong word. It’s based in places such as Ezekiel 36 and John 3. 

    Why does one little word matter so much? 

    On the website for his local diocese, they say: 
    “It is not the community that baptizes a person and incorporates them into the Church of Christ; rather, it is Christ, and Christ alone, who presides at all sacraments; therefore, it is Christ who baptizes. The Baptismal Formula (the words used in the Rite) has always been guarded for this reason: so it is clear that we receive our baptism through Jesus and not the community.”

    I find that argument interesting (I also find it to be a bad argument, but still interesting). I find it interesting that you can’t say “we” because it’s not the church who is doing the baptizing but that you must say “I” because it is Christ who baptizes…

    But in practice, it is the priest who’s doing the baptizing. And I find it interesting that if the priest says “I,” that it’s tantamount to Jesus himself saying “I.” 

    So the baptism is contingent upon the grace of Christ and (in the Catholic view) a human priest serving as a mediator. Yet, if the priest says the wrong word, then the grace of Christ can’t be conferred to the person who has made a good faith attempt to be baptized? So Jesus is gracious, but the priest can make a mistake where the sacramental benefit of baptism is withheld? Sincere question. Doesn’t that imply that the priest is more powerful than Jesus? (I’m sure no Catholic would agree with that statement). 

    This certainly goes to part of the heart of the disagreement between Catholics and Protestants. Scripture and tradition. The Catholic Church gives essentially equal weight to tradition as scripture. And so their tradition and teaching is a certain wording. And even though that wording is found nowhere in the Bible, they view their interpretation as being absolutely binding. 

    There is also the issue of human priest as mediators. The role of a priest is that they serve as a mediator between man and God. Jesus is the great high priest who mediates between us and God (Hebrews 4:14-16). This is why most Protestants don’t believe in a priestly office today. Because we don’t have fallible priests who can say the wrong thing and mess us up with God. We believe in a great high priest who is perfect, Christ the Lord. 

    Thanks for reading! If you liked this post, please share and subscribe.

  • NYT suggests evangelicalism needs to be more liberal to save itself

    NYT suggests evangelicalism needs to be more liberal to save itself

    David Brooks had a piece in the New York Times under the headline: “The Dissenters Trying to Save Evangelicalism From Itself.”

    Brooks talks of the divide within evangelicalism. Early in the article, Brooks suggests: “There have been three big issues that have profoundly divided them: the white evangelical embrace of Donald Trump, sex abuse scandals in evangelical churches and parachurch organizations, and attitudes about race relations, especially after the killing of George Floyd.”

    I’ve read this same basic piece several times in the last couple years in trying to diagnose the problems with evangelicalism in America. 

    Brooks interviews a familiar cast of characters. Russell Moore and Beth Moore (no relation to each other) who were recently popular figures in evangelical circles but have become critics of the movement. He interviews Kristin Kobes Du Mez, the author of “Jesus and John Wayne,” which is a one-sided rant against evangelicalism which only looks at the bad and overlooks any redeeming qualities in the movement. He mentions Tim Dalrymple, the president of Christianity Today who said Trump should have been removed from office.

    There’s a lot fo discourse on the problems of evangelicalism but I feel like I never see similar critiques of liberal and progressive Christianity. These articles get preoccupied with evangelical support of Trump, and that always gets framed as if it’s some obvious scourge on the gospel. 

    My question is: what in the world is so good about liberalism? What are they doing right now to benefit our country? These articles want to criticize churches for being too conservative. As if there are not thousands of churches in America that are liberal, that support values that are not Biblical values such as the LGBT movement and abortion. Liberal churches who undermine the Bible. Those churches get a pass. 

    It’s the churches who support Trump and who are not woke social justice warriors who are the problem. Basically the problem with evangelicals is that they’re not liberals. And if they embrace liberal ideologies, then they’ll be doing the Lord’s work.

    Conservative evangelicalism is an easy target because our culture institutions are increasingly liberal. The mainstream media, Hollywood, big business, big tech, pro sports, the federal government, higher education, public education, healthcare, and on and on. It’s ok to be liberal. It’s not ok to be conservative. 

    And the focus needs to be that evangelicals don’t have a big enough tent. Brooks has the audacity to frame it as if evangelicals are not welcoming enough to other points of view. Is a conservative welcome in a progressive church? Is a belief in traditional marriage, traditional gender roles, the inherency of the Bible welcome in a progressive church? 

    There are problems with evangelicalism. There are far too many powerful people in influential ministries who are corrupt and who have no accountability. That’s an issue. Brooks mentions the scandal involving Ravi Zacharias and a scandal involving Willow Creek Church. I’ve written about both. They were terrible. I’ve written about Jerry Falwell, Jr, and James MacDonald, and the Southern Baptist Convention sexual assualt scandal.

    I think too many evangelical churches have done a poor job about teaching the Bible and focus on easy to listen to messages and appealing to cultural trends and having watered down youth ministries that are not teaching kids the Bible. Again, there are problems in evangelicalism.

    There are churches and pastors who might call themselves “evangelical” with whom I would greatly disagree. But evangelicalism is a broad movement. I think we should call out people when they’re in the wrong. But I don’t think that American evangelicalism has the inherent problems that progressivism poses to the church. Progressive churches fall right in line with that ideology. I see that as the bigger threat on our culture and on the gospel.

    Thanks for reading. If you liked this post, please share and subscribe.

  • The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Studying John 1:14

    The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Studying John 1:14

    And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

    -John 1:14

    In his commentary on John, the late New Testament Grant Osborne says of this verse “In my opinion, this is the single greatest sentence ever written in the history of human language, the deepest theological statement ever written. No finite human being could ever enter the realm of God and join his family. It could only come to pass if God himself were to enter the realm of humanity.”

    The Word is referring to Jesus. And it says that Jesus became flesh and dwelt among us. 

    The God who created the world came into the world to save the world. The eternal God of creation became flesh and blood, skin and bone. 

    Jesus’ divinity matters but so does his humanity. 

    It is because of his divine nature that he has the power to withstand and to bear the weight of sin. Our sin is an affront to God and no mere mortal is capable of redeeming himself before a Holy God, let alone redeeming humanity. 

    But it also matters that Jesus is human because it is humanity that has sinned. And in being fully man, Jesus is like us in our humanity. Jesus entered sinful humanity, though he himself is without sin. 

    His sinlessness matters because it took a sinless, perfect, and righteous sacrifice to pay for sins. His humanity and divinity make Jesus a worthy sacrifice and atonement for sinful people. 

    Our verse says that the Word became flesh. God became man. 

    Colossians 1:19 says: For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell

    The glory of God came to earth through the Lord Jesus. There’s one word in particular in this verse that brings it to a climactic point in this passage. 

    Dwelt. 

    The English doesn’t truly convey the meaning of what’s being said here. Let’s take a step back. 

    In the Old Testament, people originally exist in perfect fellowship with God. That’s what Eden was. It was a holy place. A perfect place. A sinless place. 

    Because of sin, fellowship with God was tarnished. The unencumbered closeness to God was lost due to sin. 

    We were no longer holy. But the story doesn’t end there. Throughout the Old Testament, we see God bringing redemption to his people. 

    God makes a covenant with Abraham. We see God’s continued faithfulness to his covenant. 

    The Tabernacle

    The Israelites were held in captivity in Egypt. After God had miraculously freed them, and while the Israelites were wandering in the desert, God gave them instructions for a structure called the tabernacle. The tabernacle was a tent that the Israelites were to travel with and it was a symbol for God’s presence with his people. 

    Sometimes it’s called the tabernacle. Sometimes it’s called the tent of meeting. 

    Exodus 40:34-35: 34 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. 35 And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. 

    Exodus spells out very specific instructions on how the tabernacle was to be built, what types of items would be placed inside the tabernacle, etc. The instructions are so specific because it is a sacred and holy place. 

    Again, it represented the very presence of God in the world.  But this was pointing forward to something greater. 

    The temple. 

    When the Israelites entered the land, part of their purpose was in constructing the temple. As the tabernacle had been portable, the temple was meant to be permanent.

    The overarching purposes were still the same. Most notably, it was where God met his people in the word. It was his presence in the world. The temple was the place where sacrifices were made. 

    For the priests, there were specific instructions on what they had to do to prepare to enter into the Temple It was a sacred place. 

    As with the tabernacle, not just anyone could go into the temple. 

    The priest couldn’t just go into the temple any arbitrary way they wanted. It was a holy place. The temple was completed during the reign of Solomon 

    1 Kings 8:10-11 says: 

    10 And when the priests came out of the Holy Place, a cloud filled the house of the Lord, 11 so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord. 

    In both places, when the presence of the Lord comes into the temple, people can’t even stand in it because the presence is so glorious. 

    The temple is hugely important in the Old Testament. The specific instructions for the temple are important. But this points forward to an even greater temple. To an even greater example of God’s presence with his people. 

    And that is the significance of John 1:14. 

    The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory.

    The word translated as “dwelt” more literally means that Jesus tabernacled among us, that Jesus pitched a tent among us. It’s the same word for tabernacle that was used centuries before Christ when the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew to Greek. 

    The true tabernacle

    Jesus is the tabernacle. He is the greater temple. He is the presence of God with his people because Jesus IS God with his people. 

    So it’s not simply saying that Jesus dwelt among us. But rather: in Jesus, we see God became flesh and tabernacled with his people.  Instead of a tent or a building, we have a person, we have God himself. The greater tabernacle, the greater temple. 

    And he’s greater because he’s everything these places were meant to represent. It was only the priests who could go into the tabernacle and the temple. A priest serves as a mediator between man and God. Jesus is the greater priest. It is he who restores our relationship with God. 

    These man made structures were where sacrifices were offered. Jesus himself is the sacrifice. 

     And as I’ve said, the tabernacle and the temple represent the presence of God with his people. Jesus is God himself who has come to his people. The word became flesh and dwelt among us. 

    The Word made his dwelling among us. He pitched a tent among us. He tabernacled among us. 

    The God who created the world came into the world to save the world. There was no other way for a sinful people to be reconciled to the Lord than through God himself coming into the world. 

    But because of his love for us. Because of his goodness. Because of his grace…

    The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. 

    The creator entered creation.

    Righteousness

    How do you make yourself right before a Holy God? How do you earn standing before a perfect God? How do you deserve blessings before an all powerful God? You don’t and you can’t. 

    God became one of us so we could be with him. He is a personal God. It doesn’t get more personal than Jesus entering his creation. Sometimes it can be tempting to doubt if God really knows what we’re going through when we’re struggling. It can be tempting to wonder if God really cares.  

    He knows. He knows what it’s like to live in a sinful world. He knows what it’s like to have people oppose him and not like him. He knows what it’s like to be hated for no reason. He knows what it’s like to be slandered. He knows what it’s like to cry. He knows what it’s like to be let down. He knows what it’s like to be betrayed. He knows what it’s like to suffer and feel pain. He knows what it’s like to face injustice. 

    He knows. 

    It can be be easy to focus on Christ’s glory and divinity to the point where we forget his humanity. But we see his humanity in this passage. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. 

    It’s often said of people in politics who have opinions on public policies. We feel like they can’t relate to the average person. There’s the old saying not to judge a person until you’ve walked a mile in their shoes. 

    Jesus lived a lifetime in our shoes. 

    Sometimes God can seem distant. He’s a personal God who invites us to know him. 

    He joined us in our humanity. He came to earth so that we could have heaven. He died so that we could have life. He was forsaken so we could be children of God. 

    The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. 

    Thanks for reading! If you liked this post, please share and subscribe! This article is part of a series on the Gospel of John. 

  • Apple juice for communion? Why we can’t do communion our own way

    Apple juice for communion? Why we can’t do communion our own way

    27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 
    1 Corinthians 11:27-29

    I saw quite a few responses on Twitter this evening when the rapper Lecrae mentioned taking communion at home with wheat bread and apple juice and saying “I hope this still counts.”

    It doesn’t.

    Communion is a sacred remembrance of the gospel which was instituted by Christ himself with the commandment “do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19).

    There are lots of different views of communion within Christendom. Even though I pastor an independent Bible church, my view of communion aligns pretty well with Presbyterianism where I believe that communion is to be administered to a congregation by the pastor, overseen by elders, and served by deacons. It stands to reason that those people would oversee and serve communion since they’re charged with overseeing and serving the church. Last year, when churches were shut down during Covid, I saw some people partaking of communion at home. While everyone won’t agree with me, that’s not communion. Communion is mean to be COMMUNal. Virtual communion is not communion.

    Again, there are varying opinions about communion in different branches of Christendom. (Even what it should be called, such as communion, eucharist, Lord’s Supper). The Catholic view is not the same as the Presbyterian view which is not the same as the Lutheran view which is not the same as the Orthodox view.

    But they all would agree that just taking it upon yourself to have wheat bread and apple juice and to call that communion is not communion. There ought to be fidelity to Jesus and how he instituted communion, not just doing whatever you feel like.

    Thinking you can just make communion whatever you want it to be comes from a shallow theology. Any church with history would consider ad hoc communion to be sacrilegious. It comes form the modern age that makes Christianity existential, where everyone does what is right in their own eyes, and where we do whatever we want and justify it as long as it’s sincere or “from the heart.”

    Jeremiah 17:9 says: the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

    There are some things where there are prescribed ways to do them and communion is one of those things.

    My point isn’t just to criticize Lecrae. Too often we try to take the sacred and just make it whatever we want it to be.

    Communion is communal. Communion is given by Christ as a sign of the new covenant. As a covenantal sign, and as such, it is meant for the church during worship. It can’t just be you taking something you’re eating and calling it communion. Even if you’re with your family, that doesn’t make it communion. There’s a Congregational aspect to it. There’s a sacred and set apart aspect to it.

    What about home churches? I can appreciate home churches. I would also hope that home churches would still handle communion in an appropriate Biblical manner and not just arbitrarily create elements.

    You can have a fellowship meal. You can thank God while you’re eating a meal. But that doesn’t make those things communion anymore than dunking yourself in a swimming pool or bath tub doesn’t mean you just baptized yourself.

    Thanks for reading!

  • The only resolution that matters for 2022

    The only resolution that matters for 2022

    Originally published December 31, 2014

    At the beginning of each year, millions of Americans make new year’s resolutions. Common resolutions include eating healthier, saving more money, quitting smoking, or learning a new skill. All of those are great things.

    But the reason why we create new year’s resolutions is because there are areas in our life where we know we should be doing something and where we aren’t. Maybe it’s something we’ve tried and failed at before, but new year’s gives a sense of optimism. I think before we focus on anything else in 2022, our resolution should be to start (or continue) living each day for God.

    We can feel like we want to get all of our ducks in a row before we can make time for faith. There are always reasons to not pursue God. There are always things that come up, difficulties we have. If we wait until everything is perfect before we do something, it never happens.

    We might want to wait until things settle down at work, or we might have an area of our life where we know we’re falling short and we don’t feel like we can be as serious about faith. We might think “I can’t do it now. I drink way too much.” Or “I can’t do it right now, I have too many anger issues, I have this area that is out of control.”

    But it’s not about taking care of ourselves first and then developing faith. God meets you where you are. No matter what struggles you’re in, no matter what imperfections of your life or places of darkness you have, God wants you to pursue him. this. moment.

    I think a lot of people get it backwards.

    Someone might know that he or she wants to get more involved in church or to get more committed to faith and it doesn’t happen. Or you’re coming to church but you know that you’re just going through the motions. For some of us, we haven’t picked up the Bible in weeks. For others, we haven’t really prayed to God on our own in months.

    For many of us, we do have faith. We do believe that Jesus is God and that he died for our sins. But the hustle and bustle of life makes us complacent. When we have the time to focus on faith, a million other distractions compete for our time. And it’s always going to be easier to turn on the tv or the computer than to pick up a Bible.

    The Greatest commandment is to love the Lord your God with all of your heart, soul, strength, and mind and to love your neighbor as yourself. To love God with everything you have. It was never meant to be a passive thing that we do on the side.

    Maybe there’s a part of your soul that knows that you’re not pursuing God like you should. You know that you have the gifts to grow with God and to love and serve others and to build up God’s Church, but you just can’t seem to get started. You look to that future you and know you’d be happier, you know it’s what God wants.

    But you’re never going to get to that point if you don’t start making God your priority. If faith isn’t something that’s developed, and we’re not pursuing God, then our relationship with him will never possibly be what it could be.

    As I said, any number of resolutions can be beneficial for us, but there’s no better use of our time than continually making God our first priority. If you know in your heart you haven’t been doing that, then make 2021 the year you take your relationship with God to a new level. Let us all make that our first priority this year.

    For all of you, I hope that it can be a year where we start that new career, or where we see healing in that broken relationship. I pray that those of us who are healthy can see that continue in 2022 and that those of us who have health issues can see healing and God working in their lives. But most importantly, the hope is that from this moment, the last day of 2021 to this same time next year, that 2022 can be a time of getting to know God better, of loving him more, of giving more of ourselves to him, to serving more, and loving more.

    Thanks for reading! I’d love to hear what you think, and don’t forget to subscribe!