Should Christians be Sad When a Fellow Believer Dies and Goes to Heaven?
Written by Derek J. Brown |
Friday, May 12, 2023
Christians should grieve over the death of a fellow brother or sister in Christ. It is good and right to feel the weight of sorrow when our beloved fellow Christians are taken home. It is not a grief without hope (1 Thess. 4:13), but it is a grief, even a “sorrow upon sorrow.”
If we are citizens of heaven, awaiting a future of glory and an eternal inheritance—someday to be forever in the presence of Christ and again among our earthly brothers and sisters—then why should we grieve over our brethren who die and go on to heaven before us?
Isn’t it a sign of earthly-mindedness to grieve over such things? Isn’t it unspiritual to be sad when a fellow Christian dies? If so, wouldn’t it then be even more unspiritual for a Christian to rejoice when a fellow brother or sister is healed and allowed to live longer here on earth? The answer to all these questions is a resounding “no.”
“To live is Christ and to die is gain” (Phil. 1:21).
The apostle Paul proclaimed, “To live is Christ and to die is gain” (Phil. 1:21). He reminded the Philippians that they were citizens of heaven, someday to receive new bodies like the body of their Lord (Phil. 3:20). Yet, Paul was also grateful to God for sparing his brother and fellow worker Epaphroditus from death.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
The Big Tent Has Collapsed
Bishop Berlin is infamous for his speech on the floor of the 2019 General Conference where he referred to the Traditional Plan (the legislation adopted upholding accountability for a traditionalist understanding of marriage and ordination) as a “virus” that would infect the denomination. The logical extrapolation was that people who supported the traditional plan (i.e., theological conservatives) were also a virus. Moreover, the Southeastern Jurisdiction’s opening worship featured four giant dream catchers and liturgy that some felt had pagan overtones. The dream catchers were present for the entire meeting while, at times, there was no cross.
For months (years, really) bishops in The United Methodist Church, along with other progressive leaders, have pushed hard on two ideas:
The United Methodist Church is a big tent.
There is room for everyone, including theological conservatives, in The United Methodist Church.From November 2-5, 2022, the five U.S. jurisdictions held their conferences and elected new bishops. The results are clear: the big tent has collapsed. The United Methodist Church now has the most liberal Council of Bishops in its history. Not one single traditionalist bishop was elected. Not one. Forget about these elections telegraphing the future of The United Methodist Church. They declare the denomination’s present state.
It should now be crystal clear that the two points above in reality are the following:The big tent has collapsed.
It’s time for traditionalist churches to go…if they still can.There’s Room for Everyone
If there’s truly room for everyone, wouldn’t you think delegates at jurisdictional conference would want to throw theological conservatives a proverbial bone and elect at least one traditionalist-leaning bishop? Yet they didn’t. Instead, here’s a sample of who they elected and the resolutions they adopted:The North Central Jurisdiction elected Kennetha Bigham-Tsai. Bishop Bigham-Tsai will begin leading the Iowa Conference on January 1. Before her election, she served as Chief Connectional Ministries Officer at the Connectional Table. During an interview with a delegation as she was campaigning, she said, “No, it is not important that we agree on who Christ is.” She went on to further cast doubt on where she stands on the incarnation of Jesus when she said during the same interview “God became flesh, but not particular flesh. There’s no particularity around that. God became incarnate in a culture, but not one culture.” To read the article about this, including a recording of the aforementioned interview, click here.
The Western Jurisdiction elected Dottie Escobedo-Frank. Bishop Escobedo-Frank will begin leading the Cal-Pac Conference on January 1. Before her election, she was senior pastor at Paradise Valley United Methodist Church Arizona. On her biography on Paradise Valley UMC’s websiteshe is described in the following way:Dottie believes we are living in a time of epochal change, which requires the church find sacred ways to die in order to be reborn. She calls for heretics and edge-dwellers to lead the church forward. Now is the time, she says, to push these new leaders to the forefront of church restarts. (Emphasis added)
The Western Jurisdiction elected Cedrick Bridgeforth. Bishop Bridgeforth will begin leading the Pacific Northwest, Oregon-Idaho, and Alaska Conferences on January 1. Before his election, he was the director of communications and innovation for the Cal-Pac Conference. Bishop Bridgeforth is a married, gay man. His husband is Christopher Hucks-Ortiz. The Western Jurisdiction now has two married, gay/lesbian bishops: Cedrick Bridgeforth and Karen Oliveto. You can read more about Bishop Bridgeforth in this article from the Western Jurisdiction.
Read More
Related Posts: -
A Life of Listening, the Voice of One
Not long ago I took our daughter Debbie and two of our grown grandchildren on a memory trip to places in Canada where I grew up.
One special spot we visited was on Lake Rosseau in the Muskoka lakes region. It was once the site of a Bible conference, long since defunct, where my mother took me many summers of my early life.
As we cruised by boat along the rocky shore, I could see the old buildings derelict and deserted, but the memories stayed with me. I recalled the children’s meetings where a retired missionary woman and a college student told us about Jesus, and how at the end of that week I put up my hand to say I wanted to know and follow him. -
Trinitarian Personalism and Christian Preaching
Written by Scott R. Swain |
Tuesday, January 11, 2022
He, someone not something, is the supreme subject matter and scope of Christian preaching: God the Son incarnate, clothed with the promises of the gospel, crucified and risen, ascended and coming again.The Trinity and Christian Preaching
Recent days have prompted me to think about the relationship between trinitarian theology and Christian preaching.
The first prompt came in June while participating in the International Presbyterian Church’s Catalyst Conference in London. Over the course of three days, I had the opportunity to listen to a lot of good preaching, including three sermons from Sinclair Ferguson on the Pastoral Epistles. In the evenings, I had the opportunity to spend time with a number of IPC ministers and ministerial candidates, discussing the nature and calling of gospel preaching, as well as the current status of gospel preaching in the UK and North America. The second prompt came in July when I finished a short manuscript on the doctrine of the Trinity (which is to be published by Crossway next year). The third prompt came from research I am doing for other projects. The following are a few scattered thoughts on the relationship between trinitarian personalism and Christian preaching inspired by the confluence of these three prompts.
What Is Trinitarian Personalism?
“Personalism” is a term with specific philosophical connotations that I do not intend here. What I mean by “trinitarian personalism” follows from an insight, expressed by Thomas Aquinas in his disputation on divine power, that the term “person” is a term of dignity, which indicates two things about God’s supreme greatness and goodness.[1]
First, that God exists in three “persons” indicates that God’s manner of existing is the highest manner of existing. Specifically, the triune God is the living God; and the life he lives is a life of perfect intelligence, love, and beatitude. Second, that God exists in three “persons” indicates that God’s intelligent, loving, and blessed manner of existing subsists in three distinct, irreducible, unsubstitutable ways: as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The true and living God is the tripersonal God; and the life he lives is the life of the Father who begets, of the Son who is begotten, and of the Spirit who is breathed forth in their mutual love.
What does this rather fine metaphysical point have to do with Christian preaching? Stay with me.
Trinitarian Personalism in Patristic Exegesis
The Church Fathers display a kind of trinitarian personalism in the ways they read Holy Scripture. Three examples stand out.
The first example comes from Irenaeus of Lyon. In his dispute with Gnostic interpreters who so twisted Holy Scripture that its unified message became unrecognizable, Irenaeus argues that the main purpose of the “rule of faith” is to help readers identify the person of Jesus Christ as the handsome king to which all scriptures point. The scope or aim of Scripture, on this understanding, is not something but someone. Holy Scripture, in all its literary and historical diversity, is a book that holds forth before the eyes of faith God the Son, the handsome king.
The second example agrees with Irenaeus in seeing the persons of the Trinity as the central subject matter of Holy Scripture and (potentially) explains the origin of the term “person” in Christian theology. As Matthew Bates and others have recently argued, New Testament and early patristic interpretation of the Old Testament exhibits an ancient reading strategy known as “prosopological exegesis,” the practice of identifying otherwise unnamed or ambiguously identified characters (dramatis personae) within the drama of scriptural discourse. For example, the author of Hebrews identifies the king whom God addresses in Psalm 2:7 as Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity (Heb 1:5). This “person-centered” approach to exegesis is the “birth” of trinitarian personalism: the scriptural foundation of the church’s perception of three “persons” in one God.[2]
Read More