Several years ago, in a different ministry context, the pastoral staff was asked if we could do a favor for one of the relatives of a church member.  The sister of one of the ladies in the church had recently accepted Christ and wanted to be baptized, but lived several hours away.  Since she was coming in to visit, the request was made to the pastoral staff if she could be baptized at our church while she was in town. 

What should we have done?  Should churches baptize people from out of town?  Should baptism occur separate from church membership?  Is the church commanded to baptize a part from the ongoing process of discipleship? 

We discussed this situation in great detail among our staff.  Though opinions varied and disagreement was expressed, we finally agreed that we would not baptize her but would encourage her to find a local church in her area, follow the Lord in baptism, and join that fellowship for accountability and fellowship.

There are several reasons why I believe that churches should not separate baptism from church membership. 

1) Baptism symbolizes union with Christ and His body.

It is true that the church exists universally (all believers) and locally (believers in a local church).  However, the universal church is expressed through the local body of believers.  Baptism points to union with Christ (Romans 6:1-4) and union with Christ is expressed through the participation of the local church (Romans 12, 1 Cor 10:16-17, Eph 1:22-23, 2:16; Col 1:18, 2:19, 3:15, and many others).  Therefore, you cannot separate union with Christ from union with His body, expressed locally in covenantal community. 

Think of it this way…
Baptism show union with Christ—Union with Christ is shown through participation in His body—participation in His body is shown through local church membership.

2) The Great Commission does not separate baptism and discipleship. 

The three participles in the Great Commission involve “going, baptizing, and teaching.”  Therefore, when churches separate baptizing from the ongoing teaching and discipleship in a local congregation, they are not fulfilling the Great Commission. 

3) Baptism is a “church ordinance” not an “individual expression.” 

I have said often that baptism is not an individual event, it is a congregational event.  In baptism, the person expressions identification with Christ, the church is affirming that profession, and the local faith community is proclaiming the gospel to one another.  That is why we believe there are two ordinances…baptism and the Lord Supper. 

Just as one would not (or at least should not) participate in the Lord Supper in isolation of the local church, baptism is not to be separated from the local body either.  You don’t take your wife out to eat and say, “I think we should take the Lord Supper together tonight.”  Why?  Because it is a church ordnance to be practiced within the local covenantal community…as is baptism.  Baptism was practiced in the early church under the leadership of the Apostles and within the context of the visible church (Matt 16:16-18).

4) The teaching of Acts 2. 

The clear order of Acts chapter 2 is the preaching of the gospel, the baptism of believers, and the addition into the local church.  Though the phrase “the church” is not given, verse 42 speaks of life and function of the local church.  Words like “Trinity” or “rapture” are not given, but we see their process and function. 

5) It is spiritual dangerous to baptize someone without participation in the local church.

More than anything, new believers need the local teaching, accountability, and discipline of the local church.  To allow individuals to be baptized (affirmed by that congregation) and not placed under the watch-care of the church can have dangerous consequences upon the believer. 

There are other reasons why I believe that baptism and church membership should be connected.  Those who disagree often point to the Ethiopian eunuch as not being baptized into the local church.  There are a few problems with this example. 

a) It is likely that there was no church in Ethiopia at the time because the gospel was starting to spread. 
b) We are not given enough follow-up information concerning this situation as to discern what happened after his baptism.
c) One should never take one example (of which we do not have all the surrounding information) and a make a universal principle out of it when the entire rest of the New Testament demonstrates to practice of baptism into the local body. 

The decisions like we made in the situation described above are not always easy.  But at the end of the day we felt (and I was thankful) that the best thing for that new believer was to find a Bible-teaching congregation in her community, profess her identification with Christ to that body, and submit herself that covenantal community of faith.  That, in our opinion, was the best favor we could do for her. 

Pastor Wes

Jesus was walking down the dusty path, as He did most everyday of His life on earth, only to encounter another interruption, another question, another person on their knees, another real life situation to handle, another need to meet. The question He was asked this time did not surprise Him, for He was asked this question time and time again…What must I do to have eternal life? Such is the question everyone wants to ask; yet no one wants to hear the answer because Jesus always makes it personal and it always comes at a cost.

As was the case for this man on this particular day for he was a good man, one who had not murdered, committed adultery, stolen from others, or dishonored his parents. Yet for Jesus, this wasn’t enough. It wasn’t the answer to the ultimate question. Jesus, looking at him with loving eyes, knew that because of this man’s riches, his treasure wasn’t heaven, it was his own possessions.

How disheartened this young man must have been, he had lived a good life, done well for himself, and yet it seems it was all for not. Maybe he wanted to hear, “I’m proud of you for living a good life” or “Just keep doing what you are doing and you’ll be just fine.” Whatever the case, what he heard ripped his heart out. The very idea that he had to give up everything he had worked so hard to gain was a thought he could not bear. This man heard the very thing he hoped he would not hear, namely “If you want to have eternal life…give it all away!” You see the answer to the ultimate question is ultimate sacrifice. You don’t want to hear the answer to eternal life if you are in love with this one.

I’m remind of this passage in Isaiah…

Bel has bowed down, Nebo stoops over; their images are consigned to the beasts and the cattle. The things that you carry are burdensome, a load for the weary beast. They stooped over, they have bowed down together, they could not rescue the burden, but have themselves gone into captivity.

Listen to Me, O house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, You who have been borne by Me from birth. And have been carried from the womb; Even to your old age will be the same, And even to your graying years I will bear you! I have done it, and I will carry you; and I will bear you and I will deliver you. (Isa 46:1-4)

As in the case of the rich young ruler, we have the option of carrying our own burdens or letting the Lord carry them for us. For many of us the thought of letting go is too hard, too much sacrifice, too much of a cost. We have deceived ourselves into thinking we are okay on our own; after all we’ve come this far without help. After all, “we’ve got it all together, just leave us alone.” It is a wonder our backs don’t break with the load we carry.

We can complain about how hard life can be; yet we are unwilling to give up the weight. We keep trying to do the best we can, although our best will never be good enough. We keep wondering what it will take one day to have eternal life, even though we may not really want the answer!

Pastor Wes

I was recently asked, based on my end time beliefs, whether I thought that there would be a sizable Jewish conversion in the last days and what I thought about a "self-proclaimed evangelical group that specifically targets a race/ ethnic group as the true inheritors of the Kingdom."

Here is my response...

I do believe that there will be a turning of the Jews (ethnically speaking) to Christ as seen in Romans 11.  I do not believe that God’s plan will turn primarily to ethnic Jews again, but that there will simply be many Jews who will repent and trust Christ.  I believe that the fulfillment of Israel (The True Israel as Paul would put it) is one man…Jesus of Nazareth, who fulfills all that Israel did not (i.e. He fulfills the law, circumcision, descedant of David, etc.).  As a result of our identity in Christ, we too are Jews (spiritually speaking, or as Paul would say "circumcision of the heart") and consequently all the promises of God apply to us because of our union with God's Son.  Therefore, I do not see two future peoples of God (the church and Israel), rather I see one people of God…those who belong to the true Israel (Jesus Christ). 

Through the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God’s inheritance is open to all people groups.  In my view, to say that one particular ethnic group is the “people of God” is to completely miss the centrality of Jesus Christ in the redemptive plan of God.  God’s plan was never “Adam” but the “True Adam”, it was never “Israel” (ethnically speaking”) but the True Israel (ethnically speaking).  True inheritors of the kingdom, now and in the end times, are all of those who find their identity in Christ, the Israel of God!

Pastor Wes

Are Christians called to pray for the dead? Can our prayers now be a means of ensuring that those who have already passed can go to heaven? What does Paul mean about be "baptized for the dead? (1 Cor 15:29)"

There have been a variety of explanations for what Paul means about being "baptized for the dead" in 1 Corinthians 15:29. One of the reasons for such a variety is because it is a difficult verse to translation and interpret. Mormons, for example, believe that you can go to a temple and through baptism "represent" someone who has died and be baptized for the individual who has passed away. [It should be pointed out here that Mormons also believe that water baptism saves so therefore being baptized, an act of salvation, for someone else can be the means of another’s salvation.]

This is hardly Paul’s meaning in 1 Corinthians 15 because it in no way takes the context into consideration (a great danger in any interpretation). Paul, in the first 19 verses of chapter 15, has discusses the resurrection of Christ. Then in verses 20-23 he speaks of the order of the resurrection [Christ first and then those who are united with Him will be resurrected when He returns]. Then Paul deals with the reign of Christ and the final destruction of death. Paul questions, "what will those do who are not baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?"

Paul is writing here to a church in Corinth. Corinth was surrounded by a pagan religion that believed that baptism in the sea guaranteed a good afterlife (see Homer in "Hymn to Demeter" pg 478-79). Paul recognizes that these practices were going on so he uses this as a part of his overall argument, namely that "the resurrection is a reality." His entire point is that "if there is no resurrection, we are dead in our sin and our preaching is in vain (12-13)."

So Paul uses the example of these pagans (those who were trying to be baptized for the dead) as an example to show than even the pagans see the importance of the resurrection otherwise they would not practice "baptism for the dead." One of the key phrases in the text is "otherwise what do people". Therefore, Paul is NOT encouraging the practice and the Corinthians are NOT practicing such a ritual. Rather, Paul is trying to show believers the importance of the resurrection by showing them that if the pagans around them place such a great importance on the resurrection, how much more those who put their faith in the resurrected Christ. [Paul often uses the culture of the day as a means of communicating the gospel…see Acts 17 when Paul quotes their own philosophers as a means of leading them to Christ.]

Now some will respond that the above is not correct because the word "they" is not in the Greek text, namely "they are baptized on their behalf" rather than "you (the Corinthians) are baptized on their behalf." However, the Greek word "baptizontia" is a present, passive, indicative, in the 3rd person plural, meaning that "they" (the pagans not the Corinthians) are "being baptized. 

Therefore, Paul is using an example, practiced by the pagans, to illustrate the importance of the resurrection.  If the resurrection is that important to the pagans, how much more for those of us who find our identity in the true resurrection...Jesus of Nazareth, the ONLY ONE who was baptized (the cross) on behalf of others!!!

Pastor Wes

For the past several months I have been meeting regularly with our mission teams to Mexico and Philly.  We are now only a few weeks away from building two homes in Mexico and about a month and a half away from working with a church in Philly doing evangelistic outreach.  In light of these upcoming events I’d like for us to think about “why” we do missions.

You see, if the local church is to function as God has intended missions must be a healthy and vibrant part of its practice. A church that lacks a desire for missions lacks in their understanding of what the church is to be doing until the return of Christ. Often churches begin with the “how” of missions before they have established the “why” of missions. The word “theology” is often one that makes people cringe and yet everyone has a theology, whether it is biblical or not.

Missions isn’t about what we want to accomplish, it is about what God desires. We don’t set the agenda for missions, God does! Effective missions has less to do with the fruit seen by the laborer and more to do with whether or not the mission is carried out according to God’s plan. So what theological principles, revealed in Scripture, ought to motivate God’s people to commit their lives, money, time, etc. to the work of missions? Though there are many, I would like to emphasize three main principles that ought to drive each of us towards greater involvement in the work of God.

Principle #1: A Passion for the worship of God.

As stated above, our motive for missions must be God’s motive for missions. We must seek to join God in His passion and work for seeing missions done. John Stott noted “The highest of missionary motives is neither obedience to the Great Commission…nor love for sinners…but rather zeal…for the glory of Christ” (Stott, Romans, 53). Stott certainly viewed the Great Commission and a love for sinners as important, but none more important that a desire to see Christ worshipped and glorified in our efforts.

God’s first and foremost passion is to see Himself honored and glorified in the work of his people (Eph 1:4-6, Jer 13:11, 1 Cor 10:31, John 17:24.). There is little value in seeking a global strategy and an obedient heart if our chief desire is not the honor and worship of a holy God. 

I am teaching my son catechisms.  I ask him, “Who made you?” and he answers “God.”  I ask, “What else did God make?” and he answers “everything.”  “Why did God make you and everything?”  He answers, “For His own glory!”  That is what I want my son to know…all things are motivated by the glory of God!

John Piper states it this way, “Missions is not the ultimate goal of the church. Worship is” and then he goes on to add, “Worship is ultimate, not missions, because God is ultimate, not man” (Piper, Let the Nations be Glad, 17). Therefore, our goal is worship, because God’s goal is worship. What motivates us for missions is the worship of God.

Principle #2: A Passion for people of all nations.

Another theological force is that God has people throughout the world who need to hear the gospel. The idea of “the people of God” chosen to be a missionary community “to all peoples” is the Bible’s central theme (Terry, Missiology, 9). One cannot avoid this biblical theme in light of Revelation 5:9. Here we see a people who have been purchased for God from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation. This fact alone must compel our mission strategy to be global. A proper mission program must have all kinds of people within its target. This does not mean the local church is able to focus on all people. They are, however, expected to focus on different peoples.

Principle #3: A Passion for faithfulness to God’s commands

While obedience to God only, without a passion for His glory or His people, could lead to dry legalism, the realty of God commanding His people to a global task cannot be avoided either. Just as the Bible is clear about a passion for God’s glory seen in all peoples, it is also clear that God has commanded us to be obedient. Our love for God is related to our obedience to God (John 14:15, 1 John 5:1-3).

When God commands us to “go into all nations and preach the gospel” our desire for faithfulness to God’s commandments ought to compel us to go. Therefore, another driving force behind our desire for missions strategy should be the desire to be as obedient as possible to the work God has given His church to do.

These 3 principles are foundational to any mission involvement. The “why” we are going is just as important as the “what” we are doing. May the Lord continue to grant us a passion for His name, a passion for all peoples, and a passion to remain faithful to all that He has given His church to do.

On Mission with you,

Pastor Wes

My family and I returned last Friday from vacation in Branson, MO. I have had several people ask me how things went so I thought I’d share just a few things that the Lord (re)taught me. These things are in no particular order.

1) Kids grow up too fast! I was amazed at the things I noticed in my children that I had been missing due to the fast pace life I live. It was good to slow down and see those precious developments. I will NEVER forget my son trying to comfort me as I lay on the couch, acting like I was crying, while he stroked my back asking me, "Do you want some coffee?" Where does he get this stuff? Maybe I have a caffeine problem? Either way, it was a cherished moment.



2) Ice cream is best shared with your wife. My wife and I enjoyed sneaking away and leaving the kids with the grandparents while we went to Cold Stone. Nothing better than sitting on the strip eating Cold Stone with your wife.



3) You can take the boy out of the country but you can’t take the country out of the boy. I was reminded how much I love the outdoors. Trees, being on the water, catching fish (i.e. kill it and eat it), early mornings, there is something about being out in the beauty of God’s creation. I can only imagine what it will be like when it is restored (Romans 8).

4) I eat too much when I’m on vacation. Before going to vacation I was eating right and losing weight. After vacation, I gained weight, crave junk food, and lack discipline. I blame it all on Lambert's (the home of the thrown rolls). 

5) Grandparents are a blessing. We were blessed to have Stephanie’s parents go with us. They helped with the kids and allowed us to have a little freedom. Funny how you don’t have to ask twice when it comes to grandparents watching grandchildren.



6) A preacher isn’t happy unless he’s preaching (unless of course he's fishing). I felt weird on Sunday morning when I was not at my church preaching. It made me ready to return.  It resassured me how it is absolutely what I have been called to do. 

7) I have more to read than time to read it. I took a stack of books to read and made very little progress. Sometime I think I need to take a "reading-only" vacation.

8) I have been given more than I deserve. I feel very blessed. A salvation I don’t deserve and don’t live up to, a family that is very precious despite my failings as a dad and husband, and the opportunities to enjoy the handiwork of a holy, righteous God. How does a sinner deserving of eternal separation from God get all of this? Amazing.


9) "Fun" is redefined when you have kids.  I found it ironic that 4 adults paid $50 a ticket to go to an amusement park only to spend all their time watching a 2 year old who got in free.  You have no idea how many times we had to "ride the frogs." 



10) There is no place like home. As fun as it is to get away, it is always good to return home.

Glad to be home,
Pastor Wes

I know of very few issues that have been harder to deal with in ministry than the death of a baby and the unbelievable grief experienced by the parents.  I do not write this article out of personal experience and therefore am not trying to act as though I know what others, who have gone through such a tragedy, may feel.  Rather, I write this article because I am asked often about what happens to babies when they die and want people to be biblically informed in handling these situations.   

When approaching an issue like this it is easy to run to emotional responses or human logic for the sake of comfort, though many times void of biblical evidence.  It is easy to be sentimental rather than biblical.  This is dangerous and unhealthy because one should not “hope something is true” but rather “know something is true” based upon the authority of Scripture.  Therefore, before I share what I believe the Bible teaches concerning infant salvation, let me first expose some of the false beliefs that many have embraced. 

False Belief #1:  Babies go to heaven because they are innocent (Pelagianism).

I have heard many who hold to an age of accountability [a term that I am not a fan of, nor use] share that they believe that children are “innocent” until they reach a certain age.  Then at a certain age they become accountable for sin.  This is far from a biblical understanding of original sin and is, in fact, an early church heresy known as Pelagianism [the belief that human beings are born morally innocent].   

The biblical reality is that no one is born innocent [minus Jesus], no not one!  No one is righteous (Rom 3), we are by nature children of wrath (Eph 2), and we are born in sin (Psalm 51).  [Other Scriptures: 1 Kings 8:46, Psalm 143:2, 1 Jn 1:8, Psalm 58:3]  So regardless about what one believes about the salvation of infants, one cannot biblically argue that babies are innocent. 

False Belief #2:  Babies go to heaven because everyone goes to heaven (Universalism).

Though not as common in evangelical circles, there are certainly some who would say that because God is a loving God he would not send anyone to hell, particular babies.  Of course this is a false view of God’s love.  God’s love is not expressed in his willingness to overlook sin and accept everybody, but in his willingness to offer his own Son so that by faith we can enter into a right relationship with God. 

The Bible is clear that not everyone will go to heaven (in fact the majority won’t).  Jesus said, “Enter through the narrow gate.  For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.  But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find it.” (Matthew 7:13-14)

There are many other texts [Matthew 13:37-42, Luke 16, 2 Thess 1:9, Rev 20] that teach against universalism, namely the idea that all will go to heaven.  So one cannot make the argument that babies go to heaven because “God is so loving he would never do something like that.”

[One should be reminded that God is just regardless.  We do not define what is "right" and "wrong," God does.  So the idea that man, a created being, says to God, the Creator, "You can never do _______ and be just" is the clay telling the potter what to do.]

False Belief #3:  Babies go to heaven if they are “baptized” as infants (Paedo-baptism).

Some would argue that babies who have been sprinkled go to heaven because “baptism” removes original sin.  (I place baptism here in “” because I would argue that baptism is only a believer by immersion and therefore “infant baptism” is a contradiction in terms, but that’s for another article )  Luther believed that baptism “worketh forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil,” Catholicism teaches that “by baptism one enters into the kingdom of God and into the sphere of the saving work of Christ.”  Even Augustine believed that paedo-baptism released the baby from original sin [I have written a length article on Augustine’s view of baptism if you are interested]. 

The problem here is that the Bible teaches that “entering the Kingdom of God” or “being forgiven of sin” is something that is conditioned upon faith and union with Christ.  “For God so loved the world…and whoever believes will not perish (John 3:16).” “Whoever believes in him will have eternal life (John 6:35).”  “If you confess with you mouth and believe in your heart (Rom 10:17).”  In fact, the entire book of Galatians is an argument that those who inherit the blessings of Abraham are those who like Abraham believe in the promised seed (Gal 3).  [See also John 3:3, Titus 3:5]

In light of this, all baptisms in Scripture are believers who are immersed.  Therefore, in my opinion, the issue of infant “baptism” is no biblical solution at all and does not assure the baby of heaven.  In fact, such a process can give false hope to parents who assume that “because their baby was ‘baptized’” he or she is secure.  Such an approach bypasses the clear biblical teaching of personal faith in union with the death and resurrection of our Lord Christ. 

False Belief #4:  Babies go to heaven because they are given the opportunity to believe after they die.

I will not expound on this for there is simply no biblical evidence to warrant such a belief.  A relationship with Jesus Christ is a prerequisite for heaven, not something that follows it.   This position was held by Gregory of Nyssa, who claimed that all, regardless of age, would have an opportunity to believe after death. The Bible simple does not teach such a belief. 

What I believe the Bible teaches concerning babies going to heaven.

I have tried to be biblically faithful to this point, demonstrating that all are born in sin, all must have faith in Christ for the forgiveness of sin, and only in Jesus Christ can that forgiveness be realized.  It would seem then that I would be arguing against the salvation of infants.  However, such a conclusion would be invalid. 

In addition to the previously mentioned claims, the Bible also teaches that the judgment of God will be based upon the “deeds done in the body" (2 Cor 5:10, Matthew 16:27).  In other words, we are born in sin and as we grow will act out in rebellion towards God because of the sinful, depraved nature inherited in Adam.  When we are exposed to the General Revelation of God (law of God in our hearts and God revealed in creation) we will suppress the truth and live for our own desires (see Romans 1-3 for more on this). 

So you have two parts here: 1) Humans are born sinful, 2) Humans will act in rebellion towards God because of that sin when exposed to the General Revelation of God.  Therefore, as Paul states, man is “without excuse" (Rom 1:20).  Babies (and mentally handicapped), however, never make it to step 2.  In other words, they never advance to the stage where they act out in rebellion against the General Revelation of God.  They simple do not have the cognitive or moral capacities to do so.  This does not mean that they are born innocent; they simple never act on their guilt. 

[The emphasis on the rejection of the General Revelation of God is key here because in my view this is what separates babies from those who live in other countries and have never heard the gospel.  They, unlike babies, have rejected the General Revelation of God and are without excuse therefore subjecting them to the judgment of God.]

Though we are born in Adam’s sin, we must answer for our own personal, willful acts of rebellion towards God, something that infants have not done.  As a result, I would argue that babies/infants do not face the condemning judgment of God.  In light of Luke 18:16 where Jesus says, “Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these” I believe that babies are objects of the mercy of Christ, purchased through the cross of Christ, therefore avoiding the condeming Judgment of Christ. 

So in summary, are babies born in sin? Yes.  Do they act on that sin? No.  As a result, they are received into heaven through the atoning work of Christ. 

When we deal with the death of infants we do not run to false beliefs, unbiblical claims, or mere sentimental appeals, for none of these can offer us hope.  For our hope must be rooted in the word of God and the work of our Christ, the One who gave His life for the old…and the young.

Pastor Wes

Last Sunday at the sunrise service I mentioned that the resurrection of Christ is the grounds of our hope for a future resurrection.  One of the things that I have found over the years in ministry is how the hope of heaven is seen as our spirits going to be with the Lord after we die, rather than the resurrection of our bodies in the New Creation. 

Scripture speaks very little about our spirits being in heaven with the Lord.  While I am not suggesting that this is not true, nor that we should not be comforted with such a reality, I am suggesting that the overwhelming hope, according to the New Testament, for believers in Christ is a future day of resurrection and a restored physical creation (Romans 8, 1 Cor 15, Phil 3, Rev 21-22).

Paul does speak of being with the Lord upon the death of the body.  In Philippians 1:22, Paul says that “if I live on in the flesh, this means fruitful work for me; and I don’t know which one I should choose…I have a desire to depart to be with Christ, which is far better…”  Again in 2 Corinthians 5:8 Paul points to the reality of being absent from the body and at home with the Lord. 

One needs to keep in mind that the “preference” Paul speaks of in these verses is in comparison to life here in a fallen world.  Remaining here on earth (in its fallen condition) verses going to be with the Lord, well who wouldn't prefer being with the Lord?  But in saying this, Paul does not mean that this is the ultimate hope and reality for the believer.

Hope for the Christian is not some mystical, heavenly presence with Christ where everything is white, surrounded by clouds, harps playing in the background, eating grapes, while everyone eternally gazes into a bright light singing “Hallelujah” over and over again.  This is hardly our “glorification.” 

The hope for the Christian is that just as Jesus’ body came walking out of a grave…so will yours if you are in Christ.  Paul proclaims that the dead will be raised “imperishable” (1 Cor 15:52), and that God will raise us up in power (1 Cor 6:14).  Even Jesus emphasizes the future hope of the resurrection (Matthew 22:30-31, Luke 14:14, John 5:28-29, 11:25).

This is why the funeral of a believer is an occasion of joy (he or she is with the Lord in spirit) but is also an occasion of great sorrow (the body is separated from the Spirit awaiting the final day).  Paul makes this clear in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words.

The comfort for these believers was the future resurrection, not spirits in heaven.  Paul does not write to these confused, grieving Christians and say “take comfort that their spirits are in heaven with Jesus.” [Though I’m not denying there is comfort in this]. 

Rather, Paul tells them to encourage one another in the reality that the same body that walked out of a Palestinian tomb will one day split the sky and those who have “fallen asleep” will be resurrected.  That is our ultimate hope!  And that will be quite the “son rise” service!

Pastor Wes