No, you're missing the point. Whether the message choosen by this minister was appropriate is not the point, but I will address that below.
You see Yeti asserted that the minister should have been sued for preaching the Word of God because it hurt peoples feelings. Yeti also asserted that this preacher would, because of this message, be the one in Hell. Do you really think that a pastor should be subject to lawsuit because his messages hurt the feelings of those in the congregration? Do you really think our courts have (or should have) the power to make such judgements? Do you really think that a pastor will spend eternity in Hell for preaching the Word of God? Do you see now the points I was addressing?
"How many of those people do you think would ever set foot in that pastor's church after such a display? He created an absolute horrible memory for the hurt loved ones and totally corrupted Christ's desire to have people come to Him. Why would that action draw anybody?"
This is a different matter entirely from my issues with Yeti. This really is one of the fundamental issues in Christianity. What should pastors preach? Should they be inoffensive so as to not allienate or "drive away" some? Or should pastors preach the whole Word of God even if that offends some? For example, should pastors condemn homosexuality, even if that condemnation drives some away?
Of course, there is also the issue of whether this particular message was appropriate for an eulogy? Well, that's a judgement call, but to me, these words are always appropriate at a funeral: "For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." - Rom 6:23. We may debate endlessly whether these words would drive away some or whether pointing out that that an unsaved soul will not see Heaven might also be the very words to bring someone to Christ. True, a funeral is an emotional time, but it might also be the time when the weight of these words strike home.
Finally, it seems to me that the condmenation here should not be directed at the pastor but should be directed at those who would attack a man of God for speaking God's Word. One wonders just what difference there is between these who beat up a Christian pastor in Alabama because they disagree with his message and those who would do the same in some Muslim country.
No - it is not.
Those people sought someone to help them give a fond goodbye to their loved one. Does the preacher tell them he is going to say this man is going to hell? No, he does not. Why? Because he knows they would find someone else. Therefore, he intends to use this family. Instead of a gentle, kind goodbye to this loved man, the family is forced to sit through an assault on them and have their loved one judged - not by God but by a paid preacher. They are embarrassed, the subject of town gossip and they will never forget the horror of that day. What gives that preacher the right to be the judge of this man? God is our judge. I think the purpose of that preacher is to show God's love and to bring people to God - not to judge where people are going on their death.
God would be better served by the preacher giving a gentle kind message to soothe the loved ones and if need be asking any in attendance to visit his congregation if they would like to make themselves right with God.
But, never, never show that LOVE by kicking people when they are grieving, by insulting the dead, by judging the dead, by giving that family a deep resentment of anything to do with God and adding to their grief and then expecting an honorariam. Then, when presented the truth of his actions, claiming he is trying to reach the living and serve God. This is not serving God - this is using the memory of a loved one as an example at the expense of the remaining loved ones who are already grieving. Very cruel.