Play

“Questions and Answers 127”

Allen Dvorak
11/10/24 - Sun PM

The following transcription is computer-generated and may not accurately reflect the contents of the audio. Please verify the content before quoting.

(Transcribed by Congregate. Always check document for possible errors and inaccuracies in automated transcriptions.)

Appreciate the opportunity to speak with you this evening.

I appreciate your presence here this evening.

And I want to begin this evening by talking about the Lord's supper.

I felt like Kevin did an excellent job this morning in helping us to uh remember the special nature of the supper even though we do it every week.

Uh And we'll continue to do that until the Lord comes.

As Kevin noted, it is a special thing that we are observing and I want to talk a little bit about that first Lord's supper.

The Passover when Jesus instituted this supper of the Lord Jesus and his disciples had observed the Passover together before John records at least three, maybe four passovers in his jock gospel in which Jesus is with his disciples.

And they kept this Passover.

But this Passover, this last one must have seemed special and different, at least in some ways to the disciples.

Back in Mark the 20233th chapter uh Clark read from Mark 14.

But if you go back to chapter 10 of Mark, excuse me.

And in verse 32 we're told that as they're going up to Jerusalem, this is where Jesus will enter triumphantly as the king.

Uh on this last visit to Jerusalem as they're going up there, Jesus began to tell them what was to happen to him.

Verse 33 saying, see we are going up to Jerusalem and the son of man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the gentiles.

They will mock him and spit on him and flog him and kill him.

And after three days, he will rise.

Now we're told on other occasions that the disciples didn't necessarily understand some of these predictions.

The people in general didn't seem to understand the nature of the Messiah and his role in Israel's history.

But there were other signs that suggested something momentous was going to happen in these days prior to the Passover observance, there was a woman who anointed Jesus and even in the face of criticism, Jesus said, leave her alone.

She has anointed my body for burial.

I wonder what the disciples thought about that in some of the teaching that Jesus had done in the temple.

During this last week, he told a parable that suggested the death of the son, the owner of the vineyard's son.

And so the disciples may on this last night have been apprehensive about some of the things that might we were going to happen.

I still don't think they understood even partially what all was involved but this was going to be a different. Passover.

Jesus tells them as you read along with Clark, perhaps Jesus tells them that the Passover room needs to be prepared and he tells them to, gives them specific instructions, saying the teacher wants to know if the the upper room is prepared.

So this is something that may have happened before and they're using the same upper room.

It all takes place.

It was anticipated that Jesus would take the Passover, observe the Passover with his disciples in this place.

And then there's the identity of the betrayer revealed during the course of this evening.

Some rather unusual things happen.

Jesus for instance, takes some of the unleavened bread and he says, this is my body which is given for you do this in remembrance of me.

What must of the disciples have thought about that statement?

Jesus said some similar things in John the sixth chapter and the Jews in general didn't understand the figurative nature of what he was saying.

I wonder if the disciples understood and then he would say this is speaking of the cup, this is my blood of the covenant which is poured out for many.

What did the disciples think about that this evening?

We're going to do a question and answer sermon.

And it was suggested to me that perhaps Clark mckee had only scheduled two songs with the intent of making it possible for me to cover both questions. Clark.

If that was your thinking.

I appreciate it.

It's probably in vain, but nevertheless, that's what we're going to do tonight.

I prepared a couple of questions for those who are not familiar with what we do. Occasionally.

I devote a sermon sometimes to answering some questions that have been submitted to me.

The questions are not necessarily related to each other and that is the case.

Uh This evening, they're on different topics and I want you to understand that the answers I give are my answers.

They don't represent some official position of either the elders of this congregation, but they do constitute my understanding of the topics uh that the questions relate to.

And so this evening, a couple of questions, the first one has to do with the food of the vine that was used in the institution of the Lord's Supper as we read about in Mark 14.

And the second question which I just uh just erased has to do with the Christians attitude towards some of the global con uh conflicts that are going on the Russian Ukrainian war, the things that are gone going on in Israel and have been going on for the last year, nearly uh between Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah.

And now Iran has gotten involved as well.

And I, I really think that sometimes we Christians have mixed emotions about some of those things.

Our country is certainly divided on that topic.

And so we'll say some things about that.

Uh When we get to the second question, somewhere around 10 o'clock.

So the first question is one that we had anticipated talking about last time we did a sermon like this.

And quotation marks here indicate that this is the question as I received it.

Exactly quoted.

Do you think that the food of the vine during the first Lord's supper was fermented or not?

And I actually have received fairly recently, Another similar question, did Jesus drink wine, grape juice or do we even know to be able to say for sure at the first Lord's supper?

Well, I think the questions are regarding not just the triviality or some uh unimportant detail as we'll look at.

And so I'm going to pursue these questions by first noting, as you're probably well aware that the Lord's sufferer was instituted as Jesus observed the last Passover with his disciples as we read a little bit earlier.

And so he would have been using the same elements from the Passover feast.

It would have been roasted lamb.

If you're familiar with the institution of the Passover in Exodus, the 12th chapter, you know that they were to roast the lamb and then begin eating it at twilight, uh unleavened bread, bitter herbs would have been used in that uh meal.

And there are several passages that deal with the Lord's supper or the Passover since uh the Lord's supper was instituted in the context of the Passover observance I want you to note that in Luke chapter 22 and we're gonna look at Matthew 26 10003st, I think just to make an observation about a detail in Mark, uh excuse me in Matthew account verse 29 of chapter 26 Jesus said, I tell you, I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine.

He says, until that day when I drink it new with you in my father's kingdom.

Mark's account uses the same language again of the fruit of the vine.

He says, but then Luke's account uses the same language in verse 18.

For I tell you that from now on, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the Kingdom of God comes.

So all three of the synoptics use the same language to describe the cup.

It's the fruit of the vine.

I want you to note that in Luke's account if you notice um in verse 210, Jesus took a cup and when he had given thanks, he said, take this and divide it among yourselves for, I tell you that from now on, I will not drink the fruit of the vine until the Kingdom of God comes and he took bread.

And when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying this is my body which is given for you, do this in remembrance of me.

So Jesus had taken a cup of fruit of the vine.

That was being used in the institution of the Passover, not the institution, but the, the observance of the Passover, which in the Volve usually four different cups of wine.

As we note a little bit later on.

And then he took the bread that was being used for the commemoration of the paso and sad that said, this is my body.

Then in verse 214 likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying this cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.

And so Jesus talks about this cup that he uses, whether it's the cup that he uses actually to institute the Lord's Supper or whether it was one of the cups that was used in the context of the Passover.

It's referred to as the fruit of the vine by Jesus in First Corinthians the 210th chapter.

It just talks about the cub.

It doesn't describe it as the fruit of the vine.

So the question, was this cup?

Was it fermented grape juice or unfermented?

Was it what most people would call wine?

Well, one of the things we need to understand is that wine, the word that is typically translated wine in the New Testament Oeno is a word that can refer either to fermented grape juice or for that matter, it can refer to unfermented grape juice.

Well, how would you know?

Well, context will tell you uh in many cases, for instance, in Luke the fifth chapter in verse 212 Jesus said, and no one puts new wine into old wine skins.

If he does, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled and the skins will be destroyed.

Old wine skins made of animal parts would not have the capability to expand which they would need to do as grape juice that has been poured into them.

New wine begins to ferment from the yeast that is in the grape juice and the gasses need a room, need place volume to expand.

You're gonna split those old wine skins if you put the new wine in there.

Now, Jesus is not giving a lesson on the keeping of wine.

He has another purpose in all of that.

But for our consideration, just simply note that the wine here is wine.

That's fermenting.

That's the point of the illustration that Jesus uses on that occasion.

So wine can refer to fermented grape juice.

In fact, in Ephesians 27, that seems pretty clear and do not be drunk with wine.

You don't get drunk on grape juice, but you can on alcoholic uh beverages for that's debauchery, but be filled with the spirit wine.

There very clearly is used to talk about fermented grape juice.

Now, when we go to the Old Testament, I understand we're now dealing with a different language.

But I want you to see also that the word wine in the Old Testament doesn't necessarily mean grape juice that's fermented in Isaiah chapter 22023 and verse eight, the prophet says, on behalf of the Lord as the new wine is found in the cluster.

So even the juice that is in the cluster of grapes is described as new wine.

Well, it's obviously not fermented.

So the word wine is defined as fermented or unfermented based on the context because it can refer to either uh condition of grape juice.

Well, let's take a little bit different tact.

What do we know about the Passover?

Well, if we go back to the original institution of the Passover on the very night that Israel will be leaving Egypt.

We find that uh instructions had been given for how they were to observe this Passover during the final plague brought against Egypt.

The death of the first born this day shall be for you.

A memorial day, Moses recorded and you shall keep it as a feast to the Lord throughout your generations as a statute forever.

You shall keep it as a feast.

Seven days.

You shall eat unleavened bread.

There's the first indication on the first day, you shall remove leave out of your houses for if anyone eats what is leaven from the first day until the seventh day, that person shall be cut off from Israel.

Now, it's also stated in the context of Israel's departure from Egypt that there wasn't time for their dough to be leave and one might suggest or conclude that the reason that there was no leaven in the bread was just because of the need to leave Egypt rapidly.

But that doesn't really explain why subsequent observances of the Passover needed to be unleavened bread and not leaven bread.

Because in the next uh observance of the Passover which would take place at Mount Sinai, the people weren't in a hurry to leave, they weren't leaving Egypt anymore.

They were settled there at least for a little bit at Mount Sinai.

So why the prohibition against le during the Passover feast and then the subsequent seven days that sometimes is referred to as the feast of unleavened bread.

I conclude that unleavened bread has some spiritual or symbolic significance.

It wasn't just a coincidence that they didn't have leaven or that they didn't have dough that had been leavened.

There wasn't time for that.

I think there's a bigger issue here at stake.

Um Luke chapter 10003 and verse one says now the feast of unleavened bread drew near which is called the Passover.

So the Passover was actually the beginning of this feast that would then last several days.

And during that entire period of time, a week or so, then they were not to have Levin in their houses.

Levin was to be removed from the house before the Passover lamb was killed. Levin.

Of course, as we uh I think all probably recognize is a fermentation agent agent.

We use leaven uh yeast in dough to cause it to rise to gain volume.

And what's happening is there's a fermentation process that's going on in that dough that makes it larger in quantity or at least in volume I should say.

And uh then it's leavened in First Corinthians.

The fifth chapter, Jesus uh Paul makes a point about Jesus being our Passover lamb and the necessity to have already removed Levin from the house.

He's going back to Exodus 21000 and he's talking about the original institution of the Passover.

Your boasting is not good.

He writes to the Corinthians.

Do you not know that a little Levin Levins the whole lump cleanse out the old leave that you may be a new lump as you really are unleavened for Christ, our Passover lamb has been sacrificed.

Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

So his argument simply is according to the Old Testament.

By the time the Passover lamb is sacrificed, they were to have removed all the leaven from their houses.

Well, Jesus is our Passover lamb.

Paul is not suggesting that we should observe the Passover or that the Corinthians were doing that.

But he's making the observation that once the Passover lamb has been killed, Levin should already be removed in the case here, they needed to remove the leaven.

The Passover lamb had already been sacrificed.

Now, what does that have to do dough leavened or not.

With the question that we're talking about.

Well, yeast or leaven is what causes grape juice to turn into fermented wine.

Leaven is used in different ways to symbolize different things in the scriptures.

For instance, in Matthew 218 and verse 210 Jesus told a parable, here's the parable.

The kingdom of Heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour till it was all leaven.

I think Jesus is making reference to the influencing power of leaven.

You put a little leaven in dough and it works its way.

The fermentation works its way through the dough and it influences the entire lump of dough.

That's what Jesus said.

And so the expansion of the Kingdom of Heaven is compared to the effect of Leaven in.

Do we already looked at first Corinthians five verses six through eight where Paul says, don't you understand a little le le is the whole lump.

Of course, he's talking now about sin, how sin can influence its influence can spread through a congregation if in fact, it's not dealt with in the way that God intends.

Well, you know, it's interesting that the modern day Jewish cedar meal peso is the word for Passover.

And the meal is described as a cedar meal uh meal.

And if you look at the picture there, you notice there are four cups of wine and each cup was intended to symbolize some portion of God's promise to Israel.

And you can see the meat there, the lamb and then some bitter herbs and then off to the right.

And in the middle, upper part of the picture, you see the unleavened bread.

So that's what a meal, a cedar meal would look like.

But the question is, what do Jews today understand about the wine or the cup that would be used to celebrate the Passover?

Because after all, that's what we're talking about in Mark the 14th chapter, we're talking about Jesus and his disciples celebrating the Passover.

There's no reason to believe that they used anything other than what was available for the Passover in the institution of the Lord's Supper.

Well, um the fact of the matter is do a little research and Jews who celebrate the Passover today, either grape juice or alcoholic wine.

Kosher wine is used in the celebration of the cedars.

Some yeasts are allowed in Kosher wine.

I want to read you something I found kind of interesting uh as I did a little bit of research on this.

Um and you'll find a lot of different uh kinds of information about this, not everybody is consistent in their discussion of it.

But here, here's uh the comments of one article that deals with the question of Kosher wine for Passover.

Kosher wine is a great wine that is produced according to Judaism's religious and dietary laws.

In order for a wine to be kosher.

It must be created under a rabbi's immediate supervision.

With only Sabbath, observant Jewish males touching the grapes from the crushing phase through the bottling.

So I guess either Jewish males who aren't observing the Sabbath or women can pick the grapes.

But when you get to the crushing say stage, it's only those males Jewish males who are observing the Sabbath sounds a little bit like the Pharisees.

So it continues, uh while all wines require some sort of mold or yeast for fermentation.

Kosher for Passover wine must be made from a mold that has not been been grown on bread such as sugar or fruit and must exclude several common preservatives like potassium sorbet.

A wine that is Kosher for Passover cannot include comets which includes grain bread and dough.

The most Kosher wine that is uh marketed and sold commercially has a seal of approval called and I don't know how to pronounce that word.

This typically comes from a Kosher certification agency.

So if you're a Jew and you're wanting to celebrate the Passover, you can go and you can find wine that is uh certified to be Kosher, meaning that it has been prepared according to Judaism's dietary laws.

So basically what we're saying and I'll share another quotation with you is that Jews believe at least some that you can use fermented grape juice in the institution of the Lord's Supper.

Many beers, bourbons and gins are typically considered kosher however, because they are made from fermented grains, a different kind of mold, they are a no go during the week of Passover.

Wine is commonly served at Passover celebrations just as long as it is made by a Kosher winery.

In other words, that has to be fermented by a particular kind of mold.

Well, what does that have to do with our question?

Well, let me suggest to you that as I indicated before, I don't think the requirement of using unleavened bread in the institution of the feast and also its observance later on.

I don't think the fact that they had to remove all leave from their houses before they could celebrate the Passover before they could kill the Passover lamb and then celebrate the cedar meal.

I don't think that's coincidental.

I think there's symbolism there, especially since Levin often represents sinful influence.

And what we know about our Passover lamb is that he was without sin, no 11 in his life, he was tempted like we all are tempted, but without sin.

The Hebrew writer says in chapter four.

And so I think the idea of celebrating the Lord's supper with unleavened bread.

It's not just a coincidence.

Oh, that's what they had at the Passover.

And so Jesus just used whatever that I think the fact that it was unleavened, the Passover was significant because the Passover was a shadow of the Lord's supper.

The Lord's supper is the fulfillment of this observance this memorial supper.

And so here's my answer to the question.

The fact that Levin was to be removed from the house before the Passover lamb was killed.

And the Passover to be observed with unleavened bread causes me to think that the original Lord's supper was not observed with fermented grape juice.

Wine is great juice that has leaven that has been fermented.

The bread wasn't to be fermented.

What makes us think that it would be acceptable for the cup to be fermented?

I would suggest that wasn't God's intention in light of the association of leaven with sin and the sinless of Jesus Christ.

I don't think it's coincidental that Passover was celebrated with unleavened bread.

Although fruit of the vine could conceivably be used to mean fermented wine.

I personally find it interesting and suggestive that every gospel account uses the phrase fruit of the vine rather than wine.

Isn't that interesting?

Because the word wine is used quite frequently in the New Testament, but fruit is a different word.

Fruit of divine is a different idea.

And I wonder if we weren't being told something.

So that's my answer to the question.

And I want to move on to the second question and this question I didn't really receive specifically the language of it.

So I've kind of summarized the question that I received.

What should be the Christians reaction to current regional military conflicts.

We're all aware that there are numerous armed conflicts going on in the world, even some that we don't hardly hear about in the United States because of the fact that they are in another part of the world.

But there are two wars that are going on right now that are getting a lot of press.

Obviously, the Russian Ukrainian war and the conflict between Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah now and Iran it seems is also involved now.

And as I said earlier, our country is divided over what the role of the United States should be in these conflicts.

Some people say, no, we don't need to be sending money there or expending our assets for these conflicts where we don't have any kind of national interest.

Others are saying we have a national interest and we need to defend freedom for whoever Israel of course, has been a long standing ally of the United States and it's not just our country that's probably divided.

I suspect that as individuals, we probably have some mixed feelings about these conflicts.

For instance, on the one hand, I think we all would pray for peace.

That was Paul's instruction to Timothy and first Timothy two, it's on screen verses one through three.

First of all, he writes, then I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions and thanksgivings be made for all people for kings and all who are in high positions.

And here's the purpose for this.

Here's what's in mind that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life.

Godly and dignified in every way.

This is good and it is pleasing in the sight of God, our savior.

What I understand from the passage is that Paul is writing to Timothy and saying, pray for peace because in peace, we're going to have a quiet, peaceful lives, Godly and dignified in every way.

Conflict frequently makes it more difficult for the gospel to be preached, to be distributed in areas where conflict is going on.

That's certainly true in the con in the areas where conflicts are going on now.

And we know that war generally doesn't bring out the best in people.

I don't know how much you've read about some of these things.

But uh in both conflicts that I've mentioned, there have been horrific barbarous acts that had been, had taken place by combatants.

In fact, that's really what initiated the conflict between Israel and Hamas and some of the reports that people are denying that the evidence is there video evidence in some cases and certainly eyewitness testimony, those fighters who came out of Gaza treated many Jews in a terrible way and then they took a bunch of hostages back, some of whom they've killed.

I've seen reports of some of the things that have been done in the Russian Ukrainian War.

I hasten to point out that the information that we frequently receive about anything that's going on in another part of the world has often been manipulated or massaged by mainstream media.

In fact, I would recommend to you that if you listen to mainstream media for your information about the world, you may want to broaden your sources a little bit.

The same thing is true of those who can find their information from one source in particular.

It's very easy for us to be deceived or at least misled by those kinds of sources.

So, on the one hand, we really want peace and we're told to pray for peace.

But then on the other hand, it would seem that both Ukraine and Israel are defending themselves against armed aggression, armed aggression from enemies.

Israel didn't invade Gazan October 7th 2023 Hamas invaded Israel and Ukraine didn't initially invade Russia. Russia.

Actually, that war started in 2014.

You're probably aware of that when Crimea and certain portions oblast in the southern part of Ukraine were basically just annexed by Russia against the will of the Ukrainian government.

But in both cases, one nation or one people invaded the other.

And so that involves now the defense against armed aggression.

Paul's comments in Romans 13 suggest to me that a nation has a right to defend itself.

He talks about the government not bearing the sword in vain.

And I understand that in Romans 183, we're talking about individuals in particular and how we should obey government, the ruling authorities because they're instituted by God that is government in general.

And we understand the purpose of government as it is described in Romans 13.

But I would extrapolate from Romans 13 and say, I think nations have a right not only to uh to create and preserve order in, in countries and territories, which seems to be part of the problem part of the issue in Romans 13.

But I think they have a right to defend themselves against aggression by other nations.

Now, we may view Russia and Hamas and Hezbollah as being bad actors with Ukraine and Israel being in the right.

And that may very well be correct.

Again, I would caution us to, to, to remember that sometimes we're manipulated by not just how information is presented, but what information is presented.

Sometimes we don't hear about the whole situation.

So it's a little hard sometimes to draw or make judgments about situations like that.

I think we need to remember that.

And I would also suggest to you that there's usually not a single cause for armed conflict.

In fact, any conflict that takes place typically has a history of things that have gone on in the past.

And so when we try to think of a conflict as being, you know, this happened and this happened and that's why the co it may be much broader than that and usually is.

But with all of that in mind, let me make three observations quickly about these kinds of conflicts.

This isn't going to be any mind shattering new material.

But there are things that I think we need to remember and take into account.

And the first one is there's consequences to actions.

In fact, I think that's a fundamental truth that we need to accept, that parents need to teach their Children, Children need to accept.

There are consequences to actions.

Hamas has worked very hard to elicit support, sympathy from the international community.

Israel is viewed as the bad actor according to Hamas and has been accused by others in the world of genocide.

They're trying to wipe out the Pales, Palestinians and that they're guilty of wanton disregard for civilians.

Well, Hamas uses civilians as human shields and then points the finger at Israel when civilians are killed.

It's my understanding and again, please understand we all need to evaluate our sources of information, but it's my understanding that Israel has often gone the second mile to ensure that civilian casualties are kept to a minimum.

I don't know how many nations will drop leaflets, warning people that there's a strike coming so they can get out of the way.

It almost seems kind of contrary to the whole point of the thing, but it is an effort to try to avoid killing people who are not directly involved in the conflict.

But the problem is it can be difficult to distinguish between Hamas fighters and Palestinian civilians.

Hamas doesn't use uniforms and so fighters fade back into the civilian population and then when people are killed they're identified as civilians because they're not wearing uniforms.

But my point is there's consequences to actions.

You invade a country and you do some of the horrible things that Hamas fighters did to, uh, innocent and helpless Israelis.

I'm not even going to talk about them.

There are young Children here.

They don't need to hear those kinds of things.

But when you do do those kind of things, there are consequences and that's a, a biblical principle we're told over and over again in the scriptures that we're going to be held accountable for the things that we do in the body.

Is that not true?

Second Corinthians, the fifth chapter verse 10, I've used it often enough.

Everybody can quote it.

Probably we're gonna all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

And we're gonna give account for the things that have been done in the body, whether good or evil, we're all gonna stand before God and give account of ourselves.

Romans 14 and verse 10 through 12 says actions have consequences and we shouldn't be surprised when there are consequences that occur because of actions that have been taken.

Now, there are other things involved, but it seems clear to me that the Israeli invasion of Gaza was prompted by the actions of Hamas on October 7th 2023.

I think that's something we need to think about what happened when terrorists flew airliners into the twin towers of the World Trade Center.

Well, a lot of people were killed, not just people in the towers, but also those who went to try to help those in the towers as the towers then collapsed and killed many of the first responders.

What did the United States do?

Well, we ended up finding a war.

Eventually we responded to the actions that had been taken.

And it's interesting that we didn't have somebody invading our country and then taking hostages.

It was an act of terrorism.

I wonder what the United States would do.

The government, our government would do if one of the cartels in Mexico just decided to come across the border.

And this may not be totally hypothetical, came across the border and they killed a bunch of people in some of the same ways that Hamas did Israelis and then took a bunch of Texans or Arizonians or New Mexican people and took them back into Mexico as hostages with the United States say, well, we, we're not going to do anything about that.

Brothers and sisters.

I'm afraid we'd be bombing Mexico City the next day.

And I think we need to remember when we are critical of those nations that defend themselves or try to eliminate dangers, which I think what is, what Israel is trying to do?

You need to remember that actions have consequences.

And the second observation I would make is that sometimes others suffer the consequences of our actions.

And that's true.

Not just of us obviously, but of people in general, what I do in this world affects other people, not just Debbie, not just my family, not just you because we're intertwined.

We're not islands to ourselves and sometimes innocent people suffer because of the sins of others.

Children sometimes suffer because of the sinful actions of their parents.

And someone says, well, that's unfair.

It's unjust, it is a reality.

The fact of the matter is suffering is not always an indication of guilt.

Sometimes people suffer for reasons that have nothing to do with personal guilt.

They just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

And we understand this, the father or the mother that drinks or does drugs, Children are gonna suffer.

We sometimes suffer because of the actions of strangers, actions that may be sinful or may just simply be unwise but others suffer the consequences of our actions, the actions of bad actors also in this world.

So says, well, it's, it's unfair that civilians are being killed in these conflicts.

And I think that's exactly right.

It's not fair and it's not a matter of justice, although we're gonna talk about justice in just a moment.

But the fact of the matter is there's going to be people who are going to suffer in a conflict as broad as the ones that we've used as examples.

And then third, it's a good thing, Clark that you only need two songs.

We may make it, it's easy to take pleasure in the punishment of evil people, not just in a broad conflict like the ones I've described, but even in the execution of criminals who frankly aren't suffering justice, the, the consequence of justice, they're put to death for certain crimes.

It's easy to take pleasure in the justice that's meted out by these nations that we perceive to be in the right.

But we need to understand or remember the big picture.

You know, we sometimes talk about wars that are just, but war is rarely a good way to accomplish justice.

And the individual combatant soldiers who are participating in that war in the battles.

They often do not share the rationale of their government nor even responsibility for their government's actions.

They are essentially, I, I hate using this word but they're essentially pawns of a government who will send them to fight for something.

Maybe they don't even believe in and certainly not responsible for the initial cause of conflict.

I have been reading as I suspect many of you have also that in the Russian Ukrainian war, the Russians sometimes are losing 1000 soldiers in a day or a week.

And we can just read that so many reports come across the news, 1000 soldiers died today in some offensive and because they were perhaps poorly trained or poorly equipped, they were just mowed down, they were killed and it's easy to think about casualties of warfare.

A as just numbers and whoever can get the largest numbers on the other side comes out the winner.

Those are people, the casualties, those are people with souls, those are people whose lives are being cut off short.

There are people who are going to meet their maker as a result of this conflict and many of them I feel confident are unprepared to do so.

Now I understand if there wasn't a conflict there, I don't know how many of those people would respond to the Gospel or even would seek out uh truth or God or would be willing to obey Him if they heard the Gospel.

But I know this once they die, that's it.

There is no more opportunity.

There's no joy in that ought not to be any joy in that, even in situations where we perceive that one nation is justly punishing another nation for an infraction of some sort, the people who are dying, they don't have any more opportunities to obey the Gospel.

It's interesting to me that Ezekiel is writing as a prophet with the exiles in Babylon.

God has sent those people to Babylon as punishment for the nation's idolatry.

But in Ezekiel 18 God pleads with people to repent, to turn.

He says, have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, the death of the wicked God says, I don't take any pleasure in that and not rather that he should turn from his way and live.

I understand the reality of the world.

I understand what's going on.

I know that there are things that you and I as individuals can't change, we can't stop.

But our attitude toward what's happening in these places are also to reflect the fact that there's a bigger picture and it is that we're all going to stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

And many of these people, their lives are being cut off unnecessarily because of warfare.

People killed in a conflict are not just numbers.

There are people who are going to meet their maker in judgment.

Wars come and go.

Nations come and go.

But our circumstances after death are immutable.

Once we die, there's no changing our situation, no second chance.

So here's my answer.

Although some warring parties may seem to us to be on the side of justice.

War is rarely an effective way of accomplishing justice.

As long as they're evil men in power, they are gonna be wars and that's gonna bring suffering to innocent people.

That's, it's unavoidable.

It seems even as we recognize the need for nations to defend themselves.

And I think they do have that right.

We need to pray for peace, that men and women will have the opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel.

The question was what should be our attitude toward these kinds of conflicts?

No joy in the death of hundreds of thousands of people.

And we could look back at other wars and multiply those numbers into the millions.

No joy in the fact that people are going to be lost eternally, not because they were killed in warfare, but they didn't have another opportunity, didn't have additional opportunities to obey the gospel.

You ever known somebody who obeyed the gospel late in life?

What if they'd been cut off?

Their lives had been cut off earlier in the 10th plague that was visited on Egypt?

You remember that the first born of every household was going to die unless of course blood from the Passover lamb that had been sacrificed was applied to the lentil and the door posts on the side.

You remember, and that blood preserved the life of the firstborn from death.

God gave the Israelites instructions.

This is what you do in order not to die.

The first born not to die.

Jesus Paul said is our Passover lamb sacrifice so that we could be preserved from physical or excuse me, spiritual death, physical death was the Passover.

But we're being preserved from spiritual death by the application of the blood, the blood that Jesus shed on the cross, that cleansing blood that has to be applied and it's applied.

When we respond to the Gospel, God's invitation for grace.

In the act of baptism, we're baptized into the death of Jesus Christ.

And I believe it's at that point when we're baptized for the remission, the forgiveness of our sins, that, that blood is then figuratively applied to us and we are preserved from spiritual death, forgiven of our sins as we continue to walk after Jesus to listen to the voice of the shepherd.

If you need to do that this evening, if you need to respond to the invitation of the gospel, in any way, we encourage you to do that.

Now, while you have the opportunity as we stand and sing, to encourage you.