Spirit Fruit

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. Galatians 5:22,23 ESV

The fruit of the Spirit is singular, and yet it produces all these different effects in the believer. That tells me this fruit is all encompassing, covering all the positive characteristics of the Godhead that we require to have a completely fulfilled life which will make it obvious to the unbeliever that we spend time with Jesus and want to be more like Him.

First up is ‘love’. Can you think of a better place to start? Paul’s writings are inspired, and he made no mistake in putting ‘love’ at the front of the list. It has often been said that all the others depend on love to make them work best. Since we are told that God IS love, it follows that the other parts of the fruit will flow from a heart of Christlike love.

Can you imagine the kind of world we would occupy if everyone lived with a heart full of the fruit of the Spirit? Let me go one step further. What if all the Christians in the worldwide church lived to these standards? We are told by Jesus in Luke 10:27 “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbour as yourself.” I suggest with that command in our hearts, we will be well equipped to make good headway with the fruit of the Spirit. The notes in my Bible say it this way: “A person who exhibits the fruit of the Spirit fulfils the law far better than a person who observes the rituals but has little love in his or her heart.”

Paul ends this verse with the reminder that there is no law which can stand against these characteristics. We are not law breakers, we are God’s law keepers, and heaven seekers. The bar may have been set high for us to reach as Christians, but it is worth it as we keep our heavenly goal in our sights.

The Coin

Every coin has two sides, and Jesus recognised this when he taught his disciples the full message of His Father’s love and judgement. Each is a side of the same coin, and just as no coin has only one side, love and judgement go together and are needed to complete the whole truth.

In the past, some evangelical preachers were seen solely as ‘hell fire’ messengers as if that was the only message of the gospel. I think we have moved on from that, but perhaps we have replaced it with something just as incomplete. The message that Jesus loves everyone, irrespective of their actions, and if we just love the sinner fully and completely, that will be enough to see them enter the gates of heaven. I think we need to be careful that we don’t preach or teach a ‘one sided’ Gospel.

Scripture is full of warnings to sinners of remaining in their sins, and not turning from their sinful ways. The words are old fashioned, but they remain necessary. Words and phrases like, ‘confession of sin’, ‘repentance’, ‘born again’, and ‘saved’. Again, we need to be careful to preach and speak the whole counsel of God.

Teaching the message of love, without pointing out the consequences and dangers of remaining in sin, is incomplete, and only part of the full Gospel of Jesus Christ. God accepts us in His love just as we are, warts and all, but that same love doesn’t allow Him to leave us the way he found us! Now that is amazing grace. Paul puts it this way:

Sin is no longer your master, for you no longer live under the requirements of the law. Instead, you live under the freedom of God’s grace. Well then, since God’s grace has set us free from the law, does that mean we can go on sinning? Of course not! Don’t you realize that you become the slave of whatever you choose to obey? You can be a slave to sin, which leads to death, or you can choose to obey God, which leads to righteous living. Romans 6:14-16 NLT

The Camel

“A camel is a horse, designed by committee” so the old saying goes.

The past week in the UK has seen some groundbreaking changes and decisions made by committee. If you live outwith Scotland/UK, I will try to help you understand. Those who live in our country, need no explanation.

Two important, but very separate and different committees convened on 20/21 May to discuss and decide on the same general issue which has plagued our church and nation over the past few years. In both cases the horse went in and came out as a camel. Let me explain.

The UK government of elected representatives met over two days to decide if the institution of marriage which up until now has meant the union of a man and a woman only, can be redefined to include any combination of man/woman. All in the name of equality, or at least one definition of equality. In their ‘wisdom’ they decided by a large majority to change marriage as soon as possible and redefine it. A camel emerged. Of course the UK is not alone, at the last count many other European countries have done the same, as have some US States.

At the same time as the UK government were discussing, debating and voting, so too was the national Church of Scotland. They convened their annual General Assembly to decide if a homosexual man or woman can be accepted as a minister in a church which calls them, and that was carried. At the same time, they say they hold to the Biblical truth that marriage should be between a man and a woman only. It should be remembered that this church already had a number of homosexual ministers in churches around the country. I have to confess that I feel for members of the church who, in good conscience, stayed with the church as it deliberated over the past few years while the committee sat. Another camel emerged.

There is a groundswell of change happening very quickly, and before our eyes. If you happen to be in the minority of any significant faith group (Jewish, Muslim or Christian) your views have been listened to politely (but ignored) while the views of a minority have succeeded. This is democracy at work I suppose. The only thing that might give us hope is that when these same significant faith groups become a minority themselves, and they will, maybe then the governments and churches will take notice of their own people and do the right thing. In the meantime, if we ever needed it, we who live in the UK are confirmed as not only secular humanist, but with no moral compass, and God-less. I wonder how many more committees will make camels from horses in the future?

Save Dale Farm?

As a Christian, and wanting to believe and do the right thing, I am flummoxed by the eviction of travellers who have been living illegally for many years, at Dale farm, Basildon, Essex. The cry going up is, “Save Dale Farm”, but save it from what? Eviction is the first and obvious answer, but what is behind it?

Should the families of Dale Farm be exempt from the law? No. Should the residents be able to change the law? Maybe, but this has been tried in the highest court in the land, and failed. Should the residents be offered another place to set up camp? Yes, that has been done, to a site just a few hundred yards down the road. Should the council offer a house to live in, instead of a caravan, for the young families? Yes, and that offer has also been refused.

So, it is plain to see that the residents are in the wrong, on all counts. The local council has to be congratulated in their patience, and offers of help. After all, this has taken 10 years of patient negotiation and legal process, to get to this stage. The eviction did not come out of the blue, even though you could be forgiven for thinking this, by all the media attention given. The police are also doing a difficult job in an almost impossible situation. It’s not their fault!

Back to the question, “why?” My own feeling is that the travellers want to make a point, and are prepared to do what they can, and to go down fighting, literally! Think about this. If a group of squatters took over your home, and it took 10 years for the law to be applied, what would you think? Meanwhile, other neighbours and ‘friends’ join the party in your home. What if your home was not looked after, or kept in good repair? Would you be happy as you waited for the courts to decide to evict the squatters? I know I would not! Both Jesus and the Apostle Paul make it clear that we should obey the government, and give to it as required. It is worth remembered that Jesus and Paul lived in and through Roman occupation, and yet the principle of civil obedience is given as our example.
Based on all of this, I believe the travelling community are in the wrong, have had long enough to reconsider, and should be moved on. The use of force has been made necessary by the actions of the travellers themselves. To put it in plain speak, they only have themselves to blame!

Information or Transformation

Subtitled: Law or Grace?

Gal 1v14 - “I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers.”

Philippians 3:9 - “...and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.”

I can remember the 'older, glory days' of the church. Pews were filled, singing would have inspired you, prayers were powerful, and the body of Christ in the church was united in the great commission of reaching out to the world. Great days, and impossible to forget. These days helped form my convictions and gave me a strong feeling of right and wrong. All parts and all ages within the church were growing, and healthy. That made it a secure environment to learn and grow individually. Having said all that, I and many others like me are victims of our early church life. How can that be, I hear you ask?

The years after WW2 were full of church growth, true, but something else grew, and that was the 'law'. To be more descriptive, it would be the rules, some written but some unwritten, but all were expected to be obeyed. Do you remember being allowed to have a Sunday walk, but not allowed to play with friends? Not doing school homework on Sunday? Not taking the bus on the Lord's day, so walking to church? No mixed bathing/swimming? No TV, and therefore no cinema, because it supported an immoral industry? A dress code to promote modesty, but resulted in the 'frumpy' look for the ladies? Ladies did not wear trousers! The list could go on.

The youth of that day, had a tough time when change came along. Somehow, the bad habits we had been warned against, became the norm. How many good Christians do you know who go for a walk on Sunday, or any of the other things listed earlier? I would reckon all of the things listed, are being done today and no one bats an eyelid. Look at the two verses above again. The same person, Paul, describes how he lived by the laws, but that was BEFORE he was changed by faith. The change which transformed his life, and gave us most of the New Testament, was brought about by a personal encounter with Jesus, and the faith which followed. It had NOTHING to do with the rules he followed religiously.

Question: How many Christians do you know who came to sound faith in Christ because of the 'rules' they obeyed? I know what my answer is!

Assisted Suicide Scottish Parliament Bill Debate

The topic of assisted suicide is an emotive one, and any decision should not be taken lightly, or on the wishes of a very vocal minority group. This Bill has a champion in Margo McDonald MSP, herself a Parkinsons Disease sufferer, so it already has a well educated, experienced spokesperson. She does a magnificent job in putting her own, and others who feel like her, opinions across. Margo is the best argument that particular lobby has, and without her the subject would have stumbled and faltered long ago. 


However, and it is a big however, this subject has to be bigger than one person, and not only that, it should be bigger than any single, though very vocal, minority. There is another, strong view that goes in the opposite direction. Somehow, I believe this view to be in the majority of thinking. I believe Assisted Suicide is a bad Bill, and would be a bad law, for the following reasons.


1. There are some people who want the right to end their lives at the point of their choosing. Not now, but at some time in the future. All of these people have serious health problems, which cannot be minimised. We didn't choose the time of our entry into this world, should we have the right to choose the time of our departure? Not everyone believes in God, but I do, and if there IS a God, should we not at least give Him some thought?


2. If we give the right to end life as chosen by law, and by that vocal minority, what does that say to our other ill, or diseased elderly people who could then feel unwanted, or a burden on family or society? Anyone who has been around an ill elderly person, would have come across the words, 'but I don't want to be a burden'! Does that mean they want to bring forward the time of their death? Absolutely not! BUT, they might feel it is something they should be thinking about, due to unspoken pressure. If a law is passed to allow assisted suicide, it will be in older folks thinking, even if we do not speak it out loud. Do we want to unsettle our already frail elders?


3. This bill, and this debate is being conducted by people who want someone else to step in, on their behalf, when they can no longer commit suicide by their own hand. There is an underlying, but very obvious almost unspoken element to this. People (yes who have serious illnesses) want to put the onus and responsibility on another to kill them. It isn't a government who would do this, it would be a person whether they knew it or not. This then becomes not assisted suicide, but assisted murder, because it is premeditated (by the victim!). 


4. If we take step 3 a stage further in our thinking, why do the people who advocate this type of 'mercy killing' (killing is a better word than suicide) not do it themselves, while they can? This sounds cruel and unfeeling, but what is really being proposed, is the act of suicide being changed into an act of murder, by person or persons unknown. If we really think we want to end our own lives, while we have the ability, why put that awful responsibility on someone else? Why not do it yourself while you can? Suicide is not illegal, but murder is!


5. What kind of pressure are we putting our young up and coming student doctors, under? They take a 'hypocratic oath' to help save life, and in fact the opening words contain the statement, 'first do no harm'. How does that square with the training of our doctors in the NHS? At this point we can get into the argument of the practice of 'withholding treatment' to allow a dying patient to pass away peacefully. This passive kind of treatment and choice should never be confused with the active decision of doing something, not in the attitude of 'doing no harm' but totally against that commitment. All doctors, do not believe in God, but they ALL take the hypocratic oath.


6. What kind of NHS do we end up with? That depends entirely on the success or otherwise of the 'assisted suicide' bill.


Yes, as I said at the start, this is an emotive issue, and you now know where I stand. If you feel differently, or if you agree, I would urge you to tell your MSP. At least then, they will know what the real people think, not just a few who make their voices heard in the debating chamber. Oh by the way, I speak from the experience of losing both parents and a wife to diseases which would qualify for assisted suicide under this proposed bill, so I know what I am saying. The biggest difference in my experience is that at no time did any one who was suffering say the words, 'I'ts about me' or 'I want', or acted in a selfish way, which you would think would be their right. When I listen to the debates, I often hear words like, 'this is my right', or 'my basic human right' or 'I want'. There is a great big difference between the base attitude of the very vocal minority, and the selfless, silent majority, and how good it is to be with them, and share their LIFE. All of it!!