A brutally poor use of the Bible

I recently read a blog post made by an ordained minister (to keep your mind on topic, I'm not going to mention the name/gender/denomination of the minister) which cited the Biblical reference of Galatians 5:22-23 in a way that was one of the most ridiculously eisegetical misuses of Scripture I have ever read.  The Word of God cannot mean whatever we want it to mean, it cannot be divorced from its original settings, the intent of the author (in this case Paul and God), nor the understanding of the Church as a whole concerning the text throughout history.  If all of these safeguards are ignored, if proper exegesis is not done, you get the type of nonsense I read online.  Let me share the text of Galatians 5:22-23 and then explain what this minister said about it.

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.  Against such things there is no law."

I'm also not going to share what particular issue this verse was cited in connection with, because it would also change most people's focus from the text itself to that hot-button issue.  In a nutshell, the minister cited this verse and then declared that something that the Bible in a variety of places calls a sin can no longer be considered a sin because some of those who commit this sin also (in the minister's opinion) display the fruit of the Spirit.  In other words, if the virtues listed by Paul are present in a person's life, whatever behavior that person is also doing, no matter what the Bible says specifically about such behavior, can no longer be judged as sinful and must therefore not only be accepted as legitimate but championed as good, beautiful, and pure.

Do you think that Paul wrote those words in order to destroy the Law of Moses?  Did Paul intend to eliminate the very idea that there are behavior which God has forbidden to not only humanity in general but his people in particular?  How could anyone possibly read these verses, in their context, and come up with such a conclusion?  To abuse Galatians 5:22-23 in this way is a crime against the Word of God, it is having a particular conclusion in mind and searching for a passage of Scripture to back up what you already want to believe.

The very words written by Paul both before and after vs. 22-23 utterly refute the contention that 5:22-23 negate the idea of behavior being sinful, In verse 19-21 Paul wrote, "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity, and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like.  I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God."  Following vs. 22-23, Paul continued, "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires." (vs. 24) The essence of the fruit of the Spirit is not only the presence of virtue, but the absence of vice.  We cannot possibly be living according to the Spirit of God, walking in his will, if we at the same time are indulging in sinful behavior.  And yes, the behavior that this minister was declaring to be good and pure, instead of immoral, is part of the list in vs. 19-21.  Nowhere in the Bible is this idea taught, nowhere does God give man the authority to define right and wrong.

If a thief displays the fruit of the Spirit, should we ignore the fact that he continues to steal?  If a liar displays the fruit of the Spirit, should we ignore the fact that she continues to bear false witness?  If adulterers display the fruit of the Spirit, should we ignore the fact that they are dishonoring their marriage?  The presence of virtue does not negate the presence of vice.  The implications of such an awful interpretation of Scripture are laughably absurd, yet this is the type of thing that people are willing to do to Scripture, bending and twisting, pulling and shoving, to try to make it fit what they want to believe.

Every lay person in the Church should know better, an ordained minister should be ashamed of such behavior.  The Bible is not a tool to suit or fancy, it is the Word of God, it deserves far more respect than that.