Good morning everyone and welcome to this Thursday's mentoring hour, today's Thursday August 12th. I have also just turned on the recording so we could record this session, the interactions we have and also make it available to people who would view it at other times, whether on Google Classroom or in the e-learning portal. So good morning everyone, welcome again and we'll just get started with a word of prayer. You can request somebody just to please just lead us in a prayer and commit ourselves to the Lord as we talk and discuss. Prabhakar, would you please like to pray? Sure, fast. Do you have any Father, we praise you. We glorify your holy name, we come to your throne of praise. Father, we are very grateful to you for this wonderful opportunity, for this mentoring session today. Lord, lead us in your holy grace. Lord, give us the wisdom to understand your holy verses and whatever the questions has been asked and the answers has been delivered. Lord, be with us and let us understand the proximity of it and let us understand what you have in build for us. Lord, lead us and bless each and everyone with your heavenly grace and wisdom and knowledge and Lord, thank you for everything and I dedicate everyone to your throne of praise and I ask this prayer in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. Thank you. Amen. Thank you Prabhakar. All right, so we will get started. It's an open time of interaction so everyone is free to participate, to ask questions, to share your thoughts. Everyone is welcome to do that. I noticed one question that was on the stream in the main audio. Manu had shared that question and I was trying to understand. We'll just start off with that and then we could take up other questions as well. Anything that was unfinished from last week as well. We could take it up. I'll just share that question and respond to that and Gene would you like to lead today's discussion? I mean I will start off and hand it off to you if it's okay with you. Okay. I'll just respond to Manu's question and then I'll hand it off to you. All right so Manu's question on the stream there was and I hope I understood it correctly but the question says if there's somebody in the congregation so you have a pastor and a congregation member situation where there's somebody in the congregation who prayers and who says you know they receive a word from the Lord or somebody from the congregation says that they feel led to pray about something. Should the pastor go with that? Is that your question Manu? Did I understand your question correctly? Okay I don't know. Actually my question is if the pastor has a vision and the pastor is saying that church we will do this and this. So after that in church believer that is saying no when I will not do this because when I get something from God then I will do then what to do? Okay I understand. Maybe I understand better now. So you're saying the pastor who's leading the congregation says this is our vision. We're going to do this. Whereas somebody in the congregation says no. Only if I pray and I feel led or something. Only then I will join. Is that the scenario? Yes. Okay so okay yeah and I think that is perfectly fine right. So what we should do is we do not control people. We do not you know in any way control or manipulate people. We want people to follow the vision only as they feel released. They feel free to do that. Some of the scriptures that really help me in this direction are this mentioned too. Second Corinthians chapter 1 and second Corinthians chapter 1 and verse 24. Somebody could type that in the chat. Second Corinthians 1 24 and also I will look at the other scriptures and second Corinthians chapter and then okay let me read this first and find the other. Second Corinthians 1 24 Paul is writing to the Corinthians and he says not that we have dominion over your faith but our fellow workers for your joy for by faith you stand right. So notice Paul is very clear. He says we do not have dominion over your faith. That means we do not control your faith right but what do we do? We are working for your joy. That means you know to encourage you and so on. So as a leader we do not have dominion over people's faith. We cannot control them. We cannot dictate what they have to do right and there are several other scriptures on this. I'll just mention the other one from a second Corinthians chapter 13 and verse 10. This is another verse that I like. I mean I can think of two more but secret 13 10 Paul again writing to Corinthians. He says you know he says he says I should, lest I should use sharpness according to the authority which Lord has given me for edification and not for destruction. So what he's saying is you know God has given me authority. God has given us spiritual authority but we use it to edify not to destroy people right. So we have to exercise authority but it's always for edification not for destruction. Another scripture that would fit into a scenario like this is in 1st Peter chapter 5 where Paul is writing to the elders. He is speaking to the spiritual leaders you know and he says 1st Peter 5 and I'll just read verse 3. 1st Peter chapter 5 verse 3 he says we are not as being lords over those entrusted to you but being examples to the flock. That means we don't lead by force. We don't lead by you know in the modern language would say dictatorship. We don't lead like that. We lead by example. That means I set the example I must do it first so that others can follow. So that's what that's how I would respond to that question that you know that is perfectly fine. People must be given the freedom to make their choice whether or not they want to follow the vision of the leadership. And at some point if somebody in the congregation feels they have a different vision they are free to move in the direction they wish to go. But we can't force them to follow the vision of the leader. Okay I hope that helps Manu. Okay I'm gonna hand this over to Gene. Gene is one of our faculty and also part of our pastoral team. She will just host this meeting but everyone you know is welcome to participate. Thank you Gene. You're Mike. Thank you Gene, you're Mike. Thank you Pastor. Yeah so welcome everybody. Yeah we could post in our questions or even unmute and and ask. I think there are there is another question that's come up on the chat by Charles. So he's he's asked for more insight on Ephesians chapter one versus 11 to 14. Ephesians chapter one versus 11 to 14. Charles could I can I ask you to read that out for us please? Charles? Ephesians chapter one versus 11 to 14. Okay maybe I'll I'll read it out and I can open this up. So Ephesians 1 11 to 14. In him also we have obtained an inheritance being predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of his glory. In him you also trusted after you heard the word of truth the gospel of your salvation in whom also having believed you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise whose the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession to the praise of his glory. Okay I'd like to open this up to any of the pastors to maybe share your thoughts also anybody? Okay maybe I'll I'll probably give in a couple of insights and the way that I've understood it and then I'm sure the other pastors could definitely put you. So I think in in the scripture it it specifically talks of how the Lord has chosen us. He has predestined us from the beginning to receive an inheritance from God. So it's always been in the heart of God that his creation has fellowship and a relationship with him and so those who do put their trust in Christ have received an inheritance those and God chose those from the beginning. He's predestined us from the beginning on our relationship with Christ and when we do put our trust in him and when we believe in him we have been identified by we've been given the promise of the Holy Spirit and that that is that is so whoever puts his trust in the Lord Jesus does have the the guarantee of the Holy Spirit and we are we have his presence in us. So this wisdom and the understanding that we have we grow in the knowledge of God as a result of of the presence of the Holy Spirit in us. So the Spirit is the Lord's guarantee that he will give us all that we need or all that he has promised and the Spirit is the guarantee that we are purchased as his people and so I don't know if I've really kept it maybe not too prepared on answering it right away but a couple of things is that he has chosen us we have been identified as his own by his Spirit which he did promise long ago and this Spirit is a guarantee to us in everything that he has promised and purchased for us his people. So this is in short what you know I'd like to open it up to the other pastors to to add in. Yeah thank you Jean. What I just want to share from you know some just to add to what Jean has shared right so in this passage Paul is talking about our our life in Christ by saying in him right so if you look at it three times he's saying in him in him in whom so this is what we have in Christ so verse 11 is saying we have been predestined and then verse 13 and 14 13 is talking about something we have right now which God has given to us and verse 14 is then saying there's something coming up in the future so verse 13 he says after you believed you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise so that's something we have right now that seal is really God's mark of ownership right so he's saying look in Christ you've been marked by God you have God's mark of ownership on your life you are sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise but the seal which is God's mark of ownership also serves another purpose he says in verse 14 which is the guarantee the old king James would say the earnest or the modern usage would say down payment so the seal which is the mark of the Holy Spirit is a down payment of something more to come and what is that he says the full redemption of the purchased possession so right now we are God's purchased possession but God has sealed us marked us as his own so that's in that's saying look I got to I got my stamp on you you are my purchased possession but the seal which is the presence of the Holy Spirit in our lives is a guarantee of something more to come which is the complete redemption so there is a part of redemption we enjoy right now and there's a part of redemption which is going to come in the future and what would that be and there's a lot that is out there in the future our bodies you know first thing you know we think of our bodies will be glorified this mortal will put on immortality there will be you know none of the problems we have to struggle with here on earth and then there's so much more you know we're going to reign with him we're going to be part of his eternal kingdom and so on you know so that's all in the future we enjoy some of these things right now I hope that helps Charles and if you have any follow-up questions of more specifics you can direct that to Jean please right Charles is there is there any follow-up question on that I'd also like to you know just open up there there is a some series on the book of Ephesians in the in the website so it the the some series does does have the entire book of Ephesians that we dealt with so you know for an in-depth study that's something that you could look into just study the book of I just I'm just putting up the website sorry the book of Ephesians is is there at the sermon so for an in-depth study you could just look into the messages that are notes as well there that could actually you could learn her through okay I think Charles is my there's a problem that's right okay there's a question from Subajit it says in which conditions should a believer lead the church he's attending since coming to the Lord okay I think I'll just bring in a couple of points and and and leave that open for the discussion I think one of the maybe I think I'd give you a just just a first start off with a personal testimony in the the church that we belong to before we did come here was the religion church and that's where I did get to know the Lord serve the Lord you know grew up in my faith but however the there was some of the doctrines in the church that some of the doctrines that were not in line with scripture and that was something that we we really the point of time that we were in our earlier community and went seeking to find a church that that spoke and that believed in that encouraged its members to live it through that doctrine so I think the the biggest thing for us was now it wasn't that we were going through didn't acknowledge the work of the Holy Spirit but not in its entirety and not in the power that is spoken of in the word so some of those doctrines was something that we had to question we had to really seek and I must say that even when we started coming into this new community it it took us a while to really align ourselves to what what what God had said in his word because we were probably so filled with the understanding of tradition and how it works within tradition it really needed a different mindset to to approach it from the word of God to be able to dwell into the word of God and learn that so I think that's that's one also point I would like to bring up is the way that you know in communities in church communities there may be times that you're you you're under the strong mentorship of spiritual leaders and that's a good thing but when they begin to speak into your life when they begin to dictate or when they begin to ensure that things need to be done in a way that they may see is right is again another a place where where we did need to question when the choices that we made or the the positions that we needed to take when we felt it was according to the way that God had spoken to us and which was right to the word there were differences that were you know shown to us through our leadership so that was those are two things that that you know come to my mind as this question has come up I'd like to open it up to the others as well to bring in your thoughts and your understanding yeah just wanted to go ahead and I'll see none of us you could you could share please I'll come in after that thank you okay okay very quickly just wanted to mention that you know since we're all work in progress there's no church which is a perfect church right but then again you know what would happen is to see what is the core thing what is the core doctrine if there's something which is blatantly off or which is not grounded in scripture then we can very easily you know walk away knowing that okay this is they're not preaching Jesus they're not preaching the whole gospel and so I can you know easily easily you know step away and go to a place where where I can grow right but we do it in a way that's honorable we do it in a way that's that's honoring God honoring people the leadership and and also do it in a very I would say you know dependent on the Holy Spirit you know just because we want to move away from one place you know that we don't make the mistake of just going and I mean being part of another church in a in a hurry so we can do it prayfully prayerfully but so if something is very blatantly off you know very clearly off in the teaching in the life of the church then it's easier I just want to read one scripture you know Colossians 1 and 28 so this is Paul's ministry and he's saying in a hymn we preach warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus so you know this is the ministry of Paul so he's preaching he's teaching and he wants to present his desire really is to present every person perfect or mature in Christ so that's another thing you know is I am in this body it's a great community you know it could be a great community to be having a lot of fun it's fine but spiritually is there something happening that I'm am I growing you know am I have I discovered the call of God what about the gifts what about the deeper things you know so so this is the thing you know is the am I you know it it it looks a little bit selfish but also to see you know am I being ministered to as an individual and also as a family are we being ministered to what about the call of God have I discovered have I you know started growing in in Christ likeness and so on so as much as it's a it's a personal work but also we know that we need to draw from spiritually draw from you know the church and the leadership and the ministry of the church rather so yeah I just wanted to share that over to you Nancy yes thank you pastor I think pastor you've shared the last point that's the point that I wanted to add to the discussion about our growth and about the pursuit of the vision that God has for us so in this case in Subajit's question Subajit you're saying the church that one is attending since coming to the Lord so that shows that you know been part of the church for a very long time but one question that we must ask ourselves is whether we are growing in God growing in the things of God and whether we are living to fulfill the purposes of God for our lives and if the answer to that question is a no then again you know we must really prayerfully seek God and I believe like you know God would direct us to be planted in a church where we can grow and we can be a blessing you know for the for the church also to grow and thrive so we can contribute significantly so that is something to look for and if at all you know the Lord after a while being in the church the Lord leads you in a certain direction which is different from the church you know I'm sure with the blessings of the leadership and you know in a very cordial and cooperative way you can always move forward and you know either the Lord leads you to start your own ministry or to support somebody else in their ministry but to be led by the spirit of God and yeah to be in a church where you grow so I wanted to share this scripture in Psalms it says those who are planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God so you know being committed to a local body is very important and that also brings about our spiritual growth and flourishing so just wanted to add that point thank you Pastor thank you Jean thank you thank you Pastor Jekama, Pastor Nancy anyone else who would like to add in I think there was a follow up question by Diana she says when we have left one church to join another what do we answer when someone asks us about the shift okay actually I went through that me and my wife we were part of another church and we were serving as youth advisors and then and then we came to you know like we were in a leadership position there so serving in a small way but we were there anyway so when we came here we made our decision to be part of APC and and because we wanted to grow spiritually and so on so there was a lot of a lot of questions actually why you know why not here why not just trust in God you know he's the one who anyway speaks and you know why can't you do some why can't you watch some TV programs actually the pastor said that you know I know that we don't teach a lot of things but you watch God TV and then you come and you know so all those things were there so we just had to be patient with you know with the leadership with all the others actually more than I think the leadership it was easy we could just tell them you know this is we feel that God leading us and we also feel that this is where God wants us to be planted and so on but then there are others who felt hurt they felt that we were letting them down you know it's like you're you're uprooting yourself from that family and then moving on it's like hey this is deficient you know this family is not enough so for them it it was you know we just need to create we just needed to reiterate that we we still love them that we would be in touch with them but the you know we need to there's a higher purpose and so initially I don't think everybody anybody you know and I don't think everybody understood it but then over a period of time I remember one person he came to church and I think we were ministering in worship and all that and so we went back and then he texted I'm glad that you you moved to you know APC you know after many years actually after I don't know about five years or so so so the thing is to yeah so yeah so to say that to be patient to answer and tell them speak the truth in love actually you know to be polite you know sometimes it can be very difficult when they ask you know why why not what's wrong with us and so on they take it very personally but yeah that's that was my experience thank you thank you pastor yeah I so even we've experienced this and I think we experienced it for very many years even after we joined APC and I think like pastor Jay Kumar said the the pressure was a lot more from from immediate family and immediate friends because the fact that we were serving there and that that you know uprooting ourselves from that meant not just a lot of young people who were impacted by our going but also the family at large so I think something that we did was we kept in touch with a lot of people who you know who were looking up to us and who were in we were in mentorship programs at at the youth as well as the you know in the sadly school there so we ensure that we kept in touch with them even after that to keep that relationship going and not letting them see that it it's it was anything personal against anybody but it was a calling that we had to see you know more yeah so that's been my experience to anybody else else we can go on to the next question yeah I just like to add from a point of view of you know you know coming from a denominational church and I've been asked this question you know why why APC why not some other you know born again church and I think that besides doctrine and you know a lot of insights that that I received personally from you know from the from the teachings which were which were very very you know it made a lot of changes you know in the way I I thought about the Bible and about you know about Jesus and and and God you know in its entirety so that was definitely one thing the other thing I think is also about you know you know I think the the I think the the the the pastoral team which I was very you know impressed with and I think in this in this day and age of you know a lot of misinformation, gossip, there are sometimes you know slander and unfortunately you know you know issues with you know you know pastors and pastoral team having you know sort of you know fallen and I mean this has made you know you know made the news internationally as well as within India itself and in Bangalore also unfortunately so I think the the the pastoral team has you know is you know I had you know my my view is that you know they adhere to a code of conduct and I think that is that is you know something that's very important for anyone who attends a church so that's that's something I just wanted to add thank you Christopher thank you okay we move on to I think there's another question on the chat by John says what would have God really meant when he said said his name as I am that I am in Exodus 314 okay so in this in the passage we see that God comes to Moses at at a at a quiet miraculous occurrence when he's at the at through the burning bush and this is where God calls him into his mission of going back to Egypt to bring out his people from slavery to freedom so even as I'm just going to open that scripture but I think in the previous verses God is telling him telling Abraham as telling Moses as to what he wants him to do instead to go go back to Pharaoh and show him these particular signs and have have the children freed from there the children of Israel freed from there so we see that you know Moses has a lot of doubts and he has a lot of questions and he comes with with those doubts and questions to God not not being confident of doing what he would he is called to do and that's where God says he says who who shall I say sent me and then God says say my name is I am who I am and this is my just a couple of thoughts is that you know God is showing who he is his nature and his identity through this through this name and says you know this is who I am this is my nature and when you need to go in back to Israel to Egypt to get back the Israelites this is who I am and it is in the power of who I am that you you do and no commission to do or call to do what you've been asked to do so it's God really bringing about his identity and his nature and that's a name that that even Jesus speaks of speaks of I'm sorry I don't know the reference but he also talks of it and brings back this this name of God so it is to bring about his identity his nature to Moses so that he goes in that confidence that it is God who is going to be bringing the entire nation out from from slavery would would someone please add on yeah I'd just like to thank you just you know just like to add you know this this phrase that God used in Exodus 3 he said I am that I am so God says Moses go tell the people I am has sent me to you and then the way Jesus used it which Jean referred to John age 58 Jesus tells the Pharisees and the religious leaders he says before Abraham was I am so Jesus is using the title for himself but he's really playing on the time element which really shocks the people I mean here they're seeing a man who is about 30 years of age and he's saying before Abraham was he's going back in time about 2000 years and he's saying before Abraham was I am so not only is he using the God's title for himself but he's playing on the time element so what I want to highlight John is this this title or this the God's title I am that I am has with it this time element and basically God is saying I am I God dwells in the eternal now that means for him eternity all of eternity is collapsed into now it's hard for our minds to comprehend that but that is God for God there is no yesterday no tomorrow he is in the eternal now and all of eternity eternity past and eternity to come for God is now I mean that's how big he is so when he says I am then I am God is saying I dwell out of time I dwell outside of time and all of time is collapsed into an instant for God which is now he dwells in the now and that's why you know he uses language like this you know I am Alpha I'm Omega I am the beginning and the end he's trying to communicate to us people live in time that he dwells outside of time and for him all of time is in the now so I just I like to throw that in. Pastor does it also refer to God being the self-existent one in or does it point to that now? Yeah so you know when we would say he is the eternal self-existent one you know that's another way to put it eternal self-existent one he is not dependent on anybody else for his existence yeah good thank you thank you thank you for the person yeah I hope I answered your question don't you there's another question that's there on the chat it's by Ruth she's asked to shed light on 1st Corinthians 720 which says each one should remain in the situation he was in when he was called I'd like to open this out to Pastor to kindly answer this. Alright thanks okay so 1st Corinthians chapter 7 as we understand as we all know Paul is coming to address the issue of marriage so 1st Corinthians Paul is addressing different issues from the church and Corinth and he's going through you know addressing them one after the other and in chapter 7 he's addressing this whole issue of marriage and so he starts talking about marriage and then you know and I'm sure that these are questions the church have sent to Paul you know through the messengers who came from Corinth so Paul is responding to that so part of that question was you know what if one of the people in the marriage is a believer and the other one is not and so Paul writes about that you know and then this is basically in verses 12 13 14 and 15 so he's come down to that that aspect where he says you know okay you know if there is a believer and an unbeliever and the unbeliever departs then okay you know the marriage can be absolved because the unbeliever has departed that the wife is free but if the unbeliever is willing to stay with the believer then continue that way right so he's kind of gone through it and then suddenly he takes a little side excursion like many of us preachers do verse 17 to 24 he goes on a little side excursion before he comes back to the subject of marriage and the side excursion is kind of connected to what he has just finished saying which is look what has he finished saying if there's a believer an unbeliever and the unbeliever is willing to stay with the believer then don't depart you stay in that you know we're standing so why if there's not to depart from a husband to stay there you stay in that even if the unbeliever the person is an unbeliever but he's willing to stay he's willing to continue the marriage you stay in that marriage right then he goes on a side excursion and says okay let's extrapolate this to all other situations in life and so he extrapolates that what does he say he addresses whether you're circumcised or uncircumcised that's verses 17 to 19 then he addresses your social standing which is are you slave or free which is verses 20 to 23 and then he concludes in verse 24 remain and let everyone remain in the state which he's called that means he's saying look once you become a believer God is not asking you to change where you are so you're a believer who's married to an unbeliever remain there if you are if the unbeliever's unbelieving spouse is you know is happy and willing to continue the marriage secondly if you were a circumcised person you were a Jew or you were an uncircumcised you were a Gentile it doesn't matter you don't have to change that that part of you you know and this of course has to do with the religious bringing you were a Jew or a Gentile you don't have to you know worry about that that's just a cultural thing or a social thing where you are slave or a free person it doesn't matter you can continue on that and of course he puts in a little thing saying that if you are slave try to become free because obviously being free is better than being a slave so that's verse 21 you know if you can be made free then hey go for it you know be free because obviously being free is better than being a slave but the main the essence of what you're saying there in verses 17 to 24 is you know you belong to God regardless of where you are in life when you got saved so if you were married to an unbeliever you got saved you remain there because you belong to God you may have been a Jew or a Gentile don't try to change that you belong to God you are a slave or a free you belong to God of course if you're a slave it's good to become free fine but what he is saying is verse 22 whoever you are you belong to God and in God you are free he says you are bought at a price and therefore he says conclusion verse 24 let each one remain with God in the state which he was called I mean wherever you are called remain there right don't don't think that you need to change that so that is the essence of what he is saying now how does that apply to us today right it means that you know wherever God is called us you know whatever culture we belong to whatever you know country, political, I mean whatever our background is we belong to God and we need to live out of who we are in God not worry about the immediate thing right so then he gets back afterwards 24 onwards he gets back into you know marriage and those kinds of things so that's the you know the essence of what Paul is saying now if you have a specific question like on its application Rose you know you could bring it up because that's the issue many people struggle with okay how do I apply that in life to my everyday situation so if you have a question on that you can bring it up and we can address it thank you Buster that's it for now thank you okay thank you thank you Buster thank you Rose there's one more question as a follow-up of the the aphidians the question the aphidians I'll just bring it up I don't have time to discuss this but the question of predestination as discussed appears to me that some people are even missing out in the inheritance as mentioned in aphidians 4 because they are unbelievers or have not or cannot accept Jesus and we know that God created all of us and does want us to be saved in this sense what should be our role as believers to help save our brothers who might miss out miss out on the inheritance so I think this is this is again a question of predestination and free will the the fact that you know God has given each of us as his creation to choose that we have the free will to choose and make choices as against the the predestination that you know God has chosen some to have to be in his kingdom to have the inheritance and Buster I will need to ask you to help with this too again yeah thanks Jean I think you know let's open it up to others any of the other faculty want to share go ahead yeah yes Buster thank you just some insights like I'm reminded of just like John 316 for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son then of like second Peter 3 verse 9 that you know it's it's not it's God's will that none should perish so you know while the Bible in in this passage talks about predestination the same word of God in several other places talks about the fact that what Jesus has done on the cross it's the that work is available for for everybody and you know we see scriptures that say that whosoever believes you know whosoever calls upon the Lord shall be saved so there is the free will of man and man's choice to to accept what the Lord Jesus has done as well now your one part of the question Isaac yes is you know what should we do to help our brothers and sisters no Romans 10 of Romans 10 I think it's words verse 14 where it says how then shall okay I'll just go to that and I'll read it for us yeah it says how then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard and how shall they hear without a preacher so you know it talks about taking the word taking the word of God sorry sorry past yes so it talks about us taking the word out and preaching it to people and just as the Lord Jesus commanded us just as he gave us the great commission I think the way the way people can respond is when we share the message we share the message of what has been made available to us through the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus so just wanted to add these thoughts thank you okay thank you come on Jean we could sorry I lost my connection I think we're at 850 thank you thank you for all who responded thank you for those questions I think that I've lost my chat so I don't know if there's any other question that has been that has come as a result at the end Pastor Nancy may just request if you could just look up the chat to see if there is anything and yes should we pick it up next week yes yes yes why don't you wrap up and you can close in prayer and take up Abraham's question next week Abraham if it's okay sure can can we just close with a word of prayer Father God we thank you once again Lord for this time Lord where you continue to speak to us thank you Father for the clarity that you give us through just looking into your word and the way that we can apply it Lord into our lives Father as we go through our day we pray that your spirit Lord continues your work your his work in us praying Lord that we will do as we are called Lord thank you once again we give you praise we give you glory in Jesus name amen thank you everybody for connecting thank you thank you pastor see you all at class thank you


Good morning, we have general questions question 1, Mark McDonald. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the presumption of mainstream education. The Scottish Government's position on the presumption of mainstream education is clearly set out in legislation. The standards in Scotland's schools etc act 2000 places a duty on education authorities to provide education in a mainstream school unless specific exceptions apply. In summary, those exceptions are where education provided in a mainstream school is not suitable for the aptitude and abilities of the child in question, where placing the child in a mainstream school may be seriously disruptive to other pupils at the school, or where placing the child in a mainstream school would incur unreasonable levels of public expenditure. The legislation indicates that it is presumed that the circumstances arise only exceptionally. I thank the minister for his answer. I have received concerns from across Scotland that there are great inconsistencies in how the presumption of mainstream education is being applied. Can the minister confirm that the Government's intention is to review the presumption and can he give some indication of what he hopes that review might achieve? I can certainly confirm to the member that a review of the guidance on the duty to provide mainstream education will certainly take place. The review will aim to refresh the current guidance in light of legislative and policy developments and will be undertaken in partnership with stakeholders. The draft guidance, which is subsequently developed, will be subject to public consultation to ensure that the contributions of a wide range of interested individuals and organisations can be made and heard. Given the member's long-standing interest and knowledge about the subject, I would certainly more than welcome to hear his views about the refresh of the guidance as it develops. Can I ask the Scottish Government what the implications for Scotland are of the Paris agreement for fossil fuel production and consumption? The First Minister and I were privileged to represent Scotland at the UN climate conference last month. Thanks to the efforts of everyone in Scotland, we reported a 38.4 per cent cut in emissions since 1990, which is much more than the 31.7 per cent that was originally envisioned. We now generate half of our electricity demand from renewables, delivered our 500 megawatts target for community renewables five years early, and our 12 per cent target for energy efficiency improvement was already at the required level in 2013. The First Minister pledged a further doubling of our climate justice support for some of the world's poorest people. The Paris agreement, as we hope, provides certainty about the global low-carbon future in the same way that we set certainty for Scotland's low-carbon future in legislation in 2009. The agreement sets a clear international context for our climate change proposals and policies covering the period to 2032. In addition to Scotland's economic and industrial objectives, it will also set the context for our new energy strategy. Patrick Harvie. I am grateful for the answer, although it did not mention fossil fuels, which was the subject of the question. The fifth assessment report from the IPCC was the first to include a carbon budget, an expectation of the amount of fossil fuel that the world can use if we want to have a reasonable chance of that two-degree goal—restraining climate change to two degrees above pre-industrial levels. Given that the Paris agreement sets a more ambitious goal of well below two degrees and aiming at 1.5, is it now inevitable that we have to acknowledge that the world has dramatically more existing reserves of fossil fuels than we can afford to use? A country such as Scotland or the UK is going to have to abandon the strategic objective of maximum extraction. We very much welcome the Paris agreement that it pledges best global efforts to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. That is a tremendous victory for our poor and vulnerable and for climate justice, but advice on the next set of the greenhouse gas annual targets is expected from the Committee on Climate Change in March 2016. It will be based on the latest evidence, including on international policy. The Scottish Government has been clear that Scotland needs a diverse and balanced energy portfolio to provide us with secure and affordable electricity and heat for decades to come. Our ambitious renewable targets, our climate change targets and our policies on electricity generation, renewable heat and energy efficiency are progressively reducing our use of fossil fuels. Scotland, as I said, already generates half of our electricity demand from renewables. I would like to know if the minister agrees with me that the number of rapid 50 kilowatt charging points, electric car charging points in the highlands and high islands should be increased to make the ownership of electric vehicles in the highlands and islands more attractive. I thank the member for his question. Yes, that is why we are working closely with our local authorities and our other partners to deliver rapid charge points across the highlands and islands. 43 of those are already available for public use, with a further 10 to be commissioned in the coming months. Scotland now has one of the most comprehensive networks of rapid charge points in Europe supporting the continued growth of the electric vehicle market. To ask the Scottish Government what socio-economic impact assessments it has carried out of the new marine protected areas and how many jobs will be lost onshore and at sea in those locations as a result of their dissemination. Protecting the habitats and species that exist in our seas is vital if we want to see sustainable futures for the industries that do operate in them, as well as realise the wider benefits for society, for our ecosystems and what they deliver in terms of carbon capture and storage, coastal defences and, of course, conserving fish stocks. We have undertaken detailed impact assessments that are available publicly covering our network of marine protected areas and what those show as long-term benefit for Scotland is very positive. Will the minister listen to concerns from fishing communities who have protected the marine environment for generations? Had they not, there would be nothing left to designate them. They are concerned that the operation of those designations will pose the biggest threat to the fishing industry and indeed to fragile communities for decades. Will he ensure that there is appropriate compensation for workers affected by job losses both at sea and onshore, and will he set up a pace in each affected area to help the workforce that will be displaced? Rhoda Grant speaks of the fishing industry and I would point out to her that there are many sectors within the fishing industry, some of which believe that we are not going far enough with her proposals and some of which believe that we are going too far. In terms of the concerns that have not been expressed, however, I have listened very closely to what has been said, and that is why we have had substantial consultation over many months on those proposals, as indeed has the Parliament's committees. I also announced a three-point plan covering environmental monitoring, including £500,000 worth of support for vessels to participate in that monitoring over three years, as well as monitoring the economic impact and taking other mitigation measures. The minister will be aware that the proposed marine SPAs are even more challenging in posing restrictions on activity as soon as draft areas are selected for consultation. In Orkney, the areas selected are disproportionately large and offer little scope for mitigation by relocating activity and risk sterilising huge areas of strategic economic importance for the local community and the country. Will the cabinet secretary commit to amending the proposals for Orkney waters to address concerns raised by the local council, Orkney Fisheries Association and others? I do not agree with all the language that Lee McArthur has used in his question. I recognise that there are concerns about the forthcoming consultations over the SPAs. However, we have European obligations to fulfil them. I believe that the people of Scotland want to protect our waters and our marine environment. Therefore, we have to strike that balance between protecting the social economic interests of our island communities with fulfilling our obligations to protect our marine environment, and we will listen closely to representations from Orkney and our other island communities. Does the cabinet secretary share my disappointment that the Labour Party with her question appeared disinterested in protecting the marine environment? I agree that, far from costing jobs, marine protected areas will boost them by helping to ensure a sustainable fishery, as well as delivering additional jobs in tourism, angling, marine research, et cetera. As is the case with many issues, we have had rather different messages from different members of the Labour Party. As there are spokespeople, I commend them for that. They have been very supportive of the direction of travel undertaken by the Scottish Government in terms of marine protection, although other members have perhaps taken a slightly different view. However, what is really important is that there is public support for what we are doing in terms of protecting marine environments in Kenny Gibson's constituency and elsewhere in Scotland. The cabinet secretary will be aware of the Clyde Fisherman's Association's concerns about the South Arran Marine Conservation Order 2015-437 for the recovery of the marlbeds that prohibits fishing with gear and certain types of fishing. Does he agree with the Clyde Fisherman's Association that the level of protection is both unnecessary and unwelcome and that the consultation period was too short and inadequate? The result of that order is that the Clyde Fisherman's incomes and livelihoods will be put at risk by that order. I assure John Scott and others that we have undertaken 20 weeks of consultation on those management measures. As I said previously, the Parliamentary Committee undertook around eight weeks of consultation on those measures. It should also point out that many parts of the fishing industry support what we are doing and we wish that we were going further, although we have a lot of support from local communities whose voices also have to be listened to in terms of the future of Scotland's marine environments. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is regarding calls to revisit its position on the principle of universalism in public service provision. We believe that a fair and equal Scotland in our commitment to universal public services, which was reaffirmed in the recent draft budget, is vital to creating the right social and economic conditions for everyone in Scotland to flourish. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Can I take it from that that he, like myself, is proud to be part of a Government that supports opposition to unnecessary means testing of the provisions of public service benefits rather than returning to the previous situation promoted by the Better Together parties? Absolutely, Presiding Officer. Universal services in Scotland are wide-ranging and consequently apply to different groups of people on a range of different bases. It would be extremely difficult to apply any form of means testing on an equitable basis with respect to existing universal services. Those universal benefits have the advantage of being transparent, equitable and non-stigmatising. Take-up is often a matter of an individual's choice rather than relating to the provision of experience of need, reducing unnecessary and expensive bureaucracy. Unlike Johann Lamont, who is the weekend question why people need free higher education, free bus buses, free school meals and free prescriptions, we believe that we do. We all contribute to society and we all benefit. Those are the choices and investment in our society that we make to reduce poverty and support the Government's commitment to a fairer, healthier and prosperous country. Does the cabinet secretary not think that it is time to embrace progressive universalism rather than crude universalism? For example, within the universal provision of health, more resources should be targeted to GP practices in deprived areas. Within the universal service of education, more resources should be targeted at schools and nursery schools, where there are significant numbers of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds, as proposed by Kezia Dugdale. We already have progressive universalism, for example, in the health service. There are more than 100 deep-end practices in and around Glasgow in particular, and they get additional resources, for example, resources for link workers and the like. The point about the contribution from Johann Lamont is that it is neither universal nor progressive. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the outcome of its recent meeting with the RMT union. I met with the RMT union on Thursday 7 January, and again this morning, as part of an STUC delegation. I look forward to the continuing, on-going dialogue. The minister is aware that RMT members working on the Caledonian sleeper service are in dispute with the new operator circle. The RMT have identified more than 200 faults with the rolling stock that is being operated by circle. The RMT have also repeatedly expressed concern over the inclusion of an indemnity clause in franchising agreements that it believes undermines industrial relations. Following his comments in the member's business debate on this important issue last night, what action the Scottish Government can take to address those concerns before the arrival of new rolling stock in 2018? Of course, we are all looking forward to the new rolling stock, but there is also a programme of maintenance and improvement, and that has been subject to some interrogation that I am satisfied with. On the point about compensation and indemnification, there has been no approach to the Scottish Government for such a payment, but I am sure that all members will welcome the progress that has been made through ACAS between the RMT and the circle in terms of the current concerns and the on-going issues for dialogue. To ask the Scottish Government for what reason total expenditure and the legal aid fund in 2014-15 fell by 8 per cent compared with the previous years. Minister Paul Wheelhouse, comparison between years is not straightforward as a range of factors influence the demand for and level of legal aid. Anyone eligible who requires legal aid will receive it as it is a demand-led system. We do not ration access to legal aid on the basis of available budget. Indeed, in every year since 2012-13, actual spending on legal aid fund has exceeded the budget set for that year. A slowdown in court business has resulted in a decrease in criminal expenditure, and this is part of a longer-term trend that has seen criminal proceedings reducing the number from £179,500 in 1994 to £122,000 in 2013-14. We plan to work with the Law Society and the Scottish Legal Aid Board to review legal aid provision and to understand factors influencing the need for legal aid and to discuss how best to achieve a simpler and more efficient legal aid system that better manages expenditure while protecting access to justice, something that has not been protected in England and Wales. In addition, through the justice board we are taking the necessary steps to speed up access to justice within sheriff courts and SCTS has confirmed that trial diets are now being made available across courts in line with optimum timescales. The minister will be aware of the concerns raised by members of the Falkirk and District Faculty of Solicitors. Under the new sheriff appeals court arrangement, those judges presiding at hearings, the other court officials, police officers and lawyers for the prosecution will receive 2015 rates of pay, while those in court standing up for the appellant shall only receive 1992 rates of pay. Does the minister agree that this situation is unacceptable? In his response to me dated 4 November 2015, the minister stated that he is committed to reviewing legal aid arrangements to find a sustainable and appropriate free structure. Can he perhaps outline when he expects this review to take place? On the latter point, I have just outlined in my original answer the work that we are doing with the Law Society and the Scottish Legal Aid Board. Indeed, I had an internal meeting in the Scottish Government today to discuss how we take that work forward. On the first point about fee rates, it is worth pointing out to the chamber that there have been significant changes to legal aid fees for summary criminal work in the past decade. For example, in 2008, the payment for guilty pleas under up-war was increased from £70 in sheriff court and is currently £485. Statutory provisions and rates across legal aid have been subject to multiple revisions over the years. For example, the broad structure of the current fixed payments regime for summary criminal work was put in place in 1999—not 1992—and has subsequently been amended. Focusing solely on the perceived profitability of individual elements gives an incomplete picture, because total payment for legal aid work is considered in the round. However, I recognise that there are concerns in the sector. I am happy to continue to listen to the member and others who bring forward points. I am happy to engage with Siobhan McMahon as the review is undertaken. To ask the Scottish Government what Barnett consequentials will arise from the £600 million increase in mental health spending announced in the recent spending review and how the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Economy plans to allocate that. At a spending review, Barnett consequentials are determined on a departmental level as opposed to a programme level. It is therefore not possible to isolate the financial impact of individual spending decisions, although any consequentials from expenditure on mental health in England will be reflected in the Scottish Government's total budget announced in the spending review. Last year, we announced investment of £100 million to improve mental health services over the next five years. The draft budget 2016-17 provides an additional £50 million, resulting in a total package of £150 million. On Tuesday, the First Minister announced that £54.1 million over one-third of that package will be invested over the next four years to provide support to boards to meet waiting-time targets by investing in workforce development, recruitment and retention, and service improvement support. I thank the cabinet secretary for his response, but I think that we must insist that we take the spending in context. The percentage of NHS expenditure related to mental health has been falling in Scotland since 2009. Cabinet services receive about 0.45 per cent proportion of the total NHS budget here in Scotland. That is compared to 0.7 per cent in England.  Does the cabinet secretary accept that an additional £10 million a year that is re-announced for mental health is not going to deliver the set change that we desperately need? The Government acknowledges the importance of ensuring that we have in place effective mental health services in the country, and particularly that the child and adolescent mental health services must meet the needs and the requirements of individuals in our society. It is for those reasons that the Government has increased the resources that are available to mental health services to make sure that we can fulfil and address the expectations that members of the public correctly have. There is provision for that improvement within the budget that I put to Parliament in December.