November 10, 2009
Soul Defender
Court ordered attorneys are often called upon to defend criminals who've committed unspeakable acts. I suppose some of these lawyers turn their defense into a mental game where the only thing important at the end of the day is the win/loss column. I really don't understand defending the indefensible, even if you are ordered to do so by the court. Unless you were on a debate team, or just loved playing the role of an antagonist, how do you defend someone you believe to be guilty? And then there is Jesus, who defends us in spite of all the unspeakable acts we've committed...our court appointed Attorney.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----Our law gives a man the right to a trial by jury with an adequate defense. Although the law of perjury precludes outright lying during the trial, the issue of guilt is determined by a technical analysis of complex evidence. In most situations, there is evidential matter that falls on both sides of the guilt question. Some, like O. J. Simpson, will take advantage of these technicalities and complexities in hope of establishing a shadow of doubt. Others, like Hasan of the Ft. Hood massacre, have no defense against the fact of the commission of the crime. They can only play the complexities hoping for lesser charges.
-----But not all criminals opt for playing the game. They have enough character to admit their crime and its severity. They confess. Before that great and final court on Judgment Day, the accused who will find the court’s mercy will be those who admit their guilt and the severity of their crimes. They will not be afraid to stand before that court, for they love the truth, and they know the court does as well. So by admitting the truth about their crimes, they are free to address the truth about the court - its desire to be merciful.
-----The differences between our courts and that court are many. In that court, the judge is also the witness. He saw every crime committed, therefore, every defendant who stands before that court stands as guilty. That court also made payment to buy the defendants. Therefore the establishment of innocence instead of guilt before it is not the point of clemency received from it. The acknowledgment of and agreement with the sale transaction is. So those who go before that court do not go there to argue the issue of guilt, but they go there to present themselves as possessions of the court. That is why their names are sought in the Book of Life. And the last difference I mention, but certainly not the last there is, the case the defendant makes for his ownership by the court is not made on that Judgment Day. His name is found in the book on that day, but his case is presented during his life before that day arrives. Knowing that the judge is also the witness, knowing that the court has made payment for his life, knowing that the court loves truth, he will truthfully acknowledge the terms of the sale, pleading guilty to his crimes as he commits them, calling upon his defense attorney for assistance, and working towards the aims of the court before he gets there. When the judge witnesses the truthful desire to be the court’s possession, he will record the name in his book of life before trial day even begins.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment