I'm glad you've stopped by to share a moment of your time. I pray that you'll be enriched having taken that time to share some of my thoughts.
In order for a person to judge someone as an enemy (offender) they must not only understand their own "rights", but also the importance of the sovereignty which governs and reinforces those same "rights" equally.
Man seems to have a sweet love/hate relationship in having established rules and laws. Somehow laws bring him comfort as long as he thinks himself innocent of NOT having violated those same rules/laws.
Many today also seem to enjoy unspoken laws which are supposed to define what a good relationship is and how it mutually performs.
There also seems to be a favorite past time man has and that being "Figuring a way around having the enforcement of those same laws also to apply to himself"? Enough so that is to where he always finds himself innocent of an offense.
What if there was only one "right" available to everyone?
One to where it's written as though "All men get to enjoy the thought of being innocent of any offense towards another"?
It's enforcement being, should this one right of another ever get violated it then becomes "Pay Back" time to those who've been offended?
Let's just say out of generosity we mutually decided to add that we're all entitled to what many have fallen in love with as "Happiness". That is to suggest "finding ourselves happy and at all times"?
If you could then somehow find a way to properly manage these mandated allowances you could then "Truly" enjoy the opportunity within the "Freedom" to pursue both?
I think where many might get lead astray would be due to their individual interpretation of the hinge word as if their "Freedom" to do so.
I think many assume the word "Rights" and "Freedom" are interchangeable in their use and once misinterpreted they get dragged kicking and screaming into the light of their individual and "Proper" context
What if all rules and laws were reestablished as if only your God given "Right"? How would they read if they were considered to be the conditions under which you then get to "Enjoy" the continuation of your endeavor to be found Innocent of an offense towards another person"?
How would you be found and if found guilty of offending someone else, how could you be cleared of the offense?
One last consideration, "What if the person of God were to be considered as one that you could also offend"?
If you were the only one determining whether or not something you said or done was an offense would the matter then all boil down to whether that someone was also a person that you want or are trying to have a "Close" relationship with?
The picture of an enemy and how one gets made should be starting to form right about now?
The easy choice would be to deny the offense ever took place. The second choice might be to try and hide the evidence that might prove you guilty and the third to somehow create a disguise for yourself so you could move about freely having been found guilty while trying to prevent being recognized by others.
What would be your plea be if all the above didn't work out like you planned and you were once again caught, tried and convicted? How many enemies do yo have now?
Do you serve time as if paying back to humanity what was stolen or do you serve the one that paid for and gave back to you the prior state of mind (freedom) as if you were once again thought of as "innocent"?
Either way it gets asked the only one that can restore you through the process of extending forgiveness is the one that was considered innocent before your violated "Their" rights.
The completed cycle where repentance and true forgiveness meet in agreement looks nothing like it did before. One might suggest that forgiveness has its way while others the thought that having accepted the repentance that was true lead to forgiveness.
Many serve time yet that's all they serve. Some abuse forgiveness and some make poor use of leniency (mercy) shown only to come full circle being found guilty as repeat offenders time and time again and are usually forever labeled as such by those that have been violated.
What is the habitual offenders model plea, "If you'll forgive me and show mercy, I promise that I'll never do it again"
How would you then see "Laws" as if the enforcement of such a "Right"? That single right as if it were the only God given right to where we then pursue the cause and importance of the innocent?
As if one people that value and uphold all efforts which are "For" the consideration of those that deeply desire to be found as if "Innocent"?
So by now you've reached the conclusion that we've at minimum have all at least lied.
By most standards that accepted notion levels the playing field which then makes lying not such a big deal, right?
Maybe the consideration of a lie being the "Minimum" or "Minimal" petty crime is the root cause of those assumed greater crimes?
How many times have you ever found yourself offended, yet only after further time had passed you realized that someone had violated what "You" understand as your own said "Right(s)"?
Maybe it was your right to free speech as if your were denied "Your" expression of "Self"? Was your being denied an act of theft?
Maybe later evidence surfaced where you discovered someone to be a "Liar"?
Having believed their lie(s) while trusting the person, the physical evidence of the lie(s) then surface. It surfaces as the net result (theft) in their having taken something such as your wife, husband, child, property, honor or for heavens sake "Your Trust"?
I'm of the opinion that a "Lie" is simply an instrument used by a thief in order to get close enough to you or your property to where it can be more easily taken from you. Often times so that it might appear on the surface as if by way of your own immediate consent.
Maybe a thought "Friend" that managed themselves enough to where they got close enough to steal from you?
My point is that enough time had lapsed to where more specific knowledge eventually came your way which then presented the "Entirety" of the matter in a much different light.
Is that different light such where you somehow place yourself in the shoes of someone else even if only for a moment?
John 3:19-21
This is the verdict : Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."
NIV
As if to suggest unfair judgement where someone else's child got off easy in your opinion in your saying, "If that had of been me or one of us, they would have given the electric chair".
Maybe you were watching someone else's child on TV that had been rightfully caught red handed in a crime where you then just blurted out, "THEY deserve everything they get"!
It's easy to assume specific rights we seem to want to enjoy trusting, yet what if we individually fail to uphold those same rights by way of not leading those offended to their own "Justice'?
It's easy to say "Justice has been served" when we read where a once convicted rapist then gets raped when sent to prison or maybe we hear where the early released murderer that meets with his early demise?
When I say "Upholding the Rights" I'm suggesting the "Full" benefit's of justice being applied equally to others and at all times only because you refuse to let yourself off the hook when you've been proved to be the offender?
How close to the precise definition of "Accountability" does that come?
I'm not talking about "True" innocence in the face of a false accusation, I'm talking about being guilty of the charge (accusation) being presented?
Why are liars allowed off the "Hook" of justice? Is it because those judging have been proved to be liars at another time or are we're simply "Making room" for our own future lies told by not finding all "Liars" guilty?
One of many phrases which seem to have lost potency today in western culture is, "God given right".
What if after you read this you only later discover that it might be you that is the poor and needy which finds yourself in need of those same rights?
One might also see why believers are called to visit those in prison as if by chance they were only imprisoned because they were found guilty as charged? What if there were a prison for liars and not just thieves and murderer's, rapist and pedophiles?
Is the root offense of violating some one's right that cut and dried? As if to suggest there's a difference between the convenience store thief that robbed at gun point over and above the banker that steals from his clients?
Is the root consideration more to do with the potential for "Violence" for which one gets handled more severely having each committed theft by taking? Or the root of the "Offense" is never addressed as severe enough to try and exterminate it?
Did they both realized a gain as the net result? Is the only difference in that the banker lied instead of use a gun in order to realize his net gain?
Prov 31:8-9
"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy." NIV
It's easy to wink at situations when others need their rights upheld and supported, yet what if it were you instead?
What if God were devalued in the mindset of such a culture? That to mean the cultured perception of a "God" which provides said rights to mankind?
Rights which get mismanaged so poorly that it produces very little esteem towards His (Gods) opinion concerning established governmental oversight? Does it all boil down to the enforcement or the lack there of to where tolerance being carried forward in time then becomes the rule of the day?
I'm of the opinion that the unrighteous law makers won't write into law the same law they think God will find as an offense unless they too are at least presently willing to walk the same white line.
Writing a matter into law is one thing, yet anticipating the possible end result of ones own future action(s) is an act where the LAW gets abandoned from inception. In doing so in such a manner those scripting said laws have simply made room for others to follow behind.
The closet or open homosexual won't right laws that would undermine their self perceived rights. Nor will the thieves changes laws which could prevent in the future a realized "Illegal" monetary gain for themselves.
I digress though as this is not about politicians as much as it the essence and evidence of a corrupt mind.
Far worse, what if a culture/society devalued to the right to where God ceases to be the dominate influence within the thoughts/decisions being made within this culture? Is this not robbery of a different color?
Liars don't just wake up one morning and decide they're going to lie to the surrounding world in order to get what they want and neither did the thief that robs at gun point.
Simply put each just found their own method of manipulating their surroundings in order to take what did not belong to them.
So, maybe the real question is "How small does a lie start out and how big do they get? Big enough to rob from the people that come to THEM because they're trusted or bold enough to where they come to YOU at gunpoint?
Many choose not to believe in a God which completely understands the importance of justice served, yet why do they trust more in man that is living Proof of the injustice being carried out here in the earth?
The rules have not changed, yet mercy is still available prior to the arrival of the pronounced sentence already given.
Don't just live for today and all that it holds, Live for the cause of the One that was innocent yet found guilty as charged by the judgment and reasoning of humanity.
Matt 27:3-4
When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood."
NIV
Mic 7:
Because I have sinned against him, I will bear the LORD's wrath, until he pleads my case and establishes my right.
NIV
Many having refused the thought of the importance of a prophet today have also thrown out the sound of the prophets voice that might otherwise remind them of an offense that was and still is considered to be against the Lord.
2 Sam 12:13
Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD."
Nathan replied, "The LORD has taken away your sin.
NIV
Be thankful that God is not the respecter of persons. It would be a bad thought that as Our God, that He could somehow find also himself deceived by the persuasive expressions of men.
Men which allow themselves to be deceived by their own devices having convinced themselves they are also a friend of God because of what they "Say" having managed to also see and know themselves well enough to get close.
Believe in Mercy and trust in Judgement, yet don't seat yourself as the jury serving sentence until you've understood what causes people to find and appreciate all that True mercy is and becomes.
No comments:
Post a Comment