Witnesses!
Ah, that is an interesting topic in law. And in practical everyday living. And it is highly relevant in my life as a Christian.
Where shall we start? One can write an entire doctoral on this topic
alone, but I am not going to do that.
I recall one High Court murder trial where I was sitting as an assessor,
with the judge, who has passed away where the one witness made a huge
impression on us. She was the daughter of the accused; he was accused of the
killing of his wife, the witness’s mother. I won’t “entertain” you on the grizzly
details of that atrocious deed. Truth be told, there were lots and lots of
matters where witnesses made such an impression on me that I can hardly forget
it. Some were reliable witnesses. Some totally and utterly unreliable and
deceitful and completely depraved.
Let us return to the daughter and her father and the court proceedings.
The accused had an alibi as a defence.
Bear in mind that if an alibi fails, then the accused, whoever it might
be, is guilty.
While she gave evidence, she looked straight at the accused and pointed
her finger at him and said: “He killed my mother.”
That was still chilling. Goosebumps. “He killed my mother.”
And his alibi was clearly presented to the court that at the time of the
killing, he was with his daughter at a restaurant and therefor he could not
have done it.
The court had to deal with this heart-breaking evidence. How does that
fit in with his defence? Does it have a direct and substantial bearing on the
evidence presented by the State? How does that have a bearing on the rest of
the evidence? We had to deal with that. And we dealt with it.
The State presented its evidence. The police did not do a good job of
the investigation. The police had to go back to the scene of the crime how many
months after other people started renting the flat and were living there. They
failed to investigate the alleged killer’s home and his clothing and his bathroom
and so on and so forth. The time frames presented by the State and the time frames
presented by the accused were meticulously looked at and analysed.
The court came to the conclusion that the horrific deed was committed at
a specific time within the time frame of his alibi. And the time frames
of both the State and the accused were so closely related that it is too flimsy
to convict him. We were satisfied that it would have been highly difficult to kill,
leave the scene, wash and clean up the get-away vehicle, clean up the house, if
that was where he cleaned himself, and be with his daughter all at the same
time.
We found him not guilty; we stressed the philosophy behind an acquittal that
it is not a finding that an accused did not commit the alleged crime. It is
only a statement that the State failed to prove the guilt of the accused. If my
memory serves me correctly, the court was, subjectively, of the meaning that he
did it but objectively the alibi succeeded and consequently he was found
not guilty.
This brings me to the circumstances surrounding the judicial killing of
Jesus Christ, His embalming, His entombment, and the earth-shattering events
three days later: His resurrection and aftermath of these events.
It is obvious that we do not have the eyewitnesses nor the original
documentation with us; we are stuck with mostly the New Testament and documentation
after these events. And I am further hampered by the fact that I cannot read the
original languages. I am relying on the Afrikaans text, English and modern
Dutch. On a balance of probabilities, I am satisfied with those documents. These
are the most reliable documents pertaining to the Christian faith. Even more
reliable than the historical documents about Julius Caesar.
The requirements to have been an apostle were stringent and the requirements
to fill the place of Judas, the traitor, were just as stringent. You can read
it in the Book of Acts of the Apostles chapter 1: 13 - 26 and I quote it verbatim:
“And when they had entered, they went up to the upper
room, where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and
Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot
and Judas the son of James.
All these with one accord were devoting themselves to
prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.
In those days Peter stood up among the brothers (the company of persons was in
all about 120) and said, “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which
the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who
became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. “For he was numbered among us and
was allotted his share in this ministry.” (Now this man acquired a field with
the reward of his wickedness, and falling headlong he burst open in the middle
and all his bowels gushed out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of
Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their own language Akeldama, that
is, Field of Blood.) “For it is written in the Book of Psalms, ‘May his camp
become desolate, and let there be no one to dwell in it’; and ‘Let another take
his office.’ “So one of the men who have accompanied
us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, “beginning
from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us—one of
these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection.” And
they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also called Justus, and
Matthias. And they prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all,
show which one of these two you have chosen “to take the place in this ministry
and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.” And they
cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the
eleven apostles.” [My emphasis].
The apostles, for certain, knew that this would make or break the Gospel
of Jesus Christ! And it is just as true then, as it is at present.
Do you believe that? If not, what are your reasons? If yes, bless you.
Please write me your story: neelscoertse@wirelessza.co.za
