It has been remarked that in the UK most people talk about their GP and recommend their GP to others, whereas in Jersey most people talk about their lawyer and recommend their Advocate to others.
Those who think about such things have commented that the small amount of land in Jersey seems to have given rise to proportionately more litigation over land ownership than where land is plentiful.
Jesus Christ in AD 33 (see bold above) spoke (in confidential session at the time) to his 11 disciples about the Advocate whom he would send to them. Jesus made it abundantly clear that this Advocate would come from the Father and would be “holy spirit” – intangible but real.
The most startling thing about this Advocate is that he would be very successful, “when he comes he will convict the world........”
That kind of ability to convict could certainly command huge fees.... Interestingly the original Greek word for “convict”, elegcho, contains an element of rebuke or shame on the part of the person convicted. It’s as though the person is convicted against his/her will. This, of course, is normal in court cases. The defendant does not want to be convicted.... But this Advocate will achieve it.
The ability which Jesus claimed for this Advocate whom he would send needs to be put to the test. Did this Advocate succeed? Does he succeed today? To make the test as stringent as possible, let’s ask only, “Does this Advocate convict Jersey today?”
You may well ask, “Convict Jersey about what?” About three things actually – see above – but let’s just take the first one: “When he comes he will convict the world [that is, Jersey folk] of sin, of sin because they do not believe in me.”
Are Jersey folk convicted about the sin of not believing in Jesus? Here’s an answer....
First, Jersey folk are not going to admit it, even if they are so convicted. They may well see it as being against their best interests to believe in Jesus – so they won’t. In fact, those so convicted are going to deny it – but inside themselves they will be convicted of sin.
Second, Jersey folk who are so convicted will be saying, within themselves, that Jesus -
· was a good man who should not have been crucified as a criminal; and
· showed people how they should live their lives (but don’t); and
· really should not be rejected.
But they will not necessarily do anything about it – because they are convicted against their will (as it were). Their will, their desire to live their own lives and to live for their own perceived “good” is stronger than their inner conviction.
Third, Jersey folk who are so convicted will also be saying, within themselves, that Jesus, who claimed to be the Son of God the Creator, has been treated in the same way as the Creator – ignored and never thanked. But that also will not change their way of life.
Some of these convicted folk will be like Richard Dawkins and shout aloud their rejection. Most will not do that but merely remain conscious of the problem of not investigating as they should. But all actually hate...by deed.
So, was Jesus correct AD 33? Does the Advocate sent by him convict the world of Jersey folk “concerning sin, because they do not believe in me”?
Later, we’ll test the Advocate’s abilities under (b) and (c) above.