Deviant Oath? - Not a judge!

[David Merrill]

doug,


That makes perfect sense. A demand for lawful money is a lawful claim upon a Trustee. In other words, one is requesting relief and the trustee must consult the bylaws to see if relief can be granted. The claimant makes a demand and this demand is not the act of redemption - rather it is a request FOR redemption.

To go Scriptural - we confess sins before the Mercy Seat of Christ but we cannot forgive our trespass upon the Divine. Free will is upheld in Choice. So when I have a choice, I choose life. But I must give another the same choice I had and have.

Best regards,
MJ

I am borrowing that wisdom from another thread to open this thread. It speaks differently to various readers, I know. But where I am; the filters it comes to me through - my projections and reflections of those projections upon my conditioning should all be considered when reading this Opening Post.

So please spend some time getting some perspective about "where I am at".

Doc 1 - True Bill and Jubilee Claim. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImbmV1RVFTUlVNM2c/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 1-1 - Attachment Part 1. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImUmFJWVZSaVk4WUU/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 1-2 - Attachment Part 2. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImNGFZcVFfQXdkNkk/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 2 - Declaration of Mailing to the US Attorney General. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImcVJCd1RfOW11cm8/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 3 - Declaration of Mailing to the Colorado Attorney General. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImdnM1VVppU0htM2s/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 4 - Declaration of Mailing to the Colorado Governor. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImMkgxbWhHUXpGamc/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 6 - Delegation of Authority WARRANTS. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImalBQWHNUa1hsNk0/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 7 - Affidavit of True and Correct Substitution. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImTU9IYXFKTHJIb0E/view?usp=sharing)

From Michael Joseph's quote, what strikes me is how my perspective is so unique. Especially coming from this, the Fourth of July. Keep in mind that I consider the Declaration of Independence a survey of the Claim or Estate - and upon precedent from Matthew THORNTON, I have signed (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImZV9aWTdIREw5bm8/view?usp=sharing). Upon my perceptions is the knowledge that the Declaration is a quiet title to the American estate as calculated in Biblical prophecy by Daniel and upon his BELTESHAZZAR cycle of 2,520 (MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN).

4231


I must respect that for others, the Declaration is an internal memorandum between different earlier factions of the Triumvirate I now address in the Docs linked above. Especially upon finding Robert J. BRYAN in collusion with the deviant oath conspiracy and criminal syndicalism - changing So help me God into SO HELP ME GOD, it would seem nothing more than international treaty manipulation to plant the United States of America for the Crown. - And by Crown I mean what I describe better in my opinion, as Templar Society.

4232

This is so you might get my perspective, which is knowledge, that there is no authority for that estate. So in that light I present Doc 5:

Doc 5 - Order to Show Cause. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImWGNDRUNCTDVvbVU/view?usp=sharing)

Scarcely worth the postage to Refuse for Cause really. I have already filed BRYAN's recusal, with an offer and opportunity:

4233

Somehow I doubt he plans to take up the proper mantle of authority. Another word for the International Bar, across the road from the Inner Temple. Inn of Court.

4234


Perhaps more annoying from my knowledge (perspective) is that this same Bob is the reason why I am notifying the Triumvirate from Tacoma instead of the preferred Roman Mount of the Gods - Olympia.

I should elaborate on the notice of claim though. I am delegating authority as the trustee for the resulting trust, primarily in the year of my birth (1958) there was a major breach of trust in the selection of the new Pope. Like BRYAN, if the Pope should earnestly seek redemption from the "curse known as national debt" found in the Delegation of Authority then he will find himself in authority to grant Jubilee claims to those congregants MOTU PROPRIO.

...or he can continue pretending.

No matter; I have done my job, for now anyway.

[allodial]

It might be worthwhile to consider a book on the history of the ROman Catholic Church in America refers to a planned establishment of Roman Catholic 'Metropolitans' in Oregon Territory / Oregon which was a British-U.S. joint for quite some time (some suggest it to still be such). Finding Inns of the Court or vestiges thereof would make sense in view of the joint venture. Keep in mind, back in England in history, there were Islamic Inns and there were Church of England Inns.

Alberto Rivera (sp?) alleged like many others that the RCC created Islam or uses Islam as a 'militant' arm. However, the Japanese experience seems to lend credence: when the Japanese ousted the Jesuits and the RCC they were puzzled how they managed to re-enter. How did they re-enter? Through the Mohammedan temples (i.e. through mosques). Rome has never necessarily been friendly to orthodox, Bible-based Christianity. Look at the position in which the EU and NATO put Orthodox Greece, Christian Yugoslavia and Serbia.

Interestingly enough, a major news outlet ran a 'top bar' connecting Henry VIII's disconnect from Rome and Brexit. Someone later alleged to me that most of the governmental or parliamentary seats in the EU are held by members of the RCC. Shortly after the Brexit vote, CAMERON who promised to get right to Article 50 (exit perfection procedures) quit so before he could fulfill his promise and North Ireland (predominantly Roman Catholic) threatened to leave the UK.

Why would a major news rag associated Brexit with Henry VIII's disconnect from the RCC unless they know something we don't know or unless they see the EU as centered around Rome?

4235

Related:
Henry VIII and the Perils of Brexit (http://infacts.org/henry-viii-perils-brexit/)
Palace of Henry VIII Holds First Catholic Service in Nearly 500 Years
(http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/world/europe/hampton-court-henry-catholic.html?_r=)

[David Merrill]

I remembered that example of a warrant on my disk, so I used it. Then it struck me while making copies and signing/notarizing that the Case was an admiralty seizure of millions, in an astounding number of seized trust accounts, only for the sake of laundering the money through the STATE OF COLORADO CAPITAL INVESTMENT CORPORATION.

Ronald Dean's Prosecution. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImZlliaFZSMTZ2Uk0/view?usp=sharing)

Think about that for a moment. There is no accident that this case arises to the Triumvirate in this context. I have colonized not only my central nervous system, the mastery of biblical prophecy signifies that I have also colonized my spirit.


4236



4238

[David Merrill]

P.S. By firing the attorney trustee, and making a responsible claim or right Ronald Dean was Returned his $75K life's savings. US Bank wanted for Ron to sign an indemnity waiver before they would allow him access to his accounts. He called me to ask about that and when the bankers heard us laughing they wrote letters of apology to any of the people and parties affected by the five-day seizure.

Federal reserve notes as private credit notes (endorsed) are like unclaimed insurance policies, stock certificates and the naked signature on the back of a paycheck designates the intention to keep passing that credit around for a while, allowing the central bank to capitalize. But I am saying it to show how like with the warrant, just about everything defaults into admiralty without redemption. Redemption is the answer and is always available...

What would Jesus do?



P.P.S. In admiralty, does one invite the fraud?

I do not think so. Fraud vitiates all contracts ab initio.

[Gavilan]

David,

Reading Ronald Dean's process above, it reads that UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the one bringing the action in rem, but logically, if government is an entity that cannot reason but through its agents, wouldn't it also make sense to attach the agent, shouldn't the agent be also liable to damages for his actions?

[allodial]

P.P.S. In admiralty, does one invite the fraud?

I do not think so. Fraud vitiates all contracts ab initio.

They say "back in the day" the people were sound of mind enough to view excessively high prices as fraud. Even denial of rights by a government officer is fraud. A woman who is an attorney taught her clients how to commit crimes and get away from them and profited. When the matter was brought to my attention that not only was she an attorney at bar she is also a sitting judge, it wreaked of fraud. Not only does she have obligations as a citizen, she has obligations as an attorney at bar and a judge (collecting a paycheck, enjoying perks and lending surveillance equipment to drug dealers and convicts to help them perpetrate larceny): basically, the stench of fraud was easily recognizable. If the one injured were to go to an attorney, I wonder if fraud would ever have been be brought to mind. As a term 'fraud' more wide open than most might expect.

Holding office without the right oath of office and with reservations not made plain or compensated for: that also smacks of fraud.


David,

Reading Ronald Dean's process above, it reads that UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the one bringing the action in rem, but logically, if government is an entity that cannot reason but through its agents, wouldn't it also make sense to attach the agent, shouldn't the agent be also liable to damages for his actions?

If you view UNITED STATES OF AMERICA as the alter-ego of the United States Attorney for the district ....

[Gavilan]

They say "back in the day" the people were sound of mind enough to view excessively high prices as fraud. Even denial of rights by a government officer is fraud. A woman who is an attorney taught her clients how to commit crimes and get away from them and profited. When the matter was brought to my attention that not only was she an attorney at bar she is also a sitting judge, it wreaked of fraud. Not only does she have obligations as a citizen, she has obligations as an attorney at bar and a judge (collecting a paycheck, enjoying perks and lending surveillance equipment to drug dealers and convicts to help them perpetrate larceny): basically, the stench of fraud was easily recognizable. If the one injured were to go to an attorney, I wonder if fraud would ever have been be brought to mind. As a term 'fraud' more wide open than most might expect.

Holding office without the right oath of office and with reservations not made plain or compensated for: that also smacks of fraud.



If you view UNITED STATES OF AMERICA as the alter-ego of the United States Attorney for the district ....

allodial,

That's what I suspect all along, which makes the holding them to their oaths a very crucial matter!

David's work is essential, as is anyone's that is willing to hold them to their oaths.

[David Merrill]

Hi Gavilan;


Thank you for your support. I feel that Jim and I have started something very noble and global.

Service to the agent is service to the principal. - And vice versa.

[Christopher Thomas]

Hope Everyone is well...

So, Today went to the Comptroller's office to Record my "Solemn act and Deed"...I was polite and of course he attempted to provide legal advise by refusing to Record my Deed..he did go 'in the back' to speak to the 'manager'...approx 15-20 mins came back and handed the documents and postal money-order [which not sure if one should stamp or not...I used USN in form of FRN to purchase money-order and [pay to] rather than [pay to the order of] so I figured I did my part in the transaction by using soley postal money orders] back, I immediately slid them back in his side of the window with a 'notice' of a $9,000.00 liability for refusing my document and once document received it is recorded and violating there 'Oath'. I walked out...

Not sure if smart, however, he kept the Original Solemn Act and Deed, Postal Money Order for Filing fees, and the Notice..so i'm wondering what will happen cause the transaction has been accepted. will they be forcedd to record the documents..or send them back to the address on the MO?

[David Merrill]

Is this about the seventieth Jubilee?

What state? In California they probably mailed it directly to the attorney general. Watch for it online. If it does not show up or come back to the PMO address I would drop it. There is a court security act and a "patriot" would press a $9K lien, more like a $90B lien against the clerk and recorder. - And of course stand around righteously, even in prison.

You would have to convince me that you have traced out some criminal behavior, and have the direct right of waiver of tort; and that there has been a tort...

[David Merrill]

Thank you for reminding me about this thread:

Doc 8 - Return of Service on Triumvirate. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImdUdjemZtckxwZm8/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 9 - Clarification of Cause; Warrants Issued. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImVXFBSFNqR2x5eHc/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 10 - Order for Dismissal. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImVkhSY0FlMUVCSXM/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 11 - Dismissal by Clerk of Court on Doc 10. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImX3B0U0xCYWx4RlU/view?usp=sharing)
Doc 12 - Notice of Lien.
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImb0lfRF9CdldvOTA/view?usp=sharing)Doc 13 - Certificate of Mailing; Notice of Lien. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImN00wbG14S1pzUHM/view?usp=sharing)


There might be some differences in the heritage, destiny, legacy and charters. I would not worry about the process you abandoned unless you actually plan to continue a billing cycle.

4423


4424


Look carefully at Doc 12 and Doc 13. In order to enforce that I own everything I have besmirched the good faith and credit of the United States to its major creditor, China. China can dismiss this all they want. On the 9th of Av it was like only a couple loose apples fell when I gave the tree a shake:



4425


The actual lien is against the same delusion; that debt has substance/that cybercurrency can be hacked/stolen. To give me grief about the Notice (to China and at the City of London too) would be to admit there is more behind my lunacy than more lunacy.

P.S. The chatter on Quatloos? - That is a genius mind bomb under current implosion. Carefully regulating the collapse of highly compressed information infrastructures - Capital Integration:

4427

[marcel]

hey my judge has deviant oath too!

It is by far their worst loss of the year.

[David Merrill]

hey my judge has deviant oath too!

It is by far their worst loss of the year.


What state?



P.S. Major win! I actually got somebody in cyberspace to check into it for themselves. Major!!

[BLBereans]

IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.

[xman]

Public Law 97-280 (Senate Joint Resolution 165], 96 Stat. 1211) passed by Congress and approved on October 4, 1982.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Bible



The 97th Congress of the United States publicly declared 1983 the national "Year of the Bible". The bipartisan document known as Public Law 97-280, was signed on October 4, 1982 by Speaker of the House Thomas P. O'Neill, President of the Senate - Pro Tempore Strom Thurmond, and President of the United States Ronald Reagan. It reads as follows:

WHEREAS the Bible, the Word of God, has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation and people;

WHEREAS deeply held religious convictions springing from the Holy Scriptures led to the early settlement of our Nation;

WHEREAS Biblical teachings inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States;

WHEREAS many of our great national leaders--among them Presidents Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, and Wilson--paid tribute to the surpassing influence of the Bible in our country's development, as in the words of President Jackson that the Bible is "the Rock on which our Republic rests";

WHEREAS the history of our Nation clearly illustrates the value of voluntarily applying the teachings of the Scriptures in the lives of individuals, families, and societies; WHEREAS this Nation now faces great challenges that will test this Nation as it has never been tested before; and

WHEREAS that renewing our knowledge of and faith in God through Holy Scripture can strengthen us as a nation and a people: NOW, THEREFORE, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President is authorized and requested to designate 1983 as a national "Year of the Bible" in recognition of both the formative influence the Bible has been for our Nation, and our national need to study and apply the teachings of the Holy Scriptures. 33

[David Merrill]

IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.



Indeed. I see your point but have actually rationalized; and I mean that mathematically that when we reach the monad of monotheism, all these gods are God. It is irrational therefore to say, Since I believe in the God of the Holy Bible, all other singular godform(s) in singular, are other gods. Because God is everywhere, it is quite impossible to have any other gods, and still conform to monotheism.

There is the CHRIST of the Fundamental Orders of 1639 for example (linked (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImWDV5VVdRNG9IeHc/view?usp=sharing)). While I am compelled to agree with you I also resort to precedence, meaning that 1639 precedes a lot of American stuff.

4503

On that token the Charter of Freedoms and Exemptions Granted to Patroons is 1629 and the Patent of August 13 (371 years on the Five Cube Sum Number Locks) preceeds and is therefore the precedent. This is my "perpetual inheritance" and so we find lessons about estate and usage - property rights over on www.lawfulmoneytrust.com with Michael Joseph coaching me about exercising dominion (https://youtu.be/ZyRaPfxVkag). - Which of course considers the God of the (fill in the blank) in a universal light.

[Chex]

that the Case was an admiralty seizure of millions, in an astounding number of seized trust accounts, only for the sake of laundering the money through the STATE OF COLORADO CAPITAL INVESTMENT CORPORATION.

Results
[PDF]99°“
www.goldismoney2.com/.../colorado-articles-of-incorporation-1988-pdf.21939/
1. Cached as follows: (a) To acquire by purchase, lease or otherwise, interests: in real or personal property, or any combination thereof, to construct or install improvements

The Corporation Manual - Google Books

IPS | Articles of Incorporation http://www.protease.org/articles.html

Cherry picked …..from Overview – Corporations http://corporations.uslegal.com/overview/

Most States have a general corporation code that lists certain requirements, and anyone who satisfies these requirements and files the necessary papers with the government may automatically become a corporation.

In 1950, the American Bar Association published a Model Business Corporation Act (MBCA) to assist State Legislatures in modernizing State corporation laws.

In 1984, a revision of this Model Act was published (RMBCA). All states have adopted various versions of the MBCA or the RMBCA with only slight variations.

One or more natural persons or corporations may act as incorporators of a corporation by signing and filing Articles of Incorporation with the designated state government official (usually the Secretary of State).

These Articles are often filed in duplicate, and the Secretary of State, when satisfied that the Articles conform to the State’s corporation statutes, stamps filed and the date on each copy.

The Secretary of State then retains one copy and returns the other copy, along with a filing fee receipt, to the corporation.
However, if the Articles contain no purpose clause, the corporation will automatically have the purpose of engaging in any lawful business.

If no reference is made to the duration of the corporation in the Articles, it will automatically have a perpetual duration
corporate existence begins upon the issuance of a Certificate of Incorporation by the Secretary of State.

A corporation is called a domestic corporation with respect to the State under whose law it has been incorporated. Any other corporation going into that State is called a foreign corporation. For example, a corporation holding a Texas Charter is a domestic corporation in Texas, but a foreign corporation in all other States. A foreign corporation must qualify to do business in a foreign State. Etc etc etc etc (1040?)

, ...

[allodial]

IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.

The saint would probably find himself at home among the people of the free and sovereign states that created The United States of America rather than in the United States. Perhaps that is the 'secret'? If someone were to suggest the United States (singular) to not be "founded as a Christian nation", I'd really find it challenging to disagree! The states which created The United States of America were in fact on the orthodox (note the small 'o') Christian side of things--and David Merrill is very on the money when he points back even further to the 1600s. Each of those several states had its own, separate Crown prior the American Revolution. Come 1775 to 1776, while those states united in a military sense, they did not utterly unite. It was commented in Congressional records from what I recall that "U" in "United" was distinct from 'united' to show a limited kind of uniting rather than one complete or total.

The idea of The United States of America or the United States being founded in 1776 seems to be a lie. The (plural) declarations of independence were made in 1775 if not also before. The United States according to respublic vs. sweers is a revamp of the United Colonies resulting from the Articles of Association of 1774--so much for the Weishaupt and secret sauce theory of the founding America.

If one really gets it, then obligations the British Monarchy had to anyone else ceased to have any significance in the former-colonies at the end of the America Revolution (except maybe for private businesses run by British concerns). Nonetheless, it seems the efforts between 1861 to 1870 and after was to put America under an ancient yoke.

Rhode Island.
Newport was a major slave hub and is said to be location of one the first prominent Masonic Lodge in America (it was most certainly not the Christian convivial club that is said to have typified lodges prior to Scottish Rite or Grant Orient being introduced into America). Note: prior to 1661, slavery was unlawful in all of the colonies.

4504
St. John’s Lodge of Newport, founded December 27, 1749, the first in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations

[BLBereans]

IMHO, the "god" proclaimed by Muslims is not the same God of the Bible. Mohammad came from a polytheistic background and decided, through "divine revelation" to pick 1 of the many gods worshiped by his brethren (Allah) and proclaim that this is the ONLY true god. This is why Mohammad was rejected by both Jews and Christians during his "peaceful" campaign in Mecca. He turned violent when he found a willing and able army in Medina which conveniently happened to coincide with his "new" revelation of domination and forced conversion through jihad.

Those who continued the ways of the Pharisees ("jews" who reject Jesus the Christ as the prophetic Messiah) also worship an entity other than the God of the Bible. That is why Jesus himself told said Pharisees that they are of their father the devil. Satan is who they follow and worship - their "God".

The rejection of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ our LORD, is the ONLY test which denotes whether or not the True God is the One being evoked. Those who reject Him worship false god(s). Unitarianism, gnosticism, theosophy, hinduism, occultism, kabbalism, etc. ALL reject the truth of Jesus of Nazareth as LORD and Savior, therefore, they worship "other gods" which is a direct sin against the Pre-Existent One - The Creator of ALL things. Many of these belief sets claim that "God is everything and everything is God". This is a humanistic belief which was offered, and accepted, in the garden as the original lie. The belief that man can be equal to God is first lie where from ALL other lies derive.

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

If you do not know the TRUE Lord thy God, you cannot fulfill these two essential Commandments.

[Michael Joseph]

Not to throw stones, but I find it interesting that so many folks rely upon Names - as if God [the True God - the Eternal One] cares about a Moniker. Michael Joseph is a fiction. It is merely a tool of which relationships may be founded. Michael Joseph is not a WAY OF BEING. The Scriptures I read tell me that the The All in All is not a respecter of persons. Finding a name [moniker] a person [tool] or a fiction subject to some set of laws, how then can a claim be made about Monikers of God?

Isn't the truth closer to "ways of God"? Clearly we can know them by their fruits. How many have been slaughtered in the "name" of Christendom? How many more in the name of Islam? Shall we explore roots? Abraham fathered [established] both Isaac and Ishmael. A couple of weeks ago I was in a Mediterranean restaurant and I met a man who was of the Islamic faith. He asked of my faith and I told him I followed Christ. Paramount before me is Love. I then told him that in fact we are brothers of One Father Abraham. But as Jesus said before Abraham I AM. And who is Jesus? The Word. Now is Jesus some of the Word [according to Men] or all of it?

As for my house, I reject all monikers as God. What will we call God? Jacob asked the same question. For after struggling all night [in ignorance] he asked "what is your name?" And the response "For what cause do you seek my name?" I wonder that same question when I consider the control systems of religion and the false Idol placed in the temple of God - NAME. For what end does it serve mankind to know the proper name of the Eternal? It seems to me that this is just another way to perpetuate bloodshed upon the face of the earth.

For if man truly understood that name is Way of Being, then man would be more interested in the Way of Life and less interested in defining and confining and refining the Everliving - as if man could even do that! But nevertheless men march on to war in the Moniker of their "God" - marching to the tune of idolatry. For these men are NOT one with God. How could they be? For by their very words they profess that God is without them. Unwilling to take their thoughts and desires captive they go forth to slaughter their brothers and sisters in the moniker of their God - excuse me Idol. I wonder how long until Love replaces Hate in the Heart of man? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKoRp05L95c)

Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

How hard is it for one to accept that the Scriptures declare us to think ourselves equal with God? Who can lead save he who has humbled himself? For with much power comes much responsibility. It seems when I look around today that what I see is men [and women] seeking to get something for nothing by use of some certificate. We cannot abide laziness. Let us work to keep and guard and preserve the Common Faith while pushing on to Pentecost and Tabernacles!

What a horrific and wonderful revelation it was to realize that I [my lower mind] was standing in the temple of God showing myself to be God. In surrender one is raised O Excellent Theopollis - or Reuel. We must be careful to rightly divide else we may fall into superhero worship. Mergeance into El Elyon - one is Friend of God.


And now we see 1st Samuel 8. And the choice of mankind to place the created [another adam] at its head. Is this not Idolatry? What now of Church? How many sit at the feet of pastors who do nothing but destroy the pleasant vineyard of God? I see a relationship between a man and a beautiful woman. The beautiful woman is society or laity. And the man is politician or pastor. Both the same model. And He speaks softly to this woman telling her "its going to be okay baby - I will ensure your safety and change is going to be for the good." But we both know these are lies and the woman being excited in her emotions - for she wants to believe - gives him a 2nd and 3rd ..... chance to make good on his many lies. Hoping against hope that their superhero will win the day! Always looking without her windows she cries at the doorstep wondering why oh why does he treat me this way. And yet, she takes the abuse for He speaks in the NAME of her God.

Is he not the Leader of the Cult of Personality? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FKv5QLa8q8)

I would hope that we can move away from judging each other and come to see the truth which lies behind the different systems of names. For there is a truth. And knowing and doing that truth sets one free. For instance Jesus told the masses don't pray to me and what do the masses do? The very opposite. Jesus said "of myself I can do nothing" but what do the masses do? They worship him. But Jesus said "Ye shall do greater than I." And now I wonder how can this be as long as one prostrates himself in do nothingness under the feet [false understanding] of pastors who do nothing but keep the world in a constant state of false hope. I see these as Agents of Satan in the pulpit. They seek their Own self in Power and Prestige and Office. These are finely clothed in riches.

This is the Rich Man of which came to Jesus in the Scripture. For knowing the Law and following it, Jesus told him go sell everything you have and come follow Me. And Jesus leads one INWARD. But this Rich Man is addicted to outward riches - fame, power and desire. How will he find Himself? And what of his Inner Child? Can this Rich Man be as Jacob and go "all in" going headlong into Egypt?

For just as Islam has its 72 Virgins so to does a Hebrew Israelite [One who has crossed over]! Are we ready for Shin-Mem or Shin-Mem-Yod-Mem. Sweet the rains new fall - Sun Lit from Heaven..... let the latter rain fall.

Psa 110:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.


Finding the only one I can try to change is Me, I shall have no other gods before Me. Rightly dividing the Word, is it no wonder that Carnality cannot understand for it seeks only its Own? Is it now time to "leave it all behind and face the truth?"

Two Suns in the Sunset (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOJHz6Przdw) - Let us all Finish the Race! Can we have the courage to Co-create our Will or will we continue to live under and within the Dream and Vision of men who died 1000 years ago? Can we have the courage to bind the little foxes that spoil the vine to overcome OUR SELF? With eyes on Christ, Peter walked on Water.


Quoting Zimmy: "Though the rules of the road have been lodged, its only peoples games you have to dodge"....

[marcel]

What state?
Massachusetts. I did online request here https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/request
and got the oath 5 days later. For "Agency" I selected "Dept of Justice - Office of Information Policy"
There is no fee.

[David Merrill]

Massachusetts. I did online request here https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/request
and got the oath 5 days later. For "Agency" I selected "Dept of Justice - Office of Information Policy"
There is no fee.

Please scan the oath of office and find the CODE or constitutional stipulations that are violated. If you don't want to embarrass the "judge" run it through Paint and sanitize it a little first.


P.S. I thought of you while snorkeling yesterday...

4505

[allodial]

Not to throw stones, but I find it interesting that so many folks rely upon Names - as if God [the True God - the Eternal One] cares about a Moniker. Michael Joseph is a fiction. It is merely a tool of which relationships may be founded. Michael Joseph is not a WAY OF BEING. The Scriptures I read tell me that the The All in All is not a respecter of persons. Finding a name [moniker] a person [tool] or a fiction subject to some set of laws, how then can a claim be made about Monikers of God?

READERS: ANYONE WHO WANTS YOUR PRAYERS OR SPIRITUAL WARFARE TO BE CRIPPLED OR USELESS WANTS GET YOU TO STOP USING OR SAYING THE NAME!

The name matters very much. It means so much that many have conspired to hide or conceal the name (by taking control over Sunday schools and educational literature, etc.) I'll solve part of a 'riddle' for you:


Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Matthew 7:21-23

One reason behind Matthew 7:21-23 is that they are using titles "lord, lord" rather than using the name. The name being given and refusal to apply it is regarded as a sin (see Parable of the Talents). AFAIK, the term "god" is not necessarily a name, it regarded to be a title or points to a role or office. Yehoshua has {Note that 'eyeh'/'yeh' is encoded at the front of the name and that he specifically said he comes in his Father's name...} Specificity serves to is to prevent confusion with Canaanite gods. Of course, those who want to lead the sheep to the dragon's mouth will wish to blur the distinctions. There are those who suggest "all roads lead to God". There is a guy who has a series of videos on the book of Revelations, he seems to have a lot of "I think" mixed in there but he has reached the conclusion that effectively are only two roads: one is to the Great Dragon and one is to the Tree of Life. The distinction is in the specificity. So perhaps it is true in the sense that: 99.9999% of the roads lead you to the left hand and a specific, narrow path leads you to the Tree of Life? And perhaps that is exactly the message the OT and the NT paints.

Consider the statement, "Everyone should wear allegiance to the president." --what exactly do you mean by 'the president'. If you are not specific you might wind up as a subject of the Philippines. The same ambiguity games are played in the United States with jurisdictional names. When you say 'state of Missouri', what exactly do you mean because specificity means a lot!

Elijah dealt with the ambiguity crowd too:


“And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.”

If it didn't matter, 1 Kings 18 would not have been written for our edification.

A hungry dragon wanting to be fed will tell you lies to get you down in its gullet. Have fun with ambiguity? "Baal" means 'lord' (it is a title, as explained in the KJV "the LORD" refers to a specific name it does not mean "god" or "him" or "the awesome one" or "lord". Elijah specifically addressed the 'titles only' ambiguity crowd. The reason they do not like names is because of the power in the name. Casting out evil spirits or praying or healing "in the name of the lord" does not comply with scriptural requirements. Of course, since they want you to fail they discourage you from using the name, and hope you will simply stop believing rather than getting wise to the deception.

For a more clear picture of who Yehoshua was and is or to see the connection between the OT and the NT:


And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night. Exodus 13:21


And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent... Matthew 27:51


"Thou wentest forth with the YESHA [variant of ESHUA-Jesus] of [or for] thy people; with YESHUA thy MESSIAH [thine Anointed One: i.e., with Jesus thy Anointed] thou woundest the head of the house of the wicked one..." Habakkuk 3:13 (literal translation)


And thou shalt call his name Jesus (SALVATION = YESHUA);for he shall save [salvage] his people from their sins! Isaiah 53:1-12


Remarkably, Jewish records show that when God’s Shekinah glory departed the Temple, it remained over the Mount of Olives for three and a half years. During those years, a voice was periodically heard coming from the region of the Mount of Olives pleading for the Jews to repent of their ways. The Jews failed to heed this warning from the voice, and the shekinah glory light left the earth and retreated back to heaven just before the final siege of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70.” (“Josephus’ History of Pentecost")

Related:

Jesus (Yehoshua) Already Stood On the Mount of Olives (http://americanvision.org/5120/jesus-already-stood-on-the-mount-of-olives/) (of course, it could happen again)
The Name of JESUS in the Old Testament (http://www.menorah.org/yeshname.html)

[David Merrill]

4504
St. John’s Lodge of Newport, founded December 27, 1749, the first in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations

Fibonacci in the Golden Rectangle...



4506

4507

[xparte]

Is it realistic Gods will if one does the will of God he certainly has no free will? A particularly interesting one is the fact that we don't choose our brain.
Well what about your little brain? Did you choose how it would govern the unconscious processes of your existence?None of what makes us up, is up to us.It seems like we are making decisions, but it is very likely that your brain is making them for you, and then you are becoming aware of them after they have already been made.You only have the free will to the extent of knowing what you are.. nothing more [IMHO].Its no news that we take things too seriously Names our Audience & Authorities . We over think to the point where we become anxious. We over analyze and overvalue things to the point of depression.God gave us conciliation as to become like him or posses that nature>who can we claim makes GOD jealous spiteful or judgmental. Start enjoying that will or his nature and its a long walk home for jealous spiteful and judgmental our three old friends or the fallen will ."determined to act" instead of "chosen to act." determinism and choice are much closer than they might appear. ACTORS then APPEARANCE ones Pride Predestines who? A greater debate is the naked truth.

[Michael Joseph]

Is it realistic Gods will if one does the will of God he certainly has no free will? A particularly interesting one is the fact that we don't choose our brain.
Well what about your little brain? Did you choose how it would govern the unconscious processes of your existence?None of what makes us up, is up to us.It seems like we are making decisions, but it is very likely that your brain is making them for you, and then you are becoming aware of them after they have already been made.You only have the free will to the extent of knowing what you are.. nothing more [IMHO].Its no news that we take things too seriously Names our Audience & Authorities . We over think to the point where we become anxious. We over analyze and overvalue things to the point of depression.God gave us conciliation as to become like him or posses that nature>who can we claim makes GOD jealous spiteful or judgmental. Start enjoying that will or his nature and its a long walk home for jealous spiteful and judgmental our three old friends or the fallen will ."determined to act" instead of "chosen to act." determinism and choice are much closer than they might appear. ACTORS then APPEARANCE ones Pride Predestines who? A greater debate is the naked truth.

E. Swedenborg relates a story of his witness between a group of spirits who were fashioning a lamp stand for Father El Elyon. Whilst fashioning said lamp stand they were so very pleased with themselves as they imagined every little detail in hopes of creating something wonderful to present to the King. As he looked on at this scene he was allowed to know that their work while thought to be of their own free will was in fact allowed of them of our Father. When an angel [messenger] was dispatched to inform these spirits of this truth, being that they were in the state of Love, they immediately saw the truth and they praised Father even more.

[David Merrill]

Is it realistic Gods will if one does the will of God he certainly has no free will? A particularly interesting one is the fact that we don't choose our brain.
Well what about your little brain? Did you choose how it would govern the unconscious processes of your existence?None of what makes us up, is up to us.It seems like we are making decisions, but it is very likely that your brain is making them for you, and then you are becoming aware of them after they have already been made.You only have the free will to the extent of knowing what you are.. nothing more [IMHO].Its no news that we take things too seriously Names our Audience & Authorities . We over think to the point where we become anxious. We over analyze and overvalue things to the point of depression.God gave us conciliation as to become like him or posses that nature>who can we claim makes GOD jealous spiteful or judgmental. Start enjoying that will or his nature and its a long walk home for jealous spiteful and judgmental our three old friends or the fallen will ."determined to act" instead of "chosen to act." determinism and choice are much closer than they might appear. ACTORS then APPEARANCE ones Pride Predestines who? A greater debate is the naked truth.



E. Swedenborg relates a story of his witness between a group of spirits who were fashioning a lamp stand for Father El Elyon. Whilst fashioning said lamp stand they were so very pleased with themselves as they imagined every little detail in hopes of creating something wonderful to present to the King. As he looked on at this scene he was allowed to know that their work while thought to be of their own free will was in fact allowed of them of our Father. When an angel [messenger] was dispatched to inform these spirits of this truth, being that they were in the state of Love, they immediately saw the truth and they praised Father even more.

It is surprising.

I invented a time machine when I was forty. More like I discovered time is an illusion, or at best like Allodial has pointed out; a mutually agreed-upon holographic construct. My fantasy has been to go back in time with what I know now. My invention has delivered something better. I have sixty years of experience and memories in a sixteen-year old brain!

Neuroregenesis, I call it.

Mostly it is curcumin, in turmeric juiced with gangala ginger (pepper increases absorption past the blood-brain barrier). I am convinced that with some other treatments I have been doing since Fukushima that I have discovered spiritual ascension is assisted biochemically.

[xparte]

There is a common misconception that arises from the use of the phrase "free will" without proper definition. "Free" in the context of "free will" is usually used to mean "unfettered" as in "unfettered will", this clearly is a logical impossibility, since I can have the "will" to float over my couch unaided, but I cannot fulfill that will. So, "free will" in an objective, non-theological sense, does not mean the ability to do everything I wish, instead it means something closer to "I am free to desire anything". In a theological sense, especially in the Biblical context it means something importantly different.

"Free will" in the Biblical context usually more precisely refers to the question of "Are humans free to choose to do good vs evil?" or "Is a person unhindered in choosing their eternal destination (heaven or hell)?" We can see that narrowing the question down immediately makes it easier to find an answer in the text of the Bible.The mark of one who is dead is utter inability to do, think, feel, decide, or anything other than.. well, rot and stink. A dead person has no will, and a spiritually dead person has no spiritual will. So, we can see right away that we definitely do not have an unfettered will, nor an unhindered will. We are slaves to sin, and sin has domain over our will and therefore our actions. This is why we need God to be the initiator, and why Christ says that he leaves the 99 sheep that are safe to go find and rescue the one that is lost. (Notice that it is us who are lost, not Christ, and we are not the ones who go out to look for and find Christ, it is He who finds us.) But again, Paul sheds some clarity in this, by quoting from the Old Testament.So, before being saved and redeemed, our will is only continually desiring evil, all the time. And it is only the common grace of God that restrains evil men from being as evil as they could be, and doing the evil they wish to do. This explains why we haven't wiped ourselves off the face of the earth in our evil. So again, our will is not unhindered, it is enslaved to sin. And whats a biblical sin and a modern sin both enjoy slavery .Bible documents mans sin its greatest industry what will eventually just hold a bible as just a human research account. Enterprise is the virtue of will God is sovereign over all creation, including the will of man, it does not actually mean that He controls the will of man at all times. knowing everything that will happen is not the same as causing everything to happen. Though, again, God is sovereign, and omniscient, I just wanted to clarify that these things are not the same.

In summary, we do have a will, but it is bounded by what is possible, and the common grace of God, who does not allow us to be as evil as we could be, and as slaves to sin, we definitely do not have free will. Even after redemption, our will is a result of the new nature He gives us, the new heart (which is a Biblical metaphor for "desires", ie, the fruit of our will) so in a sense, even after being freed from sin, we still do not have a truly "free" will, it is still bounded by what is possible and by the sovereignty of God. So when God controls the believer's decisions, it is because the believer has invited God to work through them . This control is something accepted by faith. A fear of God is what we control if its measured its at free will .

[David Merrill]

There is a common misconception that arises from the use of the phrase "free will" without proper definition. "Free" in the context of "free will" is usually used to mean "unfettered" as in "unfettered will", this clearly is a logical impossibility, since I can have the "will" to float over my couch unaided, but I cannot fulfill that will. So, "free will" in an objective, non-theological sense, does not mean the ability to do everything I wish, instead it means something closer to "I am free to desire anything". In a theological sense, especially in the Biblical context it means something importantly different.

"Free will" in the Biblical context usually more precisely refers to the question of "Are humans free to choose to do good vs evil?" or "Is a person unhindered in choosing their eternal destination (heaven or hell)?" We can see that narrowing the question down immediately makes it easier to find an answer in the text of the Bible.The mark of one who is dead is utter inability to do, think, feel, decide, or anything other than.. well, rot and stink. A dead person has no will, and a spiritually dead person has no spiritual will. So, we can see right away that we definitely do not have an unfettered will, nor an unhindered will. We are slaves to sin, and sin has domain over our will and therefore our actions. This is why we need God to be the initiator, and why Christ says that he leaves the 99 sheep that are safe to go find and rescue the one that is lost. (Notice that it is us who are lost, not Christ, and we are not the ones who go out to look for and find Christ, it is He who finds us.) But again, Paul sheds some clarity in this, by quoting from the Old Testament.So, before being saved and redeemed, our will is only continually desiring evil, all the time. And it is only the common grace of God that restrains evil men from being as evil as they could be, and doing the evil they wish to do. This explains why we haven't wiped ourselves off the face of the earth in our evil. So again, our will is not unhindered, it is enslaved to sin. And whats a biblical sin and a modern sin both enjoy slavery .Bible documents mans sin its greatest industry what will eventually just hold a bible as just a human research account. Enterprise is the virtue of will God is sovereign over all creation, including the will of man, it does not actually mean that He controls the will of man at all times. knowing everything that will happen is not the same as causing everything to happen. Though, again, God is sovereign, and omniscient, I just wanted to clarify that these things are not the same.

In summary, we do have a will, but it is bounded by what is possible, and the common grace of God, who does not allow us to be as evil as we could be, and as slaves to sin, we definitely do not have free will. Even after redemption, our will is a result of the new nature He gives us, the new heart (which is a Biblical metaphor for "desires", ie, the fruit of our will) so in a sense, even after being freed from sin, we still do not have a truly "free" will, it is still bounded by what is possible and by the sovereignty of God. So when God controls the believer's decisions, it is because the believer has invited God to work through them . This control is something accepted by faith. A fear of God is what we control if its measured its at free will .


Thank you for that post. It is good to hash this out now and again.

This sounds hedonistic, but to me free will is the choice to feel guilty or not. Conscience is what decides what is worthy of guilt. Sin is the emotion of guilt, not the action.

I spoke to somebody today who ascribes to ACIM. I showed the finding of fact that Bill and John were dosing Helen with LSD. My only twang of guilt was that this fellow might become scared or angry about what I presented. Then I might feel guilty about turning what is allegedly a good experience (loving) into a fearful one.

It has always been so easy to forgive Bill and John because they were products of the Cold War and dosed people with LSD as part of their military duties. Then the perfect laboratory (Helen) came along and she trustingly sipped her morning tea with Bill.

4508

4509


It took me a lot longer to forgive Ken, who had already made millions on erroneous interpretation of the Text. He died in 2013 but MK-ULTRA was declassified in 2001 so there was twelve years for him to expose the truth and to adjust his teachings according to the findings of fact.

I did finally forgive Ken though. But as I sit in class I realize that he has caused fear to guard falsity in people who otherwise seek peace, joy and love. So I don't bring up LSD as a rule.



P.S. In five years of study groups I have found only one or two people who seem to have acquired a sustainable "Holy Instant". The rest are there to gripe why they cannot, or more commonly why it has to be in their future and not now or in their past.

I presume it is due to the "Wapnicult of Nihilism" as I call it. Ken's teaching that reality is a dream.

Row, Row, Row your Boat...

[allodial]

Re: the will of God
There are some who see God as a micromanager of their lives when it comes to "doing the will of God". I see the will of God as more of you work with the Original Plan or you work against it. You love your neighbor as you love yourself (hopefully you love yourself to start!) or you don't. Love of course in the sense of a kind that stems out of sound mind and sound morals and sound doctrine (i.e. having sex with your hog isn't the kind of love of discussion). The automaton, Divine micromanager "What sock do I put on first? What hand should I put out first to get the sock?" view, I don't see as scriptural.

I've met people who would swear up and down they were doing the will of God when they abandoned their children, mistreated their husband, stole money from people regardless of the admonition to put duty to family before duty to the secular or to put the body of Christ before the secular.


“Which commandment is the most important of all?” 29 Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ 31 The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” 32 And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher.

If you were to hate your neighbor and yourself, perhaps you'd not be doing God's will?

[David Merrill]

Thank you all for the wonderful contributions!

Xparte; I think a lot of Paul Andrew, especially all the work that he does accumulating federal oaths of office. I am sorry if my grandeur is a turn-off. I am confident that it is not founded in delusion.

[xparte]

I am sorry if my grandeur is a turn-off. I am confident that it is not founded in delusion. Have my comments chastised delusions of grandeur or the necessary resources to have been misleading been provided. David explain Xparte; I think a lot of Paul Andrew,

[David Merrill]

Maybe I cross-threaded. My plate is prettyful; which is like beautiful but prettier.

[allodial]

I suspect that taking it further, the action to oust the person from office to end their 'defacto easement' is an important next step. Interesting, I considered how swearing falsely fails to express love for God, oneself or one's neighbor. Very much related.

Also, perhaps a mandamus should be issued so that when the DoJ's OLP or the Administrative Office of the United States Courts fails to receive required materials they automatically subpoena for them and if they cannot obtain them, the AG or SG has to initiate an ouster.

Otherwise, a lawsuit could be initiated {Plaintiff} vs. {name of man or woman alleging to hold office without any reference to titles or the like}. Otherwise, one can put it to the person holding office (in a case) that if they continue to hold office beyond thirty days from the notice they shall be held and bound under and by the oath without any reservation whatsoever. Then one can file the certificate of service, notice of default/nonresponse in a case jacket and send copies from the case jacket with the default notice, original communication and the certificate of service to the OLP, court administrators and from that point treat it as an oath taken.

Key thing seems to be in avoiding any allowing them to hold office without them being bound to the oath of office. Without that one holding the office is defrauding the sovereign people by collecting a paycheck without obligation.

IMHO, the only way someone can hold office without oath is if they have a claim based on inherent prerogative. But that claim must made express (i.e. some form of letters patent) or some official would have to vouch or attest to the right to that office. And even still, they would have to stay within the confines of the office and also post bond for injury or loss they cause. Imagine converting the office of janitor into a full-blown monarchy. Be wise folks. I mentioned it years ago the notion of the supreme court as if a 9-seat legislature running inferior United States.

[David Merrill]

I suspect that taking it further, the action to oust the person from office to end their 'defacto easement' is an important next step. Interesting, I considered how swearing falsely fails to express love for God, oneself or one's neighbor. Very much related.

Also, perhaps a mandamus should be issued so that when the DoJ's OLP or the Administrative Office of the United States Courts fails to receive required materials they automatically subpoena for them and if they cannot obtain them, the AG or SG has to initiate an ouster.

Otherwise, a lawsuit could be initiated {Plaintiff} vs. {name of man or woman alleging to hold office without any reference to titles or the like}. Otherwise, one can put it to the person holding office (in a case) that if they continue to hold office beyond thirty days from the notice they shall be held and bound under and by the oath without any reservation whatsoever. Then one can file the certificate of service, notice of default/nonresponse in a case jacket and send copies from the case jacket with the default notice, original communication and the certificate of service to the OLP, court administrators and from that point treat it as an oath taken.

Key thing seems to be in avoiding any allowing them to hold office without them being bound to the oath of office. Without that one holding the office is defrauding the sovereign people by collecting a paycheck without obligation.

IMHO, the only way someone can hold office without oath is if they have a claim based on inherent prerogative. But that claim must made express (i.e. some form of letters patent) or some official would have to vouch or attest to the right to that office. And even still, they would have to stay within the confines of the office and also post bond for injury or loss they cause. Imagine converting the office of janitor into a full-blown monarchy. Be wise folks. I mentioned it years ago the notion of the supreme court as if a 9-seat legislature running inferior United States.

Resulting trust.

The Olympus Ordeal has Authored I AM THAT I AM in authority. Without DISTRESS. Lynn Hartford authored Silent Weapons and sadly enough simply paid out the nose for many years. He even goes unnamed at his Release Hearing - THE WITNESS (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=4512&d=1474457579).


4514

I think this is Hartford Senior.

Let's be clear and honest. This is just my perspective, mostly watching how ACIM students fall into the Wapnicult of Nihilism, thinking that somehow when we all grasp the sustainable Holy Instant together the "universe will disappear". The Disappearance of the Universe is rather absurd, if you ask me! What is actually said by Jesus behind Helen's Voice is that we will find the "Real World". One of Heaven; where fear and death are recognized as illusion.

Which is the Gospel of Pragmatism's (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImZEVYYUZ4UU1uVUE/view?usp=sharing) model too.

Jesus was seen by multiple "Witness" after the Cross because he never died there.

But what I am getting at is a similar and related point. Because of the guilt stirred within Abraham's incest with Sarah, enough that he nearly killed the issue and blamed God's insecurity for that near genocide, it is deeply ingrained to accept RUACH as the nature of the Breath of Life breathed into Adam (rather than MIND - NESHEMAH) so deeply ingrained into our transformation of information into truth that we deny ourselves the basic right of Biblical Prophecy. We make the attempt to distress (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImSUN0LVFhWHlNbDQ/view?usp=sharing). - Rather than to authorize Creation in the Name I AM.

My invention biocosmetric sonoluminescence led to the first biocosmescient sonoluminescent laser - wonderful! I would not throw that away for the world. I have a future by being here now.

[David Merrill]

P.S. Get a look. Distress (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImSUN0LVFhWHlNbDQ/view?usp=sharing). Bonded by a Criminal Complaint.

4516


Thank you Allodial. Settlement might be as close as the Court Administration you have mentioned. I have been thinking to Compile the thirteen Docs of the Olympus Ordeal into one book. The Book of Biocosmetric Sonoluminescence. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImQjk4Qi1OVURLaW8/view?usp=sharing) 345 Pages (perfect right angle?) and I might go back to "Olympus Ordeal" but ordeal implies distress... - A lengthy read but they might enjoy it at the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.




P.S. This might be promising. (http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/judicial-conduct-disability/filing-judicial-misconduct-or-disability-complaint#faq-Where-do-I-file-my-complaint?)



Who will consider my complaint?

In most instances, the chief judge of the circuit where you filed your complaint (or the chief judge of the Court of International Trade or the Court of Federal Claims, if applicable) will consider your complaint (if you filed your complaint in the appropriate court office).

The Attachments near the beginning of the Gospel of Biocosmetric Sonoluminescence reveal how I have already been in both of the courts mentioned. But I might serve the Gospel on the chief judge of the Tenth Circuit in Denver.

[Michael Joseph]

I suspect that taking it further, the action to oust the person from office to end their 'defacto easement' is an important next step. Interesting, I considered how swearing falsely fails to express love for God, oneself or one's neighbor. Very much related.

Also, perhaps a mandamus should be issued so that when the DoJ's OLP or the Administrative Office of the United States Courts fails to receive required materials they automatically subpoena for them and if they cannot obtain them, the AG or SG has to initiate an ouster.

Otherwise, a lawsuit could be initiated {Plaintiff} vs. {name of man or woman alleging to hold office without any reference to titles or the like}. Otherwise, one can put it to the person holding office (in a case) that if they continue to hold office beyond thirty days from the notice they shall be held and bound under and by the oath without any reservation whatsoever. Then one can file the certificate of service, notice of default/nonresponse in a case jacket and send copies from the case jacket with the default notice, original communication and the certificate of service to the OLP, court administrators and from that point treat it as an oath taken.

Key thing seems to be in avoiding any allowing them to hold office without them being bound to the oath of office. Without that one holding the office is defrauding the sovereign people by collecting a paycheck without obligation.

IMHO, the only way someone can hold office without oath is if they have a claim based on inherent prerogative. But that claim must made express (i.e. some form of letters patent) or some official would have to vouch or attest to the right to that office. And even still, they would have to stay within the confines of the office and also post bond for injury or loss they cause. Imagine converting the office of janitor into a full-blown monarchy. Be wise folks. I mentioned it years ago the notion of the supreme court as if a 9-seat legislature running inferior United States.

Yes. I think MOTU PROPRIO declared by Pope Francis relates that when an officer of a Ministerial Trust is in breach of said Trust, then said officer does not enjoy protection of the State. Therefore said officer would be subject to action upon his personal estate. The lines get blurred due to presumption that the entire world is operating in the Central Banking Scheme.

[allodial]

Well, its just simple trust law, breech of trust results in reversion to the settlor or successors or beneficiaries or any of their respective successors (as applicable) or to remaindermen. The pseudo-trustee is a thief beyond a certain point. Glitzy media freak show to make a lie seem true, well the lie is still a lie. Those who are not legitimate trustees though they claim to be trustees are lying. Again, when a state fails the power reverts to the sovereign people (not to be confused with residents or public citizens) rather than to 'trust outsiders'. The claims of alleged corporate creditors who have more than triple-dipped and who have been paid thrice more are inequitable and moot in a lawful court setting.

The territorial jurisdiction masquerading as de jure: that is what you have been wrestling with (mind games, spiritual warfare de jure).

[David Merrill]

Yes. I think MOTU PROPRIO declared by Pope Francis relates that when an officer of a Ministerial Trust is in breach of said Trust, then said officer does not enjoy protection of the State. Therefore said officer would be subject to action upon his personal estate. The lines get blurred due to presumption that the entire world is operating in the Central Banking Scheme.



Well, its just simple trust law, breech of trust results in reversion to the settlor or successors or beneficiaries or any of their respective successors (as applicable) or to remaindermen. The pseudo-trustee is a thief beyond a certain point. Glitzy media freak show to make a lie seem true, well the lie is still a lie. Those who are not legitimate trustees though they claim to be trustees are lying. Again, when a state fails the power reverts to the sovereign people (not to be confused with residents or public citizens) rather than to 'trust outsiders'. The claims of alleged corporate creditors who have more than triple-dipped and who have been paid thrice more are inequitable and moot in a lawful court setting.

The territorial jurisdiction masquerading as de jure: that is what you have been wrestling with (mind games, spiritual warfare de jure).

Thank you both.

That last sentence, it sounds like an agreeable mental model. But it does not set right with me. The wrestling match began with, By what right to you make this claim? To know MY NAME? Some times it would seem I am the only man who can understand what it is to form MY IDENTITY. You are both brilliant but neither of you FEEL like I AM ME.

My claim is formed legally from 1629 and August 13, 1630 formed Patent upon the Albany/NYSE properties as Estate.

4517

4518


It is not boasting so much as my explaining and reassuring myself that regardless of the outcome, my bond is Life, Estate and Sacred Honor and that this is what I was born to be doing.



P.S. It is there in the Complaint:

Title (Christian or given name) - David Merrill.
Office (family or surname) - VAN PELT

[David Merrill]

P.P.S. This feels like Original Jurisdiction, in disguise. I look around for the number of copies required and it refers to local rules for the Tenth Circuit but there are only rules regarding Appeals and forever, even in phone conversations the Tenth Circuit will not reveal anything about having that Original Jurisdiction. However, not having Government-issued ID the guards would not let me enter the building:



4519

Yet the clerk came to the doors and we handled this transaction (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImd0VUZmF4TldKcVU/view?usp=sharing), infuriating the security guards:



4520

4521


4522



I recall so many amazing things about that day. The timing, immaculate! I was walking on the clouds as everything went so perfectly all the way through publishing it at the county clerk and recorder and all the way home with God's speed.

[allodial]

A claim of right to access the building comes to mind--could sue for access in the court. Not sure how they could restrict a building to franchisees only--maybe for insurance purposes they don't want living souls around. For government ID, require the Secretary of State to affix his seal your ID. Strange for a county court to require state ID to enter the court building, but yet someone wearing a 'special outfit' believes himself to have authority to abduct you and force you to enter? Seems far imbalanced.

TBH, I suspect they figure by capturing a clown they 'must' own the circus, the building the tent, all the elephants and cotton candy in the world too, not so. Perhaps they take themselves too seriously? Territorial jurisdiction and big, huge lies gone way too far.


That last sentence, it sounds like an agreeable mental model. But it does not set right with me. The wrestling match began with, By what right to you make this claim? To know MY NAME?

Was not so much about the beginning but moreso about where it lead to.


Title (Christian or given name) - David Merrill.
Office (family or surname) - VAN PELT

I'd tend to suggest that the office or estate is DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT. The NAME of the surety after induction (i.e. becomes surety or speaker for the dead; in layman's terms -> 'director of the corporation') into the collective is VAN PELT. All because...


Disparata Non Debent Jungi -- Dissimilar things ought not to be joined.

[David Merrill]

A claim of right to access the building comes to mind--could sue for access in the court. Not sure how they could restrict a building to franchisees only--maybe for insurance purposes they don't want living souls around. For government ID, require the Secretary of State to affix his seal your ID. Strange for a county court to require state ID to enter the court building, but yet someone wearing a 'special outfit' believes himself to have authority to abduct you and force you to enter? Seems far imbalanced.

TBH, I suspect they figure by capturing a clown they 'must' own the circus, the building the tent, all the elephants and cotton candy in the world too, not so. Perhaps they take themselves too seriously? Territorial jurisdiction and big, huge lies gone way too far.

It has been a long time since I gave access thought. They do it by "Judge's Order" - usually the chief judge. Funny how that particular attorney holds so much sway with the security guards at the door.

It reminds me though; I would call the clerk of court and he would come to the door and get me in. One day he said; "I will let you in today if you quit filing papers in MY COURT." I was a little dumbfounded; "YOUR Court?"

Then we both broke out laughing like he was joking. I don't think he was until I asked him to stand by his claim.

[allodial]

Is it just me or has there been a trend as of late for county or municipal seals to no longer be affixed to birth certificates?

4523

Consider the above scan, typically there would be a City or County or State seal where there is now a RED CONTROL NUMBER. Notice how awfully inappropriate that looks. Same here...

4524

Not so here...

https://paulsotrop.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/birther2.jpg

To quote The Donald: "There's something going on."

[allodial]

Here... this is a better example of how it used to be done...

4526

Another...

4527

Interesting, perhaps they are changing jurisdiction of BIRTH while hoping people won't notice. Or, maybe it really doesn't matter.

[Michael Joseph]

Well, its just simple trust law, breech of trust results in reversion to the settlor or successors or beneficiaries or any of their respective successors (as applicable) or to remaindermen. The pseudo-trustee is a thief beyond a certain point. Glitzy media freak show to make a lie seem true, well the lie is still a lie. Those who are not legitimate trustees though they claim to be trustees are lying. Again, when a state fails the power reverts to the sovereign people (not to be confused with residents or public citizens) rather than to 'trust outsiders'. The claims of alleged corporate creditors who have more than triple-dipped and who have been paid thrice more are inequitable and moot in a lawful court setting.

The territorial jurisdiction masquerading as de jure: that is what you have been wrestling with (mind games, spiritual warfare de jure).

Yes, I agree. You know in Hebrews chapter 7 it states that "Levi tithed to Melchizedok in the loins of Abraham." Since Levi is an heir of Abraham, we can see that Levi benefits from the DEED of his Father. Therefore, a question begging to be answered is was Levi subject to the obligations of that benefit? I think under Trust Law the answer is yes.

It seems logical then, that an heir is also subject to the debts of his Father. Funny how those who would steal run and hide when that light is shown upon them. For how much more would one be determined to remain without debt if his heirs were burdened with his lack of responsibility.

It is damn hard to control a general public if they are all frugal and responsible. Hmmmm.

And yet consider the ants or the bees - their civilization goes on and on and on - each working everyday in support of the whole - not taking too much but enough for the good of all.


Regarding pseudo-trustee being thief - I am reminded again of psalms 50:

Psa 50:14 Offer unto God thanksgiving; and pay thy vows unto the most High:
Psa 50:15 And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.
Psa 50:16 But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth?
Psa 50:17 Seeing thou hatest instruction, and castest my words behind thee.
Psa 50:18 When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers.


allodial you make a very valid point in terms of escheatment upon the Grantors/Creators - that would be White Men - and this is not in any way to mean the Causasian race of men. Hey, I did not build it, I just comprehend how it was built.




4528

Many do gravely err thinking themselves to be "We the People of the United States." Also, in terms of the Federal Reserve districts those trustees while de-facto to the United States districts may very well be de-jure to the Federal Reserve districts.

[allodial]

The trust terms weren't necessarily debts but terms of enjoyment of the estate. Its worth considering that Abraham was tithing being one of great substance like a king with armies and a large entourage who was winning victories through faith rather than say a woman who cleans toilets for a living getting paid a pittance for it.


4528

Many do gravely err thinking themselves to be "We the People of the United States." Also, in terms of the Federal Reserve districts those trustees while de-facto to the United States districts may very well be de-jure to the Federal Reserve districts.

Some would suggest 1870 to have been when Scottish Rite and the like really took footing in the United States and when the D.C. and the U.S. began to take a turn away from merit-based society toward one of entitlement based on the color of skin. There are those who suggest Albert Pike (self styled Sovereign Pontiff?) to have been founder of the KKK. And those who deny it but... then those who point to his relationship with one Phileas Walder who aim to reaffirm it as true. Who knows?

4529

It is well researched that Benjamin Franklin was for that skin-color society moreseo than Thomas Jefferson). Benjamin Franklin (member of Hellfire Club?) admitted that he wanted a "pale skinned country" (like England--but history shows England wasn't that way before 1665). Franklin even admitted that most Europeans were BROWN-SKINNED folks (even Russians)! Its rather clear that the brown-skinned people were very much part of founding the colonies and drafting its key instruments. On that note, "White supremacy" is regarded to be a mid-to-late 1800s invention coming out southern Asia, Anatolia (Turkey area) and Eastern Europe through Germany.

However, the cat is out of the bag 720 different ways and has multiplied with pregnant kittens. No putting it back in. Keep in mind that come Franklin's time, England had been invaded which much of its artwork destroyed (what exactly was being hidden?) and 90%+ of the population of Germany had been wiped out (during the Thirty Years War which some regard to have been a genocide against brown-skinned Europeans). There is also the hub-bub concerning the physical appearance of King James I & VI ("Black" some have suggested) and the reason for beheading Charles I (ala Cromwell) being to put an end to brown-skinned royalty in Europe.

AFAIK, the original idea of a "white" was a freeborn, highborn and/or born-again Christian per orthodoxy. They wouldn't have had to re-define the meaning if a different definition didn't exist. So in 1870 they invented a term of art and proceeded to pretend as it were natural law. Tulsa Race Riots, etc.

The thing about the "People of the United States" is I've not been able to identify quite accurately put my finger on the singularity called "the People of the United States". Have you ever seen a court case of "People of the United States vs."? Ah wait, perhaps that is the D.C. municipal council? The several states that were generally referred to as the United States in the Treaty of Paris were a plurality rather than a singularity. Under English law they had separate crowns. To this day there is a People of New York, a People of Georgia, a People of Maryland. As for myself, I've never claimed to be a U.S.-anything, I've done quite well as a Marylander or the like.

4530
King James (JACOB) VI (Scotland) & I (England & Ireland) - 19 June 1566 – 27 March 1625

4531
Engraving of the famous William Tyndale.

I was rather skeptical until I saw the contrast between original paintings that went up for auction and the "Photoshop" work done in textbooks.


...you make a very valid point in terms of escheatment upon the Grantors/Creators - that would be White Men - and this is not in any way to mean the Causasian race of men. Hey, I did not build it, I just comprehend how it was built.

The creators of the original colonies would have been orthodox Christians of a varied sort. The white = skin color came into play in the mid-1800s as Eastern Europeans started moving into positions of power in the United States. So magically in 1870 presto, power to revise the original trust was granted to someone? Not to mention that the key reason for D.C. burning was to destroy evidence of the brown-skinned origins of the United States of America. Remember, the idea of lifetime chattel slavery was something that radical liberal newcomers to Britain sought to import to the Americas. Consider the prohibition of slavery up to 1661 or so. What happened, ENGLAND BURNED..people were WIPED OUT. Many moved to North America. 1732, prohibition on slavery in Georgia. Obvious, a plan was fomented to to overturn Christian orthodoxy in America: so 'white' had to be redefined.

You see, North Carolina managed to avoid allowing the tampering with the original trust that happened in Georgia. North Carolina (Georgia came out of the Carolinas) is prima facie evidence that brown-skinned people were citizens/nationals and People of the original thirteen colonies right along with paler-skinned ones. You see, religious tests were like this: to be an overseer of God's creation you had to harmonize with His terms. Consider when they got rid of religious tests and the things that paralleled and followed that. Its all too obvious: Satanists and antichrists could not hold office under the original trust.


And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Revelations 7:14 (KJV)

It doesn't take too much to see the meaning of white in the Bible sense. Also, doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the Lords/People in Holland or England would have been Christians of orthodoxy.

[allodial]

Re: Founding Fathers..

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=2226&d=1422736846

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=2227&d=1422737312

Where is the signatures of George Washington or Thomas Jefferson? Nowhere to be found. Point: these 'founding fathers' are widely overlooked. Except for a few like John Adams, Oliver Woolcot, John Hancock and Samuel Adams. Their religions being very much of import.


***

Here, I'll refer to a Jesuit writing:


Cromwell drove Irish men and women from their home counties into the relatively barren and inhospitable province of Connaught. The soldiers and the intelligentsia, mainly Catholic Priests, teachers and Gaelic Bards, posed a real threat to a new government, and his solution was to institute a system of forced labour, which would provide British planters in the Caribbean with a massive influx of white indentured labourers. In Thurloe’s State papers, it was ‘a measure beneficial to Ireland, which was thus relieved of a population that might trouble the planters, and of great benefit to the sugar planters who desired the men and boys for their bondsmen and women and Irish girls in a country where they had only Maroon women and Negresses to solace them.’ Speaking from my own personal experience I would say that the planters came off the worst in that deal!!! Cromwell’s son, Henry was made Major General in command of his forces in Ireland and it was under his reign that hundreds of thousands of Irish men and women were shipped to the West Indies.

From 1648 - 1655 over 12,000 Irish political prisoners were shipped to Barbados. Although indentured servants (Irish included) have been coming to Barbados since 1627, this new wave of arrivals were the first to come involuntarily. The Irish prisoners made up for a serious labour shortage caused by English Planters, lack of access to African slaves. The Dutch and Portuguese dominated the slave trade in the early 17th century, and most white land owners in Barbados and the neighbouring islands were unable to purchase slaves of African origin.

A Jesuit priest Father J.J. Williams , in his 1932 book ‘ The Black Irish of Jamaica’ details chapter and verse the subsequent shipments from Barbados and direct from ‘The Auld Sod’ . The last shipment appears to have been in 1841 from Limerick , aboard the "SS Robert Kerr", a voyage that took seven weeks. The "Kingston Gleaner" noted that "they landed in Kingston wearing their best clothes and temperance medals"..meaning, believe it or not, that they did not drink alcohol!

Of course they are explained away as "slaves" kicked out of England but the records don't tend to agree. Remember, this relates to 1666 Cestui Que Vie Act (i.e. takeover of England, place was burned, people were diseased and kicked out). To figure out what they looked like: J.J. Williams explained. Note, eventually, Cromwell's body was dug out of its grave and hanged.

So perhaps yes "White Man" meaning Christians of orthodoxy, freeborn/highborn (note the statute you quote says "free white person" (not man). An attempt at a redefinition 100+ years after the original trust simply reveals a scheme to overturn the original jurisdiction. Just look at the history of Georgia's legislature come 1830. Even 'mulatto' originally referred to someone born of a Christian and a non-Christian (such as a Muslim).

Cromwell and Cyrus Scofield Koolaid
The evidence suggest Cromwell actually believed himself to have been fulfilling the Book of Joshua. Problem, it was fulfilled thousands of years ago but the Israelites didn't live up to the terms.

4533
It was King James (JACOB) VI & I's whose son Cromwell had hanged and Charles I's son, Charles II, with whom the English monarchy was restored. The Thirty Years' war ensued during the reign of Charles I.

Related:
George Washington's Vision & Pre-1800s Freemasonry (https://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?1007-George-Washington-s-Vision-amp-Pre-1800s-Freemasonry)
Cyrus Scofield - Who Was He? (http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/hoax/scofield.htm)

[David Merrill]

Is it just me or has there been a trend as of late for county or municipal seals to [no] longer be affixed to birth certificates?


I am still thinking that a typo Allodial. So I awaited clarification before examining your point.

The two examples are METRO organization. This global municipal jurisdiction is now exemplified by John William as Mayor John SUTHERS. He is being prosecuted for deviant oaths of office but that is a presumption about the metaphysics of law. We have evidence that such things exist:



https://youtu.be/-8szr8oPrxE?t=405

Louisiana as you know is not within the same State law boundary. This is due to a Bloodline claim - French Common Law. However I hear this is more of a pure Roman Civil Law and Equity foundation. Both make sense and can be true in conjunction with I Macabees 12 with Rome recognized as a Tribe of Israel.

Colorado is a little more complicated but better described as a war chest for the Union. Either way, it is not really a State because it never perfected its territorial jurisdiction, as you have said it Allodial.

[allodial]

I am still thinking that a typo Allodial. So I awaited clarification before examining your point.

Corrected.


I am still thinking that a typo Allodial. So I awaited clarification before examining your point.

The two examples are METRO organization. This global municipal jurisdiction is now exemplified by John William as Mayor John SUTHERS. He is being prosecuted for deviant oaths of office but that is a presumption about the metaphysics of law. We have evidence that such things exist: ...

Wasn't it Augustine that penned or used the term 'qua entities'? I wonder how might that term relate to the terms 'defacto trust' or 'resulting trust'? Something tells me that deviant oaths might most always about secret creation of some 'special .... jurisdiction'.

[David Merrill]

Corrected.



Wasn't it Augustine that penned or used the term 'qua entities'? I wonder how might that term relate to the terms 'defacto trust' or 'resulting trust'? Something tells me that deviant oaths might most always about secret creation of some 'special .... jurisdiction'.

4535

4536


You may be right. The jurisdiction is quite the opposite my knowledge then, alerting both China and Israel. The lack of bonding on judicial officers facilitates collections, not inhibiting collections. My presumption is that the behavior is riotous and will lead to an implosion of the highly compressed information infrastructure supporting the delusion that debt has substance at all.

We pass through these extra-territorial jurisdictions... The recent one and probably the last one I will pay attention to was called 'quantitative easing'. There was some nonsense about bailing out Greece too...


The very idea of Super Shemitah - the Seventieth Jubilee since the invasion of Canaan - is that those who desire truth, will have the law deliver it to them.

[allodial]

4535

4536

Impressment? ... 'mathematical unit' perhaps because a reckoning or accounting (discharge? settlement?) would be required at some point to correct the 'wrinkle' in time and space caused by the interruption. Reminds me.. SSN..name/nombre in Spanish (same thing?). On that note, it might be a challenge find too much difference between holding a birth certificate or SS card and impressment.

***

So basically, when Georgia legislature (trustees) and judges started trying to modify the 'original deed of trust' and attempting to conspire against the rights of brown-skinned people an entirely new "State of Georgia" (at least in a side-band parallel jurisdiction) was created and likely they knew it. Of course, one can consider whether or not the 1789, 1798 or 1861 Georgia constitutions actually served (or were even intended to) to put an end to the 1777 one. (Maybe therein lies the secret to decoding Texas v. White?) On that note, anyone recall a statute of any of the 12 or 13 original colonies that dissolved the original colonial charter? (No? I didn't think so.)


The 1833 law provided that “it shall not be lawful for any free person of colour in this state, to own, use, or car
ry fire arms of any description whatever.” --The Racist Roots of Georgia's Gun Laws

Of course taking men and simply assigning fairy terminology to them in order to 'justify' conspiracy against rights is 'magical' like fairy dust? Begs the question, what exactly is a 'free person of color' (especially if Lady Justice is blind?). The most sensible and sound interpretation would be a reference to felons who were held in a term of servitude and who were now free. So 'magically', the Georgia legislature decided to declare all brown-skinned people as some fairy-magical entity called 'free person of color'. This is regarding the creators of original trust mention by Michael Joseph. Even the most superficial glance at the historical record shows lots of attempts at tampering in order to 'force' the idea of 'person of color' (i.e. checkered past or colorable persons such as corporations or perhaps even 'felons under a special social franchise') meant "brown skinned" and that 'white' would now mean 'pale skinned' instead of freeborn, highborn or born-again Christian of orthodoxy. Of course, the desperation to modify and tamper with the original jurisdiction cause leaks. So they had to create a fiction (i.e. tamper with the particulars of another trust) about brown-skinned people being cursed sons of Ham. When, in fact, Canaan was cursed rather than Ham.


And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. Genesis 9:25

Nonetheless...'qua entities'.... interesting.

[David Merrill]

Impressment? ... 'mathematical unit' perhaps because a reckoning (discharge? settlement) would be required at some point to correct the 'wrinkle' in time and space caused by the interruption. Reminds me.. SSN..name/nombre in Spanish (same thing?). On that note, it might be a challenge find too much difference between holding a birth certificate or SS card and impressment.

***

So basically, when Georgia legislature (trustees) and judges started trying to modify the 'original deed of trust' and attempting to conspire against the rights of brown-skinned people an entirely new "State of Georgia" (at least in a side-band parallel jurisdiction) was created and likely they knew it. Of course, that didn't spell the end of the 1777 State of Georgia. (Maybe therein lies the secret to decoding Texas v. White?)

I think the nom de guerre fits impressment (Shanghai) better. The man is held to break the First Command. I have had that image for a long time and grabbed it for that point, anyway. I think Joanne TOOKE wrote something called The Just War of Saint Thomas Aquinas...

I want you to find the 40:00 Minute Mark of this lecture (https://youtu.be/rM_LGnPWnUs)...

Listen for a minute and consider that the speaker is comparing to the Breath of Life NESHEMAH - NESHMAT CHAIM and substituting RUACH which is traditional commercial priestcraft. Just as the real Hebrew word for Breath of Life is NESHEMAH (MIND) I would assert that the term for the Divine in Us Alan speaks of is NOT RUACH ADONAI but is rather NESHMAT ADONAI. The Mind of God, like what God really breathed into Adam's nostrils - The Breath of Life, being NESHMAT CHAIM.

This is the cusp of jurisdictional boundary-making you seek. (Spoken like Obe-wan Kanobe but with that journalist on The Men Who Stare at Goats (https://youtu.be/9mscxntkJWc) speaking.)

Even Alan WATTS needs to protect a roof overhead so that people can be comfortable paying to hear him be a guru.



This discovery, that is the Gospel - that is the Good News.

And even such a guru states it in deception.

4538


4539

[allodial]

Well that is interesting. I consider the idea that people believe the Biblical meaning of heart as being what is in one's chest rather than meaning mind. On that note, speaking of mind and 'mind control', its interesting the number of organizations alleging to help "persons of color" might actually only serve to exist to maintain use of the injurious terminology (the NAACP (http://www.daghettotymz.com/rkyvz/articles/naacp/naacp.html) comes to mind). Morgan Freeman might be onto something....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=I3cGfrExozQ

Similarly, consider the effects of stopping saying or remembering a social security number.

***


4540

4541

Source: The Real Man: A Study Guide (ch. 7)

Note how it ties together: "black" isn't so much a color in law but a term connoting 'death' contrasted to... 'life'. Its widely held that dark side occultist tends to abhor the original jurisdiction.

[Michael Joseph]

I think the nom de guerre fits impressment (Shanghai) better. The man is held to break the First Command. I have had that image for a long time and grabbed it for that point, anyway. I think Joanne TOOKE wrote something called The Just War of Saint Thomas Aquinas...

I want you to find the 40:00 Minute Mark of this lecture (https://youtu.be/rM_LGnPWnUs)...

Listen for a minute and consider that the speaker is comparing to the Breath of Life NESHEMAH - NESHMAT CHAIM and substituting RUACH which is traditional commercial priestcraft. Just as the real Hebrew word for Breath of Life is NESHEMAH (MIND) I would assert that the term for the Divine in Us Alan speaks of is NOT RUACH ADONAI but is rather NESHMAT ADONAI. The Mind of God, like what God really breathed into Adam's nostrils - The Breath of Life, being NESHMAT CHAIM.


You know I have never been able to find a definition of Spirit that suits my intellectual curiosity. What I am finding is that Spirit is just another way to say Infinite Mind. And Infinite Mind is a very difficult concept for the five sense limited mind to grasp. Infinite Mind speaks to means of perception that are without the five senses and thusly it seems very enigmatic in regard to our current condition.

Nevertheless, the Scriptures do declare that we should have the same Mind as Christ Jesus who did not count it robbery to be thought equal with God. For he said "I and the Father are One" and he said "If you have seen the son you have seen the Father." Now Jesus relates that he was first of the first fruits. That would make him "a son of God" And that makes many folk very uneasy.

Finding that a trust structure is just a CONCEPTUAL MODEL - all that is within is also ideal and concept. The sub-verse which is State is just a sub-set of the Uni-Verse. And since State is founded upon the Vision [Mind] of Father [Founders - Testes as in Testa-Ment], where Testa relates to Seed from Testes and Ment to Mens or Mind, we see that the State is founded upon a Vision or an Imagination of a few for the many.

Now then, within this dream are many offices and officers but these are merely titles and duties - where is a man within that structure? You can't find one! There is no such thing a a man within the Dream of State. And this to me relates directly to the Promised Land - Under God. Once the Testator dies then the Testament is of force - for it is now Irrevocable. And many begin to take shade in the branches of the new Tree. But those who occupy within a dead man's estate are not occupying in their Original Estate in God. Rather, they work as trustees, agents and executors [offices] subject to duties and benefits.

Comes now a man - who has a claim? And who will Voice their Claim upon their own liability before God and other Men? Finding only titled officers, as far as I can see - a man has become quite rare indeed!

It seems that we have listened to a thief and consented in our ignorance... but listen to the following two verses:

Isa 13:11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

Isa 13:12 I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir.


When men began to ask for a man-king at their head - that is exactly what was granted to them. But that meant the beginning of kingdoms and therefore offices and titles. Therefore we were removed from Claim as it was replaced with Complaint. And since kingdoms are very structured so that the courts can manage equity according to law, these kingdoms merely reflect poorly the real. Said kingdoms are only a MODEL of the Real.


Tangent: Today I held up some assortment of energy and atoms commonly called a cup in front of my friend. I asked him to tell me what it was. He began to describe it and my response was "that is good, but it is not real." All the words in the world cannot make something real. For instance I looked out the window and some say there is a "Forest" whatever that means! I see something that looks like the CONCEPT of many trees.


Thusly the vision or dream of the Testator subject to the terms claimed and ascribed within the "finition" of the ONE. For the State is not Two but One.


This also meant that someone else would bear the liability for all persons in the Kingdom. For all Estates belong to the King and thusly all charges are discharged upon those Estates. It is only by mere execution of law in equity that trustees are allowed to hold property and thus amass rights of use in Estate. For the kingdom is constituted as a single Man. And as Jesus said - the poor ye have with ye always. As such, give thanks for the New Corn and Wine, but don't curse the old Bread. For it brought us to know - we needed to experience [baptism by fire] - and thus it was a school teacher.

Praise Yah. Yehovah Yireh. For the Kingdom is the Lords - we have been busy at school learning. Hear O' Israel the Lord thy God is One.


In my Ignorance I sometimes go Sleep Walking (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSq4B_zHqPM)

[David Merrill]

You know I have never been able to find a definition of Spirit that suits my intellectual curiosity.


The biblical Hebrew reveals that Spirit is comprised of five concepts, that all have different words.

4542


4543

[allodial]

On the topic of executors de son tort, pseudo-trustees, adverse-and-deceptive deviant oaths, forgot to add:


"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that enters not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. But he that enters in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter opens; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calls his own sheep by name, and leads them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers." John 10:1-5 (AKJV) [translation from Aramaic (http://biblehub.com/aramaic-plain-english/john/10.htm)]

For emphasis: He that enters not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. Hmm perhaps that means such a thief and robber will ... will steal and rob instead of 'take care of' or 'honorably serve' or 'honorably tend to' or 'honorably execute official duties'.


7 Then said Jesus to them again, Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. 10 The thief comes not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.. John 10:7 (KJV)

There was only one door on the Noah's Ark.

Re: Steal ('klepto') and Kill (also slay, sacrifice or slaughter)

4544

4545

Related:
John 10, Aramaic Bible in Plain English version (http://biblehub.com/aramaic-plain-english/john/10.htm)

[Michael Joseph]

You know I have never been able to find a definition of Spirit that suits my intellectual curiosity.


Quoting E. Swedenborg as follows:

AC 94. Verse 7. And Jehovah God formed man, dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath (spiraculum) of lives, and man became a living soul. To "breathe into his nostrils the breath of lives," is to give him the life of faith and love


AC 96. As to its being said that "Jehovah God breathed into his nostrils," the case is this: In ancient times, and in the Word, by "nostrils" was understood whatever was grateful in consequence of its odor, which signifies perception. On this account it is repeatedly written of Jehovah, that He "smelled an odor of rest" from the burnt-offerings, and from those things which represented Him and His kingdom; and as the things relating to love and faith are most grateful to Him, it is said that "He breathed through his nostrils the breath of lives." Hence the anointed of Jehovah, that is, of the Lord, is called the "breath of the nostrils" (Lam. 4:20). And the Lord Himself signified the same by "breathing on His disciples," as written in John:--

He breathed on them and said, Receive ye the Holy Spirit (John 20:22).

AC 97. The reason why life is described by "breathing" and by "breath," is also that the men of the Most Ancient Church perceived states of love and of faith by states of respiration, which were successively changed in their posterity. Of this respiration nothing can as yet be said, because at this day such things are altogether unknown. The most ancient people were well acquainted with it, and so are those who are in the other life, but no longer any one on this earth, and this was the reason why they likened spirit or life to "wind." The Lord also does this when speaking of the regeneration of man,

in John:--

The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the voice thereof, and knowest not whence it cometh, or whither it goeth; so is every one that is born of the spirit (John 3:8).

So in David:--

By the word of Jehovah were the heavens made, and all the army of them by the breath of His mouth (Ps. 33:6).


And again:--in the Psalms

Thou gatherest their breath, they expire, and return to their dust; Thou sendest forth Thy spirit, they are created, and Thou renewest the faces of the ground (Ps. 104:29, 30).

That the "breath (spiraculum)" is used for the life of faith and of love, appears

from Job:--
He is the spirit in man, and the breath of Shaddai giveth them understanding (Job 32:8).

Again in the same:--
The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of Shaddai hath given me life (Job 33:4).

[BLBereans]

READERS: ANYONE WHO WANTS YOUR PRAYERS OR SPIRITUAL WARFARE TO BE CRIPPLED OR USELESS WANTS GET YOU TO STOP USING OR SAYING THE NAME!

The name matters very much. It means so much that many have conspired to hide or conceal the name (by taking control over Sunday schools and educational literature, etc.) I'll solve part of a 'riddle' for you:



One reason behind Matthew 7:21-23 is that they are using titles "lord, lord" rather than using the name. The name being given and refusal to apply it is regarded as a sin (see Parable of the Talents). AFAIK, the term "god" is not necessarily a name, it regarded to be a title or points to a role or office. Yehoshua has {Note that 'eyeh'/'yeh' is encoded at the front of the name and that he specifically said he comes in his Father's name...} Specificity serves to is to prevent confusion with Canaanite gods. Of course, those who want to lead the sheep to the dragon's mouth will wish to blur the distinctions. There are those who suggest "all roads lead to God". There is a guy who has a series of videos on the book of Revelations, he seems to have a lot of "I think" mixed in there but he has reached the conclusion that effectively are only two roads: one is to the Great Dragon and one is to the Tree of Life. The distinction is in the specificity. So perhaps it is true in the sense that: 99.9999% of the roads lead you to the left hand and a specific, narrow path leads you to the Tree of Life? And perhaps that is exactly the message the OT and the NT paints.

Consider the statement, "Everyone should wear allegiance to the president." --what exactly do you mean by 'the president'. If you are not specific you might wind up as a subject of the Philippines. The same ambiguity games are played in the United States with jurisdictional names. When you say 'state of Missouri', what exactly do you mean because specificity means a lot!

Elijah dealt with the ambiguity crowd too:



If it didn't matter, 1 Kings 18 would not have been written for our edification.

A hungry dragon wanting to be fed will tell you lies to get you down in its gullet. Have fun with ambiguity? "Baal" means 'lord' (it is a title, as explained in the KJV "the LORD" refers to a specific name it does not mean "god" or "him" or "the awesome one" or "lord". Elijah specifically addressed the 'titles only' ambiguity crowd. The reason they do not like names is because of the power in the name. Casting out evil spirits or praying or healing "in the name of the lord" does not comply with scriptural requirements. Of course, since they want you to fail they discourage you from using the name, and hope you will simply stop believing rather than getting wise to the deception.

For a more clear picture of who Yehoshua was and is or to see the connection between the OT and the NT:

Related:

Jesus (Yehoshua) Already Stood On the Mount of Olives (http://americanvision.org/5120/jesus-already-stood-on-the-mount-of-olives/) (of course, it could happen again)
The Name of JESUS in the Old Testament (http://www.menorah.org/yeshname.html)


I think your answer was adeptly ignored... Deviant Oath? - IS a judge!

Those who claim to be judges, are so, to those who prefer man-kings of a worldly kingdom rather than Jesus the Christ, The Son of God (Pre-Existent Father) who is King of ALL kings of the ONLY Kingdom that matters - the one not of this world. They are also judges of those who are confused about what "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" is the sovereign being evoked in said oath.

The Name matters.

Allah is NOT the God of Abraham any more than the Roman Church is the Body of Christ. There is a not-so-mysterious kinship between Muslims and the Pope which is as clear as day. The abomination that is Mystery Babylon, The Whore of Babylon, The Roman Catholic Church, born out of an evil blend of the Roman Empire, Paganism with the slightest veneer of Christianity for purposes of deception, is the author of Islam, Dispensationalism & Full Preterism.

The office of Pope, the Popery, Pontifex Maximus is the anti-christ of biblical prophecy. The Roman Church has ALWAYS sought out and murdered the true saints (orthodox "jews" and christians) who would not submit to the Harlot and the Beast of Rome. Conversion of Arabs to Catholicism was being challenged in a major way by the saints who were spreading the true gospel in North Africa, Asia Minor, etc. Also, some would just not convert and submit to the Roman Church.

This dilemma was solved by the creation of Islam by the Roman Church in conjunction with the Jesuits who are the secret and infiltrating "special-ops" arm of the Roman Church. There are ex-Jesuits and ex-Roman Priests who verify this. Those who do not see the absolute similarities of the symbols, idols, rituals, etc. between Roman Catholicism and Islam are willfully blind or not interested in truth. Neither serve the true God of the Bible. Both have a murderous and evil history of conversion by the sword - that is NOT what Jesus the Christ taught. The true believers knew/know and followed/follow that teaching and were/are slaughtered for it by those who are loyal to the Pope and to Mohammad.

After the Roman Church could no longer hide the scriptures from the people, and in order to deflect the known fact which prophecy revealed regarding the Papacy as the anti-christ, the Roman Church commissioned two Jesuit priests to manufacture the lies of dispensationalism and preterism to intentionally obfuscate and propagandize against the Protestant Reformation. The Reformers found the truth and called out the Roman Church as the Whore and the Beast of Prophecy and the Roman Church had to do "damage-control" quickly.

Preterism teaches that ALL prophecy was fulfilled by 70 AD and Dispensationalism teaches futurism; the anti-christ is yet to come - how convenient for the "vicar of Christ" (anti-christ), the Whore of Babylon and the Beast that is the Roman Church. Both false doctrines deflect the truth about the Roman Church as the Beast of prophecy. Unfortunately, those two lies have been adopted by most non-catholic christians and the Big Lie was mostly protected - Satan is always the most subtil so as to fool even the very elect...

The original State Constitutions (except Rhode Island) had it right; the invocation of Jesus the Christ as LORD and Savior must be believed and declared by those who seek to hold office in order for ANY Nation to be blessed and protected by the True God of the Bible. God has shown the He blesses and protects people, and the nations they form, if they truly believe in Him and follow His Laws. The Constitutional Convention discarded that requirement and they created a new sovereign, a new "god" called "We the People" and the "People's" law was declared the "law of the land" rather than the Law of the Bible. That outcome, unfortunately, is inevitable due to the temptations of power and wealth and that is why God's True Nation of People, His True Family, is scattered all over the earth.

The "Deviant Oath" is sworn unto this new "god" whether it meets Constitutional requirements or not.

The Name matters.

[allodial]

re: Babylon
Speaking of Babylon, anyone who doesn't believe in the possibility of a literal body resurrection of the physical body of man but subscribes to anything Babylonian or Zoroastrian might be in for a shock. The Pharisees were widely regarded to have borrowed to some extent from Zoroastrians. Not only did the Zoroastrians believe that body resurrection was possible, they had specific rules about the number of days after which they believed it would not be possible.


The word 'god'

Well it seems rather obvious that a group of men who want to be worshiped as gods could easily use the term 'god' to refer to themselves. "allah" it is suggested means "the god' (source (http://www.nccg.org/islam/Islam01-Allah.html)). Of course if it follows that 'the president', 'the lord', 'the king' or 'the son' are not names then....'the god' might not be a name either.


The word "Allah" comes from the compound Arabic word, al-ilah. Al is the definite article "the" and ilah is an Arabic word for "god", i.e. the god. (source (http://www.nccg.org/islam/Islam01-Allah.html))

So imagine possibility of thousands of people bowing down to a title, but a handful of mean keeping the secret that they are referring themselves. Imagine ten million people each from separate countries that have a 'president' who are somehow led to believe that since they all call their CEO 'the president' or 'president' that they must all live in the same country. Fancy that! Or even ten billion people being convinced that they have the same father because they call call their father....

dad.

4546

Without a specific name, one might be dealing with ambiguities that lead to dangerous doors and wide paths to deception, error and mistake.


....Islam, Dispensationalism & Full Preterism.

Those who outright and irrevocably rejected Christ de jure are probably looking for something in the future. Some suggest that will likely be very unpleasantly surprised.


...some would just not convert and submit ...

For some reason, brought to mind is the vision of Joseph where the stars and the moon (the greater light and the lesser light) bowed down to Joseph rather than the other way around.


Both have a murderous and evil history of conversion by the sword - that is NOT what Jesus the Christ taught.


I have yet to find anything supporting conversion at gunpoint or at the point of the sword anywhere in the Bible. But of course, if you're not adhering to the name and the specificity associated therewith, how are you going to pull off legitimate miracles in the first place?


Preterism teaches that ALL prophecy was fulfilled by 70 AD and Dispensationalism teaches futurism...

Preterism isn't necessarily full preterism. The astute student with the proper divine leading can identify what has been fulfilled and what has not. Is there any significance at all in that 66AD to 1066AD is 1,000 years.


The original State Constitutions (except Rhode Island) had it right; the invocation of Jesus the Christ as LORD and Savior must be believed and declared by those who seek to hold office in order for ANY Nation to be blessed and protected by the True God of the Bible. God has shown the He blesses and protects people, and the nations they form, if they truly believe in Him and follow His Laws.

AFAIK, those states were never dissolved.


The Constitutional Convention discarded that requirement and they created a new sovereign, a new "god" called "We the People" and the "People's" law was declared the "law of the land" rather than the Law of the Bible. That outcome, unfortunately, is inevitable due to the temptations of power and wealth and that is why God's True Nation of People, His True Family, is scattered all over the earth.

Gary North seems to make it rather clear that there was an attempt at usurpation starting with the 1788 Constitutional Convention. If you really get it, you just might see a divine hand at work.

[xparte]

The "Deviant Oath" is The "Deviant Oath" is sworn unto this new "god" whether it meets Constitutional requirements or not.unto this new "god" whether it meets Constitutional requirements or not. In God we trust, So help me God,Do not add or subtract from the law of God. We must first understand what oaths are. Those who defend the swearing of oaths define an oath as “calling God to witness to the truth of a statement. We have all seen why they define it this way However, Christ had a different definition of oaths in Matthew 23:16-22.

In this passage, Jesus is rebuking the Pharisees for making rules concerning which oaths could be broken without guilt and which ones had to be kept inviolable. Notice what the Pharisees were swearing by: the temple, the gold of the temple, the altar, and the gift on the altar. Obviously, these were oaths, and Jesus treated them as such. However, none of them were “calling God to witness”! We see then that this cannot be the true definition of an oath. There are two parts to an oath: 1) the oath itself (“I swear”) and 2) the confirmation: what is being sworn by. People swear by many things, for instance, “I swear to God” or “I swear by my mother’s grave.” Some even swear without a confirmation, just saying “I swear that…” There are the judicial oaths in courts, service oaths for public office or military service, and the Hippocratic oath for medical professionals. These are all oaths. The writer of the book of Hebrews affirms that oaths are sworn by something greater than the swearer and are used for confirmation of something asserted: “For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife” (Hebrews 6:16). We see in this verse that the purpose of oaths is for confirmation of a statement based on the authority or weight of something greater than the swearer.In the book of Deuteronomy 6:13-15 and 10:20-21, God includes swearing by His Name as part of the service which He desired from the Israelites and mentions it in the context of a rejection of idolatry.

Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name. (Deuteronomy 6:13-15).

Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God; him shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave, and swear by his name. (Deuteronomy 10:20-21).

Oaths were also required in the service of the priests. Numbers 5 records what was to be done with a woman who was suspected by her husband of unfaithfulness. She was to be brought to the priest, who was to perform a ceremony to allow the Lord to reveal whether she was guilty or innocent. Part of this ceremony involved an oath:

And the priest shall charge her by an oath … (Numbers 5:19-22).

Not only were oaths permitted and commanded in the Mosaic Law, God Himself on more than one occasion. For instance, in Jeremiah 22:5, God declares: “But if ye will not hear these words, I swear by myself, saith the LORD, that this house shall become a desolation.” In Exodus 17, after a battle between the Israelites and the Amalekites, Moses built an altar and called it Jehovahnissi, “Because the LORD hath sworn that the LORD will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Exodus 17:16). (See also Deuteronomy 7:8; Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 6:13, 17; Isaiah 45:23).

So we see that not only were oaths permitted under the Law of Moses, they were actually required in some circumstances, and God Himself swore. Nevertheless, there were restrictions which were applied even under the Mosaic Law which are important to understand.The Law of Moses strictly forbade false oaths—swearing to something which was not true, or swearing that a person would do something and then not doing it. If a man swore to do something and was unable to perform it, the Law considered it sin and required that he bring a trespass offering to the priest. Leviticus 5:4-6 and Numbers 30:1-2 speak of this, as well as swearing falsely in Leviticus 6:2-5 and 19:12.If a man swore to do something and was unable to perform it a deviant oath is just a false God idol worship Actors and Persons are sworn daily thank Christ for letting us in on our persona whats in a Name nothing but the truth

[xparte]

Judges are the priests And the priest shall charge her/him by an oath … (Numbers 5:19-22).Jesus made clear the radical new standard which He was requiring of those in His Kingdom—no oaths at all, for any purpose, in any way. “Swear not at all,” has nothing unclear about it.

James’ words on swearing

Jesus was not the only one to instruct the citizens of the kingdom of God to abstain from swearing. The Apostle James wrote:

But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation (James 5:12).So the Bible has two testaments swearing on either book is designed for idolatrous behaviors IMHO yea means yo nay means no.Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.Its our job to make plain the message that a man in the flesh trumps the idolatrous shenanigans derived from the Tree of Knowledge or the worshiping of a written book Interpret the law and swearing negligence are ones vanity in GODS NAME only. The management of a book is a litigation onto itself if one man became flesh the book is now a screenplay moving pictures.I have taken the book as serious knowledge but literacy has came no further than Christ .

[allodial]

Sarcasm/cynicism alert:

4548

"The idea of many pools is an illusion, we all swim in the same pool...

because we all call it...

4547

....'the Pool'. It must be the same. There is only one pool!"

https://media.giphy.com/media/13pJbVxaJjwipq/giphy.gif
Do you dare disagree!?!?

*** END OF SARCASM/CYNICISM ***

The error with their logic is that it hopes to cast the into oblivion the commandment "...have no other gods before me". If the doctrine of the Hebrews was "monotheistic" in the modern sense of the term (see quote at bottom of this post) then why would there be a prohibition on having NO OTHER gods if there were actually no other gods to worship (https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/ctr-nt/luter-worship-ctr.pdf). Foreign judges, foreign rulers and foreign deities were referred to as gods although in some cases 'idol gods'. Someone can hold drugs, money, seemingly wealthy men, seemingly powerful men, steak sauce or sexual pleasure to be a god or an idol.


I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

Does that the one named at Exodus 3:14-15 equate himself with that all which he creates? If 'the god' of the Canaanites was also 'the god' of Israel, would there have been either conflict or controversy? What would the Mt. Hermon pact makers of Enoch 6 argue? Of course if you take the pantheistic view, worshiping (https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/ctr-nt/luter-worship-ctr.pdf) a statute, worshiping a symbol, worshiping (https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/ctr-nt/luter-worship-ctr.pdf)a graven image of that which is in heaven becomes 100% Parve-Kosher-Tasty-Fresh because...pantheism.


And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. Genesis 1:16

He/They made two great lights (which some regard to be symbolic of two classes of rulers). However, does that mean utterly equating him with His/Their creation? The error of pantheism has one worshiping the creature as if it were the creator (distinction failure).

re: Worship or Veneration of Mary
Readers might be quite interested in the fact that in Aramaic the word 'marya' or 'mary' means ....

4550
(surprise!!!!)

...'lord'. Of course her proper Hebrew name is Miriam (http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=obstinate).

4549
Source of table: click here (http://www.dukhrana.com/lexicon/lexeme.php?adr=1:1843&font=Estrangelo+Edessa&size=125%).


And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD {name} be God, follow him: but if Baal {actually means 'lord'}, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. 1 Kings 18


The first commandment, then, does not constitute any sort of denial of the existence of other gods or of the divine council in Israelite religion. The point of the command, like so many other declarations in the Torah and elsewhere, is that Israelites were to have Yahweh as their sole object of worship (https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/ctr-nt/luter-worship-ctr.pdf).

...

"Monotheism" as a term was coined in the 17th century not as an antonym to "polytheism," but to "atheism." A monotheist, then, was a person who believed there was a God, not someone who believed there was only one spiritual entity that could or should be named by the letters G-O-D. This understanding of the term has been lost in contemporary discourse, and so it would be pointless to call for its re-introduction. --Monotheism, Polytheism, Monolatry, or Henotheism? (Heiser) pp. 27 (http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1276&context=lts_fac_pubs)

Related:
Panentheism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism)
Pantheism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism)

[xparte]

Was Christ to be Worshiped or just his message who gets Venerated on this Sarcasm/cynicism alert: Do i know how to overcompensate for any evildoers should i hopefully avoid a homeless man or ask a Cop for directions.I am fed up with the Scriptures and its true God who one needs a license to speak about. Does finding a purpose in life come first or does life require the dogmatically purpose that is life.Adam had a verbal communication with his creator his conscience held the rest A Christ conscience is that equivalent in all Men .Call it Bob or Rita its still a connection that conscience or nature of God willed us all. Can i mentioned how a bible saves any argument no inoculated being can. I have seen the NAMED and its registration as issuing license to break the law.Getting agreement is Christs message not the licensed or existing agreement that a person has been buried with.

[allodial]

'worship' means service but it also has other meanings (http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=worship&allowed_in_frame=0). In the OT there was a separate set of laws for the stranger --points to the issue of Universalist-Fundamentalism. 'Love the stranger that is among you' comes to mind. Its interesting how many dismiss the Bible truth, but yet they first thing they do to try to bolster their personal yarns is give the impression that its based on the Bible. Uncanny. Then there are those who say they hate "Christians" but yet the they couldn't run their business if not for honest Christians helping them with their affairs (since most anyone else would rob them blind) (really what they hate is someone else being consistently honest and having self-control that they themselves lack). And on the same note, those who say they don't like "Bible people" when they are actually having a problem with those who don't really live by the Bible but instead live by caricatures of the Bible or heretical ideologies. Again..uncanny.

re: Adam.
Adam (and Eve) fell courtesy of the Serpent. The following regards Genesis 3:21:


In some contexts, clothing someone is an act of investiture. Kings and priests were clothed in installation ceremonies. Joseph was clothed by his father with a special coat and was clothed by Pharaoh on his appointment to high office. But all of these constitute elevations of status, whereas Adam and Eve are ready to be demoted. In the Tale of Adapa, after Adapa loses the opportunity to eat from the bread and water of life, he is given clothing by the god Anu before being sent from his presence. (Walton)

[David Merrill]

Not that I haven't been writing lately...

Notice to Tenth Circuit - TYMKOVICH (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImUDFUSTgzSERVd0k/view?usp=sharing). It is signed in front of a notary and the full page oath is Refused for Cause with a red sharpie. Otherwise, you get the picture.

Watch for Livery: (https://www.ups.com/WebTracking/track?loc=en_US&WT.svl=PNRO_L1) 1ZV326300364816740

Notice and Complaint


Edited: as I understand Michael Joseph, it was delivered it to the UPS clerk and am livering to the "chief judge" at the Tenth Circuit.

[BLBereans]

Not that I haven't been writing lately...

Notice to Tenth Circuit - TYMKOVICH (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImUDFUSTgzSERVd0k/view?usp=sharing). It is signed in front of a notary and the full page oath is Refused for Cause with a red sharpie. Otherwise, you get the picture.

Watch for Livery: (https://www.ups.com/WebTracking/track?loc=en_US&WT.svl=PNRO_L1) 1ZV326300364816740

Notice and Complaint


Edited: as I understand Michael Joseph, it was delivered it to the UPS clerk and am livering to the "chief judge" at the Tenth Circuit.

They are speaking to you...

"Our Court maintains a website..."

"Thank you for your interest in our Court."

"The Rules of this Court are enclosed."

You attempt to "speak" like them yet you are not recognized as a member - one of them. It is clear that they are asserting the claim that the Court you wish to enter, is their Court. They recognize the styling you use, and how you identify the venue, as being theirs, therefore, their Rules must be followed.

The matter you bring forth is also unrecognized by their Court and they state that it does not fall under the jurisdiction of their Court.

They are attempting to communicate to you that you are a foreigner who is not following the Rules of the Court you are praying to enter and that your matter is not something they can "hear".

Also, you may want to start using blue ink for your thumbprint(s) as that will dispel any notion of actual blood being on your presents which is a reasonable argument for denying your potentially contaminated paper(s).

Furthermore, IMHO, I do not believe they are impressed and/or intimidated by your self-given stage sobriquet "I AM THAT I AM". Some might even consider that blasphemous.

[BLBereans]

The error with their logic is that it hopes to cast the into oblivion the commandment "...have no other gods before me". If the doctrine of the Hebrews was "monotheistic" in the modern sense of the term (see quote at bottom of this post) then why would there be a prohibition on having NO OTHER gods if there were actually no other gods to worship (https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/ctr-nt/luter-worship-ctr.pdf). Foreign judges, foreign rulers and foreign deities were referred to as gods although in some cases 'idol gods'. Someone can hold drugs, money, seemingly wealthy men, seemingly powerful men, steak sauce or sexual pleasure to be a god or an idol.


Does that the one named at Exodus 3:14-15 equate himself with that all which he creates? If 'the god' of the Canaanites was also 'the god' of Israel, would there have been either conflict or controversy? What would the Mt. Hermon pact makers of Enoch 6 argue? Of course if you take the pantheistic view, worshiping (https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/ctr-nt/luter-worship-ctr.pdf) a statute, worshiping a symbol, worshiping (https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/ctr-nt/luter-worship-ctr.pdf)a graven image of that which is in heaven becomes 100% Parve-Kosher-Tasty-Fresh because...pantheism.


He/They made two great lights (which some regard to be symbolic of two classes of rulers). However, does that mean utterly equating him with His/Their creation? The error of pantheism has one worshiping the creature as if it were the creator (distinction failure).

re: Worship or Veneration of Mary
Readers might be quite interested in the fact that in Aramaic the word 'marya' or 'mary' means ....

(surprise!!!!)

...'lord'. Of course her proper Hebrew name is Miriam (http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=obstinate).

Source of table: click here (http://www.dukhrana.com/lexicon/lexeme.php?adr=1:1843&font=Estrangelo+Edessa&size=125%).



Related:
Panentheism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism)
Pantheism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism)

Psalm 82

God Presides in the Great Assembly

1 {A Psalm of Asaph.} God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

Deuteronomy 32:8

8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.

"Moses' farewell song in Deuteronomy 32:1-43 is one of the more intriguing portions of Deuteronomy, and has received a good deal of attention among scholars, primarily for its poetic features, archaic orthography and morphology, and text-critical problems. Among the textual variants present in the Song of Moses, one in Deut. 32:8 stands out as particularly fascinating. The verse is rendered as follows in the NASB:

“When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.”

Controversy over the text of this verse concerns the last phrase, “according to the number of the sons of Israel,” which reflects the reading of the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible (hereafter, MT). The MT reading is also reflected in several later revisions of the Septuagint (hereafter, LXX): a manuscript of Aquila (Codex X), Symmachus (also Codex X), and Theodotion."

"The debate over which text is to be preferred is more than a fraternal spat among textual critics. The notion that the nations of the world were geographically partitioned and owe their terrestrial identity to the sovereign God takes the reader back to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10-11, and two details there regarding God's apportionment of the earth that are important for the context of the textual debate in Deuteronomy 32:8. First, the Table of Nations catalogs seventy nations, but Israel is not included in the inventory."

"Israel alone is Yahweh’s portion and so is not numbered among the seventy other nations. The referent of the number seventy, the "sons of Israel" (in MT), initially seemed understandable enough, for both Gen 46:27 and Exo. 1:5 state that 70 members of Jacob's family went down to Egypt in the days of Joseph. Little thought was given, however, to the logic of the correlation: How is it that the number of the pagan nations was determined in relation to an entity (Israel) or individuals (Jacob and his household) that did not yet exist? Even if one contends that the correlation was in the mind of God prior to Israel's existence and only recorded much later, what possible point would there be behind connecting the pagan Gentile nations numerically with the children of promise? On the other hand, what could possibly be meant by the textual option that created a correspondence between the number of the nations in Genesis 10-11 and heavenly beings?"

source

(http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/DT32BibSac.pdf)Exodus 20:3-6

3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

[David Merrill]

They are speaking to you...

"Our Court maintains a website..."

"Thank you for your interest in our Court."

"The Rules of this Court are enclosed."

You attempt to "speak" like them yet you are not recognized as a member - one of them. It is clear that they are asserting the claim that the Court you wish to enter, is their Court.

Yes. The affront to trust law is secondary. A symptom if you will.

The fraud is to deviate from form with the bonding process. That is the basic finding of fact.

What you did though is verify that one can open, read and glean the plain English findings of fact. Thank you.

[Michael Joseph]

Not that I haven't been writing lately...

Notice to Tenth Circuit - TYMKOVICH (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImUDFUSTgzSERVd0k/view?usp=sharing). It is signed in front of a notary and the full page oath is Refused for Cause with a red sharpie. Otherwise, you get the picture.

Watch for Livery: (https://www.ups.com/WebTracking/track?loc=en_US&WT.svl=PNRO_L1) 1ZV326300364816740

Notice and Complaint


Edited: as I understand Michael Joseph, it was delivered it to the UPS clerk and am livering to the "chief judge" at the Tenth Circuit.

DE means to abandon
Thus to Deliver means to abandon rights, titles and interest in property or estate.

Thus abandoned property is subject to TAKE. For Take implies abandonment. And also, we then "make the livery" of property upon another. When one "makes the livery" of property upon another a trust is implied. But when one "delivers" property then there is only a contract of which service is rendered upon terms of payment.

If one is ever in receipt of property from another, it would do one well to ask, are there any "strings attached" meaning is this a "Quit Claim Deed" or a "Trust Indenture?" What if I made the livery of property upon you but then I never claimed or demanded it in return? Do not my heirs also retain the right of redemption in Claim or Demand? You bet they do! Is the trustee not with the ability to receive reasonable compensation for his hire? Yes sir ree! Said compensation usually comes from the "management of the property held in the Estate" or the "sale of the property". Thus the husbandman is worthy to receive the first of the firstfruits.

Years ago I could not get service on Ban-Ki MOON [Secretary General United Nations] so in order to get service on him, I realized all I needed to do was make the livery upon agent. So I put my contents in a sealed package and made the livery of said contents to the USPS [registered mail]. All defects were then cured. But I did not abandon my Moses in my little Reed Boat. I merely put him on the waters in trust.

[xparte]

Biblical folks and Bible folks whats literally taken is a journey of the words and life of unceremonious piety.If i bash the book and then bask in it i am a judge its a law book and i respect the level of investment biblical script impacts on our western legal system so yes i am guilty of that same jurisdiction that lorded over the folks in the bible. Is it necessary or possible for a spiritual life after Adam/Eve based on the scripture alone.The industry called sin was knowledge or knowing the difference .Christ in the flesh legal arguments or lawful agreement. You attempt to "speak" like them yet you are not recognized as a member - one of them. It is clear that they are asserting the claim that the Court you wish to enter, is their Court. They recognize the styling you use, and how you identify the venue, as being theirs, therefore, their Rules must be followed. That,s the Biblical truth if Christ sits on the right the lawful seat who then is legally on the left.The OT / NT are left to right .after all Judas identified Christ.We Judas ourselves everyday.And the Bibles are just a silent reminder on why they're in a court of law .Who,s listening and the venue for the bible is strictly biblical .

[xparte]

Also, you may want to start using blue ink for your thumbprint(s) as that will dispel any notion of actual blood being on your presents which is a reasonable argument for denying your potentially contaminated paper(s). Its ones commitment LB one has tools to keep the truth attached to his commitment Tainted words are just that anchoring any truth one might adjacent how courts venue truths.If rules just dispatch the truth someone has contaminated paper(s). Or ignorant paperwork the rules tend to ignore.This foreign Christ and his redemption are the Crux and let the record show how contaminated the process is.

[David Merrill]

DE means to abandon
Thus to Deliver means to abandon rights, titles and interest in property or estate.

Thus abandoned property is subject to TAKE. For Take implies abandonment. And also, we then "make the livery" of property upon another. When one "makes the livery" of property upon another a trust is implied. But when one "delivers" property then there is only a contract of which service is rendered upon terms of payment.

If one is ever in receipt of property from another, it would do one well to ask, are there any "strings attached" meaning is this a "Quit Claim Deed" or a "Trust Indenture?" What if I made the livery of property upon you but then I never claimed or demanded it in return? Do not my heirs also retain the right of redemption in Claim or Demand? You bet they do! Is the trustee not with the ability to receive reasonable compensation for his hire? Yes sir ree! Said compensation usually comes from the "management of the property held in the Estate" or the "sale of the property". Thus the husbandman is worthy to receive the first of the firstfruits.

Years ago I could not get service on Ban-Ki MOON [Secretary General United Nations] so in order to get service on him, I realized all I needed to do was make the livery upon agent. So I put my contents in a sealed package and made the livery of said contents to the USPS [registered mail]. All defects were then cured. But I did not abandon my Moses in my little Reed Boat. I merely put him on the waters in trust.


Thank you. That makes sense. And you explained it before I abandoned process for a vacant officer to take. I appreciate that.

[xparte]

NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROCEDURE
The procedure through which a nuisance abatement action takes place is set forth generally it is triggered by the adoption of a municipal ordinance designating the public officer and granting her the powers set forth in state law. As with any legal procedure affecting property, the action takes place through a series of steps designed to ensure that parties receive notice, and have the opportunity to challenge the process.I abandoned process for a vacant officer to take no notice whatsoever A LEGAL STANDING is a particular office . New York (State). Court of Appeals - 1880 - ?Law reports, digests, etc
An officer dc facto cannot be compelled to act, and will not incur any liability by his ... as alderman, "his office as such alderman shall immediately become vacant. The definition of deviance Or ignorant paperwork the rules tend to ignore.This foreign Christ and his redemption are the Crux and let the record show how contaminated the process is.

[allodial]

Also, you may want to start using blue ink for your thumbprint(s) as that will dispel any notion of actual blood being on your presents which is a reasonable argument for denying your potentially contaminated paper(s).

Good point. Purple is an option its the (priestly or kingly) color of the next level of authority down from red. Silver or gold are options too.

[xparte]

When a clerks refusing to stamp file or received on documents for my case evidence getting before the Judge the explanation is defendant cannot be submitting a notice of appeal until after a conviction Has any suitor tried handing a unmarked file not stamped filed or stamped received, directly to a judge that has given instructions for said clerks not to accept my paperwork. If i was to show up on a court day not my court date how might i legally approach the bench to avoid being disruptive between opening all rise and all rise this courts adjourned.The general rule or etiquette!Without ambushing and embarrassing the traffic courts we cannot hear you/you have no standing.brush off

[David Merrill]

This is probably time for a complaint to a chief circuit judge. Or in Canada the top judge in the whole nation.

[allodial]

This is probably time for a complaint to a chief circuit judge. Or in Canada the top judge in the whole nation.

One can invoke a chief judge's duties as a conservator of the peace or peace officer as in notify them of the crime/grievance and actually require (use the the word require) them to see to it that the nuisance or problem is abated. Any judge that is lawfully seated is a conservator of the peace (de jure law enforcement).

[xparte]

Something that just requires the appearance of justice has been the Judge & Clerks strategy on this patterned behavior known as our summary conviction court.re venue and arraignment has been possible again due too the lesson plan, yes in principal i have recorded and notarized formed for the record the significant Required due diligence as process requires[use the the word require] It seems all required notice has only a file form that is received and or refused on its suitability notify them of the crime/grievance and actually require them to see to it that the nuisance or problem is abated.The text book way is delivery too the County,s Provincial Chief Judge.As the judge in traffic court acting on behalf of her Majesty the QUEEN and CANADA being a federal crown corporation, being no provincial matter or a county crime no standing for indictments exists yet i had no luck to date getting my paperwork received on a county level. The redundancy being even if i managed to hand into the case a record that identifies my notice and the required refused for cause as federal crown has no jurisdiction/standing in provincial prosecutions and provincial crown has no jurisdiction/standing in federal prosecutions. avoiding overwhelming odds the crown is seeing my appearance as acquiesce that corrects a provincial crown agent has permission to act as a federally appointed agent.My point is notice to the provincial judge is just further exposure as he also is acting federally in a county court house having no juice to here a Criminal Code of CANADA matter so a waste of time its all provincial acting as a federal/state

[DouglasOfAvalon]

David,

Reading Ronald Dean's process above, it reads that UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the one bringing the action in rem, but logically, if government is an entity that cannot reason but through its agents, wouldn't it also make sense to attach the agent, shouldn't the agent be also liable to damages for his actions?

Yes, holding these "agents" (employees) 'personally liable' for their malicious ac ts will stop this nonsense. I am proving this in court using that REGISTERED legal business name. Here is a paper I authored explaining what I have recently discovered. BTW, I am the guy driving around with the "PRIVATE PROPERTY" plates.. :)

https://www.scribd.com/doc/271354344/Everything-in-Commerce-is-Fiction-6-2015

cheers!

Douglas of Avalon

[BLBereans]

“A person who does business for himself is engaged in the operation of a sole proprietorship. Anyone who does business without formally creating a business organization is a sole proprietor. Many small businesses operate as sole proprietorships. Professionals, consultants, and other service businesses that require minimum amounts of capital often operate this way. A sole proprietorship is not a separate legal entity, like a partnership or a corporation. No legal formalities are necessary to create a sole proprietorship, other than appropriate licensing to conduct business and registration of a business name if it differs from that of the sole proprietor.

Because a sole proprietorship is not a separate legal entity, it is not itself a taxable entity. The sole proprietor must report income and expenses from the business on Schedule C of her or his personal federal income tax return.” This means that ALL income that “passes through” that business is tax exempt and since I am not the sole proprietor, I have no “personal income” and thus, no personal income tax liability. All the income is “business income” under the control of the “accountholder” which of course IS me and no tax filings are required whatsoever.

"accountholder" is like a trustee; without ANY liability for the business and affairs of the NAME other than administration. It is the necessary living being who facilitates the "pass-through" business transactions for the entity. 'Trustee' (accountholder) is NOT liable for any tax, fees, charges, etc. relating to the business of the NAME: he/she is an overseer or administrator.

Makes sense for those who understand that the NAME is not 'you'.

Where/who is the 'tax target' for the IRS in this scenario?

[David Merrill]

One can invoke a chief judge's duties as a conservator of the peace or peace officer as in notify them of the crime/grievance and actually require (use the the word require) them to see to it that the nuisance or problem is abated. Any judge that is lawfully seated is a conservator of the peace (de jure law enforcement).

This is of course encouraging but I have highlighted my point in red.


Yes, holding these "agents" (employees) 'personally liable' for their malicious acts will stop this nonsense. I am proving this in court using that REGISTERED legal business name. Here is a paper I authored explaining what I have recently discovered. BTW, I am the guy driving around with the "PRIVATE PROPERTY" plates.. :)

https://www.scribd.com/doc/271354344/Everything-in-Commerce-is-Fiction-6-2015

cheers!

Douglas of Avalon

I hold these guys accountable, but had to discover the authority that they by law, are accountable to.

4603


I have the components attached explaining why this response is in Tim TYMKOVICH Refusing my offer for Cause. I offered that he might wish to sign a proper bond and proceed to clean up the judiciary, and order by Comptroller Warrant payment to me of $23M. He has R4C'd and I expect that is because to sign a proper bond now would be a confession of guilt, of fraud up until now in his career.

[allodial]

One can invoke a chief judge's duties as a conservator of the peace or peace officer as in notify them of the crime/grievance and actually require (use the the word require) them to see to it that the nuisance or problem is abated. Any judge that is lawfully seated is a conservator of the peace (de jure law enforcement).
This is of course encouraging but I have highlighted my point in red.

I have observed their conservator of the peace status successfully invoked--more than once. This power of conservator of the peace vests in the people (notice I didn't type 'citizens') all times. Citizens are also conservators of the peace by prescription. However, if I have not made myself clear then you are the conservator of the peace. If the state actors fail to conserve the peace or uphold the constitution (terms of the trust), then you have a case of executors de son tort trespassing widely on the estate (ergo invasion--it doesn't look like invasion because they wear the same uniforms and used the same symbols, seals and buildings as before >>VERY SNEAKY<<). The people have every right to exercise prerogative to clean house. Lawfully seated judges, sheriffs, attorneys general are all customary conservators of the peace. The problem with police officers is that they are of a devolved form of enforcement internal to municipal corporations and are employees to the corporation rather than to the state except in their peace officer capacity SEPARATE from their employment--in short: according to their employment they are at the behest of an attorney.

The Mainstream Media has served to obscure this simple fact: the U.S.A. have been suffering from widespread dereliction of duty. America is being beset by invaders (1830s, 1870, Jim Crow laws (evidence of invasion) 1908, McKinley assassination, 1913/1913 gold theft, 1920s race riots, WTC gold theft, 1960/1970 Nixon-Johnson lawful money suppression, etc.). Fortunately, a resulting trust arises out of the thievery and hijacking. Putin AFAIK has suggested: the Bolsheviks are now in America.

***

According to Erika Carle's revelations, the secular humanist likes to put private persons into positions pretending to be government. Well go figure, fake judges pretending to hold office is exactly that.

Related:
Why Things Are The Way They Are (Erica Carle) (savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?1195-Why-Things-Are-the-Way-They-are-(Erica-Carle))

[David Merrill]

Updating;

I filed a modified complaint (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImWThFS3ZUUlM2TzQ/view?usp=sharing) - shortening the text down to five pages but a total of 67 pages including attachments. If David TIGHE took a second look at this Complaint then I imagine he would begin to realize the depth of this mess.

I figured that there was stipulation so that the clerk might not publish the doc on PACER in the Tenth Circuit so I tried to sneak it a day early into the USDC where I have two evidence repositories for each trust and have had success until this doc, getting published. It did not work. But this morning I watched for delivery and a few minutes later my default against TIGHE was published, if maybe only a few hours. But I grabbed it and will use it robustly.

This is summarized a bit, but that is because the Refusals for Cause are private to the living Trust in the header. - Which is only to say, if you want to get into my family stuff, then register on PACER and get the full doc. I think it is set to download but am not sure if you need to be registered on www.bishopcastle.us for that to happen. Let me know.

Notice of Void Judgments/Complaint. (http://bishopcastle.us/filedata/fetch?id=365)
Direct Link to Post. (http://bishopcastle.us/forum/main-forum/jim-and-dave-chose-life/life-and-debt/178-refusal-for-cause-on-dryep?p=364#post364)

Here it is on my gdrive. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EaV_bU7VImeFpWdUdzQjBZQ00/view?usp=sharing)