UnderStanding

Greetings, I come in Peace and Honor.

(This thread will cover many subjects pertaining to words and definitions and what understanding them means, and where such perceptions came from to begin with. All verbiage herein is my own beliefs and opinions on said subjects using my own Reason and Logic)

What is Known? I cannot define that for you, but only for me.

(1).
I exist as a Conscious Entity of a dualistic nature. I am only aware of the dualistic nature because of my Conscious Entity. My Conscious Entity is interacting with, and inhabiting for use, a Physical Body that comes from the clay, mud, and Minerals of the Earth defined as (in my case) Man. The dualistic nature of this existence is presented by the body afforded to the Conscious Entity for use by the Man on and in Earth. The reason of the term “in Earth” is to acknowledge that my Conscious Entity is inside the Man somewhere.

(2).
There is a physical construct that is forming matter, and allowing matter to be formed, that my Conscious Entity can use and interact with. The only inhibition to this interaction and use thereof is limited only to the imaginations, thoughts, and proceedings emanating forth from my Conscious Entity. I can empirically observe there are other Conscious Entities doing same. The variables of use are limitless.

(3).
Since my Conscious Entity is empirically observing what I believe is true as stated in (1) and (2), I can also presume that what I am observing came from someone else, as I do not believe (1) and (2) created itself. If (1) and (2) never have created itself then I also presume and believe that there a creator had to have to.

That is all I can prove by Personal Knowledge. For some 1 through 3 will present problems, and that is ok, for I need not force any other to agree with me, for the only agreement I make with others is Peace and Honor between, and present NO CLAIM against any Individual Conscious Entities Believes and opinions.

I would however like to revisit the Title of this thread now. Understand. Under Stand. Under Standing. Why does every Official ask us “if we understand”?

Lets look at the “Compound Word” “Under Stand”.

Under should be self evident. Stand however?

STAND:“–verb (used without object) ((((not in numerical order))))
1. (of a person) to be in an upright position on the feet.
2. 2. to rise to one's feet (often followed by up )
3. to take a position or place as indicated: to stand aside.
4. to face or encounter
5. to endure or undergo without harm or damage or without giving way
6. to endure or tolerate
–noun
7. the act of standing; *an assuming of or a remaining in an upright position.
8. a determined policy, position, attitude, etc., taken or maintained
9. the place in which a person or thing stands

Why would anyone choose as Conscious entities to be under such definitions? Do you understand? I sure hope not. I hope you choose to keep your Standing.

What is the reason for their system anyway? What is its purpose? Who System is it to begin with?

It is well known that from every corner of Earth, Mans Law has come about. Whether it be Natural Law, Common Law, Constitutional Law, Admiralty Law, Tribal Law, or any other type of projection of Conscious will that is projected as a Claim against another Conscious Entity while in use on Earth. All of these have always been and forever be invalid, fraudulent, and non existent because these instruments of claim have no real authority.

Authority and Standing:

(1) (2) (3) are Claims “I” make. That there is a Creator as the end result of said observations. I can only Claim this as a True Belief for myself.

My Belief as a Conscious Entity:

That Conscious Entities inhabiting fleshly bodies of Men and Women have Believed in a Creator since the beginning of Men and Women in fleshly bodies upon the Earth. Their believes have varied in metaphor, symbolism and interpretation. A common trait in these varying believes is good and evil. Duality.

I am most familiar with the Bible, as that is the text I have studied the most, though I am Generally familiar with others. Because of this I will only use the Bible for my reasoning as to stay on point. I am also not religious, as I am a seeker of Truth.

It can be read in Genesis the Creator created the Estate, and that Estate IS the Realm of Creation. The seen and unseen of Everything in the Universe. The Creator is Trust. The Trustee is the Son, called Jesus. The Beneficiaries are Man and Woman. The Inheritance of Men and Women is the Earth. Maybe that is why it was said “with faith the size of a Mustard grain you can move mountain”.
Faith in whom? The Trust and Trustee. Faith is what is paid for use. And then one can mine gold in the mountains and streams which is moving a mountain. One can also move our bodies around freely, for we are part of the Earth that a Mountain is made of(I think mountain was used as example of the magnitude of use implied) The price is Faith. Standing.

This is the only true system of Authority, all others are imitations, proxies, and idols of worship. Anything other is the worship of the Estate, in which the Trust Created. Its Mozart going and bowing down to his Piano, and giving it power unto itself, when in fact it is the Conscious Entity inside that gave the Piano power. The Conscious Entity is the copy of the Creator, not the instruments Men produce. The Creator made us in the Creators image.

That is why many teachings it seems espouse becoming like the Creator. Becoming Godlike. “Like” is the key word. Not the Creator itself. I find it very interesting that the reply to Moses of “the name” was “I am that I am”. Names are just idols and false worship. They are instruments that have no inherent power or Authority. The Creator was explaining to Moses what he was. And that was him name. “I am” is self identifying. Everything is what is being implied. “That I am” implies action. Creation. Productivity.

So what then was the meaning of the Garden of Eden, and what was taking place there?I believe it was the Estate of Being. Man Women of Conscious Entity Standing before the Creator Naked in their intentions and Heart of Being. There was no need for any instruments being used because the Contract was being fulfilled and there was no breach.

The Contract:

Quote:

---

Genesis 1:28-31
28And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth." 29And God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. 30And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food." And it was so. 31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

---

The Tree of the Knowledge of “Good and Bad” was the only Idol in the Garden that was designated by the Creator to not even be looked at, let alone touched. It was an idol because an idol is something that looks like the Creator, or represented the Creator, but is not the creator. Should not Adam and Eve gone to the Creator for Knowledge instead of some tree?

When they did, they lost Standing with the Trust. With the Creator. A breach occurred, and inheritance was lost. The Trustee was then needed to remedy the breach. So where did the breach start from and whom?

It seems that another Entity in Contract with the Creator was bringing Claims “against” the Trust by stating that the Creator was not disclosing information. The Beneficiaries on Earth were told that within the Fruits and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Bad was what the Creator was hiding from Man and Woman. What was really being presented as CLAIM was that the Creator was not enough, and that a system of the Law of Good and Bad needed to be created, for the Creator was holding back such Knowledge because it was a benefit to all the Entities created by the Creator. I think that it is very interesting that as soon as the fruit was eaten, they became 'aware' of their Nakedness and were ashamed. Ashamed of presenting their true intentions, as being Naked in front of all to see. That is what the Knowledge of Good and Bad brought to them. (Reminds me of People being afraid or ashamed, today, to speak their truth and testimony because of what others might think) Being Naked. Heart and Mind exposed.

We can shed further light upon this with the instituting of the Kings. The Kings judged between Right and Wrong. Just like Adam and Eve, Israeli too demanded the Knowledge of Good and Bad to be dictated to them by some other instrument other than the Creator.

Quote:

---

“Heed the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them. According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even to this day; with which they have forsaken Me and served other gods; so they are doing to you also.” 1st Samuel 8.

---

So again we see the rejection of the Creator, and the supplication of Law placed upon them by their own will, testimony and Word.

Since the original events of Man and Woman desiring the Law placed upon them, whatever those events; if any, really were, “Man has dominated Man to his injury” by the use of the created instrument “Law of Good and Bad”, which stem from Morals and Philosophy. We all have a claim to use such instruments, but only as long as we are using the Spirit to commune with the Creator in doing so. Appointing Kings, Judges, Courts, etc, is the idol. The fake Knowledge. The fake trust. The fake Trustee. The fake inheritance. The fake beneficiary. These instruments are always to tell others how to think, act, perform, Be, Live, Love, Hate, Exist, Consciously animating the moving of Mountains, etc, forever and ever.

List of Invalid entities:

1. Trust- There is much confusion about the True Trust. There can only be one True trust. The Creator. Every Man made trust is not the True Trust. Every Conscious Entities Trust is not the True Trust. Only the “I am that I am” is True Trust.
2. Trustee- The Firstborn out of all Creation is the True Trustee. There had to have been a First by the mere fact we are all here. The Word. The Instrument used by the “I am that I am” to have do “I am that I am” biddings. All other Conscious Entities Trusteeship are invalid, and have no True Standing before the Creator and True Trust.
3. Estate- There is nothing of the Estate of the Creator True Trust that is owned by any other Couscous Entity other than the Creator True Trust. The “I am that I am”. Everything is “I am that I am”, how can any of the Conscious Entities that are Beneficiaries claim they own the Estate of the Creator True Trust.
4. Beneficiaries- There are many instruments in this category that are invalid being used today. The only true Beneficiary are the Conscious Entities that exist; both seen and unseen in the Universe, because of the Creator True Trust, and his Will and Testimony, the “That I am” of the “Iam that I am”.
5. Inheritance- Inheritances depend on the Conscious Entities. The Contract stated by Creator True Trust for Conscious Entities residing in the Temple of the Body Inherit the Earth, and all living things upon Earth. We are free to live, animate, and move Mountains on the Earth. The only Valid Claim brought against such action is that the Conscious Entities in Man and Woman have Faith.

Believing that Knowledge of Good and Bad, Judges, Courts, Mans Laws is eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Bad , and turning our back away from the Creator True Trust, “selling our inheritance” as Esau did.

Jesus said this about the matter as Trustee:

Quote:

---

Luke 12:13-15 ESV
“Someone in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.” But he said to him, “Man, who made me a judge or arbitrator over you?” And he said to them, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.”

---

The only Rightful Judge of any part of the Estate, or the Conscious Entities therein is Creator True Trust. I am that I am. Any other Judgments, Claims or proceedings are Trespass upon the Creator True Trust Realm.

I also find it interesting that Jesus mentions possessions. When we as Conscious Entities and Beneficiaries of the Inheritance from the Creator True Trust, possess, or take possession of any instrument that is being used as an instrument of Trespass against the Creator True Trust, the True Estate, then we ourselves have fallen into temptation and have picked the fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

How many of us use the False Trust, and its instruments that have been created by Man as cheep imitations of trespass upon the Creator True Trust. “It is not what a Man eats that defiles him, but what he utters out of his mouth.” Our of the Mouth the true intentions of the heart speak. What are we doing when we use and possess their verbiage, and instruments of such to try to gain access to the True Trust as Beneficiaries from Men and Women? Even the True Trustee Himself said ““Man, who made me a judge or arbitrator over you?”

Quote:

---

"Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.” Matthew 4:8

---

So it seems that the Kingdoms of the World and their splendor the Devil had been building up from the beginning when he established the first Claim against the Creator True Trust with the Law of Knowledge of Good and Evil claiming as “his own”. He made the Claim that the Creator True Trust was invalid and that the Creator was not fully disclosing. Hence the breach in trust. Jesus does not answer the Claim, question it, or entertain the thought. He as Trustee puts Faith in the True Trust. He retains Standing before the Creator I am that I am. I also find it interesting that Satan Claims ownership of all the Kingdoms of the Earth by the offer “give” and the price is Worship for offer and Contract by “bowing down”. Or Understanding. The price for being a Beneficiary of the Creator True Trust is Faith. Faith can be defined as the “believe that is not based on proof”.

All of these years later and the only thing that we have learned from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Bad, is that we know nothing at all, not even when we were born, where, or what time, or who our Mother and Father are in flesh are. That Tree was just another tree. The true test there in the Garden was Faith. Faith in the Creator True Trust.

So how does this all relate to the situations we find ourselves in on a daily bases in relation to the invalid, dishonorable, and corrupt system that we bow to by interacting with as if it is valid, authentic, and has any type of Authority to bring any type of claim against us at all, and have no authority to even utter words of such to begin with.

Forgiveness. It has nothing to do with us. The Trespass is upon the Creator True Trust, not our Trust, because we dont have one. Nor can we have a valid Trust of any type as Beneficiaries of Inheritance. Our fight is not with flesh, but with Principalities and Power in High places. I have not truly worked out how can I be in the World but not a part of it. Because while in it, if not a part of it, they bring claim constantly. Having to continue involving myself in answering their claim “in some way or another” is not acceptable for myself once I am conscious aware of the implications. I do have a solution and remedy of logic for myself however, but have yet to articulate it fully inside myself. But it does center around intentions and motives of dealing with them to begin with. “The worker are few” comes to mind. What is the workers metaphor talking about?

I will offer my Believes and opinions about this more another time.

I am not “Under Standing”.

It is wonderful to have such ponderings here. I am in a couse called A Course in Miracles that meditates on these things every page.

My thoughts on studying what might seem frivolous to some is that we have a public trust around elastic currency.

IN GOD WE TRUST

A big part of that trust is that the officials exercising authority upon our understanding shall always, upon any indictment grant us the right to understand the nature and cause of the accusation against us. This is an authority we grant by being in social compact.

These days it is difficult to acquire this kind of bonding necessary for the officials to actually be holding this authority in trust. After nearly twenty years of my extensive efforts, and suitors' operating in the brain trust we find John William SUTHERS actually looking like a bank note expressing his trust operation in Denver:

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/6...lefidelity.jpg

However, his underling is feigning to be bonded by having a Traveler's Insurance policy. We all know how insurance companies are though; when Dan MAY tries to collect they will suddenly discover that his oath of office (bond) is faulty and of course that is not what they cover. At least I feel justified in understanding law that way, since I have seen a police officer render that legal opinion for the Insurance Industry.

I think it is likely that a minor traffic charge will be dropped if you continually persist that, I do not understand. My own experience however tells me that for felony charges one gets shredded through psychological evaluation to find out if you are fit for trial.

But I love developing common mental models through discussion. I just wish I had a bit more time to pick through your posts and give them the reply they deserve.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Hello David,

I dont know if it is language itself that presents the problem or something else. But the use of the word "we" in that phrase "in god we trust" presents a problem for me. It is all inclusive, and is still attached to a instrument of Man that is the instrument of Trust. An idol if you will. Im still looking for Authority from the Creator to issue such an instrument in dealing with the Creators Trust, as there is no need for a intermediary for access to inheritance as Beneficiary. Some type of instrument is always used as access to the Inheritance, whether it be fiat, sea shells, or anything else "from" the inheritance itself. That is illogical to me to use the inheritance as the means of access to the inheritance, when we already have access to the inheritance by the very fact our Conscious Entities are residing inside of it, the clay and mud body of Men and Women. Paper Money of no inherit value makes little sense to me, if it provides me with nothing directly in exchange for my sweat and labor. I still need to drive to the store instead of eating it. I still need to buy a water pump with it, instead of drinking it. I still need to purchase a bed, instead of lying down in it, though I suppose with glue or tape, or string, dollars could be made into a blanket. :)

As it is all inclusive, it does not allow anyone to disengage from it either if that is their will. Man and Woman are bound to it by necessity of circumstances beyond their control mostly, and thus it is unfair as Trespass upon the Beneficiary, the Estate, and True Trust.

Dont know, still playing around with some of these ideas. Thanks for your interest thus far.

You are welcome. My point is that the bail bond, should one be arrested and charged is not in seashells. It is in fiat instruments that bear earmarkings of the same trust.

IN GOD WE TRUST

In addition though, I was making the point that I hope to have more time for strictly philosophical discussion soon. For now though, I just feel that I must apply more practical use of each keystroke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

It is wonderful to have such ponderings here. I am in a couse called A Course in Miracles that meditates on these things every page.

My thoughts on studying what might seem frivolous to some is that we have a public trust around elastic currency.

IN GOD WE TRUST

A big part of that trust is that the officials exercising authority upon our understanding shall always, upon any indictment grant us the right to understand the nature and cause of the accusation against us. This is an authority we grant by being in social compact.

These days it is difficult to acquire this kind of bonding necessary for the officials to actually be holding this authority in trust. After nearly twenty years of my extensive efforts, and suitors' operating in the brain trust we find John William SUTHERS actually looking like a bank note expressing his trust operation in Denver:

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/6...lefidelity.jpg

However, his underling is feigning to be bonded by having a Traveler's Insurance policy. We all know how insurance companies are though; when Dan MAY tries to collect they will suddenly discover that his oath of office (bond) is faulty and of course that is not what they cover. At least I feel justified in understanding law that way, since I have seen a police officer render that legal opinion for the Insurance Industry.

I think it is likely that a minor traffic charge will be dropped if you continually persist that, I do not understand. My own experience however tells me that for felony charges one gets shredded through psychological evaluation to find out if you are fit for trial.

But I love developing common mental models through discussion. I just wish I had a bit more time to pick through your posts and give them the reply they deserve.



Regards,

David Merrill.

---

I have never reviewed the "Social Pact" as a formal contractual document, which I scratched the surface of when speaking of Mans Law arising from all over the Earth. The theories are far to subjective for me to agree to under Contract. And it appears to further divide the inheritance between brothers and sisters until there is nothing left of the inheritance. I am not party with it. I dont recognize paper, ink, verbiage, seals, and symbols as being any valid instrument of access to the True Trust, for my Consciousness already inhabits the inheritance. Why would I seek remedy for something I already posses?

The term understanding is not to do with the capacity to understand a concept, but for the possible applications of the Compound Word as it might be used in Law. I already have Standing at Law, because I acknowledge my Standing before the Creator, and need no other Judgment upon me. If I am under; as in "below" Standing, then I no longer have Standing. If I dont have Standing in the Court of Men how Can I have Standing in the Court of the Creator? As above so below. As below so above.

I agree, and yes, this is a purely Philosophical entry and thought form. But then again, is it?

Have Peace David, and I hope you will have more time in the future to delve further with me.

Standing also has to do with the status of an actor within a society or association.

Estate, within a given signification, can mean interest. Usage in this sense probably applies more so under Common Law.

I suppose my thought for you and prayer for the world is that as long as you are giving more than you receive by way of peaceful inhabitant, if you are going that extra 10% more than cleaning up your own mess and by example encouraging others to do the same then you might stay out of the purview of social compact. There are so many instances however when you get drawn into it as it does persist there even from the privacy of your own home. [Rethinking Boundaries in Cyberspace for example.]

You might summarize the essence of a religion called Patriot Mythology in that perception that we are not in social compact until we agree or consent to be.

Rather my approach is that the Constitution governs the terms and we find that the fiat (1863) has described the trust as IN GOD WE TRUST.

What I showed was that Attorney General SUTHERS has a valid bond, appealing for witness of the Almighty ever-living God. You might think, So what? Well, here in Colorado the General Assembly happens to agree with me.

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/6332/formofoath.jpg

http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/1...ffirmation.jpg

On the national level, the same trust for oaths of office is found.

So strictly philosophically I think that is where I stand. Philosophy is amusing meanderings like A Course in Miracles if it cannot be applied. The facilitator and others were trying to convince me that Mind and Intellect are worthless, during class. That is all I remember about their point though. I told them, The Mind is a wonderful thing! and Intellect is the cat's pajamas! I remember that part.

I stopped short of saying, If there is no mind or intellect behind your words, I don't think them much worth remembering.

I think you are missing my point David. Certainly I argue not for a animationless Mind or intellect. Hardly. The Mind is the instrument of the Conscious Entity to tell the inheritance of the Earthen body how and what to perform. I also think Philosophy is not worthless, as Law, Medicine, Math, and Science has derived from it.

Your approach is fine, but you have accepted it for yourself through consent by your Conscious Self.

The problem I have with paper oaths is that I have no trust in the paper or the oath. How can I? I have no Personal knowledge of either. Today, many Men and Women who have taken oaths are not living up to them, they have vacated their offices, when in fact they do not even know they have, and still occupy them. They are in breach. The General assemblies I certainly do not trust. How can I? If no individual is imbued with with any Authority, then how can any group of individuals have any Authority? What individual living breathing Man or Woman has Authority over me? Would you please point them out so that I may address them. I have yet to find any that will take that liability.

As Kant in "Critique of Pure Reason", I too am uniting experience and reason to move beyond what I perceive the failures are of so called Law, which include the use of Philosophy.

Until I can prove with Personal knowledge anything beyond the three proofs I have empirically found, how can I agree with anything else in truth and Honor as existing? If I lay claim upon, and agreement with, anything beyond that which I can prove by empirical observation, then I commit fraud against myself.

"There are so many instances however when you get drawn into it as it does persist there even from the privacy of your own home."

Agreed. And that is the temptation. In many cases it is a violation that is occurring. Trespass. Again, by the systems own reasoning, no individual in imbued with any Authority to force themselves or ideas, concepts, philosophies, upon any other. Speaking of mythology. How do these individuals with no Authority then get together and imbue themselves with Authority?

Hmmm. Here is a thought. Im going to start an movement. This movement will abide by all Man created protocols in forming a General Assembly. We will take Oaths. Be will be bonded. We will vote. Our goal is to rob People of what we dont have inherently, because we would rather form a movement, get bonded, and take Oaths and vote to get what we inherently dont have at the expense of the sweat and labor of others that have it.

This happens every day. By what Authority do they claim? Consent? I dont Consent. If they say they need something, then have a bake sale, and let People buy cakes showing their consent in what is being said they need. A road needs building in the community, and my money needs to be taken to fund it. Really? Says who? You? The guy down the road? If "I" think a road needs building I would be the first to lend my sweat, labor, time, and resources for such. Otherwise others need to get their hands out of my pockets before I cut them off with my sword.

This is the system will live under. These delegations and assemblies the same.

Nature works differently. All one needs to do is go out into Nature and observe. Maybe our thinking is the reason the animals run from most? We are not in harmony with Natural Law, or the Lawmaker of Natural Law?

You see my People, the People in which I come from, my ancestors and blood line, have seen paper before. We have seen oaths. We have seen all of these things for 500 years now. An oath means nothing to the ones taking them it appears. The paper they signed means nothing to them. We have empirically observed time and again throughout the length of the Earth that anytime Man and Woman get together with Authority they dont have, they violate others in some form with that false Authority.

Is this not the empirical evidence in which you can observe? This system of doing things does not function properly because of the assuming of Authority by Men and Women, that was not imbued to them as individuals, or any group of individuals that come together out of common interests. Which mostly is observed as theft, and subjugation. Where is the proof otherwise?

If through empirical observation this can be presumed as a established fact, then what use is the system other than to steal and subjugate Men and Women of Conscious that are using the land by the very fact they are inhabiting the land?

Dismiss this if you may, but the reasoning still stands. It has Standing. Why? Because it is coming from me, and I have Standing. As all should and do.

I only see the perpetuation of a system of subjugation, theft, murder, and trespass. Common Law? These Principles were around much longer than 1,000 some years. Much longer.

Quote:

---

Maxim (Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856): An established principle or proposition. A principle of law universally admitted, as being just and consonant with reason.

2. Maxims in law are somewhat like axioms in geometry. 1 Bl. Com. 68. They are principles and authorities, and part of the general customs or common law of the land; and are of the same strength as acts of parliament, when the judges have determined what is a maxim; which belongs to the judges and not the jury. Terms do Ley; Doct. & Stud. Dial. 1, c. 8. Maxims of the law are holden for law, and all other cases that may be applied to them shall be taken for granted. 1 Inst. 11. 67; 4 Rep. See 1 Com. c. 68; Plowd. 27, b.

3. The application of the maxim to the case before the court, is generally the only difficulty. The true method of making the application is to ascertain how the maxim arose, and to consider whether the case to which it is applied is of the same character, or whether it is an exception to an apparently general rule.

4. The alterations of any of the maxims of the common law are dangerous. 2 Inst. 210.

---

Even the system itself recognizes them, though it is becoming common place to discard them.

And yes, I am talking about the application of them. But all the rebut I receive is more paper is needed. I used to live in Japan, they LOVE paper, but paper does not solve the problem. It is much deeper than paper and oaths, and protocols. Much deeper.

Many talk today about returning the system to Honor. I through empirical observation have never known or seen ,or heard, or observed the system to be built upon Honor. If we take that further, and take hearsay from History book, and hearsay from the "History keepers" of the Tribes of old, then there is much evidence pointing to this fact further, that Honor has never been in this system.

Where is it? That which the reasons for such protocols and oaths, actions, etc.

It is supposed to be because of Honor. Thereby Authority is gained. With my eyes I see a scam. A fraud. A usurpation. I am not a minority in my believe is such a thing to be important. I dont believe in the majority/minority fallacy. I believe. I am. And that is sufficient for me. But that is not sufficient for many others. They feel the need to drive out into life and tell others how to "Be", and what they are. They seek to define others by their own subjective perceptions.

Self Government is my goal. I need not any other tell me what is wrong, for I inherently have it imbued upon me and my heart. I think most Men and Women do. Our Conscious tells us so. There are some without Conscious. Ironically many of them are in the halls of Government to begin with. Who else would seek a position as such? Isnt it those 'usually' without Conscious? If they do have Conscious, they loose it rather quickly when its time to perform the dictations upon other Consciousness.

That is what happens. That is what they do. That is the truth. They dictate through a majority. The majority gives them their Authority. A majority of individuals with no inherit Authority over others imbued to them. Its the "appeal to Authority" fallacy.

Who has expert knowledge as to how to handle my affairs other than me? No one. What Person of stable Mind is going to make such a Claim? What is the liability in such a Claim? What is the effects of such claims? Well, we can empirically observe the State of the Earth today, and what the continuation of Men and Women making such Claims upon others is upon our Species as a whole. Hell on Earth is what the effect is.

"Dominating Man to his injury".

We never were given Authority to dominate ourselves, only to fill the Earth and subdue it, and use everything upon it.

That was the Contract. Not from Mans Society; as in Social Contract, but from the Creator of the Universe.

Why are we still in breach?

Hello Shikamaru,

"Standing also has to do with the status of an actor within a society or association."

Indeed. That is the Standing I am touching on I suppose. Our Standing before Men and God.

I have always wanted to know the "true" meaning of such a question by the State. Much like when they ask if we are "full legal name", and the intent behind such a question.

Hmm, Estate meaning interest. Thats a very interesting slant there. In my premise the Estate is the Creation. And as beneficiaries the Interest we pay is the Estate. By use. Our payment to the Creator is the use of the Estate. Our payment for existence is the use of the Estate, the Estate itself is this interest. The culmination is the inheritance. Or maybe the inheritance is the fruition derived from paying the Interest. Which is what we form, through payment of the interest on Earth.

Thanks for that. Will much on it some more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bear Eagle

Hello David,

I dont know if it is language itself that presents the problem or something else. But the use of the word "we" in that phrase "in god we trust" presents a problem for me. It is all inclusive, and is still attached to a instrument of Man that is the instrument of Trust. An idol if you will. Im still looking for Authority from the Creator to issue such an instrument in dealing with the Creators Trust, as there is no need for a intermediary for access to inheritance as Beneficiary. Some type of instrument is always used as access to the Inheritance, whether it be fiat, sea shells, or anything else "from" the inheritance itself. That is illogical to me to use the inheritance as the means of access to the inheritance, when we already have access to the inheritance by the very fact our Conscious Entities are residing inside of it, the clay and mud body of Men and Women. Paper Money of no inherit value makes little sense to me, if it provides me with nothing directly in exchange for my sweat and labor. I still need to drive to the store instead of eating it. I still need to buy a water pump with it, instead of drinking it. I still need to purchase a bed, instead of lying down in it, though I suppose with glue or tape, or string, dollars could be made into a blanket. :)

As it is all inclusive, it does not allow anyone to disengage from it either if that is their will. Man and Woman are bound to it by necessity of circumstances beyond their control mostly, and thus it is unfair as Trespass upon the Beneficiary, the Estate, and True Trust.

Dont know, still playing around with some of these ideas. Thanks for your interest thus far.

---

I think the IN GOD WE TRUST verbiage is meant to deceive the masses of people that it is all inclusive and the opportunity to join, be persuaded and "understand" is provided and nurtured. The fact is that the "we" refers to the men who created, and decided to continue on with, "debt-backed" fiat currency and the false balances inherent in it. This is because they either didn't have an answer/solution or they didn't want an answer/solution and prayed to God on their man-made paper instrument that He will someday restore proper balances and correct the evil that men do. They knew the abomination and repugnance of such a creation and saw an opportunity to "capitalize" on it at the expense of most others who are intentionally kept ignorant of the system.

It is true that there is only one true Trust and one Trustee regarding God's creation. However, due to the lack of trust and responsibility of most men and women, evidenced in all of history, a system of governance among men must be instituted to account for such. I believe that the governments of men are placed into that position by God Himself as "2nd level trustees" over His Estate on Earth here and now awaiting the true sons and daughters to claim their inheritance as such. I believe they have dual roles in that they will be a king over you or serve you as the king you are depending upon the manner and truth in which you conduct yourself. This appointed authority must be in congruence with His law, however, in order to maintain that ordainment. The corruption and evil of man however makes it a difficult challenge to be recognized in that regard and it is then, when all truthful declaration, honorable action and administrative avenues have been exhausted, that we rely upon the "1st Level" trust to manifest the truth to fruition.

This is all we can do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

I think the IN GOD WE TRUST verbiage is meant to deceive the masses of people that it is all inclusive and the opportunity to join, be persuaded and "understand" is provided and nurtured. The fact is that the "we" refers to the men who created, and decided to continue on with, "debt-backed" fiat currency and the false balances inherent in it. This is because they either didn't have an answer/solution or they didn't want an answer/solution and prayed to God on their man-made paper instrument that He will someday restore proper balances and correct the evil that men do. They knew the abomination and repugnance of such a creation and saw an opportunity to "capitalize" on it at the expense of most others who are intentionally kept ignorant of the system.


It is true that there is only one true Trust and one Trustee regarding God's creation. However, due to the lack of trust and responsibility of most men and women, evidenced in all of history, a system of governance among men must be instituted to account for such. I believe that the governments of men are placed into that position by God Himself as "2nd level trustees" over His Estate on Earth here and now awaiting the true sons and daughters to claim their inheritance as such. I believe they have dual roles in that they will be a king over you or serve you as the king you are depending upon the manner and truth in which you conduct yourself. This appointed authority must be in congruence with His law, however, in order to maintain that ordainment. The corruption and evil of man however makes it a difficult challenge to be recognized in that regard and it is then, when all truthful declaration, honorable action and administrative avenues have been exhausted, that we rely upon the "1st Level" trust to manifest the truth to fruition.

This is all we can do.

---

Indeed. That is another interesting Word. "In Deed". I remember when People used to Contract Private Business dealings with Word and Hand Shake. Your conclusion is much along the same lines of my premise of Forgiveness. Is it though then the responsibility of Men and Women to turn back their faces to the Creator? Again, why should anyone reclaim that which they never have disowned? How can a Conscious Truth and Honorable decision be made of disowning to begin with if through fraud and deception the entire issue was withheld and not disclosed?

Yes, the Creator did place Governments before Men and Women, but only at the request of Men and Women, and told them they would pay a heavy price and loose freedoms because of it. He did not want to do it, but did at the request of the Beneficiaries of the Inheritance. That Contract, Convenient of Law is no longer in operation it appears. Has not the Convenient been fulfilled? The price paid, by the True Trustee? The Law fulfilled. Was not he the "Law"? The Word? So what then the significance of his presence here on Earth? If he in fact died as a Living Man, what did he die for? The first Adam? Why was he called "Son of Man"? We see this same metaphor in the Writings and Deeds of most Spiritual Ideology. Including Indigenous Knowledge systems as well. There is a pattern of a source Metaphor.

"If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

Free from what? What did he teach? Was it not Love and Forgiveness?

'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments. [Matthew 22:37-40 NIV]

The Law and the Prophets "hangs" on these two commandments. That interesting. Old English it is "dependeth". "Lex pendant". Dependeth is Third-person singular simple present indicative form of depend.

Quote:

---

“Ye have counsales, lawis, and men of reputatioun that have establisshed all thingis, as ye suppose: Bot none of all these can maik any religioun acceptable unto God, whiche onelie dependeth upon his awin will, revealled to man in his most sacred word.”

The Works of John Knox, Vol. 1 (of 6)

---

John is getting close here. He is getting close to the Religion of Law that the Pharisees established, that Satan established by Claiming Knowledge of Good and Bad, thereby putting himself in a position to Judge Good and Bad. The Creator revealed to Man his Will by his most Sacred Word. The True Trustee. The Creator values the Word, as he does words spoken. For a Word is an Oath. It is the only Oath individual Men and Women can give. Anything else is not an Oath.

Quote:

---

“And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.” Mark 11:25 (NIV) “But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.” Luke 6:27-29 (NIV) “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.” Luke 6:36 (NIV) “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.” Luke 6:37 (NIV)

Elsewhere, it is said, "Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. Matthew 18:21-22 (NKJV)

Jesus asked for God's forgiveness of those who crucified him. "And Jesus said, 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.'" Luke 23: 34 (ESV)

---

If we love and forgive even our Enemies what Claim can any Man bring before and to us?

We cannot, for we are the Beneficiaries of Inheritance.

Can a Beneficiary of Inheritance make a Judgment or Claim on another Beneficiary of Inheritance?

There is a solution for remedy, but only by insuring that the instruments used by Men and Women, and their Oaths are True and Honorable. Which is impossible, for the Nature of Men and Women are not Honorable and True because of the turning away from the Creator and his Living Will as Trust. The events all can observe in the World are proof of this. Are they Honorable? Truthful? Just?

Therefore the only remedy is a turning of face again to the Creator and his True Living Will. What is his True Living Will?

It was the original Contract with Man and Woman. Which does not include Knowledge of Good and Bad to be accessible to Men and Women to use. For when Men and Women use this Knowledge they then dominate each other to their injury. By forcing their own ideals, subjective perceptions, morals, dogma, and ways of being onto someone else thus dominating them.

We as Couscous Entities are able to access the Creator True Trust through the Trustee, and need no other party to Know Good from Bad. I presume that Love, and Forgiveness is a concept comprehendable to most every Man and Woman alive. It is an individual choice and decision of them, thought they have comprehension of the meanings of said concepts. It is not my responsibility for anyone else choosing NOT to follow their own Conscious decision to do Good.

What is Good? Nothing that brings harm to any other Couscous Entity is Good. There is no need to argue the finer points of such. Its very simple actually. If one causes harm to another both in Spirit or Body, then I have caused harm. Who can decide what constitutes "harm done"? Only the Couscous Entity performing. If one listens to their Conscious, it will Testify against itself.

Laws are made for those who choose not to follow their Conscious. Those who not care what their Conscious Testify against them. For these, the Laws of Robbery, Murder, Theft, and Trespass apply. Anything beyond these "Common Laws" applied to Men and Women without Conscious is Unjust, and not Honorable. For even the Creator makes the Sun shine upon the Wicked and the Righteous.

Quote:

---

Romans 2:

1 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

---

Quote:

---

12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

---

Quote:

---

28 A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

---

I think this is all relevant since all Law in existence 'today' comes from the Bible, specifically Ecclesiastics. What was the "Law" being talked about by Jesus, and Paul(the Lawyer) in Romans? It was the Mosaic Law, as well as Ecclesiastical Law. The True Trustee fulfilled the Law, and covered the breach in and of the Trust.

Love and Forgiveness IS THE LAW.

So does our Conscious Entity possess a tool for use, such as a "conscience"? It is talked about from the Book of Law. It is in every Law, and Ideology. Could it be that the Conscience is the Law of Self? The tool provided within Conscious Entities to Judge oneself by and for?

I think so. I think it is the only valid Authority of Judgment of Self that the Beneficiary has. And it can only be applied to self. We are not imbued with any Authority other than the Conscience. And this Authority of our Consciousness can only be used and applied directly to our own Entity as Conscious Entities inhabiting the inheritance as Beneficiaries upon and in Earthen vessels, as we fulfill the Contract that was Willed to us by the Creator True Trust.

Any other Conscious Entity using either their Consciousness or Conscience to demand our performance to such is a "Trespass on Inheritance". Its null and void. An Idol. Dressed up to look like something, but having no inherit Power or Authority in the realm of the Creators Estate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bear Eagle

What individual living breathing Man or Woman has Authority over me? Would you please point them out so that I may address them. I have yet to find any that will take that liability.

---

Assuming you are in Colorado at the time, state Attorney General John William SUTHERS is in authority over you. However, if you are in El Paso county then you can prevent Dan MAY, the district attorney from prosecuting you from a vacant office.


That was my point in a nutshell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Assuming you are in Colorado at the time, state Attorney General John William SUTHERS is in authority over you. However, if you are in El Paso county then you can prevent Dan MAY, the district attorney from prosecuting you from a vacant office.


That was my point in a nutshell.

---

I accept Men and Women as my equals. I certainly dont accept artificial entities as SUTHERS being above me. The only one above me is the Creator. I will not accept anything less as being something I recognize as Legitimate. Sure, they can dominate me because of the non acceptance, but I can also forgive them, for the liability is on their own heads before the Creator, not mine, for I am still Standing in Honor then before the Creator, for I have not submitted to something artificial taking the place of God. My Creators approval is the only issue I care about. I need not Man to tell me whether or not I have my Creators approval, nor what he wants for me.

The Creator desires Worship in Spirit, something the Pharisees never understood with their "instruments", while others are still trying to turn lead into Gold and miss the point entirely.

The Law has already been fulfilled.

However, you are free to accept anything you like.

That is my point outside of the nutshell. It must be a tree of "life" then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bear Eagle

I accept Men and Women as my equals. I certainly dont accept artificial entities as SUTHERS being above me. The only one above me is the Creator. I will not accept anything less as being something I recognize as Legitimate. Sure, they can dominate me because of the non acceptance, but I can also forgive them, for the liability is on their own heads before the Creator, not mine, for I am still Standing in Honor then before the Creator, for I have not submitted to something artificial taking the place of God. My Creators approval is the only issue I care about. I need not Man to tell me whether or not I have my Creators approval, nor what he wants for me.

The Creator desires Worship in Spirit, something the Pharisees never understood with their "instruments", while others are still trying to turn lead into Gold and miss the point entirely.

The Law has already been fulfilled.

However, you are free to accept anything you like.

That is my point outside of the nutshell. It must be a tree of "life" then.

---

The older definitions of Understand (arraignment) help clear up this difference in perceptions.

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/4...visitation.jpg

Ex visitation Dei

You are as though right off the monestary. So we form an ad hoc jury to determine if you are really that ignorant of our ways, or are pulling our leg. If you are pulling our leg, then you are determined summarily to be competent to stand trial. If you are that ignorant then we give you whatever coaching necessary to bring you up to speed - honoring your right to understand the nature and cause of the accusation against you.

These days that is a psychological evaluation. To save your time, listen to the state sockpuppet evaluation at the latter half of the first video while reading his evaluation. [The case was dismissed for no evidence and witnesses. BERMUDEZ was never arrested but the objective believe it or not was to destroy my mind with psychotropic pharmaceuticals and I prevented that.]

The authority is gathered by bonding. If the social order provides compensation to you for violating your rights then that is genuine authority. Like I showed you that bonding is behind fiat currency IN GOD WE TRUST and we find the security agreement is in place too, in Colorado anyway.

The electorate decides which man will be in that position. But the facts decide if he is bonded or not; whether or not he has the authority you so flippantly deny.

The electorate has authority over you. That is done by assuring the bonding operation is in place:

http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/2...rswherefil.jpg

P.S. On the chance you might have taken a look at the videos - Psychological Evaluation as an Arraignment Tool - Parts 1-3 I produced those to form the record. At the end of Part 3 I was indeed remanded to the jail (Psycho Ward) for "two or three weeks" where the other local psychologist, Dr. Kaye BARON qualified to evaluate legal competency visited me in my turtle suit through Plexiglas. Her assistant was with her and was in the hearing where he remanded me to the jail for my "independent" evaluation. That was serendipity because she was there for another patient of hers.

She took a quick look and evaluated me to be competent to stand trial. Not only that, she followed my exact instructions and did not evaluate me at all. She never entered anything into the court, like I requested. She simply phoned the court and told them I am competent.

I have wanted to make a sequel video - Part 4 but without being coerced by the malicious prosecution just never get to it.


To be succinct about it, I caught Dr. John BERMUDEZ in a blatant lie in this last paragraph:

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/2...rmudezliar.jpg

If you listen to the end of Part 1 notice I never spoke about government or my $20M lien against the state.

Arraignment is an show of understanding in court. The defendant says, I understand the nature and cause of the accusation against me. Then the court may proceed to trial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bear Eagle

Hello Shikamaru,

"Standing also has to do with the status of an actor within a society or association."

Indeed. That is the Standing I am touching on I suppose. Our Standing before Men and God.

I have always wanted to know the "true" meaning of such a question by the State. Much like when they ask if we are "full legal name", and the intent behind such a question.

Hmm, Estate meaning interest. Thats a very interesting slant there. In my premise the Estate is the Creation. And as beneficiaries the Interest we pay is the Estate. By use. Our payment to the Creator is the use of the Estate. Our payment for existence is the use of the Estate, the Estate itself is this interest. The culmination is the inheritance. Or maybe the inheritance is the fruition derived from paying the Interest. Which is what we form, through payment of the interest on Earth.

Thanks for that. Will much on it some more.

---

You can find estate defined as interest in Bouvier's Law Dictionary (1856).
You can find a copy of it online via Google.

Your usage of such terms are not to far off from the subjects of trusts and feudal tenures....

Interestingly, a 'use upon a use' is a forerunner to modern day trusts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Arraignment is an show of understanding in court. The defendant says, I understand the nature and cause of the accusation against me. Then the court may proceed to trial.

---

David Merrill, you acknowledged in previous comments that this was a Philosophical conversation in nature. Did you not?

I thank you for your information, but the information you have provided I do not seek in this thread. I am simply asking a question at the root of my questions and reasoning.

As equals, by what Authority do we Judge one another? You have presented information pertaining to Man getting together with Man and writing the mechanisms by which they conclude that they have the Authority to Judge. Delegates are comprised of individuals who are not imbued with such an Authority, no matter the majority vote or reasoning in the matter.

I am not contesting their conclusions. I know their conclusions.

You keeping giving me the very reasoning and writings in which I am contesting as proof, when these questions are Philosophical. I am trying to establish the reasoning and proof of anyones Authority as individuals to tell any other individual to perform. If a group is formed, that group is still comprised of individuals forming the group.

There is a contradiction there. Of Logic, and reason. Until this contradiction is resolved then how can I honestly agree with what you are presenting me?

"flippantly deny" I cannot accept what is not true. The burden of proof lays with anyone making the claim.

The root issue. The source of the contradiction, that individuals have no inherit Authroity over other individuals. Because all individuals are equal to each other as Beneficiaries of the Inheritance.

So by what Authority then do a group of People that come together as delegates gain their Authority from? Themselves? The voters? The People the delegates represent?

As individuals with no inherit Authority imbued them, how do the individual Voters gain such Authority?

It seems the only logical answer is that in every case it is created within the Individual and then given away to a group, thus the justification of it.

Not logical. Fallacious. Un acceptable.

Man still in Sin.

Since you have stated previously that you dont have much time for Philosophical discussions, I suggest you either present a Philosophical argument, or move on from this thread. While the information you have presented in valuable unto itself, it presents a conclusion by Men. I am questioning the premise of the conclusion itself.

If raising such an issue on your site is offensive to you, or objectionable, then just say it. Because I get the felling that is what you are implying by continually telling me I am a subject of Man. I am not. I am a subject of the Creators Realm. As Man is. Whether you like it or not, Philosophy is the cornerstone of Mans reason.

There is a new age coming. A new period on Earth. New ideas, and reason. If you do not see that then you are well ingrained in the system of passing.

Seasteading is but one. http://seasteading.org/

Again, I dont demean your efforts, or knowledge, I just am not asking the questions in which you are giving answers to. And as of yet you have not answered any questions raised in this thread. As of yet I hardly know you, because you have given me nothing but what others have defined as true, and have accepted such for yourself as being true. I placed this thread in the category of "religion" for I did not find any other category in which I felt it appropriate.

Thanks for the information on "understanding", I already knew that information however. I am looking beyond the mechanism, and into the roots of issues. Of words. Of definitions. Of Logic. Or trying to. I am asking "why"? Why are we doing this? What is the point of doing this? What are the effects of doing this? Where did "this" come from to begin with? Is "this" good for us? If not what proof is there that it is not? If so what proof is there that it is so?

I think it is not good for us. I think I need a new way of doing things. I new way of seeing. Of Believing. I think that there are many in agreement with I as well. But that "new way" is only for themselves to decide upon as individuals.

I believe in the non aggression Principle. I see the current system as the aggressor. Since I dont believe in aggression to achieve my will, by default I dont agree with the system of aggression.

Your own Personal experience proves the system aggressive, because the system Judged you as guilty first, and then demanded you prove your innocence, while holding you captive, and under threat of violence.

I cannot agree with that, or anyone agreeing with that. They contradict their own Principles and Laws, yet hold us accountable to prove them otherwise. The solution for me, and others, is not working within the system to change it, for what does that change? The nature of the system itself doe not change, for it still requires one to prove that which is already in proof by the mere fact of existence of the one then having the prove something. I dont have to prove I am a living breathing Conscious Entity to anyone, the fact is self evident when I Stand before someone. To the contrary is ridiculous, and only a game. Word majik. And it proves exactly what this system is. A game of Words and performance to show some dictator of "Life" that you are worthy to be playing on the board. Statist Elitism at its finest. Utter BS. A slap in the face to my living Man. A slap in the face to the Creator, his Trust, and his Estate.

If there is no remedy then outside of this system, then the following is set in motion.

Delegates:

The 144,000.

Bond: By the True Trust of the Creator, and his Estate.

Oath: Circumcision of the Heart by the Sword of Spirit issuing forth from the Creator.

Chair: Les Visible of the 144,000.

Defendant: The Cult of the Pharisees, and The Learned Elders of Zion.

Finding of the Chair: GUILTY.

Sentencing: Yet to be set.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkp95ePFy5Y

--What is the difference?--:eek:

There is much more going on in the seen and unseen that you might not be aware of Friend. "what is loosed in Heaven is loosed on Earth"

Peace be unto you David Merrill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkcrusade

This is good and the trifecta should be explored.

The Divine Right of Kings pertains to all men, we are all born Sovereigns-Without-Subjects. Here is are three verses(not 4 or 5) that are prima facie evidence of this fact.

1Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood...

Peter is not talking to some select little group of wannabe rulers, he is speaking to everyone who has "come out from among them", i.e. seceded from the governments of men, and returned to God's Kingdom.

Revelation 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and [even] his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Revelation 5:10 And hast made us, unto our God, kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

Again, John the Revelator is not talking to some small elite, he is speaking to those who have "overcometh".

Colossians 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

What "handwriting of ordinances that was against us"?

When we "withdraw from membership" in the group, i.e. state citizenry, we are "civilly dead" and therefore no longer "subject to ordinances...after the commandments and doctrines of men", so don't "touch" them, "taste" them or "handle them", they are not for you and you will perish with the using.

Colossians 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ [the anointed] from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, 21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using.) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

Individual secession rather than expatriation; these are two entirely different acts.

Secession. The act of withdrawing from membership in a group. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 1351

Expatriation. The voluntary act of abandoning or renouncing one's country, and becoming the citizen or subject of another. Ibid. page 576

“The right of self-government rests on the right to withdraw consent from an oppressive government. That is the only really effective restriction on power, in the last analysis.” ~ Clyde Wilson, Secession: The Last, Best Bulwark of Our Liberties

"In the majority of men, there is such a love of tried arrangements and so great a dread of experiments that they will probably not act upon this right until long after it is safe to do so." ~ Excerpted from The Right to Ignore the State by Herbert Spencer

Luke 22:25 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles [nations] exercise lordship [rule] over them; and they that exercise authority [control] upon them are called benefactors. 26 But ye shall not be so...

No one knows who first made the discovery that men are free. The fragmentary records begin with one person.
There is no historical proof that he really existed, but the story holds its own self-evident truth; and for countless
generations, it was handed down from father to son. They said that when Ur was the great empire (about
4,000 years ago), a shepherd named Terah, accompanied by his son, his daughter-in-law, and his orphaned grandson,
traveled with his flocks toward the Far West. When Terah died, the family - now headed by Abraham - continued
westward. They also were shepherds, always moving with their flocks. http://mises.org/books/mainspring.pdf

---

That was off the thread "Coming out of Babylon". However, those coming out, are coming out of "Babylon the Great". You pointed out correctly in the thread the reference to the Tribe of Judah coming out of Babylon, but "Babylon the Great" is the system of our day that is talked about in Revelation. The revealing.

REV 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written a mystery: BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

What was Babylon to begin with? Why did the Creator tell Judah to come out of her? Was it not that Babylon dominated and subjugated Judah to the Laws and practices of herself instead of the Creators will and Law?

Babylon the Great of today.

REV 17:15 And he said unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sat, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written a mystery: BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
17:6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.
17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sat. [King James Version; the New International Version Bible uses "hills" instead of "mountains"].
17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he comes, he must continue a short space.
17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goes into perdition.
17:12 And the ten horns which thou saw are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
17:15 And he said unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sat, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth.

Who is the whore? Who is Babylon the Great?

Though open to interpretation, these Kingdoms can be identified by the use of History. They were empires of the Earth from the time revelation was written till now.

Who rules the Earth today? What Kingdom? Who runs and subjugates the US even? Who issue forth their orders for the World to follow?

The last King mentioned is yet to appear. That is the Antichrist. He will sit as an abomination of desolation in a holy place. We can already see his Kingdom established, and the empty seat that is his to take in the future. The answer lies in the question of "who are the True Jews"? Where are they? They were spread out over the entire Earth, many of which dont know their Heritage. Or that they are Heirs to the Kingdom. I was making my way to this in this thread, and building a foundation for it first. In simple terms we are all Heirs and Beneficiaries to the Kingdom because of the Trustee. The Elect are the 144,000 that will rule the Earth as Righteous Kings and Priests in Heaven that have been elected as such from the Earth. Some have already taken their Crowns through death, and some are still on Earth, for the Bridegroom comes to Earth for the Bride. The Trustee does not wait in Heaven for them to come to him. He returns. I like putting these issues into my own words, because then I make them my own, and understand them from myself. For I will be called into account sometime in the future when I am dragged to the Courts and synagogues. I care not what Man Judges me with or kills my body, for I am more concerned with the Judge of my Spirit. I only worship the Creator. I only perform when the Creator tells me to do so. Man has no claim or Power over me. I am not part of this World, only in the flesh as Spirit. I laugh at the presumed authority of Man, for he has none. Man is not everlasting. True Authroity is everlasting, and cannot be blown away in the wind like dust is. Man asserts his presumed Authority by the Physical animations of his clay mud Temporal body, by the will of his Conscious being. "all we are is dust in the wind".

A Conscious Entity bowing and subjecting itself to dust is comical. A Conscious Entity whether in Spirit, or "in" dust is equal to each other.

REV 19:10 "At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

John feel down to worship an Angel of the Creator, and look what the Angel said to John. If an Angel states this, how can we in honesty and truth fall down and worship men in what they demand from us, and of us just for us to prove that we are free of them? Absurd!

The only reason for what they ask of us is to entrap us in a Word game thereby enslaving us. If we finish and complete their game, they give us then the keys to the Kingdom. But by playing their game to begin with we have already lost the Kingdom, because we are seeking from Men and not God. Their Key is a fallacy, and non existent to begin with. That is the temptation. To seek the Kingdom of Man rather than the Kingdom of God. The flesh is passing away. But he that does the will of God remains forever.

No matter really, the Creator is sorting this out, as he is alive, and so is his Will. All will understand in the last hour.

I look for practical application of philosophy. The thread title is indeed Understanding.

The subject is about how one acquires authority over another through this term - understanding. I think the clearest example is The Court of Ten Million Dollars written of by George LIPPARD in the 1840's.

If the man in the example refused consent to be tried in The Court of Ten Million Dollars then he would immediately face less formal trial by his peers in the next room. His informed answer, Arraignment, demonstrated that he understood the terms.

This manifested more crudely in the form of caput lupinum, where a man could be killed or mugged with immunity, without consequence of law.

Quote:

---

CAPUT LUPINUM, Eng. law. Having the head of a wolf. An outlawed felon was said to have the head of a wolf, and might have been killed by any one legally. Now, such killing would be murder. 1. Hale, Pl. C. 497. The rules of the common law on this subject are much more severe in their consequences, than the doctrine of the civil law relating to civil death. See 1 Toull. Droit Civil, n. 280, and pp. 254-5, note 3.

---

Time toned that doctrine down:

Quote:

---

CIVIL DEATH, persons. The change of the state (q. v.) of a person who is declared civilly dead by judgment of a competent tribunal. In such case, the person against whom such sentence is pronounced is considered dead. 2 John. R. 218. See Gilb. Uses, 150; 2 Bulst. 188; Co. tit. 132; Jenk. Cent. 250; 1 Keble, 398; Prest. on Convey. 140. Vide Death, civil.

---

My point is simple and I believe I have expressed that I speak from experience. It works great with minor traffic offenses to simply hold out:

I don't understand.

But that is only if you are not making a show of it for your friends or YouTube. If you threaten the current Cash Cow then you will be remanded to psychological evaluation, sometimes in the local jail.




Regards,

David Merrill.

Yes, use upon a use. That is the Nature of the Creators Estate. He wastes nothing.

Yeah, that Cash Cow is nice and fat, and it also appears ready for slaughter, and the meat divided up. I understand your argument, and actually see nothing wrong with it. It is a prudent argument for the sake of living a relatively normal life. So that we can go home in Peace to our Families. My endeavor is something different in Nature on this thread however. Cutting the branches of evil does not take care of the root so that the branches dont have to be cut every day. I am also looking for a practical application in Philosophy. An application that will end the limb cutting, and strike the root.

I presume as well that our circumstances in life will dictate the approach that will take in our endeavors for remedy. I have no children, have no wife, and live in poverty by my own choice. I grow my own food, hunt my own meat, and am already living on the land of my own self sufficiency. Not everyone has the circumstances in life to approach these issues the way I have. I understand that, and find no fault with any other approach.

I am looking for remedy in which suits my circumstances. The remedy I am formulating suits my circumstances. That of which is made stronger by observing other People using their own remedies. It helps me to cast out the methods in which have no meaning to my circumstances, and continue on a narrow path to my goals and objectives. I use Philosophy in order to do this, because my method is Testimony from my Being. I cannot in truth say that I Believe in something, that in which I have believed in by taking in from another.

The objective is rather impossible in a way, and rather not in another way. But, in our own ways we are all Scientist in these endeavors, and must test and apply that which we find to work and not work in our own circumstances. Peer review is nice, but it did not do Justice for Tesla, or many others either, because greed of covetousness still was in operation of his, and their, peers.

Anyway, I have taken the Liberty over the last few days to engage myself here because I have not been busy. The 22nd was the Equinox, and I need to plant many things today, and this weekend. My busy Period is starting for winter. I need to get to work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bear Eagle

Yeah, that Cash Cow is nice and fat, and it also appears ready for slaughter, and the meat divided up. I understand your argument, and actually see nothing wrong with it. It is a prudent argument for the sake of living a relatively normal life. So that we can go home in Peace to our Families. My endeavor is something different in Nature on this thread however. Cutting the branches of evil does not take care of the root so that the branches dont have to be cut every day. I am also looking for a practical application in Philosophy. An application that will end the limb cutting, and strike the root.

I presume as well that our circumstances in life will dictate the approach that will take in our endeavors for remedy. I have no children, have no wife, and live in poverty by my own choice. I grow my own food, hunt my own meat, and am already living on the land of my own self sufficiency. Not everyone has the circumstances in life to approach these issues the way I have. I understand that, and find no fault with any other approach.

I am looking for remedy in which suits my circumstances. The remedy I am formulating suits my circumstances. That of which is made stronger by observing other People using their own remedies. It helps me to cast out the methods in which have no meaning to my circumstances, and continue on a narrow path to my goals and objectives. I use Philosophy in order to do this, because my method is Testimony from my Being. I cannot in truth say that I Believe in something, that in which I have believed in by taking in from another.

The objective is rather impossible in a way, and rather not in another way. But, in our own ways we are all Scientist in these endeavors, and must test and apply that which we find to work and not work in our own circumstances. Peer review is nice, but it did not do Justice for Tesla, or many others either, because greed of covetousness still was in operation of his, and their, peers.

Anyway, I have taken the Liberty over the last few days to engage myself here because I have not been busy. The 22nd was the Equinox, and I need to plant many things today, and this weekend. My busy Period is starting for winter. I need to get to work.

---

Thank you for an engaging thread.

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/9026/...ngonthelaw.jpg

I genuinely believe that the whole tree is strong, it is a matter of waking up to our destiny as heirs apparent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bear Eagle

Yes, use upon a use. That is the Nature of the Creators Estate. He wastes nothing.

---

Well... 'use upon a use' was devised by the King's attorners to evade his revenues and charges.

I'd have to dig into the history of why property held in trust at that time was termed a use .....

There were tinges of theology to "the King's Law" as well as Common Law.
Ecclesiastics influenced many bodies of law throughout Europe.