hi everyone,
say you have a private business reprogramming computers and you only accept cash and dont use banks.
how would you convert the FRNs that youve earned this way to Lawful money?
thanks
Printable View
hi everyone,
say you have a private business reprogramming computers and you only accept cash and dont use banks.
how would you convert the FRNs that youve earned this way to Lawful money?
thanks
One could write or stamp the demand on each bill.
But unless that cash is going to be deposited into a bank, I don't believe it's necessary.
but in this case, what is the best way to demand and then record your demand? to have a record of the newly lawful money for future transactions with that lawful money.
You mean for buying a car with cash, stuff like that?
+ Keith Allen
I just got this explanation in my e-mail.
Its long but explains the subject so everyone can understand.
You might find what you are looking for in it.
Public Money vs. Private Credit
July 4, 1861 Abraham Lincoln re-convenes congress under an ‘extraordinary occasion’ that is technically still in-place today [Lincoln's order convening Congress was by proclamation set forth 15 April 1861]. It had adjourned sine die since March 28 1861 [by March 28, the southern congressmen had walked out of session. That, combined with uncertainty as to Lincoln's military intentions, led the remaining members of the 37th Congress to agree to adjourn without setting a day to reconvene — sine die means without day]. The congress today is still a [Lincoln convened, executive] de-facto congress. [To my knowledge, congress still adjourns sine-die, informing members of the re-convention date during the recess]
Twenty eight days prior to congress adjourning sine die, we find that the territory of Colorado was formed and would have taken 30 days to form properly. President Buchannan was actually lining up Colorado with the gold claims found in Aurora and Central City to be the war chest for prosecuting the war between the states [erroneously referred to by many as a civil war — which it was not] from the union side. Colorado was basically a union state.
President Lincoln got the election, so he moved into President Buchanan’s plans. The first territorial governor, governor Gilpen, issued notes. These are the predecessors to the United States notes called green-backs. If we take a look at the treasury, their website, we find this particular page regarding legal tender
http://www.ustreas.gov/education/faq...altender.shtml
Legal tender status. Now pay particular notice to the bottom of the page:
United States notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve notes. As a result, the Treasury Department stopped issuing United States notes, and none have been placed into circulation since January 21, 1971.
[Article published by Freedom League 1984:]
When Congress borrows money on the credit of the United States, bonds are thus legislated into existence and deposited as credit entries in Federal Reserve banks. United States bonds, bills and notes constitute money as affirmed by the Supreme Court (Legal Tender Cases, 110 US 421), and this money when deposited with the Fed becomes collateral from whence the Treasury may write checks against the credit thus created in its account (12 USC 391). For example: suppose Congress appropriates an expenditure of $1 billion.
To finance the appropriation, Congress creates the $1 billion worth of bonds out of thin air [actually, created upon a presumption — see David's comment below] and deposits it with the privately owned Federal Reserve System. Upon receiving the bonds, the Fed credits $1 billion to the Treasury’s checking account, holding the deposited bonds as collateral. When the United States deposits its bonds with the Federal Reserve System, private credit is extended to the Treasury by the Fed.
Under its power to borrow money, Congress is authorized by the Constitution to contract debt, and whenever something is borrowed it must be returned. When Congress spends the contracted private credit, each use of credit is debt which must be returned to the lender or Fed.
Since Congress authorizes the expenditure of this private credit, the United States incurs the primary obligation to return the borrowed credit, creating a National Debt which results when credit is not returned. However, if anyone else accepts this private credit and uses it to purchase goods and services, the user voluntarily incurs the obligation requiring him to make a return of income whereby a portion of the income is collected by the IRS and delivered to the Federal Reserve banksters.
Actually the federal income tax imparts two separate obligations: the obligation to file a return and the obligation to abide by the Internal Revenue Code. The obligation to make a return of income for using private credit is recognized in law as an irrecusable obligation, which according the Bouvier’s Law Dictionary (1914 ed.), is “a term used to indicate a certain class of contractual obligations recognized by the law which are imposed upon a person without his consent and without regard to any act of his own”.
This is distinguished from a recusable obligation which, according to Bouvier, arises from a voluntary act by which one incurs the obligation imposed by the operation of law. The voluntary use of private credit is the condition precedent which imposes the irrecusable obligation to file a tax return. If private credit is not used or rejected, then the operation of law which imposes the irrecusable obligation lies dormant and cannot apply.
In Brushaber v. Union Pacific RR Co., 240 US 1 (1916) the Supreme Court affirmed that the federal income tax is in the class of indirect taxes, which include duties and excises. The personal income tax arises from a duty — i.e., charge or fee — which is voluntarily incurred and subject to the rule of uniformity. A charge is a duty or obligation, binding upon him who enters into it, which may be removed or taken away by a discharge (performance) Bouvier, p 459.
Our federal personal income tax is not really a tax in the ordinary sense of the word but rather a burden or obligation which the taxpayer voluntarily assumes, and the burden of the tax falls upon those who voluntarily use private credit. Simply stated, the tax imposed is a charge or fee upon the use of private credit where the amount of private credit used measures the pecuniary obligation.
The personal income tax provision of the Internal Revenue Code is private law rather than public law. “A private law is one which is confined to particular individuals, associations, or corporations”: 50 Am.Jur.: 12 p 28. In the instant case the revenue code pertains to taxpayers. A private law can be enforced by a court of competent jurisdiction when statutes for its enforcement are enacted: 20 Am.Jur.: 33. pg. 58, 59.
The distinction between public and private acts is not always sharply defined when published statutes are printed in their final form: Case v. Kelly, 133 US 21 (1890). Statutes creating corporations are private acts: 20 Am.Jur. 35, p 60. In this connection, the Federal Reserve Act is private law. Federal Reserve banks derive their existence and corporate power from the Federal Reserve Act: Armano v. Federal Reserve Bank, 468 F.Supp. 674 (1979).
A private act may be published as a public law when the general public is afforded the opportunity of participating in the operation of the private law. The Internal Revenue Code is an example of private law which does not exclude the voluntary participation of the general public. Had the Internal Revenue Code been written as substantive public law, the code would be repugnant to the Constitution, since no one could be compelled to file a return and thereby become a witness against himself.
Under the fifty titles listed on the preface page of the United States Code, the Internal Revenue Code (26 USC) is listed as having not been enacted as substantive public law, conceding that the Internal Revenue Code is private law. Bouvier declares that private law “relates to private matters which do not concern the public at large.”It is the voluntary use of private credit which imposes upon the user the quasi contractual or implied obligation to make a return of income. In Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan & Trust Co., 158 US 601 (1895), theSupreme Court had declared the income tax of 1894 to be repugnant to the Constitution, holding that taxation of rents, wages and salaries must conform to the rule of apportionment.
However, when this decision was rendered, there was no privately owned central bank, issuing private credit and currency, but rather public money in the form of legal tender notes and coins of the United States circulated.Public money is the lawful money of the United States which the Constitution authorizes Congress to issue, conferring a property right, whereas the private credit issued by the Fed is neither money nor property, permitting the user an equitable interest but denying allodial title. [In other words, you cannot really 'buy' anything with Federal Reserve Notes.]
Today, we have two competing monetary systems: The Federal Reserve System with its private credit and currency, and the public money system consisting of legal tender United States Notes and coins.One could use the public money system, paying all bills with coins and United States notes (if the notes can be obtained), or one could voluntarily use the private credit system and thereby incur the obligation to make a return of income. Under 26 USC 7609 the IRS has carte blanche authority to summon and investigate bank records for the purpose of determining tax liabilities or discovering unknown taxpayers: United States v. Berg, 636 F.2d 203 (1980).
If an investigation of bank records discloses an excess of $1000 in deposits in a single year, the IRS may accept this as prima facie evidence that the account holder uses private credit and is therefore a person obligated to make a return of income. Anyone who uses private credit — e.g. bank accounts, credit cards, mortgages, etc — voluntarily plugs himself into the system and obligates himself to file.
A Taxpayer is allowed to claim a $1000 personal deduction when filing his return. The average taxpayer in the course of a year uses United States coins in vending machines, parking meters, small change, etc, and this public money must be deducted when computing the charge for using private credit.
On June 5, 1933, the day of infamy arrived. Congress on that date enacted House Joint Resolution 192, which provided that the people [actually, HJR-192 applied only to corporate persons, not to people] convert or turn in their gold coins in exchange for Federal Reserve notes. Through the operation of law, HJR-192 took us off the gold standard and placed us on the dollar standard where the dollar could be manipulated by private interests for their self-serving benefit. By this single act the people and their wealth were delivered to the bankers. When gold coinage was thus pulled out of circulation, large denomination Federal Reserve notes were issued to fill the void.As a consequence the public money supply in circulation was greatly diminished, and the debt-laden private credit of the Fed gained supremacy.
This action made private individuals who had been previously exempt from federal income taxes now liable for them, since the general public began consuming and using large amounts of private credit. Notice all the case law prior to 1933 which affirms that income is a profit or gain which arises from a government granted privilege.
After 1933, however, the case law no longer emphatically declares that income is exclusively corporate profit, or that it arises from a privilege. So, what changed? Two years after HJR-192, Congress passed the Social Security Act, which the Supreme Court upheld as a valid act imposing a valid income tax: Charles C. Steward Mach. Co v. Davis, 301 US 548 (1937).
It is no accident that the United States is without a dollar unit coin. In recent years the Eisenhower dollar coin received widespread acceptance, but the Treasury minted them in limited number which encouraged hoarding. This same fate befell the Kennedy half-dollars, which circulated as silver sandwiched clads between 1965 and 1969, and were hoarded for their intrinsic value and not spent. Next came the Susan B. Anthony dollar, an awkward coin which was instantly rejected as planned.
The remaining unit is the privately issued Federal Reserve note unit dollar with no viable competitors. Back in 1935 the Fed had persuaded the Treasury to discontinue minting silver dollars because the public preferred them over dollar bills. That the public money system has become awkward, discouraging its use, is no accident. It was planned that way.
A major purpose behind the 16th amendment was to give Congress authority to enforce private law collections of revenue. Congress had the plenary power to collect income taxes arising from government granted privileges long before the 16th Amendment was ratified, and the amendment was unnecessary, except to give Congress the added power to enforce collections under private law, i.e. income from whatever source.
So, the Fed got its amendment and its private income tax, which is a banker’s dream but a nightmare for everyone else. Through the combined operation of the Fed and HJR-192, the United States pays exorbitant interest whenever it uses its own money deposited with the Fed, and the people pay outrageous income taxes for the privilege of living and working in their own country, robbed of their wealth and separated from their rights, laboring under a tax system written by a cabal of loan shark bankers and rubber stamped by a spineless Congress.
Congress has the power to abolish the Federal Reserve System and thus destroy the private credit system. However, the people have it within their power to strip the Fed of its powers, rescind private credit and get the bankers to pay off the National Debt should Congress fail to act.
The key to all this is 12 USC 411, which declares that Federal Reserve notes shall be redeemed in lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank. Lawful money is defined as all the coins, notes, bills, bonds and securities of the United States. Julliard v. Greenman, 110 US 421, 448 (1884): whereas public money is the lawful money declared by Congress as a legal tender for debts (31 USC 5103), 521 F.2d 629 (1974).
Anyone can present Federal Reserve notes to any Federal Reserve Bank and demand redemption in public money — i.e. legal tender United States notes and coins. A Federal Reserve note is a fixed obligation or evidence of indebtedness which pledges redemption (12 USC 411) in public money to the note holder.
The Fed maintain a ready supply of United States notes in hundred dollar denominations for redemption purposes should it be required, and coins are available to satisfy claims for smaller amounts. However, should the general public decide to redeem large amounts of private credit for public money, a financial melt-down within the Fed would quickly occur.
The process works like this: Suppose $1000 in Federal Reserve notes are presented for redemption in public money. To raise $1000 in public money the Fed must surrender US Bonds in that amount to the Treasury in exchange for the public money demanded (assuming that the Fed had no public money on hand). In so doing, $1000 of the National Debt would be paid off by the Fed and thus canceled.
Can you imagine the result if large amounts of Federal Reserve notes were redeemed on a regular ongoing basis? Private credit would be withdrawn from circulation and replaced with public money, and with each turning of the screw the Fed would be obliged to pay off more of the National Debt. Should the Fed refuse to redeem its notes in public money, then the fiction that private credit is used voluntarily would become unsustainable.
If the use of private credit becomes compulsory, then the obligation to make a return of income is voided. If the Fed is under no obligation to redeem its notes, then no one has an obligation to make a return of income. It is that simple! Federal Reserve notes are not money and cannot be tendered when money is demanded: 105 So. 305 (1925).
Moreover, the Ninth Circuit rejected the argument that a $50 Federal Reserve note be redeemed in gold or silver coin after specie coinage had been rescinded but upheld the right of the note holder to redeem his note in current public money (31 USC 392 rev., 5103): 524 F.2d 629 (1974), 12 USC 411.
It would be advantageous to close out all bank accounts, acquire a home safe, settle all debts in cash with public money and use US postal money orders for remittances. Whenever a check is received, present it to the bank of issue and demand cash in public money. This will place banks in a vulnerable position, forcing them to draw off their assets. Through their insatiable greed, bankers have over extended, making banks quite illiquid.
Should the people suddenly demand public money for their deposits and for checks received, many banks will collapse and be foreclosed by those demanding public money. Banks by their very nature are citadels of usury and sin, and the most patriotic service one could perform is to obligate bankers to redeem private credit.
When the first Federal Reserve note is presented to the Fed for redemption, the process of ousting the private credit system will commence and will not end until the Fed and banking system nurtured by it collapse. Coins comprise less than five percent of the currency, and current law limits the amount of United States notes in circulation to $300 million (31 USC 5115).
The private credit system is exceedingly over extended compared with the supply of public money, and a small minority working in concert can easily collapse the private credit system and oust the Fed by demanding redemption of private credit. If the Fed disappeared tomorrow, income taxes on wages and salaries would vanish with it. Moreover, the States are precluded from taxing United States notes: 4 Wheat. 316.
According to Bouvier, public money is the money which Congress can tax for public purposes mandated by the Constitution. Private credit when collected in revenue can fund programs and be spent for purposes not cognizable by the Constitution. We have in effect two competing governments: the United States Government and the Federal Government.
The first is the government of the people, whereas the Federal Government is founded upon private law and funded by private credit. What we really have is private government. Federal Agencies and activities funded by the private credit system include Social Security, bail out loans to bankers via the IMF, bail out loans to Chrysler, loans to students, FDIC, FBI, supporting the UN, foreign aid, funding undeclared wars, etc., all of which would be unsustainable if funded by taxes raised pursuant to the Constitution.
The personal income tax is not a true tax but rather an obligation or burden which is voluntarily assumed, since revenue is raised through voluntary contributions and can be spent for purposes unknown to the Constitution. Notice how the IRS declares in its publications that everyone is expected to contribute his fair share. True taxes must be spent for public purposes which the Constitution recognizes. Taxation for the purpose of giving or loaning money to private business enterprises and individuals is illegal: 15 Am.Rep. 39, Cooley, Prin. Const. Law, ch IV.
Revenue derived from the federal income tax goes into a private slush fund raised from voluntary contributions and Congress is not restricted by the Constitution when spending or disbursing the proceeds from this private fund. It is incorrect to say that the personal federal income tax is unconstitutional, since the tax code is private law and resides outside the Constitution.
The Internal Revenue Code is non-constitutional because it enforces an obligation which is voluntarily incurred through an act of the individual who binds himself. Fighting the Internal Revenue Code on constitutional grounds is wasted energy. The way to bring it all down is to attack the Federal Reserve System and its banking cohorts by demanding that private credit be redeemed, or by convincing Congress to abolish the Fed.
Never forget that private credit [central bank credit] is funding the destruction of our country.
[Reprinted from 'Freedom League', Sept/Oct 1984]
By demanding non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes at the time of cashing any paycheck, you’re avoiding the taxable event:
Redeemed in lawful money Pursuant to 12 USC 411
:True Name: dba LEGAL NAME
You’re avoiding the activity — or the verb — of endorsement. [Actually, I believe it is a restrictive endorsement because it 'restricts' how the bank may negotiate the instrument.]
Negotiable instruments can be exchanged for other and presumably higher forms of currency. So a nonnegotiable Federal Reserve Note is a way of saying that you’re getting United States Notes instead. This is domestic emergency currency, instead of foreign emergency currency (Federal Reserve Notes). The problem with this non-endorsement as far as the bank is concerned, is that the bearer of the check is not pledging any credit; any private credit behind the check.
[The Story of Money — Federal Reserve Bank of New York]
The only bond behind the check is the presumed goods or services, and the full amount has to come out of the bank account of the drafter — whoever drafted the check. This means that the bank cannot do any fractional lending; for every $10 that’s put into the vault, they can’t lend out $90 more. And so this is what it means in the article by it diminishes the private credit. You’re actually redeeming the private credit from the Federal Reserve and putting it into public money form — non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes. They still look like Federal Reserve Notes…
****************************************
*************************
*******
So there you have it; Income tax is a tax for using PRIVATE 'MONEY", i.e. CREDIT extended to Congress by Federal Reserve. And what do you think will happen when you start using CREDIT that Congress got from the FedRes, and is liable for? Do you think that Congress will be paying interest on that debt, when YOU are USING IT? NOPE, they pass that obligation on to YOU, since you're the last user of that credit. And that's why they established the Internal Revenue Service; to COLLECT the interest/fee for use of PRIVATE FedRes credit from YOU, since you're the one using it!
Don't wanna be liable for that? Then STOP USING that FRN DEBT instead of real money! And the 12 USC 411 demand, is the MAIN step everyone needs to take in order to return to the REAL law of the Republic, where the people are sovereign, rather than being gov't subjects and paying private bankers for the use of their credit.
Oh, and I hope everyone realizes that the more FRN debt notes are in circulation, the HIGHER the national debt. And the higher the national debt, the FEWER FREEDOMS there are in a nation. So you can whine, shout or protest all you want, but as long as the ND keeps on increasing, your freedoms are going to keep disappearing. So it's YOUR CHOICE, you can either wait until you're a total slave before doing anything, or you can START NOW, by making DEMANDS for LAWFUL MONEY.
And the latest demand for lawful money that we now use as endorsement on paychecks is:
Special Deposit.
Demand is made for lawful money,
pursuant to Title 12 USC 411.
Jaro Henry Smith; dba JARO HENRY SMITH
If one writes their demand as a NOTICE, makes it a public record and then issues that notice to any FRB... POOF! ...Converted!
I would imagine that one could make a list of FRN serial numbers and face values in a document and write something like
Could get it notarized perhaps even and send it off to the appropriate government fiduciary. You could stamp them and mark them with the number of your Redemption Certificate. EZrhythm might have mentioned something like this earlier in the thread.Quote:
Redemption Certificate # 1234
Bills : Federal Reserve Note serial # A 12345678 having a Face Value of $20; Federal Reserve Note bearing serial # ...... having a Face Value of $100; ....
Pursuant to 12 USC 241, ...., by special visitation do hereby redeem each of the said Bills, Federal Reserve Notes or clearinghouse certificates for lawful money.
There is only to do. My intent is to fulfill the law. Why do I give a crap if the acct is digital. It is not mine to begin with. There now does that mollify the wound?
If this paypal stuff bothers you what will you do when cash is removed from circulation in its entirety.
But since you Asked you must deem me worthy to respond. Will you heed my response? If no then why did you ask?
Consider I speak to trust. If I have declared myself then there is only to do. Therefore I have duty to fulfill the laws of the house wherein I reside.
My intent matters. Blessed be the peacemaker.
Shalom
MJ
I don't see this as simple. But alas free is considered cheap. I withdraw.
With Paypal I suspect the most significant issue is when you transfer from Paypal to a bank. Also, it used to be that one could take funds from Paypal to Coinstar.
You're mixing me up with another who asked about Paypal.
I asked someone else a semi-off topic question in this thread and you answered, then I couldn't understand your answer.
I just wanted to know: when a check is written, does one cross out "the order of" and is there more to it. I've seen this mentioned before in lawful money discussion, but the reason wasn't explained clearly.
It just occurred to me that I may have committed a forum faux pas by asking that question.
*cue sitcom wah-wah trombone*
At the same time, I would triple-dog dare people from this forum to get on Karl Lentz' Unkommon Law call and ask him about 12USC411 and the Federal Reserve Act. People will be treated the way I was treated: ignored or head bitten off -- even though it's remedy. Because a common law man is an "idiot", meaning he is deaf, dumb and blind to "their" codes and statutes. He can't even try to interpret them or apply them.
I'll be the one with the binoculars and jumbo bucket of popcorn, extra butter. :-D
Oh I see, apologies. I never cross out PAY TO THE ORDER OF. Here is the reason. I choose free will. What I mean is that I was given a choice and I should give another a choice. Do unto others as it were. Now "Pay to the Order of" is the language of negotiability. If for instance you only see PAY TO - then the check is non-negotiable which means it cannot be ASSIGNED.
I have been known to attach an allonge and pass a check along to another payee. Of course, I make a demand for Lawful Money along the way. I may even assign without recourse.
Let me tell you a tale of what happened to me five years ago in a Wachovia Bank. At the time I was president of a Civil Engineering firm and majority shareholder.
Now then a client of ours decided to issue payment for the previous month and the check was approximately $8500. The client was doing business thru an LLC - I will call it CLIENT, LLC. I was doing business thru engineering firm, lets call it ENGINEER, INC.
NOW the client made the check to ENGINEER, INC drawn on clients bank [Branch Banking and Trust Company BB&T]. Remember I was at Wachovia Bank. I, as President negotiated the check in front of a Notary - attached an allonge assigning the Check to a Trust Company whereof I was trustee. Of course the assignment was made "without recourse" and of course a demand was made for Lawful Money.
As trustee for TRUST COMPANY, I demanded that the bank cash the check signing as trustee and absent individual liability, without recourse and demand is made for lawful money. This caused quite a stir at Wachovia and they closed for business early so that the management might consult with legal. Legal just came back with a deadpan response - "you have to do it". So Wachovia quickly got on the horn to BB&T - to check to see if the funds were available and to ensure that they had an agreement that IF they negotiated this instrument for cash that BB&T would not leave them "high and dry". Took about 15 minutes. They completed the transaction and then reopened the bank for business.
The check is a PRIVATE issue so if you desire to strike the "To the Order of" language, then that is your business. However, remember the account is NOT yours. You are an Unsecured Creditor making a loan to the bank. And your loan is subject to the terms expressed in the UCC. So since your name is not on the money. What are you loaning? Your interest in the USE.
In my mind a transaction, whether it be electronic or otherwise is still subject to the same TERMS OF USE.
Shalom,
Michael Joseph
The constitution was written in a foreign language. While it is English, do you understand all of those Capitalized Nouns? It is a foreign language meant only for those in that closed law boundary. The marriage was between the States and the United States.
Shalom,
Michael Joseph
The word 'wedding' and the word 'federal' just might be related.
hi EZrhythm, when you say any FRB do you mean as institutions or the people/customers? I ask because if one is not utilizing a bank then why would they send the notice to the bank?
yes, I think this is the way I should file a LOR at some point and anything else purchased for keeps.
thanks for the tip, I see ;-)
why? off-topic? that the norm here, havnt you noticed? I kinda like it.. sorta expands the mind but at the same time that probably why I as of yet have not committed myself to implementing these (Davids) strategy. kinda confusing like that.
if I ever talk to Karl I will be sure to mention it now ;-) seems to me there are many details being left out though I cant see the bigger picture with his approach yet either. Ive gotta be able to see it this way before I take action. I find what Boris has put together so far the best in that regard. (bigger picture)
hi everyone
I just got payed in lawful money but would like to know how to convert them into the FRNs they look like, so I can accrue the tax liability, and .. um ... help out the bankers?
[SCOTTY] Cap'n! disinfo deflector shields being bombarded by so much excremental wave forces, I dunno how much moar she can take! The vibrations in the engine room are making the crew nauseous in a gaseous sort of way. It's a full on assault to rational thought or coherent reasoning and these pressures we are experiencing are causing some to actually think that bullshit is like brain food or something. My first officer just came up and asked to be introduced to Famspear, for Petes sakes. Captain...I am no longer able to even reach these people with sarcasm or parody. I'm afraid we are doomed. But on the other hand, maybe this just means we are one step closer to annihilation, so that would be something to look forward to, I guess
At a glance this thread looks very interesting, at least from a psychology and research perspective. To get something out of the thread though, you must understand since the gold seizure of 1933 US notes in the form of Federal Reserve notes is about as close as you get to lawful money without suffering a terrible loss through purchase and sale of precious metals at every transaction.
If you demand cash you have circumnavigated the entire issue; the demand for lawful money was either made by the buyer (of your goods and services) when he or she put it in his or her wallet, or not. I like to put the stamp on my bills anyway but that is just so that people might look up Title 12 USC §411 on their browser and start preparing their minds for the bigger redemption picture.
I think that is what Michael Joseph is alluding to. Jesus said that you must love yourself before you can love your neighbor - at least that is inherent in - Love thy neighbor as you love yourself. To love yourself you need to forgive yourself and I am directing you to focus on redeeming your neighbor from the national debt by redeeming lawful money yourself. Following this back up the Whole of the Law we hear Jesus say, Love the LORD they God with all thine heart, soul, mind and strength. By substitution that would leave no love for your neighbor or yourself unless you and your neighbor are as if God - the Image and Likeness of God. Therefore as God-creatures, God never being able to create anything outside Himself we lay claim to the Image and Likeness of Him/Ourselves as the Law of the Flag in admiralty [hence the Libel of Review by restricted appearance (Rule E(8)) and its Law of the Flag]. However the highest is in the Preamble; so many people misunderstand Law and what the Preamble does as Enactment Clause: The LORD our God is One LORD. This is the SHEMA - Hear O' Israel - The LORD our God is One LORD. It was a blessing and reminder that Aaron sang over the Tribes of Israel morning and evening.
Shema! Israel! YODI-HEYHO-WAVOH-HEYAH Eloheynu
YODI-HEYHO-WAVOH-HEYAH echad!
It is very difficult to justify that God would cause a man to kill his son or even kill His own Son but it is easy to resort to it as a rationale. A great example is Paul resorting to the Roman Empire for protective custody for the last five years of his life and then saying God told me to go minister to the Gentiles. Abraham created Isaac and the Israelite (Jewish) people out of incest (Sarah was his half-sister) while in ignorance, but finding out his error - 50% recombinate DNA in the gene pool - realized what a cumbersome problem he had created, where his stiff-necked offspring would need somebody singing the SHEMA morning and night just to remind them of this Unity. Therefore we find Abraham on Mount Moriah with a knife to Isaac's throat. Imagine the remorse after allowing Sarah to kill Hagar and exile his only genetically sound lineage Ishmael.
Continued...
Do you wish to buy into the national guilt-trip?
Here we put it upon ourselves that God killed His only begotten Son Jesus CHRIST because we are born in sin. We call ourselves filthy rags before God. You will reflect back what you project and always through the filter you wish to hold. Look closely - the Roman crucifixion was not intended to kill. It was a three-hour torture. Pilate was surprised to hear about Jesus' death! Ask anybody who works in an Emergency Room. If the Romans hung you upside down though, you were finished. Also, Jesus showed his wounds to "Doubting Thomas" so we know that Jesus survived the Cross. Thomas DIDYMUS was an identical twin himself and being rumored that Jesus had died on the Cross a few days prior wanted to see the wounds just to make sure that Jesus was not a long lost twin brother to the healer/minister.
This gets more interesting! Several years later Shaul, who was a treacherous suspect being from treacherous Celicia that had quashed an uprising against Rome in the previous generation was short and bald and so had to come up with an extraordinary plan - to marry into the Levites on the Temple Mount as the bounty hunter who captured Jesus so the Sanhedrin could publicly kill him off for good! Jesus had moved up to the Jewish community in Damascus and people still loved him and his healing ministry, as well as his rightful crown. The Herodian Guard on the Temple Mount were quite willing to buy Shaul's services as bounty hunter as Jesus had cast a pallor on the contracting of the drachma and shekel coins franchise with his tantrum episode in the courtyard, overturning the tables of the moneychangers.
The encryption is thin but in 6 BC as despotic king Herod the GREAT died leaving the Israel territorial claim to his three sons Archelaus, Antipas and Philip. Archelaus HEROD was the King over all Israel and therefore sat on the throne in Jerusalem and ruled over Judea, Sumaria and Syria (Antipas and Philip were only Tetrarchs respectively). Archelaus received a very disturbing visit on December 25th 2 BCE from three mystic Babylonian dignitaries alerting him that there was born a child-king living (15-months old) in the City of David (Bethlehem). These dignitaries brought gold, frankincense and myrrh to purchase a memorial for this King - a family tomb - and apparently a scholarship so that this King could study in all the esoteric lodges of Babylon, Israel, Egypt and it is even rumored in India too during His twenties, equipping him to become a most wise (educated) king indeed. The Prophet Daniel BELSHAZZAR, Chieftain of the Babylonian Astrologers and Sorcerers had indeed done well for God by planning out a marvelous heritage for his final destiny.
Archelaus felt quite threatened and began an infanticide campaign against any boy-toddlers less than two years of age. He quickly grew unpopular among the parents of Israel and they did not know what to do so many of them began to petition to the nearby Roman Empire to please come into Israel and unseat this national tragedy of a king, Archelaus HEROD. Rome had never really been interested enough in spreading out its resources to "Outreamer" but could not resist the open invitation to extend its borders, free for simply unseating one already very unpopular King. They exiled King Archelaus and somewhere along the line, living in hiding Archelaus picked up a divine Prophet (channel for Elijah) John, son of the High Priest Zechariah, who is also found living like a mountain man (in hiding/exile) in the Bible Story. Archelaus could not stay quiet when he saw the opportunity to retake the throne in Jerusalem - Antipas had taken Herodias, Philip's wife to Jerusalem and was sleeping with her in adultery. Both John and Archelaus were killed but John, only after it became clear that Antipas wanted John desperately to convert to his throne, so that Antipas could properly quit as Tetrarch and take Jesus' throne as King of Israel. See Mark 11:27-33 and get a taste for the Key to decrypt the ultimate PARABLE. The Baptism on the Jordan River was clearly a low-budget coronation ceremony. Daniel's Magi were right, whether they co-created Jesus the MESSIAH, or not. Remember Daniel was castrated and so therefore had no children, no sons to carry a heritage.
Hopefully that carries the reader to understand that King Jesus was truly a political King, crowned by John around the time that Archelaus was encouraged to risk everything attempting to regain the throne. So the question begged answers itself. Passages, a Bible museum sponsored by the Green Initiative of Bible Scholars revealed to me that the Book of Mark is certainly the first Gospel to come about, maybe as early as 40 AD or about a decade after the Crucifixion. Christianity Explored (3rd round) brought to my attention that Paul and Jesus conferred about writing the Book of Mark for three years (Galatians 1:18 and "many days" of Acts 9:23). So the three days of blindness is a CODE for three years in the making - The Book of Mark. The Question is:
Why not just speak this out plainly without encrypting it in parable?
ANSWER: To protect the King of Israel and his lineage.
Paul's Conversion on the Road to Damascus was just the beginning all right! He field tested the Resurrection Myth in Asia Minor where he knew this would go over well with the pagans he grew up with in Tarsus, Celicia. They just loved Birth, Death and Resurrection as demonstrated by the seasons that they already worshiped since the beginning of human psychology. In three years he was reporting back to Jesus, Peter and Mark - who apparently had the wherewithal to provide the literary skills to publish a book, rare and expensive at that time. This causes me to recall the belief among churchmen that the young man (neoteros) who was following Jesus and Herodian Guard who captured Him was in fact Mark, deducing from the writing style that it was very unlikely somebody else watching would have put that in the Book of Mark. Remember the young man who was picked up for following Jesus too closely, who escaped by slipping out of his cloak and fleeing naked?
I repeat: At a glance this thread looks very interesting, at least from a psychology and research perspective. To get something out of the thread though, you must understand since the gold seizure of 1933 US notes in the form of Federal Reserve notes is about as close as you get to lawful money without suffering a terrible loss through purchase and sale of precious metals at every transaction.
That brings us back to the Opening Post. What inspires us to program conditioning between us and the original Message? Why would we teach our children too, to lay the burden of the national debt upon each other? It is so inherent within us to replay our guilt trips like generational curses as little sound bites that somehow condone and console us, comforting us when it all comes out in the wash - without the filters, projection and reflection right there in front of us?
JESUS DID NOT DIE ON THE CROSS AT ALL!!
ABRAHAM'S INCEST WITH SARAH DID NOT KILL OFF THE ISRAELITES!!
So it is not only clearer why so many people who are insisting on being paid in cash, still misunderstand and want the need of additional exoneration from the guilt, to still be able to convert to just weights; the whole guilt trip as a business plan complicating our thinking and compelling us to seek redemption through sacrifice (priestcraft) is hereby put to the test!
In other words – How could a nation be so guilt-ridden as to voluntarily join in this trust agreement?
Attachment 1899
Honor thy Father and thy Mother - well in the flesh that is simply a moral code which is subject to all sorts of interpretations such as HOW DO I HONOR them? There is many denominations here - Scisms of thought - there does not exist ONE TRUTH in the flesh because in THE MAN Christ JESUS can only be found subjection. Thus folks opine on and on about stuff that does not matter at all.
Those walking out their existence according to their Five Senses do so to their Death [these cross over Jordan]. There is no deliverance - they are oppressed each and every day by Goliath. For the Central Nervous System rules their house [flesh tabernacle] and their spirit SLUMBERS - will someone please awaken David son of Jesse? The spiritual child must be birthed. Until then the flesh remains DEAD. The flesh is the VINEYARD - Isaiah 5.
Language matters. Yeshua, Yehoshuah, Jesus, Iousus - died. Michael Joseph is dying to self such that from glory unto glory I may be transformed into the image of Christ. I can't do it in my own imaginations. I must be Led into this path. Thus I ask the Holy Spirit [as Esther did]: What does the King like? My own vain thoughts [that's not what it means to me] means absolutely NOTHING.
I construct a "golden calf" in my VAIN, WORTHLESS thoughts.
=======================
Abraham's incest?: This is absurd to me. The relationship is what is being conveyed. Sarah was taken from amongst a PECULIAR PEOPLE - She is the barren that didst not bring forth. She Births the CHILDREN OF PROMISE. She births the children of Election. As the relationship gets more and more degraded we eventually find Jacob married to a SLAVE.
The bondwoman is one who is under the Law in her free will. She in her free will chooses to keep the Law. She is a slave.
The Children of Promise are led by the Holy Spirit and are therefore set free from the burden of the Law. This group or company takes their orders from the ADMINISTRATION of the Holy Spirit. Is the Law of God annulled ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Abraham who is the Leadership was granted this Promise. Well there was another Promise made even before the World even came into existence. I will get there shortly. I notice that 430 years after Abraham was granted that Promise [IN EQUITY] the Law was founded. So which is greater? Can the Law annul the Promise? HARDLY. Can the Promise annul the law, ABSOLUTELY NOT. There is Law AND Equity and these TWO merge into ONE under the Administration of the Holy Spirit.
But look around you what do you see? I see MEN trying to KILL the Promise. These men in their ignorance seek to put man under law.
The Israel of El Elyon is FREE in the PROMISE - however She [Israel] is DEAD or a SLAVE in the Law. And yes, Israel is the feminine in the analogy. The Men of Judah [or Leadership] is masculine.
So insert any woman you choose into the Analogy. Which one do you identify with? Which one would you like to identify with?
I choose Eve before she fell, says one, but that too is only halfway home. Says WISDOM, I choose to see the TWO in ONE before the BREACH. This is the putting together of the two sticks. And yet men opine on and on in their own vanity.
Did not the 12 disciples submit? How many cranial nerves do you have? See how it plays out in you? The answer is 12. There is one cranial nerve that went down into Egypt. It supports all of the organs. Funny how the medical profession calls this the JOSEPH NERVE.
How many elders are around the throne - 24 right? Each cranial nerve has two branches - 2 x 12 = 24. And yet as fantastic as that is - it is WORTHLESS. This is flesh and flesh - while it is the CONTAINER of the Symbolic meaning of Spiritual matters - the flesh will not inherit. For we shall receive a NEW HEAVEN and a NEW EARTH.
So what do Abraham and Sarah represent? The Spiritual Path.
He is a man of Faith - the Leader [Heb 11:1 Now faith is the title-deed of things hoped for, the proof of things not seen.] and
She is the woman of Faith - the Laity : Spiritual Church : [Isa 54:1 Shout in triumph, O barren [Sarah], thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the sons of the desolate than the sons of the Married Lady, saith the LORD. ]
He and She BIRTH the Elect Children. The Elect Church births the Elect Children. The Elect Church is Led by the Holy Spirit.
========================
Anyone teaching the Scriptures in the Flesh is building a DESOLATE HOUSE.
Isa 5:9 In Mine ears said the LORD of hosts, Of a truth many houses shall be desolate, even great and fair, without inhabitant.
Oh these houses are full of folks who are living for this day - but they are Spiritually DEADER than a box of hammers. Essentially DIRT - BAGS full of hot air but their spirit has yet to be birthed.
========================
Oh yes LET Sarah shout in TRIUMPH for she did not bring forth in her SELF WILL - Her Child - WAS A CHILD OF PROMISE.
So lets get to that Promise shall we?
Tit 1:1 PAUL, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the full knowledge of the truth which is after godliness;
Tit 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
Tit 3:4 But when the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, [Ref Psalm 27 v. 1]
Tit 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we did, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of Spiritual rebirth, and renewing by THE Holy Spirit;
Now wherein is the FLESH? Pray tell - I can't find Sarah's womb anywhere in the foregoing. I however do see that this Heavenly Woman is THE CHURCH OF THE FIRSTBORN - according to the Promise.
So what now of this incest argument? It finds no root in my garden. I find it to be a weed. For this is rooted in Christ JESUS and this is far from Jesus CHRIST. I find many today denying the Christ because the WORD was encrypted into the FLESH nature. To say that Jesus did not die [flesh] is to deny the current state of affairs.
Please bear with me in my foolishness:
1. Has the WORD been beaten, put on trial, denied and essentially buried [entombed] within the "BELLY OF A GREAT FISH"?
2. Who did this to the WORD was it not the one who denied Him three times? The Church = Peter.
Continuing...
Continuing....
3. Notice Peter [the Church] HAD THE TRUTH meaning He [leadership] was being led by the Holy Spirit at one time :
Mat 16:15 He saith unto them, But who say ye that I am ?
Mat 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Happy art thou, Simon, son of Jonah: for flesh and blood [mortal human being] hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father Which is in the heavens.
And yet Peter will DENY THE WORD yet another time just before the start of the New DAY. For a rooster crows at the DAWNING OF THE NEW DAY. He is blind in his flesh.
Therefore what do I expect to see? I expect to see a Church teaching a MORAL CODE subject to 50,000 interpretations - for they are drunk of the wine of Babylon [water] but there comes a time when that WATER shall turn to WINE. But NOT at the hands of men.
Happy are Thou Simon Bar JONAH. SON OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
My Sister my Spouse IS A GARDEN ENCLOSED. Eve within the Body of Adam = Kingdom - The citizenry and the King in perfect harmony.
Can you catch LEVIATHAN with a hook? Kingdoms of man! HOWEVER long before these kingdoms came to be THERE EXISTED A PROMISE. Before NIMROD's court and long before even matter came into existence. The Promise was renewed in ABRAHAM / SARAH even in their degradated estate.
4. Now how many DESOLATE HOUSES do you see today being led by leadership such as LABAN? Who would SELL the Church for his own GAIN? Pray tell you do see them, yes?
Gen_29:15 And Laban said unto Jacob, "Because thou art my nephew, shouldest thou therefore serve me for nought? tell me, what shall thy wages be?"
Gen_29:16 And Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel.
Gen_29:25 And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, "What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me?"
5. How many men and women do you see today DESOLATE HOUSES who sell themselves for hedonism? Jobbed out for Nothing. Empty inside - this is Pornography played out in real life. She [soul] is abused by all of her lovers as she refuses to submit to the one closest to her - her brother [spirit]. So she dotes over all her lovers, since she can't find love at home, and they USE her and ABUSE her. Is that about right? She is Delilah selling out Sampson.
Talk about eating Hog Slop. Even the SERVANTS in my Fathers house had it better. [She is Bilhah and Zilpah = SERVANTS]. Well pray tell, what do you see when you look around today?
SHALL WE CLIMB THE LADDER - SO THAT WE MIGHT COME BACK HOME?
Spirit - Abraham
Soul - Sarah
Now then, are you Sarah? You cannot become Eve without crossing the CRYSTAL SEA. [Ref Book of Adam and Eve and Revelation 15:2].
I will put it to you like this: Are you committing INCEST with yourself? HARDLY. And yet, have you even married her within the Tent? Many are widowed - there spirit sleeps on. SELF WILLED they are.
What about those DRY BONES?
Eze 37:2 And caused me to pass by them on every side: and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry.
Eze 37:3 And He said unto me, Son of Adam, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord GOD, thou knowest.
Eze 37:4 Again He said unto me, Prophesy over these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
Eze 37:5 Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath [SPIRIT] to enter into you, and ye shall live:
6. Has the twin sticks been put together globally? No.
Can the two sticks be put together in one man? Yes.
===================================
To deny one part of Christ JESUS is to deny Jesus CHRIST. Faith is the title deed. By the way, it should be clear that I am in no way shape or form promoting dogma of the Subverted Woman. I propound THE WAY.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning [of the ages] was [already pre-existent] the Word [Christ], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (Gen_1:1)
Joh 1:2 This Word was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us, (and we beheld His glory [The Shekinah], glory exactly like an only begotten Son sent from beside the Father,) abounding in grace and truth.
The Word = Jesus CHRIST.
The CHRIST condescending to the Estate of The Man = Christ JESUS.
The Man Spiritually REBIRTHED by the Holy Spirit = First Fruits. Christ JESUS was first of the first fruits.
What is the STUMBLING BLOCK to the Churches? FREE WILL over CHRIST.
Do you operate in your free will according to your five senses attempting to keep the way of Christ in your OWN POWER? This is Bondage. Insert any woman in the relationship [Leah and the Bond servants]
OR do you operate in your free will choosing to submit to the Holy Spirit [in Her Administration of your life]? Have you died at the Cross Roads [The River Jordan]? Have you crossed over to being led to CHRIST by the Holy Spirit?
"Yes, there are two paths you can go by, but in the long run
There's still time to change the road you're on." - Stairway to Heaven
Has David son of Jesse killed Goliath? Is it the Spirit, friend, or does the Flesh rule your house? Remember David son of Jesse did not kill Goliath in his own strength. And he struck the Giant where?
IN THE FOREHEAD. Time to resurrect those thoughts! Only She can do it.
Honor thy Father: Flesh aspect: Abraham.....Spiritual Aspect: my spirit, the church leaders
Honor thy Mother: Flesh aspect: Sarah.......Spiritual Aspect: my soul, the church congregation
CLIMBING THE LADDER:
Honor thy Father : His Majesty El Elyon
Honor thy Mother: El Shaddai, Wisdom, Holy Spirit
She gives BIRTH to the VERY ELECT - the First of the First Fruits.
================================================== ======
But if all you can appreciate is the flesh, then I suppose honor your father and mother in the best way that you deem appropriate. Of course that is subjective. Until that day LEVIATHAN keeps swimming in the sea of darkness.
Shalom,
Michael Joseph
thanks David, you have said way more than I think I was ready for, kinda speechless and now I have a headache.. from other things mainly but this read topped it off.
I need to go work it off now then come back and read it again and then the marvelous (im sure) post/reply by Michael Joseph which I am really looking forward to also.
Resurrection was done by Elijah in the OT, so resurrection has at least one OT precedent in the Bible.
Quote:
17 And it came to pass after these things, that the son of the woman, the mistress of the house, fell sick; and his sickness was so sore, that there was no breath left in him.
18 And she said unto Elijah, What have I to do with thee, O thou man of God? art thou come unto me to call my sin to remembrance, and to slay my son?
19 And he said unto her, Give me thy son. And he took him out of her bosom, and carried him up into a loft, where he abode, and laid him upon his own bed.
20 And he cried unto the LORD, and said, O LORD my God, hast thou also brought evil upon the widow with whom I sojourn, by slaying her son?
21 And he stretched himself upon the child three times, and cried unto the LORD, and said, O LORD my God, I pray thee, let this child's soul come into him again.
22 And the LORD heard the voice of Elijah; and the soul of the child came into him again, and he revived.
23 And Elijah took the child, and brought him down out of the chamber into the house, and delivered him unto his mother: and Elijah said, See, thy son liveth.
24 And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in thy mouth is truth
1 Kings 17:17-24 (KJV)
More instances: click here.Quote:
2 Kings 4:35 (KJV)
35 Then he returned, and walked in the house to and fro; and went up, and stretched himself upon him: and the child sneezed seven times, and the child opened his eyes.
What about transfiguration. Yes sir ree. Enoch, Elijah, maybe Moses (see ref in Jude). Jesus.
The caterpillar becomes a butterfly.
Shalom
MJ
The paradigm shift is to be redeemed from the guilt. It is guilt that causes one to blindly contribute to the national debt through endorsement of private credit. It caused a nation to give up its gold.
It is very radical and outside the box. I am grateful for people like James CAMERON who are just telling it like it is. But then, like James CAMERON I am not defending what I believe to be true. You can just look for yourselves. I linked the movie - The Lost Tomb of Jesus. It is very convincing.
The whole thing feels like learning the truth about Santa Clause at first and does nothing to threaten salvation. This is more leading to the true concept of redemption so that the linguistics can apply. Please remember where I placed the post, after somebody here sent a PM requesting clarity. I was not sharing my research to offend anybody and I truly believe that the precepts like what Michael Joseph is elaborating on are truly enlightening mathematics. To find the Truth, this is a very wonderful thing that just makes everything all the more fascinating! - Like the prophetic calculations for Daniel to send the Magi to Bethlehem.
This shows a whole new side to supernatural, unlocking the mysteries! But all in all I was simply feeling this is a good way to explain how and why we would furnish the national debt and provide the continuance of the abomination of fractional lending and elastic currency.
That was a lot and many might be wondering why is he so off topic. I assure you I am NOT off topic!
The masculine, in the analogy, brings forth the IDEA - which is analogous to the SEED in man. Remember that FRUIT carries its own seed. That is why your underwear are called "Fruit of the Loom".
The feminine, in the analogy, naturally receives and conceives. So the IDEA or the Doctrine is masculine and the act or conception is feminine. Thru her function comes forth the Child or the DEED.
Now consider what is CASH but a Flesh level - understanding of a concept. I myself do not consider it necessary to actually put my hands on a piece of paper or some solid so that my senses might be appeased. The THOUGHT is Expressed in DEED. Thus I am not double minded.
Quoting the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY as follows:
“What are United States Notes and how are they different from Federal Reserve notes?"
"Both United States Notes and Federal Reserve Notes are parts of our national currency and both are legal tender. They circulate as money in the same way. However, the issuing authority for them comes from different statutes. United States Notes were redeemable in gold until 1933, when the United States abandoned the gold standard. Since then, both currencies have served essentially the same purpose, and have had the same value. Because United States Notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve Notes, their issuance was discontinued, and none have been placed in to circulation since January 21, 1971.
United States notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve notes. As a result, the Treasury Department stopped issuing United States notes, and none have been placed into circulation since January 21, 1971.”
[Thus the dual nature of the Federal Reserve Note bearing two seals and two signatures]
I HAVE FULLFILLED THE LAW BY MAKING MY ADMINISTRATIVE DEMAND FOR LAWFUL MONEY AS NOTICED ON THE BACK OF THE CHECKS PRESENTED TO REBUT ANY PRESUMPTION OF INTERCOURSE WITH THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.
IF you follow the analogy INTERCOURSE would be the correct term. My spirit/soul [the two become one] do not wish to submit to the husbandmen in the Federal Reserve System in Marriage. My marriage bed is for Christ alone.
Thus I see the Trustees and I do not wish to Tort them. Said another way - and I will now go to Scripture as I always do - for where dear reader do you suppose the common law came from?
Tit 3:10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second warning reject;
Comment: A heretick creates scisms in the society - assembly. In Church one teaching Christ JESUS should be warned once, then twice and if he refuses to teach Jesus CHRIST, then reject him. Now stretch the tent chords of your MIND - and think about one who refuses to obey the bylaws of the Trust Agreement and yet desires to benefit under the Will. That would be called TAKING AGAINST THE WILL. That is a Tort. This is called a Tortfeaser. Let his wrong be upon his own head.
Tit 3:11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
Comment: One who is a tortfeaser sins against the Will and seeks to TAKE what he has no interest in. Therefore he brings judgment upon his own head. Therefore - enter stage left - the CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTEE - a.k.a. Trustee de son Tort. This one has not been appointed to be a Trustee by those who established the assembly - therefore he wrongfully acts.
Tit 3:14 And let our people also learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful.
Comment: The law boundary has been established and the Trustees have been appointed. The MAN [leadership] is in place - and the WOMAN [citizenship] = our people. So then, let the people be about the USES established by the ADMINISTRATION - The Holy Spirit. BY THE WAY - does any of this seem to even remotely be ringing any bells? I sure hope so.
So then the use is established [necessary use] and then the people UNDERTAKE in those uses for the good of the Kingdom.
Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
Comment: The United States underwrote the debt of "The United States of America" - thus creating a "more perfect Union" = a peculiar people. You might say the U.S. redeemed the U.S.A. These types play out over and over and over again. And they will continue to do so.
What is interesting is that we also see playing out over and over and over again is the Woman [citizenship] being led into rebellion by a small people - sons of Cain. Thus the serpent in the garden plays out again and again. The insider leads the woman into apostasy. And she then leads her leadership into apostasy - she gives him the fruit [deeds]. For she receives and conceives the child.
=======================
Therefore MY INTENT is expressed and implied and therefore I fulfill the law. Simply put - if I make a promise, I keep the promise. Otherwise, I let the husbandmen do their job. It is not for me to interfere with them. Allodial Property is in the Husbandmen. Allodial Estate might be in the Wife in Fee Simple; however, perhaps she has been sold into Prostitution?
But first have you been experienced?
Hos 1:2 The beginning of the word of the LORD by Hosea. And the LORD said to Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms and children of whoredoms: for the land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the LORD.
Shalom,
Michael Joseph
Many Jews and Christians distort the passage. And that is really my point - avoid the distortion and then accept what is - the truth is true.Quote:
Abraham's incest?: This is absurd to me.
Quote:
Gen 20:12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.
NQ1) if/when I accept this cash then how do I put it on record?
you have demonstrated to us in the past that you purchased a case file with cash and in doing so you recorded the serial numbers of each bill, now these bills could be either/or (lawful or not) so..
NQ2) in order to verify these are indeed lawful moneys, one must have a record of the demand that converted them, no?
David, Im not sure I will ever be able to comprehend this. Im not a bible basher and I enjoy most all the different perspectives of other people regarding the book BUT if at all possible, can you please answer the two new questions I have marked above without referring to the bible?
yeah, Im not getting it (the guilt stuff) and it just complicates the issue since I am trying to determine the technique. if there was a schematic, we could save lots of time.
Ive been trying to "wrap my mind around this" for at least four years now. I am not the sharpest but I dont think Im even close to approaching dullness. Ive tried for a long time now to comprehend this without interaction with you because your time is limited and I didnt want for you to have to spend much on my account however, now Im starting to think it is not me that is making this more complicated than need be. having said that I dont think you are intentionally making it over complicated either. can you explain it mechanically?
about your biblical perspective, it is interesting.. if you dont mind my asking, do others share your seemingly unique viewpoint and if so, what is it called?
same question for you Michael Joseph also, if you dont mind?
thanks
NQ1) if/when I accept this cash then how do I put it on record?
Attachment 1904
What is critical to understand is the above payment verification for demand is superfluous because the claim is with me. As recipient of the funds I will and I have stayed in honor. The Payer now owns part of my claim - my BoE and stake in Wall Street as a Patroon etc. More elegant to some of Michael Joseph's teachings is that this suitor too has a claim to approval by signature of the Declaration of Independence and therefore comes into Party of Interest character with the People in the Preamble of the Constitution(s).
The Instructions at the bottom of the Libel of Review state:
Quote:
3) default judgment. After 21 days the issue is ripe for default judgment. There is a bill of exchange on file with Richard Grasso NYSE since August 13, 2001 for all the money in the world to back your judgment by fidelity bond (secured confidence.) However, it is preferable to simply rely on the truth - that the defendant never filed in the appropriate district court prior to exercising a claim. Compared to the truth, the bill is only ink on paper; a representation of the Bible's original estate belonging to the rightful heirs. Nobody has challenged the bill to date but confidence in the truth goes a lot further and requires no citing the bill.
The form above was simply practice so that the new suitor was ready for when it mattered:
Attachment 1905
Now this expresses a claim to the intellectual property of a Case in the US District Court that has no attachments or liens.
NQ2) in order to verify these are indeed lawful moneys, one must have a record of the demand that converted them, no?
No. Only on funds that you convert to cash. If the payer is giving you cash you have no need to get a record of their demand.
I can tell you are very intelligent and made the presumption that you have the social conditioning just the same. This is what I was proposing is causing you to complicate this. So I went a bit overboard in order to show everybody the roots of the guilt conditioning. My objective is that you understand so I will keep diagramming this for you until we are satisfied you do.
It is an unequivocal interpretation but the basics are expressed through teachings like Guardians of the Grail and Holy Blood; Holy Grail etc. One item to keep in mind is that the Book of Mark was first, and the other Gospels followed suit with the same objective - to protect the Bloodline of King Jesus.