I remember the phrase from somewhere that you can't "buy, sell, or trade" without it.
The legal name (along with identification) fits this description perfectly, in my opinion.
Agree or disagree?
Printable View
I remember the phrase from somewhere that you can't "buy, sell, or trade" without it.
The legal name (along with identification) fits this description perfectly, in my opinion.
Agree or disagree?
I see it as you cannot play the game without a token or game piece, and the LN is that, especially for the Public, yet the board has two sides, yeah?
So...as above, so below, and if you play on the Private side, it is the obverse/reverse side of the Public, and one can buy, sell, or trade - to me labels of exchange.
I do notice the "own" is not in the phrase, is it telling by omission?
There is! I tend to forget that sometimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Booth
To own in a beast system, both the name and item must be registered.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Booth
“Mark of the Beast” may also mean money. My Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology lists mark as being used in old English as money or a unit of coinage (starting around 1200 AD). It is from Proto-Germanic origin. Germany still uses the term today, hence a German Mark.
give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and give unto God what is God's. I take notice that I did not enter this age with any ownership and I shall not leave it with any ownership. I also take notice that I was, I am and I will be. Therefore what is a date in regard to my existence?Quote:
Originally Posted by RThomas
I also take notice that my people asked my God for a man-king [Trustee]. The State is a Nullity absent God. Because what man has the power to transfer rights in to another body of men?
The Mark of the Beast has been around since Eden. I take careful notice that it was a son of Cain that built the first city. Society requires Trust, yes? first in the hand - labor; then in the forehead - full faith. If you are looking for the Mark, you will be deceived for it has always been there.
It is simple - Trust God. Any other trust is mis-placed and is leaning on a false rock. But my Rock is unmovable - God's Word is the same yesterday [first Age] today [flesh Age] and tomorrow [Age to Come].
shalom,
mj
I think that the American author Jan MARCUSSEN does a very good job of explaining what is the biblical "mark of the beast" which is only mentioned in the book of Revelation.
His relatively short, and I believe correct analysis of the topic can be read here, where it is presented in an intentionally sensational style and at a 6th grade reading level in order to make it accessible to the TV minds.
Not a bad read though; I enjoyed it:p
I interpret this as you seeing what I see. Money of that time (and now) contains images (graven) or imprints of the beast. The Beast’s mark or image on such, may have led to ‘money’ of the beast being referred to as the ‘mark’ of the beast. Books of etymology support the conclusion (albeit a circumstantial one) as to why in 1611this English word was used as the translation of the original Greek. I also see that money that originates from Caesar is Caesar’s and not of God.Quote:
give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and give unto God what is God's.
Who is giving you notice? God does not need notice, God is knowledge. If you allow God to flow through you than you would ‘know,’ not ‘take notice.’Quote:
I take notice that I did not enter this age with any ownership and I shall not leave it with any ownership. I also take notice that I was, I am and I will be.
I see that dates are a concept of man and not of God. The question before us was in reference to a concept that existed before the here and now. The response was to show the nexus to the here and now.Quote:
Therefore what is a date in regard to my existence?
Man can be deceived into giving up his ‘rights.’ This is the essence of ‘free will.’ God will not transfer ‘rights.’ The question is, is one of man or of God, and of which God?Quote:
I also take notice that my people asked my God for a man-king [Trustee]. The State is a Nullity absent God. Because what man has the power to transfer rights in to another body of men?
The concept of deception has been around since Eden. The specific form of deception inquired about in the OP came later as a concept of money, as representing a proxy for the future exchange of labor.Quote:
The Mark of the Beast has been around since Eden.
Joining a society requires trust. One who joins with blind trust may be foolish. A society accepting membership into their society requires no trust of them for you, but may accept one’s giving of trust (from you), blind or not. They may try to hold you to the pledge of trust, blind or not.Quote:
I take careful notice that it was a son of Cain that built the first city. Society requires Trust, yes?
As given above, the OP was about a specific reference to a form of deception and not to the general concept of deception itself.Quote:
first in the hand - labor; then in the forehead - full faith. If you are looking for the Mark, you will be deceived for it has always been there.
This last part appears to be a perception you hold that I do not see. What I see is much different. God only spoke through man, using the language of man. The ‘word of God’ may be metaphorical. The truths in the messages originating from God are universal in all languages of man and in all ‘dates’ (Ages) of man (our being and existence).Quote:
It is simple - Trust God. Any other trust is mis-placed and is leaning on a false rock. But my Rock is unmovable - God's Word is the same yesterday [first Age] today [flesh Age] and tomorrow [Age to Come].
For the record, I am not one of 'religion.’ I see the messages expressed in the Bible, and find truth in them. I am one of and with truth, not belief. Also, I wish to express my appreciation of your post.
Hopefully I may find time to catch up on this interesting thread. For now though - the comment about dating grabs me.
The term I hear comes from the term "to gift". So you are giving something up when you date a document. I have quit dating documents and allow the software, clerk or notary to declare the date for me.
Thank you for pointing this out David.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
I looked at the Merriam-Webster online dictionary and it says this:
Origin of DATE
Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin data, from data (as in data Romae given at Rome), feminine of Latin datus, past participle of dare to give; akin to Latin dos gift, dowry, Greek didonai to give
First Known Use: 14th century
By way of a nice coincidence, I had just been wondering if I should date a certain document when this little tid-bit of info helped me to decide:)
The word ‘Date’ may be nothing more than an agreement of precedence or a gift of proof to another of what originated first. If you think about it a date is not required for a transaction. A signature is. A date is merely a giving of proof or precedence (supremacy) of a transaction. This ‘gift’ may be of a benevolent nature (one of truth within the provided form of communication of time (calendar)). As to the method of 'dating' an event, can anyone claim a third party right to refute the method of documenting (setting precedence of) that event? Can anyone who has declared a 'calendar' for the documentation of events, hold any right to define the meaning of those events outside of their language that originates from what can be known by anyone who sees the celestial bodies.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...13&version=NIV
The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.
It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666
Revelation 13:15-18
This is the most viable theory I have seen; http://usa-the-republic.com/mark%20of%20beast/toc.htm
I was heavily influenced by Eric Temple BELL's Numerology (1933). The party game of UCLA then was Beasting. The mathematics scholars could invariably find a variation of somebody's name equalling 666; of course they could bounce between variations and languages to get there. [Except uncannily for Eric's, that was the ongoing challenge - find a 666 for Eric.]
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/7545/216gk.jpg
That is the magick encryption of the Angelic Name of God (72-Fold) and we find that Exodus 14:19-21 are 72 letters/verse alright. This has been a basis of gematria (qaballa) for many centuries now. 72 x 3 = 216. 6x6x6=216 too. I have many remarkable interpretations and decryptions of the KJV Bible if you have been paying attention and considering the passage in context of John isolated on a prison island, writing a letter he hoped would survive the Roman Empire occupation it strikes me more likely that this is the numerical operation that he was referring to.
I surmise that the white stone of acquittal is akin to knowing your identity; for being truth as a basis for distinguishing truth - like a tuning fork and your true name (given or Christian names/First and Middle only) functions for this purpose. There may be no useful metaphysics to that but I believe otherwise. Exodus 13:16 is part of the Libel of Review's Law of the Flag, indicating that the Mark of God is upon our hands and foreheads - exactly where John foretold of the Mark of the Beast? Monuments come to mind - surveys. Who will you find there? - In our actions and thoughts? One or the other.
While discovering our own Power (prayer) we may come to a point like Saul, who repented to Samuel; or David, who repented in front of Nathan to God. It is whether we utilize what we understand about the nature of God (216) and his manifestation of miracles for the Glorification of God or Mammon that really matters, as far as I am concerned. The manipulations of the Tetragammatron are inticing indeed, the fear of God is quite essential while discovering Power.
Regards,
David Merrill.
Social security always baffled me, I could never understand why I had to enlist into this program when I didn’t want it; never the less at fourteen I was told I needed this to get a job.
My question is how am I with a new grandchild underway was going to get power of attorney for this child. You know when the nurse comes in the first order of business is the SS5 very important even before the B/C gets signed by the informant (like Wisconsin, Massachusetts and Louisiana Administrative Code RS 40:34 and I’m sure the other states alike) to have this application filled out. I didn’t understand why it was necessary for a baby to have this number at birth other than the lie “you get a tax break”.
I needed some detailed information about this SSAct in that sensational style and at a 6th grade reading level and thanks to treefarmer from the Table of Contents starts the process.
What really caught my attention are the facts that represent the rulings especially in Chapter 8. Watching this judge really brought attention to detail, especially when one court case involving a minor who purchase an automobile from a adult by contract and the judge told the plaintiff “You cannot contract with a minor, check your state laws”,
Although further research states “The minor is able to cancel any contract at any time prior to reaching the age of majority and for a reasonable period after that time.”
What is for a reasonable period of time? I might be thirty years past the date and slept through the class in high school when they were teaching this subject but I like to know how the SSA contracted with a fourteen year old and for some reason it’s considered a binding contract?
Curiosity gets the best of me so I called the SSA and told them to stop the deductions because I wanted to take those contributions and invest them myself into a more promising venture (like me) in the same amounts that were taken out of my payments of debts I was receiving.
I was told “NO” because if I continue working and my credits do not get applied I will be receiving a lower benefit instead of a greater benefit. I told her I understand that, I’ll take the penalty. Then the kicker, “You have to call the IRS for permission”. Why do I have to ask the IRS for permission? “They have the authority” she stated.
Chapter 5 referring to Fleming v. Nestor and the RESERVATION OF POWER maybe is not an earned right perhaps that’s why I have to call the IRS or be in economic hardship.
Maybe it's my Tax Class 5? "gift" and not an earned right.
I would agree with you only that it is a down-stream result of a much deeper and more historical context.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
Go back in time to study Nimrod, Semiramus and Tammuz (the false trinity) from Babylon. They are the originators of the clever and secret doctrines of the world throughout history. And understanding what occurred back in the garden is key.
The solar magic square is an important mathematical and alchemical key and link among so many others. Solar deities and ancient mystery religions are based solely on Satan's/Lucifer's desire to counterfeit EVERYTHING from Yahweh/God/Our Creator and Father.
Lucifer wanted man/woman to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil instead of relying on the Tree of Life (Yeshua/Jesus).
I would suggest that the "mark" of the beast is identified in who we worship...knowingly or unknowingly.
A "mark" is also a "sign" or "seal". Kings and presidents have 'seals'. Their seals present their authority of who they are, what they have authority over and whom.
Yahweh's/God's mark of His authority is found in His Fourth Commandment:
Exodus 20:8-11
New King James Version (NKJV)
8 “ Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
"I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them." Ezekiel 20:12. "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth." Exodus 31:17.
Questions: Why do we "worship" on "Sunday"? Who are the "Sun/Solar" deities? Why is December 25th the "birth"day of ALL of the Solar deities?
Look down from the "heavens" on to D.C. and you'll see...the "image" of the beast? Is the Washington Monument the "image" of what is found in St. Peter's Square in Rome?
Just my thoughts! :-)
Thank you! You have outdone me with informative links. I know how much longer a post like yours takes and I appreciate that extra effort.
I went to the SSA office and had a discussion with the manager. Since that time I have not had a SSN.
Why not?
Because I do not write it or say it. When somebody asks me for one, I say, I do not have a Social Security Number.
I am uploading a very special example of utilizing the priesthood METRO organization - for example:
How about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumor from yesterday's email
If you have some time to spend get into this download. Just so that you don't feel you wasted your time though - if you go into the ER for X-Rays or CAT Scans make sure you leave with the whole report on CD. If you try to get them later they will charge you. My point is that these requirements are not really required.
If you understand relationships (trusts) well enough, you can usually just wait for the truth to catch up with the logic that you owe the billing information at all. Most of the time, the delivery - the biological one is done through the ER anyway with the woman or more often Daddy so flustered he will sign anything in front of him. What will they do? Just make the woman deliver in the waiting room?
There are horror stories though... about handing the new baby over to protective services so keep context about your research!
As David Merrill has clearly shown on this site and others, there exists intent to convert ones fruits (your labor; paycheck) into acceptance of another’s claim to them (a claim that you gift your labor to satisfy their debt). David has shown a way to refute any such claim.
There is a similarity to this type of claim of ones knowledge of truth and a recording of such in a ‘Bible.’ The ‘Bible’ (conceptually) does show many truths. But whose ‘Bible’ is true to the ‘word of God.’ Is the ‘word of God’ (KJV) actually from ‘God’ or from servants of King James who may have translated the original language in a manner that served their master? Does not the introduction of the King James Version show who their master was? Does it show that they serve only one master, King James, and not the one true ‘God’ as evidenced conceptually in their text? Who, conceptually, is ‘God’ to you? Conceptually, is ‘God’ as what you may have been conditioned to believe? Or is ‘God’ conceptually what you have come to see within a pursuit of truth? Did not Jesus say that the only way to ‘heaven’ (heaven may be a concept and not an actual place) was by truth and light?
If one pursues, the concept of ‘God’ with a religious bias (conditioning originating from others as opposed to a mind that is like an innocent baby, or a mind that is ‘born again’) they may never see that which is hidden in plain sight.
I wish to add to this thread that I am aware that shikamaru might perceive my post as off topic. As this is his thread, I hope he sees that I am sharing what I see as on topic within my perception of his pursuit of truth. Let me know, and I will cease.
Not at all !!Quote:
Originally Posted by RThomas
Contribute anything and everything you care to.
The thread will take its own course :).
I'm ignorant on this subject so, I'm just soaking it all in.
The phrase of "being unable to buy, sell, or trade without it" caught my eye. The legal name fits the bill perfectly.
I think I can explain this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chex
If you look at the case Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, you will note that there is a standard for raising a Constitutional issue.
If you avail yourself of a statute or act, you will be unable to raise a Constitutional issue. The issue becomes merely administrative.
This is why it is important to correct your status and remove one's self from statutory benefits.
Ashwander rule
Many of the other one's are important too.Quote:
1. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly, non-adversary, proceeding, declining because to decide such questions "is legitimate only in the last resort, earnest and vital controversy between individuals. It never was the thought that, by means of a friendly suit, a party beaten in the legislature could transfer to the courts an inquiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act."[1]
2. The Court will not "anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity of deciding it." [2] "It is not the habit of the Court to decide questions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a decision of the case." [3]
3. The Court will not "formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the Precise facts to which it is to be applied." [2]
4. The Court will not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by the record, if there is also present some other ground upon which the case may be disposed of. This rule has found most varied application. Thus, if a case can be decided on either of two grounds, one involving a constitutional question, the other a question of statutory construction or general law, the Court will decide only the latter. Appeals from the highest court of a state challenging its decision of a question under the Federal Constitution are frequently dismissed because the judgment can be sustained on an independent state ground.
5. The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute upon complaint of one who fails to show that he is injured by its operation. Among the many applications of this rule, none is more striking than the denial of the right to challenge to one who lacks a personal or property right.
6. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits.
7. "When the validity of an act of the Congress is drawn in question, and even if a serious doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal principle that this Court will first ascertain whether a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the question may be avoided." [4]
Thank-you everyone for your contributions.
So much meat to chew on here !!
This is awesome!Quote:
Originally Posted by RThomas
This is why I like to focus on the extinguishing of rights especially with regard to others' claims to my accumulations.
When you sign a contract for services, you essentially grant that company access to your earnings as well as your estate (in the event you fail to pay the bill).
Your earnings and accumulations (asset$) are surety for your transactions in commerce.
My public/private model is essentially moving your earnings from being in the market and accessible to property of status jus privati and absolute.
Thank you for the Ashwander Rule. I am amazed sometimes at my ignorance of such obvious doctrine.Quote:
Originally Posted by RThomas
Quote:
1. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly, non-adversary, proceeding, declining because to decide such questions "is legitimate only in the last resort, earnest and vital controversy between individuals. It never was the thought that, by means of a friendly suit, a party beaten in the legislature could transfer to the courts an inquiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act."[1]
2. The Court will not "anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity of deciding it." [2] "It is not the habit of the Court to decide questions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a decision of the case." [3]
3. The Court will not "formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the Precise facts to which it is to be applied." [2]
4. The Court will not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by the record, if there is also present some other ground upon which the case may be disposed of. This rule has found most varied application. Thus, if a case can be decided on either of two grounds, one involving a constitutional question, the other a question of statutory construction or general law, the Court will decide only the latter. Appeals from the highest court of a state challenging its decision of a question under the Federal Constitution are frequently dismissed because the judgment can be sustained on an independent state ground.
5. The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute upon complaint of one who fails to show that he is injured by its operation. Among the many applications of this rule, none is more striking than the denial of the right to challenge to one who lacks a personal or property right.
6. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits.
7. "When the validity of an act of the Congress is drawn in question, and even if a serious doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal principle that this Court will first ascertain whether a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the question may be avoided." [4]
That will really make a big difference in some work I am doing.
The Club de Paris is a non-organization. It has obvious roots in the UN's IMF though. It would seem to be the controlling arm, which would at first blush seem extraordinary - considering it is a non-organization. The Club de Paris though, decides unilaterally it would seem, which nations get loans and more importantly - what dispositions and setoffs will be granted.
This disorganization; or rather non-organization shuffles upward into chaos and the power accrues as it does so! The power seems to accrue with immunity. [This coagulates for the other echo chamber as I write here; for a woman whom the trial judge swapped out the LEO, probably because she identified herself correctly to be the woman, not the legal entity on the Card. Notice how non-organized this trial judge is - no conformity to swearing in the authority of the Name of God. She is a county court judge, who would file her oath with the county clerk and recorder - not the Secretary of State! But her oath went with the chief judge's oath hours after my $20M lien was perfected at the SoS... Before. After. All the while the AG claiming before the Tenth Circuit the trial judge has immunity has never subscribed his swearing to God at all!] As 'government' descends into the depths of non-organization in other words, the officials acquire power through being immune - "judicial immunity from suit" is what the AG likes to call it.
That is all just to prepare you for the staggering implications that the non-organization descends to a century-old dinner club - replete with members who have nothing to do with each other, and when they do are as likely to squabble as to agree. The point being it is these non-organized diners of the Anglo-World who have the trusts (UBO's - Unorganized Business Organizations) that hold all the energy accrued from... where? Well that must be awaiting claim of the Beneficiary:
If they are holding all the wealth by dishonest means, that means they are criminals. But consider this; they are holding the wealth as trustees. [This non-organization; on it descent into the 20th-Century Dinner Club above linked, formed through Scottish Rite Masonry (note the honeycomb under the eave) along the way - through a Southern General named Albert PIKE. Ergo, some poetry worth reading might be the required reading - also found in the Library of Congress - Morals and Dogma.]Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars
Is not that exactly what would happen in the hospital? The issue (baby) would be held in trust should the parent decide to be the trustee by claiming the baby? This claim would be made by failing to transfer the issue into the state registry - the Department of Health.
Regards,
David Merrill.
However, let's remember that a hospital is not a building..but a "legal entity"..a corporation. "Born" in a hospital means charter/origin within the corporation. If the hospital is a public entity under a bankruptcy claim...then perhap the fruit of the hospital is.... But remember its just a corporation--it doesn't exist in nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
***
Quote:
Originally Posted by RThomas
When you sign a check in blank..its BASIC/SIMPLETON/RUDIAMENTARY banking knowledge that a check signed in blank is a bearer instrument. Stop being your own worst nightmare. Redeem for lawful money. Stop doing blank endorsements. Walk away from a bearer instrument is just like leaving one hundred bill on the counter--it can be akin to abandonment.
Relevantly...I'd considered starting a thread headed "A New Trend". Just recently, someone went to deposit money to a bank account. Now for some reason, a direct deposit form with bank account information and routing nubmer and all that printed out automatically from a printer by the teller. AFTER the item printed out--AUTOMATICALLY--without ANY request from the one depositing the funds, the teller asked "Would you like a direct deposit application form? If not I'll shred it for you." Normally there would just be a receipt printed and that would be all! The one depositing the money was extremely puzzled since it stunk of poo that by simply depositing funds that a document containing routing number, account number, name on account or the like would automatically be printed out without any request and that the financial institution would have the audacity to ask if it was wanted AFTER it was already printed WITHOUT request--without asking. Of course, the teller effectively said "We can shred it for you" immediately after the printout was made. But he knew better because if he left it, it would be a kind of abandonment (1099-A).
So it gets more interesting, I thereafter found that another financial institution was doing similar things. They were WITHOUT REQUEST FROM THE CUSTOMER printing out documents that weren't related to the counter transaction and which contained sensitive information and then asking saying they would shred the items. The lady I spoke with said when she insisted that she would take the documents herself they got quite pushy about allowing them to shred the documents INSTEAD. Why?
Is it that they want you to abandon something? To abandon a claim?
I believe you are exactly correct. Entering the new baby on the state registry is abandoning claim. Keeping that claim while going to the hospital at all though, may be bad for the family's future.
Michael Joseph has been introducing us to a new line of thought. Redeeming lawful money is the remedy written for elastic currency only.
On earth as in heaven...
With the state insisting on being trustee, one might trust in Paul's formation of the Roman Welfare State (spending his last years in protective custody and in Rome on the taxpayer's dole). What I mean is that we become conduits between - the Bride if you run to the Blood Sacrifices and relate your identity to Israel - or just being in that relationship of being in the world but not of it. You become the conduit between heaven and earth.
You submit the baby into the state's entitlement but maintain the beneficial use of the baby. If the trustee is doing its job, then this is for the baby's good. If not, then you move into the position of trustee (resulting trust).
One thing for sure though; if you have the beneficial use of the baby 24/7 you have 18 years or so to teach him or her about this trust relationship and prepare the child for responsible parenting too.
Regards,
David Merrill.
What is interesting is that all along... the birth certificate says:
"CHILD"
even when you are 50 years old.
***
Enough experience, testimony and evidence shows that the entity created is a legal entity and that it has little or nothing to do with a baby coming out of its mom womb--that maybe its an office created..a container for ..something or someone perhaps. Isn't it interesting how the word person is similar to the word 'prison'. I did a trace of legislation of one "country's" birth certificate laws and found a correlation to an act that gave what one might call "legal entities" the ability to perform "natural person acts". These acts originated around the 1930s from what I recall.
The key IMHO is for John Henry to take the right kind of perspective on, JOHN HENRY DOE, for example.
Could that be first blank endorsement done by power of attorney exercised by the parents (or rather entities --or perhaps the trustees or fiduciaries for the entity?)?Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
If you look at most birth certificates FATHER is usually the third "underwriter"/"endorser"/"surety". When THE CHILD reaches the age of 18 or 21 its perhaps presumed that the fiduciary is also 18 or 21 and an now sign for himself/herself and for THE CHILD? Contracts with infants can include contracts with those under 21 years old btw.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Some time ago I pointed out to someone that the child support laws might be a lot more telling than they might at first seem. Might John Henry might be responsible for supporting child JOHN HENRY DOE? Paying CHILD's traffic tickets? Showing up to court for CHILD? Filing CHILD's taxes, etc? {Who doesn't get it?}
Isn't that that what they do when YOU don't pay CHILD's traffic tickets? They start doing the trustee work for you? Oh and that taking over the trustee's role when the trustee is incompetent or acting in bad faith and that whole resulting/constructive trust thing--that might apply with regard to gold, lawful money or even the right to travel.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
And/or perhaps time to teach the baby the difference between a legal entity and himself/herself. Now hypothetically what if one were to enter the baby's name on the register in exchange for lawful money?Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
****
That said... the old tales about the Kracken was that it fed pretty leisurely just lying at the bottom at the sea easily sucking up fish. Many small fish would feed off of its excrement so larger fish were plentiful in the area. Who figures that the Kracken was after the taste of wood when it devoured vessels? Or was it perhaps the cargo, owner or ...fiduciary...it was after?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb2zIR2rvRQ
http://www.benbarren.com/wp-content/...picture-12.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ertificate.gif
It is an intense argument indeed.
I think one might consider Colorado's New Cash Cow - at least I do because I know him. He showed a current Proof of Insurance card at a traffic stop and was jailed a week for No Proof of Insurance. - Because the police officer made a legal decision for the entire Insurance Industry, from the witness stand!
He identified himself correctly to the Stopping Officer, a woman officer and they were bold enough to bring one of the subsequent officers, a man to the trial to testify.
Likewise with me, the DA gambles on statistics that people will plea-bargain down the charges (fines and charges). Which has a way of backfiring when somebody has a good dose of:
We are watching the same drama build for Anthony Joseph - showing us that his driver license has been revoked on the other thread. From the looks of it, the DA has no intention of pursuing the initial charge that he Failed to Appear about. His bond, the Trustee Card, has been determined of no value to AJ ($250 bail value to the average Trustee). So they will hit him, next time he is stopped with $250+ out-of-pocket - no cash accepted! Check only...
That way they get that legal or full name from him by signature bond.
I have been told, at 1:00 am in jail to sign the Bond Agreement exactly as it appears on the Form.
HER''ESY, n. [Gr. to take, to hold; L. haeresis.]Quote:
Thank you for the Ashwander Rule.
1. A fundamental error in religion, or an error of opinion respecting some fundamental doctrine of religion. But in countries where there is an established church, an opinion is deemed heresy, when it differs from that of the church. The Scriptures being the standard of faith, any opinion that is repugnant to its doctrines, is heresy; but as men differ in the interpretation of Scripture, an opinion deemed heretical by one body of christians,may be deemed orthodox by another. In Scripture and primitive usage,heresy meant merely sect, party, or the doctrines of a sect, as we now use denomination or persuasion, implying no reproach.
2. Heresy, in law, is an offense against christianity, consisting in a denial of some of its essential doctrines, publicly avowed and obstinately maintained.
3. An untenable or unsound opinion or doctrine in politics.
Name, identity, records, and accounts.
Attachment 3681Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
In the end brethren LET IT BE LOVE which motivates you. Michael Joseph is no better than any other and I do not wish to elevate myself in the minds of others who might fall prey to making me his/her man-king. Thusly I hope what is revealed to me is beneficial to you and if you are blessed then maybe you will join into the conversation. If you desire to be removed from this discourse please send an email and I will discontinue these broadcasts. I do believe it is true that the love we take is equal to the love we make - so let me serve you in the way that the Holy Spirit allows in Me. I hope you are blessed as follows:
May your BED BE GREEN upon the Astral Plane - and may your love feast be without spot. For He makes me to lie down in GREEN pastures....amen. [you too!]. May your union with Christ be everything that you desire.
=========================
Look hard at the attachment provided above- the Husband and Wife were considered as One Person. Don't allow the errant thought of "Rudeness" to enter upon your mind - it is a false flag. No government system ever came into being whereby the husband and wife were not considered One.
The reason the Husband and Wife are considered One Person because their marriage [contract] presents the Personage of Trust. The Wife places all of herself in the trust of her Husband. This is the perfect image of Christ and His flock. Those that are His are the Virgin presented. This is a Spiritual function within.
Nevertheless the outward expression of the inner trust is one Personage. It is the trustee who has the authority to act and the trustee too must pay a fee to the wife's father in order to contract to take his wife in trust. Thusly the Estate in Heir is transferred to the Husband to hold. For the happiness of the wife is the Responsibility of the Husband. For those who know the Scripture, this should ring a bell. But many a weak mind has already run into the fleshly relationship and to that end I would say: It is necessary to wash thy feet Peter. Notice that Peter is the unregenerate Carnal Mind that cannot understand that his feet represent the left and right sides of his consciousness and this lower conscious existence MUST be washed clean and presented to Christ as a Chaste Virgin. Thusly it is the Great Work to WASH THYSELF - discipline thyself. So that the wife may present herself to her husband in a chaste status - presentable and acceptable to ONE husband - undefiled by other lovers.
I hope the mind has not wandered back into Carnality - but I know many have. Nevertheless the perfect Image is present for us to aspire towards. Thusly in law the MIRROR image in the glass shows us ONE PERSON. For I and the Father are One. Hear O' Israel the Lord your God is ONE.
One person in TRUST. A Christ Man - regenerated and enlightened as the Sun of Righteousness arises with healing in His Wings. One is One.
A citizen [Wife] is a Femme Covert unable to contract at international law without the consent of her Husband. If the citizen tries to contract internationally and the Husband does not say anything, then the contract will stand and is bearing upon the Husband for he granted it in his silence. Of course now I speak to citizen [wife] and Leadership [Husband]. But alas the creature has two legs [lower consciousness] and these two feet touch the Earth [base beastly consciousness]. We however see that the Head is elevated above the Earth - and is separated from the Earth. Thusly the Head represents the Heavenly Realms - the place of Christ in Me [and you too].
Tangent: Thusly the beast mind [beast of the field] is the natural state [status] of the creature. This is Cain, this is Esau, etc. This is why Esau is "of the field" - a Beast of the Field. This view is from Heaven's perspective in regard to the Carnal State. For at Romans 8:7 the Carnal Mind is hatred against God it is NOT subject to the Law of God - and it CANNOT be subject to the Law of God. Now you know the number 666. It is the number of Carnal Man. 6 + 6 + 6 = 18 ==> 1 + 8 = 9. Nine is the number of Consciousness. Be it base or higher [Valley or Mountain]. For David high on the Mountain had to walk down into the Valley to defeat the Carnal Mind [Goliath]. Goliath is the champion of the Five Lords of the Philistines [five senses].
Higher Consciousness example of nines are 153 fishes [1 + 5 + 3 = 9] or 144000 saved [1 + 4 + 4 = 9] Elijah defeats 450 Baal priests [4 + 5 = 9]. There are other examples but three should get it done. But I digress.
The wife can also be a church congregation and the husband the leadership. Thusly the Pastor is the Trustee. Notice that these two are One in Marriage. Perhaps now one is getting a peek at the Divine Meaning of "thou shall not commit Adultery". See now how all along the flesh tells the truth but the carnal act is a rude reflection of what is the true light hidden in the symbol? For now consider the act of homosexuality and its Divine Meaning. Two men doing that which is unseemingly has nothing to do with carnal flesh - but rather two leaders of a different congregation getting together to determine between each other what to feed as food [Spiritual/Mental Food] to their wives. This is homosexual. For at the head of a woman [citizen/laity] is a man [leadership] and at the head of the man is Christ. This is the perfect image of Trust. The Leadership can be of form [male or female] for we are all both male and female in the analogy. Example Queen Elizabeth acts out a male role in Leadership - the people of the Kingdom are feminine in the play.
Oh I know how weak is carnality - already I know the mind is racing towards ignorance in the creature and who can blame the woman for such as response. Consider how ignorant man has thought to rule over her and dominate her - NOT REALIZING for one minute that the Her that Man is to rule over is EMOTION. The Mind should never subject itself to emotion. Thusly there exists no difference in this Divine Law in regard to the form of the creature [male or female]. For no matter the form there exists mind [male] and emotion [female] and Spirit [female]. For Jacob had two wives. And there were two wives in the Higher aspect and two wives in the carnal aspect. The carnal wives are no better than slaves and this is the Rudeness of which the author speaks.
Is it not time to realize we are all both male and female in regard to Mind and Emotion/Spirit? How long will the ignorant mind [Peter] fish and be satisfied to catch absolutely nothing?
Joh 13:6 Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?
Joh 13:7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter.
Comment: Notice that Peter has no idea what it means to have his feet washed. He only thinks to utter some words and dunk his head in water and say he believes in some man being brutally tortured to death at the hands of dupes in order for his sin to be forgiven. In deed we do commit adultery when we refuse to be TRUE TO OUR SELF.
Joh 13:8 Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.
Comment: Clearly the symbol of Jesus is the Enlightened Self for how many times is Jesus equated as the Sun - He who gives the Light and is the Light. Let us therefore perform the inner work to put back on the Light garments. For once Abraham was sent forth from Ur [the Light] and Adam found he was naked of his light clothing - but now we are awakening to our great shame [nakedness] and we seek now to cloth ourselves in Light. For SEVEN WOMEN [states of our being] seek the COVERTURE of One Man - The Mind of Christ. For Chris is THE WORD.
Isa 4:1 And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.
Isa 4:2 In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.
Let us put back on the White [Light] garments as commanded.
Rev 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Rev_19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
Comment: What is His name Moses? - I AM. You are the Branch of the LORD. And look at the wonderful promise that all of your lower and upper qualities will be redeemed - for the lower is OF THE EARTH - but first you must escape the bonds of religious control be it governmental or church - and begin to do the work of disciplining all the qualities. This great work is not possible in the creature until God reveals and begins to perform the work in the creature. This is a partnership for the creature has TWO LEGS.
===============
continuing....
continuing.....
Now consider NAME. A name is a Way of Being. To do something in a name is to do the deed a certain SPECIAL way. Thusly He makes me to lie down IN GREEN PASTURE - for His NAMES sake. Dear Reader this is the raising up of little children. For a name is in a sense a form of Government - for The Way is the Government of God. And what is reflected in the "rude" mirror image is a Corporation Sole in Charity to the Public Trust. Thusly the office of Profit or Trust. You Choose.
For you cannot escape duality - positive/negative, good/evil, hot/cold, top/bottom, back/front etc - but are not these measurements on ONE scale?
Is a name a beast system? The true answer is: IT CAN BE. But it is up to you to decide. Can the lower Beast Consciousness be changed - can you change yourself? For She [Desire] rides the Beast [Carnality] - look within and you will discover - so that you can look without and "see" with new eyes how the collective Carnal Consciousness is being manipulated by those who understand how the mind works.
A good primer is a work by Adam Curtiss - The Century of the Self - Happiness Machines. In fact Freud's nephew knew - to pacify such a huge beast [public desire] it must be fed. Enter the insurance man and the banker to give the Beast everything it desires - just sign here and you can take it home today with no money down and easy low payments.
Indeed Carnality is BEASTLY - and thusly even the State must be sold by Advertising men who appeal to the sub-conscious Eve - tempting Her with everything under the Sun. She says "Please Daddy, give me what I need". And the Conscious Mind says "sure baby, what every you want." But notice the conscious Mind is only 1/2 a man.
Look around you today in regard to the forms of existence the male is manipulated by the female by and thru her emotional state. The male who is an emotional infant is no match for her wiles and she is, most times, completely unaware of how she is being used by those who would Puppeteer this Beast System. LOOK INSIDE yourself and you will know for a certainty. For when you come to see how you work, then you will know for a fact how the world works.
Those who overcome the world must first overcome themselves! Thusly to the natural man he must merely look in the mirror to see the Beast. She is always in a Red Dress for she allures the Mind from PURPOSE - and thus DESTINY.
This seems like a good starting point. Where shall we go from here? Lead your people [thoughts and desires] Moses out of Egypt! - Isn't it time to Exodus from Desolation Row?
[I"]Open your eyes and look within:
Are you satisfied with the life you're living?
We know where we're going;
We know where we're from.
We're leaving Babylon, y'all!
We're going to our Father's land.
Exodus, all right! Movement of Jah people!
Exodus: movement of Jah people!
Movement of Jah people!
Movement of Jah people!
Movement of Jah people!
Movement of Jah people!
Move! Move! Move! Move! Move! Move! Move!"[/I] - Bob Marley
-----
"From Desolation Row.
Across the street they've nailed the curtains
They're getting ready for the feast
The Phantom of the Opera
In a perfect image of a priest
They are spoon-feeding Casanova
To get him to feel more assured
Then they'll kill him with self-confidence
After poisoning him with words
And the Phantom's shouting to skinny girls
"Get outta here if you don't know"
Casanova is just being punished for going
To Desolation Row". - Bob Dylan
With best regards,
MJ
Heh.... this is whole different can of worms, but I would have to delve into the red pill to explain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Joseph
Another conversation for another time.
It would "seem" to be different but in fact it is exactly the same. Fractals of the Holographic image. What is within will be without and a carnal people will select a man king. That is the way of being. Thusly the Woman riding the back of the Beast can now be completely understood. And she wears a Red Dress.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
This is exactly akin to being led by the Red Horse. Just turn the dial a bit and look towards the East - whereof rides the White Horse. Of course these are mere symbols but I think the symbols say more than language.
The forms of being are in fact Corporate for the body of which I occupy within has many members each to a different task. How many billions of cells busy about their daily work - governed by a higher power - of which I take no thought. Are these cells somehow non-existent because they are named? I think not.
Considering a body that is bruised and oozing with unbound wounds:
It seems today that the woman and Man [follow previous analogy in Statehood] are divorced. Therefore, we see the leadership being understood in Insurance Policies. The more claims against the Insurance Policy understanding the deeds of a de-facto Judge, then the higher the premiums. One day will come when said Judge will have to make a decision to practice absent insurance and in full liability upon his/her own estate or quit.
Moses throw down your staff [and it turned into a Serpent] and ate up the "staffs" of the magi in Pharaoh's court.
Would to God that all officers of State obtained their identity in God. For in Him, we move, we live and have our being. I recognize whereof their power to operate is derived - it is in liability. Thusly properly framing the argument - the judge is not holding a vacant office - that is absurd. It is his court and he is running his court as any other business is run. But since the people are okay with this due to their lack of opposition - they consent and agree.
You may say I am not okay with consenting to a judge who is not bonded to the people. But then the judge will ask - whereof are these people [wife] you speak? As far as I can tell all I see is corporate office holders who by their very nature are in debt - understanding and without contest to the war and other debts incurred and existing of State. Is this not the DEATH STAR of the Movie Star Wars - all male and without feminine presence? Concerning the people you speak thereof - the debtor is slave to the lender.
Many feel mis-understood as they do not understand central banking - nevertheless obtaining benefits of State [society]. So how will the status quo change? In class action - whereof a Moral Person [group of like minded people] petition the higher power Supreme Court for change. Reminds me of the letter that the defensive team of the 1985 Chicago Bears wrote to George Halas asking him not to fire their defensive coach. Halas walked down to the field telling all the coaches to leave and holding up the letter proclaimed "this is the proudest day of my professional life." Saying "you asked for it, and now you are gonna get your wish." This is Romans 13.
I see a cess-pool of commercial activity and I comprehend what understands commerce - Insurance. For the Ship of State is understood in Bottomry of the Keel. Said Judge is running his court in the name of State understood by and Insurance Policy. Is the justice better or worse - I leave that decision to you. Banking of the United States is the Rich Man of State - enter FDIC to insure transactions domestically within. Gold and Silver understands the Rich Man's commerce.
If a Man at Law is charged, then the Charge must be discharged upon the Man's Estate. I see children at limited liability discharging charges in minus money understood by Insurance Companies operating under the Law of State - Incorporations of State - to handle transactions/charges domestically within the House of the Rich Man.
My use of the terms "little children" and "Man" are not derogatory or demeaning upon the mind - rather it is a statement concerning liability. A Man is not to say male vs. female but rather one who has full liability and thus an established Estate in the Earth. In other words, Peter with both feet washed has identity in Jesus. Thusly the enlightened Man is the 6th day creation of God in the "beast of the field" which is to say the regenerated carnal natural being into a Regenerated Man of God. Thusly is Jesus called the Son of Man.
Best Regards,
MJ
Let me be quick to say that i am not sterotyping the female. I make a statement concerning my own psyche. But i can look around and plainly see that rationale thought is being replaced with emotional desire. And thusly the pendulum is swinging again. But is this good? Does this swing benefit consciousness or does the schism still exist? Let us cure the breach - restore the paths of old.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
Nevertheless one who comprehends and knows how the emotional woman works can manipulate male/female through advertising - suggest the movie BRANDED for more on advertisements and their absolute dictatorial control over the sleeping masses.
Now then the Legal Name is NOT the mark of the beast. And at this point that should be very clear. But we can see the mark is first in the hand - for how do you labor and what is your intent? And then in the forehead. What is in your forehead? Your brain perhaps? Do you think? How do you rationalize? Have you accepted this current state of being or do you imagine there could be something different?
Do you imagine yourself imprisoned unable to escape - or perhaps, just perhaps there is actually noone guarding the jail cell? Have you become so imprisoned by YOUR OWN THOUGHTS that you have erected a prison of existence? This does not have to be - Lead your people Moses!
At the core or crux is trust. The woman at the well has sat at the feet of five teachers [husbandmen] and still she thirsts.
Best Regards,
MJ