Redeem From Public To Private Venue

[David Merrill]

I find a lot of people talking about theory and very few who actually do what they talk about. Therefore I find many "with child and giving suck". A king knows he has full liability for his words therefore he is careful about his issue. If I have written anything it means I have incorporated that philosophy and begun to make its use.

I suppose I grow tired of those who speak boldly only to be shown incompetent without standing. There are no short cuts. The path is hard. Those are the facts. Those who do not declare themselves have no standing.

Looking around I see many different governments on the land. In fact over 128 as early as 1960's. I maintain compliance and not rebellion. If you are a resident then obey the laws. If you are a citizen then obey the laws. Each must decide for himself. That is the beauty if choice.

My opinion is that most times men are too lax with their words. And the sheep that follow such men will end up in the ditch as well. Putting my king hat in I see a valley of dry bones. But the programmed masses respond with just give me the five minute answer. Now that's gonna be a problem when the wise know they have more than ten thousand hours of study and they are just beginning to catch a glimpse.

My opinion again is that no man should trust another man. Always and I mean always go and check out any man. Never blindly accept any presentation. We sail our own boats and therefore I determine my own future.

When David Merrill showed me the LOR I rewrote it to suit me. It took me two weeks to write the default judgment. This is my life and I refuse to yoke myself to any man who I have not tested. This Boris May be right or maybe he is wrong but I was there in the Coresourse days meeting in Raleigh about ten years back exploring Usufruct. As for my house we will not abide in another mans claim. I find the church and state in total apostasy and I would rather be John the Baptist than Caiphas.

In the end one must stand in front of the mirror and answer "what is it I want"? Until then Alice still chases that busybody bunny.

Shalom
Michael Joseph

I can relate to that.

John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah. Elijah was transfigured. We find a mythology that Moses was transfigured in the Christian religion but there it is; Moses died like other men and "to this day" his body can be found on Mount Pisgah. Who was it transfigured?

Enoch.

But which Enoch? There are two. Maybe both? Both Sons (of God, of Cain) were transfigured and so are up for a persistent channeling? That gets pretty interesting very fast.

Yehoshuah H'Natzrith V'MOLECH H'Hadiim - H'Mashiach (Jesus CHRIST) was transfigured too, according to The Book of Acts. I find it peculiar the revulsion Christians have for channeling when their own favorite John the Baptist was coveted by Antipas TETRARCH (not KING)! [I get the feeling however that Archelaus KING, exiled in 6 AD for whom John was True Prophet in Israel - (with the Spirit of Elijah) was already executed; Antipas hoped to turn John into his personal pet Prophet. Too late though - John had already Crowned BRANCH (David's Coronation NAME attached) - the new King of Israel!]

When you get the Key - this all works together so very well for good.

In summary, those transfigured are open and accessible throughout time - ever living. Get it? Jesus of Nazareth is Jesus BRANCH! Jesus, Son of David - KING of Israel. Natzar is BRANCH.

[Michael Joseph]

I can relate to that.

John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah. Elijah was transfigured. We find a mythology that Moses was transfigured in the Christian religion but there it is; Moses died like other men and "to this day" his body can be found on Mount Pisgah. Who was it transfigured?

Enoch.

But which Enoch? There are two. Maybe both? Both Sons (of God, of Cain) were transfigured and so are up for a persistent channeling? That gets pretty interesting very fast.

Yehoshuah H'Natzrith V'MOLECH H'Hadiim - H'Mashiach (Jesus CHRIST) was transfigured too, according to The Book of Acts. I find it peculiar the revulsion Christians have for channeling when their own favorite John the Baptist was coveted by Antipas TETRARCH (not KING)! [I get the feeling however that Archelaus KING, exiled in 6 AD for whom John was True Prophet in Israel - (with the Spirit of Elijah) was already executed; Antipas hoped to turn John into his personal pet Prophet. Too late though - John had already Crowned BRANCH (David's Coronation NAME attached) - the new King of Israel!]

When you get the Key - this all works together so very well for good.

In summary, those transfigured are open and accessible throughout time - ever living. Get it? Jesus of Nazareth is Jesus BRANCH! Jesus, Son of David - KING of Israel. Natzar is BRANCH.

One Enoch from Seth. One Enoch from Cain. I content that Moses' bones were being contested. Ref Jude. In my opinion Moses and Elijah could come coward in time to see Jesus because they transfigured.

What is interesting to me about Jesus' geneology is that he was of Levi and Judah. Remember that Mary sprang forth from Levi and Judah. Joseph also from Judah but only by law adoption.

In my opinion Jesus walked his boundary Survey. He was and is King. If you translate Israel you get "the prince that prevailed with God". Therefore we see an Israel of God. That is royalty. God too has a government and it is founded on a King.

I find Only one name that is above all names. The reason I hate the model being proposed by others is that it denies Jesus Christ. Salvation thru any other name is no salvation at all but is subject therefore to the claims established by imperfect men. I equate that to leaning on a shaky reed.

Remember the false one comes In prosperity. Said one does bring financial peace but he denies Christ.

Shalom
MJ

[David Merrill]

One Enoch from Seth. One Enoch from Cain. I conten[d] that Moses' bones were being contested. Ref Jude. In my opinion Moses and Elijah could come [forward] in time to see Jesus because they transfigured.

What is interesting to me about Jesus' geneology is that he was of Levi and Judah. Remember that Mary sprang forth from Levi and Judah. Joseph also from Judah but only by law adoption.

In my opinion Jesus walked his boundary Survey. He was and is King. If you translate Israel you get "the prince that prevailed with God". Therefore we see an Israel of God. That is royalty. God too has a government and it is founded on a King.

I find Only one name that is above all names. The reason I hate the model being proposed by others is that it denies Jesus Christ. Salvation thru any other name is no salvation at all but is subject therefore to the claims established by imperfect men. I equate that to leaning on a shaky reed.

Remember the false one comes In prosperity. Said one does bring financial peace but he denies Christ.

Shalom
MJ

Yes. The Book of Jude refers to The Book of Enoch all right. I had not looked carefully into the debate about Moses' bones until now. - The commonality being oath - the Mark or Stigma placed on both Cain and the Sons of God. The Lucifer Rebellion swearing out an OATH (Enoch 6) on Mount Hermon...

I am interested in Joseph being adopted? I always thought Joseph was Judah by bloodline.

[Michael Joseph]

Yes. The Book of Jude refers to The Book of Enoch all right. I had not looked carefully into the debate about Moses' bones until now. - The commonality being oath - the Mark or Stigma placed on both Cain and the Sons of God. The Lucifer Rebellion swearing out an OATH (Enoch 6) on Mount Hermon...

I am interested in Joseph being adopted? I always thought Joseph was Judah by bloodline.

My apologies I should have been clearer. I meant that Joseph was Jesus' father only by law [adoption]. Joseph did not lend his seed. I try not to get bogged down in the flesh but try to use the keys to get broader understanding. Christ is the Word. Jesus is the Word made flesh. So we see Christ in Jesus [Flesh nature] and we see the resurrection of Jesus to Christ. Paul understood this wisdom and if you look carefully you might begin to get a peek at the encryption. Christ Jesus vs. Jesus Christ. This is a wisdom in writing that has been hid but will be revealed by John [Elect] to Peter [Church].

So the Word was beaten and then even put to death - the preachers only teach the flesh aspect in History and Lineage. If that is all the Bible one sees - well at least they have that. The Word contains the fullness of the Godhead. And the Word was made flesh so the encryption is Christ Jesus. But the Word has power from El Elyon - thru a Promise! - isn't that amazing - everyone talks about Abraham in terms of the promise- yet few understand the promise to the Word made flesh, Christ Jesus - Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedok.

So I meant to express that Joseph adopted Jesus and further now that Mary was a surrogate.

Now I shall take a small tangent. Consider there are three items in the Ark. And I believe these are three testaments. We see Aarons Rod [NT], we see twin tablets [OT] and we see a golden bowl with manna. It is the golden bowl with the manna that interests me. I find that Jude, Paul and James quoted books that are not part of the established canon.

Just as Peter [the church] denied Christ Jesus three times so the Church has denied Christ three times now in regard to the established canon. Consider why do you require a canon at all if you understand the Wisdom of the language used to write the Scripture. Understanding that wisdom unlocks any book and therefore if those keys do not work, then the Book is not from God. Therefore what need of a canon. But I find the Church in dishonesty. For if you accept Jude, then you MUST accept Enoch. If you accept the OT, then what of Jasher, to name just one.

Book of Adam and Eve, Testament of Solomon, Testament of Moses, Wisdom, Maccabees, etc. Why does Peter [the Church] deny the Christ. Paul understood the mystery and was entrusted with the key. Paul would send Onisimus to Philemon, which is to say the Elect to the latter day Church. And while John and Peter ran to the tomb, John arrived first, but he stopped and let Peter enter in before him.

See that men rejected Wisdom so she left the sons of men and went back to Heaven and took her seat with the angels. Can't find that one in the canon, right? Well check out Enoch 42: 1-2. What will happen to pastor when he is shown everything he has taught is a lie. All of his TALENTS will be given to another man who knows how to work the field.

For while some Pearls are wonderful [understanding in the flesh] there is a GREATER PEARL [understanding in the Spirit].

================================================== =======================================

The word OF is a very important term. It denotes progeny. So I see a U.S. citizen and a Citizen of the United States as two separate classes. Just as a Resident is a totally separate class than Citizen. A Citizen takes an oath, pledging to a Constitution and that can only be done in a Common Law court. Now consider Joseph son of Jacob, when he was in the pit, he was found to be stateless. He was seized as a slave and sold into Egypt. Joseph kept his mouth shut and in his lack of Declaration of Status, he was delivered into Egype as property.

Multiple paths are set before men. The state setup in 1789 is under the Crown with its own separate government and for its own People. And I myself believe that it is impossible to become a Citizen of the United States UNLESS I am allowed. Which means I would have to take an oath and pledge myself to the Constitution of the United States. And that Oath would have to be in a Common Law court of competence. In my opinion residents lack the status and therefore the standing of a citizen. I wonder even today if it is possible to even be a State citizen. I might look into that to see if I can find a court that might administrate that oath.

No Oath or Pledge means no standing. That is the position of a Stateless man or woman. Thus a Stranger.

Now recall your Scripture. If a stranger desires to bind himself to the House of Israel [nation-state] then said stranger was to be made subject to the Torah; HOWEVER where did said stranger get standing in Israel? Shall we rise up out of the flesh to see with new eyes?

Shalom,
Michael Joseph