Page 33 of 35 FirstFirst ... 233132333435 LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 345

Thread: Birth Certificate - What it is

  1. #321
    SATANISTS OWN THE FUTURES and a willingness to bankrupt your Christ.

    I beg to differ. Today is a perfect example. I will tell more later. However this monumental process will be discussed in more detail on Lawful Money Trust behind the copyright security of membership. It of course comes off as a sales pitch and I cannot assert otherwise. But to you who can appreciate "You get what you pay for." - And for those of you who know how much more you pay attention after paying...


    Thank you so much for bringing some of the materials about PACER to light. It will be fun around here, discussing the evidence repository no doubt. I am just saying that the more private trust matters and maybe even minutes of the constitutional Preamble trust will be more private and regulated.

  2. #322
    And well you should anyone who is willing to let the Christ within be employed in a speculative futures bond market has redeemed what. It of course comes off as a sales pitch and I cannot assert otherwise. And you're nevertheless a salesman we all are i am guilty of selling the same ideals that a secularized crime has remedy it doesn't if the tools we use are secular.Evil for Evil getting what one pays fore Fore! The etymology for the word "Fore!" is not certain.Being out front or the front lines etymology is a suitors rank always one RED DIGIT away from grace.A spokesman is a salesman i am guilty of a private trust Lloyds of LONDON on the The Potomac the BRETTON WOODS act and TRUMP IS A humanitarian. are in the public trust.A death is never PRIVATE after its identified a public account isn't made private.A private official doesn't exist JUDGE CLERK EMPLOYEE are all dead in law. talking with tombstones or how is it we bring these oath less actors to life well bye adjournment of our private life.A private trust is a living one all adjournments are 3 clear days they kill you publicly 72hrs at a time.DEAD MEN WALKING around in robes a genetic genius.Whats is the GENIES power private wishes.GOBS of copyright or the heat from a private Christ.Humility 101 is truth fights nothing lies fight the truth.One might get what they deserve not what they desire.

  3. #323
    How lawful is my private demand well this is one comparison Domestic credit to private sector refers to financial resources provided to the private sector by financial corporations, such as through loans, purchases of non equity securities, and trade credits and other accounts receivable, that establish a claim for repayment.Or what interest would the bearer of lawful money enjoy but a spiritual freedom the shekel is symbolic of a private interest as its lawful under God why else is its exchange necessary .How the courtyard and the temple are separated in Gods eyes. A private offering is not without ones demand to a public record as the lawful exchange is memorialized with a shekel.If Abraham was too laundered money he did it lawfully .

  4. #324
    Three days is 72 hours...


    Thank you for reminding me! Very timely. (har har har).

  5. #325
    With all the adjournments your Calendar has subjugated your hardcore base too.just be mindful that three clear days is a powerful identification. A Subjugated identity has the Pagan adjournment its the ROMAN Remand Latin sized judgments. Its my hope clean hands is just a methodology to appreciate i find no fault with this Man and his blood is on you i wash my hands 72 hrs 72 virgins sacrifice its what the planetarium no longer owes as Christ is running a tab on and for the record just as well join him .Turn your water to wine .

  6. #326
    Does oracular authority play a vital role in modern secular society?

    Yes. Oracular authority needs a community of interpreters, acknowledged experts who reveal the true meaning of a puzzling text. I see that in the U.S. Supreme Court, where the Constitution is often treated as a kind of sacred text whose real meaning is revealed by the Court. Any time a group puts a text at its center and then gives power to a smaller group to interpret it, we are seeing the impact of oracular authority.The forming of a lower court And nowadays normative authority exerts a stronger force in the secular arena than it ever did. The U.S. is a nation of written laws, from the Constitution on down, and its citizenry naturally conflates writing, authority, and law. The very idea of a nation that can be built around a text grew out of the deep respect its founders accorded the authority of texts. Americans are extraordinarily diverse—and without this commitment to such authority, I wonder if we could just function together with just a TRUE NAME and Nature


    U.S. Supreme Court, has never been given all the say just the supremacy to say it a voided Oracular authority needs a community of interpreters,The Merrill Complaint at his Supreme Courts great behest and its that annoyance is in the tiniest print nothing squeaks better . Good luck Gringo



    In the biblical context, normative authority is taking or justifying an action because "the Bible says we should do it," such as when we apply the commandment "Love your neighbor as yourself" in our interactions with others.

    Literary authority is the common phenomenon of authors using earlier texts as models for new ones.

    In ancient Israel, there was a professional class of scribes. While they mainly performed the mundane work of bureaucrats, they also formed a kind of literati, a professional class who read each other's works and wrote for one another. As part of their training, scribes regularly copied and modified earlier texts. Thus, many of the biblical texts began as scribal exercises, not as the normative authoritative law codes they claimed to be. Exodus 20-23, for example, which contains what scholars call the Covenant Code, was originally written as a scribal exercise. Later scribes drew and improvised on that text as part of their own training—and this became the core of the Book of Deuteronomy. Few outside of the scribal elite would have even known these texts existed!

    The third kind of authority, oracular authority, is the idea that the text contains a message from the Divine realm, usually about the future. Throughout antiquity, this was the primary sense in which the Bible was perceived to be "holy." When, for example, Hosea prophesied the destruction of Israel's Northern Kingdom in the eighth century B.C.E., he turned out to be right, and his book was therefore preserved. Most prophesies that turned out to be wrong were rejected, although a few sneaked by.

    How do we know that the Jewish people did not initially perceive the Hebrew Bible as holy in the normative sense?

    Simply, most Israelite's and their immediate descendants (they begin to call themselves Jews after the fifth century B.C.E.) could not read. The literacy rate was exceedingly low throughout antiquity. This does not necessarily mean that the people did not know of these scribal texts or did not hear them recited by others, but even if they knew the biblical stories, it would not have been because the stories were in the Bible; the people would have learned them solely orally. They would not have heard these texts recited at the Temple, which performed its sacrifices in silence; synagogues did not exist in the land of Israel before the first century C.E. And it is improbable that people in antiquity, who gave authority to established custom—doing what their family and village had always done—would have undone their traditions based upon an oral tradition that also appeared in a text they couldn't even read. More specifically, little evidence exists from all of antiquity that Jews consulted texts for their normative behavior. In fact, the Bible is replete with countless examples of precisely the opposite—people ignoring biblical rules.

    Furthermore, we possess a significant number of legal papyri written by Jews in Egypt in the second century B.C.E. to first century C.E., and not one demonstrates awareness of a distinctive Jewish law, even though by that time other writings show they had begun to acquire some knowledge of biblical texts. Even by the first century C.E., when synagogues arrived in the land of Israel, knowledge of scripture was spotty and its authority did not yet displace custom. Jesus, for example, had very limited knowledge of scripture.

    Did the Jewish leadership ever attempt to give normative authority to some biblical texts?

    Yes, but their efforts largely failed. Two examples:

    In the seventh century B.C.E., Josiah, the king of Judah, instituted a policy of religious reforms that he based on his discovery of an older text that had been found during renovations of the Jerusalem Temple. Notably, this text was the core of Deuteronomy, which up to then had been buried away in the Temple unknown and unread. The biblical account is biased-it's all too clear that its author wished to promulgate Josiah's call for centralizing religious worship around the Temple and eliminating images of deities ("idols")-but even the subjective author had to admit that Josiah's reforms quickly failed, cast off even by his own son.

    Fast forward 200 years or so to Ezra the scribe, who returned to Jerusalem from Babylonia in the middle of the fifth century C.E. A functionary of the Persians, who had recently conquered Babylonia, he arrived in Jerusalem armed with a copy of something resembling part of our Torah (scholars debate exactly what) and attempted to use its authority to dissolve the intermarriages he opposed. The Book of Ezra makes clear that Ezra's efforts went nowhere.

    Christ got the librarians job no more written words a message on just started with a dozen . his peers perhaps supreme being or message.mice and men take Christ of THAT Commercial Cross he was taken down who put him back up on it and why.

  7. #327
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    The State of Soleterra
    Posts
    662
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradual_Civilization_Act

    Gradual Civilization Act

    The Act to Encourage the Gradual Civilization of Indian Tribes in this Province, and to Amend the Laws Relating to Indians (commonly known as the Gradual Civilization Act) was a bill passed by the 5th Parliament of the Province of Canada in 1857.

    The treaty built on the "Act for the Protection of the Indians in Upper Canada" passed in 1839, but required the "enfranchisement" of any recognized male Indian over the age of 21 "able to speak, read and write either English or the French language readily and well, and is sufficiently advanced in the elementary branches of education and is of good moral character and free from debt."[1] An "enfranchised" Indian would no longer retain the "legal rights and habilities of Indians" and would "no longer be deemed an Indian" but a regular British subject.[1] Such enfranchisement was mandatory, but any male Indian could be voluntarily enfranchised despite an inability to read or write, or a lack of school education, so long as he spoke English or French, and was found to be "of sober and industrious habits, free from debt and sufficiently intelligent to be capable of managing his own affairs."[1] Voluntary enfranchisement, however, required a three year probation term before it would come into legal effect.

    Enfranchisement required that Indians choose a last name (to be approved by appointed commissioners) by which they would become legally known. The wife and descendants of an enfranchised Indian would also be enfranchised, and would no longer be considered members of the former tribe, unless they were to regain Indian status through another marriage.

    Enfranchised Indians were entitled to "a piece of land not exceeding fifty acres out of the lands reserved or set apart for the use of his tribe" as allotted by the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, and "a sum of money equal to the principal of his share of the annuities and other yearly revenues receivable by or for the use of such tribe."[1] This land and money would become their property, but by accepting it, they would "forgo all claim to any further share in the lands or moneys then belonging to or reserved for the use of [their] tribe, and cease to have a voice in the proceedings thereof."[1]


    then click on "enfranchisement" and it takes you to
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffrage
    Suffrage, political franchise, or simply franchise is the right to vote in public, political elections (although the term is sometimes used for any right to vote).

    So there we have it. The BC is an enfranchisement.
    Remember the definition of "everyone" in the "Criminal Code of Canada"?
    Her majesty and an organization.

    en·fran·chise (?n-fr?n?ch?z?)
    1. To endow with the rights of citizenship, especially the right to vote.
    2. To free, as from bondage.
    3. To bestow a franchise on.

  8. #328

  9. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    The name change is quite interesting.


    Name:  Vining on title.jpg
Views: 330
Size:  93.9 KB
    A class action suit for all mankind vs all humanity?

    ***



    One of the Star Wars prequels has an interesting sequence whereby Annakin becomes, or is named, Darth Vader only moments after he takes an oath to the Sith Lord. In the TV show Arrow (or Green Arrow) sequences concerning the League of Assassins deals with the name change issue more than once. In one related series, a femme joins the Leage of Assassins, then the leader finds reason to release her at her request he tells her something like: "I release you. You can have your name and your past lives back." So effectively, "You are no longer B, you are now A." Honorable discharge?

    Once when a woman married, she would cease to be a member of one household and become a member of another. Also, where applicable, women married and would take on their husband's "last name". A woman keeping her name might be letting you know that she is not committed as you might hope.

    The Act to Encourage the Gradual Civilization of Indian Tribes in this Province, and to Amend the Laws Relating to Indians (commonly known as the Gradual Civilization Act) was a bill passed by the 5th Parliament of the Province of Canada in 1857.

    The treaty built on the "Act for the Protection of the Indians in Upper Canada" passed in 1839, but required the "enfranchisement" of any recognized male Indian over the age of 21 "able to speak, read and write either English or the French language readily and well, and is sufficiently advanced in the elementary branches of education and is of good moral character and free from debt."[1] An "enfranchised" Indian would no longer retain the "legal rights and habilities of Indians" and would "no longer be deemed an Indian" but a regular British subject.[1] Such enfranchisement was mandatory, but any male Indian could be voluntarily enfranchised despite an inability to read or write, or a lack of school education, so long as he spoke English or French, and was found to be "of sober and industrious habits, free from debt and sufficiently intelligent to be capable of managing his own affairs."[1] Voluntary enfranchisement, however, required a three year probation term before it would come into legal effect.

    Enfranchisement required that Indians choose a last name (to be approved by appointed commissioners) by which they would become legally known. The wife and descendants of an enfranchised Indian would also be enfranchised, and would no longer be considered members of the former tribe, unless they were to regain Indian status through another marriage.
    Well it has been gone over and over the notion of driver's licenses and SSNs being regarded as prima facie evidence of being a franchisee. The dead and the living being unalike; Roman Maxim: "dissimilar things ought not be joined". The "last name" is joined with "true name" to make a totally different name--familiar but not the same.

    Regarding those kinds of birth certificates, is the baby ever named or is only the personae/vessel/entity that is regarded to contain the baby named? No name, no pneuma (breath).

    ***

    Corporations are likewise spiritual or temporal: spiritual, of bishops, deans, archdeacons, parsons, vicars, &c.; temporal, of majors, commonalty, bailiff) and burgesses, &c. Some are of a mixed nature, composed of spiritual and temporal persons, such as leads of colleges and hospitals, &c.

    Lay corporations are of two sorts, civil -and eleemosynary. The civil are erected for a variety of purposes; as the king, to prevent an interregnum or Vacancy of the throne; a mayor and commonalty, bailiff and burgesses, and the like, for the advancement and regulation of manufactures and commerce. The eleemosynary sort are such as are constituted for the perpetual distribution of free alms, or bounty of the founder to them, of such persons as he has directed; as all hospitals, colleges, &c.

    A corporation may he created by the common law, by the king's charter, by act of parliament, and by prescription. When a corporation is created, a name must be given to it; and by that name alone it must sue and be sued, and do all legal acts, for the name is the very being of its constitution; and though it is the will of the king that erects the corporation, yet the name is the Knot of its combination, without which it could not perform its corporate functions. Source: The Complete English Lawyer: Or, Everyman His Own Lawyer (1823).
    Last edited by allodial; 04-12-16 at 01:55 AM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  10. #330
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post

    Once when a woman married, she would cease to be a member of one household and become a member of another. Also, where applicable, women married and would take on their husband's "last name". A woman keeping her name might be letting you know that she is not committed as you might hope.

    She takes the SEAL of her Husband.
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    Lawful Money Trust Website

    Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •