How did the Christ respond to an ID request?
The rebuttal by many to this mode of the "name game" is always the same: "it's okay to give your name to Caesar, because Jesus did when his soldiers sought Him at John 18:4-8." This is incorrect, because when we compare the KJV with the original Greek text, He did not answer to the name, to wit:
"Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon Him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?
They answered Him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am He. And Judas also, which betrayed Him, stood with them.
As soon then as He had said unto them, I am He, they went backward, and fell to the ground.
Then asked He them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus answered, I have told you that I am He: if therefore ye seek Me, let these go their way:" (KJV)
Note that in the KJV text the "He" in "I am He" is interpolated (added by the translators; it does not exist in the Greek text) in every verse.
And we see that the first time He said "I am" to the Roman soldiers who had come to arrest Him, at verse 6, "they went backward, and fell to the ground." This occurred because they were speaking to the same "I am" as Moses spoke to at Exodus 3:14:
"And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and He said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you."
And note that our Lord, in the Gospel of John, asked them a second time, at verse 7, who they were seeking. If He was answering to "Jesus of Nazareth" the first time, why would He ask them a second time who they were seeking.
We may also note that our Lord never answered to the fictitious "legal" personalities of, "carpenter" (Mark 6:3) and "the carpenter's son" (Matt 13:55). He was accused of being those fictions, but He never confirmed it. He did not "join" the question to allow "legal personality" to be attached to Him.
When one asks you your name, they obviously don't know you. If this is the case, they are from a different or foreign jurisdiction, outside of your community and the Law you minister to. By answering to the name that comes out of their mouth, you answer to the fiction that that foreign jurisdiction has created for their purposes. By answering to the name, you remove yourself from "conformed to His image and likeness" to being conformed to Caesar's, and thereby give jurisdiction to those who regulate natural persons, human beings and others of like 'species.'
The commercial aspect of names is where the imperial governments are looking. With the giving of your name, you answer as a belligerent in the field, operating in a commercial venue, making you fully regulateable through the natural man's codes, rules and regulations.
Consider the following statement by one of their own:
"Everything must have a name. Many things cannot, in fact, exist without a name. However much dignity and importance there may be in a corporation, it [*and therefore, its "persons"] can have no possible existence until it [*and therefore, its "persons"] is given a name. The importance of names is thus manifest, and it is a little surprising that apparently no attempt has before been made to deal with their full legal [*form of the law] aspect." Judge Edgar Dale, Foreword to The Law of Names, by Anthony Linell (1938).
A bondman in and of Jesus the Christ has a name given to him by God. He does not have a name given to him by Caesar. Those named by Caesar become novated into persons, human beings, individuals, residents and other "legal fictions" answering to his mark, those marks being for commercial purposes, to wit:
"Name. A designation by which a person, natural or artificial, is known.
Designation. The use of an expression, instead of the name, to indicate a person or thing.†A Dictionary of Law (1893) by William C. Anderson. (See Issue the Sixth of The News, 'To Be or Not To Be, a Human Being,' for a study of what human beings and natural persons really are.)
"Name. 1. The particular combination of vocal sounds employed as the individual designation of a single person, animal, place, or thing.
Designation. 5. In Law, the statement of profession, trade, residence, etc., for purposes of identification 1824." The Oxford Universal Dictionary (1933).
"Name. The designation of an individual person, or of a firm or corporation.
Designation. A description or descriptive expression by which a person or thing is denoted in a will without using the name." Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd Ed. (1933), page 1220.
And two of man's maxims of law reveal that those who answer to Caesar's designations are nothing more than a "thing":
Nomina sunt notæ rerum, Names are the marks of things.
Nomina sunt symbola rerum, Names are the symbols of things.
A bondman of Christ Jesus is not a thing. Therefore, if one from a foreign jurisdiction asks to see your "identification" or asks if your name is 'so and so,' let them know that you are a bondman of Christ Jesus, and being such, you have not been given a name by Caesar, and therefore you do not have a name that can be "rendered unto him.
The implications of giving your so-called "name" to anyone, especially when dealing with the imperial commercial courts and governments of D.C., the States, the Counties, and the Cities, can be quite devastating.
Therefore, it is important to fully consider the following:
"The christian or baptismal name is, of course, really the name of importance and, surprising as it may seem, it does not matter in law nearly so much about the added or sur-name. The Christian name is therefore placed in the forefront, and incidentally is an essential part of the evidence of every witness in Court...Everything must have a name. Many things cannot, in fact, exist without a name." Judge Edgar Dale, Foreword to 'The Law of Names', by Anthony Linell (1938).
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/boh/boh2.shtml Food for thought.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Chex
