can you prove your identity?

[Shuftin]

What an easy question to answer.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
"But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED.

Pursuant to Common Law, a Persons name is whatever name said Person publicly uses, is publicly known by, is publicly called by, is publicly introduced by, is publicly put forth as being, and publicly conducts business as.

I mean C'mon. Joe Shoemaker, son of Jack Shoemaker, wants to bake pies for a living. Now Joe Shoemaker, son of Jack Shoemaker, is publicly known by, is publicly called by, is publicly introduced by, is publicly put forth as being, and publicly conducts business as "Joe Baker." Pursuant to Common law, Joe Shoemaker is now Joe Baker.

The question is not "Can you prove your identity." The question is "Can the PTB disprove your valid identity."

NOTE: Proof is on the shoulders of the accuser.

Let the accuser bring forth

BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED

that one's identity is anything other than what one claims as being his true identity.

He He He, ain't going to happen!!!!

[Michael Joseph]

What an easy question to answer.Pursuant to Common Law, a Persons name is whatever name said Person publicly uses, is publicly known by, is publicly called by, is publicly introduced by, is publicly put forth as being, and publicly conducts business as.

I mean C'mon. Joe Shoemaker, son of Jack Shoemaker, wants to bake pies for a living. Now Joe Shoemaker, son of Jack Shoemaker, is publicly known by, is publicly called by, is publicly introduced by, is publicly put forth as being, and publicly conducts business as "Joe Baker." Pursuant to Common law, Joe Shoemaker is now Joe Baker.

The question is not "Can you prove your identity." The question is "Can the PTB disprove your valid identity."

NOTE: Proof is on the shoulders of the accuser.

Let the accuser bring forth that one's identity is anything other than what one claims as being his true identity.

He He He, ain't going to happen!!!!

The argument is not a legal one it is a philosophical one. For at legal then the law will decide HOW TO do a thing. But philosophically speaking are you really going to present an argument before this forum that you are going to rely upon another to prove who you are?

How completely absurd. I am reminded of the Logical Song - Please tell me who I am.




"I said now, watch what you say, now we're calling you a radical, a liberal, fanatical, criminal.
Won't you sign up your name, we'd like to feel your acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegetable."

It is utterly impossible for anyone to prove identity. Yet if you will concede to a weak position, then I will accept your concession - as long as you are suppliant to my grant.

Law to prove identity - how absurd. Now I got to go to some Law - a benefit - to prove who I am? Who settled said Law? Whose Law? China, U.S., Russia, God's Law [which one].....

If you think you can prove your identity, please pray tell enlighten me so that I may be resurrected in mind to your level. Will you as Moses pull me up - in vibrational thought - will you now solve the problem of the ages?

I am the ONLY one who can say who I am, and therefore You must either trust me or not. For where there is one, identity fails, but where two or more gather, the problem manifests. For there is NOTHING about you that cannot be altered.

Now therefore, I hold up your picture and ask for the jury "Is this you"? If you respond "yes", then thank you - problem solved. if you answer anything, then that is implied trust - for you respond to my authority - else why respond at all?

shalom,
mj

[Darkcrusade]

Yet if I am to do business with one I am gonna want to know which one I am doing business with. Especially if I am to forgive the debt in the seventh year such that we can come to agreement based on the year we entered into engagement.

Fact is I can never identify you and you cannot ever identify me. Rather we can not do it with surety or certainty. So we have the Word of a man - my word is my bond.

And since some men do not trust other men, a pledge helps to secure the trust.

I cannot for someone else - I can only do for myself. As such, I am to be with honor and other men will see that honor and perhaps want to engage this man or not. But in reality they see the works of a man they perceive is the same man they saw yesterday. So in heuristics, they trust.

The man with his Spiritual Eyes opened claims - "I see men as trees walking". Transmutating lead grudges into gold. So I shall let it go and put honor out and honor shall return onto me. But that has nothing to do with my Identity.

My identity, the identity of this man who is sometimes conveniently called michael joseph is in Yehoshuah. That should be easy enough to see - a Christ Man. Now shall we engage on that basis or do you need to see papers? If the latter, I cannot help you.

I heard another man say - what's that? I never heard of Yehoshuah and for that matter I don't believe in God. Now we got problems. Can I engage that man? Probably not. That man is going to want to see some "FORM" of identity that he TRUST[s] in.

----------------------------------------------

TOOL - The Grudge

"To consume you till you choose to let this go.

Give away the stone. Let the oceans take and
Transmutate this cold and fated anchor.
Give away the stone. Let the waters kiss and
Transmutate these leaden grudges into gold.
Let go".

---------------------------------------------

Regarding EGO, we see the EGO in King Nebuchadnezzar a great Ego:

Dan 4:30 The king spake, and said, Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?

Commentary: and we see Yehovah taking this "anti-type" right off the throne to humble him.

Dan 4:31 While the word was in the king's mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, saying, O king Nebuchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken; The kingdom is departed from thee.

Dan 4:32 And they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field: they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and seven times shall pass over thee, until thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.

Dan 4:33 The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar: and he was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hairs were grown like eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws.

Commentary: and while Nebuchadnezzar was in the field he was made to see a Sovereign sits in the Heavens.

Dan 4:34 And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation:

Dan 4:37 Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honour the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment: and those that walk in pride he is able to abase.

Commentary: I know the foregoing is a Tangent and does not go exactly to Identity; yet notice that the Yisra'elites have their identity in Yehovah.

The serious student will notice that Daniel chapter four is written by Nebuchadnezzar in Syriac - reference the Masoretic Text.

When Nebuchadnezzar realized that God is Judge [Dan-i-el] and he stopped with the I, me, my stuff, then his kingdom was given back to him.

I always thought that this is where the legend of the ''wolf-man'' started.

If not for Daniel's 'husbandry' of Nebuchadnezzar,over the seven years,the kingdom would be lost. Daniel,nothing negative noted about him in the Scripture, he was a Christ type and conspicuously absent the fiery furnace trial.

[Michael Joseph]

I always thought that this is where the legend of the ''wolf-man'' started.

If not for Daniel's 'husbandry' of Nebuchadnezzar,over the seven years,the kingdom would be lost. Daniel,nothing negative noted about him in the Scripture, he was a Christ type and conspicuously absent the fiery furnace trial.

Yes, Nebuchadnezzar had Lycanthropy - I believe.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

Back to Identity:


Within State the ONLY available office is that of Trustee. All undertake for the benefit of the Kingdom. Therefore the Kingdom is placed into Trust forming an [e]STATE. Wherein the Equitable Title remains in the King/Queen and the Legal Title is Granted to those who would UNDERTAKE for the kingdom. Therefore the question is regard to State is not necessarily your name, but it is your TITLE. And the ONLY title that will be available to you, as Subject, is TRUSTEE. And a Trustee either accepts to be Trustee or not. And if the Trust can be constructed or implied, then ALL of the Bylaws, domestic and international, apply to said Trustee.

Therefore the problem of IDENTITY is resolved in Trust. For there is ONLY one issue before any competent authority and that one issue is WHAT IS YOUR OFFICE? Are you Trustee or Unaffiliated?

For only Trustees go to jail for failure to perform according to the UNDERTAKING.

UNDERTAKING, contracts. An engagement by one of the parties to a contract to the other, and not the mutual engagement of the parties to each other; a promise. 5 East, R. 17; 2 Leon. 224, 5; 4 B, & A. 595.

UNDERTOOK. Assumed; promised.

Now Therefore, if you, take the benefit of Estate Property, as Grantee, Undertaking, as Trustee, then you are now with the Obligation to perform. Therefore the argument before any [e]State court is regarding a Nexus in Contract Agreement - have you received the benefit of Estate? If so, then the presumption, rightfully so, is then you are HOLDING estate property, and if so, that makes you Trustee.

Yehoshuah [Jesus] infuriated the rabbi's because when they sought to trap him in State matters, regarding did he pay tribute. Yehoshuah called for a coin - notice they jumped at his command - upon looking at the coin, he asked "whose image is on the coin"? Again, they perform right on command, then Yehoshuah said "give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's, but give unto God what is God's." Now the rabbi's were really in a pickle - for where was THEIR trust? Did they now make a claim on God? And would they Dare argue this position to Their Ruin?


Mat 22:15 Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.

Mat 22:16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.

Commentary: What snakes. They intend to trap him with the persons of men. Persons of State that is.

Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
Mat 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?


Commentary: Right on. These speak out of both sides of the mouth. False ones. They sought to kill him and they were looking for a nexus to do so righteously.

Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.

Commentary: See the command and then the performance.


Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?

Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Commentary: Now, the Pharisees have to be saying, we have never seen him in the Lodge before. How on earth has he come to such wisdom? Who taught him the power of state and government? Who taught him letters? But notice the Pharisees themselves did not engage themselves, but they sent their Agents.

Joh 7:15 And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?




Shalom,
mj

[Shuftin]

Your argument is extremely flawed. The argument is not a legal one it is a philosophical one. Philosophically speaking are you really going to present an argument before this forum that you are going to rely upon another to prove who you are?

JESUS F**king Christ. Did you not read my post at all??? You "Mo' Fo." You "PROVE IT." The burden of proof is upon YOU!!!.

The burden of proof is upon YOU!!! Only YOU!!!.

The burden of proof is upon YOU!!! Only YOU!!! And nobody else but YOU!!!.

Me, myself and I???

I need not PROVE anything at all. The burden of proof is upon YOU!!! Only YOU!!! And nobody else but YOU!!!.

F**k I made a mistake of posting with such retards.

YOU = I???

I have no defense against such stupidity such as YOU = I!!!

[EZrhythm]

Hey Shuftin, great to see you around again!

[Michael Joseph]

JESUS F**king Christ. Did you not read my post at all??? You "Mo' Fo." You "PROVE IT." The burden of proof is upon YOU!!!.

The burden of proof is upon YOU!!! Only YOU!!!.

The burden of proof is upon YOU!!! Only YOU!!! And nobody else but YOU!!!.

Me, myself and I???

I need not PROVE anything at all. The burden of proof is upon YOU!!! Only YOU!!! And nobody else but YOU!!!.

F**k I made a mistake of posting with such retards.

YOU = I???

I have no defense against such stupidity such as YOU = I!!!

I wasn't talking to you. Tone down your language. Burden goes go law. Prove to whom? You can't prove your identity to yourself. And you call me a retard?

Roflmao. Tell me genius how on earth will you prove your identity even to yourself? If you can muster the philosophy to even enter upon this forum of discourse, which apparently you do not have as you go directly to insults and vile language.

I would say, I'll wait for your argument, but I would be waiting a lifetime because I already know you cannot do it. If you think me to argue in the forum of laws and burdens of said law, then you think wrong; and, perhaps you should start over and read from the beginning. But then again I suppose my former statement would indicate that we are all waiting for your great insight - maybe a couple two or three curse words - you know to make yourself feel superior and to feed your ego.

Defend yourself - now that is just precious. I care not for burden's of proof here. This is philosophy NOT law. Throw your precious Law in the trash if you can and enter upon this discourse if you can.

[Shuftin]

I wasn't talking to you. Tone down your language. Burden goes go law. Prove to whom? You can't prove your identity to yourself. And you call me a retard?

Roflmao. Tell me genius how on earth will you prove your identity even to yourself? If you can muster the philosophy to even enter upon this forum of discourse, which apparently you do not have as you go directly to insults and vile language.

I would say, I'll wait for your argument, but I would be waiting a lifetime because I already know you cannot do it. If you think me to argue in the forum of laws and burdens of said law, then you think wrong; and, perhaps you should start over and read from the beginning. But then again I suppose my former statement would indicate that we are all waiting for your great insight - maybe a couple two or three curse words - you know to make yourself feel superior and to feed your ego.

Defend yourself - now that is just precious. I care not for burden's of proof here. This is philosophy NOT law. Throw your precious Law in the trash if you can and enter upon this discourse if you can.

My apologies to Michael Joseph and the board. I waaaaay over indulged in adult beverages and am guilty of PWI (Posting While Intoxicated). That is most certainly not the way I express myself in the normal flow of life.

I'd like to start anew. The topic question is "Can you prove your identity?" My initial thought was "What a silly question?" Why on Earth would one prove anything at all, especially one's identity? My name is Shuftin. This is my name for no other reason than simply because I say so. Then I delved into Common Law. Now if TPTB want to arrest me, charge me, and prosecute me under a name other than Shuftin----Let them bring forth two or witnesses to establish the fact that my name is not Shuftin. The burden of proof is on the opposing party. Me, myself, and I? I have nothing to prove, much less my identity. I found your reply extremely aggravating as it was diametrically 180 degrees opposite of what I scribbled.

Your argument is extremely flawed. The argument is not a legal one it is a philosophical one. Philosophically speaking are you really going to present an argument before this forum that you are going to rely upon another to prove who you are?

A more sensible response to your reply would be a single word, "NO." And I should have walked away.

I have no argument to present before this forum as you indicated. My name is Shuftin. That's that and that's finial. I have no desire to argue nor prove my identity to anyone.

[Michael Joseph]

My apologies to Michael Joseph and the board. I waaaaay over indulged in adult beverages and am guilty of PWI (Posting While Intoxicated). That is most certainly not the way I express myself in the normal flow of life.

I'd like to start anew. The topic question is "Can you prove your identity?" My initial thought was "What a silly question?" Why on Earth would one prove anything at all, especially one's identity? My name is Shuftin. This is my name for no other reason than simply because I say so. Then I delved into Common Law. Now if TPTB want to arrest me, charge me, and prosecute me under a name other than Shuftin----Let them bring forth two or witnesses to establish the fact that my name is not Shuftin. The burden of proof is on the opposing party. Me, myself, and I? I have nothing to prove, much less my identity. I found your reply extremely aggravating as it was diametrically 180 degrees opposite of what I scribbled.A more sensible response to your reply would be a single word, "NO." And I should have walked away.

I have no argument to present before this forum as you indicated. My name is Shuftin. That's that and that's finial. I have no desire to argue nor prove my identity to anyone.

I accept that you are called Shuftin. I also accept your apology.

You show the point exactly. I must accept you or not - that is IF, and only IF, I desire a relationship. You can only give what you can give. I must either accept or reject.

But IF my office is within another trust construct, then I must accept with conditions. Said conditions being are you in that same trust structure. So we are not discussing man to man - rather trustee to trustee. For if man to man, the fact that we are having a conversation is an implied trust.

A lady a the Feast of Tabernacles hounded me last year with the simple question: Why won't you give me your last name? My simple response "do I know you?" Meaning, do we have an established Trust? Otherwise get lost.

--------------------------

So the issue of Identity cannot be resolved even with DNA for that testing is subject to man's weakness. And again relies on a third party for I cannot see my DNA.

So then will we both go on now to Beersheba and Seven ourselves at the "Well of Oaths". Will we state an oath before God, such that we call on God as our witness? That begs the question do we have faith in the same God? And that takes us back into Trust boundary.

For the Israelite identity was IN Yehovah their Elohim. And Yehovah expressly told Israel - Do things in my name!

But we seek relationships, right? So then we must have a foundation or a place where said relationships may be developed. And that place is Trust. I trust you or I don't trust you.

And therefore Identity is of little consequence as it is but a candle beside the Sun of Trust. For you cannot identify yourself, and I cannot identify you and as such, I weigh your offer and accept or reject.

To the closed boundary called Estate: Is it Legal or Illegal? Goes to Legal Title and Trustee.

-----------------------------------

Now if we go to Scripture we have our closed boundary - the truth in identity is made by two witnesses. But that truth is established according to the Moral Code - Bylaws of the Scripture Trust - "Thou shall not bear false witness." For we appeal to a higher power, the Creator.

Pro 21:28 A false witness shall perish: but the man that heareth speaketh constantly.

Pro 19:5 A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall not escape.
Pro 19:9 A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish.

Pro 12:17 He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.

Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Lev 5:1 And if a soul sin, and hear the voice of swearing, and is a witness, whether he hath seen or known of it; if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity.

So we see that the Law of Scripture is manifest in the Creation. In other words, we have only but to watch the Created to know the Truth for God is the Judge and the Judgment for lying or falsehood will manifest before our eyes.

Example: Daniel and those princes that sought to place him in the Lions Den. They created a trap to ensnare Daniel to his death. Therefore when righteousness was established BY THE HAND OF GOD - the Lions mouths lay agape - the king rolled back the stone and ordered those princes into the Lions Den. For they sought to end Daniel's life in dishonesty, by laying a trap. Therefore in righteousness their lives and the lives of their wives and sons/daughters were cut off.

For just as all of the Seed is Abel was cut off by Cain, so too would have been the seed in Daniel. Therefore those princes paid with all of their seed [family].

Rom 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

There are two intercessors in heaven: The Holy Ghost and Yehoshuah.

Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself [herself] maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

Rom 8:34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.


There are TWO witness in the Heavens that are watching our every word for out of our mouths come Oaths with Full Liability before God. Therefore one is compelled to be honest in their dealings - to speak the truth. For the Trust is not in man, but in God.

But man has sought to throw off the bands of God and place himself, as God, in the Temple.

Psa 2:2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,

Psa 2:3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

Psa 2:11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
Psa 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.


And therefore Identity is of little consequence as it is but a candle beside the Sun of Trust. For you cannot identify yourself, and I cannot identify you and as such, I weigh your offer and accept or reject. And therefore the greatest of all is Love. Do unto others as you would have done to yourself. Therein is no malice or deceit only fair balances and righteousness and equity. And therefore we identify as "sons of God" or "Trees of Righteousness".


in the name of Yehoshuah ben Yehovah [The WAY of LIFE], I am michael joseph.

[David Merrill]

My apologies to Michael Joseph and the board. I waaaaay over indulged in adult beverages and am guilty of PWI (Posting While Intoxicated). That is most certainly not the way I express myself in the normal flow of life.

I'd like to start anew. The topic question is "Can you prove your identity?" My initial thought was "What a silly question?" Why on Earth would one prove anything at all, especially one's identity? My name is Shuftin. This is my name for no other reason than simply because I say so. Then I delved into Common Law. Now if TPTB want to arrest me, charge me, and prosecute me under a name other than Shuftin----Let them bring forth two or witnesses to establish the fact that my name is not Shuftin. The burden of proof is on the opposing party. Me, myself, and I? I have nothing to prove, much less my identity. I found your reply extremely aggravating as it was diametrically 180 degrees opposite of what I scribbled.A more sensible response to your reply would be a single word, "NO." And I should have walked away.

I have no argument to present before this forum as you indicated. My name is Shuftin. That's that and that's finial. I have no desire to argue nor prove my identity to anyone.

I am still laughing about that Shuftin! I have often wondered about that topic in general. I noticed during better economic times five liquor stores all within a few blocks of each other in a neighborhood that was upon a glance full or nice respectable professional people. My mind of course did the math and I quickly figured out that either everybody has a drinking problem or a few folks have terrible drinking problems. Sometimes I even ponder when the legislation will get hold of "Drinking While Logged On". If you play the stock market while drunk could you get your money back?

I found a little insight into identity the other day. Somebody threatened me with inuendo of the sort, The last person to do that is dead now. I decided to find out for $50 if that was really the case. Maybe the guy is a murderer? Or if the death was of natural causes then maybe it was not a threat at all but just a statement of fact. But if the subject is still alive, then I am justified in labeling this a class 3 felony - Tampering with a Witness or Victim. I am glad that for teaching Record-Forming for several years now I make a much better witness than victim!

I thought that I should call and tell the professional Private Investigator how to seach for other surnames and name changes around marriage etc. but bit my tongue. When I saw this death record search it dawned on me clearly. When somebody gets a legal name change all they do is reassign the SSN to the new name. Any searching for identity is done through the SSN.

No wonder when officials want my SSN and I respond, I do not have a Social Security Number, their first response is usually, Everybody has a Social Security Number!