Results 1 to 10 of 83

Thread: Deviant Oath? - Not a judge!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

    One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

    Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

    Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.

  2. #2

    Seems the Bible is recognized

    Public Law 97-280 (Senate Joint Resolution 165], 96 Stat. 1211) passed by Congress and approved on October 4, 1982.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Bible



    The 97th Congress of the United States publicly declared 1983 the national "Year of the Bible". The bipartisan document known as Public Law 97-280, was signed on October 4, 1982 by Speaker of the House Thomas P. O'Neill, President of the Senate - Pro Tempore Strom Thurmond, and President of the United States Ronald Reagan. It reads as follows:

    WHEREAS the Bible, the Word of God, has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation and people;

    WHEREAS deeply held religious convictions springing from the Holy Scriptures led to the early settlement of our Nation;

    WHEREAS Biblical teachings inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States;

    WHEREAS many of our great national leaders--among them Presidents Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, and Wilson--paid tribute to the surpassing influence of the Bible in our country's development, as in the words of President Jackson that the Bible is "the Rock on which our Republic rests";

    WHEREAS the history of our Nation clearly illustrates the value of voluntarily applying the teachings of the Scriptures in the lives of individuals, families, and societies; WHEREAS this Nation now faces great challenges that will test this Nation as it has never been tested before; and

    WHEREAS that renewing our knowledge of and faith in God through Holy Scripture can strengthen us as a nation and a people: NOW, THEREFORE, be it

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President is authorized and requested to designate 1983 as a national "Year of the Bible" in recognition of both the formative influence the Bible has been for our Nation, and our national need to study and apply the teachings of the Holy Scriptures. 33

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by BLBereans View Post
    IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

    One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

    Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

    Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.


    Indeed. I see your point but have actually rationalized; and I mean that mathematically that when we reach the monad of monotheism, all these gods are God. It is irrational therefore to say, Since I believe in the God of the Holy Bible, all other singular godform(s) in singular, are other gods. Because God is everywhere, it is quite impossible to have any other gods, and still conform to monotheism.

    There is the CHRIST of the Fundamental Orders of 1639 for example (linked). While I am compelled to agree with you I also resort to precedence, meaning that 1639 precedes a lot of American stuff.

    Name:  capital laws.jpg
Views: 678
Size:  290.3 KB

    On that token the Charter of Freedoms and Exemptions Granted to Patroons is 1629 and the Patent of August 13 (371 years on the Five Cube Sum Number Locks) preceeds and is therefore the precedent. This is my "perpetual inheritance" and so we find lessons about estate and usage - property rights over on www.lawfulmoneytrust.com with Michael Joseph coaching me about exercising dominion. - Which of course considers the God of the (fill in the blank) in a universal light.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by BLBereans View Post
    IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

    One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

    Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

    Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.
    The saint would probably find himself at home among the people of the free and sovereign states that created The United States of America rather than in the United States. Perhaps that is the 'secret'? If someone were to suggest the United States (singular) to not be "founded as a Christian nation", I'd really find it challenging to disagree! The states which created The United States of America were in fact on the orthodox (note the small 'o') Christian side of things--and David Merrill is very on the money when he points back even further to the 1600s. Each of those several states had its own, separate Crown prior the American Revolution. Come 1775 to 1776, while those states united in a military sense, they did not utterly unite. It was commented in Congressional records from what I recall that "U" in "United" was distinct from 'united' to show a limited kind of uniting rather than one complete or total.

    The idea of The United States of America or the United States being founded in 1776 seems to be a lie. The (plural) declarations of independence were made in 1775 if not also before. The United States according to respublic vs. sweers is a revamp of the United Colonies resulting from the Articles of Association of 1774--so much for the Weishaupt and secret sauce theory of the founding America.

    If one really gets it, then obligations the British Monarchy had to anyone else ceased to have any significance in the former-colonies at the end of the America Revolution (except maybe for private businesses run by British concerns). Nonetheless, it seems the efforts between 1861 to 1870 and after was to put America under an ancient yoke.

    Rhode Island.
    Newport was a major slave hub and is said to be location of one the first prominent Masonic Lodge in America (it was most certainly not the Christian convivial club that is said to have typified lodges prior to Scottish Rite or Grant Orient being introduced into America). Note: prior to 1661, slavery was unlawful in all of the colonies.

    Name:  FreemasonsHall1.JPG
Views: 877
Size:  244.9 KB
    St. John’s Lodge of Newport, founded December 27, 1749, the first in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
    Last edited by allodial; 09-18-16 at 05:12 PM.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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