| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Lewish |
Posted - 12 Apr 2003 : 01:43:06
Do you and your spouse have a state issued Marriage License? If so, why?
Why have you made the State the head of your family rather than God?
Early last week in the state of Michigan, a school counselor tried to give Ritalin to a 9 year old boy. The boy informed the nurse that she wasn't allowed to do that because his daddy had filed a UCC-1 on the family. The nurse asked what that was. The Principal was called in, and asked the boy if he was sure about what he had said. The Principal then called the boy's mother and asked if this was true. The mother replied yes. The Principal then asked if the mother and father had a state marriage license. The mother replied no! They had a Covenant marriage witnessed by the church elders. The mother asked the Prinicpal if she wanted to see the Covenant. NO, was the answer. The Principal then asked if the boy had a birth certificate. The mother again replied NO. She and her husband had refused to co-operate and no birth certificate had been filed. The Principal then said, "well then this is a private matter and we can't proceed." In the following days, the mother and father of the boy received calls from some dozen or more government agencies. On Monday, April 7, they received a call from the Secretary of the State for Michigan. He offered to give the parents $800,000.00 if they would sign liability releases for the state. They have so far not agreed, because they don't know what is behind the offer, or what rights they may be signing away.
So 2 points here. Don't let the State run or ruin your marriage and control your children, and don't sell your children into slavery, drug addiction, or who knows what else by applying for a birth certificate for them.
Peace to all in the name of Jesus our Lord,
Lewis |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| HenryBowman |
Posted - 22 Apr 2007 : 08:25:45
quote:
Originally posted by Greg
May I ask (and do so on the forum as other inquiring minds may want to know) what is "ATFOTRAF"?
After The First One, The Rest Are Free.
[Or, they can only hang you once...]
ATFOTRAF |
| Greg |
Posted - 22 Apr 2007 : 00:44:02
Amen, and Amen! Very well put Henry.
May I ask (and do so on the forum as other inquiring minds may want to know) what is "ATFOTRAF"?
God Bless this forum and it's participants,
His humble servant,
Greg.
|
| HenryBowman |
Posted - 21 Apr 2007 : 23:54:42
Scriptural Covenant of Marriage
pursuant to the authority of the Holy Word of God
and Revocation/Recission of “Marriage License.”
We, John Henry Doe, a flesh and blood man, and, a flesh and blood woman, and children of Almighty God pursuant to accepting His gift in John 3:16, do hereby execute this Covenant of Marriage and Revocation/Recission of “Marriage License under the authority of the Holy Word of Almighty God, recorded in the King James Version Bible, which says in Mark 10, Verses 6-9, “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
On this, the ___ Day of May, in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Five, we hereby revoke and rescind the so called “APPLICATION, LICENSE AND CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE” bearing license number _____ or any other number, that was signed by John Henry Doe and/or Henrietta Jane Smith Doe on _DATE SIGNED_, hereinafter “Marriage License.” We believe that government that is “ordained by God” (Romans 13) is subjugated to the jurisdiction of Almighty God, and will not try to take the place of Almighty God. We wanted Almighty God to be the third party in our marriage, with Him joining us together, But we see, stated in Potter v. Potter, 1931, 101 Fla. 1199, 133 So. 94: "the State is a party interest in every marriage contract[.]" We hereby disavow that we were ever informed that the State was a party to any marriage contract that we entered into, and as such there was no meeting of the minds, or full disclosure from the State, making that contract void ab initio. We hereby revoke and rescind our signature(s), implied or actual, from any so called “Marriage License,” and demand that any records of such be removed and/or expunged from government custody, records, and registers.
We hereby revoke and rescind any authority, power of attorney, jurisdiction, control, or any other power that the State of Florida presumed, assumed, received, or was granted by us, due to the taking of our marriage vows, or the signing of our so called “Marriage License.” We hereby revoke and rescind any oath(s) and/or affirmations that were made by the signing of the “Marriage License.” We hereby deny the State of Florida, or any other government of man any jurisdiction in our marriage or fruits of our marriage, including children and all other property.
We hereby covenant in marriage with Almighty God, and make these oaths to Almighty God and to each other to: love and cherish one another, honor one another, follow the directives of the Holy Word of Almighty God concerning husbands and wives, including, but not limited to Ephesians 5:21-33, and we vow to be faithful to one another, cleave to one another, and become one flesh, as the scripture says, and we ask that Almighty God would seal our covenant with his blessing, and join us together with His presence as a three-fold cord till we are separated by death. We hereby declare that any property that we own, we own jointly, and not separately, and we hold all things in common such as the fruits of our marriage, including our children and all other property, before God.
We do not revoke or rescind any oath that was made on December XX, 1984 at Central Baptist Church, in XXXXXX City, Florida that enabled us to be husband and wife before Almighty God. We do, however revoke and rescind any parts of any oath(s) that enabled the State to be made a party to our marriage, unbeknownst to us.
John Henry Doe, Husband___________________________
Henrietta Jane Smith Doe, Wife, under Coverture____________________________
Florida
________ County
Before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public acting in and for the County of ______________, and State of Florida on this ____ day of March, 2006, the above named parties executed by act and deed the foregoing instrument and then acknowledged to me their free and voluntary act. Purpose of jurat is for acknowledgement/identification only, and cannot be used to indicate entry into any foreign jurisdiction. Given under my hand and seal this ______ day of March, 2006.
_______________________________
Notary Public
ATFOTRAF |
| HenryBowman |
Posted - 21 Apr 2007 : 23:50:29
Most Bible believers, if they have a desire to follow God and his ways, want God (the God of the bible/ Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, just to be sure we aren’t talking about someone else) to be the third party of their marriage.
So, they go to the local Register of Deeds, and get a marriage license, and then they call their pastor and arrange a time to get married.
They plan their wedding day with joy, and on that day, they take their vows “before God.”
Then, the pastor says the following words: “By the power vested in me by the State of North Carolina, I hereby pronounce you man and wife.”
What just happened here?
This happy couple just made sure that any children from their union belong to the state, as do all the fruits of the marriage: (Property).
“Wait a minute,” you say. “You’ve flipped your lid.”
You would think so, wouldn’t you? Surely a Christian couple would not intentionally do this.
I didn’t say intentionally. Actually, they do this out of ignorance, although I am not so sure about the pastor’s role in helping them do this.
Here’s how the scenario plays out.
North Carolina case law sets forth:
Ritchie v. White, 225 N.C. 450, 35 S.E.2d 414 (N.C. 10/10/1945)
“There are three parties to a marriage contract -- the husband, the wife and the State. For this reason marriage is denominated a status, and certain incidents are attached thereto by law which may not be abrogated without the consent of the third party, the State.” (Emphasis added)
Do you think North Carolina is the only state with similar case law?
MINNESOTA
KASAL v. KASAL, 35 N.W.2d 745, 227 Minn. 529
"Marriage is a civil contract, to which there are three parties: the husband, the wife, and the State"
FLORIDA
Potter v. Potter, 1931, 101 Fla. 1199, 133 So. 94: "the State is a party interest in every marriage contract[.]"
NEW JERSEY
Blackman v. Iles, 4 N.J. 82, 89 (1950), "The legislature, in dealing with the subject of marriage, has plenary power, as marriage differs from ordinary common law contracts, and is subject to control and regulation by the state."
Instead of showing you more examples, I will just tell you that almost every state mirrors this precedent. After all, they issue the licenses, so they control the use of those licenses.
Have you ever wondered what the etymology (word origin) of the word “license” is?
For a disturbing study, visit www.etymonline.com
See that license derives from licentious, which is “morally unrestrained, especially in sexual activity.” Webster’s New World Dictionary
Let’s look at the “legal” definition of “license.”
“The permission by competent authority to do an act which, without such permission, would be illegal, a trespass, a tort, or otherwise not allowable.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
So, the issue of a license by the state is the state’s permission to get married. Did you catch that?
And the Word of God says: Genesis 2:24 “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”
And again in Matthew 19:4-6 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
And again in Mark 10:6-9 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Do you see anywhere in these verses that says: “What therefore the State hath joined together,…”
I don’t, and I see that cleaving to your wife makes you one flesh (married).
And even though it was the deepest intent of our hearts when we took those vows, to invoke God into our marriage as the third party, the “licensed” (by the state) minister, did his duty, as the agent of the state, and made sure that the state had a place at our dinner table, and in our bed, and in our children’s lives.
ATFOTRAF |
| Lewish |
Posted - 15 Apr 2007 : 20:24:59
Greetings,
The Marriage License is a contract in which the STATE is the third party. The STATE never disclosed that it would permanently be acting as partner in the marriage, so the contract is cancellable by failure to disclose.
Do an Affidavit to that effect and record it in the County Records. Serve a copy on the STATE with Notice. If they fail to respond in 30 days plus 5 days for mail service, record a Notice of Non-Response and collateral estoppel. The STATE can then never raise the issue again. They are estopped.
Done!
Peace to you all.
Lewis
A Man on the Land on Washington as a Citizen thereon. |
| yardstick |
Posted - 13 Apr 2007 : 08:04:04
quote:
Originally posted by JT
The laws say that we can have an annulment of the marriage license if we did not understand the nature or ramifications of the contract, but the implied meaning is referring to our commitment to each other...
The logic here implies the ramifications of the nature of the contract with the state also... |
| Bondservant |
Posted - 11 Apr 2007 : 20:47:47
Greg, you are absolutely correct. If they have a SSAN, they belong to the legal STATE; If they have a BIRTH CERTIFICATE, they belong to the STATE. Both assumptions make the STATE their "legal" (NOT lawful) parents (look up the Latin word PARENS). As biological/spiritual parents, neither the ecclesiastic mother nor father have any authority under those conditions. |
| Greg |
Posted - 11 Apr 2007 : 19:35:34
Just a thought. If you're children have "BIRTH CERTIFICATES" then they are already under the controlling purview of the STATE, and if they have Social Security numbers. If they have either of these it really doesn't matter how you and your wife interact with each other in reference to jurisdiction over the children.
Of course I don't give nor sell legal advice, just sharing the word. |
| JT |
Posted - 08 Apr 2007 : 22:18:18
Has anyone who has already entered into the licensed marriage contract with the state found a way to get out of the contract without having the "fruits" - children, come under the authority of the courts. In my situation, my wife and I received a marriage certificate from the state of Colorado (which recognizes common law marriages) about a month prior to our actual (God sanctioned marriage). We did not understand that we were placing ourselves and our future children under the authority or supervision of the state in doing so. However, since we do not wish to compromise our rights or the rights of our children, we would like an annulment of the contract somehow. However, we are remaining married under God. "Divorce" seems to give the State direct command over property and children, so that does not seem like an option. What about "annulment"? The laws say that we can have an annulment of the marriage license if we did not understand the nature or ramifications of the contract, but the implied meaning is referring to our commitment to each other, not the the part about placing ourselves and children under the jurisdiction of the State of Colorado. Anybody successfully got out of the marriage license without getting out of the marriage? |
| Owenbrittont |
Posted - 18 Sep 2006 : 19:15:46
Walter... or someone else... What is the title of the Arizona court case mentioned in Walter's response ?? |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 10 Sep 2006 : 07:56:20
Greetings and salutations, brother Linc:
Peace be unto the house.
quote:
Originally posted by Linc Nice to find another George Gordon listener on here. I find him to be 99% correct. Very inspiring. I've never seen him tackle the Trinity or the Lunar Sabbath or the Small Universe / Fixed Earth issues before. The few times I found him to be incorrect, it was in small side issues, not in anything major.
Most times, "correct" is relative to what we already believe to be true, thus we try not to put him, or anyone else, in any percentile bracket for not seeing eye to eye with us.
On a more private level, we find many of his interpretations to be very agreeable to what we have discovered but can use few of his remedies because his status in the world seems[1] to differ greatly from our own.
brother George apparently[1] believes he is an Hebrew, as it pertains to bloodline, but his status is evidently[1] not that of an Yisraelite, i.e. he seemingly[1] does not perceive himself to be a fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el. To those who believe only in the governments of men, which includes the man-made STATE OF ISRAEL, the status of fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, with very little doubt, must appear utterly foolish.
Now we have received, not the spirit [mental disposition] of the world, but the spirit [mental disposition] which is of Yahuwah; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of Yahuwah.
Endnotes:
[1] We have prefaced our remarks with these words because we are not absolutely certain that we are correct in our evalutations and do not wish to misrepresent this man's beliefs.
brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisar'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional STATE OF ISRAEL.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19 |
| Linc |
Posted - 10 Sep 2006 : 03:22:02
quote:
Originally posted by oneisraelite
We highly recommend George Gordon's August 2006 radio archives numbers 7 through 12 on the subject entitled Marriage. We have currently listened through number two and have already picked up some very valuable information.
Nice to find another George Gordon listener on here. I find him to be 99% correct. Very inspiring. I've never seen him tackle the Trinity or the Lunar Sabbath or the Small Universe / Fixed Earth issues before. The few times I found him to be incorrect, it was in small side issues, not in anything major. |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 06 Sep 2006 : 05:27:14
Greetings and salutations, Mark:
Peace be unto the house.
You wrote under an other topic here: "If we wish to terminate these contracts, thereby relieving our obligation to pay, then we must stop partaking of the benefits."
Is that you and your WIFE's[1] wish, to stop partaking of all the qualifying benefits of the STATE?
Endnotes:
[1] wife O.E. wif "woman," from P.Gmc. *wiban (cf. O.S., O.Fris. wif, O.N. vif, Dan., Swed. viv, M.Du., Du. wijf, O.H.G. wib, Ger. Weib), of unknown origin. Online Etymology Dictionary [Emphasis added] Beware of "unknown origins"!
As far as we have been able to ascertain, there is no Ibriy [Hebrew] word in the set apart Scripture for wife.
The first instance of this word in Yahuwah's Book of the Law (KJV) is found at Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man[H376] leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife[H802]: and they shall be one flesh.
When we rightly divide the word we find that 'ishshah, H802 - woman, is merely the feminine counterpart of 'ish, H376 - man. Thus we perceive that this verse perhaps should have been translated, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his woman: and they shall be one flesh.
Some may also find it interesting that there was also, apparently, no Ibriy word for our English word married, which rears its ugly head a mere 18 times in the KJV. The word translated married, in this version, is the Ibriy word laqach, which means take, and is translated as participles of take, literally thousands of times, in the KJV.
Could this explain why Yahushua, our anointed King of Yisra'el, says this?
And Yahushua answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage...
And finally, we leave you this day, with these thoughts, matrimony, i.e. mother condition is the antithesis of patrimony, father condition.
Partus sequitur ventrem. The offspring follow the condition of the mother. This is the law in the case of slaves and animals; 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 167, 502; but with regard to freemen, children follow the condition of the father. - Maxim of Law taken from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary [Emphasis added]
In cases of separation, which PERSON does the STATE generally prefer to give the children to, the mother or the father?
brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisar'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional STATE OF ISRAEL.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19 |
| krone |
Posted - 05 Sep 2006 : 22:21:07
Greetings in the Name of the Lord Jesus
I am interested in terminating my state issued marriage license. A divorce does not seem to be the answer. Illinois offers the option of annullment but I have not yet researched this. I suspect that the solution is to record a Notice with the county recorder that the secular marriage contract is terminated. Any other info out there?
Also, concerning the issue of Lawful marriages vs state licensed marriages, it seems logical to me that any marriage other than a Lawful marriage is not a marriage at all but a monogamous fornicating union. Anyone familiar with the acronym: Fornicating Under Consent of the King? Pardon the suggestion of vulgarity possessed by the f-word. I can't find a whole lot of information regarding this acronym, but I wonder if it has Christian origins! It effectively describes a state licenced marriage.
Peace to the ekklesia
Mark |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 05 Sep 2006 : 09:36:39
Greetings and salutations,
Peace be unto the house.
We highly recommend George Gordon's August 2006 radio archives numbers 7 through 12 on the subject entitled Marriage. We have currently listened through number two and have already picked up some very valuable information.
http://georgegordon.org/Radio_Archives.htm
Hope some of you also find some value in them.
brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisar'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional STATE OF ISRAEL.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19 |
| Manuel |
Posted - 18 Jan 2006 : 09:31:53
Greetings to all,
Amongst all, brother Robert, oneisraelite, brings up a good explenation:
"Disparata non debent jungi. Unequal things ought not to be joined."
It has been some time since the RULE of "I do, I do, until I sue" brings about the adverserial chaos of homocide squads turning unto divorce squads, which is a result of STATE SANCTIONED BARRATROUS encounters of those THINGS called ATTORNEY SUICIDE ASSISTED FAMILY WHORE/COURT-HOUSES. If there is truly a HOLOCAUST, it is on those BAR-INFESTED BLACK-ROBED GAS CHAMBERS tempting and rewarding one side, to further their drunken stupid and senseless slaughter to please their BANKSTER MASTERS.
I recall a man and his wife noticing some rats going to and fro the power lines, which at the moment of perception realized that by separating the families, the BANKSTERS and their BLACK-ROBED ATTORNEYS and following down the chain of destructive terror, more and more would fall prey to the hungry wolves satisfying their lusts for their STATE SANCTIONED AND FRAUDULENT LENDING PRACTICES further enslaving all. They premeditated the fraud that by "a house divided cannot stand" would lead to more usury, more slaves, more debtors.
So you see... all these kidnapping, extortion schemes and black mail/male, is but to quench the bloodthirsty glutton vipers to extend and balance their sheets and pyramid building racket.
Above all... be ye not yoked with the unclean. Let no man/woman come between you and deceive you. Call no man/woman JUDGE, for there is One Lawgiver, Judge and King which is supreme among all fake and false propheteers. Be aware of whores riding on the beast prostituting themselves mistakingly believing that they will end up with good company, finding on due course they too would reap their just rewards.
Does not past mistakes tell us that "and wo/men use their children to oppress man?" And does not the evil rulers know that for milleniums they have gotten to that womb to destroy the seeds? Does not past mistakes tell us that man too has fallen prey to that emotional blackmale... giving the beast the false power turning all unto MERCHANT-DICE?
I am,
Manuel
|
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 17 Jan 2006 : 13:13:18
Genesis 28:12 And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven: and behold the angels of 'Elohiym ascending and descending on it.
artsfree: "Follow the Seven Natural Laws that later rewriters removed from the scripture concerning Jacob's Ladder. Seven beautiful steps to eternity." (Emphasis added)
We would like to see the evidence of this removal if you care to share it.
Thank you.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| artsfree |
Posted - 16 Jan 2006 : 01:29:22
Hello dear friends and fellowseekers of truth.
Hard to break away from our "programming" isn't it?. Moral,immoral or guilt complexes created by the words of men or "slavespeak". Consider marriage in the light of the following.
Look to the inner programing placed within our breasts by our creator. Follow the Seven Natural Laws that later rewriters removed from the scripture concerning Jacob's Ladder. Seven beautiful steps to eternity. (Each of these seven laws has sublaws) Maybe 7 times seven? lol.
1. Free agency. We are all born as sovereign individuals with the right to choose our own path.
2. Cause and effect. Whatever we do or dont do, will be the cause for an effect. Good returns good and bad returns bad etc.
3. Resonance. All things "us included" have a specific frequency. Like people associate. As our frequency alters (spirituality)our circumstances change(water with applied heat may boil). Moses could only withstand observing part of our creator; to observe more may have destroyed him. If the correct frequencies are applied matter will disintergrate.
4.Forgiveness. Without which we are doomed to dwell in the past and to be filled with hatred and ill will thereby perverting the course he has laid before us to return to his presence.
5. Charity. The service we give from the bounty of our hearts and the goods that our creator has blessed us with. To provide service as the opportunity arises to our brothers and sisters. Every day to seek some opportunity to serve.
6. Love. To love others you must first learn to love yourself(self respect) only then may the fullness of love begin to really grow. If you cannot love yourself then how can you love others?
7. Transmutation. Upon passing from this existence to become "one" with the creator.(depends upon the other six tho doesnt it?)
If your decision on any matter does not align with these seven natural laws then it's not the right decision. It is my decision that plural marriage is ordained by god as "exampled" by the prophets and supported by the scriptures and that any grey area arising (varying circumstances) in between can be speedily decided by the seven laws application.
Regards Artsfree |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 20 Jul 2005 : 07:08:19
Greetings:
Peace be unto the house.
Question: Would not the STATE still be a PARTY, irrespective of whether this was a LICENSED MARRIAGE or not, as long as either one, or both, were 14th Amendment Slaves (voluntary), i.e. property of the STATE (HUMAN RESOURCES/RESIDENTS)? Note: We perceive that RES IDENTS means “things made identical”. So 'elohiym created man in their own image, in the image of 'elohiym created they them; male and female created they them.
If one is a 14th Amendment citizen (without breath), a resident of the UNITED STATES, and the other is a Citizen of Yahuwâh’s Kingdom (with breath), a resident of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, then it is a “mixed” (Heb 'ârab) marriage, which is unlawful (more or less).
Disparata non debent jungi. Unequal things ought not to be joined.
When this occurred in the commonwealth of Yisra’el, if and when they wished to return to His Jurisdiction, Yahuwâh apparently insisted that they leave behind the wives and the children of (originating from) these unlawful unions.
And when I heard this thing, I tore my garments and my robe, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down stunned.
If they both are not 14th Amendment Slaves, and if their “works” match their “words”, and if they have the strength to stand fast...in the liberty, then we perceive that you could have a winner.
H6148
'ârab
aw-rab'
A primitive root; to braid, that is, intermix; technically to traffic (as if by barter); also to give or be security (as a kind of exchange)
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 19 Jul 2005 : 21:00:13
Dear Readers;
Recently I was commissioned to process an abatement for misnomer on some felony charges against a man. I am not clear on the details because I really do not require that.
Anyway there are four stipulations in the default judgment:
quote:
4. "The woman, Cindy Rae, my wife, part of one flesh with Gerold Tarrence which no man is to put asunder (Gen 2:24, Matt 19:5-6: Mark 10:8, Eph 5:31) be returned to the place from which she was taken within forty eight (48) hours from the time of the filing of this document. The state has no lawful authority in the contract between Gerold Tarrence and Cindy Rae, because no marriage licens was obtained and the lare requires the husband will rule over the wive and not the state (Gen 3:16, I Cor 11:3, Eph 5:22, Col 3:18, 1 Peter 3:1)
|
|
|
