ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 The Roman World
 CITIZENSHIP
 Declaration of Citizenship
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 6

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 03 Jul 2005 :  16:52:15  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings David,

Please forgive the typos. I have not touched a keyboard in 10 months and am using a computer that is not mine. It will take me a while to get my computer skills back. It took me a good 10 tries to get my password right just to get into this forum. I knew what it is, just couldn't seem to type it correctly.

My webserver is down for the time being. As soon as I can get it back online. I plan to post a look of the research material and court case and Code cites that I have accumulated. Especially the parts about the authority of a U.S. Attorney. It is surprising how limited their course of action is, when they have been properly challenged. The U.S.Code and the court cases are quite clear. One of my fellow detainees did some really good research in this area. I have some of his notes, and hope to get his complete work for posting.

In the meantime, I have got to get my house in order, and then I can start trying to help others.

Peace,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 03 Jul 2005 :  17:48:43  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Typos forgiven. I must have been in a mood.
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 03 Jul 2005 :  18:53:51  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hello David,

Thanks for the slack. Much is needed for a while.


Not just for you, but for all readers:

Do you understand the concepts of Time, Place, Space and Plane in the sense as they exist when you go into the fictional world called a "court", whether it be the United States District Court or some State Court?

These are the key elements to knowing how to stop "them" from proceeding if and when you are dragged into their playpen.


Regards,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 03 Jul 2005 :  21:39:37  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings and salutations, brother Lewis:

Peace be unto the house.

You may be giving us more credit than we deserve, since we have never read the 18 Chapters of Title 8, however, here are the facts as best we know them.

Firstly, as we understand it, America is a continent, not a nation…

America, n. One of the great continentsWebster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language

…but when it is spoken of as a nation, it is understood to mean UNITED STATES or UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

America. 3 the United States of America. – Webster’s New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, copyright 1988, page 44

Secondly, a national is defined as – n. 1 a person under the protection of a (specified) country: citizen or subjectWebster’s New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, copyright 1988, page 902

Under the protection of a (specified) country”; what country might that be?

In Black’s Law Dictionary, Abridged Sixth Edition, page 711, we read these two items under the word National, which alerts us: (1) Commonly applied in American law to institutions, laws, or affairs of the United States or its government, as opposed to those of the several states, and (2) A person owning permanent allegiance to a state. 8 U.S.C.A. § 1101

On the sign-up page here at ecclesia.org under their list of Countries found under the letter A…Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Australia, Azerbaijan, and Azores, but no America.

P.S. We are of the opinion that the key elements are, knowing who we are and to whom we belong (jurisdiction); keeping in mind that a jurisdiction is a condition and not a place.

The law of persons is the law of status or condition. – American Law and Procedure, Vol 13, page 137, 1910

One’s walk (works) must match his/her talk (words); this is where most of us fall down, we perceive. We must know what Law we are under, because if we are lawless, by default we fall under their so-called law. And finally we must make it perfectly clear that we do not wish to enter into contract (covenant) with their master (god).

Jurisdiction in personam. Power which a court has over the defendant’s person and which is required before a court can enter a personal or in personam judgement. Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 24 L.Ed. 565 It may be acquired by an act of the defendant within a jurisdiction under a law by which the defendant impliedly consents to the personal jurisdiction of the court… - Black’s Law Dictionary, Abridged Sixth Edition, page 595

Our statement is:

For the Record: We asseverate that we are fellowcitizens of the commonwealth of Yisra’el, not to be confused with the man-made STATE OF ISRAEL, our Supreme Suveran [Sovereign] is a jealous suveran, He requires Exclusive Loyalty because no man can serve two masters, thus we are a Peculiar People and our Law is the Ten Commandments of Yahuwâh [Jehovah], His Eternal Moral Law, the perfect Law of liberty.

Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our Judge, Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our Lawgiver, Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our King, he will save us (He is our Saviour).

Our immediate Head and Intercessor is the Anointed Principal Officer [High Priest] of Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH], Yahushua, the Nazarite [Jesus, of Nazareth].

Absolutely nothing we think, do, or say may be construed to mean that we wish to enter into contract (covenant) with you or your master or to Disavow our Allegiance to our Nation, to our Supreme Suveran [Sovereign] or to His Principal Officer.”


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.

Edited by - Oneisraelite on 04 Jul 2005 18:44:39
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 05 Jul 2005 :  16:42:40  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hello Brother Robert,

It is interesting that Title 8 of the U.S.Code uses both American National and citizen of America to mean anyone who is a Citizen of the United States of America. Yet, in other sections of the U.S.Code "American" means a U.S. citizen. So, caveat emptor. You must be careful to limit the use of the words to exactly what you mean.

Also, remember that the United States is not a nation. Only the people of the United States of America are a nation, no matter what you may read in some dictionary. The Declaration of Independence defied who the nation is and always will be.

Title 28 U.S. Code Sec. 3002(15):

"The United States means -

(a) A Federal Corporation,
(b).....
(c).....


In Title 5, 8, 12, & 15, & others, the United States is defines as:
"The District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Istands, American Samoa and territories and other insular possessions."

So, if you live in any area of the continental states, you do not live in the United States, but rather in the United States of America. BTW- Alaska is a continental state. Many people refer to it as if it were separated from the lower 48. Also, note: Only about 8% of the land area of Alaska forms the "State of Alaska" all of the rest is a territory of the United States, having been passed by fraud from the United States of America to the federal corporation.

national... a living man can be a national of the country United States of America, or the statutory person, i.e. commercial entity, can be a national of the corporation United States. Where we get into trouble is by not separating ourselves from the statutory persons that we are presumed to be.

For those who truly wish to be a Citizen of the United States of America, it is important that you establish that you are a "non-resident alien foreign to the United States". Note: - that phrase is a very, very carefully worded legal statement. Each word was chosen with care. Once you fully grasp what it says and can display it in your life and walk, the system will not bother you. Our biggest problem right now is trying to get the Socialist Registration System, i.e., the Social Security Administration to accept this status and change their records.

When the judge asked my about my Declaration of Citizenship, which she was holding, what I could not see was that in her other hand was an SS-5 controverting my document. Now, when two affidavits are in direct conflict with each other, which one wins? This is very critical to your freedom!!!

On another note, the court cannot get in personam jurisdiction over you until it has first gotten statutory jurisdiction. When you first walk into the room with the pretender in the black dress, you are NOT in a court. You are in an administrative tribunal. Only after acquiring statutory jurisdiction does the administrative tribunal convert to a judicial courtroom. That is there one and only goal when they first bring you into the room. Avoid that mis-step and they can only hold you for 72 hours. I have seen this demonstrated several times in the time I was away.

There were 3 other gentlemen in the same federal facility with me. They made the mistake of granting statutory jurisdiction on their first appearance in the "room". However, they managed to keep the court from getting any other form of jurisdiction for 48 months. So, for 48 months they lanquished in the facility that I was in. I got to know all 3 of them fairly well. When we were first discussing strategies, I thought that they were doing good. Now, I realize that they made the same mistake I made.

"For the Record..." is also a good way to get a statement into the record when the judge is trying to shut you up. If he threatens you with contempt of court, simply start agains with your statement, but precede it with "For the Record". If he interrupts you again, ask him: "Are you going to deny me due process of law by refusing to allow me to enter evidence into the record?" Oh, they do get upset when you go there. "Due process of Law" is one thing they are very sensitive to. It is the one thing that is certain to get a case overturned on appeal, if proof is submitted.

Well, more another day,

Be Well,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

I. Scriabin
Senior Member

USA
62 Posts

Posted - 06 Jul 2005 :  00:03:44  Show Profile  Send I. Scriabin a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
Lewis and all,

Our Father in the heavens does indeed answer our prayers in most marvelous ways!! I knew something was wrong Lewis when your postings strangely ceased some months ago. Today, something tugged at my consciousness, urging me to log on to the forum here, and brought me to this topic; and lo, Lewis is back!!! What an incredible story too!!

Please accept my sincere empathy and awe in reaction to what you have been through; and my extreme gratitude that you are eager to share what you have learned to guide others who may face similar scenarios. Needless to say, those who have "done time in the joint" are elevated to the pinnacle of credibility and respect by having "walked the walk" and "paid their dues!"

Welcome back to the world of the relatively more free. As my own situation is approaching critical mass I have been struggling with how best to proceed. Your observations above have given me some fresh ideas Lewis, and a large dose of amazing insight into how things really go.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart and urge you to please continue with your wealth of knowledge.

May our Father in heaven, by means of his firstborn Son of all creation, continue to watch over you and guide you in peace.

Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 06 Jul 2005 :  18:08:58  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
My Fellow members,

Thanks for the kind words. The one thing I thank the Lord for more than anything else, as relates to this matter, is that "they" were unable to break my spirit. The Holy Spirit was my comfort and strength, and I am just as determined today, as I was a year ago, to be a Free Man and live life according to the Laws of the One who created me. I can do nothing else.

And if my little adventure gives even one other person the needed piece to complete their removal from Babylon, then my experience has been justified.

Praise to the Lord and the Father Almighty,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 06 Jul 2005 :  20:29:40  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Good to read from you again Lewis,

Following is an old writting which is right for the moment:

"A VISITOR FROM THE PAST"


"I had a dream the other night, I didn't understand.
A man walking through the mist, with flintlock in his hand.
His clothes were torn and dirty, as he stood there by my bed.
He took off his three-cornered hat, and speaking low, he said:

"We fought a revolution, to secure our liberty.
We wrote the Constitution, as a shield from tyranny.
For future generations, this legacy we gave.
To the land of the free and the home of the brave.

"The freedom we secured for you, we hoped you'd always keep.
But tyrants labored endlessly while your parents were asleep.
Your freedom gone, your courage lost, you're no more than a slave.
In the land of the free and home of the brave.

"You buy permits to travel, and permits to own a gun,
Permits to start a business, or to build a place for one.
On land that you believe you own, you pay a yearly rent.
Although you have no voice in choosing, how the money's spent.

"Your children must attend a school that doesn't educate.
Your Christian values can't be taught, according to the state.
You read about the current news, in a regulated press.
You pay a tax you do not owe, to please those who assess.

"You've given your control, to those who do you harm,
So they can padlock churches, and steal the family farm,
And keep our country deep in debt and put men of God in jail,
Harass your fellow countrymen, while corrupted courts prevail.

"Your public servants don't uphold the solemn oath they've sworn.
Your daughters visit doctors, so their children won't be born.
Your leaders ship artillery and guns to foreign shores,
And send your sons to slaughter, fighting other people's wars.

"As I awoke he vanished, in the mist from whence he came.
His words were true, we are not free, we have ourselves to blame.
For even now as tyrants, trample each God-Given Right.
We only watch and tremble, too afraid to stand the sight."

Adapted from a poem by Thelen Paulk


Yes... peace be unto this house, and all who dwell In Father, for ours is a war against powers and principalities.

I am,
Manuel
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2005 :  08:36:30  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings and salutations in the name of our King, brothers and sisters:

Peace be unto the house.

Nation, n. …1. A body of people inhabiting the same country, or united under the same sovereign or governmentWebster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language

The government of the UNITED STATES and/or the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, according to our understanding, is a government of, by and for the people.

If this is correct

…Could someone please point out to us where Yahuwâh [Jehovah, Yehovah, Yahweh, Yahveh or ___________] and His Anointed Chief Officer, Yahushua [JESUS, IESUS, IESOUS, Y’SHUA, YESHUA, Yashua or ____________], are in that arrangement (world)????

We are of the opinion that our government is of (created by) Yahuwâh, presided over by Yahushua, for the People. We are of the opinion,that this is the rest that we were once again allowed to enter into on the Shabbath (seventh) Day.

"Listen to the voice of the people"...

Unfortunately, it would seem that the vast majority still prefer the constitutions of man (of the people), i.e. governments created by man (by the people), governments that put the legislative (lawmaking) power in the hands of man (of the people) and governments that are presided over by [a] man, for the voluntary, or involuntary, enslavement of man (for the people).

And Jehovah said to Samuel, , Listen to the voice of the people, to all that they say to you. For they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from reigning over them.

But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, We do not desire this one to reign over us.

But as for me and my house, we will serve Yahuwâh, for Yahuwâh is our Judge; Yahuwâh is our Lawgiver; Yahuwâh is our King; He will save us.


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.

Edited by - Oneisraelite on 07 Jul 2005 09:30:07
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2005 :  11:22:54  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Dear Oneisraelite,

Neither the UNITED STATES nor the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA was created of, by, or for the people. They are both corporate entities. Please refer to Title 28 of the U.S.Code. Also, if you refer to the U.S. Governement Styles Manual, you will learn that anytime a name is in all capital letters, when used in a legal context, it refers to either a vessel (i.e. a ship) or a commercial entity. This has also been agreed to by all nations of the world under the "Law of Nations, Law Merchant".

Now the united States of America was created of the people, by the people and for the people as one nation under God. It is when men, particularly bankers and esquires began trying to remove God from the nation that we started having problems, and those problems divolved into the civil war of 1861. As long as God was the center of this nation, it was a strong and growing nation. But, when mens interest began more focused on money and the pleasures it can bring, then the wheels fell off the ox cart and the nation ceased to function as designed. Of course there is also the problems of the anti-christ influence, but that is a topic for another thread. We shall no go there in this thread!

Peace be with you,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Uncle Buck
Advanced Member

Australia
134 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2005 :  17:44:40  Show Profile  Visit Uncle Buck's Homepage  Reply with Quote
quote:

Nation, n. …1. A body of people inhabiting the same country, or united under the same sovereign or governmentWebster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language

The government of the UNITED STATES and/or the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, according to our understanding, is a government of, by and for the people.




G'day bros (and sisters)!
Well written bro Robert (as usual)!

THE LAW OF NATIONS OR PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF NATURE APPLIED TO THE CONDUCT AND AFFAIRS OF NATIONS AND SOVEREIGNS FROM THE FRENCH OF
MONSIEUR DE VATTEL.


§ 4. In what light nations or states are to be considered.
Nations being composed of men naturally free and independent, and who, before the establishment of civil societies, lived together in the state of nature, — Nations, or sovereign states, are to be considered as so many free persons living together in the state of nature.
It is a settled point with writers on the natural law, that all men inherit from nature a perfect liberty and independence, of which they cannot be deprived without their own consent. In a State, the individual citizens do not enjoy them fully and absolutely, because they have made a partial surrender of them to the sovereign. But the body of the nation, the State, remains absolutely free and independent with respect to all other men, and all other Nations, as long as it has not voluntarily submitted to them.

Bro Robert - you make something complex sound so simple - come out - separate - perhaps it is as simple as not accepting any benefits from the State and retaining full authority over ourselves.

*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty

Edited by - Uncle Buck on 07 Jul 2005 17:45:50
Go to Top of Page

Uncle Buck
Advanced Member

Australia
134 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2005 :  18:59:55  Show Profile  Visit Uncle Buck's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Very interesting use of the word denomination in the following legal discourse - so the secular society uses the biblical principles of Jesus to become an ungodly Corporation? N.B. 1688 was the English revolution!

CORPORATIONS AGGREGATE
HALSBURYS LAWS OF ENGLAND 3rd Ed. VOLUME 9 CORPORATIONS

3. A corporation aggregate has been defined as a collection of individuals united into one body under a special denomination, having a perpetual succession under an artificial form, and vested by the policy of the law with the capacity of acting in several respects as an individual, particularly of taking and granting property, of contracting obligations and of suing and being sued, of enjoying priviliges and immunities in common, and of exercising a variety of political rights, more or less extensive, according to the design of its institution, or the powers conferred upon it, either at the time of its creation or at any subsequent period of its existence.(o)

Footnote (o)

1 Kyd on Corporations 13. The earliest definition of a corporation of which a record has been found is in R. v London Corpn. (1692), Skin 310 (where it is stated to be "an artificial body composed of divers constituent members like the human body, andthat the ligaments of this body politic or artificial body are the franchises and liberties thereof which bind and unite all its members together, and the whole frame and essence of the corporation consist therein"). In 1691, Holt, C.J. (Holt K.B. 168), defined a corporation as an ens civile, a corpus politicum, a collegium, an universitas, a jus habendi et agendi. For a later definition see Grant's Law of Corporations 4, where a corporation is defined as "continuous identity" ; endowed at its creation with capacity for endless duration; residing in the grantees of it and their successors, its acts being determined by the will of a majority of the existing body of its grantees or their successors at any given time, acting within the limits imposed by the constitution of their body politic, such will being signified to strangers by writing under the common seal; having a name, and under such a name a capacity for taking, holding and enjoying all kinds of property, a qualified right of disposing of its possessions, and also a capacity for taking, holding and enjoying, but inalienably, liberties, franchises, exemptions and privileges; together with the right and obligation of suing and being sued only under such name."

4. COMPOSITION AND CAPACITY

A CORPORATION AGGREGATE MAY BE EITHER A MERE BODY, COMPOSED OF CONSTITUENT PARTS NO ONE OF WHICH DIFFERS ESSENTIALLY FROM ANOTHER (P); OR IT MAY BE A BODY WITH A HEAD OR OTHER DISTINCT MEMBER, THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS ESSENTIAL TO THE VITALITY, SO TO SPEAK, OF THE BODY AS A WHOLE. (q)
A coproation aggregate has only one capacity, namely, its corporate capacity; so that a conveyance to a corporation aggregate can only be to it in its corporate capacity. (r)

Footnote (q) Sutton's Hospital Case (1612), 10 Co. Rep. 1 a, 29 b. Instances of a corporation with a head are a mayor and commonality, and a dean and chapter.
(r) Fulmerston v. Steward (1554), 1 Plowd. 101, at p. 102 b.

*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty

Edited by - Uncle Buck on 07 Jul 2005 19:02:45
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2005 :  22:09:25  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings and salutations, brother Rick:

Peace be unto the house.

We are thankful for your "eyes". But it is not I who makes it "sound so simple", it is my Teacher who makes it so.

lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.


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.

Edited by - Oneisraelite on 07 Jul 2005 22:20:26
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2005 :  13:03:21  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings,

Some more thoughts.....

There is a lot of power in the Notary Public that we are often overlooking. There is even more power in putting it into the public record. I have learned that everything I recorded about myself, in the Snohomish County Auditor's Office (we have auditors rather than recorders here) was sent to the U.S. Attorney immediately after being recorded. That is why the judge had my Declaration of Citizenship in court the first day.

I think I will start a thread about Notary Public and the effective use of them. I did quite a lot of research on this subject while I was in detention.


Regards,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2005 :  07:23:09  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings and salutations in the name of our King, brothers and sisters, friends and neighbours, and yes, even our enemies (if we have any):

Peace be unto the house.

As we perceive it, there are only two jurisdictions, the one secular (worldly), the other ecclesiastical, called out (of the worldly arrangement), i.e. not secular, and although Noah [Webster] (c. 1828) incorrectly states that the legislature of one state (condition, status) can exercise no jurisdiction in another, we can still get the essence of what he was trying to explain to us. To be correct, he should have said the legislature (supreme power) of one state (condition, status,) can Lawfully exercise no jurisdiction in another or may not exercise jurisdiction in another.

Jurisdiction, n. [L. jurisdictio; jus, juris, law, and dictio, from dico, to pronounce.] 1. The legal power of authority of doing justice in cases of complaint; the power of executing the laws and distributing justice. …Jurisdiction is secular or ecclesiastical.
2. Power of governing or legislating. The legislature of one state can exercise no jurisdiction in another. – Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language


Under the word Ecclesiastical, Noah then correctly identifies the Ecclesiastical State: “[The] Ecclesiastical State is the body of the clergy.” (Ibid.)

He, in turn, identifies the Clergy as: 1. The body of men set apart, and consecrated, by due ordination, to the service of God (Yahuwâh)… these are called, in the Scripture, the body of Christ, i.e. the Body of Anointed Ones.

Now ye are the body of Christ (body politic) , and members in particular. And God (Yahuwâh,) hath set some in the church (ekklesia,) , first apostles (embassadors, commissioners) , secondarily prophets (inspired speakers/writers) , thirdly teachers (instructors) , after that miracles ([those with] power, force) , then gifts of healings (doctors, nurses, etc.) , helps (those who provide relief) , governments (those which provide directorship without possessing dominion; See Luke 22:25-26) , diversities of tongues (those who have mastered diverse languages,).

This is the body politic of the so-called Ecclesiastical State, i.e. those who are called out (ekklesia) of the worldly order of things (the alternate status).

We must always keep in mind that there is a false ecclesiastical state, and the true Ecclesiastical State. Noah identifies them as the visible and invisible church (ekklesia).

Visible church, in theology, the apparent church of Christ; the whole body of professed believers in Christ, as contradistinguished from the real or invisible church, consisting of sanctified persons.

We see here that the defacto ekklesia, which is highly visible, merely “professes” with their lips to believing in the supreme authority of JESUS but teach the doctrines and precepts of men, generally via a private interpretation of Romans thirteen, among others. (See Matt. 15:8-9)

Contradistinct to this is the invisible ekklesia [church], the de jure ekklesia, which has opposite qualities

Contradistinct, a. Distinguished by opposite qualities.

What opposite qualities, some might rightly ask? The difference is this, as we have come to understand it, the de jure ekklesia believes on Yahushua’s [Jesus’, Iesus’, Iesous’, Y’shua’s, Yeshua’s, Yahshua’s or ____________’s] Semi-Suveran Authority (See 1Cor. 11:3; 1Cor. 15:27 etc.); they believe that as Yahuwâh’s [the LORD’S, GOD’s, Yahweh’s, Yehovah’s, Jehovah’s or _____________’s] Anointed Principal Officer, he not only has the Properly Delegated Authority, but truly did Appoint unto them a Kingdom; and they, in truth, believe with all their heart and soul, that they are fellowcitizens of that Kingdom.

There may be some here who think that we must be ordained by a person of the world in order to become priests [clergy], but we say unto them…

The baptism of Yahu’hanan [John] , from where was it? From Heaven, or from men?

We say that if someone is ordained by a person of the world, i.e. recognized (legally) by world rulers, then their authority is delegated to them by the world! We are borne from above…from a much Higher Authority

He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.

We say that Yahuwâh Himself has ordained us as semi-suveran’s and priests, that through Yahushua, he has made us a royal priesthood. (See 1Peter 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10 etc.) This is precisely why the Declaration of Independence states that we have inalienable rights; the so-called Divine Right of Kings belongs to all the fellowcitizens of Yahuwah’s Kingdom and the writers of that declaration obviously understood this point in Law.

Thus shalt thou say to the house of Ya’aqob, and tell the children of Yisra’el…Now therefore, if ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto Me out of all people: for all the earth is mine (our Territory): And ye shall be unto me a Kingdom of priests, and a set apart nation (goy).

And he wrote upon the tables the words of the Covenant, the Ten Commandments.

So, the Lord Jehovah says this: Behold, I place in Zion a Stone for a foundation, a tried Stone, a precious Cornerstone
(1b) corner (of ruler or chief – figuratively) , a sure Foundation: He who believes shall not act hastily.

Wherefore also it is contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner
(ruler) stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore which believeye are a…royal priesthood, an holy (set-apart from secular use) nation (state) , a peculiar people

All who claim Yahushua [Jesus, Iesus, Iesous, Y’shua, Yeshua, Yahshua or ________] as the Head of the Corner, i.e. the Head Chieftain of their government, are the true Ecclesiastical State!

All who claim him as the Head of their Nation, i.e. everyone who believes that all authority has been given him in heaven and in earth, as it is written, is a member in particular of that body politic, that holy nation.

H6918 qâdôsh …set apart… – Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Lexicon

Holy, n. 2. Hallowed; consecrated or set apart to a sacred use, or to the service or worship of God (Yahuwâh); a sense frequent in Scripture; asa holy nation (Ibid.)

Sacred, a. [L. sacer, sacred, holy, cursed, damnable. We here see the connection between sacredness and secrecy. The sense is removed or separated from that which ispublic; and accursed is separated from society or the privileges of citizens, rejected, banished.] 1. …separated from common secular uses and consecrated to God (Yahuwâh) and his service 7. Inviolable, as if appropriated to a superior being (Ibid.)

He shall be for a sanctuary (Isa 8:14), an haven [Ger. hafen]…this safe haven [heaven OE heofon] is not only a jurisdiction, it is The Highest Jurisdiction, and this Jurisdiction is spread out on the earth but men do no see (perceive) it. (See Good Tidings [Gospel] of Thomas verse 113)

Haven,n. ha'vn. 2. A shelter; an asylum; a place of safety.

We have been Appropriated to a Superior Being, just as brother Noah stated at the end of the definition of Sacred!

Appropriated, pp. Assigned to a particular use; claimed or used exclusively; annexed to an ecclesiastical corporation. (Ibid.)

We, who claim Yahushua [Jesus, Iesus, Iesous, Y’shua, Yeshua, Yahshua or ________] as the Head of the Corner, i.e. the Head Chieftain of our government, have been, annexed to an ecclesiastical corporation, we are the chosen, we are the Ecclesiastical State!

Hoshia`na! Blessed is he who comes in the name of Yahuwâh,
the King of Yisra'el!
"

We who claim him as the Head of our Nation, i.e. we who believe that all authority has been given him in heaven and in earth, as it is written, are a Peculiar People.

Peculiar, a. [L. peculiaris, from peculium, one's own property, from pecus, cattle.]
1. Appropriate; belonging to a person and to him only.
4. Belonging to a nation, system or other thing, and not to others.
(Ibid.)

peculiar, adj. 1. Belonging to an individual; privately owned; not common. – Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1916-1960, page 619

And if that is not plain enough, here is the definition of peculiar people.

peculiar people. Eccl. Jehovah’s own people; the people of Israel; - used of themselves by many Christian bodies. – Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1916-1960, page 619

We are to be Inviolable by others…not to be violated by any but our own Master!

“Not For Secular Use!”

Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth.

Please, do not construe this to mean that once you become a fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra’el (not to be confused with the man-made STATE OF ISRAEL) that they will never try to persecute/prosecute you again…oh, contraire…

Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!

The Greek word translated “offences” in the above verse is skandalon, it is the basis of our English word scandal.

Scandal, n. [L. scandalum; Gr. In Greek, this word signifies a stumbling block, something against which a person impinges, or which causes him to fall.]
1. Offense given by the faults of another.
[In this sense, we now generally use offense.]
2. Reproachful aspersion; opprobrious censure; defamatory speech or report; something uttered which is false and injurious to reputation.
3. Shame; reproach; disgrace.


From this comes the Adversaries’ modus operandi, “Discredit and Destroy”; Attack the messenger’s credibility, cast aspersions at him, censure him, make defamatory speeches and reports about him, in order to draw attention away from his message, and if and when that fails…

Addendum

Now, having said all that, we repeat once more, hopefully with more clarity this time, our Declaration of Citizenship.

Our statement is:

For the Record: We asseverate that we are fellowcitizens of the commonwealth of Yisra’el, not to be confused with the man-made STATE OF ISRAEL, our Supreme Suveran [Sovereign] is a jealous suveran, He requires Exclusive Loyalty because no man can serve two masters, thus we are a Peculiar People and our Law is the Ten Commandments of Yahuwâh [Jehovah], His Eternal Moral Law, the perfect Law of liberty.

Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our Judge, Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our Lawgiver, Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our King, he will save us (He is our Saviour).

Our immediate Head and Intercessor is the Anointed Principal Officer [High Priest] of Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH], Yahushua, the Nazarite [Jesus, of Nazareth].

Absolutely nothing we think, do, or say may be construed to mean that we wish to enter into contract (covenant) with you or your master or to Disavow our Allegiance to our Nation, to our Supreme Suveran [Sovereign] or to His Principal Officer.”


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.

Edited by - Oneisraelite on 10 Jul 2005 09:16:30
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2005 :  11:12:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
OneIsraelite said:

Peace be unto the house.

quote:
As we perceive it, there are only two jurisdictions, the one secular (worldly), the other ecclesiastical, called out (of the worldly arrangement), i.e. not secular, and although Noah [Webster] (c. 1828) incorrectly states that the legislature of one state (condition, status) can exercise no jurisdiction in another, we can still get the essence of what he was trying to explain to us. To be correct, he should have said the legislature (supreme power) of one state (condition, status,) can Lawfully exercise no jurisdiction in another or may not exercise jurisdiction in another.


and

quote:
Our statement is:

“For the Record: We asseverate that we are fellowcitizens of the commonwealth of Yisra’el, not to be confused with the man-made STATE OF ISRAEL, our Supreme Suveran [Sovereign] is a jealous suveran, He requires Exclusive Loyalty because no man can serve two masters, thus we are a Peculiar People and our Law is the Ten Commandments of Yahuwâh [Jehovah], His Eternal Moral Law, the perfect Law of liberty.

Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our Judge, Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our Lawgiver, Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH] is our King, he will save us (He is our Saviour).

Our immediate Head and Intercessor is the Anointed Principal Officer [High Priest] of Yahuwâh [JEHOVAH], Yahushua, the Nazarite [Jesus, of Nazareth].

Absolutely nothing we think, do, or say may be construed to mean that we wish to enter into contract (covenant) with you or your master or to Disavow our Allegiance to our Nation, to our Supreme Suveran [Sovereign] or to His Principal Officer.”


I think it is wonderful integration work Lewish is doing. Finding the U.S. Codes have integrated the Law of Nations and more sublime forms of international law. Better yet finding hints of enforcement, to reconcile why those who study and profit from this body, attorneys; finding the methods they utilize to coerce from us property by judgments rendered by whatever forum. Lewish is describing the dichotomy to be manageable.

Whereas OneIsraelite describes the dichotomy in his most basic beliefs and it manifests in his having two names, even for the most high God. He gets confused even about the most basic Abrahamic tenet of monotheism. "Hear 'O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord." Nevermind he writes as though his pronunciation is the correct one and the proven one is in brackets. He must write out two names. One for each perceived jurisdiction. And he must call Noah Webster mistaken in his perceptions of jurisdiction to hold these notions too.

Well, Lewish; congradulations on your ability to navigate the combinatorial mathematics of United Nations charter law. Therein is the municipal structure we have to live with day-to-day in doctrines like Home Rule Cities, Towns and Counties. Do not dichotomize. Seek capital integration. End the dichotomies.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Edited by - David Merrill on 10 Jul 2005 11:22:20
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2005 :  12:58:55  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi David,

Well, let me be the first to openly admit, that what I am sharing is not all my work. It is coming from a couple of professors of law and many people who are digging and finding the answers to have to remove ourselves from "their" system.

It is interesting that I got packages from 3 different researchers in 3 different areas of the country, who do not know each other, who all hit on one concept at the same time. That is, we must always, formally object to their illegitimate currency that we are using. We must conscientiously object to all Title 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5103 currency in every transaction where we use it. It puts a real wrinkle in "their" plans when we do. One of my associates stopped his court case when he put in his notice of objection to their fraudulent fictitious currency.

More later,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2005 :  18:55:44  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
A suitor from Texas felt the same way paying for our coffee.

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_UsedOnlyByNecessity.jpg

Speaking for myself, I have not endorsed any FRN instruments in quite a few years. I got burned once for $70 by a lady who said she would pay me in cash. She was just dishonest and wanted to burn me anyway. But $70 is not a bad record considering.

I know if the check were worth it to endorse it conditionally with my protest adjunct to my signature.

The point I was making above is that OneIsraelite finally got his point through. There is a colorable realm and a true reality. He classified them secular and ecclesiastical. But in reality there is no ecclesiastical positive law jural society. Not of any relevant infrastructure anyway. Only the secular; the colorable realm I mentioned.

One can hold fast to the Biblical concepts and speaking for myself sanctification from that secular overdominating global municipal METRO/city of Babylon is easy for the time being. But that is not what the typical reader is after here in my opinion. The readers want ways to interface without losing the sanctification.

OneIsraelite and I have been round-and-round about the Name. That proves out to be pronounced Yehowah (Jehovah). No doubt. I am biased by my recent $50 investment in a book solely about that. However OneIsraelite still has to admit to two names because of his belief in the Yahuwah pronunciation. Two venues, two Names.

So where I am seeing your research headed Lewis is a certain reconciliation between these two ideals; secular and ecclesiastical through the rules of international law and the Law of Nations.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Edited by - David Merrill on 10 Jul 2005 19:00:03
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 11 Jul 2005 :  06:44:12  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
"He classified them secular and ecclesiastical."

"Jurisdiction is secular or ecclesiastical." – Noah Webster, c. 1828, classified them secular or ecclesiastical, not oneisraelite c. 2005th Year of Yahushua's Glorious Reign.

"There is a colorable realm and a true reality.He classified them secular and ecclesiastical. But in reality there is no ecclesiastical (called out)...It is only a mental fiction whereas...Only the secular...METRO's infrastructure is relevant."

Relevant, a. [L. relever, to relieve, to advance, to raise; re and lever, to raise.]
1. Relieving; lending aid or support.
2. Pertinent; applicable.
3. Sufficient to support the cause.


"...thou art an offence ( skandalon ) unto me: thou savourest not the things that be of Yahuwâh, but those that be of men.

The Greek word translated “offences” in the above verse is skandalon, it is the basis of our English word scandal.

Scandal, n. [L. scandalum; Gr. In Greek, this word signifies a stumbling block, something against which a person impinges, or which causes him to fall.]
1. Offense given by the faults of another.
[In this sense, we now generally use offense.]
2. Reproachful aspersion; opprobrious censure; defamatory speech or report; something uttered which is false and injurious to reputation.
3. Shame; reproach; disgrace.


From this comes the Adversaries’ modus operandi, “Discredit and Destroy”; Attack the messenger’s credibility, cast aspersions at him, censure him, make defamatory speeches and reports about him, in order to draw attention away from the message, and if and when that fails…


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.

Edited by - Oneisraelite on 11 Jul 2005 08:24:48
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 11 Jul 2005 :  06:55:31  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
You missed the point I debated OneIsraelite. There is no infrastructure to the ecclesiastical (positive law) jural society you infer. It is only a mental fiction whereas METRO is the extant secular jural society. METRO's infrastructure is relevant.

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Sheriff_METRO.jpg

For instance if you were to point to the ecclesiastical jural society you keep inferring exists you might be pointing at www.ecclesia.org or something as virtual in reality. And then you would have to make the judgment that because David Merrill and so-and-so believe the Name is pronounced Yehowah, when it is obviously Yehuwah well then... let's just let them pass in their votes and we will quietly not count them. They are obviously not really part of the ecclesia. Kind of like what went on in Florida in 2000, which you may see is the heart of METRO (probing ground outside Manhattan anyway).

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapter1.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapter2.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapter3.pdf
American’s Bulletin 1995 METRO 1313 article

Point being the image of God within us, declared law of the flag (Exodus 13:16) is the highest ecclesiastical jurisdiction. And Yehoshuah (not Yehushuah www.direct.ca/trinity/yehoshua.html" target="_blank">http://www.direct.ca/trinity/yehoshua.html ) was correct. Many of us in the true ecclesia will be called before governors and kings to bring forth their testimony on the record of human history. Until the prosecution and defense rest anyway - judgment on Manhattan; September 11, 2001.

http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/BOE1.gif
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/BOE2.gif



Regards,

David Merrill.


Edited by - David Merrill on 11 Jul 2005 07:00:32
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 6 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY © MMXVII Ecclesiastic Commonwealth Community Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.62 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000