| Author |
 Topic  |
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
 Posted - 13 Dec 2004 : 05:27:37
|
(First off the law created by governments of men simply do not apply to men and women of declared faith. The only protection provided for by the governments of men in the commonwealth and those countries displaying a Christian Bible in their court rooms is that Bible and faith in it. The Queen acts as defender of the faith. The Bible's first command is to not bow to false Gods'. Other faiths may not have the power of that Bible logged in with standing as supreme law to effect the extraction from the influence of mans law upon them. This is only an offer and warning. You can follow the ways of men if you wish or realise your true freedom via this process offered. The administrator altered my subject title without asking me which does not seem to be ecclesia based in my grasp of Biblical law which lead's me to believe the name of this site is misleading. I have changed it from what was originally there and from what the administrator did without my permission. It was not offensive but true . If truth is offensive then it is lie that is offended not truth.
Questions the adminstrator as to this act of non eccelsiatical performance as it speaks to error!)
Hello Brethren ,Glory to Jah in salutations is not enough,,,praise Jah, banging on keyboards is short of the mark,, in the spirit of the gift of life we are graced with the knowledge of our savior not cloaking ourselves by his word but rather baring our souls to the world in his name.. It is only by our duty in works that we can warn the darkness of the coming light...(Ezekiel 33:6)It is our birthright to demand our value of life that was stolen from us.(Leviticus 6:2) We have the technology! We have "The" Law. We have the proof, it appears we have the faith, now all that is missing is the works.....As the old saying goes "let’s give em the works"
This is a Canadian government website.. I ,with God's spirit prevailing, privately convinced the webmaster to post the truth..
I even did it on the phone!!
I have, with God's aid, got the treasury department of Canada served in our Lords name and done privately as well..They ageed with me and now are trying to make a law to deal with our Church
yah gotta laugh and cry to be in between...
http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/pdp-hrp/canada/guide/application_e.cfm
weve all heard the laws of congress or legislatures does not apply to us so heres the proof coming from them!!!
What I am going to show you here in this thread is how to in honor show the confused and unaware officials that their law doesn’t apply to us and when we do that it will be by private registered mail to a non commercial man or woman.
By doing this you eliminate the corporations cloak of deceit. You bring them into private agreement with you so they have no recourse but to realize that if they go back to work and continue to intimidate you that they become subject to their own criminal law and they have no defense..
Mind you the son of man never used their law as to make use of a thing implies a benefit and if you derive a benefit from one of the code's of mans laws you not only recognize it's authority but you seek to come out ahead by using it thereby contracting yourself to it's jurisdiction over you. Just like getting a ticket, a bill of exchange, and showing up at the invited time. If you show up and your there you are automatically assumed to be consenting to the jurisdiction and assumed to be a debtor by the commercial collector for the world bank, being the court, an agent of the receiver general.
You do have the opportunity to abate the assumed issue though... abatement is something some I'm sure are familiar with others not... It means your words bring them into awareness that what you intend to bring to court will destroy their argument hands down.You also have a duty to warn them of the hole in their own codes that they will fall into if they intimidate you!!!
This is a letter early in my awakening and will show you not only a popular misconception about what is defined as illegal and how to abate a process.... But that you can!
As a result of these letters the prosecution immediately stayed all charges and threatened me with contempt if I showed up!
To: Crown Counsel Mr. Von Myers November 14 2000 A.D.
St Albert Court( Alberta Canada)
Fax:780- 459-5088 Constitutional Challenge notice
From: Minister of God Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger
Tel/Fax:780-967-3915
Re: Charges of Possession of a controlled herb created by God substance ie. Religious sacramental marijuana a non criminal civil violation(Queen vs. Hauser BC SCR.1979)
You are in violation of your Supreme law of Canada in preamble and section 32 invoking the application of the charter law upon you, not me, as I am a registered Minister of God and am following the Biblical theistic dictate and gift of Genesis 1:29 and Deuteronomy Chapter 4:1-2; Chapter 7:-;Chapter 8-;Chapter9-;Chapter10;11;12;13;14;Etc.
This is God’s book of laws, laws that apply to me as the preamble so subliminally puts. If the Queen with the advise of the Lords Spiritual says God is Supreme and the rule of law, then you, or any other Crown allegiant, that says mans rule code and regulations take precedent over Gods rule are in breach of their oath of allegiance to the Defender of the faith acting in a seditious manner contrary to the royal style as clearly defined in the Queens act the statute of Westminster that applies to you as agent and representative of the Crown, directly, and making a blasphemic statement.
I as a minister of a registered Church disavow any Corporate Status and that any bonafide contract exists between myself and the Crown or the Government of Canada. I am a Creation of God and Challenge you and all the Justice ministers of Canada constitutionally to prove otherwise or that you have authority direct from God that says you have jurisdiction over me or that you can take away God’s gift, or tell me how to worship God, when God’s rule of law has not been violated.
The Defender of the faith as Gods representative acknowledges the Supremacy of God. I ask you as the representative of the Defender of the faith does you recognize God as supreme? Do you recognize Gods scriptural word as the rule of law? Do you know what Blasphemy is?
Would you as the Crowns counsel come before another Crown allegiant, a judge, encouraging and advocating Blasphemy? Blasphemy is stating that mans law is precedential and supercedent to Gods law. Do you know the definition of sedition and treason? These are some of the issues that I intend to challenge with regards to jurisdiction.
Let us be reasonable, Marijuana is Gods gift to man. (Romans 11:29)
It has never been proven that anyone is damaged by using it. The Australian Government’s two year study exposed by Foip at the request of the CBC said that drivers that use Marijuana are actually better drivers than sober drivers. They shelved that study for obvious reasons. No one has ever made a formal complaint or filed an information they were harmed by the use of marijuana. I ask you what is the purpose of an unconstitutional law? The courts have told the Federal Justice minister that this archaic repressive dictate has no force or affect and to revise the law to apply constitutionally.
I have heard, through, albeit rumors from more than one source, that some Crown prosecutors use Cocaine. Will you submit to a urinalysis? Will the possible use of this drug influence your ability to properly represent the Crown in a matter of theistic jurisdiction? These questions have no intent to defame you or discredit you anymore than a man hiring a worker that he has heard is an alcoholic. He has the right to ask and you have the right to reply in denial or in tacit consent say nothing and admit the fact by failure to rebut. Will you deny or fail to issue recognition of the Supremacy of God and will this denial or failure on your part influence the record and your jurisdiction so as to make you just a man with some words of no force or effect? Can an atheist or a Man or woman of contrary religion participate in the religious prosecution and adjudication of a Christian using one of God’s gifts as his right and religious practice and belief? Would this represent a conflict of interest if so addressed as a concern? Can an allegiant to the defender of the faith and servant of the Crown deny the supremacy of God when asked to do so? How can God reign as supreme and his rule of law if that is possible? Can a man dictate that God’s gifts are illegal without committing blasphemy? Can you prove that God gave you or anyone else permission to take away his gift to his creations of men and women? Did the King draft the statute of Westminster to protect the Royal style in particle? Is being head of the Church of England part of the Royal style? For how many centuries?
Please do not dismiss this case or withdraw the charges. I intend to set the record straight with these questions and if you attempt to thwart my efforts this is called obstruction of Justice by you! And I will press forward with an information against you! Remember your allegiance and ask yourself what the Queen would say. If you fumble this case she will not be amused!
You are hereby ordered and relinquished of permission, as you never had it, to use my name in any other form than what appears above. I will not answer to any other name and will press for Fraud Charges if you violate my dictate and my unalienable right to my name. The Federal Treasury board, that has authority over you, has a document called the "Canadian Style" You may be interested to note that it is authoritative over all federal departments as a format for communication in all forms and is respected internationally as an authority for grammar and punctuation. It clearly says you shall use upper lower case for a name inclusive of indicated punctuation and that an all capital name is reserved for a department of defense operation as in SILENT DEFENDER. There are other federal documents that state that a corporate name will be printed in all capitals. Can you prove I am a Corporation when I state I am God Allegiant? Is there a signature on a valid contract that says I am a corporation? Are you aware Judge Spevakow violated 606 of his Criminal code when he himself entered the not guilty plea for me rather than directing the Clerk of the court to do so. This is supported by the transcript record.
Will you deliver, post haste, a full-unedited bill of particulars according to your recognized case of Stinchcombe? This has never happened, as the records of the other attending officers were not made available to me.
CC: Reverend’s Walter Tucker and Michael Baldasaro of The Assembly of the Universe The Honourable Anne Mclellan M.P. Minister of Justice, Defender of the faith
The Solicitor General of Canada Lawrence MacAuly, Defender of the faith
Her Excellency the Governor General of Canada Adrianne Clarkson, Defender of the faith Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II Defender of the faith.
The Honourable Dave Hancock Justice Minister Defender of the faith
Sincerely in Christian allegiance and love of all God’s creation,
Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger 1-780-967-3915
Subject: God The Queen,the servant and Holy smoke!
Dear Allan Rock Dec1.2000A.D.
Did you swear an oath of allegiance to her majesty the Queen? Will you step in yourself soon, as the judge and counsel for the Crown could well be charged with treason by their procession with out jurisdiction.
You have charged a minister of God with possession of a sacramental herb a gift of God.
That act is not only blasphemic in proportions but also unlawful and discriminatory on religious grounds.
Would you dare tell me how to worship God?
Will you acknowledge your error?
Will you fail to acknowledge the Supremacy of God when asked as an allegiant to her majesty the Queen defender of the faith? Will you violate your oath to be allegiant to the defender of the faith head of the Church of England? Do you deny God as Supreme? Will I recognize the jurisdiction of anyone that is not allegiant to God via the Queen? Can I be forced to without it being an act of treason?
Would you commit blasphemy in stating that one of Gods gifts to man is illegal?Genesis 1:29
Would you commit further blasphemy as a servant of God via her majesty in superseding and precedenting mans law to Gods and saying mans law is superior and mandatory? Deuteronomy 4:1-2; 12:32
Would you, as a servant of her majesty, dare challenge the Royal Style and the Head of the Church of England, as the Queens father insisted not happen in 1931, in the Statute of Westminster?
Would you call God a liar and commit further blasphemy?
Would you commit treason in overthrowing her majesty's Government that was given in Gods consent to her majesty? Romans13. Introduction Canadian Constitution.
Would you compel me to worship and partake in your godless laws? Romans 16:17-20
Have I given anyone consent to proceed against me in fraud or change my name in the all capital fiction of attached to an AKA.?
Has there ever been valid bonifide proof that the holy anointing oil of the old testament for the anointing of Kings and priests contained kanehbosm(Hebrew for cannabis)Sweet smelling cane Exodus 30:23 New King James Version Her Majesty's Bible.
Was Jesus the anointed one? The Holy oil was used to anoint Kings!
Is cannabis seed the most perfect food of God's creational gift to man?
Is the oil of the seed the most perfect lubricant for engines and body?
Doe the fibre make the most perfect clothing and textiles?
Will the use of this plant for building products and paper save our forests the lungs of the planet?
Did Henry Ford plan to build and run his cars with the products of this plant?
Did Randolph Hearst, Dupont Chemicals, the Cotton industry the petroleum industry, the metal industry, the pharmaceutical industry;the medical industry;The rubber industry,The lumber industry and the criminal justice system industry have anything to gain by lobbying Congress in 1936 to institute the illegality of this sacred chosen plant of God that Mr. Ford wished to utilize?
Can you produce a damaged party or witness of such damage?
Did Hitler use this plant in his war machine because of it's superior nature. Is it's fibre as strong as steel. Is its medicinal quality well established historically? Does the Canadian judicial system make money out of keeping it illegal? Are you participating in this religious and unconstitutional discrimination and persecution?
From Minister of God Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger
I hope you realize the brevity and precarious position this puts you in. You can come out of this as sweet smelling cane or as Hemlock. You must decide if you bear allegiance to God through her Majesty or violate your oath to not only God but to uphold his law. The constitution of Canada you swore to enforce and uphold is Precedentially and absolutely Gods law as supreme as the preamble so aptly puts. Remember to bite your tongue when you habitually wish to apply mans law against me the man creation of God. Will you respect this knowledge ? Hosea 4:6
In love of Christ and on Guard of the faith eternal.
Your servant in the Lord
Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger
Sock it to them bretheren, in defence of the faith Love and blessings, your servant of the Lord faithfull and discreet slave
Brother Edward
P.S. I will speak for all who ask to whereever. I only charge for Meals, accommodation and transportation in advance. This allows me to be there for you as I am unemployed in the secular field. 1-780-967-3915
Edward-Jay
Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger
Blessings and please redistribute |
Edited by - source on 31 Dec 2004 13:57:05 |
|
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
Posted - 19 Dec 2004 : 17:33:44
|
Blessings of Yahweh upon you David,
Do any among us imply that all the laws of man apply to us??
Do any deny Deuteronomy 4:2;12:32 and God's command to not bow to false god's??
If they add to God's law, as they have, are they of God?? So if they are not of God and are intimidating us to bow to pay taxes that are not supported in scripture as being applicable to us, are we supposed to bow in contradiction of what Shadrak Meshak and abednigo did?? Didi Daniel eat the Kings food??
So the site I showed you above is proof irrefutable the laws not in line with God's law are not applicable to us as men under God and his law..All you have to do is abate their laws with a private notice to them as per the insructions of Jesus at Matthew 18:15-20 and bring them into agreement with you..
If they ignore you and force you into one of their fictional proceedings such as taxes you can call all those private men and women to testify that you made them privately aware as of your faith you can not \bow nor submit to their codes rules and regulations that are in addition to and in derogation to God's law.
They have no public power to cause you to nor to intimidate you to violate your faith and break God's first command law of Exodus 20:3-5
The Queens agent so to speak in canada has admitted she is a defacto ruler.. The world bank who is the creditor has admitted that defacto means unlawful! Illegitimate!! With no sanction of the Christian monarch since 1931. She acts as a false god!What is the Governor General's position in Government?
Canada is a parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy. This means Canadians recognize The Queen as our Head of State. Canada's 26th Governor General, the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson, carries out Her Majesty's duties in Canada on a daily basis and is Canada's de facto Head of State.
They the governments act as collectors for the creditor the world bank with all the indentured and bonded men and women as slaves and debtors as the word constitutor means volunteering to pay the debt of another!
OP 7.30
July 2001
These policies were prepared for use by World Bank staff and are not necessarily a complete treatment of the subject.
Dealings with De Facto Governments
________________________________________________________
Note:This OP 7.30 replaces OP 7.30, dated November 1994. Questions may be addressed to the Chief Counsel, Operations Policy.
________________________________________________________
1. A "de facto government" comes into, or remains in, power by means not provided for in the country's constitution, such as a coup d'état, revolution, usurpation, abrogation or suspension of the constitution.
2Peter 2:3
Do you subscribe to the constitution of man or of God? Acts %:29
If God then we cannot be yoked with the unbeleivers as the government is ...it is mammon the commercial law of men the Babylonian Talmud!
The syngogue of Satan rules the debtor countries of the world and if you do not know this you are bound to perform as of your ignorance of God's law..as of your failure to private notice all those in official status of mans government and oath bound to the Queen, of your faith and beliefs as defended by the Queen of the King James Bible.
Hosea 4:6
Bring them into awareness of your position so they agree with you silently so you are immune from mans law!!
Remember Pauls words of Romans 16:17-20 and note that in chapter 13 he says they are ministers of God. Can a minister of God demand that you bow to false authority and violations of God's law??
The only authority that God condones is the defense and practice of his laws and none other. It was the ordinances of men that Christs blood washed away not God's. Colossions 2:8; 14-22.
Here is a letter from a minster from our Church that stopped the intimidation. You heard right he has not been bothered by them since.
This notice of Good faith and demand is a result of the discovery that the CCRA officials are not truly allegiant to the Queen and are truly imposters charading as wolves in sheep's clothing. They have no authority!
by • Monday September 22, 2003 at 10:01 PM
Good faith introduction
To all concerned parties receiving this as of after September 15th in the year of our Lord two thousand and three. Please take notice that I, the living man with a Christian appellation as Donald Christopher
Carter, living on God's earth in the province of British Columbia, and being a non commercial entity of sound mind and good character, do affirm that as a result of political or religious persecution and
intimidation and having exhausted all remedies in commercial law, my diligent research and Christian faith suggests, that the following offer applies.
1. I as a *minister (See Definitions Below) in performing a function of my filing to practice and defend God's law, and with the knowledge and awareness of the unlawful actions and claims of agents of CCRA
upon the created and assumed legal fiction of a name in and for the purposes of executing a fraud upon myself and my brethren , and with the knowledge that such legal fiction debtor number assigned by CCRA to me the flesh is without any informed permission or understanding by myself and with knowledge that it is created by CCRA for the convenience of achieving consent of jurisdiction over my flesh and blood by the Receiver General and Tax court, and also severally with the knowledge that the Queen and all her allegiants are bound to defend the laws of God with all of their power by the tenants of the King James Bible, I must aver: It is as a man of God, not being a *person, that it is under serious issuance of threat, duress and intimidation that I offer this demand via the aid of my clerical *envoy, ambassador and delegate of choice. We are aware that certain moral qualities are central to the survival of our political system, among which are truthfulness, integrity, respect for the law, respect for the dignity of others, adherence to the constitutional process, and a willingness to avoid the abuse of power. We are concerned about the impact of this crisis on our children and on our Brethren. You, reading this as a servant for society as a whole, take account of the ethical commitments that are necessary for a civil society to maintain the integrity and honor of both public and private morality.
2. You are now with the knowledge and awareness that you in pursuit of a fictional debt of Usury (Exodus 22:25: Leviticus 25:36: Deuteronomy 23:19) and are with knowledge it is a fiction as per your
own files of artificial assessments between 1992 and 1996 and previous years that you have adamantly denied that I have ever filed. Your own records prove your possession of such filings and as such provide evidence of deceit and concealment on your part. I do aver that I am not a corporate commercial legal fiction nor liable to pay a fictional usurious debt.
Agents of the CCRA have conspired by fraud to discredit and to fabricate arbitrary assessments that started at $8000.00 and grew on criminal interest and penalties to $32.000.00 against this artificial commercial entity which I cannot by my faith be compelled to participate with or allow. Aiding and abetting a criminal act, albeit unaware, is a crime!
Failure to be aware of the law is no excuse. Altering a man's or a woman's name and using it for a financial purpose without their permission is fraud. By the ignorance of the law that controls the actions of the government the CCRA has supported and enforced a slavery tax of usury being in force contrary to God's law. Thou shall not raise a false witness or bear a false report! I know that there are compassionate fair and honest men and women within CCRA and to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, I summon you good and kind folk to assist me at this time in provision of ther truth. May God's blessing and spirit be upon you.
Exodus 20:16 thou shait not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Exodus 23:1 Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.
Deuteronomy 5:20 Neither shall thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Deuteronomy 19:16 If a faise witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong: 17 Then both the men. between whom the controversy is. shall stand before the LORD. before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days: 18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and. behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother: 19 Then shall ye do unto him. as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shaft thou put the evil away from among you. 20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. 21 And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
Proverbs 6:16 These six things doth the LORD hate: vea. seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look. a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies. and he that soweth discord among brethren.
2
Proverbs 12:17 He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.
Proverbs 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.
Proverbs 14:25 A true witness delivereth souls: but a deceitful witness speaketh lies.
Proverbs 19:5 A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall not escape.
Proverbs 19:9 A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish.
Proverbs 19:28 An ungodly witness scometh judgment: and the mouth of the wicked devoureth iniquity.
Proverbs 21:28 A false witness shall perish: but the man that heareth speaketh constantly.
Proverbs 24:28 Be not a witness against thy neighbour without cause: and deceive not with thy lips.
Proverbs 25:18 A man that beareth false witness against his neighbour is a maul. and a sword, and a sharp
arrow.
Matthew 15:18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.
Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have
eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life. keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shaft do no murder, Thou shall not commit adultery, Thou shall not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments. Do not commit adultery. Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
Luke 18:18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shaft not commit adultery, Thou shaft not kill, Thou shaft not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shall not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
This Demand notice, being a matter of a religious claim, is not frivolous or vexatious in form and is a serious issue that if not dealt with will cause grievous and serious harm to myself and my
family and as such the balance of convenience and credibility of the court and its officers favors granting the relief sought. This demand is offered as a result of the CCRA failing to acknowledge that I did supply them with the returns they required when demanded. They denied that I have ever filed those years but their own records of the 1992 and 1996 filings reveal they do indeed have them, showing nil return and no monies owed. These actions, on their part, of violating not only their own laws, but the laws of God by a deliberate attempt to impose a slavery tax unsanctioned in God's or man's law upon me. are criminal and punishable by their law 46;60;122;126;180;215;219;336;337;408 ,405 and 403 as well as numerous others not mentioned for lack of paper supply.
The effects of a diligent nature, to communicate the facts to agents of the CCRA, have met with indifference and failure to adhere to the terms Of their public Service employment Contract s23. Every deputy head and employee shall, on appointment from outside the Public Service, take and subscribe the oath or solemn affirmation of allegiance and the oath or solemn affirmation set out in Schedule 11I.R.S., c.p-32, s 23. and ethical standard as required by the treasury board of Canada policy in favor of public standing. (Any law that is inconsistent with the laws of God is a violation of our faith and we are merely showing you that CCRA and associate departments are breaking their law, among many others.) We also wish all to make note of the fact that. through the admission of agents of the CCRA. the fiction they are applying to me. CARTER DONALD C.. is owed in excess of $100.000.00 in child tax credits. GST rebates and other funds. As an alternative CCRA can at its own discretion deduct the claimed owed monies from the actual credit they claim the fictional entity is owed and forward $70.000.00 balance claimed as owing to the Donald C. Carter the man.
False Pretences
362. (1) Every one commits an offence who False pretence or (a) by a false pretence, whether directly or through the medium of a contract obtained by a false false statement pretence, obtains anything in respect of which the offence of theft may be committed or causes it
to be delivered to another person; (6) obtains credit by a false pretence or by fraud; knowingly makes or causes to be made, directly or indirectly, a false statement in writing with intent that it should be relied on with respect to the financial condition or means or ability to pay of himself or any person, firm or corporation that he is interested in or that he acts for, for the purpose of procuring, in any form whatever, whether for his benefit or the benefit of that person, firm or corporation, (i) the delivery of personal property, (ii) the payment of money. As such the cause for the issuance of this Demand notice, . .
Signed at Cottonwood B.C. on September 15th 2003 for good intent and defense of faith in front of three witnesses of good character and sound mind..
Donald Christopher Carter
Witness
Witness ,
Witness
Minister Definition: 2 Corinthians 3:6 "Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth. but the spirit giveth life."
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
Source: Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
Minister one who serves, as distinguished from the master. (1.) Heb.
meshereth, applied to an attendant on one of superior rank, as
to Joshua, the servant of Moses (Ex. 33:11), and to the servant
of Elisha (2 Kings 4:43). This name is also given to attendants
at. court (2 Chr. 22:8), and to the priests and Levites (Jer.
33:21; Kz.ek. 44:11) .
(2.) Heb. pelah (Ezra 7:24), a "minister" of religion. Here
used of that class of sanctuary servants called "Solomon's
servants" in Ezra 2:55-58 and Men. 7:57-60
1 (esp. in Presbyterian and some Nonconformist Churches) a member of the clergy
2 a person appointed to head a government department
3 any diplomatic agent accredited to a foreign government or head of state short for: minister plenipotentiary, envoy extraordinary, minister plenipotentiary
See: envoyTl]
5 Also called (in full): minister resident a diplomat ranking after an envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary
6 a person who attends to the needs of others, esp. in religious matters
7 a person who acts as the agent or servant of a person or thing
verb
8 [inti. often foil hy to] to attend to the needs (of); take care (of)
[transitive] (archaic)
to provide; supply
[ETYMOLOGY: 13th Century: via Old French from Latin: servant; related to minus less]
'minister"ship noun
Envoy noun
Formal name: Envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary a diplomat of the second class, ranking between an ambassador and a minister resident
(ETYMOLOGY: 17th Century: from French envoy, literally: sent, from envoyerto send, from Vulgar Latin inviare (unattested) to
send on a journey, from in-2 + via road]
"envoyship 1101111
Persona: A person portrayed in fiction or drama: character,
Demand Notice
Attention: All the natural men and women as created by God acting as the sworn truly allegiant legal fictions of Federal and Provincial judges, prosecutor's, official employees of the Canadian federal and provincial law courts, justice, inclusive and especially Canadian
Customs and Revenue officers of her majesty's service practicing and offering severally the forms of law as being Military Chauncery,(Court of Conscience) Civil, Common Law, Equity, Taxation, Admiralty, Criminally indictable and summary law. Special notice directed to:
The man acting His Holy Eminence Pope John Paul the second
The Vatican
Rome Italy
The woman acting the person of Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. The Dejure authority
Buckingham Palace
London England
SW1-AAA1
The man acting as the person The Archbishop of Canterbury
Rowan Williams Diocesan House, Lady Wootton's Green Canterbury CTl INQ
The woman acting as the person of Her Excellency Governor General of Canada
Adrienne Clarkson the Defacto authority of all the below listed recipients
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K1AOA1
Role and Responsibilities of the Governor General
The Office of the Governor General, Canada's oldest continuing institution, is a thread that ties Canadians together. From Samuel de Champlain in 1608 to Viscount Monck in 1867 to Vincent Massey in 1952 to Adrienne Clarkson today, the role of the Governor General dates back nearly 400 years.
Today, we celebrate excellence through the Stanley Cup, the Grey Cup, the Governor General's Literary Awards and the Governor General's Academic Medal. These trophies and awards were created by Governors General and are a part of Canada that everyone celebrates.
What is the Governor General's position in Government?
Canada is a parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy.
This means Canadians recognize The Queen as our Head of State. Canada's 26th Governor General, the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson, carries out Her Majesty's duties in Canada on a daily basis and is Canada's de facto Head of State.
The man acting as the person the Honourable Stephane Dion. President of the Queen's Privy
Council for Canada
8th Floor
66 Slater Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OA3
The man acting as the person the Honourable Martin Cauchon, Minister of Justice and Attorney
General of Canada
Justice Building,
Kent and Wellington Streets
Ottawa, Ontario
K1AOH8
The woman acting as the person the Honourable Elinor Caplan. Minister of National Revenue
7th Floor, Connaught Building
MacKenzie Avenue
Ottawa, Ontario
K1AOL5
The man acting as the person the Revenue Collections supervisor of clerks: J.M. Inglis Director. The woman acting as the person the Team leader Christine Cook and et al all men and women in Canada acting as the persons of the officers.employees agents or other assignees of the government of Canada assigned to accW 619-248-214 Rl. Northern
B.C. and Yukon Tax office 280 Victoria street Bag 7500 Prince George B.C. V2I5N8
To all the men and women acting as the persons of officers of the Supreme Court of Canada and all other formed courts in Canada being:
The Right Honourable Beveriey McLachlin, P.C., C.J.C. (Chairperson)
Federal Court of Canada
The Honourable John D. Richard, Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Canada
The Honourable Allan F. Lutfy, Associate Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Canada
Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada
The Honourable Barry L. Strayer, Chief Justice of the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada
Tax Court of Canada
The Honourable Alban Garon, Chief Judge of the Tax Court of Canada
The Honourable Donald G. H. Bowman, Associate Chief Judge of the Tax Court of Canada
ONTARIO
The Honourable R. Roy McMurtry, Chief Justice of Ontario
The Honourable Heather J. Smith, Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice (of Ontario)
The Honourable Dennis O'Connor, Associate Chief Justice of Ontario
The Honourable J. Douglas Cunningham, Associate Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice (of Ontario) QUEBEC
The Honourable J.J. Michel Robert, Chief Justice of Quebec
The Honourable Lyse Lemieux, Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Quebec
The Honourable Robert Pidgeon, Senior Associate Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Quebec
The Honourable Andre Deslongchamps, Associate Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Quebec
NOVA SCOTIA
The Honourable Constance R. Glube, Chief Justice of Nova Scotia
The Honourable Joseph P. Kennedy, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
The Honourable J. Michael MacDonald, Associate Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
The Honourable Robert F. Ferguson, Associate Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia,
Family Division
NEW BRUNSWICK
The Honourable Ernest Drapeau, Chief Justice of New Bmnswick
The Honourable David D. Smith, Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick
NORTHWEST TERRITORIES
The Honourable J. Edward Richard, Senior Judge of the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories
MANITOBA
The Honourable Richard J. Scott, Chief Justice of Manitoba
The Honourable Marc M. Monnin, Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba
The Honourable Jeffrey J. Oliphant, Associate Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba
The Honourable Gerald Mercier, Associate Chief Justice, Family Division, of the Court of Queen's Bench
of Manitoba
BRITISH COLUMBIA
The Honourable Lance Finch, Chief Justice of British Columbia
6
The Honourable Donald I. Brenner, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia
The Honourable Patrick D. Dohm, Associate Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND
The Honourable Gerard E. Mitchell, Chief Justice of Prince Edward Island
The Honourable Armand DesRoches. Chief Justice of the Trial Division, Supreme Court of Prince
Edward Island
SASKATCHEWAN
The Honourable Edward D. Bayda, Chief Justice of Saskatchewan
The Honourable W. Frank Gerein, Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan
YUKON TERRITORY
The Honourable Ralph Hudson, Senior Judge of the Supreme Court of the Yukon Territory
ALBERTA
The Honourable Catherine A. Fraser, Chief Justice of Alberta
The Honourable Allan HJ. Wachowich, Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta
The Honourable Alien B. Sulatycky, Associate Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta
NEWFOUNDLAND
The Honourable, Clyde K. Wells, Chief Justice of Newfoundland
The Honourable J. Derek Green, Chief Justice of the Trial Division of the Supreme Court
NUNAVUT
The Honourable Beverley Browne, Senior Judge of the Nunavut Court of Justice
Staff of the Canadian Judicial Council
Canadian Judicial Council
Att: Denis Guay
Suite 450 -112 Kent Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A OW8
(613) 998-5182, facsimile (613) 998-8889
Executive Director: Ms. Jeannie Thomas
The man acting as the person the Honourable David Anderson, Minister of the Environment
10 Wellington, Floor 28
Hull, Quebec
K1A OH3
The man acting as the person the Honourable John Manley,
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
140 O'Connor, 21st Floor, East Tower
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OS5
The man acting as the person the Honourable Ralph Goodale. Receiver General of Canada Minister of
Public Works and Government Services, Minister Responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board and Federal
Interlocutor for Metis and Non-Status Indians
Place du Portage, Phase III
11 Laurier Street
Hull, Quebec
K1A OS5
The man acting as the legal person Honourable Wavne Easter. Solicitor General of Canada
13th Floor, 340 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario
K1AOP8
The woman acting as the legal person Honourable Lucienne Robillard. President of the Treasury Board
Secretariat
L'Esplanade Laurier,
140 O'Connor Street,
Ottawa, Ontario7
K1AOR5
7
The man acting as the legal person the Honourable Herb Dhaliwal. Minister of Natural Resources
21st Floor, 580 Booth Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OE4
The man acting as the legal person the Honourable David Michael Collenette. Minister of
Transport
Tower C, Place de Ville
330 Sparks Street, 29th Floor,
Ottawa, Ontario
K1AON5
The man acting as the legal person the Honourable John McCallum. Minister of National Defence
National Defence HQ,
101 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OK2
The man acting as the legal person the Honourable Robert Thibault. Minister of Fisheries and
Oceans
15th Floor, 200 Kent Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OE6
The woman acting as the legal person The Honourable Sharon Carstairs. Leader of the
Government in the Senate
Parliament Buildings, Room 279-S
Wellington Street,
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OA4
The man acting as the legal person of the premier of British Columbia the
Honorable Gordon Campbell
PO Box 9041
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E1
the man acting the legal person of the Minister of fisheries the
Honorable John Van Dongen
PO Box 9058
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
man acting as the person the
Honourable Kevin Falcon
Minister of State for Deregulation
PO Box 9051
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
The man acting as the person the
Honourable Gary Collins
Minister of Finance
PO Box 9468
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
The man acting as the person the
Honourable Michael de Jong
Minister of Forests
PO Box 9049
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
8
The man acting as the person the
Honourable Bill Barisoff
Minister of Provincial Revenue
PO Box 9065
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
The man acting as the person the
Honourable Stan Hagen
Minister of Sustainable Resource Management
PO Box 9054
Stn PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
The woman acting as the person the
Honourable Judith Reid
Minister of Transportation
PO Box 9055
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
The woman acting as the person the
Honourable Joyce Murray
Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection
PO Box 9047
STN PROV GOVT
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
The man acting as the person the
Honourable Rich Coleman
Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General for the province of British Columbia
The woman acting as the person the
Honorable Shirley Bond MLA Prince George
The man acting as the person the
Honorable Richard Harris MP Prince George
The man acting as the person the
Honorable Collin Kingsley mayor of Prince George
The man acting as the person the
Honorable MLA Dr.John Wilson
The man acting as the person the
Honorable Philip Mayfield MP
The man acting as the person the
Honorable Stephen Harper MP
The man acting as the person the
Honorable Jay Hill MP
The man acting as the person the
Honorable Walt Cobb MLA
The man acting as the person the
Honorable Richard Neufeld MLA.
All the men and woman acting as the persons of Chief Prosecutor for the federal Customs and
Revenue Justice Department, Chief prosecutor for the civil law department of the provincial
government of British Columbia and all subordinate prosecutors and legal advisors of Justice,
Revenue and investigators of the risk management departments of federal and provincial revenue.
Chapter 1: Statement of Public Service Values and Ethics
Ethical Values: Acting at all times in such a way as to uphold the public trust.
• Public servants shall perform their duties and arrange their private affairs so that public confidence and trust in the integrity, objectivity and impartiality of government are conserved and enhanced.
• Public servants shall act at all times in a manner that will bear the closest public scrutiny; an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law.
• Public servants, in fulfilling their official duties and responsibilities, shall make decisions in the public interest.
• If a conflict should arise between the private interests and the official duties of a public servant, the conflict shall be resolved in favour of the public interest.
People Values: Demonstrating respect, fairness and courtesy in their dealings with both citizens and fellow
public servants.
• Respect for human dignity and the value of every person should always inspire the exercise of authority and responsibility.
9
People values should reinforce the wider range of Public Service values Those who are treated with fairness
and civility will be motivated to display these values in their own conduct.
Publlc service organizations shou!d be led through participation, openness and communication and with
respect for diversity and for the official languages of Canada.
• Appointment decisions in the Public Service shall be based on merit
• Public Service values should play a key role in recruitment, evaluation and promotion
Application
Chapter 4: Avenues of Resolution
Public Service Values and Ethics
Any public servant who wants to raise, discuss and clarify issues related to this code should first talk with his or her manager or contact the senior official designated bv the Deputy Head under the provisions of this Code according to
the procedures and conditions established bv the Deputy head.
Any publlc servant who wltnesses or has knowledge of wrongdoing in the workplace may refer the matter for resolution
in confidence and without fear of reprisal, to the Senior Officer designated for the purpose by the deputy head
the provisions of the Policy on the internal disclosure of information cocerning wrongdoing in the work place.
Furthermore any public servant who believes he or she has been asked to act'" a way that is inconsistant with the values and ethics set out in Chapter 1 of this code can report the matter in confidence and without fear of reprisal to the
Senior officer as described above.
If the matter is not appropriately addressed at this level or the public servant has reason to believe it could not be
disclosed in confidence within the organization, it may then be referred to the Public Service Integrity Officer in
accordance with the Policy on the Internal Disclosure of Information Conceming wrong doing in the Workplace
IT is expected that most matters arising from the application of this Code can and should be resolved at the '
organizational level. ~"-~-------------
From : The Cariboo Sui Juris Church being a non commercial benevolent congregation of respected men and women not being persons (James 2:9;Deut:10:17;Acts 10:34 having assembled in responce to a universal calling for the maintainig of to a universal calling for the maintaining of truth liberty and freedom. This assembly of men and women is not to be
assumed as purposed in clandestine order nor cultish performance but of quest for open and honest unfettered sharing of truths to ensure integrity and honor prevail. 'The one law is to cause no harm. Those who deem faith in God as cultish are obviously without God and discriminating against those who do, on a religious basis and with intent to ignore their oath sworn duty and to label a Christian monarch as cultish.--------
Minister of Christ Edward-Jav-Robin: Belanger in official function and performance
of a ecclesiastical duty et al the man Donald C. Carter President Cariboo Mining Association---
asserting no association with a false Fictitious tax file number ITA-1441-01 Acct# 619-248-214
Exodus 19:6 Romans 11:29) as per your legal reguirement of vour government law (Preamble
Section 26; 32 Canadian Constitution. 176 CCC. complimented bv 423CCC and 337of the CCC
and in defense of my parishioners of the formed ecclesiastic body of God's servants of the Cariboo region
Notice of Demand to all professed allegiants of her maiesty Queen Elizabeth
H in duty and performance of provision of true allegiance to a Christian monarch, being defender of
the Christian faith, via sworn Oath.
Before any conclusions are drawn and assumptions formed upon the previous assumptions of
other professed allegiants and those consulted for their opinions about myself as a man and
minister hope you will look at the facts I am presenting. These facts although not comfortable to
those in lack of knowledge, are still facts of indisputable proportions. If you wish to judge these words please do so with the facts not assumptions.
The men and women I speak for as their minister have an inherent right and duty God
10
commanded, to not bow to defacto authority. It is in ignorance that the masses have given over
their energy. We cannot contribute to what we have proof of is a fraud. We as followers of God's
word cannot be driven from the scriptural warnings and commandments of God it is only by our
free will of allowing deception to prevail that we can ignore them.
In our belief your fictional government form is based upon commerce and we are not to unite with
nor serve mammon being commerce. We do not wish to insult any one nor decline our
responsibility to pay for road upkeep and maintenance of other usufructs. It is the servicing of a
usurious and fraudulently obtained debt that we have issue with. It is pure slavery and forced work
outside of God's laws.
I do hope that bv collective communication in open dialogue we can avert any confrontations that
would tend to harm our ability and freedom to practice our faith and to maintain our unalienable
right of gaining a livelihood. Entrance into the corridor of a mans freedom bv any government
without probable cause is inhibiting his liberty to provide for himself and family as well as to freely
communicate his discoveries in faith to others. Please remember our offer In demand is not in
offensive mode but an imperative rendering of the instant matter concerning those of my ministry
who are caught in the fictitious trap of taxation in violation of their faith and belief in the no harm
ethic of the King James Bible and laws provided.
Justice is in disrepute and I as a non-commercial man and minister of God am required, as of my
awareness of corruption within the system, to not contract with any man acting as a Commercial
fiction nor un sanctioned bv the Christian monarch and anointed of God. I as a performing minister
of God cannot receive integral justice or honor of truly allegiant men and women unless their
oaths are understood. Mv duty and performance of a function of mv calling as a minister of God in
defense off his laws is to enquire of all as to the provision of the legitimacy of their understanding
that oath and the validity of its form. (Numbers 30:2: Jeremiah 9:3-9)
Without a truly understood oath in the possession of a truly sworn allegiant to her majesty the
anointed of God, I as a minister of God and my parishioners in faith and right unassailable in
Christ cannot participate in your unlawful defacto commercial process of assumption that we are
commercial debtors. Neither can mv parishioners participate as we have no truly allegiant dejure
and authentic court of God's law of defense bv her majesty to bring forth the truth in. We cannot
bow down to nor serve false defacto authority. (Exodus 20:3-5 :Luke 16:13) This is the command of
God! Read chapter 3 of Daniel.
I hope you will not assume this is avoiding unlawful taxes (Romans 16:17-20 Exodus 30:13-14
Matthew 17:24-27). as we wish to ensure you that you have no need to assume that, as it is
absolutely true. No assumption needed. Taxes not instituted bv God are not lawful among his
children and not of God. Ezra:7:24-26:1 Peter 2:13 only laws written for God's sake! Acts 5:29
Duet:4:1-2)0nlv dead commercial entities are taxable not God's creation! God's truly allegiant
ministers know that his law is the rule of taw mentioned of in the preamble to the Canadian
Constitution. The Coronation of her maiestv in 1953 is clear unavoidable evidence of that. She
swore to uphold the laws of God with all of her power!
Colonial Tax Repeal Act (1778) Still in force
it is hereby declared and enacted ... that. from and after the passing of this act. the king and parliament of
Great Britain will not impose any duty. tax. or assessment whatever, payable in any of his
majesty's colonies ... in North America or the West Indies, except only such duties as it may be
expedient to impose for the regulation of commerce:
Filings of Kisikawpimootewin North American Signatory Indian as serviced upon the Governor
General of Canada as of January 24" 2002 A.D. et al
Filings of Sherwood-T: Rodriaucs Notice of Collateral Esttopel May 2003
To be clear, the men and women of this Church are of faith and belief not commercial nor under
commercial jurisdiction and we challenge you to prove that we are.
If you proceed against us without proving that. under the provisions of vour public service
employment act and the terms of vour public liability insurance policy via revenue risk
11
management, that it was warranted, we will be forced to file a claim against you. If you can prove
you have lawful jurisdiction over the non commercial men and women of a non incorporated sui
juris church and its holdings of properties, we demand, as of unalienable unchartered right that
you produce that evidence in good faith so we can submit and not be wasting audited monies with
arguments of assumed and fictitious legal nature. To do so would be a fraud . I. as the officiating
minister of this religious congregation am demanding in good faith that you validate vour
jurisdiction "quo warranto veritas". Please remember I am not being adversarial just performing a
function of mv calling as an officiating minister of Christ of a formed Church to protect my parishioners from
avoidable offences not of God being enforced by impostors. (Acts 5:29: Romans 16:17-20) I am with the
authority to be requesting verification of vour true integrity and sanctioned authority in God's law
to enforce the Income tax act or any other ungodly law upon mv flesh and the ecclesiastical
property of God. Please do not be intimidated by this notice. I only want what is right in God's law for mv
congregation and their family's ensured security. The civil laws of man have no force against the ministry
of God and the Queen has supported that in law. Please read 176 and 423 of the criminal code and ask
how you or any one man or woman can make up a meaning to that true allegiance you promised you
would provide. Read the Coronation act of 1688 and the text of the Coronation ceremony of 1953. We iust
went through the fiftieth Jubilee of her majesty and the oath bound duty is still as ever clear not foggy nor
gray you just have to read it.
Matthew 6:24......You are acting as mammon(Commerce) and I cannot bow to you as you are false
authority . Exodus 20:3-5.1 cannot violate the laws of God. Deuteronomy 4:2:12:32 Numbers 15:15
You are harming mv ministry and mv right as a man and minister of God to receive truly allegiant
justice for mv parishioners. There is a value to that harm you are causing mv ministry and it's
parishioners. Your liability insurance via Jubilee insurance and other insurance services is in
jeopardy.
l do aver that I officiating as a minister of God in performance of a function of mvcalling and via the provisions of 337 of the Canadian criminal code am
demanding of you. in reciept of this demand notice, to produce the property of a
certified copy of your signed oath of true allegiance and authority to have her
majesty's sanction in jurisdiction over the natural body of my parishioners and
to inflict a violation of religious beliefs being intimidation (423C.C.C.) upon
myself or members of mv congregation namely bowing submitting and
understanding to false authority. Produce your true authority to invoke taxation
upon the Queens subjects that supercedes God's rule of law.(424C.C.C.) Prove
we as members of an international religious body are debtors of a commercially
bankrupt corporate body. Prove your created legal fictions (430C.C.C.) are
capable of being cross examined. Staufen vs. regina 2001 BCSC
fpara91 Whilst there is no evidence before the Court that Mr. Staufen was bom in Vancouver or. for that
matter, where he was born. the law is riddled with legal fictions, it is said. The Court may do so here. Mr.
Azevedo suggests.and create a legal fiction with respect to Mr. Staufen's name and place and date of
birth. fpara101 As defined bv the Oxford Canadian Dictionary a "legal fiction" is "an assertion accepted as
true (though probably fictitious) to achieve a useful purpose, esp. in legal matters". In An Historical
Introduction to English Lawand Its Institutions (3rd ed.) bv Harold Potter, the learned author, at p. 302.
groups the fictions used into three classes: (1) fictions used to increase the jurisdiction of Courts: (2)
fictions designed to avoid cumbersome and archaic forms of action: (c) fictions having a false
assumption of fact in order to extend the remedy the Court could grant. Jowitt's Dictionary of English
Law (2nd ed.). at p. 787. provides two examples in order to illustrate hqw the former practice and
jurisdiction of the courts rested largely on fictions. Thus. the king's Bench acquired jurisdiction in
actions for debt bv "surmising" or "feigning" that the defendant had been arrested for a trespass which he
had never committed and then allowing the plaintiff to proceed against him for debt. In the second
example the Court of Exchequer acquired jurisdiction bv permitting the plaintiff in certain actions to plead
that he was a debtor to the king and that bv reason of the cause of action pleaded he had become less
able to pay his wholly fictitious debt to the king.
fparal 11 Although fictions have been used extensively over the centuries to expand the jurisdiction
of the courts and the nature of the relief they can grant. I have not been referred to. and have not in mv
own research found, an instance where a fiction has been used by a court to invent the facts necessary to
decide the very issue before it. Judges are frequently told by appellate courts not to speculate on the
evidence. What is sought here would require the Court to do more than speculate.
12
1. I because of discriminatory treatment and knowledge of the lack of sanction bv her majesty to
enforce the commercial laws of men (Matthew 6:24) upon me as I am in lack of trust of vour process
as it is clearly corrupt and replete with impostors. Mv religious obligations are clear and I cannot
bow down to false authority. I hope you will help me determine vour integrity so you are not in total
appearance of dishonor.
I am an officiating minister of God (Of mv religious belief no capitalization or alterations of mv
name are allowed to be formed or attached to any document or to be associated with me or my
parishioners) of the Cariboo Sui Juris Church.
It is important that you avail yourselves of this information as of the CBC Airing of the Coronation
Ceremony on February sixth 2002. Please take notice and read the following. This is follow up to a
notice in the Edmonton Journal 2001 December 19°' to all allegiants of her majesty:
To all private parties acting publicly as oath sworn allegiants of Elizabeth the second, bv the grace of
God of the United Kingdom. Canada and her other realms and territories Queen, head of the
commonwealth, defender of the faith, and all private parties acting publicly or private, relying on oath
sworn allegiants to the Queen so mentioned for their professional advise or oath sanctioned protection.
Re: The meaning of that sacred oath of allegiance, and statement of faith may be viewed by contacting
Minister of Christ
Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger in faith of defense of faith for Donald C. Carter et al 1-780-967-3915
CHAPTER XXH.From the Westminster Confession of faith an Act of the British Parliament of 1646
Of Lawful Oaths and Vows,
1.A lawful oath is apart of religious worship, wherein upon just occasion, the person
what he asserteth or promise and to judge him according to the truth or falsehood of what he sweareth,
II. The name of God only is that by which men ought to swear, and therein it is to be used with all holy fear and reverence:
therefore to swear vainly or rashly by that glorious and dreadful name, or to swear at all by any other thing. is sinful, and to be
abhorred. Yet as in matters of weight and moment, an oath is warranted by the word of God, underthe new testament as well as under the old, so a lawful oalh. being imposed by lawful authority, in such matters ought to be taken.
Ill Whosoever taketh an oath ought duly to consider the weightiness of so solemn an act. and therein to avouch nothing but hat he is fully persuaded is the truth. Neither may any man bind himself by oath to any thing but what is good and just. and what lie believeth so to be, and what he is able and resolved to perform. Yet it is a sin to refuse an oath touching any thing that is good and just, being imposed by lawful authority
IV An oath is to be taken in the plain and common sense of the words, without equivocation or mental reservation. It can not oblige to sin: hut in any thing not sinful, being taken, it binds to performance, although to a mans own hurt:nor is it to be violated although made to heretics or infidels
V. A vow is of the like nature with a promissory oath, and ought to be made with the like religious care, and to be peformed with like faithfulness.
VI. No man may vow to do any thing forbidden in the word of God,or that what would hinder any duty therein commanded.or in which is not in his own power, and for the performance of which he hath no promise or ability from God. In which monastical vows of perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience are so far from being degrees of higher perfection, that they are superstitious and sinful snares in which no Christian may entangle himself.
Default Notice
Will you discriminate against my official Ministry, and prejudice my ability to fair defense of my
congregation's men and women? Will you ignore your duty to that oath? Will you fabricate a meaning to
that oath? Will you believe someone else's fabrication? You have seen and are now with the
knowledge of her majesty's law regarding lawful oaths and if you can refute what I am saying, do
so with in 10 days of receipt of this document and Notice of demand. Failure to rebut or reply.
*nihil dicit. to the notice of demand, sent via registered mail for proof of service, will be taken and
acknowledged via notice in her majesty's Royal post office and advertisement locally, of vour
open acceptance of my lawful sanction as a minister (Exodus19:6: 2 Corinthians 3:6) having only
13
laws in accord with his law as authority over my congregation Deuteronomv 4:2:12:32:Numbers
15:15) and will be taken and accepted as tacit consent and agreement to the assertions of law and
ecclesiastical right contained herein
I, ................... do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth
the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors. So help me God.
If your oath is not in this form it is invalid. If you cannot verify what the true allegiance is that you
swore you would provide, it is evidence that you are in breach of your obligation and have
committed perjury.
Please tell me: If one does not believe in God but takes an oath to be truly allegiant to a Queen
sworn to uphold the laws of God with all of her power can they decline to enforce and uphold the
laws of God and still be truly allegiant?
Sincerely offered in performance of a function of my calling as an officiating Minister and founder of the Church of the
Ecumenical Redemption International 2001 and of and the Cariboo Grove of the Church of the Reformed Druids 2003, The Head Druid and minister of the Onoway Grove of the Church of the Reformed druids 1993; Received Philosophy Degree in 1992 From the Edmonton Grove of the Church of the Reformed Druids, and Master of law degree in 2000 from Grand Druid Kevin Sisk under a charter mission from the Assembly of the Universe, Honorary Minister of the China Grove of the Church of the reformed Druids 1992 and international law Consulting minister for the Belize Grove of the Church of the Reformed Druids 1993(I am No longer a minister for that Church I woke up) and a Chartered mission brother and research consultant of the Assembly of the Universe Hamilton Ontario 1969 al and the Center for Self Awareness and the Church of Christian Science being all interfaith churches All glory to God and his infinite wisdom. May we all be humbled by his mysteries.
Minister Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger Ph.d Doctorate of Theology and Theocratic law
Parishioners Present
Matthew 18:15-20
Witness
Witness
Witness
* Black's Law Dictionary. Sixth Edition, page 1045
Nihil Dicit.
Judgment taken against party who withdraws his answer is judgement nihil dicit, which amounts to confession of cause of action stated, and carries with it, more strongly than judgment by default, admission of justice of plaintiff's case. See also Nil dicit judgment.
add your comments
Blessings |
Edited by - source on 28 Dec 2004 20:19:34 |
 |
|
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
Posted - 22 Dec 2004 : 03:35:27
|
This another old attempt that got quite a bit of attention
00030494AC Judicial notice of intent April9th2001A.D.
It is under threat duress and intimidation I offer this notice of the present and future good faith and intent of the man that comes before the Canadian courts provincial and federal being of sound mind and of an expert capacity in matters such as being before the court and this man under God as his savior and creator is in truth declared to be known by his birth record name in correct English grammatical form and no other than such form as Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger and relating to no other record of the name other than that which is live birth record verifiable via the vital statistics record under the authority of Barry Haugrud in Edmonton, director of records for vital statistics being recorded in a grammatically incorrect form, a violation 366 of the Canadian Criminal code and being recorded as born on the 29th day of September in the year of our Lord 1952, in the province of Alberta in its capital city of Edmonton.
As of this date the deponent herein proclaims and is stated for the courts notice that he is conducting service as a minister of God and living in the local of Onoway.
No one is given permission to alter any record, inclusive of my name, in any form or fashion without my hand authorised written consent.
I offer the allegiant and non allegiant agents of her majesty and the courts inclusive no consent or permission to assume or presume my intent is of a negative purpose as my intent is hereby declared in truth and is of good will as follows and is displayed by such words of intent . . .
The intent of the character and nature of style of Queens and Kings is sacred; their persons are inviolable; they are the anointed of the Lord, and vested of powers by virtue of their office. Their power is broad based upon the Will of God, and not on the shifting whims of the people's will . . . They are to be spoken of with exulting reverence, instead of being abused by official public disdain, and by the very allegiants sworn to them. It becomes a sacrilege to violate their persons, dignity and style, and every indignity offered to them, be it in denial of allegiance, a word or act, becomes an indignity offered to God Himself. It is this view of Royal rule and style, sanctioned via a coronation, that alone can keep alive, in a scoffing and licentious age, the spirit of ancient loyalty to justice. It is that spirit begotten of faith, combining in itself in obedience, reverence, and love for the majesty of Queens and Kings which was at once a bond of social union, an incentive too noble daring, and salt to purify the heart from its grosser tendencies, preserving it from all that is mean, selfish and contemptible. Our present Queen, like all other British Monarchs over many centuries, has also sworn these Oaths. The Statute for Settling the Coronation Oath was passed by Parliament at the beginning of the reign of William and Mary, over three hundred years ago.
King George III set the standard for the value, solemnity and lasting application of all Oaths, when he said:
"Where is the power on earth to absolve me from the observance of every sentence of that Oath, particularly the one requiring me to maintain the Protestant Reformed Religion”.
"Was not my family seated on the Throne for that express purpose, and shall I be the first to suffer it to be undermined, perhaps overturned? No, No, I had rather beg my bread from door to door throughout Europe, than consent to any such measure.”
"I can give up my crown and retire from power. I can quit my palace and live in a cottage. I can lay my head on a block and lose my life, but I cannot break my oath. "If I violate that oath I am no longer legal sovereign in this country."
In the same way, if a Parliamentarian violates his sworn Oath, he is no longer a legal member of Parliament. We owe it to our Queen and to ourselves and our children and grandchildren to hold our members of Parliament, judiciary and all agents of the crown to their Oaths of Allegiance. Otherwise, their allegiance is no longer to Canada, nor to the people of Canada, but to some powerful foreign masters in the United Nations who demand illicit allegiance with threats of Treaties and International Law.
Such disloyal Parliamentarians and judiciary are happy to take us from under the Common Law protection of the Christian Monarchy, and put us into slavery under the non-Christian United Nations.
The unwritten rule of the court in separating itself as allegiant to the Queen and from God as Supreme is like saying true justice flies with only one wing and it has the self ordained right to sever her majesty in two! The Biblical priest Melchizadek, the arch type, demonstrated that true justice imparts both aspects of rule, Church and state.
The court in attempting to use the quote “Give unto Caesar that which is Caesars” would by intent, compare a Roman pagan God to the Christian defender of the faith, this again is sac religious, blasphemic and contemptuous of her majesty’s court. Roman’s 13 is of the fact that Gods judges were ministers of God. Any minister of God when asked if they recognized the supremacy of God would loudly and proudly proclaim yes! .
All receiving this notice, are to take note of the prime reasons and my intent as a minister of God in asking the agents of the crown, being lawyers judges justices and masters etc. of this province, or elsewhere I may come before them, is to demand their acknowledgment of their allegiance to the Queen as defender of the faith when asked, with intent of proud defense of the royal law that is in every court room in Canada by royal letters patent, and in acting out my faith in God as supreme. My intent is to ensure true justice transpires to be fair and integral as in God’s law. This also being written recorded and accepted as true service by the clerk of parliament and recorded as being the intent of the parliament via the preamble to the Canadian Constitution Acts of 1981 and two and supported by section 32 of that act stating that the charter of rights and freedoms as the supreme law of Canada only applies to the government. All those that wish to classify themselves as government, federal and provincial or members of the Canadian body corporate, in all of their authority of mans law may do so. As the Queen was given advise and consent by the Lords spiritual and she cannot commit blasphemy in stating mans law is superior to Gods. The preamble and the royal law is the law for the people not of the classification as government or members of the body corporate known as Canada. The Canadian federal and provincial governments law is section 1-60.
The coronation oath of 1953 established for all men and women of a competent capacity becoming or already members of the Bar, that the Queen is a Christian monarch bound to uphold the laws of God and that all who become allegiant to her are in recognition of the royal law as supreme and of it’s author’s supremacy. The court or any agent of her majesty when failing to acknowledge it has an oath of allegiance to the defender of the faith and recognition of the supremacy of God relieves itself from sworn duty and reverts itself to a private man or woman with no more judicial authority than the sovereign inheritance of birth.
Unfortunately for those truthful brave souls that confront the appearance of a court with these ultimatum queries, the appearance of court is still in a position of usurped, unauthorized by the Queen, power, to commit further treason by partaking in a conspiracy to overthrow her majesty’s government under God and offering threats of violence enforced with guns to any who ask the questions of the court as to it’s capacity and true authority to convene and establish jurisdiction.
My intent is to verbally and spiritually convey to the semblance of a court in Canada or abroad, and establish in front of witnesses of good record, the purpose of the judicial system is to impart justice under the guard and watchful eye in defense of the faith, of her majesty Queen Elizabeth the second of England. It is necessary and sanctioned by my faith and duty as a minister of God to display my intent is, as her majesty’s style, to preserve the judicial good name of God and the continued convention of his integrity, whose hallowed halls of justice must maintain to keep the reputation and validity of the of the Canadian courts Authority in check.
Please, in a display of good faith, by way of reply, acknowledge understanding and receipt of this notice and any rebuttal by affidavit to a failure on my part to establish the truth and primarily my intent before the court! I am not a member entity or person of the body corporate known as Canada. I am a man under Gods rule and no other. I cannot, of faith and duty to God, recognize the fiction of a court attempting to operate without acknowledging, when asked of their allegiance to the Queen and recognition of it’s own supreme law. Gods royal rule of law is as proclaimed in her majesty’s royal law the King James Bible..
I proclaim this without any reservation or contempt for the court convened under God as I am a minister of God of declared faith being Christian. As her majesty is in defense of the faith and her majesty proudly administers such defense, being the foundation of the court, I cannot by faith or belief be in contempt of that man or woman which, by their own lack of respect and recognition of duty and allegiance to the Queen and failure to recognize the supremacy of God, establishes in fact for all to see that it, as a court bonafide bearing jurisdiction sanctioned by oath, clearly does not exist!!!.
Asking Questions of the court is religiously and lawfully mandatory to establish in faith the Authorised jurisdiction of the court, albeit the contempt is committed by the man or woman acting as the court failing to provide in signature or verbal an oath of allegiance or recognition of God as Supreme.
To date of memory, in this case,0003-0494-AC, Justice P.T. Costigan and Justice J.W. McClung have failed to deliver the property of their signed oaths of allegiance which validate their authority, to the writer as of demand ,via 337 of the criminal code, exercising authority as a minister of God in defense of the faith and acting as applicant/agent for over 60 men women and children of the Kilini Creek/Patricia Hills area in Alberta counties of Parkland and ,Lac Ste. Anne that will be negatively affected, in a material manner, by the SDAB decision of Lac Ste. Anne county.
It is in the intent of my declaration and authoritative questions put to the court to make clear to all, by the courts answers, or lack of them, a knowledge and comprehension of the structure of the courts authority. As it has been witnessed, that the semblance of her majesty’s courts, presided over by these gentlemen imposters, has consistently without reason or explanation refused to acknowledge the courts royal allegiance by their lack of a positive response to the question “Does this court bear an oath of allegiance to her majesty the Queen defender of the faith?” In complication of it’s own error the court further fails to acknowledge and recognize the supremacy of God. In an arrogant display and denial of royal allegiance to defender of the faith and the supremacy of God, that established, implemented, and oversee’s the Canadian courts authority, both justices have tacitly declared they have no allegiance to her majesty and possess no jurisdiction in the matter and all such orders or decisions rendered by them are void abnito.
When a non allegiant man or woman, to the Monarch of Canada of Christian heritage, posing a s a justice, judge, master, or officer of the court, in form of court of her majesty’s authority, proceeds against you when there is no damaged party ,without your permission, with force, guns, and punitive measures, that is treason!!! The unauthorized court has declared war upon the people using the Queen as their Champion. The release of a positive answer by the court to the test of integrity ,offered by the appellants would establish jurisdiction and the court would relieve all parties of confusion caused by the action of perceived treason on the part of the court against the people.
I intend no contempt for court as I as a minister hold God as supreme and as I in defense of the faith and belief hold God as supreme and having and holding faith in my spiritual father as God and as the founder of the court I cannot be in contempt. Those that choose to flagrantly disregard their oaths of allegiance vesting authority of the court established under her majesty with God as supreme are the ones in contempt. Treason is to threaten with violent force in attempting to usurp the royal power using the appearance of the Queens authority when it is not in the possession of the one using the force of violent nature. It is my intent to convey that threatening the people or those who asks such legitimate questions of the courts jurisdiction, authority or legitimacy in a matter, with contempt of court for asking those questions as I , the deponent was, with being a guest of her majesty in jail. Justice McClung committed this observed act of treason upon myself in court room 515 April 4th 2001 A.D. at 9:35A.M.in response to asking the questions of allegiance and recognition of the Supreme law . In receiving no reply in acknowledgment of jurisdiction I then correctly assumed the court had no jurisdiction was a private party attempting to contract with me, which I in defense of the faith and the people I stand for declined to accept in front of witnesses who have filed affidavits of testimony and witness to this action of treason.
I thank you for your sincerity in acknowledging and recognizing mine, is in God as supreme
Minister of God
Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger
Please CC: To all of the below listed parties of particular interest
Edmonton Calgary
The Hon. Chief Justice C.A. Fraser The Hon. Justice J.D. Braccio
The Hon. Justice J.W. McClung The Hon. Justice M.M. Hetherington
The Hon. Justice H.L. Irving The Hon. Justice C.M. Conrad
The Hon. Justice J.E.L. Cotéé The Hon. Justice E.A. McFadyen
The Hon. Justice A.H. Russell The Hon. Justice W.E. O'Leary
The Hon. Justice E.I. Picard The Hon. Justice C.D. Hunt
The Hon. Justice R.L. Berger The Hon. Justice A.B. Sulatycky
The Hon. Justice P.T. Costigan The Hon. Justice A. Fruman
The Hon. Justice N.C. Wittmann
Court of Appeal Registry
Law Courts Building Court of Appeal Building
1A Sir Winston Churchill Square 530 –– 7th Avenue S.W.
Edmonton, Alberta Calgary, Alberta
T5J 0R2 T2P 4E6
Phone: (780) 422-2416 Phone: (403) 297-6727
Fax: (780) 422-4127 Fax: (403) 297-5294
Registrar: Lynn Varty
Deputy-Registrar: Danielle Umrysh Deputy-Registrar: Ileen Moore
|
|
|
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
Posted - 22 Dec 2004 : 17:07:08
|
Thankyou for your help David and yes I noticed the text goes wide screen so it makes it difficult to read much less tolerating my poor editing ..
Thanks for you comments and help all things to edify in the glory and provision of the truth that God has ordained in his holy name YHWH we will be sanctified. I have more to posts of communication we have effected and will post as the digestion of what I have already put up takes place.. Blessings upon the patience and good will of those who may read this thread.. |
Edited by - source on 25 Dec 2004 12:04:32 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2004 : 07:31:46
|
You said:
quote:
Re: Charges of Possession of a controlled herb created by God substance ie. Religious sacramental marijuana a non criminal civil violation(Queen vs. Hauser BC SCR.1979)
I am supposing for now that you fail to see this is an elaborate and ritually based Refusal for Cause. You seem to have read a lot of supernatural powers, probably based in your belief Jesus arose from the dead, into a simple R4C. The non-statutory abatements out of California (Randy Lee etc.) at least read, "Therefore I am returning your papers to you in a timely fashion Refused for Cause with no recourse to me." The remainder of the verbiage was religious clutter. However it certainly had me convinced at the time that the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth was driving the process.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. Maybe there is a similar effective clause in your letter but the page width makes it a little difficult to read (for now). Maybe after it is corrected, I will point out the effective verbiage in your prolific preachings.
P.P.S. I find it a little wierd that you published being a pothead so widely and among the political elite of Canada. And that you expect getting stoned contributes to Christian ministry.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 24 Dec 2004 07:40:29 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2004 : 09:31:47
|
Greetings and salutations David:
Peace be unto the house.
Why do you always insist on "sugar-coating" your responses? LOL [I am only funning, so no response is necessary.]
Does P.S. stand for "paranoid schizophrenic"? LOL
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the STATE OF ISRAEL. |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2004 : 10:14:41
|
He made some sense here:
quote:
By doing this you eliminate the corporations cloak of deceit. You bring them into private agreement with you so they have no recourse but to realize that if they go back to work and continue to intimidate you that they become subject to their own criminal law and they have no defense..
This is Piercing the Corporate Veil and Instrumentality Rule. I do not necessarily believe that the above abatement brought them into a private agreement. Just the same, the right of avoidance was exercised. I suppose the THC in the marijuana and its narcotic effects would substantiate the delusion there is an ecclesiastic authority in Christianity as a religion playing a part in the process. Tetrahydracannabanol is a mild psychotomimetic (psychodelic) drug.
quote:
A class of drugs reliably inducing temporary states of altered perception, often with symptoms similar to those of psychosis. The drug experiences are clearly perceived, vivid, and remembered. Sensory input is heightened and subjective experience is intensified, but control is diminished. The subject's feelings and momentary perceptions gain an independence from the normal corrections of logic; whatever stray item occupies the attention (a sensation or an unguarded or unveiled memory or thought) becomes at the moment compellingly significant. Thinking and perceiving of this order coexist with the capacity for, but not an interest in, normal thought and function.
McGraw Hill's Concise Encyclopedia of Science and Technology; Psychotomimetic Drug.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 24 Dec 2004 10:22:18 |
|
|
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2004 : 13:59:55
|
If you research Exodus 30:23- you will find a recipe for the anointing of preist and Kings....Further research will expose you to the irrefutable fact that Calumus was not an ingredient in that recipe but in fact Kanehbosm the Hebrew word for Cannabis was ... Now you may wish to rguwe this but please ask a Hebrew Scholar before you accept the musings of men. Keeping in mind Jeremiah 8:8....All Preists of God and Kings were to be anointed with this oil! Was Christ??
HE was King so as to God wishes he must have been. It is no secret the plant existed in thso times and wsa widely used so who are we to doubt that Christ was anointed with this oil. The THC is absorbed through the skin in this manner with all the other ingredients it musaty have induced a very powerful effect and brought the subject much closer to an etherical relationship with God.. It was after all his gift of Genesis 1:29 and further is provided as something to not repent for using it. as in Romans 11:29.
Your catergorising me a "Pothead " is a slight on my abilities and character in subtle attempt to discredit me.. You will find I am quite a dedicated researcher David and since your a proponent of mans law not God's, all can see that is why we differ.. God's law is supreme so I guess that says a lot about where you stand.
I do not know how to get rid of the wide screen so I apologise for the difficulty. Maybe someone can advise on how to correct it..
Praise Jah and all credit to him,
As you will note that last letter is almost four years old and I no longer serve up the public entities but rather the private men and woman as advised by Christ. Yes I am quite familiar with brother Randy Lee and his work.. Has he been successful?? Has he proved the laws of man do not apply which I notice you are not to keen to debate?
Blessings upon our discource in the edification of all who read these forums in YHWH's holy name let it be so. Amen is the name of an Supreme Egyptian deity ! Exodus 23:13 applies!
Blessings |
Edited by - source on 25 Dec 2004 12:11:49 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2004 : 16:42:17
|
I think you could at least try to spell correctly while defending your marijuana addiction. Please try using a word processor with a spell checker and then Cut and Paste.
Yes. Randy Lee's abatements work and I have used about five in that form with all the religious clutter. Then recently I revisited that form when I found a copy floating around on the Internet. The only verbiage of effect is, "Therefore your papers are returned timely Refused for Cause without recourse to me." There is common law process. Notice and grace. Simple R4C.
You discredit yourself with that silly notion about both the Qetoret (Temple Incense) and the anointing oils. The 1992 cave find revealed the formula the rabbis were using. No marijuana. There is one mild narcotic Sausuria Root, better known to me "Qi Mu Qiang" because I have to send to China for it. The incense properly mixed smells delicious! Yes, if you don't mind the pun, divine. The Qi Mu Qiang is that ingredient that is supposedly foul to include the Abrahamic Covenant extends to the Goyim, the Gentile nations of the world. You may find the information at http://www.vendyljones.org.il/Incense.htm
The opiate effects are so mild they are negligible. However eating large amounts will induce a thorough evacuation of the bowels, which is the primary medicinal value of the root in Chinese medicine; to balance the chi in the intestines.
I will tell you the recipe in case it is no longer published by Hebrew University in Tel Aviv where they analyzed the find. The rabbis are so picky about 'strange fire' that they will not burn the incense with fire. They would only burn it with hydrochloric acid, which of course if you are familiar with that, would alter the fragrance dramatically. But it would not surprise me if they removed the exact recipe from Internet availability. http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Qetoret.jpg
So whoever told you that stuff about Biblical marijuana was probably a pothead too and also inducing "folie adieu"; group psychotic disorders. Usually the term applies to paranoid delusions of a father who brings up children believing in the same complex persecution delusions as he; like that. But I have had to import the term for the societally based Multiple Personality Disorder when one cannot distinguish one's self from the artificial entity/legal name/Strawman or whatever.
But in your case it was probably somebody looking for somebody else to party with.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. I have asked Admin to please correct the page width. Please support that the Parliament's legislation subsequent to the charter respects the ecclesiastic authority you purport. All I see from your report is that the same common law processes in commercial and international law (UCC, Law of Nations etc.) are adhered to in Canada as well.
P.P.S. To Readers. Because of the unexpected vehemence in Source's initial reaction to my point of view I removed my initial Posts to be polite and to give him a chance to form his premise better. Subsequently we got into a spat and Admin has pulled some Posts that were deemed non-productive. So as you read, you may find comments that do not quite fit.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 30 Dec 2004 08:08:02 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 07:13:37
|
I removed the comment about illegal substance abuse because I was speaking for the forum's moderators. Also, it seemed as though I am expressing my distaste for substance abuse adaquately by all the 'sugar-coating' in the main text. I have a distaste for anyone who would promote that the Israelite priests of the Holy Bible were constantly stoned on marijuana. Also, a marijuana addict would fall into doctrine and scriptural interpretation that would support getting high as a sacramental religious rite.
While I can respect practitioners of Kundalini Yoga may spend over a decade promoting an enlightened state of mind; psychodelic drugs always prove out a very undisciplined method of acquiring the same. The results are pretty unstable:
quote:
According to the book THE SPEAR OF DESTINY, by Trevor Ravenscroft, Adolf Hitler became involved with an occult group called the "Thule Gasellschaft," which, as we have previously observed, claimed descent from the Knights Templar - guardians of the Grail...
...It was said he (Hitler) seldom took a bath...During this time, Hitler was on drugs. He tried to learn the so-called "ABC's of the Grail" by the use of the mind expanding drug, mescalin, found in peyote. The "ABC's" refer to the development of a "higher consciousness" or "transcendent awareness" that permits one to communicate with the spirit world.
It is said there are two ways to learn the ABC's of the Grail. The "proper route," is to learn "without black magic" - through the process of Yoga or Transcendental Meditation. But it is a slow process of initiation and requires a devoted, personal quest for the mystical "Grail." The other way is to learn by the use of "black arts" or "Black magic" - through the use of mind expanding drugs, which short-circuits the arduous process of attaining the level of spirituality supposedly needed to cope with the reality of the spirit world.
One day Hitler went to the Treasure House to study the Spear of Longinus. Hour after hour he gazed upon the relic, as if in Transendental Meditation. According to his own testimony he went into a trance:...
Excerpts from The Guardians of the Grail; The Men Who Plan to Rule the World by J.R. Church.
Since neither the Cumran cave or the 1992 cave finds have any marijuana I figure that is enough to convince most of the readers. If they are potheads though, they will like your version. Personally I believe the rituals of the Levitical priesthood could be a disciplinary practice suited to groom the men into proper priests. Above you suggest and promote the mathematical precision and prophetic insight of the Holy Bible is the result of God commanding a drug cult. This may be supported indirectly by etymology but not by any evidence. Certainly hemp has played a role in fabrication of clothing etc. and I suppose its THC effects were discovered early in human history. So the idea is quite appealing to those who light up.
The works you cite above indicate that the Qetoret was a crucial part of the mindset of priests in the Tabernacle and Temple. I agree. [If I remember rightly, John the Baptist's father Zechariah had a Qetoret-induced vision while serving his term in the 'cloud'.] I think the question the reader might want to decide is was there marijuana or was it another 'Spirit-provoking' mixture? So in my closing argument I would like you to consider the effects of such high doses of THC over a lifetime. That would be disabling.
quote:
...The narcotic ingredients allegedly have stimulating effects, and after smoking two or three cigarettes, the smoker often has a feeling of well-being and increased power and ability. After excessive amounts of the drug, illusions are often common, as well as pleasing, fanciful hallucinations. Sometimes the excessive user experiences disorientation and even delirium.
McGraw Hill's Concise Encyclopedia of Science and Technology; Marijuana.
And so I quickly linked your illusions of correlations; Refusal for Cause being the Canadian's legislative respect for non-extant ecclesiastical authority, to be related to marijuana use. Understand that a timeline I believe to be prophetic from the prophet Daniel and referred to by Jesus at Matthew 24:15 says the corporate body of Christianity sold itself as a 501(C)(3) asset in the foreclosure proceeding of bankruptcy on March 18, 1997:
Daniel's Calendar
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/DanielCalendar.jpg
Daniel's Books
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/DanielBooks.jpg
Darius conquers Scythians
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/Scythian.jpg
The Khazars convert
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/khazar.jpg
And that timeline is supported by the mathematical correlation with "Week". I never drew it on the original timelines but 1260 years after the Darius drove the Assyrian captives north out of Israel with the Scythian invasion of northern Israel the (now long refugee) Jews in the Caucasus Mountains were selected by the Khazars for the state religion. 1260 years following that was the year 2000, Intifada. Intifada began on September 28, 2000 when "Sharon scales Temple Mount". Exactly 1290 days following the resolution of the national debt cured in the district court case 95-D-3136 (interesting that "D" is for judge Wiley Young DANIEL). You can call (303) 844-3433 and the clerk will read you the docket that the case was 'closed' (meaning instead of 'dismissed' that the debt had to be resolved) on February 17, 1997 and with the 30 day cure time that means the national debt, at least for a moment in time (the Treasury just billed Congress to re-institute the illusion of debt) was resolved. [See January 26, 1996 Associated Press release "Rubin predicts default date". The case was filed commencing the "31 Day Government Shutdown" on December 17, 1995.] These days count exactly by the Bible. So I may be under the illusion these are Biblical timelines but I have a lot more evidence behind my beliefs than you are presenting with your claim about the Canadian Parliament and proof that Christians are not subject to a body you call "the laws of Man".
So maybe prior to March of 1997 there would have been reason for legislators to recognize "Christian authority". Not to say they were.
In preparation of the Qetoret for my own use I researched the verses you refer thoroughly; the Standards. Nowhere along the way did I ever get a hint I should buy some marijuana for an ingredient.
You say:
quote:
In case you did not read David the laws of God are the only ones that apply to men and women in Canada.. I have no need to prove anything other than that and I did already!!
Please cut and paste that passage succinctly. From the charter or legislature of the Parliament. I may have missed it. For one thing I believe you entertain a drug augmented illusion in saying so. But the wide page makes it a little difficult to read smoothly here.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. I take it by the above Post you are literate with good communication skills. You have done your homework about this. So I will restrain my jabs about imbibing in the herb yourself.
P.P.S. From The Word; The Dictionary that Reveals the Hebrew Source of English by Isaac MOZESON:
quote:
CANE Koof-Noon-Hey QaNeH
CON-EH_______________________[KNH]
ROOTS: The so-called IE root kanna (a reed) is admitted to be "of Semitic origin." Babylo-Assyrian qanu (pipe) is cited rather than QaNeH (reed, tube, stem, the "stalk" of Genesis 41:5, the "shaft" of Exodus 25:31, and the "branch" of Exodus 25:32). KaNeH is a stalk or root (Psalms 80:16) and KaiN is a base or foot (of a laver).
BRANCHES: Directly attributed to Greek kanna (reed, cane), the AHD only lists 7 cognates of CANE: CANAL, CANISTER, CANNELON, CANYON, CHANNEL, KENNEL, and (with Greek kanon meaning rod or rule) CANON- as in Biblical CANONIZATION. Most C-A-N- words in English derive from the versatile Hebrew etymon above, a CAN is a tubular container or CANISTER. (...) KANKAN means container, and is an Arabic extension of (...) KÄNEH (tube). Longer and larger "cans" include the CANNIKIN, CANNON, CANNULA and CANOPICURN. Weaving the reed (KANEH) to larger containers will yield the CANASTA (basket, and later card game) and CANEPHOROS. Weaving rushes in wider, flatter shapes will produce a CANAPE, CANCEL (lattice, grating-thus a verb of crossing out), and CANOPY.
CANAPE and CANOPY also recall (...) KÄNÄF (extremity, wing)—a cousin of (...) KÄNEH (branch, extension). Other possibilities include CANT HOOK, CANTEEN, CANTHUS, CANTINA, CANTILEVER, CANTLE, CANTO (angle, corner), and CANTON (a political branch).
For sugar CANE and CANE SUGAR return to (...) KÄNEH (stalk, stem), reinforced by (...) KÄNE (base, post, upright). (...) KÄNEH is a pipe too, and to pipe or produce shrill sounds with our widpipe, may be the KN source of all CANOROUS or CANTORIAL activity by a CHANTEUSE CHANTING a CHANSON - or that of a CANARY or CHANTICLEER (rooster). CAN-CAN and CHANTAGE involve the "singing"' of tattling and blackmailing. CANT is traced to the whining singsong of beggars. There's also the CANTATA, CANTICLE, CANTO, CANTUS, and CANZONE(T). For the IE root kan (to sing) and (...) KÇNA (dirge) see "KEEN." Hungarian enekel (to sing) might be a reversed K-N singing term.
Returning to branches, bough in Polish is konarm. A canal (kanat in Arabic) is a kanova in Finnish.
See "CANDY," "CANOE," and "CINNAMON." See "OCEAN" for more on CAN or CANISTER.
A Chinese rod is a kan; the Thai equivalent is kahn. Kano in Hawaiian is a large, hard stem or a tool handle. (...) KAYIN is a cane-like spear (II Samuel 21:16); the Arabic (...) KEEN is a cane or spear.
CANVAS is from Latin cannabis (hemp) and the IE root kannabis (hemp - a late IE word borrowed from an unknown source).
QaNBOO$ is an early post-Biblical term for CANNABIS or hemp. Other Mishnaic variants sound like K'NÔVES and KÄNÄVÔS. The word HEMP is traced to Greek kannabis and Persian kanab (notice the K to H change, as well as the more common N -->M and B -->P Grimm's Law changes). The ultimate etymon is conceded by Webster's to be "a very early borrowing from a non-IE, possibly Semitic, language." A probable source of CANNABIS is either QaNeH BoSeM – Exodus 30:24 , see “BALSAM” or N/L confusion with CALAMUS – see “CALAMUS” (A).
In seeking Semitic words related to QaNVOAS (hemp), consider Aramaic QaNaBH (to trim, prune—possible source of NIP and NIBBLE) and QaNeH (stalk, stem, reed).
HASH-ASH________________[H-S(H)-S(H)]
ROOTS: Political ASSASS(INS) and drugged up killers were common to the Middle East long before Anwar Sadat and Lebanese car bombs. ASSASSINS and their source of inspiration, HASHISH, are officially borrowed from the Arabic term hashish (dried hemp, grass). (...) HASHASH means dry grass, chaff or hay. Isaiah 5:24 'Assuredly, as straw is consumed by a tongue of fire and hay (...) shrivels as it burns . . ."
BRANCHES: The "straw" of the above verse is (...) KASH, a harder sound and feel than hay or (...) HASHASH. (...) KA-SHEH is hard; (...) CHASEV is grass.
KASHA or KASZA is a Russian and Polish dish of hulled, crushed, coarse buckwheat that they still feed to humans. Kusa is grass in Japanese. CASSAVA, starchy plant food, is from Haitian kasabi. HASSOCK is from Anglo-Saxon hass (coarse grass). CO-HOSH is an herb named by the Algonquian Indians. Reverse K-S for other hay words like SACATON or ZACATON (from Aztec). HASH might resemble a clump of hay or (...) HASH(ASH). HASH is currently linked to the IE rot skep (to cut, scrape, hack).
P.P.P.S. I got interested in King Josiah and the claim the Qetoret may have been altered around 621 BC. I found an interesting article - http://www.direct.ca/trinity/mirror.html
The author find wonderful correlations with the number 2520 but multiplied again by 360 and translated to days. I had not thought about doing that. More on "mathematics worth pondering".
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 25 Dec 2004 12:46:28 |
|
|
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 12:32:46
|
Possession of marijuan is a civil offense in Canada and has never been criminal according to Queen vs. Hauser 1979. You will note below fron Canada's criminal code the law that states ministers are not to held not obstructed in any civil offense as they are immune! Once you read that you may wish to read the proof underneath the law that states the reasons for the Decision in Hauser.. The courts in Canada have held that tobacco and alcohol are far worse substances than marijuana could ever be.Even sugar has more addictive qualities than the herb! It was Henry Ford and his experriments with the plant and wish to build and fuel his cars with it that caused it to illegal but you probably fell for the lie that the government promoted for industrial purposes.. Such is the folly of those who ignore knowledge and do not quest for the truth like yourself!Hosea 4:6
The Truth about Canada's Marijuana Laws!
Canada's legislation against God's Tree of Life, Marijuana was declared a federal civil non-criminal public health law by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1979 via its ruling in
The Queen v. Patrick Arnold Hauser that Canada's Narcotic Control Act
"is not a matter of criminal law."
Those of us convicted of Marijuana Offenses do not have a criminal record and should not allow ourselves to be treated like or referred to as criminals as if we had actually violated the Criminal Code of Canada. If charged and/or convicted we must demand that the court and no-one, not the Judge, Jury, Media and especially not the Prosecution refer to the charges, conviction and/or punishment as if it were criminal.
In 1995 Reverend Baldasaro was convicted at Hamilton, Ontario of Trafficking in Marijuana. The Chief Judge and the Crown Prosecutor kept referring to the charges as criminal, even to the jury, however when Reverends Tucker and Baldasaro objected the judge and crown were forced to concede that the proceedings were non-criminal and to refer to them as such before the jury and even at sentencing which ended in 1997 with a successful appeal as to sentence in the Court of Appeal for Ontario.
NOT CRIMINAL!
It is immoral for the state to make it appear that persons charged with and/or convicted of Marijuana/Drug Offenses violated criminal law when their authority to act is based upon a federal non-criminal health legislation. Such misrepresentations and lies cause us to be stigmatized "Reefer Madness" as if we actually committed a grave criminal offence when in fact, we had not!
The incorrect reference by the Justice System is biased and discriminating. The use of the word criminal in non-criminal matters illegally gives the perception of a violent offender and offence under the Criminal Code. It wrongly prejudices the judge, jury, media and public against an otherwise non-violent harmless defendant "victimless crime". Such misrepresentations of the circumstances surrounding such non-criminal matters constitutes cruel and unusual treatment and punishment and is un-constitutionally criminal and illegal to say the very least and has brought the administration of justice into disrepute.
Our Justice System is currently painting everyone with the same brush, regardless of their offence and without any consideration to the degree of these non-criminal offenses.
Proceedings under the Narcotic Control Act and/or the Controlled Drug and Substances Act can only result in a record for a conviction under those specific Acts. Only a conviction for a violation of the provisions of the of the Criminal Code itself could result in a Criminal Record upon conviction.
The mere fact that criminal procedures and sanctions are being used by the prosecution in the criminal courts for non-criminal crimes such as drug and provincial offenses, i.e. Trespass to Property Actor a conviction for the crime of jay-walking will not result in a criminal record is proof that one may have a Jay Walking Record and/or like myself and so many other Canadians, a Narcotic Control Act or Controlled Drug and Substances Act Record NOT CRIMINAL! See the Hauser decision cited below:
.
Attorney General. In R. v. Hauser(1979), 46 C.C.C. (2d) 481, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 984, 8 C.R. (3d) 89
It was held (5:2) that the Attorney General of Canada has exclusive jurisdiction to control the proceedings in non-Criminal Code offenses where the particular offence does not depend for its validity on the criminal law power in s. 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867. In particular the Attorney General of Canada has power to prosecute offenses under the Narcotic Control Act, (Can.) since that Act is not a matter of criminal law, but rather falls within Parliament's general jurisdiction to legislate for the "peace, order and good government" of Canada.
In Hauser, the Supreme Court ruled that Marijuana Laws, originally prosecuted under the provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada were un-constitutional or ultra vires parliament and re-shuffled the Legislation under the Narcotic Control Act (now the Controlled Drugs and substances Act) a.k.a. the War Measures Act, (peace, order and good government) pursuant to the provisions of Section 91 of the British North America Acts, 1867 to 1997. known today as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It wasn't criminal then and it is not criminal now. It is a
non-criminal federal health law, un-constitutional under any guise!
Canada's Marijuana Offenders are currently being prosecuted by the Attorney General of Canada on behalf of the Minister of Health Canada and not as criminals.
In criminal law there must be a victim and the complainant must be the victim of the alleged offense. Marijuana laws have always been referred to as victimless crimes. Reference: Hauser, supra and in the Criminal Code "complainant means" the victim of the alleged offense.
We are being illegally prosecuted!
Administered by the Minister of National Health and Welfare, the provisions of the Marijuana Legislation, originally passed under the federal governments residual power to make laws for the peace, order and good government of Canada, are of no force or effect until locally adopted and proclaimed into force via the majority of voters in each Municipality across Canada just like Canada's Prohibition of Alcohol. Reference: Laskin's Constitutional Law, (1951) and R. v. Hauser
In 1991, Statistics Canada reported 33,275 Canadians arrested and treated like criminals because of their association with the Marijuana, Tree of Life culture and supposedly violating this public health law which is not even legally in force.
We should be hiring more health care professionals to treat health problems
and not judges, lawyers, police, and jail guards etc.
Obstructing or violence to or arrest of officiating clergyman
176. (1) Every one who
(a) by threats or force, unlawfully obstructs or prevents or endeavours to obstruct or prevent a clergyman or minister from celebrating divine service or performing any other function in connection with his calling, or
(b) knowing that a clergyman or minister is about to perform, is on his way to perform or is returning from the performance of any of the duties or functions mentioned in paragraph (a)
(i) assaults or offers any violence to him, or
(ii) arrests him on a civil process, or under the pretence of executing a civil process,
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
Disturbing religious worship or certain meetings
(2) Every one who wilfully disturbs or interrupts an assemblage of persons met for religious worship or for a moral, social or benevolent purpose is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Idem
(3) Every one who, at or near a meeting referred to in subsection (2), wilfully does anything that disturbs the order or solemnity of the meeting is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 172.
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 13:11:29
|
I am starting to figure out that you are quoting other people when your spelling and syntax perfects; often without us getting the benefit of knowing who or by what authority.
Presuming you speak of me;
quote:
Such is the folly of those who ignore knowledge and do not quest for the truth like yourself!
We will just leave it to the readers. My point was clear I hope. That because you are on narcotics you have confirmed an illusion as real. The illusion is that the ministers in Canada are honoring or respecting Christian authority when you properly present it. And I am dispelling that illusion by presenting that simple Refusal for Cause is what, if anything, they are respecting. These common law precepts are universal. Canada or elsewhere.
For instance in what I perceive your point with the quotes above. The (Colorado) state Constitutional precept is at Article V, §18 -
quote:
Enacting clause. The style of the laws of this state shall be: "Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado.
Since 1933 (War Powers/Trading with the Enemy Act) this has been replaced by an 'omnibus' enacting clause accompanied by a trailer on each bill that begins, "The General Assembly has found it necessary to...." Therefore no bill ever gets properly cured into law and never gets its own enacting clause according to the Constitution. A good booklet about this is The Authority of Law by Charles Weisman. I hear it can be found as someone has just ordered a few copies. It even has a sample motion on how to defeat subject matter jurisdiction regarding any charge for which there is no enacting clause on the face of the "law".
Here as well as there, one charged with possession is charged with a non-crime. If no law is broken there is no crime committed. And?
But you still have not extracted and explained how you have proven the premise. Maybe I missed it because the page is still difficult to read. So summarize please how the Canadian charter or whatever proves Christians are not subject to what you call "the Laws of Men". But I think you try to do the mathematics after you get stoned and never really see anything but a bunch of quotes, authoritative or not.
I was warning people there would be a violent event on top of the Temple Mount for about three weeks prior to September 28, 2000. When it transpired as I had said people thus thought I was a true prophet of God. Was Daniel a true prophet? Well, if you ask me he was a mathematician. He even calculated Jeremiah's prophecy to become a prophet himself. My point is all the while I do not drink or do any narcotics. I imagine any mathematics professor would tell you narcotics are disastrous to mathematics. Hopheads just choose to be art majors after a semester or two. Therefore I certainly would not attribute the priests and prophets of the Old Testament were stoned and that marijuana has any contribution to make in how we relate to God.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. As promised, the ingredients and proportions found in the 1992 cave find are linked in the post above. http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Qetoret.jpg |
Edited by - David Merrill on 25 Dec 2004 13:32:07 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 14:26:43
|
What are the implications of Exodus 30:30-33 in regard to who may partake of the
substance Lawfully (i.e. according to Yahweh's Law)?
quote:
Book of Yahweh, Exodus 30:30-33...And you shall anoint Aaron and his sons, that they
may minister to Me as priests. And you shall speak to the children of Israyl, saying;
This shall be a holy annointing oil to Me throughout your generations, Do not pour it on
men's bodies, and do not make any oil with the same formula. It is holy and it shall be holy
to you. Whoever compounds any like it, or whoever puts any of it on anyone other than a
priest, must be cut off from his people.
The words in red may be translated improperly...see KJV translation below.
quote:
King James Version, Exodus 30:30-33...And thou shalt annoint Aaron and his sons, and consecrate
them, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office. And thou shalt speak unto
the children of Israyl, This shall be an holy annointing oil unto me throughout your
generations. Upon man's flesh shall it not be poured, neither shall ye make any other
like it, after the composition of it: it is holy, unto you. Whosoever compoundedeth
any like it or whosoever putteth any of it upon a (zuwr)stranger,
shall even be cut off from his people.
Psalm 1:2,
Marty
P.S. Perhaps hitting the "enter" key more often is a temporary solution to the "wide Page"
syndrome. |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 25 Dec 2004 14:29:58 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 15:09:40
|
Interesting tangent. We should consider ourselves priests and kings. Thus I was free to mix Qetoret and use it. I call that a tangent because it does not directly address whether marijuana is used in the intended ingredients.
I am more of the global fix kind of guy. If we edit and start hitting enter and then Admin fixes the page, it will look pretty bad. |
|
|
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 17:08:27
|
[quote]Originally posted by Cornerstone Foundation
What are the implications of Exodus 30:30-33 in regard to who may partake of the
substance Lawfully (i.e. according to Yahweh's Law)?
Exodus 19:6 may lead us to the answer .... |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 17:13:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
Interesting tangent. We should consider ourselves priests and kings. Thus I was free to mix Qetoret and use it. I call that a tangent because it does not directly address whether marijuana is used in the intended ingredients.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
That thought had occured to me also. Israylites or at least certain Israylites were told , by Peter, that they were kings and priests when Peter quoted Exodus 19:5 & 6 in his letter to the diaspora:
quote:
I Kepha (Peter) 2:9
But you are a chosen [race], a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that you would show forth the praises of Him Who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light-
This is confirmed by Yahchanan(John) the writer of the Book of the Revelation at Revelations 1:6.
David,
Your specific post had dealt with the ingredients of an oil.
It is our understanding that the a more broad topic of discussion concerned:
a: a certain substance that may or may not be in the recipe....
b:...and who may Lawfully partake of the substance,
c: and in what form and under what circumstances and for what purpose.
Having stated that... the following questions arise in our mind?
1. Was and/or is the use of the annointing oil restricted only to the sons of Aaron (i.e. the Aaronic Priesthood)? Not all priesthoods are created equal..are they?
2. Was and/or is the prohibition in Exodus 30:33 against applying the oil to someone other than an Aaronic priest....or
3. Was the prohibition in Exodus 30:33 against applying the oil to the body of a zuwrstranger?
4. What is a zuwr stranger?
Thank you for helping us to understand this better. Inquiring minds want to know.
Best Regards,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 25 Dec 2004 17:19:08 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 20:06:00
|
Keep in mind I am under the impression from my last reading that the oils and perfumes were of the same ingredients. The anointing oil was derived from the Qetoret. The method of the "fine perfumer" is not very elaborate so I take extra virgin olive oil and steep the Qetoret and then strain it. The oil then takes on the fragrance of the unburned Qetoret.
These are just impressions. But I wrote out the Laws of Moses (Exodus 20-24:7) in Sumarian Ostraca - paleo-Hebrew from David's time and then translated it back into English word by word. Also, I have written out the Pentatech on the word processor to fulfil that requirement of a king; to have written his own copy of the law. http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/HebrewLaw.gif
The way I grasp priesthood is that there are various functions within the scope of the Levitical priesthood. And what I mean by that is the tremendous burden on that priesthood. Remember that but for Moses convincing God to repent, the decision was already made to destroy the Israelites for the Golden Calf imagery. So the Ten Commandments were delivered a second time with 613 Mitzvoth or lesser laws. The Levitical priesthood was created with the awesome responsibility for the very survival of Israel. See Exodus 24:7. That contract came with an enforcement clause that Israel would be destroyed if not to comply with the lesser laws too.
But there is a symbology that I feel relates much better to the Messianic Age; the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant in the fulfilled prophecies of the Messiah. That is collateral to my fulfilling the lawful prerequisite as king - Melchizedec. Melchi-tzaddic. King of Righteousness. Serving in conjunction with Jerusalem. Yeru - shalom. Prince (teacher) of peace.
Since Melchizedek is without bloodline or training, then the set functions become foggy. It would seem that this original priesthood was more an election of God, rather than some sort of Tabernacle or Temple function one was born into or even groomed for by training.
When a Melchizedek priest appears to Abraham, there is an assumed authority. No questions. The tithing is natural. And so therefore no contesting the bill of exchange for all the debt (money) in the world. I enjoy that. Nobody at the Treasury, Federal Reserve, United Nations, World Bank [IMF/IBRD], Bank of International Settlements or even the CIA will talk about it.
Bill of Exchange Image 1
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/BOE1.gif
Bill of Exchange Image 2
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/BOE2.gif
One morning I was getting some other documents and found the proof of service already on Cecilia's computer screen! When she came back with my document I asked for the bill and the affidavit of service on her screen. She was a little perplexed. I pulled the reception number for the bill off my Pocket PC and think she may have thought I had hacked their system with it. But I sometimes wonder if the Treasury or whoever was requesting a certified copy at the same time I walked up to her counter.
Cecilia’s computer screen
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/onscreen.jpg
Once an agent called and tried to bully me but when I started toward the police station, he backed down. I told him I was on my way to turn myself in (he was calling from Burbank, California) and that he had better get his complaint there before I arrived. Well, the CIA is not allowed to operate on this soil* (of mine according to the cured bill) because that would be an ongoing accusation of the principal over the agency of espionage. So he became docile when I told him I was on my way downtown. So the authority exists, or at least there is enough evidence for me to abide in the illusion.
Regards,
David Merrill.
* To clarify. Most pre-law enforcement signal intelligence activity is carried on by British Echelon type services and exchanged for similar services by CIA in Britain.
Source; If the legislature said that men and women were not subject to the laws of man, that is what it would say. I don't see it in that link. That is all. If anybody can read it there, please cut and paste it here with an explanation. Thank you.
In case you are still wondering:
quote:
David I am really starting to wonder about your own dereliction to read...
That is as far as I read. You cannot insist I read your insults. I retain and exercise the right to read a Post as far as the author's handle and move on. Past experience says the readers here do not enjoy reading squabbles. Although I enjoy getting into them a little too much.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 26 Dec 2004 14:22:29 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2004 : 21:12:28
|
Greetings and salutations in the name of the King, David:
Peace be unto the house.
quote:
These are just impressions. But I wrote out the Laws of Moses (Exodus 20-24:7) in Sumarian Ostraca - paleo-Hebrew from David's time and then translated it back into English word by word. Also, I have written out the Pentatech on the word processor to fulfil that requirement of a king; to have written his own copy of the law. http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/HebrewLaw.gif
Most commendable, David!
We would, however, like to point out one minor difficiency that we noticed when we went and read the gif you posted; you translated yodh, he, waw, he as Lord. Lord is beyth, 'ayin, lamed, a.k.a. ba'al, which of course equals "lord"...
BDB Definition:
Baal = “lord”
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the STATE OF ISRAEL. |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2004 : 00:23:14
|
The Hebrew is from the Pentateuch and Haftorahs by Soncino Press 2000. It is good to hear someone is comparing the fonts or has diversified into paleo-Hebrew too.
You are correct. In translating back to English I should have written "Yehovah" above the Tetragrammaton. Not the misnomer of the original text "LORD". Thanks. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 26 Dec 2004 14:13:03 |
|
|
|
True North
Advanced Member
USA
163 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2004 : 14:38:37
|
There is/can be no recognition of authority 'outside' the ecclesia except you choose to dwell in the 'polis of Cain'. We have been over this already in the discovery of the Greek word 'polis'. To reject the ideology of authority, I.E. "The authority that Law comes from HaShem", is to become subject to any and all authority that carries a bigger gun than you carry. To believe that it has been common law that has protected or will protect people from tyranny and at the same time have no 'septa' that honors the notorious authority of Law (I.E. Hashem) is analogous to answering "yes" to the question posed in Job 40:9
Action will prove out who I really 'believe' is the author of Law when the men with the rubber hoses come to force confession.
The ecclesia has always held the government of men, however ineffective, as the following trial of the philosopher Spinoza given to us by Van Vloten and translated by Willis in 'Benedict de Spinoza' 1870, shows; ...
"The heads of the Ecclesiastical Council hereby make known, that, already well assured of the evil opinions and doings of Baruch de Espinoza, they have endeavored in sundry ways and by various promises to turn him from his evil courses. But as they have been unable to bring him to any better way of thinking; on the contrary, as they are avowed by him, and of the insolence with which these heresies are promulgated and spread abroad, and many persons worthy of credit having borne witness to these in the presence of the said Espinoza, he has been fully convicted of the same. Review having therefore been made of the whole matter before the chiefs of the Ecclesiastical Council, it has been resolved, the councilors assenting thereto, to anathematize the said Spinoza, and to cut him off from the people of Israel, and from the present hour to place him in Anathema with the following benediction:" (end quote).
The ecclesia has always had the notoriety of "The authority that Law comes from HaShem". The ecclesia has also always had the notoriety of the resurrection, the gestation of life in an unfertilized female and the ability to choose good and evil or to choose that which brings life.
To assume that ... (because) the books of the law (Torah) were not written down until the first millennium C.E. the law was not extant previous to the laws of Hammarabbi, Marduk or Annu is ignorance of the Semitic culture. It is also ignorance of the Semitic culture to decide that the fables of resurrection and virgin births extant in writings preceding the Christian era were used by Christians to explain the historicity of Yeshua HaNazarit.
Ignorance and deception designed and sold as logic foment the ideology of a Creator as the Source of Life and then at same time hold an ideology that the fables of resurrection and hero myths come from a history removed from that Source. Yes, there was the ressurrection story of Egyptian antiquity and of the virgin Isis giving birth after being impregnated by the Sun god. The late Joseph Campbell correctly pointed out that almost all cultures have a three day death, burial and resurrection story.
A syllogism that is a description of man's way of reasoning does not merely describe man's way of dressing up his reasoning for the persuasion of another mind, although it can, when cloaked in ignorance. To hold to a Creative Source and yet hold to the notoriety of ancient fables as the source for Christian myth is to hold to one of two premises or patterns or premises for logic; ...
Premise One is that thought begins with premises and seeks their conclusions and Premise Two holds that thought begins with hypothetical conclusions and seeks their justifying premises. Scientific Theory seeks the justifying premises by observation of particular events under the controlled and isolated conditions of experiment. The Scientific method must be applied. A Creative Source premise can have no contradictions or it can be relegated to theory and dogma.
Ignorance holds to some premise without any knowledge about that premise and that ignorance eventually develops into the word that americans use for 'faith'. Ignorance also holds that because a fable has a notorious parallel that the one recorded first is the source of the fable. This ignorance is illuminated and revealed (or 'should' be revealed) with the knowledge that memorization precluded writing and the knowledge of importance of memorization' place in ancient culture.
To hold that the resurrection is adapted fable is ignorance of the mystery of the symbol of resurrection. To hold that birth of a child with no introduction of sperm as adapted fable is to hold to the ignorance of that symbol in its application. To hold that HaShem is not the author of Law is ignorance of what is Ruach HaKodesh.
Conclusion; The ecclesia is coming together again for the first time since the first chapters of the book of Acts were played out and there are some who welcome this and some who fight against it desperately with the eloquence of sophistry and presumed authority.
TN |
|
|
|
source
Senior Member
Canada
65 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2004 : 14:54:56
|
Blessing upon you brother North for your somewhat cryptic adoration of Hashem and his law as supreme.
Would I assume correctly that you to are in agreement with the first post on this thread, as was the original topic that has some what been digressed from by our somewhat critical brother Merril?
What are you impressions about such a starling revelation?
That was the purpose of starting this thread.
I had hoped that more will take a stand with the evidense at hand, and start exercizing their faith by works in taking Yeshua's advise of Matthew 18:15-20 in a gloriously effective and expanded way rather that just bang on keyboards randomly.
"Knowledge without wisdom is as a load of books on the back of an ass!"
How do you see this wonderful revelation in the Canadian governments own words that david seem not to be able to either read or understand as being useful to followers of the one source of all energy?
I post those words again as a courtesy to those who do not like clicking on links and reading they are under a fasle assumption and have been spreading falsehoods about bowing to mans cosed rules and regulationos in addition to God's law.
The below is a portion of the top supreme law of Canada with all other laws created by men being subordinate and in submission to it's absolute authority in Canadian law!
The offer of God's law as Supreme is contained in the preamble.
"Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law."
What follows is the offer of man!
Which one has God counselled us to accept?
Which one has he counselled us to reject?
GUIDE TO THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
Part II : The Contents of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Section 32
Application of Charter
This Charter applies
to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matter within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and
to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.
Notwithstanding subsection (1), section 15 shall not have effect until three years after this section comes into force.
The purpose of this section is to make it clear that the Charter only applies to governments, and not to private individuals, businesses or other organizations.
Praise Jah and his blessings upon your response. |
Edited by - source on 26 Dec 2004 18:36:45 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Government Statutes don't apply to the ecclesia
