send you a verse as if one just magically explains it all. Shows you need
to study the topic. Please do if you wish to have this discussion.
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 4:27 PM Garrett Mersman <c1rcaman48@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Send me a verse....because I guarantee you don’t talk that way either.
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 12:33 PM Jb <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Study the topic. Why the king James 1611. * not the NKJ
On May 28, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Garrett Mersman <c1rcaman48@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Plus I don’t talk like that...how can I reasonably quote my Bible verses
to others using old English....doesn’t make sense to me.
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 8:43 AM J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ailus Cercle.. The KJV 1611 doesnt have any contradictions. The so
called ones would be human error *not the humans that were guided by Guy to
write the bible
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 8:09 AM Aéius Cercle of
Quantum-Note(Law-Division) <Law@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So you didn't actually *grow up* with the bible ? Fine, but, plenty of
people *did*. Why are you responding in *such a manner* as-if though
«uninformed» is some sort of pejorative (though it is not). Why not
*accept* and *welcome* the more «peer-review» process where we
*examine* even the «diametrically opposed to our own
paradigm(s)/world-view(s)» in order to *further-refine* our
knowledge-and-understanding/comprehension ? (I will address the word
«uninformed» in a bit more detail further down in this message)
I am only pointing certain things out for your own sake/*benefit*,
and, it's not like you *haven't* made certain «uninformed»
posts/comments, such as the number of supreme-courts, the existence of only
*one* «constitution», etc (the people who've *done* their
«law-homework» will *know* what I referring to in these examples). I
do not intend it as criticism against you, but, more like a friendly «hey,
I think you may have missed something important over here/there» message,
why not *at least* *consider* that this *may* be *more
accurate/comprehensive* than the «paradigm» in which you have
presented/projected ? I have already presented my «references» that *back
up* with *much evidence* for various things with which I have posted
(but, for *many* cases, nearly all of my references *are* a lot to
digest, *more so* than the *short* amount of «time» in which you
«respond/reply» which *does demonstrate* that you *did not even look
into* the «information» that I referenced *before* *ironically*
«judging» it as-if though you «*already know*» the *right* answer
*contrary* to your references that you have «found so much more to
know» [and there is indeed a *lot* to know...])
Regarding «*your* Bible» I am only going to ask you to do ONE thing IF
you *wish* to «demonstrate» to me that there are NO issues with it : *Find
*me the «passage» within «*your* Bible» (*supposed* to be Isaiah 11:6)
where it reads the *original* writing of *Lion* (rather than «Wolf»)
and take a photo of that page and upload the image as an attachment
*then* it will at least serve as «significant-evidence» that IT had
*not* been *altered*. People who *grew up* with Bible-teachings (like
the man in the following link) remember the *original-wording* which
was *not* «Wolf» but *Lion...*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HujIJ70dA3I&fmt=18
And, from one of my earlier posts, I also linked/reference
nonstampcollector's videos which *quotes directly from the bible
itself* various *obvious* and *glaring* «contradictions» ...*intentionally
ignoring* the «evidence» like «it doesn't exist» is simply being
intellectually dishonest and is simply not good for your
spirit/soul/God-standing/etc., and is *why* I use words like
«uninformed» in *response* to *that* kind of disposition/reaction.
Said «contradictions» video is as follows...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk&fmt=18
That mentioned, certainly, much «truth/wisdom» *can* be found within
the bible, but, also, *very* seemingly «satanic» writings can *also*
be found within said so-called «Holy Book», too., just as with every other
*supposèd* «holy» text-book (Qu'ran or otherwise). This is *not*
«conjecture» but is literally pointed out in books like «Jehovah Unmasked»
by Nathaniel Merritt (although this publication points out «issues» with
the «bible» and is not about the Qu'ran which *also* has *similar*
«issues» [regardless of whether you wish to admit/acknowledge that they are
«issues» or not]). I have an Aunt-in-Law who is a Fundamentalist
Southern-Baptist, but, she was at least *honest* *enough* to admit her
mis-givings about the direction the [typical American ?] «church» has gone
(i.e.: *cough*modern-day*cough*Pharisees*cough*), even though, in her own
words, she literally said to me that day that she «hates to admit it,
but...» (and the rest is part of a *long* history to how things have
ended up to the present-day with why I write about these things the way I
do now).
On 2021-05-27 8:57 p.m., Charley Dan wrote:
Uniformed? Who made you judge? I've learnt from three years of Bible
college and Dallas theological Seminary home courses. I'm less Learnt then
the day I started as I found so much more to know. I totally disagree with
most of what you said because my Bible never had issues you mentioned.
Second is more about my relationship with Jesus and how I treat others then
about my head.
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 8:24 PM Aéius Cercle of
Quantum-Note(Law-Division) <Law@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charley, with all due respect, I only wish that you to not continue toLife in one word--LOVE
remain *uninformed*.
Whilst I will acknowledge that God does not make mistakes; whilst I
will acknowledge that God makes NO mistakes, God could even be described
as
a mega-super-ultra-quantum-computer which would explain the *reason*
for such *accuracy*, *omniscience*, *omnipotence*, etc., in «terms»
that are more «objective» to modern-day audiences (I don't buy that «old
man with a long beard sitting on a throne amongst the clouds in the sky»
reference/definition; it would be absolutely laughable to think that some
mere «mortal-form» constitutes the *fullness* of the Eternal
Creator-of-All). Anyway...
Much as you worship and adore and «hold as gospel» the «history»
written in the book (i.e.: bible), listen, man, I used to *live*
in/with a Russian-Orthodox Christian-Community, and «church» for us was a
DAILY activity (like, the *whole entire day*, and, I *assure* you,
*they* most-*certainly know* the «bible» inside-out *much more* than
any average American), and, *frequently* did we go over *much* of the
bible-passages, how-ever, the «history» as we/you/I know it has
*changed* in various forms of alterations to time-lines/time-pockets.
Therefore, I do not *automatically believe* what I read in *any*
«history» book *regardless* of whether it is a «secular» *or*
«religious» text-book, unless I was *personally* there, and, even
*then*, I cannot necessarily trust that «history» won't be or wasn't
or will not be «altered» on the level of time-travel
machines/technologies.
Examples of time-line/time-pocket alterations to «history» *as it
pertains to the bible* are as follows...
*Exhibit 1 [Isaiah 11:6]* I *specifically remember* when the
church-members made reference about the *Lion* shall lay down with
the lamb, how-ever, *regardless of which* version of *any* bible you
grab, NONE of them mention the word «lion» as it was *originally
written* (and no, this is NOT a translation-difference, and it is NOT
a version-difference, but a *literal* *alteration* to *history itself*
on the level of someone using literal time-travel/time-machine
technology).
It *now* reads that the «Wolf shall dwell with the lamb» (good thing
that there are Christian-researchers who have done the work on this so
that
I do not have to put together the compelling presentations for myself
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HujIJ70dA3I&fmt=18>).
*Exhibit 2 :* One does not put win into old *wine-skins* lest the
wine-skin breaks, but, instead, are put into new wine-skins*; **this*
passage,
apparently, now reads as «bottles» *instead of* «wine-skins» (also
another bible-reference that I remember when I lived with that
Russian-community).
*Exhibit 3 :* The famously known Lord's Prayer about «forgive us our
trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us» *was* its
*origina**l* writing; currently, it is written as «forgive us our
*debts* as we forgive our *debtors*» (yes, even in the KJV, believe
it or not).
*Exhibit 4 :* The word «matrix» now shows up in the bible; its
*original* wording was «womb» but, now, for some reason, it is
«matrix» and it *also* now makes NO difference as to *which*
«version» of *any* «bible» that you can pull up for reference
(...probably *!*).
*Non-Bible Exhibit :* Tienanmen-Square incident known as the
«Tank-Man» who *got ran over* during the *original*
time-line/time-pocket, sparking a HUGE world-wide protest/controversy,
something that should be more well-known amongst the «memories» of the
more
«elder» group-members. Now ? Same «Tank-Man» apparently *never got
ran over* during the *current* time-line/time-pocket.
I *could* provide *many more* examples, but, I would rather that any
of you who come across my posts *read* the *entire context* for
yourself *before* you «judge a book by its cover» so to
metaphorically speak; for a *more* «scientifically» obtained «map of
reality» (and, thus, *much more comprehensive* than what is even
written within The Testament of Truth by The Messiah himself) I would
recommend obtaining a copy of «The Cross-Correspondences» archives (held
at
the SPR <https://www.spr.ac.uk/>). The total amount of reading spans
12,000 pages and was assembled by several of the absolutely greatest
scientific (and *honest*) minds who had *ever* walked upon the face
of this/the earth (but it has also been my experience that
«fundamentalists» seem to *insist* on *remaining* in an
«echo-chambre» so I do not necessarily expect anybody who holds onto any
kind of «rigid mental-construct» to go out of their way to necessarily
*inform
themselves* even if I wish to be hopeful that they would at least
*try*).
Anyway, I was earlier intending to quote this particular reference,
but, the Border Decree is also still relevant...:
«
No visitor to any place on earth is an 'illegal' person for having
arrived unannounced or non-permitted as they seek refuge or for any other
reason, for no persons or institutions of man owns any country or nation,
for no 'army of men' or Constitutional papers or 'flag' raised up as a
banner of such abrogates *God's* ownership of every atom of planet
earth.
Let it be now clearly understood that *God* is the absolute owner and
Ruler of earth, not men using force of arms.
»
-Quoted from
http://www.the-testament-of-truth.co.uk/truth/web/sovereign.htm
On 2021-05-27 6:20 p.m., Charley Dan wrote:
WOW! Jews we know where they are going because they were not to mix
with foreigners. Utterly destroy foreigners or I'll judge. It's amazing
the
interpretations one can get without using Genesis to Revelations. Plus
they
had land ownership that eliminated foreigners every fifty years. The land
was granted to tribes and individuals. If one lost their land for unwise
decisions or bad luck. Fifty years it was returned to the original Jews
ancestry. Showing ownership is valid. David who defended the borders of
Israel then became King. He fought Goliath to protect the border.
Personally I'm tired of colleges preaching social justice as it is not
scriptural. Love from my heart and compassion are taught. It also defies
the law of equality that God laid down.
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 5:09 PM Aéius Cercle of
Quantum-Note(Law-Division) <Law@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I will make a brief attempt at trying to clear up a little bit ofOn 2021-05-27 4:16 p.m., Charley Dan wrote:
«confusion» going on here...
One cannot «enter» into a corporate-construct (what many people seem
to think is a country but is not; it is a corporation) without a
contract.
Furthermore, ALL «land» is *owned* by *God*, not any mere mortal man
nor any man-made institution of man
(*cough*such-as*cough*governments*cough*).
Walt Disney (i.e.: the *man*) is NOT the same thing as WALT DISNEY
(the corporate-construct). ANY time you use the word «legal» or «illegal»
it is ALWAYS pertaining to the CORPORATE-construct (in *contrast* to
saying «lawful» or «unlawful»). ANY claim of ownership of *land* by
man or man-made institutions DOES NOT ABROGATE *«**GODS'»** true
ownership* over said land-mass (I suggest everyone ready the
*Border-Patrol
Decree* from The Messiah's writings *before* they end up on the
«wrong side» of God's law come the time when their spirit is «scheduled»
to
depart from their earthly flesh)... that is all I am going to respond
with
for now other than the following quote from yet again The Messiah's
writings *whether or not* you believe that «the second coming» is
*yet* to happen or not :
*~ The 'border' Decree ~*
*Any person operating as a 'border' policing Agent who is empowered
by the 'State' of man to halt or restrict or prohibit the exit or entry
of
any person for any reason onto or away from any national borders is also
*
*'barred' **from entering the State of Heaven, as is any person
demanding any 'fee' for the import or export of any goods by others,*
*The Decree:*
*"To enter Heaven you must withdraw from being a 'user'
of any darkness in your daily deed. The 'control' exercised by
Immigration
& Customs regulation is darkness in action*
*From this moment on all God's children are deemed by God to be
citizens of Earth and able to move anywhere and reside anywhere, and
trade
anywhere, they so wish to without 'let or hindrance' from any other.*
*Any whom for any reason continue to demand or 'ask' others
to first obtain a travel passport or 'permit' or 'visa' prior to
embarkation or disembarkation on airline or ship or passage through a
road
border will 'bar' themselves from entering Heaven and they become a
'citizen slave' of Hell by their own hand.*
-Quoted from
http://www.the-testament-of-truth.co.uk/truth/web/heaven.htm#page%205
Life in one word--LOVE
Not true at all. Because if one entered internationally illegal. The
constitution grants United States authority over it. Then again?
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 4:10 PM Garrett Mersman <c1rcaman48@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Charlie you seemed confused... if you are born on the land ofLife in one word--LOVE
America. You are automatically naturalized and are an American National.
Doesn’t matter your skin color
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 2:50 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
For another perspective from what happened historically. Lincoln
went south that United States rules over the states and they could not
make
their own law as a whole. And required to pay those United starts
servant
taxes to the United States. The Fourteenth amendment is about the
constitution of the United States now applies to the states of United
States because it. rules over the state.
It also made blacks citizens to the United States. I would love the
case with a black Individual being denied the constitution. At this
point
the United States has not challenged that yet. Obama. Talked. Of this
in
his departing speech. "Some people in this country has more rights then
others. Trump. Has referred to it and said Congress needs to take care
of
it. This is not an executive order fixer but congressional Signature.
The people coming here and borned here without naturalization are
in the same boat as blacks. If I was one, I would go get naturalized
because without it. Your children have the same problem and can get
extradited quickly. A man from Norway came here and was to work on
naturalization but did not. His grandson a very good dairy farmer but
got
extradited this year and he never lived in Norway. America is not
perfect.
On May 27, 2021, 13:44 -0600, NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx>,
wrote:
agree. i found the fact the justice noted the BoR was not binding
on the states.
if one opens the commentary, the notation is made that 20th century
courts shy away from this interpretation, based on 14th amendment
citizenship (paraphrase)
------------------------------
*From:* administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on
behalf of Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Thursday, May 27, 2021 2:58 PM
*To:* administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: Barron vs.
Baltimore 1833
Bill of rights is only a light to ones freedom. Unless they are in
a free citizens jurisdiction.
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 12:44 PM Don Mashak <
dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello
Interesting... the Initial assessment that the Bill of Rights does
not apply actions of States...
Though it is incorrect...
I was about to have a hissy until I read deeper into the text
(where it says read more)
I found this there
*Case Commentary*
While the decision was reaffirmed by later 19th-century Supreme
Court cases, the 20th-century Court moved away from Marshall's view.
*It
has found that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
applies
most of the Bill of Rights to the states under a doctrine known as
incorporation. Therefore, Barron, although not explicitly overruled,
probably cannot be considered valid law.*
------------------------------
But I would argue the ruling was wrong from the beginning...
The UNALIENABLE NATURAL RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL exits in a state
of Nature, before the government.
We only agree to give up our rights to act a Judge, Executive and
Legislator when we CONSENT TO BE GOVERNED.
Unalienable Rights do not come from government; depending on your
preference inalienable rights are either inherent and innate in the
individual and/or bestowed by God.
<JeffersonJudgesOligrachyClipArtSmall.jpg>
By definition, unalienable rights are not alienable. They do not
require explicit restatement in every government document. To argue
that
the Bill of Rights (a partial list of Natural rights as evinced by the
9th
Amendment) and damages caused by
alienation of alienation (Takings - 5th Amendment) only apply to
the Federal Government and NOT lower governments is wholly in error.
The unalienable Rights of an individual exist with or without any
government. The difference being in the Pre-government
state it is the obligation of the individual to enforce their
Natural Rights, and after words, it is Government's duty to protect the
inalienable rights of all individuals from the trespasses of others.
<NaturalLawVsProgressivismPurposeOfGovernment07292016.jpg>
Finally, I should have started with this.... Judges are not
God's... We don't have to take their word for anything.
Judges are just as nonvirtuous as the rest of us.. and Progressive
Globalist judges hate the Concept of Natural Rights.
Each of us has the unalienable Natural Right to Establish Truth for
ourselves using our own observations and reasoning.
I previously demonstrated that Judges over 50 years changed
Jurisprudence from the "Pound Principle" where all matter before the
courts
are to be settled on the merits, not technicality; to a new
jurisprudence
where deciding matters on a technicality are much more accepted... as
evince by SCOTUS refusing to hear Election Fraud on Technicality.
With that precedent, why wouldn't they misinterpret the application
of Natural Rights as a means to advance the
Progressive Globalist Insurgency?
<ResolvingCasesOnTheMeritsRevisited03172021.jpg>
Those were my thoughts.
Thank you for your time.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
On Thursday, May 27, 2021, 11:25:05 AM CDT, NELSON DICE <
nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/32/243/
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsupreme.justia.com%2Fcases%2Ffederal%2Fus%2F32%2F243%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C3001c1fb5c754a247d9808d9214188b5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637577387635376637%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=dt%2FuxLH9RjHBleNXzZTRpXzood7KnAYppSzbVSS3USI%3D&reserved=0>
Sent from Mail
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgo.microsoft.com%2Ffwlink%2F%3FLinkId%3D550986&data=04%7C01%7C%7C3001c1fb5c754a247d9808d9214188b5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637577387635376637%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=DI0VsjNdUfSUc%2B8fsOMnA%2BR90r3WBgNOnHNdNvc2qZM%3D&reserved=0>
for Windows 10
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
--
--
