there parables.. they are real in the sense of a parable is a parable a
lie is a lie. a truth is a truth
so yes it tells a story/action with a lesson behind it
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 8:41 PM Paul M <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
are any parables really absolutely 100% true
On Friday, May 28, 2021, 6:53:58 PM CDT, Aéius Cercle of
Quantum-Note(Law-Division) <law@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sorry, you are wrong on this one, for this is literally part of «The Great
Deception» where «even the elect shall be deceived» ...people aren't
mis-remembering (so-called «reality» is not what you seem to think it is).
You should take some this Mandela-Effect Quiz about the Bible then get back
to me IF you some-how managed to score 100% on the first try (extremely
doubtful).
https://testmandelaeffect.com/scripture-kjv-do-you-know-your-bible/
How well do you *really know* the bible, or, perhaps, more accurately,
how *prone/immune* are you to the «wily tricks» of the *ultimate deceiver
of all *(satan/shetani/devil/etc) ? In any case «mis-remembering» is *not*
an adequate answer when literally nearly half the whole entire world
remembers it the *original* way rather than the «time-pocket-changed»
current time-line-configuration way.
On 2021-05-28 4:46 p.m., J_B wrote:
nothing to address. Folks are remembering incorrectly The KJV makes clear
Isaiah 11:6 KJV
“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down
with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and
a little child shall lead them.”
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 6:44 PM Aéius Cercle of Quantum-Note(Law-Division)
<Law@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Alas, *few *(if any) on earth can claim to be «sin-free», and, thus, that
they are *not prone* to the «errors» otherwise typically made by
«sinners» and, alas, I have *yet* to see the «Mandela-Effect issues»
addressed as it pertains to particularly the passage about the *Lion
shall lay down with the lamb* (once somebody has a screen-shot of a photo
of that page/passage where it reads *lion* and *not* «wolf» *then* I will
have to re-consider my apprehensions, but, until then, *nobody* has even
*tried* to address it thus far). Not sure what I am referring to or why ?
Listen to and read the words in the following video...
https://www.bitchute.com/video/SIxNWntbtU4m/
I believe this has also been the case for various/certain segments of
so-called «Law» (including its history). As some of you know, just like
prosecutors prosecute based in text-information presented before them
(regardless of whether it si accurate/truthful or not), legislators
legislate based on historic text-references that are available to them
(regardless of whether it is truthful/accurate or not). This is something
that can and does have serious implications and shouldn't be over-looked
but I will hold off on getting into too much detail until for another day
when I might have enough spare-time to be able to obtain some compelling
evidence for Mandela-Effects as it pertains to Law.
On 2021-05-28 8:43 a.m., J_B 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 to
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 of
«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
On 2021-05-27 4:16 p.m., Charley Dan wrote:
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 of 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
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE