No Rings, No Drama, Just Dominion

[The Revolting Man]

Sigh. Because you don't try to understand the foundational issue. (And you won't ever listen to me anyway, but others here might.)

I might have hoped that when it came to "firearms" at least (note: that term is NOT in the Bill of Rights - it is a 'term of art,') that Zec might understand there is a difference between "de facto" Law and 'de jure.'

I can show you in genuine print that the Right to "keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." And infringed (see Webster, 1828, and law texts of the period) was the strongest prohibition the Founders could find in the English language.

But they do it anyway now. How?


FIREARMS

...armed Citizens are considered more serious.

How did a form of Government with a specific, total PROHIBITION against doing exactly what they are now doing manage somehow to acquire "jurisdiction" to do that against the ONLY type of property actually enumerated in the ENTIRE DOCUMENT about which it is said they shall NOT?

They didn't "repeal" anything!

They got there by working over time... "to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws."

Free citizens own property. Subjects do not.

Free citizens do not ask permission. Not to protect themselves and their families, not to marry,* and not to "buy or sell."

If you do not understand that distinction now, and what "choose life," means, you will not be able to recognize the deception that will get the vast majority of 'xtians' to willingly accept a jurisdiction that will require a certain Mark, and fairly soon.


------------------------------
* Except from the fathers involved, of course, as per Instruction.

What? Your claim is that a lawless government that violates its own founding documents will some how be stymied by your refusal to cede jurisdiction?

There is nothing in a marriage license that references jurisdiction. There is nothing in marriage law that would stop an unmarried couple from accessing the court system to dissolve their bonds. This is just nuts. No amount of obfuscation or deflection changes that.

Our government is a “law” unto itself. It does not care about sovereign citizen style weirdness. That stuff doesn’t work, has never worked and will never work and if you doubt me then I dare you to tell a judge in a custody dispute that he doesn’t have jurisdiction. Let’s see if you can get the case dismissed.

 

[ASyers41]

I just wanted to contribute one thought here on the Public School System at least here in the United States. The Public School System literally says once they are dropped off they are property of the government until they are returned to your care it’s in the small details that no one reads when they register their child for school.

 

[Mark C]

What? Your claim is that a lawless government that violates its own founding documents will some how be stymied by your refusal to cede jurisdiction?

You are so full of your own BS you can't see straight.

Whom do you trust? YHVH or man? "Show me your faith by your ACTIONS."

This isn't about what Big Brother can, and will, do to you, and whether your almighty hubris can stop it.

It's whether or not you trust Him enough to walk in obedience. 'Cause if you don't, you haven't got a prayer surviving what's coming anyway. And He says so.

 

[FollowingHim]

That evidence has been provided before, here, and at length.

Furthermore, I have done national radio shows on the topic, and made the case at length, for over twenty years

And I am very familiar with your radio show, being once a regular listener, and have gone there seeking answers to things before. Never found the answers I was seeking, because everywhere you discuss this issue you do exactly what you are doing in this very discussion: talk all around the issue with many, many words but never actually prove your point. I am thoroughly persuaded that there is zero value in listening to hours of you talking in the hope of getting the answers I am asking you for, because I don't believe the answers will be there either.

If you do have an answer, prove me wrong by giving it - not a link to 2 hours of waffly talk that you claim includes the answer but actually never does, give the actual answer itself. Or if you don't intend to answer the question, either because you have no answer or don't want to give it for some reason, just stop talking.

 

[The Revolting Man]

You are so full of your own BS you can't see straight.

Whom do you trust? YHVH or man? "Show me your faith by your ACTIONS."

This isn't about what Big Brother can, and will, do to you, and whether your almighty hubris can stop it.

It's whether or not you trust Him enough to walk in obedience. 'Cause if you don't, you haven't got a prayer surviving what's coming anyway. And He says so.

I’m not Eve sure what you’re claiming but I think knots that marriage licenses are sinful maybe? Do you have a proof text for this at all?

 

[Mark C]

And I am very familiar with your radio show, being once a regular listener...

I don't believe you. And you've lied before. And you make this claim NOW?

You got more of an answer than your sarcasm merited directly above. I cited law. I cited court precedent. I cited related examples. @ASyers41 above pointed out the example of the public cesspool schools, where "Gun-Free Killing Zones" have proven an invitation to mass murder. You can't, or won't, see any of them.

HaSatan (the Adversary, and his minions) is required, I believe, to give warning, just as (Amos) YHVH does nothing but He first declares His intentions through His servants, the prophets.

But he doesn't spell out the details for the blind!

He is, after all, a Deceiver, and "comes but to steal, kill, and destroy."

The modern American legal term is that you "knew, or should have known." And so, says Yahushua, you "are without excuse."

There is NO 'magic bullet,' and if you'd actually listened I wouldn't have to repeat that, either.

Furthermore, if I reference His Instruction ('torah') - you and I both know you or your Revolting Mini-Me would censor it before it could be read! So, are you baiting me (again)?!!!

And I've already made the point, from Romans 6:16. Since you didn't evidently bother to look it up, here it is:

"Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience to righteousness?

The answer is so clear, and so simple, you both refuse to see it:

"You can NOT serve two masters!"

And if you can't see the "fine print", the 'adherent contracts,' the strings attached, to asking permission from ANOTHER MASTER to do that which our Creator, YHVH, has given you EVERY Right to do -- NOBODY here can help you!

 

[The Revolting Man]

"Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience to righteousness?

What you’re not showing is how a marriage license is presenting ourselves as slaves to obey unrighteousness. There is no connection between this verse and a marriage license.