Nazarene Space

The "Whole Truth" and "Nothing but the Truth"

Imagine yourself in this situation. A bailiff asks you to place your right hand on a book he says is the "Bible" and repeat after him before you are allowed to speak to the presiding judge. 

________________________________

Oath:

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Note: In some cases "so help you God" may be replaced with "under pains and penalties of perjury".

Oath (California):

You do solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this court shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God.

_________________________________

Now, knowing scripture advises us NOT to make oaths...

Jas 5:12 But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by the heaven or by the earth or with any other oath. But let your Yes be Yes, and your No, No, lest you fall into judgment.

Furthermore, knowing (voweless) scripture tells us not to use the false title, "GxD" when referring to the Eternal...

Isa 65:11  “But you are those who forsake יהוה, who forget My set-apart mountain, who prepare a table for Gad ( לגד ), and who fill a drink offering for Meni.

...Comments please! How would you respond?

Views: 245

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Matt: 10:17 Take care to yourselves of men, lest they deliver you up to the courts, and scourge you with whips in the assemblies.
18: And you will be led unto officers and kings for My sake, for a testimony to them and the Goyim
. (HRV)

In court yesterday to plead on a petty "improper pass on right" traffic ticket. (perfectly legal where I was)  I noticed there were guns in the room! This made me wonder if they thought they were somehow morally superior to myself. I squashed those thoughts when the "judge" tried to "swear me in" by asking him why he was asking me to "raise  my right hand" and repeat after him and initiate some sort of "oath" when The Book says not to do that!  He quickly lowered his hand and did not threaten me, YET with "Contempt". (...I eased his mind by stating "I always tell the truth, an oath is not required")

Protect and KNOW your rights as a human being with the intent of going through life treating others they way you wish to be treated. Here's a good place to start IMO. http://marcstevens.net/

Now, knowing scripture advises us NOT to make oaths...

reply:

to make things simple it was "advised" not to swear at all. but the Torah

does not forbid swearing for those whose intents were righteous and truthful.

"Thou shalt fear Hashem thy G-d; and Him shalt thou serve,

and by His name shalt thou swear." Devarim 6:13

swearing makes civil intercourse convenient, by it the virtues

are strengthened and made more relevant to human conduct.

imagine, you obtain mortgage, loan, credit or buy house or

real property by signing a document that says--

   "Subscribed and sworn to before me..."

putting an end to all unwanted doubts and suspicion

to your integrity.

although, personally i don't need to swear, because i take

every word i utter as solemn itself.

shalom.

Quote:
The Torah does not forbid swearing for those whose intents were righteous and truthful.

Thanks beryl, just so no one is confused concerning "those who's intents" were in this instance, here's a quote from a book I highly recommend for anyone being attacked by some bureaucrat (..to whom I will never swear an oath) ....

"Adventures in Legal Land" (Marc Stevens)

When going to any court you enter what I call "Legal Land". "Legal Land" is where words and phrases mean whatever a "judge" or other lawyer thinks they should mean. This is a fantasy world where theft and violence are OK. if you have a badge or a fancy political title. It's a magical world where FACTS are OPINIONS and OPINIONS are FACTS. (emphasis mine)

(Is is any wonder judges and prosecutors have given themselves immunity from prosecution.) 

.

well that's a good example of "bad intents" anyway. :)

i don't subscribe to the statement that says "FACTS are OPINIONS and OPINIONS are FACTS"

that is pure "falsehood" jumbled in different words; and that is an enemy of Hashem the G-d of Truth.



Mikha El said:

Quote:
The Torah does not forbid swearing for those whose intents were righteous and truthful.

Thanks beryl, just so no one is confused concerning "those who's intents" were in this instance, here's a quote from a book I highly recommend for anyone being attacked by some bureaucrat (..to whom I will never swear an oath) ....

"Adventures in Legal Land" (Marc Stevens)

When going to any court you enter what I call "Legal Land". "Legal Land" is where words and phrases mean whatever a "judge" or other lawyer thinks they should mean. This is a fantasy world where theft and violence are OK. if you have a badge or a fancy political title. It's a magical world where FACTS are OPINIONS and OPINIONS are FACTS. (emphasis mine)

(Is is any wonder judges and prosecutors have given themselves immunity from prosecution.) 

.

btw, where and what land is it that where you find a civilization without rule of law

and without legal interpreters of law? tell me.

It's called Libertopia here on earth. (Non-existent in the US, ...aside from in the hearts of true freedom seekers) It's a goal of all those with the "disease" of leave-me-aloneism and have strong desires for a longer leash.

If you haven't been contacted by some Statist in uniform yet, give it time, it will happen. Usually it's to extort "money" or redirect you to make you feel inferior to their Statist religion despite you harming no one.  "Law" or "statutes" (...aside from those that harmonize with scripture) made by men in robes and long dead lawyers are opinions. This being the case, do they have the jurisdiction they claim they have? I contend they do not. Hence the question to ask them... "Where is your proof I am subject to your constitution and codes when I am physically in X. ( X = the "state" you are in when attacked) 

In case your of the opinion a volunteer society cannot happen....

http://www.notbeinggoverned.com/anarchy-never-been-tried-part-i/

:) anarchism is an obsolete philosophy. it became irrelevant instantly because of its obvious

self-contradiction. it offers freedom, primarily to an individual, secondarily to the collective organ.

yet, the fact that freedom is here deified as the sole cosmic moral dictum it diminishes the the value

of individual security. the social contract of Jean Jack Rousseau cannot satisfy the natural need for

man to be secured in his person and property without externally imposed norms that a well organized

state alone can guaranty.

there is though a society of individualist anarchism, it exists just around us, but not among the realm of

rational mammals... it exists merely among the societies of animals and beasts.



Mikha El said:

It's called Libertopia here on earth. (Non-existent in the US, ...aside from in the hearts of true freedom seekers) It's a goal of all those with the "disease" of leave-me-aloneism and have strong desires for a longer leash.

If you haven't been contacted by some Statist in uniform yet, give it time, it will happen. Usually it's to extort "money" or redirect you to make you feel inferior to their Statist religion despite you harming no one.  "Law" or "statutes" (...aside from those that harmonize with scripture) made by men in robes and long dead lawyers are opinions. This being the case, do they have the jurisdiction they claim they have? I contend they do not. Hence the question to ask them... "Where is your proof I am subject to your constitution and codes when I am physically in X. ( X = the "state" you are in when attacked) 

It appears to me may be mistaken on the meaning of the term, "anarchism"?  The Greek word simply means "without/no rulers". (In my mind it means without pagan "rulers".) Lets try a different word, how about "abolitionist". Sound better to you? To me this term means "no form of slavery". Agreed? Is taxation a form of slavery to you?

"Diminish the value" and "well organized State"? Your kidding right? Apparently you are under the assumption the "government" has a duty to protect you and others? Have you tried suing them after your car is stolen? Not going to happen. Check every court case you wish and you will see that the "government" as no legal obligation to protect anyone. With the highest per capita incarceration rate of any "country" in the world, can we with all honesty say this is the "Land of the Free? (Sorry, I don't share that delusion). The "state" is a figment of the imagination forced upon us by the "hounding fathers." 

I also don't agree that "Jean Rousseau" was someone intent to be truly free from government interference. The desire to be free may, as you say exist in "animals and beasts", but I can also most assuredly tell you it exists in the hearts of those of us that wish to be free from the shackles of the ever increasing encroachment/expenses Statism forces upon us. Speak to the many people that have their lives torn apart by the "security of the state", and you will learn the truth of the intent on those hellbent on destroying the desire of TRUE FREEDOM.  Check here for further info..  http://zerogov.com/

quote:

:) anarchism is an obsolete philosophy. it became irrelevant instantly because of its obvious

self-contradiction. it offers freedom, primarily to an individual, secondarily to the collective organ.

yet, the fact that freedom is here deified as the sole cosmic moral dictum it diminishes the the value

of individual security. the social contract of Jean Jack Rousseau cannot satisfy the natural need for

man to be secured in his person and property without externally imposed norms that a well organized

state alone can guaranty.

there is though a society of individualist anarchism, it exists just around us, but not among the realm of

rational mammals... it exists merely among the societies of animals and beasts.

"but I can also most assuredly tell you it exists in the hearts of those of us that wish to be free from the shackles of the ever increasing encroachment/expenses Statism forces upon us. Speak to the many people that have their lives torn apart by the "security of the state", and you will learn the truth of the intent on those hellbent on destroying the desire of TRUE FREEDOM. "

--ha ha ha ha ha. i am quite convinced of this point. partly you are right. but only to the extent of which government he/she is in. from your point of argument, allow me to opine that for us living in the united states we are better off choose  anarchism? ha ha ha

Only partially correct? Please show me where I have been led astray! 

"Better off" without the lairs, killers and thieves (...yes the cops, lawyers and judges lie, kill and steal and some have even given themselves "immunity from prosecution!)  pretending to be some sort of spiritual authority over us? Of course we would be! A volunteer society would flourish without the encumbrances of "government". Imagine for just a second how if even a few of the over 90% of people who are part of the prison population locked up for non-violent "offenses" could have changed things here for the better by being doctors or whatever.  How anyone can maintain the dual standard required to turn a blind eye to the thousands of injustices that occur in "government" daily is unfortunate for those that think they can maintain a semblance of freedom while simultaneously thinking they need protection from something from someone that as I have mentioned has no legal obligation to protect you. (Care to hear about some of the thuggery going around you yet unreported to the masses?)

Here try this.... Here's a link to a man that lived shortly after the writing of the 4 pages we have mistakenly clung to (...the "constitution") all these years. He was a lawyer that attempted to run a mail delivery business proving he could do things more efficiently than the "government" could. He did, yet they shut him down and wiped him out. Suffice it for now to say unjustly so. Being a brilliant lawyer, he has written volumes. One is on U-tube. Be sure to take notes and study what he is telling you so that you can know for certain what you, any many others,  are hopelessly clinging to. Yah help us all!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWESql2dXoc

         

Mikhael,

  • Only partially correct? Please show me where I have been led astray! 

indeed, only partially. because human civilization must necessarily have a government at this stage.

i did not say you are astrayed –i leave that to your own vigilance, out of respect.



  • "Better off" without the lairs, killers and thieves

so you have to go for a stronger government under a stronger law.



  • (...yes the cops, lawyers and judges lie, kill and steal and some have even given themselves "immunity from prosecution!)  pretending to be some sort of spiritual authority over us?

your vehement ridicule of these professional betrays a desperate experience. quite opposite to what i have observed. for indeed if there were no judges in your country i doubt if you ever find the convenience of peaceful retire right there.

where i live no lawyer no judge ever pretended to be spiritual authority. where do you live?



  • Of course we would be! A volunteer society would flourish without the encumbrances of "government". Imagine for just a second how if even a few of the over 90% of people who are part of the prison population locked up for non-violent "offenses" could have changed things here for the better by being doctors or whatever. 

you have rightly said... imagine. for it can only exist in imaginations for the next millennium.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service