What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

So there's something you just HAVE to get off your chest, and it doesn't fit into any of the above catagories? All spam, rants, and random chatter belongs in here.
scott
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:41 pm

What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by scott » Thu Dec 26, 2013 4:27 pm

What’s Your Name? The Legal Fiction.

The purpose of this post is to hopefully get sound input from other people who have had experiences of the 'presumptions' that are immediately being fabricated at a stop (or in court), in order to further educate other men and women,as well as myself.
Any time you even talk to a cop or a judge they are always presuming that you are one of their subjects (citizen, resident, person, driver, nom deguerre or some type of commercial corporate legal fiction.) When you 'answer 'to the 'name' you are agreeing to their 'presumption' that you are one of the above.

I don't think this is a trivial matter. The voluntary act of identifying yourself in a legal contractual setting without proper status declaration will continue your enslavement to the system. We are created by God (not the state). I don't believe we were ever meant to have become the fictions, persons, and entities that are so common today.

“The giving of a 'name','birth date','address', and or 'SSN' all form a 'legal description' of a 'legal personality' and a 'legal fiction'. They are all identifiers that deceitful men use to confirm one to be the property of the Babylonian system, which created and uses those identifiers to mark its property.”

“Who you are is an issue designed to aid in the deception of creating a 'legal fiction'. That is why they always start with that issue by asking for a “name”, or confirmation of a name. Virtually any response you offer in direct response to the issue of a name can only be accepted by them as an offer of evidence concerning the issue of the “name”, not the issue of jurisdiction.”

“Legal fiction. n. A ‘presumption’ of fact ‘assumed’ by a court for convenience, consistency or to achieve justice. There is an old adage: 'Fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.'”
From Oran's Dictionary of the Law, 1999, this definition of legal fiction is found: “A legal fiction is an assumption that something that is (or may be ) false or nonexistent is true or real. Legal fictions are assumed or invented to help do justice.

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, 1996, states: legal fiction: “something assumed in law to be fact irrespective of the truth or accuracy of that assumption.”

The way I see it the ‘legal fiction’ creates a jurisdiction issue. For example the new government health care laws apply to ‘legal fictions’ only. They don't apply to you unless you have entered into an agreement or contract that you consent to.
In the last several years of my studies I think one of the most important issues (after you have come to terms with ‘Who’ you are in Christ and your Creator) is, are you a flesh and blood man on the land, or are you a ‘legal fiction’ person?
My goal here is to encourage you as a ‘lawful’ Christian to seek this matter out, because it is critical in relation to how you are going to stand when brought before the magistrates.

This is hardly a complete analysis of the 'legal fiction' issue. Hopefully its a start, with the help of others that I know are seeking first the kingdom of God, to bring more knowledge to light on the subject.

I believe that the use of the 'legal fiction' is one of the most detrimental deceptions that 'lawful' Christians needs to become wise to. And if we are ever going to be free of the conflicting, arbitrary, laws of man that change on a political whim, we are going to have to be able to rebut all presumptions that get us entangled with jurisdictions other than 'standing' in the kingdom of God.

From several men I personally know that are on the same page, we have noticed that out of 10 encounters the three times that anyone ended up in jail was when the 'legal fiction name' was established. By established I mean the commercial policy enforcement agent found some type of evidence on the 'person' or in the 'vehicle' that allowed the cop to build a 'presumption' of a 'legal fiction person.' Or the man was identified as a 'legal person' that had been incarcerated before. At every encounter there is a lot of effort by the cop to obtain a 'name', 'address' and 'birth date'. I think these are the three main identifiers to get positive id. The men that successfully stood their ground as a 'lawful' Christian were released at the stop. I can't say this is always going to be the case, but I do find it very interesting.

Again, my goal with this post is to encourage people to share experiences or thought that would help people to see what's happening in this area and ways to prevent being the victims of 'presumed' creations (dead I might add) of the fictional state.
Praise be to our Creator.

Scott
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by notmartha » Thu Dec 26, 2013 8:50 pm

This article is excerpted from: The Words of His Kingdom and the words of the world compared. Sorry, I don't know who wrote it.


What's in a Name?

A name has a life of its own. To know the name of someone gives insight into the nature of the one in question. The name is not only a label, but a description. Our modern tendency to give nicknames often is an attempt to describe someone. Knowing someone's name places him in your power; he is compelled to hear and obey when his name is called. He has to respond when his name is spoken. After all, if you call his name, doesn't he stop and turn around? In short, he whose name is known could be controlled.

The value of a name is easily seen in everyday attempts to communicate. We give things a name to avoid the need of describing the item every time we refer to it.

The Miracle Worker told of Ann Sullivan's heroic struggle to educate Helen Keller. She determined to bring the child, Helen, out of her soundless, sightless dungeon of isolation. Patiently and persistently Ann brought the little girl into touch-contact with countless articles, slowly tracing out the letters in the name of the item into Helen's open palm. Countless times the routine was repeated without the message coming across. Ann felt that if Helen could only catch the idea that everything has a name, then real communication could begin. The name would be the mental link-up with the physical object. The mind could retain the name, the hands could explore the object, and the corresponding link-up would be the lesson. But the key to understanding was the name. Finally, one day, while water was running across her hand and Ann was patiently tracing w-a-t-e-r across the palm, the realization came to Helen, "It has a name, and its name is water." After that, the floodgates to learning were literally opened and her questing mind eagerly absorbed everything.

In scriptural times, someone's name stood for the whole character of the one involved. To know a name was to know all about ones character. It served as a window into one's nature and personality. Character is not communicable. Godly character is not personal; it is from above. But the name represents the character. To tell someone your name was to tell him a great deal about you. Anyone who knew a great deal about you had some power over you. He knew your strengths and weaknesses, likes and dislikes. In short, he knew what made you tick. You were vulnerable. You were in his power. To give someone your name was to take him into your confidence. You would not do that unless you trusted him. In other words, a name was valuable, so it was guarded very closely in ancient times.

Scripturally, a name represents one's character. This is why God changed the name of His servants (Genesis 17:5,15; 32:28; 35:10), and told parents what to name their unborn child (Genesis 16:11; 17:19, 1 Chronicles 22:9, Isaiah 7:14, Hosea 1:4,6,9, Matthew 1:21,24, Luke 1:13,31), and why men have chosen one name over another for their child (Genesis 35:18, Luke 1:59-60), and why name's of cities have been changed (Genesis 28:19): to reflect their character!

In our culture, the first thing we do when we meet someone is tell them our name. Our names are little more than a social convenience now. That's why we have so docilely accepted being assigned numbers in place of our names, such as social security numbers, credit card numbers, drivers license numbers, etc. Our names are no longer intended to describe us, but merely to identify us, personally.

But God calls His servants by name (Isaiah 43:1; 45:3; John 10:3, Revelation 2:17). Everyone's name is sacred, an icon of the follower of Christ. It demands respect as a sign of the dignity of the one who bears it, having received it from the One who gave it.

If somebody (i.e., kings, governments, etc.) wants to acquire jurisdiction over you, the first thing they must do is re-name you; to mark you as their property. That's the first thing that king Nebuchadnezzar did with Daniel and the three young men he brought into his kingdom. He re-named them, so that he would be able to have, or acquire, jurisdiction over them (Daniel 1:7). But all he had was jurisdiction over the name that he created. Had the young men not answered to that name, then there would be no substance behind the form that he created. Only when you answer to a name do you give life to it, otherwise it's a dead thing.

Whenever someone's name is replaced, it is usually spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. This is what the translators of the King James Bible did; they replaced God's name with ALL CAPS. The name for God, "YHVH" (Hebrew word #3068) originally appeared in the Old Testament texts 6,519 times! But God's name was replaced, at some point in history, with a title. In the King James Bible, when you see the word "GOD" or "LORD" in all capital letters, it means this was where the name for God, "YHVH," originally appeared in the Hebrew texts. And when "God" or "Lord" are spelled in upper and lower case letters, they were translated, not from "YHVH," but from the corresponding Hebrew titles of ‘God’ and ‘Lord.’

Dear reader, has your name been replaced as well? Here's a question for you. Have you ever, in your entire life, 'signed' your name in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS? When you write to your family or friends, do you refer to yourself in an all caps signature? Of course not! Haven't you always used both upper and lower case letters to sign your name? Yes. And why is that? Because that is what you have been taught since a child. Because the standard Rule of Law governing the use of English Grammar states that the correct Capitalization of Proper Names must begin with a capital letter, and the rest of the name must be spelled in smaller case letters. At Law, this lets others know you are an entity created by God, and not an entity created by man.

Now there are, believe it or not, entities created by man. Corporations, for example, are known as 'persons' created by the government. They are created on a piece of paper and brought into existence by the government. To differentiate between those created by God and those artificial persons created by the government, those created by the government have their names spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. This lets others know that this person does not have a soul, but this is a fictitious entity created for the purpose of making a profit. Corporations are engaged in capital, thus, by spelling incorporated names in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS, this shows the world that they are involved in capital, in profit.

The following six definitions are taken from Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988:

Capital: "Wealth (money or property) owned or used in business by a person, corporation, etc. Any source of benefit or assistance". Page 207.

Capitalize: "To print or write a word or words in capital letters." Page 208.

Capitalization: "Converting something into capital. Using capital letters in writing and printing." Page 208.

Now, compare how a "CORPORATION'S NAME" is spelled with how someone's "Proper Name" is lawfully spelled:

Capital Letter: "Used to begin a sentence or proper name". P. 208.

Proper: "Designating a noun that names a specific individual. ["Donald," and "Rover," are proper nouns, sometimes called proper names] (opposed to common)." Page 1078.

Common: "Belonging equally to, or shared by, two or more or by all (as opposed to proper)." Page 281.

Notice very careful that a capital letter is used to begin a proper name or proper noun. A corporation is not a proper noun, because it does not exist, except in fiction. You cannot touch it, see it, hear it, smell it, or taste it. It is brought into existence by a piece of paper. Corporations, in fact, can have no possible existence until it is given a name. The importance of names is thus manifest. Also, the name of a corporation is shared by two or more people, because a business cannot be incorporated unless there are two or more people running this business. So it is a 'common' name (see above definition), and is not a 'proper' name.

Now, if you look at all documents issued by the government, you will notice the names that appear on them are spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS! (Please pause for a moment and look at your "name" on your drivers license, social security card, credit cards, etc., right now). What this means, at law, is that the entity that is named on this piece of paper is engaged in capital! It is a creature of the government (now having "legal"personality), and not a created vessel of God. In order to get a license or other documents from the government, one must substitute one's lawfully spelled name for a fictitiously spelled name. You must deny the name given to you by God, and accept a name given to you by Caesar in its place. Your name is not spelled in all capital letters, therefore, this name is not yours! That is not who you are. And you must lie and say that this name is yours to get a license, permit, certificate, document, etc. The name that appears on all pieces of paper issued by the government is called a misnomer, at law:

Misnomer: "The act of applying a wrong name…to a person. An error in naming a person or place in a legal document." Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, page 867.

Misnomer: "Mistake in name; giving incorrect name to a person in accusation, indictment, pleading, deed or other instrument. Under rules of practice in some states, such is ground for dismissal by motion. In most states, however, as well as in the federal courts, such misnomer can be corrected by amendment of the pleadings." Black's Law Dictionary, 6th edition, page 1000.

"Misnomer is a good plea in abatement, for since names are the only marks and indicia which human kind can understand each other by, if the name be omitted or mistaken, there is a complaint against nobody. And…if the defendant has been arrested by a wrong name, the court will set aside the proceedings…and discharge him if in custody." 4 Bacon's Abridgment, (D) of Misnomer, and want of Addition (1832), page 7.

For those of you who believe that it does not matter how your name is spelled, and that a court will not dismiss a case in which the name of the accused is spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS, read this clipping from the front page of this newspaper, which is read world wide:

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT? A man said government court filings referred to him in bold, capital letters, instead of upper and lower case letters. Thus, he said, those filings were aimed at someone who is "either a dead person or a corporate fiction," not him. The court disagreed and dismissed his case." The Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, June 21, 2000, page 1.

Occasionally, one's name is spelled in upper and lower case letters, but always with a middle initial! In Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, page 867., an initial is defined as "a capital, or uppercase, letter."

In other words, an initial indicates capital, or commercial activity. In this case, the Godly name is still denied because the courts have ruled "that an initial cannot be regarded as a Christian name." Reg. V. Bradley, 3E. & E. 634. And, "An abbreviation is no part of the description." Reg. V. Tugwell, 3 Q.B., 704.

For example, if you abbreviate your (First Middle Last) name, so that there are only three letters total (i.e., F.M.L.), would you claim that these three initials are your name? Of course not. And neither is a middle initial a name. You were not given an initial at birth, you were given a name. An initial is given by Caesar, your name is given by God. (However, if your middle name is indeed a single letter, don't put a period after it, because that would indicate that your single letter is an initial). Therefore, a Godly name with an initial in its place is a misnomer, in law:

"We are of the opinion that the word 'misnomer', which means a naming amiss, is wide enough to cover the faulty indication of a Christian name by means of the initial. That it was not a mere case of misnomer, because the initials were no name at all." The Queen v. Plenty, Court of Queen's Bench, 4 C.Q.B. 46. Vide, Bacon's Abridgment of the Law, Misnomer.

"A person's name consists in law, of a given or Christian name, and a family surname. It has been said that a description or abbreviation [*initial] is not the equivalent of a name…The Christian or first name is, in law, denominated the "proper name," and has been used from early times to distinguish a particular individual from his fellows…Originally, it was the only name which was recognized in [*the common] law, and consequently, it has always been considered an essential part of a person's name. The giving of a wrong Christian or given name to a person, in legal proceedings or in conveyances, generally constitutes an error which may invalidate a judgment or deprive the record of an instrument of its effect as notice. It has been held that the law knows but one Christian name of a single individual." 57 American Jurisprudence 2d, Sections 1 and 4.

One's 'Christian name' is one's given name. A servant of Christ does not have a last name. The last name, or family name, belongs to your family. It existed long before you were born. Therefore, it is not you and it does not describe you. It is not a 'God Given Name', but a name designated by your family relating, usually, to a previous craft or commercial profession, or to a former master, or place of residence. In addition, since a family name is a common name, shared by two or more people, and not a proper name (see definitions above), it is considered an incorporated name under man's law. Thus, a family name is a corporation, it's an incorporated name, a family name is combining a group of people into a unit:

Incorporated: "Combined into one body or unit; united." Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, p. 684.

In short, a family name is considered a 'legal fiction' in man's law. Your family name describes your relationship to a lineage for historical purposes, but your only lineage that is important, in Law, is that relating to our Lord and Saviour Christ Jesus. That is not to say that your family is not, or should not be, important to you. But it is man's law that makes these distinctions important. They look to earthly connections to attach 'legal personality' to you. This is the mark of 'the old man' of the world, better known as a 'natural man,' 'natural person' or 'human being.' This is how they acquire jurisdiction over the servants of Christ.
Notice these three definitions taken from Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988:

Christian name: "The baptismal or given name, as distinguished from the family name". Page 249.

Family name: "Surname. A name or epithet added to a person's given name". Page 489.

Surname: "The family name, or last name, as distinguished from a given name". Page 1347.

This is why, when marriage occurs, the woman keeps her given name, but leaves her last name with her family, because her last name belongs to the family, and not to her. This is why adopted boys leave their last name with their former family and adopt, or 'incorporate', the name of their new family, but they keep their given name. This is why all characters in the Scripture (David, Abraham, Moses, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Mary Magdalene, Judas Iscariot, Simon Peter, etc.) use only their given names, and not their family names, because last names belong to the earthly family. Even in all the genealogies of family trees listed throughout the entire Scripture, the family names are never mentioned in these genealogies! Jesus said one's true family are those who do the will of God (Matthew 12:49-50, Luke 8;21), and not necessarily those who are blood related. So, by using a last name, surname, or family name, you are stating that your conversation is of the world, and not of heaven (Philippians 3:20).

"The christian or baptismal name is, of course, really the name of importance and, surprising as it may seem, it does not matter in law nearly so much about the added or sur-name. The Christian name is therefore placed in the forefront, and incidentally is an essential part of the evidence of every witness in Court…Everything must have a name. Many things cannot, in fact, exist without a name. However much dignity and importance there may be in a corporation, it can have no possible existence until it is given a name. The importance of names are thus manifest, and it is a little surprising that apparently no attempt has before been made to deal with their full legal aspect." Judge Edgar Dale, Foreward to "The Law of Names," by Anthony Linell (1938).

Avoid giving a Name

"Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?" James 2:7

A bondman in and of Jesus the Christ has a name given to him by God (Isaiah 62:2, Revelation 2:17). He does not have a name given to him by Caesar. Therefore, if one from a foreign jurisdiction asks to see your "identification," or asks for your name, let them know that you are a bondman of Christ Jesus, and being such, you have not been given a name by Caesar, and therefore you do not have a name that can be rendered to him (Matthew 22:21, Mark 12:17, Luke 20:25).

The implications of giving your so-called "name" to anyone, especially when dealing with the imperial commercial courts and governments of Washington D.C., the States, the Counties, and the Cities, can be quite devastating.

When you are confronted by a 'person' asking if your name is 'so and so,' you should not deny or confirm it, because that would cause "joinder," joining you to the controversy (which may give them jurisdiction over you). You must answer as our Lord answered many questions. For example, "I also will ask you one thing" (Matthew 21:24). In this way, you transfer the burden from yourself to the intruder. What that question is that you ask will be put in your mouth by the Holy Spirit; it is not for me to put words in your mouth.

However, possible responses to those who ask if your name is 'so and so' may be, "You say I am," or "Who told you I was?" or "Whatever gave you that idea?" or “You don't know who I am?” or "Who do you minister for?" or "I can only render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's. Since I do not have a name given to me by Caesar, I do not have a name that can be rendered to you,” or simply say, "You don't know who I am and I don't know who you are, therefore I have nothing to say to you because you are a stranger and I don't talk to strangers," and it can be continued by importing God's Law into the situation by saying "Let's search the Scriptures and find out who is who here."

The rebuttal by many to this mode of the "name game" is always the same: "It is okay to give your name to Caesar, because Jesus did when the Roman soldiers sought Him at John 18:4-8." This is incorrect, because when we compare the King James Version with the original Greek text, Jesus did not answer to the name.

"Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon Him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered Him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am [he]. And Judas also, which betrayed Him, stood with them. As soon then as He had said unto them, I am [he], they went backward, and fell to the ground. Then asked He them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus answered, I have told you that I am [he]: if therefore ye seek Me, let these go their way:" John 18:4-8

Note that in the King James Version text, the "he" in "I am [he]" is interpolated (added by the translators; does not exist in the Greek text). And we see that the first time He said "I am" to the Roman soldiers who had come to arrest Him, at verse 6, "they went backward, and fell to the ground." This occurred because they were speaking to the same "I am" as Moses spoke to at Exodus 3:14:

"And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and He said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent Me unto you."

And note that our Lord asked them a second time, at verse 7, who they were seeking. If He was answering to the name of "Jesus of Nazareth" the first time, why would He ask them a second time who they were seeking?

When one asks your name, they obviously don't know you. If this is the case, they are from a different or foreign jurisdiction, outside of your community and the Law you minister for. By answering to the name that comes out of their mouth, you answer to the fiction that that foreign jurisdiction has created for their purposes. By answering to the name, you remove yourself from being "conformed to the image of His Son" (Romans 8:29) to being conformed to the image of Caesar, and thereby give jurisdiction to those who regulate natural persons, human beings, and others of like 'species.' As they put it, you become one of their "right and duty bearing units."

Legal Definition of Names

Name: "A designation by which a person, natural or artificial, is known." A Dictionary of Law, (1893), William C. Anderson, Page 694.

In Caesar's eyes, if you give them a name, you are describing yourself as a "natural person," which is the same thing as saying that you "receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God" (1 Corinthians 2:14), which is to say that you have no soul. You are saying you are a "thing."

"Names are the symbols of things." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, (1914), 'Maxim', page 2149.

"Names are the marks of things." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, (1914), 'Maxim', Page 2148.

"A name is as it were a note of a thing." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, (1914), 'Maxim', Page 2148.

Dear reader, are you a 'thing'? When you are asked, "What is your name?" by Caesar, and you give him a name, you are identifying yourself as a 'thing'. The name that Caesar gives is a mark, note, and symbol of 'things'. Things don't have a soul. And because a name refers to a 'thing', it does not refer to the bondman of Christ, for we are not 'things'. Nor are we 'individuals.'

An individual is defined as:

"Any thing regarded as something single, as a unit. Especially a person, a human being." Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy (1996), page 272.

When you say you're a resident, you are calling yourself a 'thing'. In A Dictionary Of Law, William C. Anderson, 1893, page 886, Res is defined as "a thing, or things", and identifying the thing is something that's of the world. Res-ident = a thing identified. The bondmen of Christ are not residents; we are transients, visitors, and sojourners with Him. And residence is opposed to transient visitation.

"Residence implies something more than mere transient visitation." The National Law Library, published by Collier, Volume III, page 358 footnote.

When we "identify" only with Christ and become one with Him, we are not to be identified by the heathens as being a "resident" of their ungodly nation (2 Corinthians 6:14-18).

"The voice of the legislators is a living voice to impose laws on things and not on words" Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914, 'Maxim.' P.2142.

"We impose laws, not on words, but upon things themselves." Black's Law dictionary, (4th, edition, 1957 & 1968), p. 1205.

This is how the 'police power' attaches to those who do not sojourn in Christ. Those dead to Christ are made after the image that created them. For example 'the State' is a corporation, a dead thing, and they are dead to Christ, and they are made in the image of Caesar, because they live by all the corporate laws that Caesar creates. Corporations, or the corporate governments, always mark their property, or 'things', with 'legal descriptions.'

Why these Fictitious Names?

Is the spelling and usage of a proper name defined officially by the U.S. government? Yes! The United States Government Printing Office in their Style Manual, March 1984 edition, provides comprehensive grammar, style and usage for all government publications, including court and legal writing. Chapter 3, Capitalization, prescribes rules for proper names:

§ 3.2: "Proper names are capitalized… [Examples given are] Rome, Brussels, John Macadam, Macadam family, Italy, Anglo-Saxon."

At Chapter 17, Courtwork, the rules of capitalization, as mentioned in Chapter 3, are further reiterated:

§ 17.1: "Courtwork differs in style from other work only as set forth in this section; otherwise the style prescribed in the preceding sections will be followed."

In section 17, there are no other references that would change the grammatical rules and styles specified in Chapter 3 pertaining to capitalization. At section 17.9, this same official U.S. government manual states:

§ 17.9: "In the titles of cases the first letter of all principal words are capitalized, but not such terms as defendant and appellee."

Section 17.12 is also consistent with the aforementioned section 17.9 specification that all proper names are to be spelled with capital first letters; the balance of each spelled with lower case letters. From the above, we have established that courts are required to abide by the standard rule of law governing the use of English grammar and the correct capitalization of proper names. The following court cases also evidence this truth:

"The parties to a the suit must be specifically mentioned (Com. Dig. Pleader, C. 18), and actions to be properly brought must be commenced and prosecuted in the proper Christian and surnames of the parties." Seely vs. Schenck and Denise, Crandall vs. Denny & Co, 1 Penn., Rep. 75. Tomlinson vs. Berke et al (5 Haisl. Rep. 295). Oregon Supreme Court Record, Book No. 1, 1844-1845, page 58.

"The object of the description of persons in all legal proceedings is to identify them, or to designate their office or the character in which they are to be viewed [*perceived] in the proceeding. All persons are presumed to have what is called a Christian or given name, and for the purpose of identifying parties, it is a primary rule in practice and pleading, that the full Christian name and surname should be given at length, unless averred to be unknown. Under our criminal code, as well as the old practice in this State, the Christian name of the defendant, if known, must be set out in full in the indictment or information." Gardner v. The State, 4 Indiana 632; Bricknell Criminal Practice, 84.

"If the Christian name be wholly mistaken, this is regularly fatal to all legal instruments…and the reason is, because it is repugnant to the Christian religion, that there should be a Christian without a name of baptism, or that such a person should have two Christian names...and therefore if a person enters into a bond by a wrong Christian name, he cannot be declared against by the name in the obligation, and his true name brought in an alias, for that supposes the possibility of two Christian names; and you cannot declare against the party by his right name, and aver he made the deed by his wrong name." New Abridgment of the Law, by Matthew bacon, 1846, Volume VII, published by Thomas Davis, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

The government cannot legally communicate with you unless you are identified in all upper case letters. Since the names that appear on all government documents are fictitious names, and since the courts disregard the standard rule of law governing the use of English grammar and the correct capitalization of proper names, let us see what this means:

Pseudonym: "A fictitious name." Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, Page 1085.

Nom De Guerre: "War name. A pseudonym." Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, Page 920.

Nom: "[French. 'name']. Used in expressions denoting a pseudonym, a false or assumed name; esp. a nom de guerre, lit. 'war name,' a name assumed by, or assigned to, a person engaged in some action or enterprise." The Oxford Universal Dictionary, (1964), page 1333.

A fictitious name is a pseudonym, and a pseudonym is a nom de guerre, and a nom de guerre is a war name! This name is both "assigned to" someone by Caesar, and "assumed by" that someone to be theirs ("oh, yes, that's my name"). When courts issue a judgment against a defendant, the Order is always typed in all capital letters and a middle initial which, according to the rules of law governing the English language, has no meaning at all! Yet, the courts are required to use the rules of English by their own Rules of Court! Why does the government convert our Godly name into a war name? The reason our name is changed into a war name on all government documents is because all parties to an action during war cannot appear in their own name:

"An alien enemy cannot maintain an action during war, in his own name." See alien' in Wharton's Pa. Dig., Sec. 20.94. Cited in Oxford English Dictionary (2nd Edition, 1989), page 315.

Today's courts cannot deal with real people because, being bound by International Law and the Law of War, such courts can only deal with fictitious persons. Thus, all parties agree to be named with a fictitious name spelled in all capital letters, and usually with a middle initial, i.e., a nom de guerre (war name). But it's only because they are, as Oxford puts it, "engaged in some action or enterprise" ("action" means war, and "enterprise" is strictly a commercial term).

For example, all IRS forms and letters to taxpayers use a nom de guerre by the initial in the name, and regularly violate the rules of English. They request only a middle initial, not a full name, be used on all their forms (see the instructions to any IRS form).

And what is the purpose of them doing this? Any law dictionary will confirm that the purpose of these fictions is to give the court jurisdiction! But we must remember that when one is not engaged in carnal warfare (action) and not engaged in commerce (carnal enterprise), the fictions that a court or government may attempt to attach to you will not "stick." When one walks according to the Spirit, in full faith, a line is drawn in the sand; the world and its things cannot and will not attach, by the Grace of God.

Fictio: "In Roman law, a fiction; an assumption or supposition of the law. Such was properly a term of pleading, and signified a false averment on the part of the plaintiff which the defendant was not allowed to traverse [*challenge]…The object of the fiction was to give the court jurisdiction." Black's Law Dictionary, 6th edition, page 623.
Fiction: "Founded on a fiction; having the character of a fiction; pretended; counterfeit. Feigned, imaginary, not real, false, not genuine, nonexistent. Arbitrarily invented and set up, to accomplish an ulterior object [*i.e., to trick the unsuspecting into submitting themselves to an unlawful court]." Black's Law Dictionary, 6th edition, page 624.

"…Do not rich men [*merchants] oppress you, and draw you [*with contracts] before the judgment seats [*courts]? Do not they blaspheme [*deny, mis-spell] that worthy name [*Godly name] by the which ye are called?" James 2:6-7

"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." Matthew 7:6

When you give that which is holy (your Godly name) to the dogs (Caesar), and cast your pearls before swine, it will be converted into something dead of the State's creation (a misnomer, a fiction) which will give standing in its courts, because the law that the State declares is the one written in its books. Caesar gives you a name in all capital letters, which marks you like an animal. Caesar is now re-defining you in terms of 'the person' described in its codes, rules, and regulations. The other indicia are a birth date, address, and social security number. This is how the State courts acquire jurisdiction over you. Now it can proceed to tame you.

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge:" Hosea 4:6

The Christ is, in deed, seen in you and does not identify with (confirm) that character on the paper offered before the court. The surety for the fictitious person is not found; and a warrant is issued under their "testament" for the pagan, citizen, patriot, infidel, natural person, human being, or other private person having that lawless character who will ignorantly stand as surety for that fiction. The fiction has no economic value without the ignorance of the followers of Christ. Please remember that fictions are not the Way, Truth, and the Life for the minister of Christ, and it is no sin to stand mute when questioned on whether you are surety for their kingdom (Matthew 27:12-14, Mark 15:3-5). You are mandated to confess Christ to avoid the malicious plans of men.

Always remember, Confess Christ to Avoid and Justify so you may be Excused. The technique is to confess the Law of Christ to justify your lawful act(s) and to avoid the consequences of their purported law.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by notmartha » Thu Dec 26, 2013 8:52 pm

"Name" as defined in Bouvier's 1856:

1. One or more words used to distinguish a particular individual, as Socrates, Benjamin Franklin.

2. The Greeks, as is well known, bore only one name, and it was one of the especial rights of a father to choose the names for his children and to alter them if he pleased. It was customary to give to the eldest son the name of the grandfather on his father's side. The day on which children received their names was the tenth after their birth. The tenth day, called 'denate,' was a festive day, and friends and relatives were invited to take part in a sacrifice and a repast. If in a court of justice proofs could be adduced that a father had held the denate, it was sufficient evidence that be had recognized the child as his own. Smith's Diet. of Greek and Rom. Antiq. h. v.

3. Among the Romans, the division into races, and the subdivision of races into families, caused a great multiplicity of names. They had first the pronomen, which was proper to the person; then the nomen, belonging to his race; a surname or cognomen, designating the family; and sometimes an agnomen, which indicated the branch of that family in which the author has become distinguished. Thus, for example, Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus; Publius is the pronomen; Cornelius, the nomen, designating the name of the race Cornelia; Scipio, the cognomen, or surname of the family; and Africanus, the agnomen, which indicated his exploits.

4. Names are divided into Christian names, as, Benjamin, and surnames, as, Franklin.

5. No man can have more than one Christian name; 1 Ld. Raym. 562; Bac. Ab. Misnomer, A; though two or more names usually ke* t separate, as John and Peter, may undoubtedly be compounded, so as to form, in contemplation of law, but one. 5 T. R. 195. A letter put between the Christian and surname, as an abbreviation of a part of the Christian name, as, John B. Peterson, is no part of either. 4 Watts' R. 329; 5 John. R. 84; 14 Pet. R. 322; 3 Pet. R. 7; 2 Cowen. 463; Co. Litt. 3 a; 1 Ld. Raym. 562; , Vin. Ab. Misnomer, C 6, pl. 5 and 6: Com. Dig. Indictment, G 1, note u; Willes, R. 654; Bac. Abr. Misnomer and Addition; 3 Chit. Pr. 164 to 173; 1 Young, R. 602. But see 7 Watts & Serg. 406.
5. In general a corporation must contract and sue and be sued by its corporate name; 8 Jobn. R. 295; 14 John. R. 238; 19 John. R. 300; 4 Rand. R. 359; yet a slight alteration in stating the name is unimportant, if there be no possibility of mistaking the identity of the corporation suing. 12 L. R. 444.

6. It sometimes happens that two different sets of partners carry on business in the same social name, and that one of the partners is a member of both firms. When there is a confusion in this respect, the partners of one firm may, in some cases, be made responsible for the debts of another. Baker v. Charlton, Peake's N. P. Cas. 80; 3 Mart. N. S. 39; 7 East. 210; 2 Bouv. Inst. n. 1477.

7. It is said that in devises if the name be mistaken, if it appear the testator meant a particular corporation, the devise will be good; a devise to " the inhabitants of the south parish," may be enjoyed by the inhabitants of the first parish. 3 Pick. R. 232; 6 S. & R. 11; see also Hob. 33; 6 Co. 65; 2 Cowen, R, 778.

8. As to names which have the same sound, see Bac. Ab. Misnomer, A; 7 Serg & Rawle, 479; Hammond's Analysis of Pleading, 89; 10 East. R. 83; and article Idem Sonans.

9. As to the effect of using those which have the same derivation, see 2 Roll. Ab. 135; 1 W. C. C. R. 285; 1 Chit. Cr. Law 108. For the effect of changing one name, see 1 Rop. Leg. 102; 3 M. & S. 453 Com. Dig. G 1, note x.

10. As to the omission or mistake of the name of a legatee, see 1 Rop. Leg. 132, 147; 1 Supp. to Ves. Jr. 81, 82; 6 Ves. 42; 1 P. Wms. 425; Jacob's R. 464. As to the effect of mistakes in the names of persons in pleading, see Steph. Pl. 319. Vide, generally, 13 Vin. Ab. 13; 15 Vin. Ab. 595; Dane's Ab. Index, h. t.; Roper on Leg. Index, b. t; 8 Com: Dig., 814; 3 Mis. R. 144; 4 McCord, 487; 5 Halst. 230; 3 Mis. R. 227; 1 Pick. 388; Merl. Rep. mot Nom; and article Misnomer.

11. When a person uses a name in making a contract under seal, he will not be permitted to say that it is not his name; as, if he sign and seal a bond " A and B," (being his own and his partner's name,) and he had no authority from bis partner to make such a deed, he cannot deny that bis name is A. & B. 1 Raym. 2; 1 Salk. 214. And if a man describes himself in the body of a deed by the name of James and signs it John, he cannot, on being sued by the latter name, plead that his name is James. 3 Taunt. 505; Cro. Eliz. 897, n. a. Vide 3 P. & D. 271; 11 Ad. & L. 594.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by notmartha » Thu Dec 26, 2013 9:03 pm

The word onoma {on'-om-ah} is translated as "name" over 150 times in the NT. From Strong's:

# 3686

1) name: univ. of proper names
2) the name is used for everything which the name covers, everything
the thought or feeling of which is aroused in the mind by
mentioning, hearing, remembering, the name, i.e. for one's rank,
authority, interests, pleasure, command, excellences, deeds etc.
3) persons reckoned up by name
4) the cause or reason named: on this account, because he
suffers as a Christian, for this reason

Here are some examples:

John 14:13-14 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name , that will I do , that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name , I will do it.

Acts 3:16 And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong , whom ye see and know : yea , the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all.

Acts 4:7 And when they had set them in the midst , they asked , By what power , or by what name , have ye done this?

Philippians 2:9-10, "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him , and given him a name which is above every name : That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow , of things in heaven , and things in earth , and things under the earth;"

Colossians 3:17, "And whatsoever ye do in word or deed , do all in the name of the Lord Jesus , giving thanks to God and the Father by him."

It seems to me that a "name" equates to "authority"... doing this or that in the authority of the Lord. So maybe when the so-called PTB are looking for a "name" what they really might want to know is under what authority you act. ??
scott
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:41 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by scott » Fri Dec 27, 2013 12:29 am

notmartha,
I have the 'The Words of His Kingdom and the words of the world compared.' in booklet form and a cassete series. They were done by Randy Lee. Thanks for the input. A lot of good info. for the lawful Christian.
scott
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by notmartha » Fri Dec 27, 2013 4:41 am

Yes, it was Randy Lee. Thank you for reminding me. Here is the case about mistaken identity you posted, for others to reference.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by notmartha » Fri Dec 27, 2013 2:07 pm

scott wrote:From several men I personally know that are on the same page, we have noticed that out of 10 encounters the three times that anyone ended up in jail was when the 'legal fiction name' was established. By established I mean the commercial policy enforcement agent found some type of evidence on the 'person' or in the 'vehicle' that allowed the cop to build a 'presumption' of a 'legal fiction person.' Or the man was identified as a 'legal person' that had been incarcerated before. At every encounter there is a lot of effort by the cop to obtain a 'name', 'address' and 'birth date'. I think these are the three main identifiers to get positive id. The men that successfully stood their ground as a 'lawful' Christian were released at the stop. I can't say this is always going to be the case, but I do find it very interesting.
Can you please explain how you stopped the creation of the "legal fiction name" from the lawful Christian name.

I have a friend who only uses his lawful Christian name, let's say "David John", but he found out on an FBI file that the PTB purport is him that they converted his lawful Christian name into a fiction.

In one place there was:

Subject Name(s) JOHN, DAVID

and in another place there was:

Subject’s Name DAVID JOHN

Not giving any name or identification does not always work. In the situation I'm aware of, the man who refused to give his name was detained beyond the roadside stop as "John Doe", fingerprinted, and released 18 hours later. I know that somewhere in their "code" it says (I'm paraphrasing) that driving without a license is not an arrestable offense but refusal to show ID is. I'm not finding it right now.

So, I'm wondering how the men you know successfully stood their ground as lawful Christians. Specifically, what was said, shown, etc.?
scott
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:41 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by scott » Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:37 pm

notmartha,
“Can you please explain how you stopped the creation of the "legal fiction name" from the lawful
Christian name. “
It would have to be rebutted. If you are truly 'standing' in your lawful Christian capacity, and someone is trying to make the 'presumption' that you are a legal fiction, then you have to declare 'Who you are'.
For example, if some cop is making the presumption that you are a legal fiction person, only you can say, “That's not me! I do not consent to your false legal fiction presumption. As a matter of fact you are committing a felony by misrepresenting material facts.”

We actually carry a card 'Notice of Felonies (in comity)' always ready to serve to any humbug when they are committing felonies, as well as, a label fixed on any Asseveration or Notice being used.

“I have a friend who only uses his lawful Christian name, let's say "David John", but he
found out on an FBI file that the PTB purport is him that they converted his lawful Christian
name into a fiction. “
Why would 'David John' assume that the DAVID JOHN in the FBI file is even him?
I would have to ask your friend : Did he give any name without clarifying it? Did he give any info that linked him to a fiction? Did he give a signature? Did he bail? So far, in the arrests that I can attest to, there was always evidence (material or words out of their own mouth) that confirmed the legal fiction to some degree. Did he consent to anything including 'understanding' anything the cop said?


With biometrics and computer data becoming so prevalent, it is going to be a bigger challenge to rebut the 'legal fiction'. If a cop is showing you a picture of a legal fiction that looks like you, asking if it is you, what do you say?
“In one place there was: Subject Name(s) JOHN, DAVID and in another place there
was: Subject’s Name DAVID JOHN
The fact that a name is in all caps is a good indication it is referring to a legal fiction. If I were standing in the Christian appellation of David John I would not agree to the legal fiction name DAVID JOHN.
Unless I wanted to.
“Not giving any name or identification does not always work. In the situation I'm aware of, the
man who refused to give his name was detained beyond the roadside stop as "John Doe",
fingerprinted, and released 18 hours later. I know that somewhere in their code" it says (I'm
paraphrasing) that driving without a license is not an arrestable offense but refusal to show ID is. I'm
not finding it right now. “
It is important to understand that 'if' it is 'illegal' to refuse to show i.d. that would pertain to a statutory created fiction. Not a man of God. For instance obamacare applies to 'citizens' and 'persons'. The people who are subject to it are 'individuals, persons, citizens, taxpayers and whoever will consent to it. Whatever the FBI, IRS, or ATF has in their computer system does not pertain to me.
Remember, almost all the problems people face these days are by consent.

“So, I'm wondering how the men you know successfully stood their ground as lawful Christians.
Specifically, what was said, shown, etc.?'

Each encounter is different. Basically it begins with the cop asking for typical info, and then
the ambassador/traveler serving his Asseveration declaring his Lawful Christian appellation, what Kingdom he stands in, and Who he serves.
You have to avoid anything that creates the presumption that you are a 'resident 'or 'citizen' or any attributes that would confirm such.
They usually are trying their best to get the name, address and birth date. The goal is to not answer any questions that can be used against you in any way.

The Book of Hundreds provides a lot of good thought on responses to questions like what is your name, where do you live, when were your born?

Here's a true example of one cop trying to get JS to give him an address.
Cop: Where do you live?
JS: I travel.
Cop: Where are you headed?
JS: To a friend's house.
Cop: Where is that?
JS: North of OKC
Cop: Where do your parents live?
JS: They also travel.
Cop: You know you need to have some identification, you could be a murderer or something.
JS: Well, I'm not.
Cop: I don't know that. (All this time the cop is mocking JS and telling him how much blankity blank all this is.)

Out of all the encounters (this one lasted an hour and fifteen minutes), this one was my favorite because it shows to what degree the cop was trying to get legal fiction info to go on. A little further into the encounter …..

Cop: JS, if I wanted to send you a Christmas card, where would I send it?
JS: You don't have to worry about that, I don't celebrate Christmas.
Cop: THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT, NOW IF I WANTED TO SEND YOU A CHRISTMAS CARD, WHERE WOULD I SEND IT?
JS: Well, people don't generally send me mail. But I guess if they were, they would send it General Delivery wherever I'm going to be.

It was about the same way with the birth date.
Cop: What day were you born.
JS: I don't know. I don't have a birth certificate.

All this time the cop continued to threaten JS with taking him to jail, taking his friends to jail, etc. and JS knew to expect that. He also yelled and cursed and repeated questions over and over. JS maintained his calm, although inwardly nervous, throughout, depending on the Holy Spirit to keep him calm.

In a different encounter my son had a cop demand to talk to his Dad. The encounter was pretty hot and my son went ahead and dialed me up. After threatening me on the phone for awhile he asked me what my son's birth date was. I told him I had no idea, and that since the government uses information like that to make legal fictions out of us, I thought best not to use birth certificates and birth dates. He then asked for his SSN. That was easy. I told him that he doesn't have a SSN.
The cop muttered something about jail and handed the phone back to my son.
In the beginning of this encounter my son had declared that he was a citizen of the kingdom of Yahweh and that he was Yahweh's. The cop's last words were, “Well, it looks like your Yahweh helped you out. I have to get somewhere right away.” This was in a car with no tag, insurance. or license.


We have had several good encounters using this basic premise. When I say 'good' I mean that there was no arrest. In reality I would have to say even the encounters that ended in jail were 'good' in the sense that the men that went in came out stronger in their conviction about Who they are and Who they serve.


Again, my goal with this post is to encourage people to share experiences or thoughts that would help people to see what's happening in this area and ways to prevent being the victims of 'presumed' creations of fiction.
I'm only sharing the experiences we have had so far. I can't emphasize enough that there are no silver bullets or templates that solve all the problems.
Every man needs to seek out what it is that the Father is trying to teach him. Yahweh is our only true protection that we can rely on.


Hallelujah
iamfreeru2
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:11 am

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by iamfreeru2 » Mon Dec 30, 2013 7:00 pm

Excellent post scott. Praise YHWH!!!
I am called Michael, a bond servant of the Chirst
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: What's Your Name? The Legal Fiction

Post by notmartha » Tue Dec 31, 2013 5:00 am

Scott,
Thanks for your complete, helpful answers. My replies are in purple
scott wrote:
“I have a friend who only uses his lawful Christian name, let's say "David John", but he
found out on an FBI file that the PTB purport is him that they converted his lawful Christian
name into a fiction. “
Why would 'David John' assume that the DAVID JOHN in the FBI file is even him?He didn't, but they did and acted on it.
I would have to ask your friend : Did he give any name without clarifying it? Did he give any info that linked him to a fiction? Did he give a signature? Did he bail? So far, in the arrests that I can attest to, there was always evidence (material or words out of their own mouth) that confirmed the legal fiction to some degree. Did he consent to anything including 'understanding' anything the cop said?I wish I could tell you but he is not available to ask.


With biometrics and computer data becoming so prevalent, it is going to be a bigger challenge to rebut the 'legal fiction'. If a cop is showing you a picture of a legal fiction that looks like you, asking if it is you, what do you say? Assuming this is after jurisdiction is challenged, and one is moved to answer any of purported leo's questions, "No, it is not me. It may show some resemblance to me, but it's not me."
“In one place there was: Subject Name(s) JOHN, DAVID and in another place there
was: Subject’s Name DAVID JOHN
The fact that a name is in all caps is a good indication it is referring to a legal fiction. If I were standing in the Christian appellation of David John I would not agree to the legal fiction name DAVID JOHN. Me neither, but I find it hard to communicate a qualified name verbally.
Unless I wanted to.
“Not giving any name or identification does not always work. In the situation I'm aware of, the
man who refused to give his name was detained beyond the roadside stop as "John Doe",
fingerprinted, and released 18 hours later. I know that somewhere in their code" it says (I'm
paraphrasing) that driving without a license is not an arrestable offense but refusal to show ID is. I'm
not finding it right now. “
It is important to understand that 'if' it is 'illegal' to refuse to show i.d. that would pertain to a statutory created fiction. Not a man of God. For instance obamacare applies to 'citizens' and 'persons'. The people who are subject to it are 'individuals, persons, citizens, taxpayers and whoever will consent to it. Whatever the FBI, IRS, or ATF has in their computer system does not pertain to me.
Remember, almost all the problems people face these days are by consent.Totally agree. Also by assent. If you don't say "no" they say you say "yes"

“So, I'm wondering how the men you know successfully stood their ground as lawful Christians.
Specifically, what was said, shown, etc.?'

Each encounter is different. Basically it begins with the cop asking for typical info, and then
the ambassador/traveler serving his Asseveration declaring his Lawful Christian appellation, what Kingdom he stands in, and Who he serves.
You have to avoid anything that creates the presumption that you are a 'resident 'or 'citizen' or any attributes that would confirm such.
They usually are trying their best to get the name, address and birth date. The goal is to not answer any questions that can be used against you in any way.

The Book of Hundreds provides a lot of good thought on responses to questions like what is your name, where do you live, when were your born?

Here's a true example of one cop trying to get JS to give him an address.
Cop: Where do you live?
JS: I travel.
Cop: Where are you headed?
JS: To a friend's house.
Cop: Where is that?
JS: North of OKC
Cop: Where do your parents live?
JS: They also travel.
Cop: You know you need to have some identification, you could be a murderer or something.
JS: Well, I'm not.
Cop: I don't know that. (All this time the cop is mocking JS and telling him how much blankity blank all this is.)

Out of all the encounters (this one lasted an hour and fifteen minutes), this one was my favorite because it shows to what degree the cop was trying to get legal fiction info to go on. A little further into the encounter …..

Cop: JS, if I wanted to send you a Christmas card, where would I send it?
JS: You don't have to worry about that, I don't celebrate Christmas.
Cop: THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT, NOW IF I WANTED TO SEND YOU A CHRISTMAS CARD, WHERE WOULD I SEND IT?
JS: Well, people don't generally send me mail. But I guess if they were, they would send it General Delivery wherever I'm going to be.

It was about the same way with the birth date.
Cop: What day were you born.
JS: I don't know. I don't have a birth certificate.

All this time the cop continued to threaten JS with taking him to jail, taking his friends to jail, etc. and JS knew to expect that. He also yelled and cursed and repeated questions over and over. JS maintained his calm, although inwardly nervous, throughout, depending on the Holy Spirit to keep him calm. LOL! Good for JS!

In a different encounter my son had a cop demand to talk to his Dad. The encounter was pretty hot and my son went ahead and dialed me up. After threatening me on the phone for awhile he asked me what my son's birth date was. I told him I had no idea, and that since the government uses information like that to make legal fictions out of us, I thought best not to use birth certificates and birth dates. He then asked for his SSN. That was easy. I told him that he doesn't have a SSN.
The cop muttered something about jail and handed the phone back to my son.
In the beginning of this encounter my son had declared that he was a citizen of the kingdom of Yahweh and that he was Yahweh's. The cop's last words were, “Well, it looks like your Yahweh helped you out. I have to get somewhere right away.” This was in a car with no tag, insurance. or license.
Your son is blessed to have you in his corner.

We have had several good encounters using this basic premise. When I say 'good' I mean that there was no arrest. In reality I would have to say even the encounters that ended in jail were 'good' in the sense that the men that went in came out stronger in their conviction about Who they are and Who they serve.


Again, my goal with this post is to encourage people to share experiences or thoughts that would help people to see what's happening in this area and ways to prevent being the victims of 'presumed' creations of fiction. Maybe we could list the most commonly made presumptions, and the rebuttals? The "name" has been covered. And to some extent the "address". Some others to discuss... citizenship, contacts, interest, ...
I'm only sharing the experiences we have had so far. I can't emphasize enough that there are no silver bullets or templates that solve all the problems. Oh, I understand all too well. I'm just all for learning from others mistakes (and successes)
Every man needs to seek out what it is that the Father is trying to teach him. Yahweh is our only true protection that we can rely on. Amen!


Hallelujah
Post Reply