Another letter from a defender of Commercial Redemption. My response follows:
Your explanation of "Commercial Redemption Rejected as Valueless"
Appears to be restricted because of lack of perspective, your logic
process should to apply the COMPLETE understanding of who Yashua is
and what his word says and what he is doing, your label of Redemption
as Valueless is immature, Yahsua is the creator of honest
relationships as in commerce, and sense man (debt base currency ) has
become dishonest and has stolen the wealth and energy Yashua has
given, that has become a judgment against us yet if we repent, of
course the debt is paid at the cross, so how is the repentance taking
place? When we establish the Yashua’s law, make crooked strait
again, Take back (Daniel 7) return wealth and secure the future for
Yahsua’s children. All while exercising judgment, mercy, and grace
with the gifts of agape and kindness.
Yashua is not mocked, nor on the sidelines when these wicked men began
there pursuit against Yashua’s people, he has had made provisions in
security every moment the wicked try to change his laws and
definitions or act and accept a thought that is untrue. When they do,
that becomes there judgment as well.
As for the value of repentance it is priceless, in all areas as a
whole including Commercial, all of us must face what has been done
wrong and undo this theft the Feds have done, by every single word and
line.
For He holds every breath they take in his hands with mercy.
David
Hi David,
Thanks for writing.
I've gotten a lot of mail in answer to
this article over the years. Most (not all) of it negative, since people don't usually tend to write to give thanks; they only write if they have a complaint. I've been called much worse than "immature", I assure you. Turncoat, collaborator, and agent provocateur, have accompanied descriptions like stupid, ignorant, and irresponsible. I've even been accused of being in league with Satan himself.
That's okay with me, David, because my article has also helped to make some people's lives better. Those were the people who grasped the point of my article, rather than insisting on holding on to their "COMPLETE understanding" of Commercial Redemption.
Let's go with a hypothetical example, okay? Let's say you heard about this Commercial Redemption thing, and you studied everything about it that you could find, for months. There were some points you didn't understand, so you consulted with the top legal minds of the Montana Freemen AND the California Jural Society. By the time you got done, you were certain you had a "COMPLETE understanding" of the process.
So you used it. As a result you were charged with fraud and indicted by a federal grand jury. After several drawn out weeks of trial in a federal courthouse, you were sentenced to five years in a federal penitentiary, where you served your full time because the Feds wanted to make an example of you.
Given plenty of time to think, at some point you agreed with Gregory Allan: The problem was probably NOT that you were wrong-- you still believe you were right, and you probably were. The problem was that you were unable to convince a jury. How, in the space of a few weeks, could you possibly hope to educate a jury (in open court, and over a federal prosecutor's objections) about a process that took you months of study to acquire "COMPLETE understanding"?
But wait... this is NOT a hypothetical example. It actually happened to six personal friends of mine.
The point of my article is that a process such as Commercial Redemption is valueless unless someone can find a way to make it easily comprehensible by a jury. Your critique of my article failed to offer any "perspective" or insight into that which I have clearly identified as Commercial Redemption's greatest flaw. Until you have something concrete to offer along these lines, I can only view your opinions as immature.
--Gregory Allan
