POLICE OATHS

[vanilla]

Not think but KNOW.

Strange how so many people KNOW so many conflicting things, yet none of them accept they could possibly be wrong.

You enquire this of me because you know not of God, so how is it that I could open your eyes, ears and mind. perhaps you could teach me first how to raise the dead and then I would be able to prove what you ask.

Can you answer the questions or not?
If not, why do they matter enough that you should ask them of me?

Let us assume God does not exist... Then how is it the Queen and other authorities swear an oath to God and claim their power and authority is of God?
Truly, such a question proves their deciept and fraud...

Firstly, the authorities don't necessarily swear an oath to God, I think we went over this in another thread. The police swear allegiance to the monarch regardless of where her power comes from, and MPs can choose to make an affirmation with no mention of God.

Secondly, I looked at the Queen's oath and I cannot see that at any point she claims her power is of God.

Why does the Queen swear an oath to God if we assume He does not exist? Some options I could think of:

a) Perhaps she really believes it, and is mistaken
b) Tradition
c) Politicial reason 1 - The monarch is also the head of the Anglican Church
d) Politicial reason 2 - A fair amount of the population are Christian, they will be more inclined to have allegiance to a leader of the same faith

If I were to be forced to enter their courts, for I would not go of free will. I would not plead to them of equal standing as if they were exalted above me. I would not defend myself using their legislation, be it statute or common law. Both statute and common law are their rules and are made for them and not the people, many lost cases of truth have proven this to be so.
Ergo, I would use the only true law that would beat them every time, the law for which they have no defence and again has proven to seal their mouths and dismiss their judgements.

I shall end now, for I have stated too much as you will not understand any of the last 9 lines I typed...

I understand you, I just think you're wrong. Let me know how that defence works out for you if you end up in court.

[ljtherock]

Not think but KNOW.

Strange how so many people KNOW so many conflicting things, yet none of them accept they could possibly be wrong.

Really, "none." That broom has certainly swept the floor clean then...

You enquire this of me because you know not of God, so how is it that I could open your eyes, ears and mind. perhaps you could teach me first how to raise the dead and then I would be able to prove what you ask.

Can you answer the questions or not? Of course I could but as I stated you would not and could not accept them. No rudeness or evasion is intended. It is just simply not conductive to tie one end of a rope to you and the other to a speed boat and then proceed to travel at speed in order to teach one to swim.
If not, why do they matter enough that you should ask them of me?
To cause you to enquire of other sources than the ones you have indoctrinated within you at present...

Let us assume God does not exist... Then how is it the Queen and other authorities swear an oath to God and claim their power and authority is of God?
Truly, such a question proves their deciept and fraud...

Firstly, the authorities don't necessarily swear an oath to God, Merely soldiers, it is the emperor that matters... I think we went over this in another thread. The police swear allegiance to the monarch regardless of where her power comes from, Then they would be wise to begin to enquire as to where it comes from and to be more diligent in such events. and MPs can choose to make an affirmation with no mention of God. But... Elizabeth has and as we all know, she claims to be Queen.

Secondly, I looked at the Queen's oath and I cannot see that at any point she claims her power is of God.
It is all in the historic records along with the coronation itself...

Why does the Queen swear an oath to God if we assume He does not exist? Some options I could think of:

a) Perhaps she really believes it, and is mistaken Due diligence springs to mind.
b) Tradition Lame horse, she does it because her ancestors did. Perhaps she were a lemming in another incarnation.
c) Politicial reason 1 - The monarch is also the head of the Anglican Church So, she is decieptful not only via the politics but also the church.
d) Politicial reason 2 - A fair amount of the population are Christian, they will be more inclined to have allegiance to a leader of the same faith Again, decieptful in order to empower and gain for herself.

If I were to be forced to enter their courts, for I would not go of free will. I would not plead to them of equal standing as if they were exalted above me. I would not defend myself using their legislation, be it statute or common law. Both statute and common law are their rules and are made for them and not the people, many lost cases of truth have proven this to be so.
Ergo, I would use the only true law that would beat them every time, the law for which they have no defence and again has proven to seal their mouths and dismiss their judgements.

I shall end now, for I have stated too much as you will not understand any of the last 9 lines I typed...

I understand you, I just think you're wrong. Let me know how that defence works out for you if you end up in court You already know the answer to that as that is why you phrased you reply as above. In which case I shall state "Might is not Right.".

I feel that you know the system is wrong and corrupt but you serve it well for it benefits you.

[vanilla]

Really, "none." That broom has certainly swept the floor clean then...

As I was talking about those who feel they "know" something beyond any doubt, it was practically tautological rather than a generalisation.

Of course I could but as I stated you would not and could not accept them. No rudeness or evasion is intended. It is just simply not conductive to tie one end of a rope to you and the other to a speed boat and then proceed to travel at speed in order to teach one to swim.

How about you just answer them? I've spent years on religious forums and I'm more than familiar with the patronising crap that comes out when believers are asked to explain something they don't really understand by less credulous folk.

To cause you to enquire of other sources than the ones you have indoctrinated within you at present...

That would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The reason I don't have an unswerving devotion to religion is because I am open to looking at other sources.

It is all in the historic records along with the coronation itself...

Could you be any more vague? I looked through the transcript of the coronation. If you have some evidence for your claim why not just present it plainly?

a) Perhaps she really believes it, and is mistaken Due diligence springs to mind.

If we are assuming God doesn't not exist and you say you KNOW he does, then what's your excuse?

b) Tradition Lame horse, she does it because her ancestors did. Perhaps she were a lemming in another incarnation.

Have you truly not adopted any of the cultural conventions of your recent forefathers?

c) Politicial reason 1 - The monarch is also the head of the Anglican Church So, she is decieptful not only via the politics but also the church.

I suppose she could just stop pretending and drop any references to religion in state affairs. I have no problem with that, but I'm guessing the church might. I take it you've never told a lie to keep the peace?

You already know the answer to that as that is why you phrased you reply as above. In which case I shall state "Might is not Right.".

Yet you are devoted to following a master who effectively killed the entire population of the Earth because they wouldn't do as he said.

I feel that you know the system is wrong and corrupt but you serve it well for it benefits you.

You can assume whatever you like

[ljtherock]

@ Vanilla...

Patronising, no.

You do not understand as to where I am coming simply in truth that you are not in knowledge of what I talk of.
When I enquire of you to first show me how to raise the dead I am genuine in my enquiry, not patronising on that point or others I make.
When you can teach me to raise the dead then truly I can point you to truth and you will know of it...

It is not that you have not seen the evidence/proof, it is that you have and are denying it. Is it not also possible that you refuse to see because as I stated earlier, that you benefit from the system.

Even if God did not exist, then surely you too can see that they have no authority and cannot provide evidence of having so.

By your own inadvertent admission you state that they have no authority to claim because if there were no God then, how do they claim their authority?

[enegiss]

Hi Vanilla, if you had an inkling as to what we who know the truth of things know, then you would ask questions from yourself as to why you stand yours and the illegitimate Monarchy,s corner .

There are no oaths in reality, only words spoken, meaningless and vague at Best, and a curative for the disenfranchised so they can ponder their own mundane existence against those who steal from them "with easily debunked excuses as to why they can do this", and feel Lowly but satisfied they have done the "right thing" in accepting and complying, whilst truly lacking anything described as Knowledge of self, or rather confidence of the true "Self" Who exist in totality and sustains even your poor quality excuses for the "authorities" you so desire to comply with.

well vanilla, "Good Luck" with them then

you tell him lj,

[ljtherock]

@ Vanilla...

Almost forgot...

The Cornation Oath/Ceremony... How is it possible that you cannot see that Elizabeth claims her power of authority is derived of God...

You are being selective and decieptful in what you read and claim.

How can you possibly miss the claim made, perhaps you cannot see that God is written all over it, perhaps you do not see the clergy all over it or is it just the case that you wish not to...

Let me attempt to heal your blindness and mental inability to truth, although I cannot promise you miracles please humour me and read the link below:

http://www.oremus.org/liturgy/coronation/cor1953b.html

[enegiss]

well that about wraps it up then

Secondly, I looked at the Queen's oath and I cannot see that at any point she claims her power is of God.

The Lord who hath made you Queen over these Peoples
give you increase of grace, honour and happiness in this world,
and make you partaker of his eternal felicity
in the world to come. Amen.

Our Father(creator), which art in heaven (awareness),
Hallowed be thy Name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done
in earth (body), as it is in heaven (awareness).
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive them that trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation;
But deliver us from evil:

For thine is the kingdom,
The power, and the glory,
For ever and ever. Ameen.

our brother esa

[ljtherock]

@ Enegiss.

Good to hear from you enegiss.

Unfortunately for Vanilla, he does not see the flaws within his own postings...

His defence of those claiming authority, especially Elizabeth is based on the foundation that she told a few lies for the sake of peace and fraudulent gain. Even though her authority is delegated down to others such as courts and police etc, as long as they do not have a belief or knowledge of God then they are truthful in their claim to authority over the masses...

So in summation at present, Elizabeth carried out a decieptful fraud on the people and continues to do so and delegates her de facto authority down to her employees all based on her claim of authority as bestowed upon her from God (no proof of such) and if she truly were ordained by God then the oath she swore to God is null and void because she broke it as soon as she assented to any new legislation.
Of course, she would have been better not swearing an oath as the book that she kissed and swore upon told her.

In all truth though, Elizabeth could repent and stand down along with parliament and all others of same ilk.


By the by, I am with John H. in context of his latest story, well at least fundamentally... One true King, King of Kings, King of the people and for the people.

[enegiss]

yeah, i had a little read of JH,s writing, but i will have another look now i think, ime not a monarchy sympathetic person myself, but the movie of life has wonderful tangents, and i would like to see a great part like that played in my lifetime event peace to ya lj

[vanilla]

When you can teach me to raise the dead then truly I can point you to truth and you will know of it...

I'm sorry, I cannot teach you to raise the dead.

It is not that you have not seen the evidence/proof, it is that you have and are denying it. Is it not also possible that you refuse to see because as I stated earlier, that you benefit from the system.

As much as you'd like that to be true so that people fit into your nice little mental compartments, it's not I assure you.

Even if God did not exist, then surely you too can see that they have no authority and cannot provide evidence of having so.
By your own inadvertent admission you state that they have no authority to claim because if there were no God then, how do they claim their authority?

That's only if you view 'authority' as something given by some other, higher authority. I don't. The evidence for them having authority, is that people recognise her as the authority, and the agencies of government have the power to enforce their rules.

Go out into the street and ask someone who the head of state is, or who makes the laws...

You're stuck on the idea that authority is given by some other power.

Secondly, I looked at the Queen's oath and I cannot see that at any point she claims her power is of God.

The Lord who hath made you Queen over these Peoples...

Might I point you two enlightened gents towards Part IV of the ceremony, pertinently titled "The Oath", wherein is contained the text of... the oath.

Elsewhere in the proceedings, yes, the Church claim that her power is from God, but she doesn't.

You are being selective and decieptful in what you read and claim.

That's not very Christian, is it? I don't appreciate being called a liar.