The ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM ?

[aether]

I believe the "original intent" of the legal system was to create a fictional venue whereby men could make rules for their society without breaching the laws of the Creator. There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another? (James 4:12).

Within this new system, men and women would voluntarily animate fictional entities (citizens) and "act" in accordance to their new societal rules (Acts). Given that all men are created equal under God, and given this is an acknowledged fictional system, accepting the new role must be done in accordance to ones own free will and consent. In the same vein (equality), one must also consent to "acknowledge and recognize" authorities.

Should the "recognized" authorities breach the public trust by abuse of power, corruption etc., the remedy of the man is to stop recognizing authorities in his original nature, a man - defined as a spirit incarnate, a Creation of God, and subject to the Creators Testament.

(1 Cor. 6:19-20) What? Know ye not that your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own. You are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

It would follow that an original spirit charged man will scare the man in the judges costume out of a courtroom like he has seen a ghost. Would he rather challenge the Creator over control of the true man - of God?

Watch this between 4 and 5.5 minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmrAQXhLfi4

aether
http://www.aetherical.blogspot.com ... A website attempting to prove the above through true law and legal definitions etc.

********************************************

[bodge]

As soon as you start spouting "Religion" your post will be sent to the "Highly moderated area" were no one will really want to see it. Its best not to espouse religion in posts, its too controversial.

[scottmurray]

good post

[Thomas]

.

Acts of Supremacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Supremacy

(which was just swopping one plutocracy for another, and no individual Sovereignty that our good conscience tells us that we all have rights, equally.)

Which should tell us why we have been taught to have a knee jerk reaction to a word that means "an obligation to good," and why it's been so misrepresented.

[ljtherock]

Just for you Bodge,i will leave it where it is....................................................................................

In fairness, the post did not mention religion, only God.

Also, aether was the thread creator so surely he can mention God if it is part of what he debates?

Of course I may have misread your statement, perhaps you were jesting...