Love for Life

Dear John & Others
To believe in the knowledge of being sovereign is abdicating "MAN - Conscious-Living MAN" The Creator John Wilson that you really are, permitting fictions to step in to govern John Wilson.

Either you are the creator or you are under-the-standing (under copy-right control) of the knowledge of belief (I John Wilson Am Sovereign - I John Wilson Stand Up For My Sovereignty) you believe in (the knowledge) invented by another.

For the creator sovereignty does not exist because the creator already is.

Why are you fighting for what you already have John?

Why would the creator need to believe in the creator when the creator is already the creator?

Does the creator need to believe in the knowledge that the creator exists for the creator to exist?

The creator does not need to make a leap of faith to believe in something that does not exist, in this case the belief in knowledge that I Am Sovereign - I Stand Up For My Sovereignty or I believe in the knowledge that I exist therefore I exist.

We (creators) do not need to fight for sovereignty when we already are.

I provide you with substance, the inspiration of conscious-living creation to inspire you The Creator of John Wilson to step aside from the CON as in the belief in knowledge of con-struct - con-cept - con-dition - con-ceived etc (I Am Sovereign - I Stand Up For My Sovereignty) and be the creator that you really are. Here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5079 is a conscious-living gift providing conscious-living information to step out of the invented maze of fiction, the apparitions of the dark-side that appear to exist but don't.

All beliefs are based on knowledge, therefore beliefs cannot exist without knowledge, therefore beliefs in knowledge are apparitions (leaps of faith) which seem to appear as if they exist when in truth they don't exist. The Creator of John Wilson is not an apparition but the beliefs in knowledge such as I John Wilson Am Sovereign, I Stand Up For My Sovereignty are apparitions. Does John Wilson need to believe in John Wilson (leap of faith) for John Wilson to exist? Does John Wilson need to believe in the knowledge "I John Wilson Am Sovereign" for John Wilson to exist? Does John Wilson need to believe in the knowledge "I John Wilson Am Sovereign" for the sovereignty of John Wilson to exist? Does the creator need to believe in the creator for the creator to exist? Of course not, so why are you still allowing yourself to be sucker-punched? Do we need to believe in the knowledge of a tree or a bee or a bird for them to exist?

The creator has substance while the believers in the knowledge of being sovereign have no substance, therefore are fiction (apparitions) to be dealt with by other fictions (the copy-right owner of the belief in knowledge that you believe in and the copy-right owners administrators). The rule of Law is the organisation of fiction to govern those lost to its fiction. The rule of law is an apparition and everything deemed by the rule of law to exist are apparitions as well. The Rule Of Law does not see (is blind) to the creator John Wilson but governs everything John Wilson believes in. (Knowledge).

This also goes for being a Freeman. Just replace the word Sovereign with Freeman to receive the same message/heartfelt point of view.

Conscious Love Always
Arthur Cristian
action @ loveforlife.com.au
www.loveforlife.com.au

--------------------------------

Peace be unto your house.

We shall continue to discuss, argue, comment, persist. That's good. Just throwing my tuppence in. Was a tuppence made of silver?

Who also made oaths who work in the corporation-court you are entering? Judges, solicitors, sheriffs, clown oops crown agents?

Are their oaths true? Or True, correct, complete and not misleading?

Zechariah 8:17 And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour; and love no false oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the LORD.

Now, let's try to swear an oath, at times on an imaginary scripture (bible=pagan god) which is copyrighted. So what do we do, hold our hand up in the air? Who said to do this? Man-made commands?

Matthew 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mark 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Ignoring that, let's see how we should swear:

Matthew 5:33-37 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

(also 38-42)

And

James 5:12 But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.

So we can't swear an oath, ok, what about telling the truth?

Can we know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Methinks you would lie or perjure from the first breath. Unless you are perfect of course.

Genesis 32:10 I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which thou hast shewed unto thy servant; for with my staff I passed over this Jordan; and now I am become two bands.

Deuteronomy 32:4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

1 Kings 17:24 And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in thy mouth is truth.

2 Chronicles 18:15 And the king said to him, How many times shall I adjure thee that thou say nothing but the truth to me in the name of the LORD?

Sounds like the king is compelling him to tell the truth in the name of the LORD. Does this happen in court? Don't think so.

So should not your answer be:

"Your honour, if you wish me to swear upon this good book and proclaim the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, methinks my name would be inside it, not my hand upon it."

Ant

PS

More on oaths

Numbers 30:2 If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.

1 Kings 2:43 Why then hast thou not kept the oath of the LORD, and the commandment that I have charged thee with?

Ecclesiastes 8:2 I counsel thee to keep the king's commandment, and that in regard of the oath of God.

Ezekiel 21:23 And it shall be unto them as a false divination in their sight, to them that have sworn oaths: but he will call to remembrance the iniquity, that they may be taken.

Hebrews 6:16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.

Maybe it's not coincidence I was combining 2 docs this morning from Mark and Freerad. I enclose for all's pleasure.

----------------------------------

On 7/11/08, John Wilson wrote:

Dear thommy,

I recognize a lot of what you attribute to me ...but some bits don't ring a bell, at all.

Why is there no mention of my saying that each juror asks "So help me God" in order for them to administer Justice because when two or more are gathered in His name, He is amongst them ... which complies with Matthew 18: 15 - 20.

Why is there no mention of the Levels of Jurisdiction that I promote, ie: at the top, Theocracy; in the middle, Democracy; and at the bottom, Bureaucracy (see attached ...in fact, if someone wants to go to the trouble, best to read my website http://www.rightsandwrong.com.au fully, to see what I actually promote.

Don't forget what is demanded of anyone giving evidence, ie: to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Yours sincerely,
John Wilson.

------------------------------------------

WHAT IS SOVEREIGNTY?

John Wilson says; Sovereignty is defined as "the ultimate overseer or supreme authority in a state. In a state sovereignty is vested in the institution, person, or body to impose law on everyone else and to alter any pre-existing law."

Terence says; The sovereignty in every land is that of God, and the absolute error in every land today is where a 'chief, king, or other warrior' group' wielding force of arms has seized control of a land mass, and keeps the populace subjugated and enslaved to rules named 'the law,' and these rules force the 'enforcers' to defy their Creator as they punish all for any non-conformity.

John Wilson says; In Australia sovereignty lies with the people because we are a Democracy where, by definition, the people rule.

Terence says; The people do not rule nor is there any Democracy, nor does sovereignty lie with the people because, - - - the people have no 'power' to disagree to the 'rules' or acts or statutes or other decrees raised up by the 'elect' that control their every activity, and the true 'sovereign' power is the RULE book for ITS TEXT ‘impersonally’ (without conscience) dictates the terms and conditions that are forcefully imposed upon the people and, - - -

The content of said unholy 'book' is inspired by men whose minds are controlled by the invisible Dark Sovereign Power, and via IT the books the Dark imposes its cruel 'inquisition,' monetary extortion, control, enslavement and punishment upon errant man.

John Wilson says; Australia is a Common Law country, where the law made by the common people prevails over all other forms of law. The Australian Constitution is, itself, Common Law because it was directly approved by and can only be altered by a referendum of the common people (s. 128).

Terence says; Error, the 'law' is made by 'some' people and imposed upon all others in the name of the king, chief, and the nation and ‘the people‘ and, - - - the Constitution most certainly was NOT 'approved' by anyone as its content is imposed upon all the new born and all ‘ad infinitum.’

John Wilson says; Australian State and Federal Parliaments create Statute Law, which are only laws made indirectly by the common people, through their elected representatives.

Terence says; Error, all 'decrees' name 'the law' enshrined with punitive attachments for non-conformity are invoked by the Dark Sovereign power through the minds of those that have taken it upon themselves to 'dictate' policy, terms, conditions, upon other mortals, and these 'ignorant' souls accrue a very painful due to God for their arrogance.

John Wilson says; No one man has sovereignty over another.

Terence says; This above statement is 'mere words,' for whether it is 'a' man or a million that 'consent' for a rule or ruling to be made that in any way controls the freedom of or free choice of another, or in any way disadvantages or punishes the 'other one,' then the 'one or a million' are exercising 'sovereignty' over the 'other one.'

John Wilson says; The American Declaration of Independence says "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness --

Terence says; The American Declaration of Independence statement is also simply 'words,' for the American RULE book that 'governs' the activity of everyone does not 'recognise' anyone as being free to live their life in happiness unless they are in conformity to every 'ruling' imposed upon them month after month by the vain and insane politicians that cannot control the 'thoughts' that stroll through their minds, and any person perceived as a conscientious objector is caste out of society using imprisonment or death.

John Wilson says; That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - "Inalienable" means that those rights "cannot be given away nor taken away." Such rights are sacred - "all men are (so) endowed by their Creator".

Terence says; Government 'agencies' secure their 'rights' to control, regulate, and abuse others using force of arms, (the gun) and these rights are thus taken by force, and no enforcer sees the life of those beneath their 'gun' as being sacred in any way because, all enforcers are 'faithless' non-believing infidels.

John Wilson says; Ancient civilizations such as the Romans regarded the number 12 as sacred, ie: "safeguarded or required by religious or reverance or tradition, indefeasible, inviolable, sacrosanct". Juries of 12, bound by oath, were regarded as a sacrament, which are the "visible signs of agreement between God and individuals". Only then could there be "the lawful judgement of his Peers" (Magna Carta)

Terence says; Any person defiant of God's "Love one another and go your way in peace and be merciful and forgiving" Command is an 'idiot,' and God said "Judge not lest ye be so judged" - - - and silly mortals believe that an 'oath' repudiates, nullifies, or sets them above the "As you do is done unto you" supreme Law of God and they are in error.

Any person judging another as requiring punitive correction and imposing 'sentence' has the same 'sword' raised up above their own head and they condemn themselves within the 'eye for an eye - equal - as you sow so shall ye reap' punitive aspect of God's Law.

John Wilson says; Trial by Jury is the confirmation of the "Freeman" status (as per Magna Carta) and the sovereignty of the People. Tyrants want to abolish Trial by Jury so that they can assume sovereignty.

Terence says; Trial by Jury is the confirmation of the 'fall' of man, in that 'some' believe that others are 'as God' with the power to judge them and others believe that they 'as God' having the power to condemn, judge and punish.

The only 'time' that man can 'judge' another is whereby one sees the other as walking in a manner contrary to that dictated by God's RULING; "Love one another and go your way in peace and be merciful and forgiving" Command, and they then 'judge' that this errant needs educating through good counsel. Only thus does the 'judge' or 'jury' themselves remain within God's Command and remain within the positive aspect of God's "As you do is done unto you" supreme Law.

John Wilson says; No one man can pass judgement on another but there must be the unanimous verdict of 12 of his equals, "beyond a reasonable doubt", for an accused to be punished for violating the rights of another. Juries exercise their sovereignty in every action brought before them by judging the justice of the law or laws cited by the parties. Law and justice are not synonymous because a law can be unjust.

Terence says; Any person using any 'law of man' to impose any punishment upon another is being unjust to their own soul, and they do suffer the penalty within God's Law, be it in this realm or another in the after life. God's Law is inviolate, immutable, and absolutely ‘Just.’

John Wilson says; The Preamble to the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights says "Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law."

Terence says; The UN Preamble is simply their justification to defy God and to use force as a means to ' protect' those being abused.

Man sees not that the 'abused' are simply paying their dues to God at the hands of ignorant non-believers. Man sees not that as he uses force to quell tyranny and rebellion, that he man is a 'rebel' in God's eyes and no better than his 'foe.' Peace and education and mercy and forgiveness is the ONLY WAY to go.

John Wilson says; Juries are just such a protection at law with Magna Carta, granting "for ever" the right to Trial by Jury. Trial by Jury is the result of the wisdom of generations and has been sustained and honoured over the centuries by the wisdom of further generations.

Terence says; Trial by Jury is the result of the ignorance of past generations that is the ‘sins of our forefathers’ that arose due to their Dark emotions within, and this ‘precedent’ is now so ingrained within the psyche of man that see it as ‘Just’ when in fact its ‘activity’ means that all ‘Jury’ participants place their own souls in spiritual jeopardy.

John Wilson says; To survive, Common Law must be in harmony with Natural Law. Natural Law is the permanent underlying basis of all law. Philosophers have extolled that there was a kind of perfect justice given to man by nature and man's laws should conform to this as closely as possible.

Terence says; God’s Law is the ONLY ‘Just and equitable’ Law, and it is in operation at all times and in every realm of consciousness. It is ‘apportioned’ at the time and in the place so ordained by God.

To ‘survive’ spiritually, man must now ‘abolish’ and ‘burn’ every ‘law’ book of man and simply UNDERSTAND that God has but ONE Law.

Man’s ‘laws’ arose at the ‘hands’ of the powerful for the primary purpose of taxation extortion, and from this it ‘moved’ in controlling every activity of man and added punitive strictures for any non-conformity.

John Wilson says; Theories of Natural Law have been an important part of jurisprudence throughout history. The moral power of Natural Law derives from the fact that man's innate nature (itself part of the nature of the cosmos) and his propensities are viewed as ideal or inherently good.

Terence says; Only the ‘pure’ sin free spirit souls that abide in the Light have NO ‘dark sinful emotions of greed, vanity, pride, anger, jealousy, fear, hatred, etc., within.

All others are ‘with’ sin, and thus are ‘variable’ in their ‘inherent’ nature, some being extremely vindictive and aggressive, merciless and unforgiving, and others ‘less or more.’

Regrettably the ‘laws-rules-decrees-dictates’ of mortal men are inherently bad, for they cause others to be enslaved to them the dictates of others and all suffer ‘penance’ or penalty, and NONE are free.

John Wilson says; Immanuel Kant said that in all men there is a categorical imperative, ie: they know what is right and what is wrong. This unconditional, absolute, explicit, direct and plain-speaking bidding of conscience creates the ultimate moral law and comprises the conditions under which all members of society can enjoy the maximum freedom from subjection to the arbitrary will of others.

Terence says; The above is ERROR, for all men believe that what is wrong is right, thus all men fight and punish rather than living in peace as commanded by God.

The ‘wrong’ way is now so ingrained that everyone is ‘happy’ to be enslaved and happy to vindictively ‘burn’ others that appear more ‘sinful’ than they are.

Man suffers due to believing that there is no ‘Law of God’ or through being ignorant of this fact. Man sees not that God is ALL – Both the Light (Creative) and the Dark (Destructive) and both aspects of this divine energy have ONE and the same Law.

It follows that if you are kind, loving, merciful, compassionate, forgiving and free giving of your ‘profits,’ then you cannot VOID the tribute of benevolence bequeathed upon you by God through others equally true to the LIGHT energy of God.

It follows that if you are unkind, punitive, merciless, unforgiving, or forcefully taxing funds from others income, then you cannot AVOID the punitive retribution imposed upon you by God through others equally true to the DARK energy of God.

Let it be CLEARLY understood that 98% of the population of this realm ARE the ‘lost race’ on their ‘way’ to eternal damnation in the wastelands below. Only I know this FACT, and all I am here to do is to reinstate THE TRUTH on earth so that a ‘few’ of ‘them’ will save themselves as they turn over a new leaf and ‘bow’ to the Command of the Creator before their ‘last day’ on earth.

Note; Original compiled by J. Wilson.

Note; Response compiled by Terence http://www.the-testament-of-truth.com

Read my ‘God is God’- page 94 at;

http://www.the-testament-of-truth.com/testamnt/testindx.htm

Read my ‘Sovereign Right’-

http://www.the-testament-of-truth.com/web/sovereign.htm

Read my ‘Consequence of actions’-

http://www.the-testament-of-truth.com/web/suaction.htm

There is a copy of this document on line as Item 163 at;

http://www.the-testament-of-truth.com/web/other.htm

--------------------------

Very well put, Ant.
Gee.
=============
If the intention are for one to tell the truth, would one need to be presented with facts first to proceed in the first place ?
If you take an Oath to tell the truth, you would be perjuring yourself, and thus led into the mouth of the LION.

This is ultimately what they want, they want a unilateral contract that you entered by yourself, for yourself to crucify yourself.

Oh they have the system so worked out it is not funny, and when you do not comply, they hold you in the gray bar motel until you concede.

The ones who hold out are the want who will succeed and be left alone.

If you truly know who you are, you will not give into their extortion and threatening methods.

Excellent information that is being passed around

Peace TO All
====================
Ask them what their oaths mean in law as if they fail to know what true allegiance means they are incompetent.

Tis a simple test that in light of such widespread corruption is of high merit to retain the honor and integrity of the proceedings
=============
Dear Edward,

Done that...and they don't even know the words of their oath. Of course, they're incompetent....and they don't care.

Yours sincerely,
John Wilson.
================
Have you considered their Bonds?
http://allcreatorsgifts.blogspot.com/2008/04/their-bonds-are-their-buns....
=================
Dear Edward,

Australian judges are supposedly appointed by HM QE2 and she is supposedly vicariously liable for what wrongs they do.

Yours sincerely,
John Wilson.
==============
AMEN!

James 1:25 the perfect law of liberty
A man warring for YHWH (God) should not be associated with secular business
===================