[bruce]

*NOTICE:

Public confession and abjuration of alleged doctrinal truths previously stated by ME-bruce, and I repent of my sin.

*After much research I can no longer hold to traditions/doctrines of men.

I would also admonish anyone who holds similar beliefs to please challenge their own paradigms to also perfect the truth through YHWH's law.

*To set the record straight I will emphasize in brackets “[]” my textual retractions in red.

“by Sonik” wrote:

(Sonik Speed @ Jan 17 2006, 10:28 PM)

Anyway, if you consider yourself a follower God, then please answer these questions. Once answers are given, then I wish to follow up with your answers. True or False would be fine. If you however believe a True or False statement is impossible, then please be specific on why. Remember, I am asking for your opinions, supported through facts.

1 ) JESUS IS GOD (True or False)

2 ) GOD IS JESUS (True or False)

3 ) ALL JEWS ARE CHRISTIANS (True or False)

4 ) ALL CHRISTIANS ARE JEWS (True or False)

5 ) THE BIBLE IS 100% RIGHT IN EVERYTHING IT TALKS ABOUT (True or False)

6 ) FATHER, SON AND HOLY SPIRIT? WHAT IS THIS?

That should be fine for now. I guess when a few people answer these questions, then I can do a follow up. Again, there is no deception here. If you think the question shoulld be worded differently, then please state so…

Sonik Speed

ALL “RED” text between brackets “[ ]” is retracted.

“Edited/Retracted text bruce” wrote:

Sonik,

Retraction between brackets “[ ]”

[Certain elements must be employed to ascertain the truth, one of which is faith, which defies logic in general.]

Now, the question is, can one accept the KJV Bible as the true ?word of God? since the original writings have been re-translated several times by biblical scholars and linguists of the day and [the fact that most of these men were of a universal religion and also royal subjects of the King?] More on this later in Q. 5) 

1) JESUS IS GOD (True or False)

Retraction between brackets “[ ]”

A)  [True, ref. KJV Col. 2:9 http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/wor…29034-7776.html For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily…]

2 ) [GOD IS JESUS (True or False)

Retraction between brackets “[ ]”

A) [True, ref. KJV Isaiah 9:6 http://kingjbible.com/isaiah/9.htm note* the everlasting father]

3) ALL JEWS ARE CHRISTIANS (True or False)

Retraction between brackets “[ ]”

A) [False, most Jews reject Christ as the Messiah which the name (Christian) was pinned by the Greeks and Romans onto followers of Christ and that the name (Christian) was meant as a reproach.]

 

4) ALL CHRISTIANS ARE JEWS (True or False)

Retraction between brackets “[ ]”

A) [False, here are the only Christian refs. in the Bible. Acts 11:26; 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16 To say that all Christians are Jews is like saying all Christians are old testament chosen people but without the Living Christ sacrifice having been made by Jesus which also extended salvation to the Gentiles.

Questions 3 & 4 are oxymorons in my opinion.  The Jews proclaim old testament law and reject Christ.  The Christians proclaim the new testament plan of salvation and proclaim the old laws were only a shadow and type of the fulfillment of Christ.]

5) THE BIBLE IS 100% RIGHT IN EVERYTHING IT TALKS ABOUT (True or False)

Retraction between brackets “[ ]”

A) [Not 100% verified, yet entirely possible, ref. KJV 2Tim 3:16,17 http://kingjbible.com/2_timothy/3.htm  How can anyone verify 100% of the bible since it contains millenniums of history and millenniums of prophecy?  Perhaps one would be foolish to make such an absolute answer either way unless of course one is the Almighty God and all knowing.

One must consider the facts that the compilations of the 66 books that comprise the KJV bible are translations by at least 54 human beings by order of the King. They were given 15 rules to follow: http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html

One must also consider the fact that some if not all of these books of the bible we use today are translations from the original authors comprised of several different languages. Also one must look at the era and the context of the scripture to grasp the original intent of the author conveyed by numerous writers and translators. If you need to confirm authenticity for the bible the Dead Sea Scrolls provide evidence of this great work.  http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/education…discovery.shtml

Until the compilation of the KJV bible in the 15th century most of the Christians had very little if any access to the word of God.  Ordinary people relied on what the Church and its leadership taught them as the supposed ?word from God? not having the scriptures in their hands written in their own language to broaden their understanding of the will of the Creator.]

6) FATHER, SON AND HOLY SPIRIT? WHAT IS THIS?

Retraction between brackets “[ ]”

A)[The 3 Titles above are the offices of God not seperate personalities.  Most of us fathers have the same offices; we are fathers of our children, sons of our own fathers and certainly creatures with a soul or spirit or at least I hope so.  How many other offices could one hold?  I am a carpenter, a driver, a hunter etc. but still only one.

Catholics [universal church] created a doctrine out of the titles calling it the Holy Trinity.  Surely more manifestations of the Creator could be found. This doctrine has its origins at the Nicean Council in 325 A.D. Nowhere in scriptures can the word trinity be found.  The scriptures declare without question that there is only ONE God. IMHO the trinity is a man made teaching that puts one in complete contradiction to the word of God.  Here is the jest of the matter; I won't judge you for believing in a trinity if you don't judge me for believing in One God.  Funny the Jews only believe in One God also.]

 

I hope this helps. 

bruce

[bruce]

Author #2 and fellow Guardians,

Thanks for the links! I can't help but think, what more can be done to help? Although I am just a beginner in this great battle I do believe that there has to be a way to slay the giant.

The more I travel the chamber halls of this Ministry the more I am blessed with a greater purpose for my life. In my opinion its all a part of the “great commission”.

I guess it all boils down to where the righteous and just laws originally came from that being from the mouth of God and his written words to whom soever will.

By including scripture references throughout your work it does give the glory to God and empowers us to do what is right. 😀

bruce

[bruce]

rattler14 wrote on Dec 12 2005, 12:36 PM:

Sonik Speed wrote on Dec 12 2005, 04:57 AM:

Mr Bruce…

Thanks for the lengthy statements. Your last sentence read as follows:

Oh by the way I have a question. Is there any justification for the killing of another human being and if there is just what might that be?

Who is this question directed to and what in reference are you talking about?

Sonik Speed

[post=”2002″][/post]

Mr Bruce,

I will offer you one case when I believe it's justified. When they are actively trying to kill you.

Meaning, if I'm getting my butt kicked and the other person decides to pull a gun to finish me off, I feel justified in doing whatever I can not to die in the present situation. If I can do it without killing, but merely containing, then so be it.

9/11 is obviously not that type of scenario. Everyone killed in those buildings were murdered unjustly, IMHO.

[post=”2003″][/post]

Greetings rattler,

Yep yep I agree self defense killing is justifiable by Civil Laws. Not sure about in Gods eyes but that is another topic.

Can you clarify what you mean in your statement:

[9/11 is obviously not that type of scenario. Everyone killed in those buildings were murdered unjustly, IMHO.]

And what relevance 911 has with respect to self defense in the context of the war in Iraq. And if you are inferring that by engaging Iraq that we are defending our Country by means of self defense I don?t believe the (Conspiracy theorys) lies that were told to justify the invasion. WMD's etc. IMHO. And if you do still believe I respect your belief although I do take issue with it. Don't feel obligated to respond because it is probably none of my business anyway and I respect your personal views being on a public forum.

bruce

[bruce]

😉

[bruce]

Bing wrote on Nov 14 2005, 03:21 PM:

The real key is Section 7, B ) 2) A) B ) C )and D ), which asserts that:

“B ) Certification Requirement- No prosecution of any offense described in this subsection may be undertaken by the United States, except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or any Assistant Attorney General specially designated by the Attorney General that–“

“(1) he or she has reasonable cause to believe that the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person was a motivating factor underlying the alleged conduct of the defendant; and”

“(2) he or his designee or she or her designee has consulted with State or local law enforcement officials regarding the prosecution and determined that–“

“A ) the State does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to exercise jurisdiction;”

“B ) the State has requested that the Federal Government assume jurisdiction;”

“C ) the State does not object to the Federal Government assuming jurisdiction; or”

“D ) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.”

I can tell you right now, Bruce, and you can tell your Reverend friend, that HR2662, is, from a legal standpoint, only enforceable for crimes committed on land that has been lawfully ceded to the federal government.

That's it. So don't get your panties in a bunch. At least not yet.

A sovereign state CAN NOT simply “ask” the federal government to simply “assume jurisdiction.”  Constitutional Law does not work like that.  Unfortunately, the very corrupted federal and state governments DO operate like that.

When Congress legislates, it is presumed that they know what their Constitutional Authority is, and what is the impact of prior US Supreme Court decisions upon any proposed legislation.

The federal government does NOT obtain lawful jurisidction over a crime committed within the territory of a Union state, merely because a “state” does not object to the federal government assuming said jurisdiction.  Such thinking is wrong-headed, legally and factually incorrect, and pure nonsense.

That said, I also noticed that the proposed Act did not legally define the term “State”. So, I presume one must look to another Section of some other US Code Title, in order to see how “State” is defined.

One thing is clear, it is doubtful that “State” means “state”.

Which means that once again, the corrupt US Congress is in a STATE of confusion.

Bing 😡

[post=”1937″][/post]

Bing,

Thanks for the admonition and I value it greatly. I am waking up and I am encouraged by you and other Guardians that we will win in the end!!!!! What a great ministry!!!!!

I am learning not to just sit back a wait for things to change. Most of what has already happened to our Constitution (shredding) was allowed by way of unchallenged legislation however illegal and repugnant it might have been but it was enacted because of non-rebuttal or failure of ?we the people? allowing it to happen given that we do have legal remedies irregardless of citizenship status. In fact Marbury v Madison 1803 stands as a Supreme law of the land and gives me consolation that there is still hope!

I understand that most of our efforts will get quashed by the neo-con driven government but we must stand against the formidable enemy of our freedom by whatever means possible i.e. The Great IRS HOAX, Federal Mafia, ?The Law that never was?, WTP Regress?., Petitions, Letters to Congress, Forums provoking each other to good works etc etc.

I guess at the end of the day quoting from memory only from a bible admonition I learned in Sunday school the scriptures say that ?faith without works is dead? and ?to whom much is given, much is required? .

bruce

[bruce]

😉

[bruce]

Fellow Guardians,

The truth about the 911demolition is catching on. However most of the sheeple that rely on TV to feed their addictions and rely on the fed funded networks to keep them informed can not think for themselves nor have an open mind. I think somehow because of all of our personal battles with the LIRS and Dept. of Injustice we have been awakened to the terrorist plans already in play against all free people. How many of us would have open minds to all of the conspiracys which are before us if we had not discovered people like each of you that provoke each other to thought or good works. These poor people only believe what they see on the network news. Ever been there? Dylan Avery and two of his college friends created an exellent video documentary for all to see and at no charge. Here is a link to his web site with access to the video. http://www.loosechange911.com/ Also here is another great site with download video on 911 to share at will. http://www.question911.com/links.php . Fox 40 WICZ aired the loosechange videos for millions of Americans to see so the word is getting out. I find in my own experience that just like trying to spread the truth about the IRS Hoax that this 911 Demolition expose seperates me even more from my peers. Tis a lonely road we must travel.

Godspeed

bruce