Why god?

[informationx]

Ive seen god mentioned with some reverence in relation to the freeman movement. Personally speaking the least I have to do with god the better.

The god im talking about is the old testament god. The bloodthirsty, neurotic child killer, who prefers meat offerings instead of vegtables.

According to this guys totals, god killed at least 2,391,421 mainly from the old testament.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html

Do some of you mean this god? or are you talking about a more neutral concept of a creator?

thanks.

[yozhik]

My comprehension of this is; it is whatever you say it is.
Know who you are ... only you have first hand knowledge of you.
This also defines your Creator as yours to define.
If I was to project my version of a Creator onto you then I would be assuming first hand knowledge of who you are, whilst rejecting your first hand knowledge as inaccurate.
I do not subscribe to the Bible, in any of its man made forms.
The printed Bible is merely a representation of a story.
Altered, edited, interpreted, manipulated and corrupted.
The word of your creator lies within you; only you can decide who you answer to.

That's my truth. :D


.

[informationx]

yozhik

My comprehension of this is; it is whatever you say it is.
Know who you are ... only you have first hand knowledge of you.
This also defines your Creator as yours to define.
If I was to project my version of a Creator onto you then I would be assuming first hand knowledge of who you are, whilst rejecting your first hand knowledge as inaccurate.
I do not subscribe to the Bible, in any of its man made forms.
The printed Bible is merely a representation of a story.
Altered, edited, interpreted, manipulated and corrupted.
The word of your creator lies within you; only you can decide who you answer to.

That's my truth. :D

Thanks buddy :D

[miked]

Where does the wiord GOD come from? I know I never invented it! So who did and what was their purpose?

Mike

[pleasuredome]

Ive seen god mentioned with some reverence in relation to the freeman movement. Personally speaking the least I have to do with god the better.

The god im talking about is the old testament god. The bloodthirsty, neurotic child killer, who prefers meat offerings instead of vegtables.

According to this guys totals, god killed at least 2,391,421 mainly from the old testament.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html

Do some of you mean this god? or are you talking about a more neutral concept of a creator?

thanks.

in operating as a freeman, the more you mention god the better. i certainly dont refer to the bloodthirsty god in the old testament when i do. just remember that god is not defined in law, but is in law. i think thats one of the keys to stripping away all the commercial servitude.

[informationx]

in operating as a freeman, the more you mention god the better. i certainly dont refer to the bloodthirsty god in the old testament when i do. just remember that god is not defined in law, but is in law. i think thats one of the keys to stripping away all the commercial servitude.

Thanks pleasuredome, what god do you refer to then?, and how is it one of the keys to strip away commercial servitude?

Im not trying to be a smart arse, im just interested.

Kind regards. :D

info-x

[yozhik]

in operating as a freeman, the more you mention god the better. i certainly dont refer to the bloodthirsty god in the old testament when i do. just remember that god is not defined in law, but is in law. i think thats one of the keys to stripping away all the commercial servitude.

Recently I remember viewing an online NoUI which was crafted in a way I had not seen before.
The document was incredibly detailed and written in a more "legal" structure.
It was impressive to say the least.
What struck me more than most was that contained within the Notice, was its own "Interpretations and definitions" section; not unlike the Statutes prepared by parliament.

The reason I am referring to this, in this post is that if such a section existed in your documentation; i.e. an Interpretations and definitions section ... could you not define God to be whatever you determine God to be?

For example, could I not state as an understanding (or similar ... defined to illustrate point of post only);

"God" is defined as the Creator; the omnipotent being; the ultimate authority of law; the highest court of judgement and holder of the truth.

Then, whenever "God" is referred to in my Notice or whatever the document might be, it is as defined in the Interpretation and definitions section. Does this not also give protection from your words being misinterpreted or mistranslated into their legalese?

Just a thought ...

Peace and respect


.

[pleasuredome]

Recently I remember viewing an online NoUI which was crafted in a way I had not seen before.
The document was incredibly detailed and written in a more "legal" structure.
It was impressive to say the least.
What struck me more than most was that contained within the Notice, was its own "Interpretations and definitions" section; not unlike the Statutes prepared by parliament.

The reason I am referring to this, in this post is that if such a section existed in your documentation; i.e. an Interpretations and definitions section ... could you not define God to be whatever you determine God to be?

For example, could I not state as an understanding (or similar ... defined to illustrate point of post only);

"God" is defined as the Creator; the omnipotent being; the ultimate authority of law; the highest court of judgement and holder of the truth.

Then, whenever "God" is referred to in my Notice or whatever the document might be, it is as defined in the Interpretation and definitions section. Does this not also give protection from your words being misinterpreted or mistranslated into their legalese?

Just a thought ...

Peace and respect


.

i totally agree with that, there's nothing to stop you, and no one could prove otherwise. why not proclaim yourself to be god? if you did, what authority could they have over you? thats what david shayler did at the high court. the judge didnt deny it and just walked out.

[pleasuredome]

Thanks pleasuredome, what god do you refer to then?, and how is it one of the keys to strip away commercial servitude?

Im not trying to be a smart arse, im just interested.

Kind regards. :D

info-x

the god i refer to me, you and the people on the land of england.

[freeman_usa_]

I personally don't think this movement will work without God.

So, if God isn't in it, then you may as well count me out of it.

[somethinganonymous]

I personally don't think this movement will work without God.

So, if God isn't in it, then you may as well count me out of it.

God is in on it:)

I think it all boils down to thoughtpattern and writing and producing a NOI and even a COR is infact creating a new thoughtpattern and putting it into circulation. By having other people read the matterials you can in a somewhat ingenious way alter their thoughtpatterns and make them reflect on issues that they had never reflected on before. And, as thoughts equals maifesting reality, by producing alternative thoughtpatterns and putting them infto circulation, spreading one man's truth, you'd subtly create an alternative reality for all. This is God.

...If not, then I'm off to burn in the eternal flame of damnation with the rest of you lot.

[freeman_usa_]

I don't see why it's so hard for "people" to seek the truth.

It seems ironic to me that someone would would have so much doubt of the validity of government, media and educational systems when it comes to law yet they never ponder the thought that the opinions they have about Christ came from the same sources.


If becoming a freeman would cost me my Salvation, I can't pursue it.

[vladmir]

I stopped using the word 'God'.
Is this the same 'GOD' that is behind the 1 dollar bill, that the masonic brotherhood trusts?
If it is, then im out.
But then, there are indications that the word God comes from Sirius, which was called the Dog star by the ancient egyptians. So they just reversed Dog to make it God.
Incidently the word Sir also comes from Sirius.

So, i just use the words Prime Cause.

[Ian2day]

Freeman of the land is attaching yourself to land. As land is of this world and this materialistic world is supposidly Satans then Freeman on the land is a satanic declaration. Perhaps it is better to declare yourserlf as a sovereign spiritual being. With no thing known or unknown in the universe having claim unto thee.

[size_of_light]

According to this guys totals, god killed at least 2,391,421 mainly from the old testament.


Well he doesn't sound as omnipotent or bloodthirsty as Stalin or Mao, for example, who dwarfed his numbers and considered him a non-existent pissant anyway, so now I'm really confused.

[freeman_usa_]

I stopped using the word 'God'.
Is this the same 'GOD' that is behind the 1 dollar bill, that the masonic brotherhood trusts?
If it is, then im out.
But then, there are indications that the word God comes from Sirius, which was called the Dog star by the ancient egyptians. So they just reversed Dog to make it God.
Incidently the word Sir also comes from Sirius.

So, i just use the words Prime Cause.

No, the God on the 1 dollar bill is like a "FreeMan" that doesn't believe in him using God in conversation with a police officer to be nice. It's the same thing. That's something to chew on.

The word Dog only tracks back a few hundred years. hence the Egyptians had their own language, Dog is a word of English origin.

On a side note, God never gave a name.
Exodus 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
I personally think putting a name on him would limit him.

God Bless

[freeman_usa_]

Freeman of the land is attaching yourself to land. As land is of this world and this materialistic world is supposidly Satans then Freeman on the land is a satanic declaration. Perhaps it is better to declare yourserlf as a sovereign spiritual being. With no thing known or unknown in the universe having claim unto thee.

Is it not Freeman on the Land?

[metacomet]

The god im talking about is the old testament god. The bloodthirsty, neurotic child killer, who prefers meat offerings instead of vegtables.


That was never 'God' ;)

I think we're all aware of this. Religion was only so true in that the awakened masters had one clear message. Everything else... even the word God are fabrications and lies...

Soon the religious and atheists will have no argument whatsoever.

[vladmir]

http://www.halexandria.org/dward109.htm
Also of interest is the Dogon tribe which talks about gods who came from the star system Sirius.

[Ian2day]

No, the God on the 1 dollar bill is like a "FreeMan" that doesn't believe in him using God in conversation with a police officer to be nice. It's the same thing. That's something to chew on.

The word Dog only tracks back a few hundred years. hence the Egyptians had their own language, Dog is a word of English origin.

On a side note, God never gave a name.
Exodus 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
I personally think putting a name on him would limit him.

God Bless

Hmm God being nameless. So God is a titled position like sir or lord. Ah lord, there is another one of the titles used by the omipotent force. The lords prayer comes to mind. Namely the part 'Hallowed be thy name'. So Gods name is Hallowed? On dictionary.com under adjective it says that

regarded as holy; venerated; sacred: Hallowed be Thy name; the hallowed saints; our hallowed political institutions.

So are the UK parliaments God? Could we instigate our own parliament our own God which gives us all devine rights and repsonsibilitys? Hmm see how maybe Freeman on the Land can be the key to unlocking the truth. What truth though. Getting back to the deffinition on dictionary.com we can see it gives

Sanctified; consecrated: a hallowed cemetery

So can we conclude that any Parliament is a cemetery full of unliving creatures. A Strawman perhaps? So Parliament is not of the living world. It is a fiction inhabited by fictitious entity's pretending to be real living breathing human beings. So as living human beings we are not bound by the dead. So how do we prove that any of us are living? What are the requirements for a decleration fo life. The UN perhaps will say what constitues the living world.

How can we prove that anything in this world is alive though. As Icke says infinite love is the only truth everything else is illusion. With God beong unconditional love. This must mean that to love unconditional is to be God. Well I love unconditional so by defacto or default I am God. Is that a delusion or what. Perhaps the only real delusion is the denial of infinite love. With me being made in Gods image, God saw that I loved unconditionally and so God was on my side.

Is God still there with me. Who knows for sure. Maybe God could let me know if God is on my side. Casue if God is about infinite love then I am on your side to the end of infinity. I dont knwo how I ended up here. I started out with God being nameless. What if Gods name was so simple and yet so powerful. Gods name is Love. QED. I'm off to have a sleep and dream of love, no make that, to be love.

[metacomet]

I'll say this much about the name 'God'....

'Oh my God' is used a million times a day in the dumbest and most worthless situations... it is a profanity at this point. The word 'God' is profane.... it's power is done with.


However, people don't say "Oh my LORD" or use the word 'Lord' profanely ;)

Thereby 'Lord' remains a reverent and powerful name...

"Jesus" is such a powerful name, as it summons the subconscious imagery of Christ every time it's used, that it is unaffected by profane use. I have noticed this!

'God'... not that powerful. It's just the end of a profane statement now. OMG.

"Jesus Christ" very powerful. Even as a profanity, rarely uttered.

"Lord" directly refers to the creator... extremely powerful. Used only in churches and amongst prayer etc... churches are not necessarily holy institutions though *sigh*.

[dlb2007]

the more you mention god the better. i certainly dont refer to the bloodthirsty god in the old testament when i do. just remember that god is not defined in law, but is in law

This is interesting....

and the truth shall set you free?


So God is the source of all freedom and liberation, our salvation from the hands of the enemy. He is our light in the darkness?

What can the courts do if you do not recognise their authority and say the only authority over you is God?

[tien an]

I stopped using the word 'God'.
Is this the same 'GOD' that is behind the 1 dollar bill, that the masonic brotherhood trusts?
If it is, then im out.
But then, there are indications that the word God comes from Sirius, which was called the Dog star by the ancient egyptians. So they just reversed Dog to make it God.
Incidently the word Sir also comes from Sirius.

So, i just use the words Prime Cause.

Ooh...you've got me on one of my favourite subjects now; etymology.

I dispute the theory that the word 'God' is the word 'dog' in reverse.
In fact, I was about to write that that is the most absurd statement I've ever read...until I read the next bit:
"Incidently the word Sir also comes from Sirius."

Allow me:
The word god, according to my dicitonaries, stems from Old English.
Given that English is made up of French, German (in the main), and Latin and Greek, with some new, invented words it seems logical that it came from one of those languages.
German: Gott
French: Dieu
Latin: Deius
Greek: ?

Perhaps I'm over-simplifying things, but I would suggest that the word came to (Old) English through German.

Sir is, in fact, a condensation of the French word 'Seigneur', which means 'Lord'.
Further, 'Monseigneur' is translated as 'my lord', condenses to Monsieur, which translates as 'Mister'.
Perhaps the reason why Freemen reject the term 'Mister' is because it indicates that one human being is born better than the other. (Why else call someone 'my lord'?)

It is a particularly beautiful concept, for me, that not only does the Freeman movement refute the idea of there being a higher authority other than God, there is also room in the movement for atheists, for whom they themselves are their own highest authority.

Personally, I believe that we all are manifestations of God, that God (and the Devil) are within us and that we choose which to allow itself to manifest through us. (incoroprates the notion of 'free will' for human beings that the 'Devil' supposedly negotiated with 'God').
If I am wrong, and there is a higher entity, a supranatural entity...then I suppose that must be God, the 'creator'.

This is only my personal opinion and I wouldn't dream of imposing it on anyone else.

It's interesting that someone mentioned the fact that God remains nameless.
Some people, in their piety, avoid uttering the word and write it thus: G-d.

May your God go with you...

[yozhik]

On a side note, God never gave a name.
Exodus 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.


Sorry, but this stood out like the proverbial dogs balls for me.

It is always suggested that we must know who we are.
There are also strong opinions premised on we are sovereign.
Much of the Freeman understanding is based on the power of "I".

Can you not see the significance of this biblical reference?
"I am that I am".

He never gave a name.

Is this not EXACTLY the plight of the Freeman?
Do you know your name? Your real name?
Or do you only know the fiction placed upon you like a cloak of lead?

We are also taught that "God" is inside each and every one of us.
The truth of the power of "I"?
The label of "God" is man made; similar to the person is the creation of man to harness the power of "I". Discard the label "God" as you would discard the fictitious labels placed around your neck.
Know who you are.

Maybe I'm sensationalising this, but for me, this biblical reference has sparked an epiphany.

I am that I am.


.

[Ian2day]

Sorry, but this stood out like the proverbial dogs balls for me.

It is always suggested that we must know who we are.
There are also strong opinions premised on we are sovereign.
Much of the Freeman understanding is based on the power of "I".

Can you not see the significance of this biblical reference?
"I am that I am".

He never gave a name.

Is this not EXACTLY the plight of the Freeman?
Do you know your name? Your real name?
Or do you only know the fiction placed upon you like a cloak of lead?

We are also taught that "God" is inside each and every one of us.
The truth of the power of "I"?
The label of "God" is man made; similar to the person is the creation of man to harness the power of "I". Discard the label "God" as you would discard the fictitious labels placed around your neck.
Know who you are.

Maybe I'm sensationalising this, but for me, this biblical reference has sparked an epiphany.

I am that I am.


.

Perhaps this should be

Ian am that Ian am

[informationx]

Ooh...you've got me on one of my favourite subjects now; etymology.

I dispute the theory that the word 'God' is the word 'dog' in reverse.
In fact, I was about to write that that is the most absurd statement I've ever read...until I read the next bit:
"Incidently the word Sir also comes from Sirius."

Allow me:
The word god, according to my dicitonaries, stems from Old English.
Given that English is made up of French, German (in the main), and Latin and Greek, with some new, invented words it seems logical that it came from one of those languages.
German: Gott
French: Dieu
Latin: Deius
Greek: ?

Perhaps I'm over-simplifying things, but I would suggest that the word came to (Old) English through German.

Sir is, in fact, a condensation of the French word 'Seigneur', which means 'Lord'.
Further, 'Monseigneur' is translated as 'my lord', condenses to Monsieur, which translates as 'Mister'.
Perhaps the reason why Freemen reject the term 'Mister' is because it indicates that one human being is born better than the other. (Why else call someone 'my lord'?)

It is a particularly beautiful concept, for me, that not only does the Freeman movement refute the idea of there being a higher authority other than God, there is also room in the movement for atheists, for whom they themselves are their own highest authority.

Personally, I believe that we all are manifestations of God, that God (and the Devil) are within us and that we choose which to allow itself to manifest through us. (incoroprates the notion of 'free will' for human beings that the 'Devil' supposedly negotiated with 'God').
If I am wrong, and there is a higher entity, a supranatural entity...then I suppose that must be God, the 'creator'.

This is only my personal opinion and I wouldn't dream of imposing it on anyone else.

It's interesting that someone mentioned the fact that God remains nameless.
Some people, in their piety, avoid uttering the word and write it thus: G-d.

May your God go with you...

Though you would like this

god

O.E. god "supreme being, deity," from P.Gmc. *guthan (cf. Du. god, Ger. Gott, O.N. guð, Goth. guþ), from PIE *ghut- "that which is invoked" (cf. Skt. huta- "invoked," an epithet of Indra), from root *gheu(e)- "to call, invoke." But some trace it to PIE *ghu-to- "poured," from root *gheu- "to pour, pour a libation" (source of Gk. khein "to pour," khoane "funnel" and khymos "juice;" also in the phrase khute gaia "poured earth," referring to a burial mound). "Given the Greek facts, the Germanic form may have referred in the first instance to the spirit immanent in a burial mound" [Watkins]. Cf. also Zeus. Not related to good. Originally neut. in Gmc., the gender shifted to masc. after the coming of Christianity. O.E. god was probably closer in sense to L. numen. A better word to translate deus might have been P.Gmc. *ansuz, but this was only used of the highest deities in the Gmc. religion, and not of foreign gods, and it was never used of the Christian God. It survives in Eng. mainly in the personal names beginning in Os-.
"I want my lawyer, my tailor, my servants, even my wife to believe in God, because it means that I shall be cheated and robbed and cuckolded less often. ... If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." [Voltaire]
First record of Godawful "terrible" is from 1878; God speed as a parting is from c.1470. God-fearing is attested from 1835. God bless you after someone sneezes is credited to St. Gregory the Great, but the pagan Romans (Absit omen) and Greeks had similar customs.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=god&searchmode=none

[jud1th]

History is the word of the victors, the bible was written by man, afew hundred years after christ died, so how can anyone believe what is written in it.
We all know how controlling it is, and what always puzzled me, was how we are meant to fear God and yet Love him?
Saying God killed X amount of people, just gives others the justification to do the same,
eg Bush,Blair etc

[tien an]

Though you would like this



http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=god&searchmode=none

Ah....thank you!

[fromthatshow]

When I speak of God, I speak of the creator, who is in all things.
So I could say that it is not the God of the Bible, but it would have to be the God of the Bible, because God is in all things and all ideas. So God was even those ideas about him.