Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International
Edmonton Ecclesia in the Universal State of Awareness
Local number 10140 -115st
No code non commercial activity.
Psalms118:8 Ezra 7:23-26
From: Donald Gordon Friske February 29th 2008 A.D.
c\o 12345-67 Street
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada the geographical location
No code, non-commercial
To: Travis Weleschuk the private man acting as a de facto highway sheriff having jurisdiction over contracted legal fiction corporate entities created by Alberta Transportation under a commercial Statute applicable upon the corporate registrants of the de facto Province of Alberta.
c/o Sheriff Branch
11th floor, Legislature Annex
Edmonton, Alberta the geographical location.
No code non commercial
This is a Private ecclesiastical non commercial Assumptive contract/agreement/covenant and understanding between Minister Donald Gordon Friske and Travis Weleschuk the private man
Provided under protest, duress and intimidation.
Hello Travis, I am Donald-Gordon; Friske, a flesh blood and bone living man created by God and an officiating minster of the Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International an ecclesiastical organism of other flesh blood and bone men and women. Travis, by my sending you this good faith agreement I do attempt to ascertain all the facts in honour. If you have any reason or proof to suggest or provide to me God’s minister officially performing the functions of my calling, that the following statements of the facts are not true, you are being offered the opportunity to refute these offered facts so as to clear yourself of any assumptive contractual awareness of the truth of such facts. Also be aware this communication of agreement cannot be lawfully inquired of at public or government expense as it is a provable private matter and government funding cannot support private contracts. All legal bills must and shall be paid for out of your private pocket no different than Maurice Duplessis the former Premier and Attorney General of Quebec.
Declaration of private Ministry
under God and his perpetual law.
I declare that I am that God created, my Christian given name Donald Gordon of the Friske family, to be a private ecclesiastic man under God as my creator and that no man or women has a moral or a lawful right to impose anything upon me without my informed consent; and that I do hereby renounce any fraudulent corporate assumptive contract and do honour the directive obligation to respect the equal God given freedoms of other men and women under his law.
To all those who set eyes on this Ecclesiastical declaration, I do hereby, officially performing the functions of my calling, serve notice to all private men and women that receive this that any offer herein, prior to, or on my part does not imply acceptance of intimidation, violence, or threats of violence against me, and that no such offer implies that I will submit to any intimidation in future applies. I as a bondservant of Christ do henceforth offer the good faith proclamation of my free born will to live in peace and declare that, by right of God, the de facto authorities edicts, codes, obligations statutes taxes, licenses and prohibitions of a defacto commercial entity are not binding on me or applicable upon God’s ministers and his Children.
1. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact that I Minster of Christ Donald –Gordon; of the Friske family was on the 19th of November 2007 A.D., unlawfully intimidated, obstructed, detained, assaulted and confined, by you Travis Weleschuk in your private capacity, by methods not sanctioned and as such being a perceived and negative nuisance to my ability to perform an official function of my ministerial calling, in violation of 176, 423 and 180 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
2.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact that on or about the 19th day of November two thousand seven that you, Travis Weleschuk, having observed the non commercial not for hire ecclesiastical engine assisted conveyance that I, Donald Gordon of the Friske family was sojourning in, engaged your emergency lights on your cruiser when there was no emergency..
3. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact that on or about the 19th day of November two thousand seven that that when you pulled me over you saw that I was displaying a clear legible sign on the back of the ecclesiastical conveyance indicating non-commercial not for hire, and upon seeing that legible sign and that no commercial license plate was visible you signalled me by violating your own policy of emergency light usage by turning them on when there was no emergency, in feigned attempt to get me to stop.
4. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that upon approaching me after I had stopped I informed you that I was a flesh, bone and blood living man travelling the public way in peace and you knowingly tried to intimidate me to follow your defacto demands to violate my right to remain silent and maintain possession of my property being my name and to use it for a commercial purpose in attachment to a dead in law process.
5. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that you intended to act as a nuisance by making me feel uncomfortable in failing to perform your duty to identify yourself me as your first response to my demand for your name and identification was Quote “It will be on the ticket”.
6. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that on this occasion you without complying to my request for identification and immediately after you saying you where not offering violence, that you did without notice or lawful reason forcibly seized my arm and began assaulting me and to obstruct my ministry by unlawfully placing me in hand cuffs.
7. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that you continued to assault me with a blunt object and then with pepper spray as I struggled to defend and protect my ecclesiastical property under a right of claim in order to remain in possession of it and at no time had you offered your identification in name or badge number despite my repeated requests.
8. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that you refused to release your grasp on me as I repeatedly lawfully demanded you to leave my automobile, to which you made several replies, quote “ I am only doing my job...’’
9. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that you verbally threatened me with violence and that harm and punishment would be applied to me further to your own wilful violations of the criminal code, by screaming at me ...quote “You are going to get taser up your ass when they get here” and “Your in big trouble now”
10. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that I was, on the date you did unlawfully obstruct me assault me intimidate me and act as a nuisance towards my ministry, lawfully able to resist with as much force as necessary the unlawful attempts at assaulting me arresting me obstructing me or detaining my property as per the law that only applies to officers of the fraudulent corporation known as Canada and it’s de facto provinces.
Ezekiel 33:6-10 no use implied by warning of hole in law you may fall into
Defence of Person
34. (1) Everyone who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.
Extent of justification
(2) Everyone who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) He believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 34; 1992, c. 1, s. 60(F).
Defence of Property
39. (1) Everyone who is in peaceable possession of personal property under a claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending that possession, even against a person entitled by law to possession of it, if he uses no more force than is necessary.
Defence without claim of right
(2) Everyone who is in peaceable possession of personal property, but does not claim it as of right or does not act under the authority of a person who claims it as of right, is not justified or protected from criminal responsibility for defending his possession against a person who is entitled by law to possession of it.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 39.
11. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that I am not a member of a dead legal fiction entity corporation known as Canada or Alberta and that specifically my name, being my ecclesiastical possession under the exclusive authority of Jehovah, is not allowed by my faith in God’s commands as defended by the Queen you swore an oath to be truly allegiant to, to be used recorded registered or altered or exchanged for a financial purpose without my permission and that it has never been offered or pledged to be for any of those reasons or to used as a surety or as a commodity with my informed consent.
12.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that any man or woman in office who up holds the law of the land and have taken an oath to the Christian Monarch to be Truly allegiant and that if they do not know what that true allegiance is when asked, then they have provided irrefutable evidence that they lied to get their job.
13.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that an oath to a Christian Monarch is an act of religious worship and all who refuse to acknowledge and submit to that fact are imposters who lied to get their job. Westminster Confession of Faith Act of the British Parliament 1648 chapter 22.
14.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that an agent of her Majesty when failing to acknowledge they have an oath of allegiance to the defender of the faith and recognition of the supremacy of God relieves themselves from sworn duty and reverts themselves to a private man or woman with no more judicial authority than the sovereign inheritance of birth as they have by lack of recognition of those prime points of law indicated they perjured themselves when swearing their oath to God.
15.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that a minister once notifying whoever obstructs them that he is a minister not bound by commercial law in performing the functions of his calling and that unless proof to the contrary is evident the man or woman once made aware of the ministry being performed has no sanction in law or from the Christian monarch they swore to be truly allegiant to, to obstruct intimidate or act as a nuisance to him while performing the official functions of his calling.
16.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that no man calling himself her Majesty’s sheriff has any oath bound nor civil authority to obstruct a minister from performing the functions of his calling nor to determine the functions of his calling unless damage has ensued to man woman or property violating God’s law as complained of by an opposing man or woman.
17.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that no oath bound sanctioned honour lies in the unlawful private action of intimidating obstructing and acting as a nuisance to a legitimate and sincere minister of Christ officially performing the noticed non commercial functions of his calling.
18.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that any man or woman who has sworn an oath to the Christian Monarch to be truly allegiant to the “Defender of the faith” then obstructs intimidates or acts as a nuisance to the ability of an officiating minister of Jehovah, has acted against the Queens ability to defend the faith and is attempting to overthrow her majesty’s government, being the King James Bible, by force....and that Section 46 of the criminal code applies to all sworn allegiant officers of her majesty.
19.It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that the “Rule of law” spoken of in the preamble to the 1982 de facto Constitution, being a rule for debtors,( that clearly only applies to all registered corporate government employee’s via section 32 of that charter), is indisputably God’s law, being the King James Bible, as defended by the Christian monarch you the private man swore to be truly allegiant to via the Canadian oaths of Allegiance Act and Coronation Act of 1689. Any other act that dares speak contrary or may have altered the authorised form such as removing the word “do” are not withstanding or legitimate .
These are the words are in Alberta from the Oath of
office Act. Indicating prima fascia an unlawful unsanctioned deficient form by
the omission of the word “do” in the Alberta oath of Allegiance thus
effectively invalidating the oath by making the oath grammatically incoherent.
I, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , swear that I will be
faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her heirs and successors, according to law.
These are the words from the federal Oath of allegiance Act for Canada ,..... it is very clear as to how the oath is to be worded in Canada, it is
(1) Every person who, either of his own accord or in compliance with any lawful requirement made of the person, or in obedience to the directions of any Act or law in force in Canada, except the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Citizenship Act, desires to take an oath of allegiance shall have administered and take the oath in the following form, and no other:
I, ...................., do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors. So help me God.
20. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that the word province in section 2 of the criminal code refers to a geographical land mass and not a legislature defined as Province with a capital “P”.
21. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that “Canada’s” geographical limits are delineated in the Canada Land Surveys Act Section 24 and that Canada being the land mass spoken of in that enactment only includes the North West Territories Nunavut and the Yukon as provinces as concurred in section 2 of the criminal code and section 30 of the de facto Charter of Rights not Freedoms.
22. It is agreed by you the private man with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you that the lawfully recognised and accepted definition of the word “drive” is a commercial application respecting one who has put their auto and themselves out for hire or contract for the purpose of gain and that the following definitions are provided in honour for clarity to avoid assumption.
Some definitions for your benefit from Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd edition. 1933. Though old, these are current with vehicle codes, revised in 1959.
"Driver" "One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car." So a driver is someone who makes their living driving on roads, such as a chauffeur, taxicab driver, or trucker. The state does have the right to regulate commerce on the roads.
"License" "permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be illegal, or would be a trespass or a tort." A license allows you to do something illegal. James Bond 007
"Traffic" (as in court) "Commerce; trade; sale or exchange of merchandize, bills, money, and the like."
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary1856
DRIVER. One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals.
2. Frequent accidents occur in consequence of the neglect or want of skill of drivers of public stage coaches, for which the employers are responsible.
3. The law requires that a driver should possess reasonable skill and be of good habits for the journey; if, therefore, he is not acquainted with the road he undertakes to drive; 3 Bingh. Rep. 314, 321; drives with reins so loose that he cannot govern his horses; 2 Esp. R. 533; does not give notice of any serious danger on the road; 1 Camp. R. 67; takes the wrong side of the road; 4 Esp. R. 273; incautiously comes in collision with another carriage; 1 Stark. R. 423; 1 Campb. R. 167; or does not exercise a sound and reasonable discretion in travelling on the road, to avoid dangers and difficulties, and any accident happens by which any passenger is injured, both the driver and his employers will be responsible. 2 Stark. R. 37; 3 Engl. C. L. Rep. 233; 2 Esp. R. 533; 11. Mass. 57; 6 T. R. 659; 1 East, R. 106; 4 B. & A. 590; 6 Eng. C. L. R. 528; 2 Mc Lean, R. 157. Vide Common carriers Negligence; Quasi Offence.
Some definitions from Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd edition. 1933. Though old, these are current with vehicle codes, revised in 1959.
"Driver" "One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car." So a driver is someone who makes their living driving on roads, such as a chauffeur, taxicab driver, or trucker. The state does have the right to regulate commerce on the roads.
"Traffic" (as in court) " Commerce; trade; sale or exchange of merchandize, bills, money, and the like."
Without a doubt, a "drivers license" is a privilege, regulating commerce on our thoroughfares, and not a right. Christians must refuse to get a drivers license to retain their rights.
This from the highway
traffic Act of Alberta
"driver" or "operator" means a
person who drives
or is in
actual physical control of a vehicle;
"vehicle" means a device in,
on or by which a person or
thing may be transported or drawn on a highway.
Now back to Bouviers and Blacks law dictionaries so we can have no argument or foolish intimidating rebuttal to the already accepted definitions in law
Transport,,, Blacks Law first Edition.
"The removal of goods or
persons from one place to
another by carrier"
CARRIERS, contracts. There are two kinds of carriers, namely, common carriers, (q. v.) who have been considered under another head; and private carriers. These latter are persons who, although they do not undertake to transport the goods of such as choose to employ them, yet agree to carry the goods of some particular person for hire, from one place to another.
2. In such case the carrier incurs no responsibility beyond that of any other ordinary bailee for hire, that is to say, the responsibility of ordinary diligence. 2 Bos. & Pull. 417; 4 Taunt. 787; Selw. N. P. 382 n.; 1 Wend. R. 272; 1 Hayw. R. 14; 2 Dana, R. 430; 6 Taunt. 577; Jones, Bailm. 121; Story on Bailm, 495. But in Gordon v. Hutchinson, 1 Watts & Serg. 285, it was holden that a Wagoner Who carries goods for hire, contracts, the responsibility of a common carrier, whether transportation be his principal and direct business, or only an occasional and incidental employment.
3. To bring a person within the description of a common carrier, he must exercise his business as a public employment; he must undertake to carry goods for persons generally; and he must hold himself out as ready to engage in the transportation of goods for hire, as a business; not as a casual occupation pro hac vice. 1 Salk. 249; 1 Bell's Com. 467; 1 Hayw. R. 14; 1 Wend. 272; 2, Dana, R. 430. See Bouv. Inst. Index, b. t.
d) "commercial vehicle"
(i) means a truck, trailer or semi-trailer, except
(A) a truck, trailer or semi-trailer that is a public
service vehicle, or
(B) a truck, trailer or semi-trailer or any class of
vehicle that by the
regulations or by an order of
the Alberta Motor Transport Board
from being classified as a commercial vehicle,
(A) a motor vehicle from which sales are made of
merchandise or commodity, and
(B) a motor vehicle by means of which delivery is
made of goods, wares, merchandise or
commodity to a purchaser or consignee of them;
(q.1) "public service vehicle"
(i) means a motor vehicle, trailer or semi-trailer
operated on a highway
by or on behalf of a person
for compensation, whether that
operation is regular
or only occasional or for a single trip, and
(ii) includes a motor vehicle kept by a person for the
purpose, subject to the regulations, of being rented
without a driver, but
(iii) does not include a motor vehicle used solely as an
ambulance or hearse or for the transportation of the
So to be definitive you need to see the lawful definition of person and the scriptures that guide me and
command me to not show respect to persons as they are
fictions of law..A player on a stage wearing a mask.
PERSON. This word is applied to men, women and children, who are called natural persons. In law, man and person are not exactly-synonymous terms. Any human being is a man, whether he be a member of society or not, whatever may be the rank he holds, or whatever may be his age, sex, &c. A person is a man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 137..
2. It is also used to denote a corporation which is an artificial person. 1 Bl. Com. 123; 4 Bing. 669; C. 33 Eng. C. L R. 488; Wooddes. Lect. 116; Bac. Us. 57; 1 Mod. 164.
3. But when the word "Persons" is spoken of in legislative acts, natural persons will be intended, unless something appear in the context to show that it applies to artificial persons. 1 Scam. R. 178.
4.. Natural persons are divided into males, or men; and females or women. Men are capable of all kinds of engagements and functions, unless by reasons applying to particular individuals. Women cannot be appointed to any public office, nor perform any civil functions, except those which the law specially declares them capable of exercising. Civ. Code of Louis. art. 25.
5. They are also sometimes divided into free persons and slaves. Freemen are those who have preserved their natural liberty, that is to say, who have the right of doing what is not forbidden by the law. A slave is one who is in the power of a master to whom he belongs. Slaves are sometimes ranked not with persons but things. But sometimes they are considered as persons for example, a negro is in contemplation of law a person, so as to be capable of committing a riot in conjunction with white men. 1 Bay, 358. Vide Man.
6. Persons are also divided into citizens, (q. v.) and aliens, (q. v.) when viewed with regard to their political rights. When they are considered in relation to their civil rights, they are living or civilly dead; vide Civil Death; outlaws; and infamous persons.
7. Persons are divided into legitimates and bastards, when examined as to their rights by birth.
TO PERSONATE, crim. law. The act of assuming the character of another without lawful authority, and, in such character, doing something to his prejudice, or to the prejudice of another, without his will or consent.
2. The bare fact of personating another for the purpose of fraud, is no more than a cheat or misdemeanour at common law, and punishable as such. 2 East, P. C. 1010; 2 Russ. on Cr. 479.
3. By the act of congress of the 30th April, 1790, s. 15, 1 Story's Laws U. S. 86, it is enacted, that " if any person shall acknowledge, or procure to be acknowledged in any court of the United States, any recognizance, bail or judgment, in the name or names of any other person or persons not privy or consenting to the same, every such person or persons, on conviction thereof, shall be fined not exceeding five thousand dollars, or be imprisoned not exceeding seven years, and whipped not exceeding thirty-nine stripes, Provided nevertheless. that this act shall not extend to the acknowledgment of any judgment or judgments by any attorney or attorneys, duly admitted, for any person or persons against whom any such judgment or judgments shall be bad or given." Vide, generally, 2 John. Cas. 293; 16 Vin. Ab. 336; Com. Dig. Action on the case for a deceit, A 3.
But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
For whosoever shall
keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.
I am not a Person, or an Individual, or even a human Travis but before you think I am crazy examine the facts.
I am not a person, or an individual, or a Human, and although some humans look similar to me, I am not a human.
Some would say that I am a 'natural' person, but as I will show you, I am not one of those either. Who then or what then am I?
To understand who I am, you must first understand the definitions which have been placed on the words I have quoted above, words that are commonly used, but do not describe me anymore. For example, the word 'person'.
Person - The Revised Code of Washington, RCW 1.16.080, (I live in Washington State) defines a person as follows: "The term 'person' may be construed to include the United States, this state, or any state or territory, or any public or private corporation, as well as an individual."
Person - Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition, pg. 791, defines 'person' as follows: "In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person), though by statute term may include labour organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers."
Person - Oran's Dictionary of the Law, West Group 1999, defines Person as: 1. A human being (a "natural" person). 2. A corporation (an "artificial" person). Corporations are treated as persons in many legal situations. Also, the word "person" includes corporations in most definitions in this dictionary. 3. Any other "being" entitled to sue as a legal entity (a government, an association, a group of Trustees, etc.). 4.. The plural of person is persons, not people (see that word). -
Person - Duhaime's Law Dictionary. An entity with legal rights and existence including the ability to sue and be sued, to sign contracts, to receive gifts, to appear in court either by themselves or by lawyer and, generally, other powers incidental to the full expression of the entity in law. Individuals are "persons" in law unless they are minors or under some kind of other incapacity such as a court finding of mental incapacity. Many laws give certain powers to "persons" which, in almost all instances, includes business organizations that have been formally registered such as partnerships, corporations or associations. -
Person, noun. person. - Webster's 1828 Dictionary. Defines person as: [Latin persona; said to be compounded of per, through or by, and sonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the stage.]
legal person - Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law 1996, defines a legal person as : a body of persons or an entity (as a corporation) considered as having many of the rights and responsibilities of a natural person and esp. the capacity to sue and be sued.
A person according to these definitions, is basically an entity - legal fiction - of some kind that has been legally created and has the legal capacity to be sued. Isn't it odd that the word lawful is not used within these definitions?
Well….. I am not "the United States, this state, or any territory, or any public or private corporation". I am not "labour organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers." So, I cannot be a 'person' under this part of the definition.
The RCW quoted above also states that a person could also be an "individual". Black's Law Dictionary also defines a person as a "human being," which they define by stating "(i.e. natural person)". So let's first check to see if I am an "individual".
Individual - Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition, pg. 533, defines "individual" as follows: "As a noun, this term denotes a single person as distinguished from a group or class, and also, very commonly, a private or natural person as distinguished from a partnership, corporation, or association; but it is said that this restrictive signification is not necessarily inherent in the word, and that it may, in proper cases, include artificial persons."
Well now, I have already been shown that I am not a 'person', and since 'individual' denotes a single 'person' as distinguished from a group or class, I can't be an 'individual' under this definition either. But I see the term 'natural person' used in the definition of the RCW, and also in the definition of some of the Law Dictionaries. Maybe I am a 'natural' person, since I know I am not an 'artificial' one.
I could not find the term 'Natural person' defined anywhere, so I had to look up the word 'natural' for a definition to see if that word would fit with the word person...
Natural - Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition, pg. 712, defines 'Natural' as follows: "Untouched by man or by influences of civilization; wild; untutored, and is the opposite of the word "artificial". The juristic meaning of this term does not differ from the vernacular, except in the cases where it is used in opposition to the term "legal"; and then it means proceeding from or determined by physical causes or conditions, as distinguished from positive enactments of law, or attributable to the nature of man rather than the commands of law, or based upon moral rather than legal considerations or sanctions."
Wow, what do they mean by this definition? Am I untouched by man (depends on what the word 'man' means), or by influences of civilization? I don't think so. Am I 'wild', or 'untutored'? nope, not me. Even though the definition states that this word is the opposite of the word 'artificial', it still does not describe who I believe I am. So I must conclude that I am not a 'natural' person, under this definition of the word 'natural'. So the term 'natural person' cannot apply to me.
Black's Law Dictionary also used the term 'human being', and although Black's defined it as a 'natural person', maybe they made a mistake, maybe I am a 'human being'. 'Human' or 'human being' does not appear to have a 'legal' definition, so I went to my old standby 1888 Noah Webster's Dictionary for a vernacular definition of this word. Maybe Noah would know who I am.
Human - Webster's 1888 Dictionary defines 'human' as follows: n. A human being; one of the race of man. [Rare and inelegant.] "Sprung of humans that inhabit earth." ...To me, the etymology of the word Hu-man, suggests that it is a marriage of two separate words 'Hue' (defined as the property of color), and man. But this cannot of course be correct, at least not politically correct, so I can't go there, because the word would then mean 'coloured man'!
Am I of the race of man? Rare and inelegant? Sprung of humans that inhabit earth (ground)? (I'm not coloured either). Well, it looks like I have to define the word 'man' through Webster's because there appears to be no legal definition for 'man'.
Man - Webster's 1888 Dictionary defines 'man' as follows: An individual of the human race; a human being; a person.
Oh! Oh! Well, it looks like we are back to the beginning of our study of definitions, yup, back to the start, completed the circle. I am not an 'individual', so I cannot be considered 'of the human race'; and since I'm not of the human race, I can't be 'a human being', and I've also been shown that I'm not 'a person' either.
Now let us see what the word Human really means......I am going into detail so you can see we have been deceived by the misuse of our own language.
Definition of Human Being
Are you a 'person', an 'individual', or a 'human being'? These words, at law, define you as being spiritually 'dead.' This is how the world makes its attachment to you.
The terms, 'person', 'individual', 'human being', etc., are not in Christ.
Words like "individual," and "human
being" do not even appear in Scripture! These are 'created' terms by the
natural man (1 Cor 2:14). These words describe the 'old man', but not
the 'new man' in Christ (Col 3:9-10).
In Balantine's Self Pronouncing Law Dictionary, 1948, page 389, Human Being is defined as "See Monster." On page 540 of this same Law Dictionary, Monster is defined as "a human being by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal."
In Webster's New World Dictionary , Third College Edition, 1988, pages 879-880, a Monster is defined as "a person so cruel, wicked, depraved, etc., as to horrify others."
From the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, 2nd Edition, page 901, Human Being is defined as a "Natural man: unenlightened or unregenerate," and on page 1461, Unregenerate means "not regenerate; unrepentant; an unregenerate sinner; not convinced by or unconverted to a particular religion; wicked, sinful, dissolute."
In Webster's New World Dictionary , Third College Edition, 1988, page 657, Humanitarianism is defined as "the doctrine that humankind may become perfect without divine aid."
In Colliers New Dictionary of the English Language, 1928, Humanitarian is defined as "a philanthropist; an anti-Trinitarian who rejects the doctrine of Christ's divinity; a perfectionist."
And in the Random House Webster's College Dictionary, 1990, page 653, Humanism is defined as "any system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values and dignity predominate, especially an ethical theory that often rejects the importance of a belief in God."
Therefore, when anyone calls himself or herself a 'human being', or a 'humanitarian,' they are saying (according to every definition of these words, and according to the law), "I'm an animal; I'm a monster; I'm not saved; I'm unrepentant; I'm an unregenerate sinner; I'm not converted; I'm wicked, sinful, and dissolute; I'm cruel, depraved, unenlightened; and I reject Christ's divinity and the importance of a belief in God."
"Men [Bondman] rely for protection of their right on God's law, and not upon regulations and proclamations of departments of government, or officers who have been designated to carry laws into effect." Baty v. Sale, 43 Ill. 351." [Codes, edicts, proclamations, and decisions are not Law, which define or regulate the Good and Lawful Bondman. Therefore, "law" suits are ungodly, and are the redress for and of human beings, i.e., non-believers.]
The Septuagint uses the term "human beings" only one time, and its meaning is identical to the above definitions. Let's look at the last verse of the book of Jonah, where Nineva was full of men who were unrepentant, unregenerate, unconverted, wicked, sinful, dissolute, cruel, depraved, unenlightened, rejected the importance of a belief in God. Or, in other words, "human beings."
"and shall not I spare Nineve, the great city, in which dwell more than twelve myriads of human beings, who do not know their right hand or their left hand...?" [Jonah 4:11 (Septuagint)]
The "human beings" of Nineve did not know their right hand from their left because they did not know the Truth and were lost. They did not know God, they were separated from God. However, those human beings were willing to turn from their ways and learn the things of God, so He spared that city from destruction.
The term "human being" is also synonymous with the term 'natural man.'
"The natural man is a spiritual monster. His heart is where his feet should be, fixed upon the earth; his heels are lifted up against heaven, which his heart should be set on. His face is towards hell; his back towards heaven. He loves what he should hate, and hates what he should love; joys in what he ought to mourn for, and mourns for what he ought to rejoice in; glories in his shame, and is ashamed of his glory; abhors what he should desire, and desires what he should abhor." [Thomas Boston, quoted in Augustus Toplady, Complete Works (1794, reprinted by Sprinkle Publications 1987), page 584].
And the Word confirms: "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." [1 Corinthians 2:14,]
The above verse witnesses to us that the natural man is spiritually dead. The 'natural man' in Scripture is synonymous with the 'natural person' as defined in man's laws.
"Natural Person means human being, and not an artificial or juristic person." Shawmut Bank, N.A.. v. Valley Farms, 610 A. 2d. 652, 654; 222 Conn. 361.
"Natural Person: Any human being who as such is a legal entity as distinguished from an artificial person, like a corporation, which derives its status as a legal entity from being recognized so in law. Natural Child: The ordinary euphemism for 'bastard' or illegitimate." [Amon v. Moreschi, 296 N.Y . 395, 73 N.E.2d 716." Max Radin, Radin's Law Dictionary (1955), p. 216.]
Those that are spiritually dead belong to the prince of this world because he's dead himself. Satan has dominion over the natural man, for he is the prince of this world [John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11]; and, as a consequence of this, he has dominion over those of the world, i.e., human beings, the natural man – those who receive not the things of the Spirit of God and reject Christ. Because the bondman in Christ is sanctified from the world, he is separated from the adversary's dominion over him–sin [John 8:34].. This is the cause for Christ having sanctified Himself in the Truth of the Word of God – to provide the entrance to the refuge in and through Himself for us.
So, I could provide you more Travis and I do sincerely thank you for your focused attention to this my honest effort at officially performing the function of my calling in establishing this agreement with you as per Matthew 5:25 and 18:15-20 , but I think you are already overwhelmed as I have upon presentation of facts destroyed your belief system and now you are aware you are working for a massive criminal organization founded upon a false oath. Can you now see why I must not allow my name to be altered? Remember everyone of the officers of Alberta has a false oath....What kind of authority swears an oath that is bogus??? A false authority!
It is agreed with no dispute to the fact by you forthcoming that you are aware that I reserve my right under God’s law not to be compelled to perform under any fraudulently obtained contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, with informed consent, voluntarily and intentionally.
It is agreed by you with no dispute to the fact forthcoming from you, that you are aware that I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed de facto contract or unlawful commercial agreement, which is my ministerial duty pursuant to God’s law to divide myself from.
* CONVERSION.Torts.The unlawful turning or applying the personal goods of another to the use of the taker, or of some other person than the owner; or the unlawful destroying or altering their nature.
When a party takes away or wrongfully assumes the right to goods which belong to another, it will in general be sufficient evidence of a conversion but when the original taking was lawful, as when the party found the goods, and the detention only is illegal, it is absolutely necessary to make a demand of the goods, and there must be a refusal to deliver them before the conversion will be complete. The refusal by a servant to deliver the goods entrusted to him by his master is not evidence of a conversion by his master. Leviticus 6:2-5
The tortious taking of property is, of itself, a conversion and any intermeddling with it, or any exercise of dominion over it, subversive of the dominion of the owner or the nature of the bailment if it be bailed, is evidence of a conversion.
The considering of one thing as changed into another; for example, land will be considered as converted into money and treated as such by a court of equity, when the owner has contracted to sell his estate, in which case, if he die before the conveyance, his executors and not his heirs will be entitled to the money. On the other hand, money is converted into land in a variety of ways as for example, when a man agrees to buy land and dies before he has received the conveyance, the money he was to pay for it will be considered as converted into lands, and descend to the heir.
It is agreed upon by you, having no dispute to the following fact forthcoming from you; that you the private man are aware that I am a flesh bone blood living man, being God’s minister, and that I cannot possibly on the 19th day of \November have been in a dead legal corporate fiction called the Province of Alberta as the Province of Alberta is not a place but a dead corporate fiction of law on paper created for the purpose of extracting money from me in fraud as it is totally against my will, a violation of my faith to submit to and is being done without my informed consent or cognisant permission for a financial purpose.
It is agreed by you with full understanding that failure to refute or disprove the facts provided above as agreed upon by you will be witnessed in 20 days time.
Ecclesiastically Autographed non commercial as Donald Gordon of the Friske family, a Minister of Christ, officially performing a function of my calling.